Desdemona
* * * * Desi * * * *
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2011
- Messages
- 767
- Reaction score
- 1
:waitasec: I'll say it again: We need to agree to disagree regarding which speculation I'll consider in this case discussion. I won't tell anyone here how they need to think, and I'd appreciate the same courtesy. Thanks.Just a couple questions, Desdemona:
• Do you know for a fact that anyone who might have hidden his computers would have had to have been someone at that complex?
• Do you know for a fact that anyone else who could possibly be involved has all ready been 1) met, 2) questioned, 3) ruled out, and/or 4) made known to the public, specifically those here in this forum ("we'd have heard of it")?
• If your answer to the above two questions is yes, would you mind letting me know your source for these facts so I can also rest assured.
Respectfully, please understand the difference between asking questions and speculating. If the asking of honest questions (without accusation) makes you sad, consider how NOT asking honest questions could bring about MORE sadness for grieving family members if the one who brutally shot their Whitney is not, in the end, brought to justice. Even if you thought the chances of someone else being involved or pulling that trigger were exceedingly slim, could you find a peace in convicting JH without a thorough consideration of the case?
I couldn't.
No one likes to have their words misconstrued, so I'll assume that was unintentional: I did not say I am sad. I said it's is sad (among other adjectives) to see speculation about innocent people, and speculation shifting blame away from the person who has confessed, when IMO there is zero evidence that anyone else was involved.
Here are your questions and my answers:
• Do you know for a fact that anyone who might have hidden his computers would have had to have been someone at that complex?
Answer: To clarify, I don't have an interest in pursuing the speculation about other unknown persons having stashed Holt's things, period, much less possibly incriminating unsuspicious, uninvolved people who live in the apartment complex or who knew the victim or perp from church.
• Do you know for a fact that anyone else who could possibly be involved has all ready been 1) met, 2) questioned, 3) ruled out, and/or 4) made known to the public, specifically those here in this forum ("we'd have heard of it")?
Answer: I've seen no evidence or indication in what has been released so far to indicate that anyone besides Holt committed this atrocious crime. Though others certainly have a right to believe what they believe, I see no reason to doubt LE has the perp in custody, no reason to doubt that any viable connection to other persons has been checked out, no reason to think anyone else is involved at this point, and see no reason to place innocent people under an umbrella of suspicion and speculation in a heinous murder case.
• If your answer to the above two questions is yes, would you mind letting me know your source for these facts so I can also rest assured.
You can see that my answers to the above questions are neither yes nor no. IMO there is no point in answering questions presupposing a premise that is neither factual, evidence-based, nor plausible to me.
Ah yes, and my guess would be that Whitney's grieving family members would prefer to trust LE and the proper authorities to seek justice for their daughter, rather than to see innocent people tainted by suspicion, and the waters muddied without cause as to the guilt of the man who has confessed to destroying her and taking her from them forever. JMO