2) A theory about what might have happened doesn’t require evidence. That’s why it’s just a theory and not a claim.
3) Someone claimed matter of factly that it was just an accident. Where’s the conclusive evidence to back up that claim?
4) His father’s statement about the sketchy men who came looking for his son suggests my theory is plausible. Not certain, but plausible.
A theory means nothing without facts to support it. There are none. An allegation of murder is the same without evidence. So far the only facts connected with his cause of death are that he was killed in a road accident. The rest is meaningless unsupported conjecture - typical of the rubbish spouted here.
His father stated sketchy men came looking for him. That’s a fact.
There are mafia-style cartels in Kenya. That’s a fact.
1-You keep talking about these two sketchy men. To deflect suspicion from yourself?
2-Now you bring in Kenyan cartels? Getting a little defensive, why aren't you talking about the theory that you did it?
3-You seem to know a lot about this case, some might find that suspicious.
4-You never identified yourself, we don't yet know how those "sketchy men" could have been. It's possible you were one of them.
All of these are facts. It's becoming more an more clear that you're the prime suspect. This isn't a trial and a theory doesn't require evidence, so it's plausible that you did it. Not certain, but plausible.
----------------
Do you see how stupid this is? Just because something is a fact doesn't mean that it's relevant. When competing ideas explain the same thing you should prefer the simpler one. In this case - a Kenyan mafia murdered and covered up the world's leading marathoner for unexplained reasons - or - a young kid driving at night on crappy roads was in a fatal accident.
We don't convict people of murder because they can't prove they didn't do it. We convict them because we can prove they did. Subtle but important difference.
Wow, your reading comprehension is abysmal if that’s your takeaway from what I wrote.
I’m not calling for an arrest or a conviction. Just saying it’s possible and plausible Kenyan mafia might have been involved based on what his father said and the fact that there are mafia-style cartels in Kenya.
Wow, your reading comprehension is abysmal if that’s your takeaway from what I wrote.
I’m not calling for an arrest or a conviction. Just saying it’s possible and plausible Kenyan mafia might have been involved based on what his father said and the fact that there are mafia-style cartels in Kenya.
"It's not my writing that's bad, it's your reading that's bad!"
So nobody else thinks it’s weird he lost 90% of his friends over this?
Like it sounds like a stupid rumour, but to hear 90% of kipchoge’s friends believe the rumours enough not to be friends with him anymore seems pretty suspect.
Wow, your reading comprehension is abysmal if that’s your takeaway from what I wrote.
I’m not calling for an arrest or a conviction. Just saying it’s possible and plausible Kenyan mafia might have been involved based on what his father said and the fact that there are mafia-style cartels in Kenya.
"It's not my writing that's bad, it's your reading that's bad!"
Way to ignore what I wrote. Make sure to recycle those straws from all your straw man arguments.
A theory means nothing without facts to support it. There are none. An allegation of murder is the same without evidence. So far the only facts connected with his cause of death are that he was killed in a road accident. The rest is meaningless unsupported conjecture - typical of the rubbish spouted here.
His father stated sketchy men came looking for him. That’s a fact.
There are mafia-style cartels in Kenya. That’s a fact.
What his father said is a claim, not a fact. "Sketchy men" - meaning what? There is no connection with him going off the road in his car. If there was evidence of tampering with the vehicle (and why would it be tampered with?) then there would be grounds for investigation. But there aren't. So what, that there are mafia-type cartels in Kenya; there is no connection shown between them and Kiptum - and what motive would they have to kill him? There is absolutely no evidence to suggest what you think is "possible". More clueless conspiracy-thinking.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Wow, your reading comprehension is abysmal if that’s your takeaway from what I wrote.
I’m not calling for an arrest or a conviction. Just saying it’s possible and plausible Kenyan mafia might have been involved based on what his father said and the fact that there are mafia-style cartels in Kenya.
There are mafia in the US, too. So when someone dies in a car accident in the US it's because of the mafia.
What his father said is a claim, not a fact. "Sketchy men" - meaning what? There is no connection with him going off the road in his car. If there was evidence of tampering with the vehicle (and why would it be tampered with?) then there would be grounds for investigation. But there aren't. So what, that there are mafia-type cartels in Kenya; there is no connection shown between them and Kiptum - and what motive would they have to kill him? There is absolutely no evidence to suggest what you think is "possible". More clueless conspiracy-thinking.
The fact is his father made a statement. From the article:
Kiptum’s father Samson Cheruiyot has called for an investigation into the circumstances surrounding his son's death.
He told Kenya's Citizen TV that a group of four people had looked for Kiptum four days before the car crash.
'There are people who came home a while back who were looking for Kiptum but they refused to identify themselves,' Cheruiyot said.
'I asked them to provide identification, but they opted to leave. 'It was a group of four people.'
The Kenyan distance runner's death came just five days after World Athletics ratified his world record time of 2:00.35 , which he set when winning the Chicago Marathon.
You may not believe what his father said (why you would you doubt him?) but the fact is his father made a statement. So yes, my theory is supported by facts.
Where are your facts to support your theory that it was just an accident?
There are mafia in the US, too. So when someone dies in a car accident in the US it's because of the mafia.
Hilarious! You must be a long jumper to make such a leap.
What is more hilarious is that it is the same as your argument that tries to link Kenyan organised crime with Kiptum's death in a road accident when there is no connection.
What his father said is a claim, not a fact. "Sketchy men" - meaning what? There is no connection with him going off the road in his car. If there was evidence of tampering with the vehicle (and why would it be tampered with?) then there would be grounds for investigation. But there aren't. So what, that there are mafia-type cartels in Kenya; there is no connection shown between them and Kiptum - and what motive would they have to kill him? There is absolutely no evidence to suggest what you think is "possible". More clueless conspiracy-thinking.
The fact is his father made a statement. From the article:
Kiptum’s father Samson Cheruiyot has called for an investigation into the circumstances surrounding his son's death.
He told Kenya's Citizen TV that a group of four people had looked for Kiptum four days before the car crash.
'There are people who came home a while back who were looking for Kiptum but they refused to identify themselves,' Cheruiyot said.
'I asked them to provide identification, but they opted to leave. 'It was a group of four people.'
You may not believe what his father said (why you would you doubt him?) but the fact is his father made a statement. So yes, my theory is supported by facts.
Where are your facts to support your theory that it was just an accident?
You make statements. That doesn't make them facts - or relevant. It isn't my "theory" that it was an accident - he went off the road in his car and there has been nothing to show that there was any other cause than his own driving.
