Why Isn’t the Libya Consulate Secured as a Crime Scene?

Filed in Gather News Channel by on September 16, 2012 0 Comments

Why isn’t the Libya Consulate a crime scene? With reporters and others having complete access to the ruined buildings, isn’t there a possibility that evidence is being destroyed?

The DailyMail has photos of bloody hand prints, with a man touching them. The caption explains, “A Libyan man explains that the bloodstains on the column are from one the American staff members who grabbed the edge of the column while he was evacuated, after an attack that killed four Americans on September 11th.”

Hello? Bloody hand prints with a man touching them? How is it possible that nobody has secured this crime scene? How is it possible that the FBI has not made priority number one to stop any flow of traffic around these sites, including the safe house?

Hopefully, the Libyan citizens whose names were revealed in the critical documents stolen from the Libya Consulate are being protected. They are clearly going to be in danger if they are discovered. It would seem like something so obvious that it could be left unsaid. However, if the Libyan officials or the FBI cannot manage to secure a crime scene, perhaps they will need a reminder. Hey, FBI! Check on the informants, will you?

The article discusses the surprising lack of security at the consulate, stating that it “did not have bullet-proof glass or reinforced doors”. The fact that it was September 11 and announcements to protest the embassy were going out as early as August 30th, perhaps some extra security would have been in order?

The news coverage from the United Kingdom far surpasses the coverage from the United States, which has been disproportionately focusing on Mitt Romney’s reaction to the statement made by the U.S. Embassy in Egypt (a reaction shared by the Obama Administration, which escaped criticism) and the low budget YouTube video called Innocence of Muslims that they claim was the “cause” of the protests.

In a BBC Podcast, Martin Fletcher describes the scene. He said that there were two “striking impressions”. One was how “poorly defended” the consulate was, surrounded by easily scalable walls and few guards. The other thing that struck Fletcher was:

“We were walking around what is effectively a crime scene, entirely unaccompanied, unescorted, free to go wherever we wanted; to touch anything. It didn’t bode well for the investigation that the authorities have promised.”

All indications are that this tragedy could have been avoided. Additionally, with the crime scene completely exposed, valuable evidence may have been destroyed.

Image Source: Daily Mail

About the Author ()

Leave a Reply