Should the FBI be allowed to treat a 100 yr old archaeological site as a crime scene?

Question

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9858626

The FBI is treating the scene of a death from the 1800s as a crime scene. Should they be allowed to potentially destroy evidence of heritage because the skeleton, over a hundred years old, might be the victim of a murder? Would it matter if there had been a crime? And if they find it was a murder...how would they arrest someone that would be dead by now?

Answer 1

If the FBI is studying a crime scene that old, it is well aware of the historic signifigance and will take all necessary steps to preserve everything they can...after all, at a crime scene, they have to preserve all evidence recovered anyway, so it is not much more for them to do.

Answer 2

No FBI must **** of if its making any damage to the site.

Answer 3

The FBI has full power to investigate the site for a crime, no matter how historically important is, which, apparently, it isn't that important as the public has no idea about this site.

The job of the bureau is to solve crimes, and I'm pretty sure there isn't a time limit to when a crime can't be solved anymore.  The date is irrelevant.  If they want to solve a crime from a few hundred years ago, they can go for it.

Answer 4

You have made a fine point here, apparently the FBI isn't busy enough these days.  You are correct in saying it doesn't matter at this point.

Answer 5

The FBI is within its jurisdiction.  Although the US courts may not try the dead for murder, solving the crime might clear an innocent person (also dead).  Would you deny the family that?

It could also lead to the recovery of stolen property.

Answer 6

Rather than destroy the site, they are more likely to preserve it and the items found there as evidence.