We had a murder locally in which a young woman was shot at close range in her car late one evening as she was about to leave a park-and-ride lot after being dropped off there by a friend.  An unarmed rent-a-cop named Jennings was on guard duty in the lot at the time and called in the shooting, saying he had heard shots. He told the police he first ducked for cover, and saw no one in or leaving the area. 

Initially there were no suspects, no weapon could be found, no apparent motive, etc.  After some months of non-productive investigation and cries from the public for an arrest, it was decided by the police that Jennings probably did the deed, primarily based on the fact that Jennings engaged in speculation about the way the crime was committed, drawing conclusions that the police felt showed he knew too much unless he had been the shooter.  Plus of course they had absolutely no one else to arrest.

For motive, they offered the speculation that Jennings had approached the woman as a prostitute and when he found she was not decided to shoot her. One problem with this is that he was on duty as an "unarmed guard" and there was no evidence offered that he did possess or carry a gun, although after my letter was published it was reported someone testified that at some point in the past while living in his native North Carolina he had a gun in his car (also reported to be legal there at the time).

In any case, a year or so after the crime Jennings was arrested, incarcerated and put on trial, resulting in a hung jury.  He was then tried again, another hung jury.  He was then subjected to an almost unheard-of third trial, all using essentially the same "evidence", which really boiled down to "he could have done it although we really have no direct evidence he did".  I agreed with them that Jennings could indeed be guilty but that the case was much too thin to reach the "beyond reasonable doubt" requirement and certainly did not justify three trials.

When this was written the third trial was about to go to the jury.

To:  AV Press

Date: 11/2009

Re:  Jennings III

Prominent placing by the AV Press of reports on the progress of Jennings Trial III indicates I am not the only one fascinated by the saga.

I scan every story for something new, such as: 

Physical evidence of any kind that points to Jennings. 

Evidence or testimony that Jennings ever possessed a handgun. 

Evidence or testimony that Jennings ever carried a handgun, on duty or otherwise. 

Evidence or testimony that Jennings’ past behavior shows he is the kind of person who, upon discovering that a woman he thought to be a prostitute was not, would spontaneously pull out a gun he supposedly carried and shoot her dead.  Or, for that matter, is the kind of person to come upon a woman he had never before met and spontaneously shoot her for some other reason. 

In fact, I scan for anything whatsoever that will give structure to what remains a vague, confusing ramble of speculation.