I find that here at WS, they are pretty much *all* 'tough rooms'. The 2 words aren't a matter of grammar, they are 2 very different definitions:
Refuted means something has been 'proven' to be wrong, while unconfirmed means something hasn't been officially verified publicly by a law enforcement spokesperson in this case. I don't think of it as splitting hairs for those 2 words to be differentiated. MOO.
If I am to understand you when you say 'while this information has been widely repeated, I think you'll find a single earliest source', no, that is not how it looks to me. To me it looks like various sources and originating from more than one source, ie, "several police sources say, the wound that killed him was a gunshot to the eye" as in the quote I referred to above. The several police sources were obviously not authorized to make public statements regarding the investigation and so would not want to risk having their name attached for fear of reprisal. Often news media will have statements made to them by perfectly valid sources who are 'in the know', with an agreement that the conversation is 'off the record' for this very reason, and for obvious reasons the reporter will protect those sources' identities.
Imho, I'm pretty sure if anyone else was there that night with LE at the home of WM after his supposed suicide, that person, or those people, would also have been 'included' in the list of people present. There would be no reason to exclude them, would there?
Refuted means something has been 'proven' to be wrong, while unconfirmed means something hasn't been officially verified publicly by a law enforcement spokesperson in this case. I don't think of it as splitting hairs for those 2 words to be differentiated. MOO.
If I am to understand you when you say 'while this information has been widely repeated, I think you'll find a single earliest source', no, that is not how it looks to me. To me it looks like various sources and originating from more than one source, ie, "several police sources say, the wound that killed him was a gunshot to the eye" as in the quote I referred to above. The several police sources were obviously not authorized to make public statements regarding the investigation and so would not want to risk having their name attached for fear of reprisal. Often news media will have statements made to them by perfectly valid sources who are 'in the know', with an agreement that the conversation is 'off the record' for this very reason, and for obvious reasons the reporter will protect those sources' identities.
Imho, I'm pretty sure if anyone else was there that night with LE at the home of WM after his supposed suicide, that person, or those people, would also have been 'included' in the list of people present. There would be no reason to exclude them, would there?
"Refuted" vs "Unconfirmed". There I go, mixing up my past participles with my present perfect progressives again. This is a tough room. LOL MOO. IMHO. IMO. etc. Actually, while this information has been widely repeated, I think you'll find a single earliest source. Is that how it looks to you, too? Further on hair-splitting, didn't Abro report that those present at WM's death scene when the cops were on site "included" DM, his X, and his mom? Accordingly I suppose the caller could have included any of those or someone who had already left the scene or any one of the many unusually inquisitive neighbors who appear to live near or beside all Millard owned properties. IMO. MOO. IMHO. (And thank goodness for them, of course, IMO, IMHO. MOO. etc.)