Could be. Maybe hired by a newish (or longstanding) lover with or without the wife’s knowledge.
The wife is rich so she (or whoever) could’ve made sure the killer had financial assistance to pull this off – hotel room in the city, the getaway bike, burner phones, whatever. But you can’t buy common sense, so the guy showed his face at Starbucks and likely left DNA behind. Doh!
So the cold blooded murder of anyone is unacceptable. Not just executives?
I’m in the disturbed/disgruntled lone gunman camp.
I know, crazy idea, right?
I’d like to suggest that the moderators remove this entire topic. While we talk about many things on these boards that are not related to getting into college, this one is not only off-topic but also personally upsetting for many who may be on this page. The family could be on here, but there are definitely friends, classmates of the sons, and other acquaintances and community members on here.
I just don’t see the wife being involved. She has a career, they share two children and on the surface it seemed they had a good co-parenting set-up. I just think it was some guy with a bone to pick and he decided to do something terrible.
Rich enough to hire a hit.
I tend to agree.
Same.
Yes to all of this.
Being rich is not necessary. Some might be shocked to know how little it costs to hire a hitman, and how easy. Google is your friend.
The news mentioned the words are close to a book entitled Delay, Deny, Defend Why Insurance Companies Don’t Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It. An expose of insurance injustice and a plan for consumers and lawmakers to fight back.
No, I just meant whether there are ways to use DNA to identify/find the suspect if the suspect’s DNA isn’t in the criminal database.
Couldn’t the same be said for just about any news topic? There is a thread discussing a war where I have immediate family members. The thread discussing transgender rights could obviously feel triggering to someone who is transgender or has a transgender child. The abortion thread could be triggering to someone who has made the painful decision to have abortion. Just about every news topic could be potentially triggering to someone. It seems, in that case, the best thing is for the person not to read or participate in threads they may find upsetting. The thread title makes the topic very clear so easy to avoid. But I guess this just gets back to whether or not we should have a politics forum at all.
Edited to add: I just realized that this is NOT in the politics forum. For some reason I had assumed it was. In that case, yes, maybe Parent Cafe is not the best place? Of course, it’s not really politics, but I guess I think of the politics forum more as a current events forum.
There was a discussion behind the scenes to keep this topic in the Cafe since it is not political. As long as posts continue to follow the forum rules, it can remain here. The Cafe historically has discussed current events that are apolitical.
Nope, I’m not googling that…
I’m sure you’re right though.
I personally assume this guy was acting on his own agenda, not “working” for someone.
Reminder that this is the cafe and not the political forum. Links to articles about claims denials and such are not appropriate in this thread.
Thank you for your understanding!
A number of posts deleted.
I believe you. 
A suggestion, I’ve been on discussion boards that have a spot for controversial topics, yes tons of political topics but they’re slowing down since the election is over. It does work pretty well. I haven’t visited the political section here, just because I went out of my way a bit to avoid political discussions. This topic is on the controversial board currently.
I’m also surprised that he was walking alone and wasn’t accompanied by any sort of security. The CEO of a big pharma company was my neighbor for a long time and he always had security. If this gentleman had received threats, which I believe his wife mentioned, wouldn’t he have some sort of security with him?
And the NYT link above mentioned something about a recent bomb threat?
On TMZ, someone who used to be employed as the CEOs bodyguard commented that he was shocked to see him walking without any security detail. He should have at least been wearing some sort of protective vest, according to this guy. But maybe because the walk was such a short distance, he insisted on going on his own. But then that would support the idea that the shooter actually had some inside information.