if 911 was a crime, why would authorities destroy the crime scene, before anyone went to trial?

Question

just curious!

Answer 1

Why, indeed.
Apparently they got "another Pearl Harbor" and put the fear of Jesus in everyone, and they didn't want anyone to find evidence of demolition. You know, steel columns sheered with thermite.
Other evidence, of explosives having been used, might indicate that something other than planes and fire brought down the towers.
And Building 7...

Answer 2

This often happens. The same thing happened after Oklahoma City. Trials often can take up to years after the crime is occured. To leave everything as is would be a nuisance to the entire city of New York, and others even around the country who would working with nearby businesses. After evidence is taken, crime scenes are often cleaned up within a few days or weeks. What you see on TV -- when they block of a crime scene for weeks, that almost never happens. Actually all of the wreckage was saved, and bagged and tagged in a New Jersey dump. It wasn't just take and thrown away, it was collected in a single place for assessment

Answer 3

the crime scene,and most of the bodies(tho not all,bones were recently found under a manhole cover near the cite) were effectively incinerated when the planes hit the towers.it burned,collapsed and was in some places,charred to powder.ther is nothing to be found,forensically,of the perpetrators.the victims and perps on the planes were incinerated utterly by the fireballs that resulted on impact-no bones,no teeth,no boxcutters-certainly no fingerprints!!!also,since we know the identities of the perps,and of the person/organisation they worked for,no further search is needed.we certainly couldnt have found any evidence,as i said ,the people on the planes were vaporised .a crime scene such as this is different from a regular fire,in which accelerants can be found and charred remains examined.the temperatures of this fire were many times higher than that of the average house fire,due to volatile fuels of the planes,and the force of impact.u cant do a forensic searchfor evidence of crimes,not enpough to work with.just like u couldnt due an examination of bodies at ground zero,or epicenter,of nagasaki blast-there were no ground zero bodies-they were vaporised instantly.different method,same basic result.

Answer 4

The crime scene was cleaned up and evidence gathered as the rescuers/clean up crew worked, so no need to preserve it for a trial. You don't leave a bloody crime scene intact in a house until the accused's trial.

Answer 5

Was 9/11 a crime?
Or was killing 3,000 people just vandalism?
Since the killers were dead, how many years did you want to look at the crime scene?
(If you want to create another Conspiracy Theory, you will have to do better.)

Answer 6

The people who did it, all died in the trial, and it wa an attack, terrorist action, not a normal crime. There was nothing in the scene that could help find the other terrorists overseas.

Answer 7

they didn't destroy the crime scene like with major airline disasters they removed the wreckage and relocated it some place were they could examine each piece more closely in their search for evidence.

Answer 8

Hmmm... how about because the rescue efforts were the most important thing.... by the time rescue crews were finished there would be little if any evidence

Answer 9

Because it is *NOT* a crime.... it is an *ACT OF WAR*.... big difference.... At any rate, those responsible for the actual act are dead.

Answer 10

Bin laden took credit for it . so much for your conspiracy theory