So we have four named suspects. Are they all open for sleuthing, comments and accusations?
If you are including BP, he is not open for sleuthing. The reason being, other than the 2016 Fox article referring to him as one by the journalist (and no other MSM that I am aware of), there is no DIRECT QUOTE by LE that he is a suspect.
Conversely, (as evidenced by the more current 2018 link I provided upthread) both our VI and the parents have been referred to in
direct quotes by Det. Lt. Shaw to be suspects. Sure, he says to the effect that "everyone is a suspect", but they aren't named like WS, FB, and NB. Big difference between what could be journalistic reporting vs out of the horse's mouth.
Rules are not black and white, they are not etched in stone. As you know, decisions can be thread specific and we make allowances and exceptions for our VIs. In this case, as CM/WS is not only a VI but also a named suspect, we are giving leeway for him to say whatever he needs to say in his own words by way of his own defence and his inside knowledge of the case. As usual, you may choose to believe or disbelieve, take it with a grain of salt. You may ask questions respectfully. If you find some of the VI's comments disrespectful and not up to WS standards, that does not warrant regular members being disrespectful or making accusations against him. We'd rather have a VI in our midst, contributing inside info to the discussion, than drive them away with our usual rules.
Parents are normally considered victims at WS, but in this case, they have been specifically named by LE as included in their current number of suspects. Other than the parents and WS, nobody else has been named.
On another note, after consulting with Tricia, she has approved discussion of the car and the shed.
If you have further questions, please address them via personal messaging rather than derail the thread with concerns about moderation.
Hopefully this helps clarify. If not, I will ask
@Tricia to weigh in on the issue.