Top UK police chief is found dead

reply to post by Yaltabaoth


I'm really getting bored now.

It's pretty simple.

If it's suicide then it's not uncommon for suicides to visit favourite places prior to commiting the act.
Why?
How the hell do I know, I'm not a pyschologist or whatever.

If it is suicide then it does go to show that you can rarely tell what is going on in a suicides mind prior to the act.
Some act perfectly reasonably, some don't.
What drives one person to suicide wouldn't drive another person.

What I have been trying to say all along is sit back and wait for the official verdict.
Then examine the evidence provided and then proclaim conspiracy or not.
It is far too early at this juncture.

I accept there may be the possibility, even the likelihood, but I will await the official verdict, pretty simple in my book.

Some posters have been doing more than declare that it maybe a conspiracy by stating it "reeks" and it "stinks" and it has "conspiracy written all over it".
With no supportive evidence to offer or even an official story to deny yet, any claims at this point of "conspiracy" will merely serve to discredit any future claims, (when there may indeed be supportive evidence).

I sincerely hope this is genuinely a suicide, (my deepest sympathies to his family etc), as if there is a conspiratorial angle to this then it will have implications that reach into the very cornerstones of our society.

As I prefer to deal in facts rather than assumptions, I will continue to follow this thread but until there are any further significant developments then I very much doubt that I will contribute further.

Err, well maybe one more

Latest from The Times:
www.timesonline.co.uk...

3/4 empty gin bottle, spare clothing, missing jacket?
Search party looking in wrong place?

What will mobile phone records show?

Originally posted by Freeborn
Chief Constable Todd had "voiced doubts about his state of mind just hours before going missing".

Rumours about his private life had been circulating for years, (he allegedly had an affair with a female detective now stationed in Herts which produced an illegitemate child).

www.timesonline.co.uk...

www.thesun.co.uk...

Whether this stands up to scrutiny only time will tell but at least now people have something to debate and research instead of crying "conspiracy" without even knowing the official story.

And we criticise MSM for being sensationalist and blinkered!

It'll be a cold day in hell when I buy anything the sodding Sun has to say.

reply to post by HeadFirstForHalos


So what about The Times then?

Just who do you believe then?
The Guardian?
Or do you just cherry pick news and news sources to fit in with your pre-concieved ideas?

The BBC have claimed that he also sent "worrying texts" during his final hours.

Originally posted by Freeborn
I'm really getting bored now.

Oh dear... I do apologise.

Originally posted by Freeborn
It's pretty simple.

If it's suicide then it's not uncommon for suicides to visit favourite places prior to commiting the act.
Why?
How the hell do I know, I'm not a pyschologist or whatever.

If it is suicide then it does go to show that you can rarely tell what is going on in a suicides mind prior to the act.
Some act perfectly reasonably, some don't.
What drives one person to suicide wouldn't drive another person.

Yes, that's very simplistic. Thank you for your further explanation, without it I would have never been able to understand.

Originally posted by Freeborn
What I have been trying to say all along is sit back and wait for the official verdict.
Then examine the evidence provided and then proclaim conspiracy or not.
It is far too early at this juncture.

That's not all you've put forward, here, is it?. Insinuating that this was a suicide (which you have done) at this "far too early juncture" is just as premature as insinuating that this is a conspiracy, is it not? It's all the same conjecture. Besides, you even say it yourself that this may possibly be a conspiracy, so my point was how are you any different from the people you're attempting to critisise? You accuse people of unfounded speculations then make a half dozen yourself. That, Sir, was my entire point. Pretty simple, yes?

Originally posted by Freeborn
I accept there may be the possibility, even the likelihood, but I will await the official verdict, pretty simple in my book.

Has not the preliminary official verdict been released already? It's right there in the BBC News article. I've told you this already and you just flatly ignored me. Obviously there may be further information forthcoming, but what if there isn't? They could just wrap this up and enough people will buy it.

Originally posted by Freeborn
Some posters have been doing more than declare that it maybe a conspiracy by stating it "reeks" and it "stinks" and it has "conspiracy written all over it".
With no supportive evidence to offer or even an official story to deny yet, any claims at this point of "conspiracy" will merely serve to discredit any future claims, (when there may indeed be supportive evidence).

It does "reek, stink," and have "conspiracy written all over it," though. That's still not saying that this is an actual conspiracy. The only person who has claimed that came in long after you started moaning at everyone for daring to speculate, just as you had speculated.

Originally posted by Freeborn
I sincerely hope this is genuinely a suicide, (my deepest sympathies to his family etc), as if there is a conspiratorial angle to this then it will have implications that reach into the very cornerstones of our society.

Certainly, just as it did with Dr. David Kelly. Easily whitewashed, and easily forgotten by this dumb, hedonistic society filled primarily with the re-programmable automaton.

We're still at war, aren't we?

Originally posted by Freeborn
As I prefer to deal in facts rather than assumptions, I will continue to follow this thread but until there are any further significant developments then I very much doubt that I will contribute further.

That's your prerogative, Freeborn. Before you depart, may I ask of you whether you've ever heard of an "Irish fact" before? It's something I always take into consideration when "dealing only with the facts." Perhaps, Sir, you ought to aswell.

Just a word of friendly advice.

reply to post by Freeborn


Dude. CHILL. I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm just saying that I don't believe that one publication on most everything. Others, I'm a little more willing to. But still I don't read an article and automatically assume it must be true because a bunch of papers printed it. Knowing some of the things his career was linked to, you really need to question every report that comes out. If I had an odd death, I'd like to hope people would be crying foul from the start.

reply to post by HeadFirstForHalos


I assure you, I am very, very chilled.

I question everything.
I just like to know what I'm questioning before I start.
As of yet we are still very much in the process of determining the facts.
Once all the facts are available, well, we'll see what is out there.

To coin your phrase, until then, chill.

Interesting BBC News 24 is now saying that the post mortem has not found any cause of death.

This has got be slightly unusual.
No signs of trauma.

No sign of drugs.

Wouldn't hypothermia, etc show up in the post mortem somehow?

Very strange.

Now am i allowed to say it reeks of conspiracy?

Hmm...

reply to post by mr-lizard


I would be seriously inclined to agree with you here.

The whole thing appears to be reeking more and more of the whole David Kelly situation.

I know posters have already said this, but it seems to be heading more towards that situation. No doubt the inevitable character assassination in the MSM will follow over the next few days...

Originally posted by more_serotonin_pls
Interesting BBC News 24 is now saying that the post mortem has not found any cause of death.

This has got be slightly unusual.
No signs of trauma.

No sign of drugs.

Wouldn't hypothermia, etc show up in the post mortem somehow?

Very strange.

Nothing for a cause?
That's just bizarre.

How does someone kill themselves in a place like Snowdon and leave no trace of how they did it. Save for a half empty bottle of gin, which last I checked, didn't kill me when I drank it. Although the next morning I felt dead.

reply to post by HeadFirstForHalos


Here's the latest from the BBC

BBC News

It says in the article that toxicology whould be back tomorrow but on the TV they are saying no sign of drugs.

Confusing no?

"The alarm was raised after he sent the messages to various people, which caused concern for their safety and his own, the BBC has learnt."
This line from the BBC news report is the strangest thing, why the concern for their own safety as well as his own ?

Originally posted by Yaltabaoth

Oh dear... I do apologise.

Why, got nothing to do with you.

Insinuating that this was a suicide (which you have done) at this "far too early juncture" is just as premature as insinuating that this is a conspiracy, is it not?

No, not all.
First of all, all I have done is post information readily available from various news organisations.
Nowhere else is suggesting a conspiracy of any kind, yet.
It maybe suicide.
It maybe murder.
It mabe a tragic accident due to a serious of events.
There maybe a conspiracy angle to it.
Any suggestion of a conspiracy at this early stage, without any supportive evidence, will just be detrimental accusations should there be evidence to support it.
At the moment we are still very much at collating the information stage.

....so my point was how are you any different from the people you're attempting to critisise?

I am not criticising anyone.
I am being critical of an approach and an opinion.
A subtle but very important difference here on ATS.

You accuse people of unfounded speculations then make a half dozen yourself. That, Sir, was my entire point. Pretty simple, yes?

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave earlier.
All I have done is post news items and comments from collegues and associates of Mr Wood.
As of yet, there is nothing definate to suggest a conspiracy apart from the opinions of some posters here on ATS.

I don't deny there maybe a time to challenge the facts, but no-one has even agreed any established facts at present.

Has not the preliminary official verdict been released already? It's right there in the BBC News article. I've told you this already and you just flatly ignored me. Obviously there may be further information forthcoming, but what if there isn't? They could just wrap this up and enough people will buy it.

No the official verdict hasn't been released yet.
Yes, some details have.
The post-mortem has reported that there are no obvious causes of death.
But the official verdict is still ongoing with increased emphasis being put on his mobile phone records, his location, search details and his state of mind.

It does "reek, stink," and have "conspiracy written all over it," though.

No it doesn't.
Reading between the lines, I would suggest it has tragic accident written all over it.
But I could very, very easily be incorrect.

The only person who has claimed that came in long after you started moaning....

Gee, if you think that's moaning you should listen to my wife!
Seriously, since when has disagreeing with an opinion or an approach been construed as moaning?
Now if you think that differences of opinion is moaning then you are going to experience a hell of a lot of moaning.
That's what ATS is all about.
Debating with people, some of whom disagree with you, whilst maintaining a cetain level of courtesy.
Not everyone see's things the same.

Certainly, just as it did with Dr. David Kelly. Easily whitewashed, and easily forgotten by this dumb, hedonistic society filled primarily with the re-programmable automaton.

I can't but help agree with you here.

We're still at war, aren't we?

Yes, but that's a completely different arguement which belongs in numerous other threads here on ATS.

Just a word of friendly advice.

Thanks.
I also sincerely hope you too consider some of the points I have raised.
I am sure you have heard the story about the Old Bull, The Young Bull and the herd of cows.

Any ''official'' story would be fabricated anyway.

If this officer was indeed involved with exposing CIA matters then it's pretty obvious.
That's how the CIA always works.
Just like they did with Forrest (MJ12) and William Colby (CIA Director) right before they tried to expose truth on certain subjects.
The list of 'suicides' is endless and they always have a CIA tag on it.

On reading about the fact that he had packed his rucksack with suitable clothing and was prepared for the weather, reminded me of the movie 'A few good men' with the Santiago chap not bothering to pack or call anyone.. this chap sounded like someone who was planning on returning to me.. surely it wouldn't matter too much if you got your trousers a bit wet if you were planning to take a header off the highest point you could find, also jumping with a bottle of gin in your hand sounds a bit odd too..

Sad as this case is I do hope that it turns out to be genuine case of suicide.. as I don't think I could handle the truth...

cheers

BB

[edit on 12-3-2008 by badBERTHA]

reply to post by Freeborn


I totally agree with your statement of 'wait and see'. Sooner or later, most of the facts will come out. We can develop our own informed opinions based on the facts, their presentation, the reasoning behind them, who discovered them and what the discoverer's/s' influences may be.

Originally posted by Freeborn

Why, got nothing to do with you.

Well, you said it in reply to my post, so...

Originally posted by Freeborn
No, not all.
First of all, all I have done is post information readily available from various news organisations.

Which contained unattributed speculations. You also did plenty of speculating of your own.

Originally posted by Freeborn
Nowhere else is suggesting a conspiracy of any kind, yet.

And this surprises you?

Originally posted by Freeborn
It maybe suicide.
It maybe murder.
It mabe a tragic accident due to a serious of events.
There maybe a conspiracy angle to it.
Any suggestion of a conspiracy at this early stage, without any supportive evidence, will just be detrimental accusations should there be evidence to support it.

What? But you yourself suggested a conspiracy on 3 seperate occasions.

Originally posted by Freeborn
At the moment we are still very much at collating the information stage.

So what?

Originally posted by Freeborn
I am not criticising anyone.
I am being critical of an approach and an opinion.
A subtle but very important difference here on ATS.

Semantic workmanship, Sire. You know exactly what I meant. If somehow you don't, I'll amend my text right here to say "You were critisising people's approach and opinions even though you shared the same opinions and approach yourself."

Does this appease your "subtle difference?"

Originally posted by Freeborn
I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave earlier.
All I have done is post news items and comments from collegues and associates of Mr Wood.
As of yet, there is nothing definate to suggest a conspiracy apart from the opinions of some posters here on ATS.

And I refer you to the answers Kilgore Trout offered you earlier. There's nothing to suggest he killed himself other than some unattributed comments from "friends" and "sources."

Originally posted by Freeborn
No it doesn't.
Reading between the lines, I would suggest it has tragic accident written all over it.
But I could very, very easily be incorrect.

No it doesn't? Reading between the lines? If it is indeed correct that there were no signs of trauma from a fall then how do you read between the lines and "suggest that this is a tragic accident," especially after earlier insinuating that he commited suicide? And don't you keep trying to say that you only posted news links. You took the information in those links and ran with it. That's right there for everyone to see in your earlier posts in this thread.

Originally posted by Freeborn
Gee, if you think that's moaning you should listen to my wife!
Seriously, since when has disagreeing with an opinion or an approach been construed as moaning?
Now if you think that differences of opinion is moaning then you are going to experience a hell of a lot of moaning.
That's what ATS is all about.
Debating with people, some of whom disagree with you, whilst maintaining a cetain level of courtesy.
Not everyone see's things the same.

Moaning, needlessly disagreeing with people whilst going on to say something similar... Whatever. It was beyond mere difference of opinion as you several times had the exact same opinion. And I can't beleive you just told a Discordian that "not everyone sees things the same." You think I'm unaware of that?

You also don't need to keep arrogantly trying to tell me "what ATS is about" like I'm a sotting n00b. I know full well what ATS is about, as I've already told you.

Originally posted by Freeborn
Yes, but that's a completely different arguement which belongs in numerous other threads here on ATS.

"Here on ATS, here on ATS!"

No, they are actually very closely related topics.

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by Peruvianmonk

 

For pity's sake!
The guy's body isn't even cold yet and already people are screaming "conspiracy".

amen! it seems like the body isn't even cold yet, but you are already buying the official story, hook line and sinker? Why the need to refute talks of conspiracy? You must be lost, this is ATS by the way.

Originally posted by Yaltabaoth

Now you are really beginning to piss me off with your antagonistic and aggresive posting.
Very easy from behind a monitor.

Now all I have said is that it would be best to wait until we know what the official line is and what evidence it is based on before starting to pull the official story to pieces and state "conspiracy".

I fail to see how this can be construed as "falling for the official story", especially as there isn't one yet to fall for.

Which contained unattributed speculations.

Sources provided:
www.bbc.co.uk...
www.timesonline.co.uk...
www.thesun.co.uk...
www.timesonline.co.uk...

Sources provided by you:
Zip.

I still stand by what I said earlier.
It may be suicide.
It my be murder.
It may be an accident.
There may be a conspiritorial angle to it.

As the story has progressed and slightly more information has become known then the possible scenario's have changed and altered. As I dare say they will continue to.
I have never once stated that I definately believe any series of events.
There are far too many missing pieces of the jigsaw to do that.
All I have offered have been possible scenario's.

What? But you yourself suggested a conspiracy on 3 seperate occasions.

No, incorrect.
I stated on 3 seperate occasions that there MAY be a conspiracy angle to it.
Now I know I'm making the dangerous assumption that you understand the difference between "may" and "is".

Moaning, needlessly disagreeing with people whilst going on to say something similar... Whatever.

Needlessly disagreeing.
Why?
Because I don't think the same as you that is deemed needlessly disagreeing?
Quite the man aren't we.

You also don't need to keep arrogantly trying to tell me "what ATS is about" like I'm a sotting n00b. I know full well what ATS is about, as I've already told you.

Member for 2 days.
5 posts.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Freeborn
Yes, but that's a completely different arguement which belongs in numerous other threads here on ATS.

No, they are actually very closely related topics.

If there are reasonable grounds to deny the official story, when it is released, then maybe it should be related to Dr Kelly and our involvement in the ME.

I really don't understand why all the hostile responses when all I have suggested is wait until the official story is released before starting to pick it to pieces.
I suspect there is much more to be revealed yet and we all may end up having egg on our chin.

Still, wtf, as if I care.
I assure you, I have thich skin, broad shoulders and much more important things to concern myself with.