4 ms·
Oh, I don’t think he’s innocent, but all information about this is post facto. All those sources exist after he was killed. I’m less conspiracy theory about th
by scarejunba 7y ago
Oh, I don’t think he’s innocent, but all information about this is post facto. All those sources exist after he was killed.
I’m less conspiracy theory about this, and more just remarking (pointlessly, I suppose) how information deteriorates over time. Some may even be true, but used as a tool to build the rest around.
- mixmastamyk 7y agoHis criminal record should clear up doubt.
- kazinator 7y agoBut the town police colluded with the vigilantes! How can it be certain that the record isn't a post hoc fabrication. Or if not entirely, then at least embellished.
- mixmastamyk 7y agoLooking the other way is quite different than planting evidence. Nor feasible in this case. Even a town sheriff wouldn't be able to modify offline (1981) databases of multiple jurisdictions. Or have the endurance to manufacture plausible entries and histories for dozens and dozens of cases over decades. A few hours research could likely pierce any misinformation.
- raquo 7y agoHe was convicted of attempted murder while he was very well alive. He was also charged for many other crimes for two decades, the charges just never stuck because he intimidated the witnesses. Plenty of information about his deeds was recorded prior to his killing.
- scarejunba 7y agoWhoops, I goofed. This stuff is pretty well documented actually. I look like a conspiracy theorist now.