Woe.be.gone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2008
- Messages
- 13,022
- Reaction score
- 226
One more thing--
I unsubscribed.
As many other WS members (some of whom I consider to be WS varsity/legends) have already declared, I'm stepping back from this case.
I'm uncomfortable with all the mixed-messages we're receiving from a variety of sources, and the undercurrent of apathy I'm spidey-sensing from parties unnamed.
My prayers are for Christina, resolution, and the PPD, whose job seems infinitely difficult with the swirl of inconsistencies that have driven us bonkers.
I may pop by to see if there are updates, but much like TES, I don't plan to return until there are credible leads.
Here are my parting thoughts before I sign off--
Please choose your words and thoughts carefully.
WS is an excellent crowd-sourcing tool for generating ideas to help bring missing people home and in generating awareness, and it serves an important role in our society. I'm grateful for it, and I believe in the members' integrity and sincere desire to bring about justice.
I say this with utmost love and respect-- as a legal investigator, I cringe when several theories or names/players start to rapidly gain member-momentum, especially if the theories emerge with equal strength simultaneously. I worry that it could be a playground for a defense attorney's team of strategists when it comes time to create reasonable doubt.
What are alternatives that could have happened?
What are reasonable people likely to agree could have happened?
I'm thankful for the moderators, who remind us of the rules and enforce them when necessary, because I think a big part of their role is in guarding against what I just described-- and it can't be an easy task!
Y'all are smart and caring and tenacious, and I'm proud of you.
Keep on keepin' on.
Thank you for your input. I'm not sure I understand your point about parallel theories though.
Isn't WS is a place where onlookers (that's all we really are) can come together to share theories about what may or may not have happened when a person is reported missing.
When a case takes shape (via LE's output) usually people can see the direction the case is headed. Not always though because LE can be vague and won't always name a POI (when later we learn they were quite certain all along as to who done it). When events are not so clear, since WS isn't a courtroom, it's best to keep a somewhat open mind until evidence is presented during a trial.
If defense lawyers can use our ideas to win cases (was WS around during OJ's trial?), then it is possible there isn't enough evidence to prosecute in the first place. Defense lawyers don't need WS to spin their stories imo.
That said, they may be able to feel out where gaps exist surrounding evidence (belief or disbelief).
We are rarely privy to all the evidence anyway (prior to trial).
A new show, How To Get Away With Murder, begins tonight. The title is alarming but I'll be watching!
I saw a clip and the show looks interesting.
Different theories don't bug me as much as statements meant to confuse or clutter our minds do.