Full Version: Not About A Particular Case, But It Still Fits.
From dictionary.com:
I'm quite sick of the police telling the media that they have "no suspects" in a case.
I don't claim to know a whole lot about investigative processes, but isn't everyone a supect to every crime?
Don't the police eliminate suspects?
If the police are questioning someone regarding their involvement in a crime, are they not a suspect?
I know that it's just a matter of semantics, but it bugs me.
Am I wrong?
Mike
QUOTE
sus·pect Pronunciation Key (s-spkt)
v. sus·pect·ed, sus·pect·ing, sus·pects
v. tr.
To surmise to be true or probable; imagine: I suspect they are very disappointed.
To have doubts about; distrust: I suspect his motives.
To think (a person) guilty without proof: The police suspect her of murder.
v. intr.
To have suspicion.
n. (sspkt)
One who is suspected, especially of having committed a crime.
adj. (sspkt, s-spkt)
Open to or viewed with suspicion: a suspect policy; suspect motives.
v. sus·pect·ed, sus·pect·ing, sus·pects
v. tr.
To surmise to be true or probable; imagine: I suspect they are very disappointed.
To have doubts about; distrust: I suspect his motives.
To think (a person) guilty without proof: The police suspect her of murder.
v. intr.
To have suspicion.
n. (sspkt)
One who is suspected, especially of having committed a crime.
adj. (sspkt, s-spkt)
Open to or viewed with suspicion: a suspect policy; suspect motives.
I'm quite sick of the police telling the media that they have "no suspects" in a case.
I don't claim to know a whole lot about investigative processes, but isn't everyone a supect to every crime?
Don't the police eliminate suspects?
If the police are questioning someone regarding their involvement in a crime, are they not a suspect?
I know that it's just a matter of semantics, but it bugs me.
Am I wrong?
Mike
Oh now this is a new one.
In the anthrax investingation, the police don't have a "suspect".
They only have a "person of interest".
What's the difference?
Give me a break!
Mike
In the anthrax investingation, the police don't have a "suspect".
They only have a "person of interest".
What's the difference?
Give me a break!
Mike
This question interested me, so I asked a detective at my local police dept what was the difference. He said that, in order to be a "person of interest", one must only have "reasonable suspicion" that the person commited the crime, which basically boils down to motive. But to be upgraded to an actual "suspect" one has to have a combination of some kind of proof and probable cause. Did that help or are you even more confused than before?
Kisov
"There's no fighting in here, this is the WAR ROOM!!!"
--President Muffley
Dr. Strangelove
Kisov
"There's no fighting in here, this is the WAR ROOM!!!"
--President Muffley
Dr. Strangelove
That does clarify it for me. "Person of interest" is a hunch. "Suspect" has something that ties in to that hunch. Am I right?
It shows that this isn't a problem of incompetent police work, as I had suspected.
It is a matter of incompetent or deceptive journalism.
I watch (or at least listen to) the news for at least 12 hours a day, and never once have I heard them explain that there was in fact a difference. What's the chance an average news viewer knows the difference.? My money is on "slim-to-none".
Naming and showing a picture of person of questionable character and suspect alibi, and then telling us they're "not a suspect" must make for good ratings.
Mike
It shows that this isn't a problem of incompetent police work, as I had suspected.
It is a matter of incompetent or deceptive journalism.
I watch (or at least listen to) the news for at least 12 hours a day, and never once have I heard them explain that there was in fact a difference. What's the chance an average news viewer knows the difference.? My money is on "slim-to-none".
Naming and showing a picture of person of questionable character and suspect alibi, and then telling us they're "not a suspect" must make for good ratings.
Mike
I doubt that the media conciders the defamation of character, the ruining of reputations, and the embarrassment that is caused when they "name and show a picture of the person" that is not an actual suspect. But I guess the public loves to have someone to point a finger at. I guess it raises their confidence in our law enforcement, makes us feel all warm and cozy that our men/women in blue are making progress. . . even if it is just a hunch. . . kinda ruins the whole innocent until proven guilt theory, doesn't it?
Kisov
Kisov
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.