4 ms·
Why? A completely unvetted “family friend” who won’t even give a last name provides a salacious quote that’s completely unverifiable. A niece, known to be rela
by JackFr 3y ago
Why? A completely unvetted “family friend” who won’t even give a last name provides a salacious quote that’s completely unverifiable. A niece, known to be related and with a name and address offers a counterpoint. It’s ok to be skeptical.
Things like: What did the note say? Where did the gun come from? Is there any CCTV video from the hotel and garage? still need to be investigated by the police.
It is possible that he was stressed, depressed, and expected to have his reputation (and life) destroyed by scorched earth lawyers for Boeing.
- theultdev 3y agoI wonder why they wouldn't give a last name... Half the "news" articles nowadays are "sources familiar with the matter". Now that Boeing is in the hot seat we want to identify journalist sources? And I don't think there's a rule that we can only talk about things that have been fully investigated. It's on ongoing current event and a development in it. It can be talked about if people want to talk about it and can do it civilly.
- burnished 3y agoWhat I'm realizing now is that I needed to do some educating as part of that comment - I'm surprised that so many people are interpreting those statements from the family as evidence of suicidal feelings, ideation, and planning.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- burnished 3y agoBecause being stressed in that situation is expected and isn't in any way a counter claim, yet was offered like it was. You calling it a counterpoint is actually my point - it in no way is. Being skeptical is good but that isn't skepticism its the gullibility of the cynic