Maybe it's just me, but this whole Kate Seeber drama is just fascinating (probably why I'm writing about it so often).

It reads more like a movie or John Grisham novel than a real-life court drama.

The rabbit hole goes deep in this case.

There is obviously the 2001 trial of Jeffrey Hampshire after the shocking murder of Ruth Witter. There is the equally shocking verdict and the jury saying afterward that "We hate it, but our hands were cuffed. We had to go on the evidence they gave to us, and the charges from the judge. I would have loved more evidence. They put us in a bad spot."

Another juror seemed sure Hampshire did it, but didn't have the evidence in front of him.

Later, of course, there is Hampshire's spotted arrest record (burglary seemed to be his hobby), and the St. Patrick's Day. car ride that took Ryan Rossley's life. for which Hampshire was found guilty of evidence tampering.

Then Katherine Seeber's confession that only netted her five years off a potentially life-long sentence (From 25 to life down to 20 to life) and the subsequent court case over tossing her plea that wound through the courts but was eventually upheld.

Upheld, that is, until Garry Veeder committed suicide and tossed the whole issue into question.

A lab tech at the NYS forensic lab, Veeder admitted to not only faking some of his results, but to actually not knowing how to work the microscope.

Here is a report from the State Inspector General affirming that point.

Here's an exerpt from page 3:
"The assessor also noted that Veeder was unable to articulate or perform basic tasks in fiber analysis including proper operation of a microscope used in several key tests in fiber examinations."

Now, 12 years after the saga started, it may be coming full-circle with a trial of Katherine Seeber for the murder of Ruth Witter.

I don't even know that John Grisham would make this stuff up. No one would buy it.