I want to point out that interest always ebbs and flows on WS cases. Discussion has to happen organically. If nothing progresses on this case, it will ebb. When there is news or a new discovery, it will flow.
I’m very concerned about Henderson putting words in people’s mouths or ideas in their head about the phrase “ruin” or “mess up” his investigation or put the fear in people of being charged with hindering an investigation. Again, I refer to The Laws of Oregon (Oregon Revised Statutes):
ORS § 162.325¹ Hindering prosecution
(1) A person commits the crime of hindering prosecution if, with intent to hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of a person who has committed a crime punishable as a felony, or with the intent to assist a person who has committed a crime punishable as a felony in profiting or benefiting from the commission of the crime, the person:
(a) Harbors or conceals such person; or
(b) Warns such person of impending discovery or apprehension; or
(c) Provides or aids in providing such person with money, transportation, weapon, disguise or other means of avoiding discovery or apprehension; or
(d) Prevents or obstructs, by means of force, intimidation or deception, anyone from performing an act which might aid in the discovery or apprehension of such person; or
(e) Suppresses by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction physical evidence which might aid in the discovery or apprehension of such person; or
(f) Aids such person in securing or protecting the proceeds of the crime.
(2) Hindering prosecution is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §207]
If you have harbored or concealed a person, or aided them to cover up their crime, or suppressed someone from revealing something -- then, yes, beware. You could be charged for hindering an investigation. But, questioning the actions of people in charge of Stephanie’s case after 3 months of no progress is not “messing it up”. Taking action to make sure this case does not go cold and to make an appeal to the public is not “hindering” it or something you could be charged with. In the real world, it’s called accountability and being pro-active. Some people don’t like to have people hold them accountable. Therefore, they blame others for "messing things up" for them.
Here is where Henderson’s real concern should be:
1. Evidence that has not been collected.
2. Evidence that has been tampered with or has gone missing.
3. Evidence that has not been followed up on, not been acted on, or not presented to the DA.
4. A misguided effort to find a body when circumstantial evidence would have brought the dangerous perpetrator in and taken him off the streets 2 months ago.
5. Aiding and abetting a person who fits the description in the above ORS.
I remember the words that summed up the OJ trial: Evidence Shmevidence.
The same could happen to Stephanie’s case.
.