But exposing him and trumpeting him immediately as their “guilty perp” - just because he was obvious and Reno (and the Atlanta PD!) needed a victim (er, criminal) - was dead wrong.
‘I do admit however, that the “profile” of Jewell as a POTENTIAL bomber (police interest, exposure, availability, access, location, etc.) was valid.’
Nonsense. Lets go down your list;
1. Police interest.
He was working as a security guard, while trying to get into a police academy. I did the same thing after leaving the service. Its hardly a ‘defining trait’ by any rational standard.
2. Exposure/Availability/Access/Location. He was working as a security guard at the event. If he wasn’t there, he wouldn’t get paid. To suggest this, you are using the guys JOB to tar him.
But exposing him and trumpeting him immediately as their “guilty perp” - just because he was obvious and Reno (and the Atlanta PD!) needed a victim (er, criminal) - was dead wrong.
I don’t accept the premise he was ‘obvious’. Using this criteria, which the FBI apparently also used, indicts every security guard assigned to the event.
The profile was wrong. He was a hero who saved a bunch of lives that day. Profilers are an abomination in police work.
Look at the sniper case. They were looking for a white male middle aged loner.
They had evidence that pointed to a 5 percenter.
Profiling needlessly focuses an investigation without reason.
Even in death, Richard Jewell, a hero, is smeared by it.
You accurately point out the problem of mixing politics and law enforcement, the need for a politician to trumpet a suspect. No better than the Nifong and the lacrosse players.
DK