Reply
Honored Contributor
Posts: 18,415
Registered: ‎11-25-2011

Re: LA News Anchors Autopsy Report - C. Burrous

”Man Dies In California”

Some think that’s all we need to know.

 

I’m glad I have a healthy curiousity to find out the ‘why’ of things.

 

Valued Contributor
Posts: 739
Registered: ‎04-01-2016

Re: LA News Anchors Autopsy Report - C. Burrous

if the OP hadn't posted this thread, I wouldn't have ever known what happened - so, is the OP actually feeding into the hype? If she's so concerned w/the details, don't tell people how to find them, and don't post about it!

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,775
Registered: ‎07-09-2011

Re: LA News Anchors Autopsy Report - C. Burrous

@Johnnyeager 

 

I have NO fear of the truth, but those who feel that money entitles them raise a very strong emotion within me, and it’s certainly not fear.

 


@Johnnyeager wrote:

The public is absolutely entitled to all the facts and details on cases such as this.

 

Taxpayer money is spent on investigation and cause of death analysis.

 

Some people just fear the truth.

 

Oh, and this thread has stayed directly and precisely on track, given the OP's initial comments.


 

"Animals are not my whole world, but they have made my world whole" ~ Roger Caras
Valued Contributor
Posts: 658
Registered: ‎09-01-2016

Re: LA News Anchors Autopsy Report - C. Burrous


@Cakers3 wrote:

Ok I'm going to say something that will not be received with open arms.

 

This thread actually put the idea out there about disclosing "disgusting" information.

It opened up the way for others to research the facts about this man's death.

 

I reading between the lines here-that the disgust about what he did is more important than the fact that it was published.  It seems that is the real issue and intent.

 

I just don't see the point of referencing the "disgusting" facts; it just drove more people to go and read about them.


Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is since you can't know what is or was in my head when I started the topic. It was not my intent to discuss his actions as disgusting, although I feel they were and especially so since it disrespected his family, however, reading between the lines is not appropriate. If I had something direct to say I would. 

 

I WRONGLY assumed that everyone already knew about the details of the cause of death since it was so readily available splashed on one website that I opened and the  obviously countless more,  People on this forum seem to be in the know about everything the second it hit the news so I thought they would on this topic too.

 

My whole point once again was to talk about whether the media should divulge all the personal details of someone's death. And nowhere in this thread did I take pot shots at anyone who might not agree with my stand. But I had snark thrown at me when someone didn't like my answer "are we done now" and accused of wanting to know grisly details.

 

I won't further explain why I started this topic because obviously it has been deemed by some that I had a nefarious reason. Typical and pitiful. I should have just posted the topic and given a poll to answer the question: should the media go into so much detail that hurts those left behind? Yes or No. 

 

That's all I wanted to know. If you want to think I had other reasons, go at it. 

QVC Customer Care
Posts: 512
Registered: ‎06-14-2015

Re: LA News Anchors Autopsy Report - C. Burrous

 

 

***Closed for commenting***