Boston update (Page 2)

Yes, we all know it is not an execution... self defense from police, and sometimes plain suicide by police for the suspect. Sometimes you think "answers" are great... but there is none. And I can tell you how sick I get from looking at endless pictures of that idiot Holmes plastered on the TV every time something comes up in his case.

Too bad you couldn't have gotten this message out to these two idiot bombers now that they're getting a good dose of it.

I think he is hiding under a bed.

I think he is thinking, "OH CHIT!!!"

I reckon he's committed suicide and they haven't found a body yet.

He's killed an 8 year old, a policeman as well other completely innocent civilians.  You don't to be taken alive in any country in the world with that on your dance card.

Perhaps I missed something but is there conclusive proof that these guys were the bombers?

I know they would still deserve to get shot for the murder at MIT (if that was them) the car jacking and the police shoot out. 

But all I have heard is they had bags and were at the race and put the bags down. That is not a conviction, that makes them a suspect. 

Seems like we all agree that the media sucks but now we are all jumping on the bandwagon that they are guilty. 

This. They are innocent until PROVEN guilty - not innocent until the media thinks they have story that these guys might have been involved in a crime.

The first bomber was positively identified by Jeff Bauman - the man who was saved by Carlos Arredondo

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bomb-victim-helped-id-suspects-hospital-bed-article-1.1321582

I'll say this..... for guys who might or might not have been involved in a crime, they sure are making a good case for themselves.

And this is the problem I have with the media. He wrote something that didn't "positively identify" anyone. Then we get hearsay from his brother and the FBI won't comfirm or deny. That does not equal a positive ID.

I just wish the media and the court of public opinion would wait for facts rather than feed on speculation.

But yes, as LB said they aren't exactly making a great case for themselves, but at the same time maybe they understand how the court of public opinion can work here. Everyone was desperate for a suspect and an arrest. If I saw my pic on the internet as the main suspect and I was not a legal citizen and I was afraid of being made a scapegoat I don't know that I would be turning myself in johnny on the spot either. 

Of course this all may be moot, it may be proven that they were both guilty but from what I have seen so far there is no proof. 

+1

But how do you expect it to be different. Those working the case know a whole lot more than us. They can't give out info... the media simply reports what they have, and they certainly have wrong stuff sometimes, and they certainly make some stuff up.

But then we talk about it, because it is all we have.. but the cops are chasing someone...and they are running HARD. Based on that info, I can make the opinion that it is them.... but my opinion counts for nothing, so who cares.

Bottom line is that the court of "public opinion" isn't going to sit quiet for a few weeks until the official investigation is released and we are all caught up. And the court of public opinion isn't an actual court of law.

It was all over the local radio today how it happened and progressed - one of the newscasters knows his brother so got the scoop - Bauman was able to say he saw #1 and thus give the FBI a timeline, then pour over hours of video looking for a specific person in that time frame. Thats how they found #2 because he was seen w/ #1.   Then they were able to look at other pictures of them, both with and with out their backpacks. 

One of my friends friends is the one who caught the pic of #2 running away without his pack.

ETA he knew the brother, not him

I ranted about this last night.  It's nauseating. 

This morning?  A reporter calls in and says they asked for a translator to interview an accomplice and the net may get wider.

THEN, someone with a LITTLE reason over there interrupts and says that area has a lot of Russian speaking people and the translator could easily be there just to talk to people for information.

The anchor was like "Thanks Steve for that, so to recap, they are bringing in a translator to talk to an accomplice".

Wait, what?  Did you not JUST hear what your reporter said to not jump to conclusions?

But an "accomplice" sounds more scary/sensational than "someone with information that could help".

So, are these guys military/paramilitary trained and have extensive knowledge in covert operational tradecraft like they reported last night based purely on how they were walking in a 5 second video clip?  And they MUST have known where they were going and practice the route many times since they were not holding a gps or map.  They also reported there backpacks were big enough to hold "something".  Wow, stellar reporting and observational skill.  A backpack big enough to hold something.

Um, just like everyone else in the picture.

I guess they have to just fill the time with words.  The MUST keep talking.  No dead air or let the video speak for itself.

You just need to read a Tom Clancy novel to learn that stuff. 

I heard on NPR this morning that our FBI or CIA is contacting Russia to see if they do have any military or explosives training.  Of course that was at 6AM and everything was and is still developing. 

This is crazy stuff.

The Boston PD/FBI has done a great job of not letting the media know what they are doing in their investigation.  If there is anyone who has watched this coverage that doesn't understand why it has to be this way.....just go back and look at the complete fabrications that the media will put out in the interest of a "scoop"....or who knows what.

I know there are people who say, "well, if you gave out the information they wouldn't have to speculate".....but that is simply not the case.  The media today is nothing but constant speculation, so no matter what you give them they will take it to a level you didn't give them.  It screws up investigations, which are usually VERY time sensitive. 

Still, it is pretty entertaining listening to these nitwits.

This is why I never like the "blogging" movement.  So many people with internet access and a computer were now "reporters" and some considered them a news source even though they had no ethical obligation to do their due diligence. Now it seems the media has taken that route and just goes for ratings and will retract later if they feel the need to.  This is a little embarrassing really to call it "journalism"

A little humor spotted on the Yahoo newsfeed:

I loved the interviews on one of those morning shows this morning with friends the suspects went to school with in 7th grade. Really gathered a lot of important info listening to the friends report they have not talked to them since 2006.

Yep.

And for the record.  I'm not saying they COULDN'T be trained (but that seems less and less likely).  I'm just frustrated that the media extrapolates that they are from 5 sec of grainy video of two people walking down the street.

Some said that the Columbine kids did that with military precision and they only watched Matrix movies and played FPS games.