The FWC investigators cannot retain the evidence (or hand it over to the Apple themselves) because it is a missing person investigation and not an active criminal investigation. It does say that there has been FBI involvement, but they've obviously made no move for the phone so I don't know what that means as to whether or not it's considered an active investigation on their end. The phone is being sent by the father directly to Apple not the FBI.
And, with the phone that is exactly my point. Any evidence should have been preserved and forwarded to the FBI. A case had been opened and charges do not need to be pending for this evidence preservation especially since there has been some question into the disappearance.
Of course the phone is being sent by the parents, the point is THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE THE PHONE! Jesus, and I think the FBI might be interested in the phone as A they subpoenaed the phone's records months ago.
Fucking fish and wildlife need to back the fuck out of this as they clearly do not know criminal procedure and, I can assure, if someone is arrested, they will walk. A defense attorney will have a field day with these mistakes.
I am not sure why you are being hostile as I am not disagreeing with you? I was just naming the reason that Fish & Wildlife cited for why they were not turning over the phone to FBI or other authorities. I understand that the FBI had an open investigation.
In the below article, it says "FWC spokesman Rob Klepper told the Sun Sentinel that the commission could not retain the evidence without family permission because its a missing-persons case, not a criminal one."
So for the life insurance thing do people think the parents harmed the kids or that they staged their disappearance?
It makes no sense to me that two sets of parents would collude to harm their children for the life insurance. For starters, children's life insurance policies tend to be small. If you're going to off a relative for a payoff, you'd pick a parent or a spouse.
Secondly, to even consider killing your own child is such an out of pocket thing to contemplate that I can't imagine you'd discuss it with other people. How does that conversation even start, hey, parents of my kid's bff? Is your kid making you as insane as he's making us? Wanna go in on a murder plot?
Isn't this the story where the boys took the boat out without permission? Trying to hide what the boat may, at times, be used for could make sense. I am thinking more they were harmed for thinking they were doing something illegal than life insurance, but people are damn crazy so who knows.
Also, apparently the agency in charge of the missing persons investigation is the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission. ? If my kid were missing, I feel like that is....not who I would want handling things.
FWC is a law enforcement agency with investigators and everything, so this isn't too strange.
(But you may already know that, so ignore me if so).
This whole thing is so strange. I just watched one of the dad's talking to the FWC commissioners about this case, and he was trying hard not to cry. I would hate to think of him being involved in his own son's disappearance.
So for the life insurance thing do people think the parents harmed the kids or that they staged their disappearance?
It makes no sense to me that two sets of parents would collude to harm their children for the life insurance. For starters, children's life insurance policies tend to be small. If you're going to off a relative for a payoff, you'd pick a parent or a spouse.
Secondly, to even consider killing your own child is such an out of pocket thing to contemplate that I can't imagine you'd discuss it with other people. How does that conversation even start, hey, parents of my kid's bff? Is your kid making you as insane as he's making us? Wanna go in on a murder plot?
It's too bizarre even for a lifetime move.
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouths, but I don't know that anyone thinks the parents of each boy are in a plot together. I'd assume the theory is that one parent or set of parents of one of the boys is involved somehow or has a life insurance policy.
Also, apparently the agency in charge of the missing persons investigation is the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission. ? If my kid were missing, I feel like that is....not who I would want handling things.
FWC is a law enforcement agency with investigators and everything, so this isn't too strange.
(But you may already know that, so ignore me if so).
This whole thing is so strange. I just watched one of the dad's talking to the FWC commissioners about this case, and he was trying hard not to cry. I would hate to think of him being involved in his own son's disappearance.
Yes but I feel like their experience with this type of investigation is probably very very limited. I can't imagine that they investigate too many missing persons cases let alone possible homicides.
It makes no sense to me that two sets of parents would collude to harm their children for the life insurance. For starters, children's life insurance policies tend to be small. If you're going to off a relative for a payoff, you'd pick a parent or a spouse.
Secondly, to even consider killing your own child is such an out of pocket thing to contemplate that I can't imagine you'd discuss it with other people. How does that conversation even start, hey, parents of my kid's bff? Is your kid making you as insane as he's making us? Wanna go in on a murder plot?
It's too bizarre even for a lifetime move.
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouths, but I don't know that anyone thinks the parents of each boy are in a plot together. I'd assume the theory is that one parent or set of parents of one of the boys is involved somehow or has a life insurance policy.
Yeah, this doesn't make sense either. My kids irritate me. But I can't fathom bumping off someone else's kid while killing mine. Just from the standpoint of not knowing how far the other parents might push an investigation.
This seems so bizarre. I just can't imagine not handing over evidence.
I agree that the most likely scenario is the boys werelost in the storm but the parents know there is criminal evidence or liability somewhere (boat, phone), possibly unrelated to the disappearance, and don't want it to get out.
It makes no sense to me that two sets of parents would collude to harm their children for the life insurance. For starters, children's life insurance policies tend to be small. If you're going to off a relative for a payoff, you'd pick a parent or a spouse.
Secondly, to even consider killing your own child is such an out of pocket thing to contemplate that I can't imagine you'd discuss it with other people. How does that conversation even start, hey, parents of my kid's bff? Is your kid making you as insane as he's making us? Wanna go in on a murder plot?
It's too bizarre even for a lifetime move.
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouths, but I don't know that anyone thinks the parents of each boy are in a plot together. I'd assume the theory is that one parent or set of parents of one of the boys is involved somehow or has a life insurance policy.
When I mentioned the life insurance thing, this is exactly what I was thinking. Not that the two families were in it together, but it was just one set of parents.
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouths, but I don't know that anyone thinks the parents of each boy are in a plot together. I'd assume the theory is that one parent or set of parents of one of the boys is involved somehow or has a life insurance policy.
When I mentioned the life insurance thing, this is exactly what I was thinking. Not that the two families were in it together, but it was just one set of parents.
You're really going to off someone else's kid to collect your kid's life insurance which probably isn't all that much anyway?
Again, that makes no sense to me whatsoever. If you knock off someone else's kid, those parents aren't likely to just stand around and hope the investigators clear the case. They're going to want answers and god only knows, especially given the finances we're talking about how much effort they are going to expend tying this shit up and keeping you from collecting. And there's always the risk of a wrongful death suit.
To me, the more likely scenario is that the boys were kills in a storm that rose up very quickly on them. One of them sent out the oh we're fucked snapchat, probably before realizing they weren't just a little fucked but very fucked and then it all came to and end. And from the parents' side, the most likely scenario is that one set of parents have accepted that there is not much more to know or maybe they simply do not want the exact details of how their child died, of how long they survived out there hoping for rescue. They simply want to move on. Meanwhile the other set of parents feels they would be very much comforted by knowing the facts, perhaps feeling if they knew exactly what happened they can prevent such a thing from happening to other kids, maybe they are hoping for some comfort and closure in knowing that maybe they died quickly, that they didn't suffer, that there wasn't much they could do short of not letting the boys go out that day to keep them from dying.
And neither set is wrong. Unfortunately they wouldn't be able to separate what they each need to go on from that the other set of parents also feel they need to go on.