[untitled]
10 comments
Note that, for the moment, only the Globe is reporting a confirmed link to the Marathon bombing. Everyone else is saying too much chaos to know anything for sure.
It may be titled as such, but according to the article, he is not a marathon bombing suspect.
The article says, "Authorities would not comment on whether the events were connected to Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings" and "The FBI source said early Friday it is 'too early to speculate' on a relation to the Marathon bombing."
The article says, "Authorities would not comment on whether the events were connected to Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings" and "The FBI source said early Friday it is 'too early to speculate' on a relation to the Marathon bombing."
Then there's also this in the same article:
> One suspect in Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings has been captured,
> according to an official with knowledge of the investigation.
[deleted]
[deleted]
"On the loose" is a phrase I usually associate with "The killer, who gunned down 50 people on live TV is still armed and on the loose"
i.e. There is a known dangerous lunatic on the run who has immediate capacity to do more damage. Not sure it applies to someone who is just a suspect.
Unfortunate (or deliberate) phrasing?
[EDIT] Looks like I am confused as to whether the suspect was involved in a firefight or not, I thought that was related to the MIT bit.
i.e. There is a known dangerous lunatic on the run who has immediate capacity to do more damage. Not sure it applies to someone who is just a suspect.
Unfortunate (or deliberate) phrasing?
[EDIT] Looks like I am confused as to whether the suspect was involved in a firefight or not, I thought that was related to the MIT bit.
Uh, yeah. The "suspects" were throwing IEDs at the cops and spraying bullets back and forth with the police, turning Cambridge into Beirut. Read the article.
Local news says that the suspect in custody is now dead.
Can you post a source please?
Christ. Got a link? What a mess.
This is the best I can find on short notice: https://twitter.com/7News/status/325134814200082432
But it doesn't jive with other images I've seen, where they had the man on the ground with guns pointed at him. So I'm doubting the veracity at this point.
Edit: It appears that the picture I saw was of someone who turned out to not be a suspect. Which would explain my confusion.
But it doesn't jive with other images I've seen, where they had the man on the ground with guns pointed at him. So I'm doubting the veracity at this point.
Edit: It appears that the picture I saw was of someone who turned out to not be a suspect. Which would explain my confusion.
Call me a cynic, but I'm hardly surprised when cop killers don't exactly survive until trial.
OP here. I'm deleting this as there are very few sources. Please repost if you find more. Sorry about this, folks.
Given I can go to the masses of media over reporting this stuff, why is it here.
[deleted]
> "an apparent carjacking led police on a wild chase into Watertown"
> "Authorities would not comment on whether the events were connected to Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings."
> "The FBI source said early Friday it is “too early to speculate” on a relation to the Marathon bombing."
Maybe I'm just terrible at reading between the lines, but this paints a fuzzy picture.
Both the headline and the opening paragraph basically state that this incident is related to the marathon bombing. However, the article then goes on to describe a carjacking as well as multiple "we-don't-know-for-sure" disclaimers.
While the presence of explosives certainly does significantly reduce the possibility of this being run of the mill urban crime, I guess I wish news outlets would temper themselves a little by not reporting speculation as fact.