11th September 2008, 05:15 PM
I see that Dr Pete has edited one of my previous posts to remove some comment, and does not want us to discuss the specifics of this case.
I can't see why. The case has been published; it is in the public domain, and open to discussion as far as I can see. I cannot see that discussion on this forum that is based on published information can have any effect on the investigation or its outcome. I believe that the comments that were edited out were fair comment and not in any way controversial.
In any case, the comments in my post that Dr Pete has edited out were not principally about the specifics of the case - they were about the photograph taken from the victim's employer's website and posted here by Sith, with no objection from Dr Pete.
Dr Pete, I would be grateful if you could either restore my original post, or give a full explanation on this forum of why you shouldn't.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
I can't see why. The case has been published; it is in the public domain, and open to discussion as far as I can see. I cannot see that discussion on this forum that is based on published information can have any effect on the investigation or its outcome. I believe that the comments that were edited out were fair comment and not in any way controversial.
In any case, the comments in my post that Dr Pete has edited out were not principally about the specifics of the case - they were about the photograph taken from the victim's employer's website and posted here by Sith, with no objection from Dr Pete.
Dr Pete, I would be grateful if you could either restore my original post, or give a full explanation on this forum of why you shouldn't.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished