|
Lucylastic -> RE: TWO MEN SHOOT UP A NIGHTCLUB IN CANADA (1/17/2016 6:32:22 PM)
|
The innocent victim. Duru is an innocent victim, with no links to any crime, or the men who shot him.
So the police investigation has determined.
Police are experts in their field, which is gathering all the evidence available, and putting forth the best and most logical hypothesis possible, based on interviews, forensics, profiles, physical evidence and their own experience and instincts.
They actually have to work for answers.
That’s why police, early in any investigation, tend to use phrases like “nothing has been ruled out,” and “we are examining all possibilities.”
For police, it’s a generic place holder — and seasoned reporters at police press conferences know not to read into such phrases, understanding that what they typically mean is, “Probably not, but give us a few more hours to confirm our hypothesis.”
Of course, seasoned reporters also cultivate sources, for off-record updates on the most likely scenario so far — and terrorism was very quickly ruled out as a hypothesis in Calgary’s weekend shooting.
Of course, the question was asked by reporters, and considered by police.
But cops on the scene were already connecting one suspect arrested on the scene to prior drug crimes in Calgary, and more importantly, had uncovered absolutely no evidence linking the gunfire to any sort of ideological motivation — a dictionary requirement of terrorism.
No responsible media outlet, knowing this, would suggest terrorism as a motivation, with zero evidence to back the claim.
To do so would cause needless public panic, and fear mongering is not the role of a responsible press.
Unfortunately, not all who report to the public are experienced, or responsible, or beyond grasping at straws — straws, such as the names of two suspects arrested at the scene, which happen to be Mohamed Elmi and Mohamed Salad.
|
|
|
|
