I am now thinking some employees found the items and alerted LE but LE determined they were unrelated. Perhaps the employees thought they knew better than LE and/or were attracted to the potential sensation of the find so they alerted a rag (NYPost) that would be more than happy to print "the exclusive."
Sometimes "exclusives" are a great scoop and othertimes they are "exclusive" because no other outlet was interested.
jmopinion
I get that this arrest and prosecution so far appears to be on track, and this is refreshing. Yet Suffolk's colors still bleed through at times. I am very disappointed, but not surprised, in Tierney making his comments.
The thing is, most jurisdictions of LE would not let the witnesses who found the evidence know if it was related or not.
Further, most jurisdictions would not make any such comment if a witness spilled the beans and the information about that buried evidence came out later.
If the evidence was related or related to any other active investigation, why didn't Tierney just say that they were aware of this discovery almost two years ago, and they cannot comment about whether it is tied to this or any current investigation?
If the evidence is related to a solved crime, why not say so?
Or, if LE has no idea what victim this evidence is related to, why didn't they release some information about the items in hopes that it helps ID their owners and start an investigation?
I can't think of a scenario where the those items would be buried and it not be part of a crime. That crime could be solved, active, cold, or not even yet begun to be investigated. But it appears related to some crime.
I have difficulty finding a reason LE is behaving as they are about this story that makes sense to me. It seems to me to fall into a pattern of being inappropriately uninterested in a potential violent crime.
Talking about the tabloidian quality of the news outlet is beside the point. It is intriguing that someone wanted that information out about now. And it is disappointing the LE is behaving dismissively.
The publisher has nothing to do with those things.
MOO