Why not say that to me up front? You berate me for thinking that they refused to answer questions from police, and then reveal to me that they refused to answer questions from the police. Deciding for yourself that they had no information that the police wanted is exactly what you accused me of doing, making assumptions about what they knew. If they had simply answered the questions the police had, maybe they could have stopped Brian’s death. That’s something they’ll have to live with.
I have 0 idea what you “thought”, what you said was “they didn’t help”, I said that as far as we know they gave the police all the information they had–specifically that Brian had gone missing, and that he had gone into the Myakka Creek / Carlton Reserve / Big Slough Reserve wilderness area.
There is 0 evidence they withheld or failed to help police. As I said, all the people saying otherwise, are assuming things not in evidence.
Resolved: Failing to disclose non-pertinent information to police, does not constitute “failure to help a police investigation.” Example: If the police were doing a “DNA sweep” in which they ask a number of people for voluntary DNA samples for exclusion purposes, if I know I have committed no crime, and refuse, I am not “failing to help police.” Since I have not committed the crime, my DNA cannot help the police, so failure to provide it is not “declining to help” it’s “declining to volunteer non-relevant information to police sans any good reason to do so.”
That is exactly akin to what Brian’s parents did, they declined to answer any questions initially, they very likely knew nothing at that point (if they did know something, then they should have shared that information if it pertained to Gabby’s whereabouts.)
I agree with every bit of this and I can’t see why it’s controversial. This was explained to me 25 years ago or so by an actual on duty cop while I was doing a patrol ride along.
My last girlfriend dumped me three years ago. The way she did it was a bit harsh (I am long ago over it, thanks) so I could see why people would think I had bad feelings towards her (I actually don’t). If she went missing a week ago and the cops were out of leads, I could see how they might grasp at some straws and try to talk to me. Given that she and I haven’t had contact in over two years, I have no help to give. There is no way I would answer even one question from the police. They can fuck off and arrest me if they can manage a warrant and then I’ll get a lawyer before I say a word.
Answering police questions is pretty fucking synonymous with helping the police.
But whatever. There is still a dead woman, the man who (likely) is responsible for it is dead, and the parents have to live with their actions.
Yes, you’re right.
There’s a walking trail map pdf of the Myakkahatchee Creek Environmental Park in the official webpage I linked to earlier, and it’s the area located to the south of the official entrance at 6968 Reisterstown Road. The area to the north of that location, where the body was found, is called Big Slough Preserve.
It’s a much larger area, so it’s maybe more understandable that the body wasn’t located at that time.
Another reason not to talk to the police in a case like this is that the high-profile nature of the case puts a tremendous amount of pressure on police and prosecutors to make an arrest quickly – which can make them prone to give greater credent to evidence that fingers the main suspect while discounting evidence that points other ways. Sheriffs and district attorneys are often elected positions, and they have a political motivation to be seen quickly bringing justice in a case like this. The Duke Lacrosse case I mentioned upthread unfolded how it did because a district attorney in a tough race defamed the accused and inflamed the community to win his reelection.
Yes but I don’t think this is a good thread for it.
I think this is where you lose the point. The police are not trying to uncover the truth. Any (honest) investigator will tell you that the truth is for the Judge and jury. Their job is to accumulate evidence. Evidence that will result in a conviction. A conviction of the person they believe is guilty. The police certainly have a consistent record of obfuscating any exculpatory evidence they may have accumulated, so the police do not occupy the moral high-ground.
There is no moral obligation to provide evidence for your own conviction (other than the obvious obligations to not lie or obstruct justice) regardless of innocence or guilt.
If they’re saying the body is skeletal that doesn’t sound like natural decomposition.
Scavengers are natural.
And Florida is full of scavengers. Good Og, man, have you seen how many lawyers they have?
yes but that would be natural digestion. I wounder if there is enough evidence to show cause of death. and in the same light, is the journal readable?
That doesn’t sound too long for that level of decomposition at all for that location, scavengers aside…
From the Wikipedia article on skeletonization…
In a temperate climate, it usually requires three weeks to several years for a body to completely decompose into a skeleton, depending on factors such as temperature, humidity, presence of insects, and submergence in a substrate such as water. In tropical climates, skeletonization can occur in weeks…
that’s quite a range but 3 weeks was surprising on the low end. If they already matched up the dental records then maybe there will be an announcement on cause of death.
It’s morbid curiosity at this point unless his journal is a confession.
Scavengers can all but pick a corpse clean within a few hours in the right circumstances, when the Zoroastrians historically did “Sky Burials” in the old days, they’d lay corpses out in these elevated buildings and carrion birds could have them picked clean within 6 hours. The specific species of bird is now critically endangered, and others don’t do the job as well, the few remaining Zoroastrians in India who do this burial practice, their corpses unpleasantly take days to decay.
Whether or not cause of death will be detectable will depend on the mechanism and specifically what part of the body is left. If he shot himself that would likely still be noticeable even from skeletal remains.
I’m confused, is someone claiming that his remains were skeletonized without being subject to scavenger action?
@kayaker posted recently about a dead deer very close to his home that stank, but within a week was picked clean. I believe he’s nowhere near the tropics.
I think weather played a big part in our recent dead deer. It was hot, humid, and it rained a few days.
As a lifelong hunter I’ve observed weather definitely affects things like this, and other local conditions, but it’s not too crazy unusual for the woods to reclaim most of a body pretty damn fast. Nature often doesn’t leave a ton of waste; the question is just how fast.
Rest assured if you ever die in the woods your body won’t go to waste.