Thank you for the well written response. What you posted makes a lot of sense. I would never advocate nor do I see others on this board advocate the release of material evidence in a case. When they do it gets pointed out rather quickly. The police work for us. It isnt about what they want. Its about whats best for society. The police are given a lot of power by society. Secrecy is the enemy of accountability. This case is an example how holding back information by the police can adversely affect a case as well as society as a whole. Up until yesterday we all believed PF was cooperating. Or at least thats how LE was describing their interactions with him. Then the white hot focus of the national media intensifies (websleuths is a form of media) and out comes the truth. Even though LE actually have yet to personally interview PF they have described him as cooperative. Yesterday they had to artfully walk that back. How many people who had information regarding PF decided not to get involved because LE represented PF's actions as cooperation? The counter argument by LE would be they intentionally misled the public to give PF a feeling he wasn't a suspect. Then they put him under surveillance with the hope he would lead them to KB or otherwise make a mistake. Only time will tell if they had him under surveillance. But without the media asking questions we'll never know.