No discussion of POIs?
Moderators: Bullitt, Aud8us, Michael Butterfield, johnny5
12 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
- FoolsGold

-
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: Somewhere betwen heaven and hell
Re: No discussion of POIs?
Thanks Mike for the correction and elaboration.
I can't speak for others, but when I, and perhaps other posters, say 'suspect', we mean person of interest, or someone LE has looked at but failed to clear through the evidence.
If we limited our discussion to suspects named by LE, there would be no discussion of suspects, period, as LE has never named a suspect.
I can't speak for others, but when I, and perhaps other posters, say 'suspect', we mean person of interest, or someone LE has looked at but failed to clear through the evidence.
Re: No discussion of POIs?
Let's face it... LE will not be providing us with the names of any new "suspects" in this 40 year-old case for discussion. Whatever investigation is still occurring, as Mike suggests, is more REACTIVE than proactive i.e. any suspect investigation will likely be the result of "tips" provided by the public. Unfortunately, it seems that only occurs these days when someone (Perez, Kaufmann etc.) yells loud enough from a soapbox that LE has little choice but to investigate their claims.
It's always easier, of course, to discuss folks like Kaczynski, ALA and Bruce Davis because few people are worried about dragging their good names through the mud as Zodiac POIs. Dead guys like Gaikowski rarely sue anyone for libel. Folks like Mr. X, however, who is alive and has no criminal record, are much more difficult to discuss and CAN'T really be evaluated without revealing some personal information because it's their personal information that created the suspicion in the first place. Do we limit the discussion to those accused by nut cases, investigated and cleared by LE or bad guys with a criminal track record (considering that Z arguably probably had no criminal record)? How could/would someone like the "PHS Zodiac" be discussed here without creating liability issues (if he hadn't been presented elsewhere) or should he be publicly discussed at all?
My intention in bringing this up really isn't to challenge the board rules but rather to raise the rhetorical question of whether a potential "new POI" can be discussed responsibly in a public forum. I do respect and appreciate Mike's desire to eliminate blind accusations.
It's always easier, of course, to discuss folks like Kaczynski, ALA and Bruce Davis because few people are worried about dragging their good names through the mud as Zodiac POIs. Dead guys like Gaikowski rarely sue anyone for libel. Folks like Mr. X, however, who is alive and has no criminal record, are much more difficult to discuss and CAN'T really be evaluated without revealing some personal information because it's their personal information that created the suspicion in the first place. Do we limit the discussion to those accused by nut cases, investigated and cleared by LE or bad guys with a criminal track record (considering that Z arguably probably had no criminal record)? How could/would someone like the "PHS Zodiac" be discussed here without creating liability issues (if he hadn't been presented elsewhere) or should he be publicly discussed at all?
My intention in bringing this up really isn't to challenge the board rules but rather to raise the rhetorical question of whether a potential "new POI" can be discussed responsibly in a public forum. I do respect and appreciate Mike's desire to eliminate blind accusations.
12 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
