Ive always read it as With Regards To
"That's the thing about possum innards - they's just as good the second day." - Jed Clampett
"That's the thing about possum innards - they's just as good the second day." - Jed Clampett
Ohhh so wireless receiver transmitter? Thanks egilbe/Buzz.
Traveler - Thanks for sharing that post. You know a lot more about SAR that I do that's for sure. May I ask what, if anything, you would have done differently if you were either a member of SAR in this case or a official in charge. In connection with that let me say that I do not think a single poster in this thread, at least lately, has blamed the SAR members conducting the search. I think they did a good job and I'm sure gave it 110%. They were following orders from a person or two and those orders/decisions seem to be questionable but that's purely my opinion. And I also don't think anyone is questioning anything about the Navy or SERE, hopefully that ship has sailed. The bollard did that, has been thoroughly stomped on here, and theres been little mention of it since. Finally, even if the WS orders/decisions were questionable, overall its a very very long way from negligence or as you say "caused the death." Again, I'm don't see anyone saying that here.
I'm curious if it was an encampment in hopes of a rescue as she felt hopelessly lost or if it were an encampment made out of a medical event that led to incapacitation. It's a sad event, but out of it maybe some valuable knowledge can learned from it.
WRT can either be:
With Regards To
or
With Respect To
I don't know enough about the specifics of the search and decision timeline to have an opinion on what could have been done differently, there are just too many variables involved. I do know best practice search protocols used have a very high statistical level of success (at or above the 95 percentile inside 24 hours), this being the atypical instance. Again, we can know all the specifics of how the search was conducted, thats not hard to document. What we don't know nor can it be determined is the victim's cognitive condition and behavior during the initial search period and if they eventually came back into an area that searchers had made their presence known. Nor do we know why dogs didn't pick up a scent during initial search or subsequent searches. We will never know these answers, we can't ask the victim and the dogs can't say. To speculate is counterproductive.
The statement "searchers/effort/rescue failed and the victim(s) died" (or similarly said) is not uncommon to hear from the public and has been said in this thread in one form or another over time. Though it may not be the intent of people saying this, associating a death with the term "failure" in the same sentence as SAR actions is a passive way of expressing the blame opinion. I am not making the accusation of anyone here about that, only drawing attention to the point. The performance metric used for this work is typically successful/unsuccessful. Failure implies searchers had a choice or opportunity when none may have existed. SAR does not share responsibility of how a victim arrived at needing help or their fate as a result. It may seem a minor point or semantics in the use of unsuccessful or failure, but to those men and women who participate in these events, its a distinction with a serious difference and should be observed.
My father went to bed one night and did not wake up the next day. This is probably more likely what happend to Inchworm rather then dyeing from exposure, or starvation. What I find suspicious is the need for the authorities to conclude. In October when she was found, head line reads "died of exposure". Ok not many exposure deaths happen in July, especially with trained, experienced hikers, who have a full set of gear, and at one time a USAF nurse. Then more recently when the medical examiners report comes out that she died in her sleeping bag in her tent the conclusion is that she died of starvation. Ok now that would of happened well after weeks of intensive searching. Her remains are found just 2,100 feet off of the AT. She had the cognitive ability to build up a bed made from pine branches to put her tent on, however no signal fire, her red jacket was not placed some where search planes might spot it. A logical conclusion to this is that she was either captured, or dead during the search. I find it odd that her arms and hands are missing, if their was evidence of foul play defensive wounds would show up on her hands and arms.
03/07/13 - 10/07/13 Flip flop AT thru hike "It is well with my soul"
Perhaps, and she happened across this spot in the end while avoiding all SAR attempts. Did her arms and hands just disappear some where, not to be found by the k9's.
03/07/13 - 10/07/13 Flip flop AT thru hike "It is well with my soul"
I think rickb meant "with respect to" but it was a little confusing, I thought he was referring to some organisation or piece of equipment that could detect cellphone signals. Thanks for everybody's help.
If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.
Acronyms are convenient, they're just not always obvious.
Miles to go before I sleep. R. Frost
Quick IT joke..
What does ATM stand for?
All together Too Much
Thank you..Thank you.
Paul "Mags" Magnanti
http://pmags.com
Twitter: @pmagsco
Facebook: pmagsblog
The true harvest of my life is intangible...a little stardust caught,a portion of the rainbow I have clutched -Thoreau
Department of Acronyms = DOA
Last edited by 4eyedbuzzard; 02-08-2016 at 15:42.
"That's the thing about possum innards - they's just as good the second day." - Jed Clampett
Is this really the sort of people that frequent this forum, people that make jokes on a thread about a dead hiker.
Absolutely disgusting how some people have zero respect
"That's the thing about possum innards - they's just as good the second day." - Jed Clampett