Weis told me Tuesday that he ordered up a review of the Koschman case. He said his people found "nothing to prosecute."
But witnesses came forward with accounts different than those in the old police reports.
There are other questions about how the police handled the case. Koschman was described by police as the aggressor, but his friends now reportedly say that's not true.
Because both sides in the confrontation had been drinking, I don't even know if a conviction is possible.
But what I want to know is that the Koschman investigation wasn't subject to political clout.
The problem with state police handling it now is that that lying to them won't land the liar in federal prison. And someone is lying in the Koschman case. Either some cops are lying or some witnesses are lying.
If you're caught lying to the FBI, you could be looking at from two to three years inside. And if you're a cop, you'll lose your police pension.
But Weis said he didn't know on what grounds the feds could become involved.
"Maybe as a civil rights matter? Maybe corruption? I don't know," he said.
Will anyone ever get to the bottom of this thing?
"There seems to be some question about witness statements. So you go interview them, compare what was written then to what is said now. You go through all the statements and see if they're similar or if there are discrepancies. Witnesses should take a polygraph.
"When you have witnesses coming forward saying there are discrepancies, those need to be evaluated, and the best thing would be an independent review."
Right now, that hot potato is burning the fingers of state police.
But for how long?