Post by woofytreats on Dec 15, 2016 18:50:17 GMT
I'm not much of a fan of probability theory to generate a static reality of what was or wasn't possible during the crime series...but if you apply probabilities about him not getting caught, you'd also have to apply similar probabilities of having one person "protecting him" or an agency or person generating an edict that somehow moved him out of an area without this information eventually becoming known. I think that's potentially both improbable and unknowable just like applying what might be subjective math to generate how it shows that there's something in the background that prevented him from being apprehended. I can't tell you that wasn't the case, but I can tell you that there are numerous probabilities that don't involve a correct or incorrect percentage of offenders getting caught within x period or number of crimes.
The example I always use is the concept of being "more surprised that he wasn't shot than wasn't caught" spread over the entire EAR period. Sac was locked and loaded during this period and if you believe Crompton's book, there was the incident where the woman chose not to shoot him directly and instead shot the window frame because she was scared of a murder rap. Is there a 50/50 probability of this result or did he get lucky?? Math is unlikely to tell me that part if the subjective qualities are at play. Being that people were apparently able to get the drop on him on more than a few occasions, that in and of itself, bumps up the numbers for a gun owner having access to his or her firearm and dispatching this guy. In that frame of mind, maybe the question to ask is what's the probability of EAR/ONS picking the wrong house and situation versus a random criminal?? If he truly was a different breed of criminal, then that might argue against applying similar statistics to give a particular result that wouldn't necessarily apply to him in comparison to the typical criminal.
The example I always use is the concept of being "more surprised that he wasn't shot than wasn't caught" spread over the entire EAR period. Sac was locked and loaded during this period and if you believe Crompton's book, there was the incident where the woman chose not to shoot him directly and instead shot the window frame because she was scared of a murder rap. Is there a 50/50 probability of this result or did he get lucky?? Math is unlikely to tell me that part if the subjective qualities are at play. Being that people were apparently able to get the drop on him on more than a few occasions, that in and of itself, bumps up the numbers for a gun owner having access to his or her firearm and dispatching this guy. In that frame of mind, maybe the question to ask is what's the probability of EAR/ONS picking the wrong house and situation versus a random criminal?? If he truly was a different breed of criminal, then that might argue against applying similar statistics to give a particular result that wouldn't necessarily apply to him in comparison to the typical criminal.