But subsequently admitted to being in error? If those earlier logs were indeed FACT they would NEVER have seen the light of day. Wherever you believe you are with this, I'm confident that ALL the agencies you vilify, IF they're concerned by anything you say, will be several steps ahead of you, as they'll consider their own survival to be of greater import than the survival of an individual.
Cops don't make such glaring 'errors' as you pretend to call them, they make 'blunders' by 'recording things', either in 'document form', or 'photographically', or in 'message logs', all of which they wished they hadn't recorded the truth at these sources. They didn't make 'an error' in confirming that a female body was downstairs in the kitchen, when there wasn't one there at all. Your having a laugh trying to pretend that something so serious can be put down as a cop error. They can't even get the explanation they came up with to account for the suggestion that there had been some sort of a mistake, by claiming that Dads body had been mistaken for the daughters body, a so called error that was not supposedly cleared up until cops set foot into the kitchen. they claim it hadn't been a female body after all, only a male one, dad in fact. Ha, ha, ha, you expect us to believe such a tale, when according to that explanation, the female was mentioned before cops entered and discovered dad in the kitchen. So, why then did cops mention the body of a 'dead female' on two separate occasions after dads body had already been mentioned in the same sentences? Do you think we are all thick? If Dads body had been mistaken for the daughters body before cops even set foot inside the kitchen, then once cops got in the kitchen they would know it hadn't been the body of a female after all, and they would pass a message, that the body of dad had been found upon entry. They would not add to this, after they mention having found the body of one dead male, add, and the body of one dead female. The key word in that message (7.37am) being the word 'AND' followed by ' THE BODY OF ONE DEAD FEMALE'. No mystery there then, nothing could be any clearer. The claim that dads body was mistaken for the daughters body before cops even set foot inside the farmhouse, does not add up with bad apple cops later claiming they made an 'error' regarding 'that' first sighting of a body through the kitchen window, being a female, it had been dads body after all. I have no problem with that, but that mistake even if it had occurred in relation to dads body having been mistakenly identified as the daughters body, would have been cleared up as soon as cops entered the kitchen. So, they report the discovery of 'The body of one dead male' (mystery finished with), but they go on to say, 'AND', 'THE BODY OF ONE DEAD FEMALE'. Now the reference to this 'female' body being in the kitchen, follows on after sexuality of the body seen through the kitchen window has been rectified. If dads body turned out to be his body, when it was first reported that his body had been a female, a mistake rectified once cops entered the kitchen, then there is no need to make any mention of another female body being there in the kitchen, as well. The wording is absolutely clear, (7.37am) 'The body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female found on entry'. That's two bodies, not one body that had been mistaken for two different ones, but one of the two bodies found in the kitchen having been mistakenly identified as a female body, which in fact turned out to be dads body, and a second (female) body which cops did not see from the vantage point of the kitchen window, but which they were confronted with upon entering the kitchen...
Which part don't you understand?
