Barricades, they're not for just doors anymore.

A few weeks ago the Advocate released a series of crime scene photos and the police report to the public. Suspiciously absent was any report of testing for gun powder residue that would have been needed to clear of criminal intent the only person reportedly present at the time of the shootings, Maria Edwards.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/258179657/Police-incident-report-for-Scott-Rogers-Mathew-Hodgkinson-murder-suicide-in-St-Gabriel

  Why would DNA tests be performed at all? All that would establish is who handled the gun in the past and owner of the blood spatter of those who were shot, and we already know who was shot, so why the DNA tests? Why did investigators forego fingerprint tests on the gun? Investigators either did not release all of the report, or substituted crucial analysis with redundant piecework that could be presented to the public as evidence. Conducting these tests may have thrown the story.....


...... But the story was already thrown. If the Sheriff Stassi's barricade story were true, then there is no way Maria Edwards could have possible been inside that house.

  http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/suffolk_us_doors_to_murder_victim_scott_rogers_immaculate_home_had_been_barricaded_as_he_prepared_for_the_end_says_sheriff_1_3755012

Now, being sceptical of how that story could have been published so soon just two days after Sheriff Stassi reported a conflicting story, I took It upon myself to contact the East Anglian Daily Times crime editor, Colin Adwent. He did verify that Stassi had called in the addendum to the story by phone.

  To further verify the source of the article, I then contact Sheriff Brett Stassi by email. He did confirm that he contacted the East Anglian Daily Times with the story and that the story was true. I was quite surprised at the degree of emotion he expressed in his response. Since the story was only published in Scott Rogers' local paper, I asked him why he did not give this account to the local papers in Louisiana. His response to that question was that he did, but they refused to report it.

  This is hard to believe. Not only because it took three emails to get Stassi to give me definitive "yes" or "no" answer, but because he went out of his way to provide a different narrative to be given to those that probably knew Rogers from his past life in England. Through the short correspondence I was not convinced Stassi was telling the truth.

   Either way, it plainly lays out that the Iberville Parish Sheriff's Office was engaged in misinforming the public. It is important to discover why.