I don’t know about you, but for me this case has been a roller coaster. I didn’t become aware of it until after the first identikit was released. I watched the BG video and tried to decipher what exactly I was looking at, coming up with something similar to the first identikit. I wasn’t able to identify what type of hat BG was wearing, but agreed that the hat in the identikit was about as close as I could come to any kind of solution.
Each time a new suspect was announced. I agreed they looked enough like the first identikit, that I was convinced LE had they’re man.
Then came the April,23 press conference where LE produced the second identikit accompanied by a profile.
This profile dramatically reduced the size of the suspect pool, and I saw an opportunity to not only speculate from the sidelines, but to participate in solving this case.
I do however have few resources, and even fewer skills. The only avenue I could come up with to identify the suspect depicted by the second identikit, was such a long shot, i didn’t even bother trying for a couple of days.
<modsnip>
I no longer see an individual resembling the first identikit when viewing the BG video. You may not agree, but if you’re interested, try pausing the video frame by frame until BG’s left ear becomes apparent, then use it as context to decipher the rest of the image. What I see is far clearer an image than any other hypothesis I’ve had of what the BG video actually represents. What I see is a young male with no hat, a knot in his hair at the top of his head, no facial hair, with his chin close to his chest, looking down as one might whilst trying to cross a bridge like this one. I see an image entirely consistent with the individual depicted by the second identikit.
<modsnip>
If this first identikit is not BG, and he is not the culprit. Then who is he?
<modsnip>
I also considered that the witness whom described the first identikit, may be the perpetrator. Unable to exit the area quickly enough, trying to divert attention away from themselves by pointing the finger in a direction where there is most likely motive to be found.
<modsnip: LE specifically said to disregard the style of hat>
I’m not sure when LE got hold of the witness statement which produced the second identikit. It seems to me given the size of Delfi, it had to have been very early on.
<modsnip>
I suggest LE concocted the first identikit, in order to apply pressure to their suspect. Hopeful it would cause him to crack under said pressure, and confess.
<modsnip>
I’m sure LE had the best of intentions, just not the most cleaver ones.
In the end, misleading an entire nation of both potential witnesses and victims, and allowing the actual perpetrator the opportunity to do a great deal more harm.
If this is an accurate account of the situation, then how do you think it will play out?
If LE was going to come clean wouldn’t they have done it by now, and if they’re planning to keep it quiet. How can there be a trial where a witness that does not exist, will have to be produced. How can you both catch the culprit and at the same time have no trial?
Perhaps neither will happen, and the perpetrator will either go scot-free or end up “quietly” dead in a ditch, leaving the case to remain unsolved.
<modsnip - it is a violation of TOS to link to pictures of random people a member thinks looks like the suspect sketch>
I can feel the hate mail coming already, and I haven’t even posted yet.
This is just the way I see it, I’m not telling you what to think. I’m only posting out of a sense of social responsibility.
Regardless of what you think of my post, Thanks for reading.
Cheers.
