@Yemelyan, thank you for your time explaining...although Merriam-Webster is on my side
Definition of CIRCUMSTANCE
“a condition, fact, or event accompanying, conditioning, or determining another : an essential or inevitable
concomitant”
With that, surely, small utterances like those of TL, are subject to interpretation.
The main thing - I enjoy your articles about SKs, but it is my human right to doubt that the girls’ slayer was a serial killer on the prowl. (ISP, in a way, almost went there, with DN, and what happened? Two years lost in vain. )
But coming to non-native speakers - if you think I had to summon my “other” languages to interpret what has been said, it is obvious, why - I don’t buy the theory of a serial killer, unless we assume that the killer lives in Delphi or around, and it is not quite logical. Maybe the murderer is a serial killer. The ISP is not releasing more facts, and how they speak, is subject to huge interpretations. (Except for R. Ives, who definitely has logic on his side, but this, I suspect, is inborn).
I hope you won’t be upset if I say - after “the shack”, after two sketches, I don’t know anymore what ISP representatives mean when they speak to public. Especially if in one interview TL uses words like “victim-specific” when speaking about the murders, and in another, “victims of circumstances and opportunity”.
My opinion? Maybe they simply have to arrest him, if they think they know, and then, the witnesses might come out. They might be scared now. Definitely, they should stop public briefings if they have nothing new to say. And for sure, being interviewed by the family member indicate certain boundary issues on DC’s part. I suspect he did it out of kindness, but his act invites another question, can he be impartial when interviewing the relatives and cross-checking the alibis?