I beleive, the police beleive and the county DA beleives, that my best
friend of over 40 years has murdered his wife of 23 years. Found at
the bottom of a set of stairs with blunt force trauma to the head that
the medical examiner ruled cause of death undetermined.No physical or
medical evidence that shows she fell down stairs. No tool or weapon
found. No physical evidence to connect the husband but he lusted after
another women for months before his wife's death. The wife had a
million dollar bank account that the husband would have lost in a
divorce. Also, two days before the death, the wife was beaten and
kidnapped by the husbands friend and part time employee. The wife
escapted her kidnapper but did not know that her husband was
connected.
Kidnapper was arrested and convicted but never implicated the husband.
Two days later she is dead. I am looking for a case of murder and
conviction based on probability with only a great deal of
circumstantial evidence. I need something to push the DA to get an
arrest, its been 3.5 years. The DA wants to make an arrest but is
waiting for "more" before he does. HELP PLEASE !!

---

Request for Question Clarification by cynthia-ga on 06 Feb 2006 14:24 PST

You might get some ideas here:

THE STAIRCASE
http://www.sundancechannel.com/film/?ixFilmID=6378
...a documentary about Michael Peterson, his wife was found dead at
the bottom of the stairs in their home.

I may be able to find more cases like this, being a Court TV addict, I
remember several similar shows I've seen. Would you like more links
like this as your Answer?

---

Request for Question Clarification by cynthia-ga on 06 Feb 2006 14:25 PST

Here's a better link:
http://www.sundancechannel.com/staircase/

---

Clarification of Question by nsb-ga on 06 Feb 2006 15:24 PST

First of all, thanks to all on getting back to me. I know about the
Michael Peterson case. In that case, Mr. Peterson had a track record
that helped convict him.With my case, the police and DA are sure this
guy killed his wife, we kust need that special link. I was looking for
case law that had previuosly set a precedent in a similar case. I am
hoping to get lucky. I have written a five page MS word story about
this case, I'll attach it and maybe it will help clear things up. I
have never used this site before so I hope it works with an
attachment. Thanks, NSB   Murder in Mystic

The village of Mystic is now known as the tourist capital of South
Eastern Connecticut. It was once just a name that described a fire
district in the small town of Stonington. Mystic is famous today for
the Mystic Seaport, Mystic Marine Life Aquarium, the Olde Mistick
Village shops and of course, Mystic Pizza. The pizza shop was just
another pizza shop until it was made famous by the movie of the same
name with Julia Roberts. The streets of Mystic in the summer time are
jammed with tourists. But as recent as 1965, a native could walk down
East or West Main Street and know each person that passed. Today, one
would be lucky to greet anyone they knew. Most locals stay away, the
shops are geared mostly for tourists with cash to spend. The draw
bridge openings every hour create traffic that most natives try to
avoid.

Mystic as a tourist attraction is unique, but it?s just another small
community that was touched by tragedy. The fatal event started with
the kidnapping of the well known and well liked school teacher, Leslie
Buck. In 1968, Leslie moved from Maine to Stonington to begin a long
teaching career. Leslie had tenure of thirty five years that would
only end as a result of her death. Leslie loved teaching children, and
her grade school students loved her. Teaching and encouraging children
to read was her goal in life. Not having children of her own, the
lives of her students were of great interest to Leslie. A child?s
church First Communion would never be missed.

Thursday, May 2, 2002 would start out like any other school day for
Leslie but end in a nightmare no one could have imagined. The first
Thursday of each month, Leslie would attend a sorority meeting at the
Mystic Hilton. On this day she will return home at approximately 8:15
PM. After parking her white Buick in the garage and walking towards
the breezeway between the garage and kitchen, she was attacked. First,
a stun gun to the back of the neck then knocked down and punched
repeatedly. She would know her attacker as Russell Kirby, her
husband?s friend and part time employee. Leslie?s husband Charlie
would hire Kirby from time to time to work at the Buck Electric
business. Kirby would also do odd jobs at the various properties that
Charlie and Leslie owned. When the attack ended, Leslie was tied and
dragged to the front passenger side of her car. Leslie sat stunned as
Kirby drove out of the garage and down the road. The brief drive would
end at the lake front cottage in Ledyard Kirby rented. Leslie?s
questions to Kirby went unanswered. Leslie asked Kirby if it was money
that he wanted and if it was, he could take her home and her husband
Charlie would gladly give him money. The questions and pleading would
continue, only to have Kirby put Leslie back into the car. They began
driving around, minutes seemed like hours for Leslie, and she asked
Kirby to untie her hands as she was in a great deal of pain.
Surprisingly, he complied. She continued to beg to be taken home, but
would only hear complaints from Kirby about the condition of her car.
He claimed there was a problem and stopped the car and got out, taking
the keys. At this time Leslie was able to retrieve a spare key from
her purse and placed it in her blazer pocket. Kirby got back into the
vehicle and continued driving. A short time later, Kirby stopped the
car again and got out to check what he claimed was another problem.
Again he took the keys. (He probably couldn?t think with her talking
and was in my opinion asking himself, ?what have I done??) This was
Leslie?s chance, when the door closed; she slid over, put the spare
key in the ignition and sped off. This left Kirby standing by the side
of the road, probably quite relieved as he just couldn?t find it in
himself to complete the job, kill Leslie.

The first Thursday of each month was also notable for Charlie Buck. He
would always attend the monthly fire house meeting in Stonington
Borough. This meeting would also be attended by this writer as Charlie
and I were the closest of friends and both long time members of the
fire department. When the meetings were over, Charlie and I would
always go to a local pub for a drink or two. On this night, Charlie
would refrain from drinking any alcohol; this was a notable and very
unusual occurrence. When I asked him why no alcohol, he told me he was
trying to loose weight. He and Leslie had been walking everyday, and
I?m sure she would be pleased that he was thinking the alcohol was
contributing to the weight problem. I bought the first round, he
bought the second. We always drank rum cokes, but tonight his drink
was without the rum. When I finished my second drink, I headed home;
it was about 8:45 PM. I wanted to be home in time to watch the crime
show CSI with my wife Marianne.

Friday morning while at work, I received a telephone call from
Charlie; he sounded quite excited and told me about Leslie being
kidnapped by Russell Kirby, I was shocked. He proceeded to tell me
what had taken place. Charlie had returned home on Thursday evening
only to find an empty house, no Leslie. After some time, he was very
nervous and called the police to say that there must be something
wrong as his wife had not returned home from her sorority meeting.
Hours passed and finally the Buick drove into the garage. As Leslie
came into the house she screamed at Charlie, I hate you and I hate
Russell Kirby. That comment would be understandable given the fact
that she had just been kidnapped and because she really never liked
Russell Kirby. She proceeded to tell Charlie about the kidnapping. The
police were called again. After a short interview with police, Charlie
took her to the Lawrence and Memorial Hospital to be checked over
because of the injuries she incurred during the attack. She told
police she would give a complete statement on Friday, after school was
out for the day. There didn?t seem to be serious injuries so the
hospital released her. She was suffering from painful bruises, but she
would not miss school.

Friday May 3rd was a very long day for Leslie. She had very little
sleep during the night, and was still in pain. Although she did not
complain, she was probably still in shock over the previous nights
events. When school was over for the day she first went to visit her
90 year old mother, Catherine Edmonston, living in Stonington. Her
husband Charlie met her at the police station a short time later but
Leslie told him it wasn?t necessary for him to stay with her while she
gave her statement. She thought he had things for his business he
needed to complete. She told the story of the painful events that
occurred the previous night to the Stonington Police detectives.

Charlie and Leslie would get a late start on Saturday and head off to
breakfast at about eleven in the morning. Their favorite place for
breakfast was the Whistle Stop in Pawcatuck. Before heading off to
breakfast she would make some telephone calls to close friends. My
wife and I had sent flowers to Leslie on Friday and she called my wife
Marianne to thank her and tell her about the kidnapping. (I did not
talk with Leslie myself as I was up to my elbows in grease in the
garage. My lawn tractor needed some serious work.) After Charlie and
Leslie finished breakfast, they stopped by for a short visit with
Leslie?s mother. This would be the last time Mrs. Edmonston would see
her daughter alive.

My wife Marianne and I were in the middle of a Saturday evening TV
program when the telephone rang about 8:45 PM. A friend from
Stonington called me to ask how Charlie?s wife Leslie was doing. I
stated that although she was bruised and in pain that she was able to
go to school on Friday. He told me I had misunderstood, that wasn?t
what he meant. The reason he was calling, he had heard on the
ambulance scanner that there had been a ?code? reported at 77 Mason?s
Island Road. This would be the Buck residence and a code meant someone
had died. I told my friend I?d better go and hung up the phone. My
wife and I headed out the door right away and proceeded to Mason?s
Island Road. When we reached the house, it was obvious that something
was very wrong. The property was surrounded by yellow crime scene
tape, and there were police cars everywhere. I stopped my car at the
end of the driveway and jumped out, my wife followed along. I asked
the police officer standing at the bottom of the driveway what was
going on, he told us he couldn?t say. My wife asked him repeatedly,
where was Leslie and to what hospital had she been taken. They asked
us who we were and we told them we were very close friends. My wife
continued to ask them ?where is Leslie?. They finally told us Leslie
had died. We were shocked, Marianne began crying and I asked the
officer where Charlie was because I wanted to talk to him. The officer
stated that they, the police, were talking to him at the police
station and that I probably wouldn?t be allowed to talk to him.
Marianne and I drove to the station and talked with the duty sergeant.
We couldn?t talk to Charlie but left a message to let him know that we
had been there to see him.

Sunday morning, Marianne and I woke up after the worst night of sleep
we had ever experienced. Still in disbelief over Leslie?s death, we
talked about the events of the last three days. No matter how much we
talked, it didn?t change that sick feeling you get when something
horrible has happened. About 11:00 AM we went over to see Leslie?s
mother. Needless to say she was in shock, her only daughter was gone.
We talked briefly; she said that she hadn?t heard from Charlie. Her
son Richard had told her of Leslie?s death earlier that morning.
Marianne and I decided to drive over to Mason?s Island Road and see
Charlie. When we arrived there were some friends of Charlie?s from the
Quiambaug Fire Department there in the living room and Captain Desmond
from the Stonington Police Department was just heading out the door.
Marianne and I walked into the living room and greeted Charlie.
Marianne put her arms around Charlie to give him a hug and tell him
how sorry she was that he lost Leslie. He began whimpering and making
sounds like he was crying. I looked at his face and noticed that there
were no tears. Then I gave him a hug; Marianne told me later that she
also noticed the same response from Charlie, a whimpering and crying
sound but no tears. He proceeded to tell us how he had found Leslie at
the bottom of the stairs. Charles has repeatedly told his friends and
the police that Leslie must have fallen down the stairs as a result of
her injuries from the beating she took from Russell Kirby. (For twenty
three years she had been going up and down those same stairs. The
stairs with hand rails on both sides.) Just about that time, the two
girls that lived next door stopped by for a visit. The Quiambaug folks
said goodbye and left. We told Charlie that Leslie?s mother wanted to
see him. I offered to drive him over to the house. He told me he would
go on his own and that he had some ?things? to drop off in the
dumpster at Buck Electric. Marianne and I told him we would see him
later, we left and went back to Mrs. Edmonston?s house. Many of
Leslie?s friends were at the house when we arrived and there would be
a steady flow of people coming to console Leslie?s mother. After a
short time Charlie came in, the whimpering and crying act would begin
again. He gave some details of Leslie?s death that no one really
needed to hear, especially her mother. Marianne and I said goodbye to
everyone, gave Catherine a hug, and went home.

It was clear to my wife and me that we had a lot of questions and
suspicions about Leslie?s death. Could it be possibly that Charlie, my
close friend for over forty years, had something to do with Leslie?s
kidnapping and death? I would soon learn from newspaper accounts that
I didn?t know Charlie as well as I thought. I had always thought that
Charlie had two different personalities. When he was out with ?the
guys? he would usually act like a whornie barn yard rooster. He
couldn?t keep his mouth shut around women. He was always making jokes
and sexual suggestions. Most people thought he was crude and rude but
wrote him off as ?just being Charlie?. I?ve had many people ask me
over the years why I continued to be his friend. I would always say
that he was an old friend and old friends accepted the good and the
bad. I had told Charlie on more than one occasion that he should watch
his mouth. As a friend, Charlie had always been very generous and
kind. Most of the memories I had were good ones, he was the best man
at my wedding and I was the best man at he and Leslie?s wedding.
Leslie and Charlie were also god parents to our younger son. When
Charlie was with Leslie, he was usually a perfect gentleman, never
over eating or over drinking. When the four of us would get together,
Charlie was usually the quiet one. The only negative comments I would
ever hear from Charlie about Leslie was that she was tight with the
money. She liked saving for her old age, Charlie wasn?t so much a
saver. He wouldn?t waste money but he liked his cars and boats.

Leslie?s funeral was the most painful and heart breaking event I had
ever experienced. Her ?Mum?, as Leslie would say instead of mother,
was going through something no mother should ever have to do, burying
a child. Although Catherine Edmonston is one of the most gracious and
dignified women I have ever known, this day was just about unbearable
for her, she was broken hearted. Leslie?s brother Richard was by his
mother?s side all day. Although he was also crushed by the loss of his
sister, he had to be strong, that?s what sons do for their mothers.
Richard and Charlie never really liked each other. I think Charlie was
always jealous of the relationship Leslie had with her brother. She
loved him, and any time she talked about her brother, she had that
twinkle in her eye and that glow on her face that said she loved her
little brother very much. Richard didn?t like Charlie probably because
he saw Charlie for what he really was; a complete ass. On this day he
wasn?t even going to look at Charlie. My wife and I sat with our son
Jonathan, Leslie?s god son. He was home from West Point to be a
pallbearer at the funeral. Everyone was so uncomfortable around
Charlie, you wanted to be polite and express sorrow for his loss but
at the same time couldn?t help but wonder if he was responsible for
her death. At the reception, we had a private moment and I asked him
if he had killed Leslie. He told me no way. I told him not to lie to
me, and he said he was telling the truth.

The May 8, 2002 New London Day newspaper started having stories about
Charlie?s relationship with a woman that worked in the Drawbridge Inn
on West Main Street in Mystic. Reportedly, Charlie had been doing
electrical work there and was lusting after a bar maid named Carol
Perez. There were stories about Charlie buying her a car and giving
her cash. There was also a story about him asking a bar employee about
the possibility of hiring a ?hit man? to do away with Carol?s
boyfriend. The boyfriend was reportedly serving time in prison on a
drug charge. Why would you hire a hit man to get someone that was
already in jail? Reportedly this all took place before the kidnapping.
I had coffee with Charlie on occasion and when we talked he told me
that the stories were all untrue. The hit man thing was just a joke,
and he was working at the Drawbridge Inn and that Carol was just a
friend.

Charlie would continue to be seen at the Drawbridge Inn, his white van
parked on the street. This really started to bother me, especially the
white van. Months earlier, Charlie asked me if I knew anyone at the
local Chevy dealer that he might see to purchase a new van. I gave him
a name of a salesman that I knew and he was able to work out a deal on
a new panel van. One afternoon as I was passing by Buck Electric on
Elm Street in Stonington, I noticed Charlie working on the new van. It
would always take some time getting a new van ready for daily use,
shelving needed to be installed. I decided to stop by and see how he
was progressing. Charlie was always very fussy, it had to be perfect.
I asked him when he was going to have the white van painted red. He
said he didn?t know when he would get around to having it done, he was
very busy. Buck Electric trucks were always red with gold and black
lettering. Over the years, even any used trucks purchased by the Bucks
were painted red. We chatted for a minute, and then I left to go back
to my office at the water company.

Rumors about Charlie?s relationship were all over town. Many people
had seen Charlie and the girlfriend out riding in one of his cars or
out in his boat. It seemed that everyone I bumped into had a different
story to tell me. This would be the first thing anyone would say to
me. It wouldn?t be how are you? It would be, ?I saw Charlie? etcetera,
etcetera. The only thing I was interested in was the Kirby case. This
would prove to be just as everyone thought, GUILTY. He would get
twenty one years. How could it be that Russell Kirby would go to jail
and not say a word about the involvement of Charlie Buck? Everybody
guessed that it was because of some big payoff. At Kirby?s trial,
Charlie was called to the stand to testify against Russell, the man
that beat up and kidnapped his wife. Charlie pleaded the 5th, wouldn?t
say anything except ?privileged your honor?. What kind of a husband
does this? Especially after Charlie?s quote back in the May 7, 2002
New London Day paper; ?All I know is they better keep him locked up?
he said of Kirby.  The evidence had mounted against Kirby and Charlie
had heard it directly from Leslie. Charlie thought he was being smart,
but this type of action only makes him look guiltier. Who was the guy
I thought was my closest friend?  I was unable to attend the trial but
Marianne, Leslie?s mother and brother and most of Leslie?s teacher
friends were there every day.

The New London Day would report on August 29, 2002 that Carol Perez
had purchased a house in Westbrook Connecticut and that she was
accompanied to the closing by a man fitting Charlie?s description.
Reportedly, she paid $235,000.00 cash for the house. How could a bar
girl that had been receiving state aid for her children afford a
purchase like this? Could this be possible?
On October 18th, 2002 I had my last meeting with Charlie Buck. It was
his birthday. He was in Bess Eaton Donuts in Mystic. I sat down and we
talked. I asked him about the house purchase for Carol Perez. He told
me he did not buy her a house. I asked him about all the stories
regarding cars and jewelry he purchased for her. (Weeks after Leslie?s
death, Charlie sold her diamond engagement ring to a jeweler in
Westerly, RI.) He told me it was all untrue. I suggested that she was
using him and taking advantage of his feelings just for money. He
disagreed with me and told me they were just friends. The last thing I
said to him was to be careful, he could end up losing everything he
and his late father had worked for over the years. We walked out of
the coffee shop together. Weeks later I ran into him again and he said
he no longer wanted to speak to me. Some ?concerned citizen? told him
that everything he told me I repeated to the police. I told him that
even if that were true, as long as he was always telling me the truth,
he had nothing to worry about. That was the last time we talked. At
this point I had lost two friends, Leslie and Charlie.

I have been in contact with the New London County States Attorney?s
office on many occasions over the past three years. All they will tell
me is that the case is still active. Charlie Buck continues to live in
Mystic, but most people don?t want to have anything to do with him. He
tells people he had nothing to do with Leslie?s death. I guess he
doesn?t realize that some of his actions before and after her death
are self incriminating. There is still a lot of whispering and finger
pointing going on around town. But we must remember that in this
country, a person is innocent until proven guilty. Charlie Buck is
innocent until three things happen; arrest, trial, conviction.

 Leslie?s mother lives across the street from the cemetery where
Leslie is buried. I visit Mrs. Edmonston often and of course she
misses her daughter every hour of everyday. Charlie visits Leslie?s
mother on the first of every month to collect his rent money. After
all, Leslie?s gone and Charlie owns the house. Some teachers and
friends at Deans Mill School have developed a special memorial fund to
raise money for the purchase of books for children. They also built a
memorial garden with a reading bench at the School. There is also an
annual Leslie Buck Family Fun Walk in Stonington Borough to help raise
funds. I hope no one forgets that Leslie dedicated thirty five years
of her fifty seven years of life, teaching children in the Town of
Stonington.

---

Clarification of Question by nsb-ga on 07 Feb 2006 08:02 PST

elwtee-ga, great comments. I do have the facts correct and I didn't
get my info from the new london day  although I used some quotes, I
haven't published this story because I don't want to get dragged into
court by mr. buck. Leslie was in the breezeway, she had her hand on
the freezer door to try to get away from kirby. the sliding door
between the garage and breezeway is always open. Thanks for your
comments, nsb

Keep in mind that if an arrest and trial are premature, without
sufficient evidence, and the person is acquitted, he can never again
be tried for the same offense, even if additional evidence comes to
light. Rushing to trial can be disastrous.

Since you believe that your bet friend of 40 years killed his wife,
why isn't the DA suing you as some kind of trap, a wire and all that,
to nab him? Apparently you also believe he killed her.

just some thoughts on your request.

to begin with, while cases are brought and successfully prosecuted to
a conviction based on what is commonly called circumstantial evidence,
it is in fact evidence. it is evidence that supports the prosecution
to the requirements of the law. you will not find a conviction based
on probability because no such standard exists and therefore no such
conviction can exist. the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. even
if your evidence amounts to a "probability" of more likely than not,
that may get you a judgement in civil court but it won't get you a
criminal conviction. well, at least it's not supposed to.

the prosecutor is not failing to press the case because of his desire
to set the guilty free, it is because the evidence to prosecute, no
matter how sure you and even he are of the evil deed, isn't available
to the state at the current time. if you are correct eventually
something may come up to vindicate your position and convict your
friend. until then he's a free and not guilty as you and me of the
crime at hand. assuming there was a crime as so far none has been
identified. we don't convict on intuition, or strong feelings, or
probability in this country. which is part of the way we protect the
innocent.

beyond that, i find some of your statements quite interesting.

"Found at the bottom of a set of stairs with blunt force trauma to the head that
the medical examiner ruled cause of death undetermined. No physical or
medical evidence that shows she fell down stairs."

the other side of the implication you are drawing is that cause of
death is undetermined and that no physical or medical evidence shows
that she didn't fall down the steps. i would also suggest to you that
forensic medicine can detect an awful lot of things that catch a lot
of bad guys. in your case, it was undetermined. which means, they and
you and me, just don't know what happened.

"No tool or weapon found. No physical evidence to connect the husband..."

and if any were found, or identified and not found or anything to
implicate the husband to the death, you might be more satisfied with
the resulting prosecution but as i've said, you can't prosecute on a
hunch. you're own statement is that no tool, weapon or physical
evidence was found.

"he lusted after another women for months before his wife's death"

you know that positively exactly how? lust isn't a crime. jimmy carter
lusted in his heart and we certainly didn't prosecute him. are you
implying that every married person with a wandering eye is capable of
murder or just this person? do you know if he ever acted on his lust?
was he being lusted for in return? are you sure his wife was unaware?
maybe they had an open marriage. maybe they lived a swingers
lifestyle. it could be they were both sexually active outside the
marriage and they didn't mention it to you. i'm not saying they were,
i don't know them. i'm telling you that until investigation indicates
something of substance relative to the death, lusting isn't a crime.
motive maybe. investigative point of interest sure. a lynch pin in a
prosecution of murder when it is unknown if a murder took place, not
even close.

"The wife had a million dollar bank account that the husband would
have lost in a divorce."

you know this how? million dollar bank account frankly sounds like
community chatter. very very few people with assets keep that much
cash in a bank account. leads me to question the baseline validity of
the statement. assuming it is a fact for the moment, where did she get
the money? pre-marriage or post? was there a pre-nup? or a will? maybe
he wasn't inline for the money in any case. i don't know. do you
know,really and for sure? assuming you do for the moment, again,
interesting plot twist for matlock. certainly of interest to the
investigation but again, we also have to assume the police are good at
what they do and they looked and found nothing to build a prosecution
on. not to say he didn't do it, just saying, they don't know, you
don't know, and neither do i but we do know they don't have enough
that meets the rules of evidence standards on which a prosecution can
be based. it isn't against the law to have a wife with assests who
falls down the stairs and she might have. they said they don't know.

"...the wife was beaten and kidnapped by the husbands friend and part
time employee. The wife escapted her kidnapper but did not know that
her husband was
connected."

but you do know that he was connected. how do you know what she knew
about his involvement or lack thereof? you have proof? did she tell
you or send you a note to that effect? can i assume you presented that
proof of a connection between the husband and the kidnapping and the
attack to the police and the DA but they did want to charge the
mastermind of the crime?

"Kidnapper was arrested and convicted but never implicated the husband"

this may be my favorite sentence in your entire piece. apparently it
is your position that the husband in some way enlisted one or more
persons to attack and kidnap his wife, for reasons unstated. that she
escaped and implicated the kidnapper who went to trial,was convicted,
went to jail and took the whole rap himself. that for reasons unknown
he refused to save himself by implicating the husband in any way?
sounds a bit unusual to me. generally it would seem like the first
thing he would do is try to cut himself a deal by turning on the
husband. after she died two days later i'm sure the detectives asked
him about it more than once. probably a lot more. i ask you, is it
possible that he didn't implicate the husband because no such link
existed. is it possible that he acted without the knowledge or
suggestion of the husband and that's why he didn't point the finger at
him? it appears that her death just days thereafter has caused you to
make a leap in conclusions where no evidence exists to support the
leap. even the bad guy isn't saying what you are and he's in a
position to know for sure and benefit substantially and personally
from speaking up.

i repeat, i'm not saying it didn't happen just the way you say. i am
saying the detectives, so far as we know, have uncovered nothing of
substance to support your allegations and hence no prosecution. that's
the way it works. without knowing any of the authorities working the
case, i'll go on record as saying that the minute they find or you
provide anything a judge will let a jury see and hear that could lead
a jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt, they will jump on your boy
like the proverbial ugly on an ape. until then, he is free to spend
the money you think he inherited on expensive gifts for the woman you
think he lusted after. you can't convict because the circumstances can
be contructed to sound sinister and suspicious.

your tale is interesting. written very much in the style of the crime
shows on the discovery channel. what is more interesting is how much
it follows, in many parts verbatim, the printed reports in the new
london day. i suppose you and charlie may have been friends for forty
years or you could have gotten all your information just where i did,
in the new london day archive. i don't know.

you might want to know that you have some details off a bit.

leslie wasn't attacked in a breezeway, she was in her garage and the
door was closed.

the million dollars you refer to was actually a million four and it
wasn't all cash in a bank account. it appears to be joint assets.

charlie did in fact take the fifth, at both the civil and criminal
trials of russell kirby. he did that on the advice of counsel because
he was a target of the investigation from the first day. in fact the
civil trial, in advance of the criminal trial, was really done just to
get access to medical records he was shielding and to get statements
under oath from charlie and kirby in an attempt to move the
investigation forward. the investigation in which he was the prime
suspect i might add. whether he is guilty or not, and i'll grant you
it looks bad for charlie, no attorney would let his client aid an
investigation aimed at him.

kirby claimed on more than one occasion and so testified at his trial
that he was acting on his own and intended to rob leslie because he
needed 10 grand. true? i don't know. but your contention that he
didn't finger charlie is weak in the face of the trial. kirby was 66
at the time and turned down a plea bargain that would have netted him
a max sentence of 14 years and according to the new london day, likely
less. instead he went to trial with a not guilty plea and lost. he was
sentenced to the max sentence available, 21 years. going in at 67 or
so sounds a lot like a life sentence. considering he is likely never
getting out of prison alive and add that the estate of leslie buck was
able to attach all his assets in the civil case before the criminal
trial even started, it must have been one hell of a payoff to keep him
quiet. wonder what he's going to do with the money. must be a big man
in the prison commissary.

no disrespect intended here but you might want to know that the state
hired henry lee to come in and do the forensics at the crime scene and
still came up empty. if the good doctor couldn't find anything of
substance to prosecute on at the time, i'm thinking you won't either
with a 10 dollar question here. you might find someone who turns you
on to an interesting case to help you write the conclusion to the book
you are writing but solving this case, i don't think so.

in conclusion, i have read the posted story of your life with the
bucks along with most of the new london day archive. you and the staff
writer at new london write pretty well, who ever was first. your tale
is interesting and as one sided and prejudicial an essay as can be
constructed with the intent of sounding impartial and investigative.
in the end however there is nothing, nada, zilch that leads to a
prosecution, let alone a conviction. charlie buck smells at least
complicit if not out right guilty but that's not good enough. he has
been and continues to be the prime and only suspect. they have nothing
to indict on and so they haven't. maybe one day your boy russ gives
them the break they need. until then the investigation seems stagnant.

here's an alternative ending for the book. charlie didn't do it.
russell acted on his own. medical reports indicate that in the
abduction scuffle, her head hit the garage floor with some force more
than once. a couple of days later she was heading downstairs, got
dizzy, lost her balance, fell, hit her head again and died and poor
charlie is just at the bad end of the very nasty rumor mill. or not. i
don't know but i didn't read anything that made it not happen that
way.

certainly the story doesn't read innocently or accidental so my best
suggestion is you gather up all your evidentiary proof and head not to
g answers for probability cases but straight to the DA's office. he'd
really like to indict.