gitana1
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- May 31, 2005
- Messages
- 29,385
- Reaction score
- 229,957
How do you find post #8?
If you're on a phone, turn it sideways and look at the bottom right of the posts and you will see post numbers.
How do you find post #8?
Not to mention the proximity to pig slaughterhouses.The area in the IOWA case is "Seven Bridges" .... water and bridges. Another coincidence.
IMO, This problem may be happening because the PC took on the tone of chasing a serial killer. Religious overtones. Saying he might be in this room. It set a fever pitch.
So to answer your question, if hypothetically I had a brother that looked like the sketch and lived near where this is, here is what I’d tell him:
Everyone’s innocent. Except someone’s not. Go to the police station, get cleared, prove where you were that day, give a swab. Chalk it up to a bad day. But, try to understand that it’s not about you. It’s about trying to catch this guy. You lost your Facebook. Two young girls lost their lives. Be part of the solution. Do what you must to get cleared. Then move on.
This! That is a great recommendation!IMO, This problem may be happening because the PC took on the tone of chasing a serial killer. Religious overtones. Saying he might be in this room. It set a fever pitch.
So to answer your question, if hypothetically I had a brother that looked like the sketch and lived near where this is, here is what I’d tell him:
Everyone’s innocent. Except someone’s not. Go to the police station, get cleared, prove where you were that day, give a swab. Chalk it up to a bad day. But, try to understand that it’s not about you. It’s about trying to catch this guy. You lost your Facebook. Two young girls lost their lives. Be part of the solution. Do what you must to get cleared. Then move on.
You’re right, they intentionally did not say it was irrelevant, but instead said it was “secondary”. Interesting isn’t it?LE said Sketch #1 is "secondary" . LE did not say sketch #1 has no connection to the murder. Unless I missed something.
I'd lock down my FB to only friends and family. There's a way to keep your FB info private. I hope that is not happening to you. That's just wrong.Let me ask this hypothetical,
Say you were being harassed on your social media by sleuths or whatever but we're innocent. Would you wipe your social media presence and all accounts or would you keep them active and fight back?
Sure, you can always report a post. FB may or may not do anything about it, though. They'll usually send a message to YOU and tell you to contact the police if you feel threatened. I have a public FB page. It's public because it's part of my business. Someone, a stranger, got angry at me once and took a picture of my daughter. They posted on FB that they'd shared the image in a room full of pedophiles or something and that she was, "An ugly abomination but still rapeable." She was 2 years old. When I reported it to FB, they simply told me to make everything private or to call the police. There was no "direct threat" and many social media platforms promise a certain level of freedom of speech. Those getting harassed on FB because of this crime have few actions of recourse. I am sure it is frustrating for them. Libel and defamation of character have been threatened but, so far, nobody's been successful at proving it. I wish someone would.
* FWIW, I don't think that person ever actually shared the image. They were just a troll. Still upset me, though.
We don’t know how law enforcement has been able to rule out CE, or any other suspects in this case.I hate to quote my own post, but in lieu of no response does that mean we don’t know how they ruled out CE as BG? As in, we don’t know if it was by DNA?
I was really hoping DNA, which would make it more likely, I think, that they also would have DNA on the real killer.
They amended this, and said that he is no longer a person of interest.You’re right, they intentionally did not say it was irrelevant, but instead said it was “secondary”. Interesting isn’t it?
We don't know for sure if it was DNA but they have said more than once they have DNA and they have taken samples from many people they have interviewed. It's sort of odd that he was arrested in Sept 2017, they have had a long while to get his DNA. Also Indiana passed a law allowing them to take samples from people charged with a felony instead of after they are convicted. It seems either if took a long while to get results back, or they had to wait for his conviction.I hate to quote my own post, but in lieu of no response does that mean we don’t know how they ruled out CE as BG? As in, we don’t know if it was by DNA?
I was really hoping DNA, which would make it more likely, I think, that they also would have DNA on the real killer.
They amended this, and said that he is no longer a person of interest.
That sketch is no longer “secondary,” it is irrelevant.
Indiana State Police clarify why they released new sketch in Delphi investigation
IMO, This problem may be happening because the PC took on the tone of chasing a serial killer. Religious overtones. Saying he might be in this room. It set a fever pitch.
So to answer your question, if hypothetically I had a brother that looked like the sketch and lived near where this is, here is what I’d tell him:
Everyone’s innocent. Except someone’s not. Go to the police station, get cleared, prove where you were that day, give a swab. Chalk it up to a bad day. But, try to understand that it’s not about you. It’s about trying to catch this guy. You lost your Facebook. Two young girls lost their lives. Be part of the solution. Do what you must to get cleared. Then move on.
They amended this as well, towards the end of the press conference.Bradford....
LE wants to know more about the vehicle on the 14th....from 12-5.
The girls were found on the 14th around noon. The car was there all night.
MOO Fighting back might just make FB more stressful and toxic. I think many people's FB is too open. I know, in the beginning, I accepted a lot of people just because they went to my high school or I worked with them. Then, after the last election I wanted to block at least half of them because of the extreme views on both sides of the aisle. Friends would be arguing amongst each other. FB became a toxic place to visit and honestly I am kinda afraid to return to it, but I still want to because I miss some people who I enjoyed seeing posts from. I think, if you leave your FB or any social media presence to just your real friends, then it shouldn't be a problem. (with the exception of possible hacking) There is probably a way to block or at least filter messages from non-contacts and only share posts with friends. I think you can remove yourself from search results. I think you can go a lot farther to make your page more personal and private without completely removing yourself from FB. The trick is to use settings wisely. Also be alert to other people's settings. If you comment on something a friend/page posts that is visible to the public, or friends of friends, then other people will see it and your comments.People are going to read into whatever choice you make: fight back and you're protesting too much and that means you're guilty; lock everything down and then they're wondering what you're trying to hide. You can't win.
I'd lock them down and probably deactivate until the masses moved on to someone else. Fighting back almost achieves nothing but more fights.
That is dispicable and I am so sorry to hear that happened to you and your daughter.Sure, you can always report a post. FB may or may not do anything about it, though. They'll usually send a message to YOU and tell you to contact the police if you feel threatened. I have a public FB page. It's public because it's part of my business. Someone, a stranger, got angry at me once and took a picture of my daughter. They posted on FB that they'd shared the image in a room full of pedophiles or something and that she was, "An ugly abomination but still rapeable." She was 2 years old. When I reported it to FB, they simply told me to make everything private or to call the police. There was no "direct threat" and many social media platforms promise a certain level of freedom of speech. Those getting harassed on FB because of this crime have few actions of recourse. I am sure it is frustrating for them. Libel and defamation of character have been threatened but, so far, nobody's been successful at proving it. I wish someone would.
* FWIW, I don't think that person ever actually shared the image. They were just a troll. Still upset me, though.
If police knew who did these murders, there would not have been a press conference. Imo, they would be using their time talking to anyone connected to him in any way...not working on thousands more new tips. Jmo
What if the person that is covering for BG is actually a religious leader that is not bound under the mandatory reporter act/law?