Why spend time wondering about the sordid details of Suzanne Jovin's death? Because those details are fascinating. So: Why not?
*THE METHOD. People say a knifing is usually a sign of close knowledge between assailant and victim. You're likely not to knife someone if that someone is a stranger. (But, then, did the Manson group really know Roman Polanski's wife? And yet: Stabbing was used there.) Classic case of the knife as a statement of intimate feelings? OJ opting to stab--rather than shoot--Nicole to death. With the knife, the killer seems to inscribe private thoughts onto the victim's body. Far more personal than a shooting. (Think of "Scream." The murderer knows his victim--knows her very well--in "Scream." And death will occur by knifing.)
*THE TANTALIZING DETAILS. In any great true crime mystery, heads will explode regarding tiny, tiny things. My favorite example is "Serial": So much ink is spilled just over the question of whether a certain Best Buy had an outdoor phone booth at a certain moment in time. Or on "Who Killed Alberta Williams?" We scratch, and scratch, and scratch our heads, wondering: Did a certain party happen? What did a choice to flee signify, for one family member? How many seats could be found in a certain make of truck, at a certain moment in time? And in the Jovin case: Was the weapon an X-acto knife? Does that mean that the killer was an architecture graduate student? Was there something romantic/sexual between Jovin and her advisor, and if so, does this fact mean something for the case? East Rock is the home of many affluent Yale professors: What does the location of the body, in East Rock, signify? (Don't get me started on Michael Peterson and the blow poke.)
*THE SPECIAL DRAMA OF THE COLD CASE. By this point, the assailant may be dead. (He may have thrown himself into oncoming traffic.) Also, mores have changed; the Jovin case happened before MeToo. How did professors conduct themselves before MeToo, and what behaviors may have been excused, or tacitly semi-excused, that wouldn't make the cut today, now? Advances in DNA analysis have occurred: What does this mean for the case? Was Yale protecting itself by withholding information at times, and if so, can there be a reckoning now, twenty years after the events "went down"?
*THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES. A special feature of the Jovin saga is that many nutty people have written at length about terrorists and specifically Osama bin Laden--and made outlandish speculations about an Osama link to the Jovin case. This is like in the Jonbenet Ramsey material, when so many people have so many thoughts about juvenile beauty queens--and it's quite possible the wackiness of juvenile pageantry had little or nothing to do with the actual murder. (But is there ever really NO connection? Are all things linked, in one way or another? This is the way you can begin to think, if you get obsessed with unsolved crimes.)
*THE BOOK THAT DOESN'T EXIST YET. It bugs me that there isn't a high-quality Jovin book in the world. In the meantime, I think of Charles Manson. I keep thinking about reading "Helter Skelter," but I know who did it. I know the solution to that puzzle. There's something really gripping when the answer seems not to exist. Witness the Amelia Earhart mystery (among others). It's possible DNA advances will spell an end to the Jovin head-scratching. We'll have to wait and see....
*THE METHOD. People say a knifing is usually a sign of close knowledge between assailant and victim. You're likely not to knife someone if that someone is a stranger. (But, then, did the Manson group really know Roman Polanski's wife? And yet: Stabbing was used there.) Classic case of the knife as a statement of intimate feelings? OJ opting to stab--rather than shoot--Nicole to death. With the knife, the killer seems to inscribe private thoughts onto the victim's body. Far more personal than a shooting. (Think of "Scream." The murderer knows his victim--knows her very well--in "Scream." And death will occur by knifing.)
*THE TANTALIZING DETAILS. In any great true crime mystery, heads will explode regarding tiny, tiny things. My favorite example is "Serial": So much ink is spilled just over the question of whether a certain Best Buy had an outdoor phone booth at a certain moment in time. Or on "Who Killed Alberta Williams?" We scratch, and scratch, and scratch our heads, wondering: Did a certain party happen? What did a choice to flee signify, for one family member? How many seats could be found in a certain make of truck, at a certain moment in time? And in the Jovin case: Was the weapon an X-acto knife? Does that mean that the killer was an architecture graduate student? Was there something romantic/sexual between Jovin and her advisor, and if so, does this fact mean something for the case? East Rock is the home of many affluent Yale professors: What does the location of the body, in East Rock, signify? (Don't get me started on Michael Peterson and the blow poke.)
*THE SPECIAL DRAMA OF THE COLD CASE. By this point, the assailant may be dead. (He may have thrown himself into oncoming traffic.) Also, mores have changed; the Jovin case happened before MeToo. How did professors conduct themselves before MeToo, and what behaviors may have been excused, or tacitly semi-excused, that wouldn't make the cut today, now? Advances in DNA analysis have occurred: What does this mean for the case? Was Yale protecting itself by withholding information at times, and if so, can there be a reckoning now, twenty years after the events "went down"?
*THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES. A special feature of the Jovin saga is that many nutty people have written at length about terrorists and specifically Osama bin Laden--and made outlandish speculations about an Osama link to the Jovin case. This is like in the Jonbenet Ramsey material, when so many people have so many thoughts about juvenile beauty queens--and it's quite possible the wackiness of juvenile pageantry had little or nothing to do with the actual murder. (But is there ever really NO connection? Are all things linked, in one way or another? This is the way you can begin to think, if you get obsessed with unsolved crimes.)
*THE BOOK THAT DOESN'T EXIST YET. It bugs me that there isn't a high-quality Jovin book in the world. In the meantime, I think of Charles Manson. I keep thinking about reading "Helter Skelter," but I know who did it. I know the solution to that puzzle. There's something really gripping when the answer seems not to exist. Witness the Amelia Earhart mystery (among others). It's possible DNA advances will spell an end to the Jovin head-scratching. We'll have to wait and see....
Comments
Post a Comment