- Joined
- Jan 20, 2015
- Messages
- 517
- Reaction score
- 1,439
Not that I don't appreciate the podcast digging up more possibilities - sometimes you really have to be aware of the winning format of true crime content while listening to this stuff.
In ep14 of Witness there is a story where the police are told Margaret was seen with FA. (~30min in)
The music is tense and grim, and the announcer is speaking slowly in a low voice that adds a lot of gravity to the story.
And you come away feeling... Whoa, the police KNEW a murdered woman was seen with FA!
But in retrospect... THREE people knew this information... and out of all of them, the only time they told the police was out their car window to a traffic policeman while driving past a traffic incident.
And the lady in the podcast is wondering "what might of happened" if the police took the information seriously. A traffic policeman trying to deal with an unrelated and probably stressful traffic indecent ... blimey, I can easily forgive him for missing that.
See. I don't blame the media for putting time into this content, and this particular podcast is more valuable than some. But it's interesting to me that this incident is added to a piled-on narrative around police incompetence. Yes I agree the Police are under pressure, and need to do way way better, but these extra layers of needling are unnecessary.
On the contrary - this type of story highlights how much BS the police have to content with.
You really get the impression these rural communities harbour quite a lot of resentment and suspicion that makes legitimate facts difficult to discern.
Instead of this witness wondering "what might of happened" if the cops did their job. I'd be doing a lot of soul-searching around why none of the three people who knew this important information went to the police. I'd be asking "what might of happened if I got to my feet and walked into a police station to make a statement". I mean, a girl has been murdered here, it's worth more than a McDonalds Drive through level of effort. Mentioning it in passing (literally!) out the window of your car as you drive past a traffic warden is rubbish.
In ep14 of Witness there is a story where the police are told Margaret was seen with FA. (~30min in)
The music is tense and grim, and the announcer is speaking slowly in a low voice that adds a lot of gravity to the story.
And you come away feeling... Whoa, the police KNEW a murdered woman was seen with FA!
But in retrospect... THREE people knew this information... and out of all of them, the only time they told the police was out their car window to a traffic policeman while driving past a traffic incident.
And the lady in the podcast is wondering "what might of happened" if the police took the information seriously. A traffic policeman trying to deal with an unrelated and probably stressful traffic indecent ... blimey, I can easily forgive him for missing that.
See. I don't blame the media for putting time into this content, and this particular podcast is more valuable than some. But it's interesting to me that this incident is added to a piled-on narrative around police incompetence. Yes I agree the Police are under pressure, and need to do way way better, but these extra layers of needling are unnecessary.
On the contrary - this type of story highlights how much BS the police have to content with.
You really get the impression these rural communities harbour quite a lot of resentment and suspicion that makes legitimate facts difficult to discern.
Instead of this witness wondering "what might of happened" if the cops did their job. I'd be doing a lot of soul-searching around why none of the three people who knew this important information went to the police. I'd be asking "what might of happened if I got to my feet and walked into a police station to make a statement". I mean, a girl has been murdered here, it's worth more than a McDonalds Drive through level of effort. Mentioning it in passing (literally!) out the window of your car as you drive past a traffic warden is rubbish.
Last edited: