If you knew/If we had known beforehand

[MickeyQ]

It is interesting to note that on Wednesday, August 10, Police Commissioner Michael Codd was out of town. Not in Europe or China; just out of town. John J. Santucci, district attorney of Queens, site of five of the eight Son of Sam attacks, would later offer this observation: "If you knew beforehand that you had identified your suspect, you just would not make the biggest arrest in the history of the Police Department without the commissioner available. It's simply not done. They didn't know until the very end it was Berkowitz they were after."

The Ultimate Evil
The Truth about the Cult Murders: Son of Sam & Beyond by Maury Terry (1999)

Hello teachers!
I've been contemplating this for a while and just want to ask something.

Regarding this particular context, does the sentence:
"If you knew beforehand that you had identified your suspect, you just would not make the biggest arrest in the history of the Police Department without the commissioner available." (2. Conditional)

conveys the same as:
"If we had known beforehand that we had identified our suspect, we just would not have made the biggest arrest in the history of the Police Department without the commissioner available."? (3. Conditional)

In other words, if John J. Santucci had said the second sentence (using 3. Conditional) at that press conference, would it have meant the same?

Thanks!

 

[jutfrank]

It depends what you mean by 'meant the same'. I'd say no.

 

[MickeyQ]

It depends what you mean by 'meant the same'. I'd say no.

I meant the same meaning.
Do those two sentences convey the same meaning regarding this particular context?

They knew about him before they arrested him but didn't know that he was the notorious Son of Sam.

 

[Piscean]

Regarding this particular context, does the sentence:
"If you knew beforehand that you had identified your suspect, you just would not make the biggest arrest in the history of the Police Department without the commissioner available." (2. Conditional)

conveys the same as:
"If we had known beforehand that we had identified our suspect, we just would not have made the biggest arrest in the history of the Police Department without the commissioner available."? (3. Conditional)

No.

For a start, the 'you' in the first sentence may refer to people in general or, indirectly, to the speaker. The 'we' in the second sentence is far more specific.

The first sentence is presenting the situation in general terms. The speaker, while clearly thinking of the actual arrest, is suggesting that the officers concerned did not know the identity of the subject because such things do not happen.

The second sentence is saying clearly that they had not identified the subject.

 

[MickeyQ]

The second sentence is saying clearly that they had not identified the subject.

Don't get this! Doesn't it mean that they had identified their suspect before they actually realized it but they didn't know that?

Something like this: they identified their suspect for some offense (possession of a gun, loitering, or whatever), and only later worked out that he was the notorious Son of Sam. If they had known (when they arrested him - which is beforehand, compared to discovering he is the Son of Sam), that they had identified their suspect, they would have made sure the commissioner was there in town when arresting him.

What do you think about this?

 

[Piscean]

If they had known (when they arrested him - which is beforehand, compared to discovering he is the Son of Sam), that they had identified their suspect, they would have made sure the commissioner was there in town when arresting him.

What do you think about this?

Fine.

 

[MickeyQ]

Could you explain this to me Piscean, or anyone else who would like to add their comment.

If my comment is fine with you or is correct, why then you wrote this:

The second sentence is saying clearly that they had not identified the subject.

Again, others are also welcome to help!
Thanks!

 

[jutfrank]

You're not misunderstanding anything about the meaning of the text, @MickeyQ. Your third conditional version is effectively saying the same thing as the original.

 

[Piscean]

If they had known (when they arrested him - which is beforehand, compared to discovering he is the Son of Sam), that they had identified their suspect, they would have made sure the commissioner was there in town when arresting him.

This counterfactual suggestion conveys two message;

1. They did not know that they had identified their subject.
2. they did not make sure the commissioner was in town.