(I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic but I'll answer as though you are serious.)
It looks like my short remark in the post didn't quite convey my sentiments. It's ok, you don't have to defend the FBI to me. I'm not questioning their capabilities.
My objection was in the area of jurisdiction. Since the matter did not take place on US soil, I thought it was more natural for the local authorities to take the lead in the investigation - short of some extraordinary/unusual circumstances that called for the FBI to act over the heads of the local authorities, that is, or until the local investigation surfaced something that required the FBI to take the lead.
In this instance, if I remember right, the FBI were indeed invited to take part (but not to lead) the local investigation, which I thought was a pretty reasonable move in the circumstances. They were asked to assist, they did so, nicely done. No impugning of FBI's capabilities meant in any way.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
...oh dear
Date: 2013-06-05 03:43 pm (UTC)It looks like my short remark in the post didn't quite convey my sentiments. It's ok, you don't have to defend the FBI to me. I'm not questioning their capabilities.
My objection was in the area of jurisdiction. Since the matter did not take place on US soil, I thought it was more natural for the local authorities to take the lead in the investigation - short of some extraordinary/unusual circumstances that called for the FBI to act over the heads of the local authorities, that is, or until the local investigation surfaced something that required the FBI to take the lead.
In this instance, if I remember right, the FBI were indeed invited to take part (but not to lead) the local investigation, which I thought was a pretty reasonable move in the circumstances. They were asked to assist, they did so, nicely done. No impugning of FBI's capabilities meant in any way.
/ded of long explanation