Swami, so what’s the real deal with the Rhoni Reuter murder case in Deerfield? Is there a suspect or isn’t there a suspect? The police sound confused. I'm confused. Are you confused, too?
Swami knows about police and physics.
In physics, it’s a rule that two physical objects cannot occupy the same space simultaneously.
In police work, you can either announce in the aftermath of a homicide that we don’t know who did the act and that we have no suspects. We’re stumped.
Or police can announce that there’s absolutely no reason for local citizens to worry about the possibility that a crazed maniac is running through the streets. (Unless we know for sure he got on the 5:10 Southwest flight to Phoenix).
But, as with physics, you can’t have both be true at the same time. Those two positions can’t be simultaneously true.
The “citizens shouldn’t be alarmed” position almost always means the police believe they know exactly who did the crime but just can’t prove it yet because the forensic evidence hasn’t been returned form the crime lab. That’s even true in Deerfield where Reuter was killed last week.
As opposed to the way it works on TV’s CSI universe, crime labs in the real world often take weeks to run basic tests because they have so many of them to do.
Swami also suggests that you should never accept the common police assertion when police say who ISN’T a suspect.
In crimes when an unmarried mom-to-be is slain, the suspicion almost always falls on one person. Police never announce that fact because they don’t want the most obvious suspect to take flight.
You are smart. Put 2 and 2 together and see if it doesn’t add up to 4. Or at least 3 ½.
Leave a comment