As someone interested in true crime, this story is fascinating:
This concludes a five year investigation.
Some are arguing that the Biden administration suppressed the investigation. I disagree. There was so little evidence to go on. To gather sufficient evidence to ensure a ~100% conviction rate, as typical for the feds, would require considerable time and effort, well preceding Trump being inaugurated, especially when there is so little evidence. There is no way the feds can mount a case like this in 10 or so months. The new admin overtook some of the work done earlier in the case report presumably. But I can understand the skepticism. Trust in agencies and government is at historic lows.
My biggest question, and the question on others’ minds is, “How was he caught when there is apparently so little evidence?” A grainy video, a sneaker brand, and that was it pretty much it. The FBI has even outdone the 4chan geolocators, which describes a loose-knit community of online sleuths who “dox” targets by analyzing geographic details such as weather patterns, cloud formations, and other environmental cues in photos, who were unable to identify him (of course, the FBI has much more resources, evidence, and extralegal powers).
Investigators reviewed tens of thousands of video files, hundreds of tips and scoured cell phone tower data. They examined data on sales of black and gray Nike Air Max sneakers worn by the suspect – fewer than 25,000 of the shoes had been sold around the time the bombs were placed.
The article mentions ‘tens thousands of video files’. How can there ‘thousands’ when there was just a grainy night video? I am guessing they reviewed surveillance videos of the entire region to try to corroborate the location of individuals who matched the grainy profile and gait of the subject. Once a region was narrowed down, they reviewed everything: street cameras, store camera footage, etc. No stone left unturned. This would have required extensive man hours and resources, again, rebutting the claim that the investigation was intentionally delayed.
This also refutes the popular social media narrative that investigators’ supposed incompetence is responsible for the low clearance rates of serious crimes, as illustrated below:
Assuming a 60% reporting rate to courts, this raises the number to at least 21 per 100,00. This is not unreasonable given modern closure rates of homicides. pic.twitter.com/nJ6TudKy3T
— LiorLefineder (@lefineder) May 13, 2024
Certain serious federal crimes have no statute of limitations, so given enough time and resources, the closure rate approaches 100% even if at the moment many crimes are unsolved. Given how much better technology has gotten, the pervasiveness of surveillance, and the dogged determination and unlimited resources of the feds, there is little reason to expect that the feds are worse at solving crimes compared to in the past. It makes me shudder at the capabilities of these agencies, but I am in awe at the same time.