cluciano63
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2010
- Messages
- 41,198
- Reaction score
- 27,341
it's all about the scoop...sad to say...all news is.
Sorry, what I was trying to say is that it's not a straight road, but a windy back country kind of road that is also very remote. Why be up there? A person certainly wouldn't have to get that far out of Fairfield before it gets mighty quiet on those roads. KWIM? Makes me think the person knows the area and was up that far for a reason. Maybe because of one of the many little dirt roads?
I don't think there is anything for anyone to apologize for. The police really did manage to keep it on the q.t. for almost all day. That is phenomenal, imo. The family deserved to know. Afterall, they were planning quite a search for today and much of the preliminary organization was going on yesterday, right up to early last night. I called it a night last night at about 10, just before the first news announcements came out. The last view I had of the Facebook page, was a little poster in the corner with a $10,000 reward announcement. It isn't there today. So, they really did need to know, imo.
And, they seem pretty cool to me, they aren't leaking a whole lot of stuff.
May not be anything to this, but I found this poster's comments alarming as well. On Fairfield's Daily Republic article regarding the discovery...scroll down to comments by "william."
http://www.dailyrepublic.com/story.php?id=701.0
The area where the body was found is described as a roadside covered in thick plant growth. The body was located some 30 to 40 feet from the roadway.
Thanks for the link, kissdegirl.
The article says:
This is the first time I've read such specific information about where the body was found. In the presser last night, LE just described the area as "remote." I wonder where the newspaper got this information?
P.S. Also, at the presser, LE said the body was found 30 - 40 YARDS from the roadside, not feet. Shoddy reporting?
In a press conference Friday, authorities said the body was found in a rural area about 40-50 yards from the road. Following an autopsy, the Solano County Coroner's Office will release the identity of the body.
Thanks for the link, kissdegirl.
The article says:
This is the first time I've read such specific information about where the body was found. In the presser last night, LE just described the area as "remote." I wonder where the newspaper got this information?
P.S. Also, at the presser, LE said the body was found 30 - 40 YARDS from the roadside, not feet. Shoddy reporting?
ETA: This one says yards too, I would go with the majority on this one, and that being yards.
http://cbs13.com/local/missing.nurse.boss.2.1682960.html
early reports are often fast and furious and riddled with errors. We do know the general area. And at least THAT has been reported (jmoo)Is it just me, or is a difference in range of 10 yards a fact that should be correctly reported? I'm no journalist, so I don't know if it's normally okay for figures to vary like that. But I find it unsettling.
Big difference, imo, in how the woman walking her dog discovered the remains. At 50 yards, I'd suspect the dog scented on the body, but at 10 feet the woman herself could've seen her. MOOSo far I've seen everything from 10 feet to 50 yards :banghead:
Thanks ~ I hadn't read that one yet, but if it's correct, how ironic is it she'd stop the car near where the body was. Oh my!According to the KTVU News report last night, the body was found by a woman who had stopped her car by the side of the road to let her dog out. The body was about 30 feet from the road. So far, for me, this is the only report that has made any sense.
The video is here: http://www.ktvu.com/news/23493530/detail.html
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.