No it's not
that simple
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2015
- Messages
- 4,364
- Reaction score
- 4,916
If, as Robert Ives says, there are at least three “signatures” left by the killer then why the heck can’t LE release what one of those is to the public. They can keep the others to themselves. But if the signatures are as they defined them, unrelated to the crime themselves but personal to the killer, why could police NOT think this would be useful for the public to know. That someone who knows the killer even casually might recognize this something as being connected to him? LE is cemented to this idea that someone close to the killer recognizes him and just is too afraid or too loyal to rat him out. But someone who is only a casual acquaintance may pick up on the “signature” and will not have any qualms....and a desire for $240,000...about turning this guy in. LE’s thinking is moronic. There. I said it. I have a huge amount of respect for LE but this investigation went off the rails a long time ago. My fear is it’s too far gone.
The signatures could be part of the COD and hence would not be released. Just saying.
ALL IMO
-Nin