Our journalists are not asking the right questions

[Rockman]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-b_SmB3T1HQ

Mr Bailey alluded to the protocol was adhered to but for the purpose of argument, what if he left her alive with the intention of killing her when he returns, would the police have intervened and prevented that?
Secondly, it is NEVER a good thing when the head of state comment on criminal matters to be decided by the courts, it has the potential to taint the entire jury pool.
Quite likely it is driven by photo opt or the notion of having a hands on approach to combating crime as opposed to having effective anti crime strategies.

[Rockman]

Why the cameras were there when the PM visited the family of the deceased???

[Rockman]

Two reports were made, and Bailey is aware of that given it was painstakingly made clear by members of the family directly to the PM and to him during the arranged meeting, yet he conveniently ignores the first report thereby only referencing the one made to the Crossroad station.

[Bricktop]

Mr Bailey alluded to the protocol was adhered to but for the purpose of argument, what if he left her alive with the intention of killing her when he returns, would the police have intervened and prevented that?

how could the police possibly have intervened when the family didn't report her missing till 8pm that night?

[Rockman]

Just completely ignore where I stated two reports were made, one prior to the 8pm one.
Obtw, I know who you are, and also about the peanuts you are fed to inject articles for probing reasons by........
This is BIGGER than you, Bricktop, and your handlers are desperate.

[Bricktop]

point me to the first report please...

[Rockman]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bYdOtoOWpgY

"That was after the fact".(some 6 minutes into the video).
Was contact made and they were advised a report could not be taken?

[Bricktop]

propaganda as usual...in the video the boyfriend said they took the info to the police at 8:30 (on wednesday) & that the call to cross roads police station was after the fact on thursday...

[Rockman]

Okay, more info will come out, the question was specifically about a written report, and the family reacted accordingly.
When it was reported to the police that she is missing may very well be a different kettle of tea, we will see.

[Rockman]

So as to prevent you from snarling yourself, what is implicitly stated when the sister said I took it upon myself to....?

[Bricktop]

they (the family) obviously suspected who did it...the boyfriend had previously told her not to take rides from the guy...so the sister took it upon herself to call the guy and inquire about her sister...what so strange bout that?

[Rockman]

You have to be joking, it is more likely she did it because the cops were doing nothing despite being informed.
If that is the case, Bailey saying the written report occurred at whatever time is lying by omission, it suggests that they can only respond at that time(knowledgeable), and ergo unable to make the difference.

[Bricktop]

how would she know if the police are doing anything or not? any family would be anxious...so after notifying police and since they suspected this guy they tried to contact him and got him on the phone...

[Rockman]

Look, we can't do anything until 24 hours!
The fact that they filed the missing report before the supposedly allotted time suggests a sense of urgency was not missing, so is it farfetched to think they contacted the cops prior..?
Not missing to me is there is obviously a disconnect between the upper echelons and the police officers, the procedure amended and they forgot to make it known.

[Bricktop]

Look, we can't do anything until 24 hours!

wrong again: