Kane
04-11-2005, 07:27 PM
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050403/NEWS01/504030301/1002
I was looking through assorted news articles at google.com when I came across the link above. It's a recent article (dated April 3, 2005) on the 1985 murder of Morris Davis. This month marks the 20th anniversary of the crime.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the case, Morris Davis was a Montana pizza delivery man who was found shot to death in a vacant house on April 5, 1985. Three years later, a gun was discovered at a pawn shop in Oregon, and a ballistic test hinted hinted that it was the same gun that was used to kill Morris. UM aired the segment around 1990.
As I was reading parts of the article, there was a surprise: in 1995, the gun was retested, and according to the crime lab, it was the wrong gun! :eek:
How could it be that initial testing showed that it was the right gun, only to have further tests tell a different story? Maybe the initial tests weren't thorough? :confused:
I honestly have no idea. But I do know this: as mentioned in the article, the detectives recently spread out the evidence in the case to make sure that nothing was overlooked. The case is still open.
I was looking through assorted news articles at google.com when I came across the link above. It's a recent article (dated April 3, 2005) on the 1985 murder of Morris Davis. This month marks the 20th anniversary of the crime.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the case, Morris Davis was a Montana pizza delivery man who was found shot to death in a vacant house on April 5, 1985. Three years later, a gun was discovered at a pawn shop in Oregon, and a ballistic test hinted hinted that it was the same gun that was used to kill Morris. UM aired the segment around 1990.
As I was reading parts of the article, there was a surprise: in 1995, the gun was retested, and according to the crime lab, it was the wrong gun! :eek:
How could it be that initial testing showed that it was the right gun, only to have further tests tell a different story? Maybe the initial tests weren't thorough? :confused:
I honestly have no idea. But I do know this: as mentioned in the article, the detectives recently spread out the evidence in the case to make sure that nothing was overlooked. The case is still open.