Listen to the professionals
CW Post-sentencing press conference led by Michael Rourke, Weld County District Attorney
35:38
Off-camera question: "Were any social media rumors really disruptive to your process?"
Rourke, Weld County DA: "All of them are disruptive to our process, and and I don't say that crassly.
When we are out [...] conducting interviews of witnesses and an individual's memory might be tainted by something inaccurate that they read on a social media site, that causes us to think, 'okay- how much do we really... How much is, is true of what somebody is saying? What did they see? What did they hear? Or what are they surmising or guessing because of something that they read on, on social media?'"
I share this here because I have seen numerous instances where news outlets or blogs have followed-up on threads of tips I have read first on Websleuths (uncredited of course). So let this be a message that drifts out from this case:
Speculation/rumors on social media about these horrific crimes disrupted the investigation and the reliability of witness memory. The interest in knowing, in being right, in connecting with others over suspicions, in defaming a victim for selfish and unknowable reasons- disrupted a murder investigation where without clear motive or provocation a man slaughtered four people in his family and attempted to walk free within days.
I have always been conflicted about communicating my "hunches" via social media during an active investigation. Rourke's words give us reason to pause before pressing send, although those who most need to are least likely to.
A summary of wholesome goals one could use before speaking, in an adaption of the Buddhist tradition, "THINK" before you speak,
Is it True (factual)
Is it Helpful (objectively and to the receiver)
Is it In Time? (is now really the best time?)
Is it Necessary? (what would happen if you didn't say it?)
Is it Kind? (does it add to positivity in the universe?)