I would agree with your post of the understanding of proactive reasoning. Like you my post focused on the same points of understanding and the benefits and downfalls of each. Proactive provides more control and protection for all individuals and allows investigators to control the direction and typically the outcome of each investigation. You mentioned how reactive reasoning is difficult due to the the need for investigators to have and urgent response, which I couldn't agree more. Between the two reactive is weaker, because of the unknown possibility of having a witness not testify and the possible life or death
I would agree with your post of the understanding of proactive reasoning. Like you my post focused on the same points of understanding and the benefits and downfalls of each. Proactive provides more control and protection for all individuals and allows investigators to control the direction and typically the outcome of each investigation. You mentioned how reactive reasoning is difficult due to the the need for investigators to have and urgent response, which I couldn't agree more. Between the two reactive is weaker, because of the unknown possibility of having a witness not testify and the possible life or death