Do you have anything against police I should know about? They say "my case" and it says to you they are insecure? "My this" or "my that" does not equal selfish insecure power sucking authority. I can't see how you arrive at that conclusion. Of course he is accepting help from wherever it shows up. It's not like he is going to take the corpse home with him in his trunk is it? I mean he said "my victim" right?
On Jul 30, 2:50 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > I repeat, its the teams job, with the help of the community. If the > lead investigator wants to the take the input and help of others and > make it his/her own, in my mind thats the actions of an insecure > person enforcing their position. If you prefer to see it differently, > thats okay ;-] > > On Jul 29, 7:47 pm, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Could it possibly be you are taking that innocent little phrase a > > tad too far? The lead investigator is in charge. I am grateful that > > they take a strong personal responsibility to find out not only what > > happened but to catch the murderer. To bring in the OJ case seems an > > odd support piece of your argument. Catching the suspect with enough > > evidence to go to court with is the guy's job, and that is the > > beginning of justice yes, but not the final result. > > > On Jul 29, 1:00 pm, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > A homicide investigation typically involves many people, not just the > > > lead investigator. He/She gets assigned to the case and its a team and > > > community effort, not one persons. There is no "I" in team. Calling > > > the victim "mine" seems to negate the involvement of the team and the > > > community, without which many crimes would not get solved. Although > > > the investigator may be on a truth finding mission, unfortunately > > > justice isn't a police function, but a function of the court. Police > > > worked very hard on the OJ case, but was justice a result of their > > > efforts? > > > > On Jul 29, 2:38 pm, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Although I agree with your view on ownership, I do not agree at all > > > > with the following: > > > > > On Jul 29, 5:04 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > For example, on the "First 48" show the other day, the lead > > > > > > homicide detective referred to the person who had been murdered as "my > > > > > victim". Pesonally, I would think that if ownership of the victim were > > > > > allotted to anyone, it would be family members. I think it would be > > > > > safe to say that the person who said this is dwarfed by insecurity > > > > > and/ > > > > > or carried away by a need to reinforce his position of power. > > > > > I don't see it that way in the least. This is a guy who is > > > > commited to finding the killer of this person. He has made it his > > > > personal mission, he has "owned" that responsibility and takes it > > > > very seriously. Nobody else is going to do that job but him. The > > > > family is not equipped to do it. He is providing a service of truth > > > > finding and justice. Saying it another way might actually make it > > > > easier to not take it so seriously. "It is just another victim" for > > > > example.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
