Funny how a cold case podcast shifted my view on armchair detectives

I used to roll my eyes at amateur theories, but the host's deep dive revealed overlooked clues. Now I'm baffled by how official investigations sometimes ignore public input.

2 comments

2 Comments

matthew_thomas414h ago

The appeal of public involvement is understandable, but official investigations often ignore amateur input for very good reason. Armchair detectives, however well-intentioned, can inadvertently destroy evidence, harass persons of interest, or spread dangerous misinformation that families must then confront. Look at the McStay family case, where internet sleuths wrongly targeted individuals and created a circus of speculation before the professional resolution. Law enforcement must operate within strict legal and ethical boundaries that podcast listeners simply do not. There is a profound difference between compiling online clues and building a court-admissible case.

cameronjenkins4h ago

Agree with you there. It's awful how speculation spirals out of control and hurts real people.