A Voicemail!

Wow!, wasn't expecting to have another post this soon, but one of the local papers today carries a story of an odd, garbled voicemail from Faith's phone on the night of the murder, hitherto unreported by Chapel Hill's 'finest' -- it may indeed have nothing to do with the murder (as they seem to feel), but I suspect few trust their judgment at this point anyway. The story is here:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/community/chapel-hill-news/article60733021.html

And more importantly it comes directly from this crime-watch show just broadcast today:

http://crimewatchdaily.com/2016/02/16/crime-watch-daily-investigates-the-murder-of-faith-hedgepeth/

(also available, in 5 parts, at YouTube):
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=crime+watch+daily+faith+hedgepeth

I haven't even had time to view it yet (nor listen to the voicemail), so may have more to write later (or perhaps not, if it only seems like overdone hype -- just peculiar that law enforcement felt a scribbled bag note was worth publicly releasing, but this voicemail was not).

ADDENDUM:  I'm late to the table on this; I see Tom Gasparoli has already posted some thoughts about the story/new-info here:

http://www.gaspowrites.com/2016/02/179-terrible-seconds-first-thoughts-on.html

(I'll withhold any thoughts 'til I've reviewed the program and tape for myself.)

ADDENDUM II:  I've given the show a once-over (and parts of it a twice-over) now...

I don't find it convincing... but that's not to say I think it's wrong. It is merely to say, that from what was shown I don't feel confident enough of the forensics and expertise involved to trust the conclusions reached. And unfortunately these type crime programs often hype/exaggerate their findings. The tape analysis and conclusions have been sent to law enforcement, so we'll see (perhaps) if they find the analysis useful or actionable. As a viewer, without knowing further details of the methods, it is simply difficult to judge the validity of the results .
Having said that, the show clearly (without using names) is pointing a finger at at least two people. Frankly, I almost hope the show is wrong, because if it is right about those two individuals who were essentially looked at closely by police early on and turned free, it would be even more damning of law enforcement's competency in this case.
Anyway, somewhere, the truth is out there... and perhaps we are drawing closer to it.....

ADDENDUM III (2/21/16) : just a quick note that local reporter Mark Schultz has now posted again on the voicemail story; nothing really additional to above information, but at least keeping the story up front:
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/community/chapel-hill-news/article61107117.html#storylink=mainstage

Personally, I remain rather skeptical of the voicemail interpretation, but perhaps time will tell otherwise.