<p>Now that the emotional fiber has been stretched to its thin limit, one can appreciate the “correct” reports that start filtering out of the “decent” media sources. </p>
<p>Accordingly, the early (and videotaped) reports on the surrender of the younger brother that included HIS shooting at the LOE appear to be as fantastic as the ending of QT’s Django Unchained. Probably every bit as apocryphal as the tales related to the interception of the tracked suspect in Watertown. </p>
<p>PS To be clear, it has now be reported that the apprehended suspect had no weapon in the boat. And that the infamously ineffective perimeter did include the boat location. Expect more CYA reports in the future.</p>
<p>They sure made a mess of that guy’s boat to apprehend an unarmed suspect. Of course, it requires a willful suspension of disbelief to accept any media reporting on this case to actually be factual. Yesterday, he had an AK-47 style weapon in the boat. Today, he was unarmed.</p>
<p>Also the ridiculous rabbit hole of the missing Brown student being one of the suspects. His body was found on April 23rd and the family issued a heart breaking statement. Not only did they lose their son, but his photo and information was broadcast all over the internet in connection to the bombing, such a terrible situation for them.</p>
<p>It’s easy to second guess reporting by police, journalist, etc. if you are looking after the fact. The real question is at the time something is reported was it such that the person reporting it knew or should have known it was wrong. If you adopt that standard, I don’t see a whole lot of fault out there.</p>
<p>Journalists then feel compelled to pick it up, knowing very well that most of their viewers/listeners/readers will skip right over the half-hearted “We haven’t confirmed this, BUT!!!”</p>
<p>And, this may help you a bit. The issue is not that they took all protections in approaching the suspect in the boat, and assumed he was armed and dangerous. The issue is that they felt compelled to embellish the stories and, with the help of the press, to pretend the suspect shot at them in a lengthy exchange. They KNEW it was pure BS and ran with it. And for the purposes of pretending to be heroic after blundering for 18 hours, and collecting the accolades from their bosses. </p>
<p>Just as the stories about the “high speed chase” and the initial confrontation in Watertown more than probably are. </p>
<p>Yes, unbelievable is appropriate in this context. Appropriate for the police reports!</p>
<p>I don’t understand. I was assured by someone on this board who listened to the police scanners and knows the area quite well that the street where the suspect was apprehended in the boat was outside the perimeter. If I recall correctly this person even said they heard over the scanner a police officer begging for that street to be included and was ignored.</p>
<p>I particularly like this little gem posted by the OP of this thread:</p>
<p>“Regarding the sensitivity of the police operations, we all understand that there is no need to broadcast everything. We do get that, but can we safely assume that little more will be disclosed about the SUV location, and that CNN will thumb its nose at the type of data exposed by mere citizens who listened to a police blog and used google maps.”</p>
<p>Seems those who listened to police scanners didn’t have it quite right and that obviously the SUV’s location was eventually disclosed, if not by CNN than other news organizations.</p>
<p>Xiggi, could you link to some sources that show the boat was within the search perimeter? I did a quick google search and couldn’t find anything.</p>
<p>That was part of a report on CNN this morning. I did not look for a source for the perimeter story --because it really does not matter. Inside or outside the perimeter makes no difference. Tiger Woods could have lobbed a ball from the SUV to the tarp of the boat, with perhaps a bit of wind.</p>
<p>The issue remains that very little was disclosed and discussed about the location of the abandoned SUV. Contrary to what the resident apologist might try to suggest.</p>
<p>"Police officials initially said the boat was in the backyard of a house just outside the perimeter of the area where investigators had conducted door-to-door searches all day. But Commissioner Davis, of the Boston police, said this week that the boat had been inside the perimeter.</p>
<p>“It was an area that should have been checked,” he said. “We are not sure how long he was in the boat. There was a pool of blood near where the car was dumped about four or five blocks away from the boat.” </p>
<p>What happened to Sunil is tragic. How do you prevent this from happening again with social media quick to haphazardly throw darts at any target.</p>
<p>In the news video I saw last Friday, I heard several rounds of gunfire shot. Later news described it as exchange of gunfire. As a viewer I presumed the suspect was armed and today it turns out, he is unarmed. What was the reason given for the shots discharged at Franklin St.?</p>
<p>Was there a high speed chase? Did someone follow the Mercedes SUV after the gun fight?</p>
<p>I myself posted here repeating what I read on twitter about the Brown student being identified as one of the bombing suspects in the early morning hours on Friday. I feel so awful for his family. People wrote hateful things on their facebook search page. I very much regret repeating what turned out to be completely false. His family has displayed enormous strength and grace at such a painful time.</p>
<p>I got the impression from interesteddad’s posts in the other thread that the house-to-house search efforts were concentrated at the Eastern side of School St despite the fact that the abandoned SUV was found at Lincoln St around 2 a.m. Maybe the apprehension of “suspects” in error and the sweep for unexploded devices caused efforts to be concentrated in the East Watertown neighborhood.</p>
<p>It seems no one placed the tip of a compass with Lincoln and Spruce intersection as a central point then drew a circle with a 3-mile radius and sent a search team within that perimeter. </p>
<p>If I lost my dog in front of FAO Schwarz at Fifth Ave. and someone at Rockefeller Center calls to inform me that he found my dog’s tag in front of Radio City Music Hall, will I keep on looking around the FAO perimeter. I would have dispatched my H to walk towards Rockefeller Center via 6th Avenue while I do the same via Fifth Ave. But what do I know? My search skills are probably just limited to looking for a remote.</p>
<p>It’s still a good exercise to figure out what went wrong that day and how a search can be done efficiently without necessarily resorting to something resembling Martial law.</p>
<p>I, too, saw and heard the video footage with the barrage of shots when the suspect was first found. The newsfolks on air thought that they were shots from the same sort of guns. I get the distinct feeling that some cops tried to shoot up the boat, before the FBI and other groups took over and made it clear they wanted the suspect alive. </p>
<p>Yes, there are a lot of questions out there. I don’t quite understand why and how the now divorced parents left the US when they did. I know a number of immigrants, and those who return do so after they have saved their nest egg or gotten a pension going. Every report about that family indicates they were struggling financially, and they go back to Russia? Not like there are a lot of money, benefits and jobs there. Plus the older of the two suspects, the deceased took a six month stay there last year? </p>
<p>Also, the wife of the older, now dead suspect, lived at the apartment? Worked 7 days a week, many hours? Who watched the baby all of those hours? The place did not look anything like a mother and child were living there from the camera footage. </p>
<p>Two brothers all of a sudden decide they will make bombs out of household items according to the directions from a magazine and leave them to explode in heavily populated places. I would guess it was the idea of the older one, but without some sort of encouragement, support, it makes no sense. Hopefully, the survivor has given some information about this. </p>
<p>I also would like to find out exactly what happened in terms of how they were recognized at MIT and what happened all of the way to Watertown. It’s completely believable to me that the young man escaped on foot and got away. Young, athletic, night and Keystone cops all contributed, as well as a real fear that he might have been carrying weaponry, including a suicide vest grenades, bombs. They did show that they were armed during the police encounter. Any word on who held up that convenience shop. All I’ve heard was that it was NOT the two of them. As for the perimeter and not finding him, I did not expect them to do so. In fact, they came closer than I expected them to. I was afraid that someone had an uninvited guest in their home. It’s not like the police searched each house. I guess there wasn’t much of a blood trail as dogs might have been able to track that</p>
<p>There were no reports of such chase, or even a pursuit. Actually, reports on what happened after the initial shooting on Laurel street just shined by their … glorious absence. No mention of the location of the SUV. Obviously, the police had NO idea what happened to the suspect after he abandoned the SUV within seconds after escaping the shooting. Hence, the lacking perimeter (whatever it is) and the ineffective search and lockdown. </p>
<p>The reports about a “chase” were meant to intimate the police had been chasing the vehicle between Cambridge and Watertown. A number of reports included the (erroneous) stories about the suspects throwing bombs and explosives at the pursuing officers. The explosives were thrown during the battle. Boston Chief of Police was using the term “chase” two days after the shooting.</p>