Posted on 10/22/2002 11:35:34 AM PDT by gubamyster
October 22, 2002 9:00 a.m.
He's a lone nut . . .There are two of them . . . He's from al Qaeda . . . He's a local . . . He's psychotic . . . He's media savvy . . . He's a teenager . . . He's in his late 20s or early 30s . . . He may strike again tomorrow . . . He might not strike again for days . . .
And on and on and on.
As happens from time to time, a crime story is suddenly the story, and the networks have once again cast a wide net in their effort to haul in enough "experts" to fill the 24-hour news cycle. Unfortunately, what they've filled it with has, for the most part, been drivel. If you've been following — and how could you not be — the coverage of the D.C.-area sniper investigation, you've heard the opinions of retired FBI agents, former police detectives, forensic psychologists (whatever that might mean), ex-military snipers, and all manner of others who have somehow convinced harried news producers that they are worthy of a bit of face time on the tube and have something interesting to add to the discussion. Having digested some of this discussion over the past few days, one thing is transparently clear to me, as it should be to you: Nobody knows nothin'. Soon we'll be seeing some talking head identified by a graphic such as this: "Amos McDuff — watched every episode of Mannix."
The various theories are contradictory, even self-contradictory at times, and every time one of the more plausible of them seems to gain currency the sniper does something to invalidate it. You think he only hits during daylight? Boom, someone is shot at night. Only on weekdays? Boom, someone goes down on a Saturday. But there are a few things we can reasonably suppose, and one of them is that when you broadcast to the world that a certain area will be saturated with police officers, and that this same area will be under surveillance by military aircraft capable of monitoring the movement of every last living creature for miles around, the evil-doer is very likely to do his evil elsewhere. As indeed the sniper did, shooting a man as he exited a restaurant with his wife last Saturday in Ashland, Va., about 90 miles south of where the police were focusing their efforts.
Another virtual certainty is that shutting down the I-95 and stopping every car within miles of the latest shooting will yield little but frustration, both to the cops who are forced to waste time on a fruitless exercise and to the people who are inconvenienced. First of all, there aren't enough cops in Virginia, Maryland, or in both states combined to put up an effective blockade against the sniper's escape, and as there seems to be no agreement even on what type of car he may be driving, responding officers don't know what they should be looking for when these roadblocks are set up. For all anyone knows, the sniper may be pulling into the very parking lots where his victims lie, blending in with the confusion even before the first police cars arrive.
There have been times when I was at more murder scenes in a month than some of these so-called experts were in their entire careers, yet I have only the vaguest suspicions about the person responsible for these crimes. And no one unconnected to the investigation has any more of an idea about it than I do, but that hasn't prevented some of these people from spouting off with their theories on the news shows. But if you don't have a theory, preposterous though it may be, you don't get to be on television. A few days ago, Larry King was trading conjectures regarding the sniper's television-viewing habits with Robert Ressler, a former FBI profiler. "Would he be inclined to watch this program?" King asked. The answer: "I think so, Larry." If that's the case, King must be torn over the prospect of the sniper's capture: How unfortunate to lose one of his few remaining viewers.
But the inanities won't stop until the sniper is captured or killed, and if he's arrested and brought to trial we face the unpleasant prospect of all those TV lawyers competing with the retired cops for airtime. And what they'll say won't make any more sense than what is being said now, for no one goes on television and admits he doesn't have a clue. Imagine the following exchange:
"Joining us tonight on Larry King Live is Jack Dunphy, of the Los Angeles Police Department. So, Jack, what kind of person is this sniper? Where should the authorities in Virginia and Maryland be looking?"
"Beats the heck outta me, Larry. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. Nice suspenders, by the way."
"Uh . . . thanks. Tomorrow night, Regis Philbin and Joan Collins . . ."
I don't think Mr. King's people will be calling my people anytime soon.
— Jack Dunphy is an officer in the Los Angeles Police Department. "Jack Dunphy" is the author's nom de cyber. The opinions expressed are his own and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.
I hadn't really thought of that. Just one more reason to hope the s.o.b. gets blown away the minute they find him.
Not quite true. The sabbath ends at sunset. The shooting was after dark.
Why would Larry lose a viewer? They get cable in prison.
I'm just waiting for someone to say, "You know, he hasn't shot any newspeople yet!" And then after he whacks one, "Well, he's only shot one."
If the authorities would release some pertinent info (not all, just some)someone would know what to look for, or who it sounds like, or remember something pertinent to the case.
Almost all the experts seem to agree; this case will be solved by luck, or by some citizen seeing something that pegs who the shooter is. And yet, the police are staying quiet with all information. Hmmmmm...wonder why?
And yet... if they didn't do this wall-to-wall saturation coverage, what would happen to the dozens of sniper-related 200-post threads that pop up on FR daily?
what if he were a FReeper and recieved his ideas from FR? what then? or Democrat Underground?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.