I mentioned this in one of my earlier posts:
You stated in one of your posts this was common practice. But this is from CBC News, and exactly what I meant:
Guyger has been charged with manslaughter, but some demonstrators want her charged with murder. A grand jury will ultimately decide whether Guyger's charges get bumped up. Her attorney denied CBS News' request for comment.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiuoq3C-rjdAhVyUd8KHXNSAtAQFjACegQICBAB&url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/botham-jean-family-wants-to-put-one-rumor-to-rest-dallas-shooting-amber-guyger/&usg=AOvVaw2-qmpdnLU8mRKmjYMXmNUs
You then posted this:
But how can you question the killer if her attorney's won't offer a statement? Killers are hardly too eager to talk for fear of inadvertently/unintentionally telling the truth; so they get lawyered up or hire PR firms to present their "truth". This killer fits the same category.
What I posted from the link didn't come from the DPD, it came from the family, reported by CBS (media). And regarding those affidavits,
they were signed off by the killer and those who took her statement(s). The counterbalance comes from the killer telling DPD one thing, the TX Rangers another thing, and her telling another thing, something totally different. Those are updates that the media is responsible to report. If they are lies/false, it's not the media's fault because they report/update what was given to them from signed affidavits. The media has reported what DPD has/had to say; they even reported what the DA Faith Johnson had/has to say. They also report what the family of Botham Jean has spoken, as well as what Merit Law has spoken. So, I'm still not understanding your point. But I digress.