I fail to understand the logic that by not looking for the murder weapon the prosecution is protecting its case.
>>>>> Spoiler Alert!!! <<<<<<
Rusty Sabitch already knows he is a suspect. Tommy Molto already accused Rusty of killing Carolyn Polhemus right to his face. Prosecutors/investigators were afraid that they would not find the weapon in Sabitch's house. Had they made an effort to search for the weapon and not found it, the defense would argue to the jury that prosecutors and police are desperate: After an exhaustive search, all they found was 'so-called' matching carpet fibers. . . kind of a letdown after failing to find the murder weapon. Just because you know that a murder weapon exists (or existed), doesn't mean that you automatically know where to look. Given the suspect in this case, and his expertise in this area, they didn't believe that the murder weapon could have been so easily found.
Prosecutors want jurors to focus on the evidence that they have presented. They do not want jurors focusing on a key piece of evidence that they spent a considerable amount of effort looking for, but could not find. This could aid a guilty defendant, helping them to seem
innocent. It adds a tangible element of reasonable doubt. In a criminal case, the old cliche applies here: 'all the defense really needs is for one juror to believe that there is reasonable doubt.' A good defense attorney will make investigators justify every single action they took against his/her client. The more evidentiary trails that prosecutors chose to follow that ended up cold, the more reasonable doubt.
There is another important reason why investigators are careful with search warrants where the suspect will likely be able to afford a venerable defense. What if the suspect is actually innocent? If you collect carpet fibers, and they don't
match, that is exculpatory evidence. It may lead you to decide to move on to a new suspect. As long as you properly justified the search, no problem. However, if you go all the way, and collect fibers and
search thoroughly for the murder weapon (subsequently turning the house inside-out) finding nothing, and no matching fibers, its far worse. It looks like you have it in for
an innocent person, and you might have some explaining to do in front of the judge who granted the warrant.
Nico Della Guardia and Molto felt that if they had evidence of an affair, Rusty's semen, matching carpet fibers, and the fingerprinted glass (that later disappeared), then they would have a strong case based on both circumstantial and physical evidence. It was a good case against Sabitch, until they failed to produce the fingerprinted glass. Once this occurred, the corrupt Judge Larren Lyttle was able to throw out the case in-part, to protect himself. Sure, they would have loved to have found that murder weapon, but what would make them think that it could have been so easily found? Remember, they thought that it was Rusty
Sabitch, the savvy, seasoned prosecutor, that killed Carolyn Polhemus. Later, we find out that technically
, they were wrong.
well, the hammer was hidden in the bottom of a toolbox in that dark basement. sometimes i find things i didn't know i had in the basement years after losing them. granted, no bloody hammers.
The circulation of confidence is better than the circulation of money.-James Madison
The wife looked burnt/spaced out so maybe she didn't have the ability to foresee the future and she was establishing HER dominance over her husband.
Spoiler alert for them spoil sports out there! Y'all like spoiled milk, stop crying over it!