You have probably noticed that I have been a silent member for some time. I always sign in--so please don't think that I am the person who "stalks" posters from one thread to another.
Actually, my computer skills are so dismal, I couldn't do it even if I wanted to, and who does that anyway?
I follow a few cases on WS, and I have to say that I am so impressed with the quality of poster's input, that I feel almost anything that I might add, is negligible.
But, I have to agree with the poster who thinks that Christine's brother should be heard first and foremost, and it is obvious (to me) who and what drives him away. He made it VERY plain that referrals to graphic descriptions relating to his sister's autopsy is traumatic for him. I can understand that. Yet, some members ignored this and carried on with the "gory" details and questions. He left. He only came back to repute some gory autopsy details. He left again. He just came back again to call out the lame response from the gory autopsy poster. Is it that difficult to empathize with a family member? I can totally understand why KJ left, even though he desperately wanted to correct the wrong information that he thinks has been reported by one member, and false and unknown info shared by the public at large.
Deadpanman--would you be willing to take over questions for KJ, as you planned? Ken--would you have the patience and stamina to respond to questions, even though you think you have already answered them? Woodland, would you take a break and let this communication happen, uninterrupted, so we can hear everything that Ken has to say? I just want to give him a chance, as an insider, without pressing his buttons (which is easy to do) to contribute to our knowledge of Christine's case. I'm not proposing that everything Ken thinks is fact, but I do know that an "insider" knows more than us. Way more than us.
Well--that's my first post on WS. Hope I didn't offend anybody.