It's impossible to read today's Times Dispatch story by Jim Nolan on the Taylor Behl case without realizing that murder charges against suspect Ben Fawley may not be that easy to support.
Sources close to the investigation are now saying they won't present evidence before a Grand Jury until January and it seems they are looking hard to make a circumstantial case against Fawley for murder.
That is far from impossible and many such cases based on circumstantial evidence do succeed. But it is far from a lock. The best thing prosecutors may have going for them is the venue and previous press coverage.
As frustrating as it may be for followers of the case - it is becoming increasingly clear as to the reasoning behind the gag order. The way in which the media coverage was going against Fawley, it would have been easy for his lawyers to mount a challenge based upon his ability to get a fair trial.
It's a layman's guess, but when, or if it does go to trial, it's likely that a jury will be instructed to disregard a great deal about Fawley that they may have heard, or read. Also, given his length of incarceration and likely number of interrogations, one might conclude a confession of some kind is out of the question.
Followers of the recently reported Natalee Holloway case would do well to take note of precisely how difficult is the job of any law enforcement agency tasked with bringing charges in a major crime under any contemporary system of justice. The Behl case is in the states, getting full co-operation from her friends, has a body and an admission of causing death - and prosecutors still don't have enough evidence to bring a murder charge.
full story here