… Or, the message was not drawn up by some random lowly typist, and was drawn up by somebody in a much, much higher position.
Not sure if you’ve ever worked in any kind of large bureaucratic corporation of other kind of organization, but that happens all the time, when somebody wants to specifically handle something personally, and also have the plausible deniability of ‘random clerk made error.’
The nature of bureaucracies is to a large extent that those best at establishing as many avenues of plausible deniability as possible, those who can set themselves up with the ability to throw other people under the bus… they tend to ‘win’, persist longer and get promoted higher in said bureacracy.
Them writing the report especially in advance would take away their plausible deniability and just bring more attention to the scene
… assuming that it can be determined conclusively that that happened.
Which, it often cannot be, in a bureaucratic system that normally has some kind of subordinate to do those things of things, but where sometimes the superior person just directly does it instead.
So ok, you clearly have not worked in a large bureaucratic organization before, or … this would be very obvious to you.
The report had no urgency to be done so having it done in advance especially considering in a murder details could have changed seems pointless
This is just nonsensical.
The entire … thing here is a statement that was released urgently.
The entire contention is that it may have been so urgent that it was actually pre-planned and drafted prior to the actual event.
You are just entirely dismissing this possibility, to prove that this possibility did not happen.
I am not saying 100% either way that it was a clerical error or a premeditated construction.
I don’t know for certain either way.
But you are using very bad logic to argue that it was a clerical error.
… Or, the message was not drawn up by some random lowly typist, and was drawn up by somebody in a much, much higher position.
Not sure if you’ve ever worked in any kind of large bureaucratic corporation of other kind of organization, but that happens all the time, when somebody wants to specifically handle something personally, and also have the plausible deniability of ‘random clerk made error.’
The nature of bureaucracies is to a large extent that those best at establishing as many avenues of plausible deniability as possible, those who can set themselves up with the ability to throw other people under the bus… they tend to ‘win’, persist longer and get promoted higher in said bureacracy.
Them writing the report especially in advance would take away their plausible deniability and just bring more attention to the scene
The report had no urgency to be done so having it done in advance especially considering in a murder details could have changed seems pointless
… assuming that it can be determined conclusively that that happened.
Which, it often cannot be, in a bureaucratic system that normally has some kind of subordinate to do those things of things, but where sometimes the superior person just directly does it instead.
So ok, you clearly have not worked in a large bureaucratic organization before, or … this would be very obvious to you.
This is just nonsensical.
The entire … thing here is a statement that was released urgently.
The entire contention is that it may have been so urgent that it was actually pre-planned and drafted prior to the actual event.
You are just entirely dismissing this possibility, to prove that this possibility did not happen.
I am not saying 100% either way that it was a clerical error or a premeditated construction.
I don’t know for certain either way.
But you are using very bad logic to argue that it was a clerical error.