Thread: How To Destroy Sandy Hook School Shooting Evidence

How To Destroy Sandy Hook School Shooting Evidence

Friday, December 28, 2012 18:21



(Before It's News)



TheSONSOFLIBERTYMC
Published on Dec 15, 2012
NEWTON SCHOOL SHOOTING ..is that how you handle evidence? Evidently the safetyNUTZI’s ..don’t understand the importance of FINGERPRINTS/etc ..even with you the DEAD GUY to put the case on SUB:



youtube.com/watch?v=wLrxSgkqJQc

Needless to say, it makes ZERO SENSE that the best weapon for the killing was left in the trunk of the vehicle. and could NOT possibly have been used at the school because the dead shooter couldn’t have put it back into the trunk.

Which raises the all important question: “Say, this kid shot mommy in the face 6 times with this thing that day, how many rounds did the stupid moron [officer at the trunk] eject from the still inserted magazine onto the pavement behind the weapon?”

I’m presuming that the magazine was ‘full’ though no gun owner would ever allow any weapon to be so stored as this puts a preset into the magazine feed spring, which is a bad idea all the way around. IF the magazine was ‘full’ at the house, and the kid didn’t calmly sit down and reload it again after killing mommy, that magazine would have a total capacity minus ’6′ or however the guy fired into mommy’s face.

Another good reason for the trunk of the vehicle to have been ‘sealed’ immediately for the vehicle to be processed properly at the State’s crime laboratory for fingerprints and other clues. Once the trunk was opened on the car and it was ascertained that the trunk did not contain any obvious booby traps of any kind, the trunk should have been shut again very carefully, the trunk lid sealed by special evidence anti tamper tape across the trunk lid seal to the body, and indeed over the key opening, and the vehicle put on a flatbed and towed to the crime lab for extensive analysis.

My guess is that that was not done. But that’s exactly what should have been done when the police determined the car contained weapons not used in the shooting, obviously, least not at the SCHOOL. That car would have gone to the central crime lab there in Hartford for processing, not mucked with on location by morons.

Dennis Cimino from

Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax and Anti-Gun “Psy Op”
By Jim Fetzer and Dennis Cimino

veteranstoday.com/2012/12/27/sandy-hook-huge-hoax-and-anti-gun-psy-op/



2012-12-28 18:17:32
Source: blogdog: How to DESTROY Sandy Hook school shooting EVIDENCE

Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax And Anti-Gun Psy Op

Friday, December 28, 2012 10:38


(Before It's News)
By Jim Fetzer and Dennis Cimino

“The page you requested was not found.”–Anthony J. Hilder facebook page notice

There are obvious signs that tell the difference between genuine and fabricated event. The recent shooting of police and firemen responding to a deliberately-set fire has all the signs of being a bona fide event: there is a single consistent narrative, one shooter has been clearly identified, and there has been no good reason to doubt that the subject, William Spengler, went off the rails and committed the crimes. There are many articles about it, which relate the same basic themes: “Killer of 2 NY Firemen had semiautomatic rifle, left note”: “Police say the man who lured firefighters in Webster, N.Y., into a deadly ambush had the same make and caliber semiautomatic rifle as the one used in the Connecticut school massacre. Webster Police Chief Gerald Pickering said Tuesday that 62-year-old William Spengler was armed with a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, a .38-caliber revolver and a 12-gauge shotgun in Monday’s ambush. Spengler killed two firefighters and wounded two others before fatally shooting himself.”

However bizarre the event, there is nothing about it that suggests it was either a hoax or a psy op. In the case of Sandy Hook, however, the situation is completely different, where we have one inconsistency after another: the mother was a teacher there and Adam was a student; the mother was not a teacher there an Adam was not a student. One shooter was involved, yet police radio reports show a second suspect was apprehended at the scene and a police helicopter video show yet a third suspect being tracked in the woods. The principal called the local paper about the shooting; the principal was dead on the scene. Excellent studies of the incoherence of the Sandy Hook narrative have been published by Niall Bradley, “Sandy Hook massacre story spins out of control” (Veterans Today, 20 December 2012) and by Professor James F. Tracy, “The Sandy Hook School Massacre: Unanswered Questions and Missing Information” (Global Research, 25 December 2012). Even NBC News has reported that there were four rather than two handguns inside the school and no long gun. There is no consistent story or coherent narrative.
The Bushmaster Hoax

Perhaps the most important point made by Niall Bradley concerned the Bushmaster, which was supposed to be the weapon that was used to slaughter 20 children and six adults as follows:



Professor Tracy observes that the report given by the medical examiner raises further questions about the weapon used, leading Tracy to question whether the man who participated in this interview was the real H. Wayne Carver or an impostor: ” . . . the H. Wayne Carver who showed up to the December 15 press conference is an almost entirely different man, appearing apprehensive and uncertain, as if he is at a significant remove from the postmortem operation he had overseen. The multiple gaffes, discrepancies, and hedges in response to reporters’ astute questions suggest that he is either under coercion or an imposter. While the latter sounds untenable it would go a long way in explaining his sub-pedestrian grasp of medical procedures and terminology.”

“With this in mind,” Tracy continues, “extended excerpts from this exchange are worthy of recounting here in print. Carver is accompanied by Connecticut State Police Lieutenant H. Paul Vance and additional Connecticut State Police personnel. The reporters are off-screen and thus unidentified so I have assigned them simple numerical identification based on what can be discerned of their voices”:

Reporter #1: So the rifle was the primary weapon?
H. Wayne Carver: Yes.
Reporter #1: [Inaudible]
Carver: Uh (pause). Question was what caliber were these bullets. And I know—I probably know more about firearms than most pathologists but if I say it in court they yell at me and don’t make me answer [sic]—so [nervous laughter]. I’ll let the police do that for you.
Reporter #2: Doctor can you tell us about the nature of the wounds. Were they at very close range? Were the children shot at from across the room?

Carver: Uhm, I only did seven of the autopsies. The victims I had ranged from three to eleven wounds apiece and I only saw two of them with close range shooting. Uh, but that’s, uh y’know, a sample. Uh, I really don’t have detailed information on the rest of the injuries.

[Given that Carver is Connecticut’s top coroner and in charge of the entire postmortem this is a startling admission.-JT]

Reporter #3: But you said that the long rifle was used?
Carver: Yes.
Reporter #3: But the long rifle was discovered in the car.
State Police Lieutenant Vance: That’s not correct, sir.
Unidentified reporter #4: How many bullets or bullet fragments did you find in the autopsy. Can you tell us that?
Carver: Oh. I’m lucky I can tell you how many I found. I don’t know. There were lots of them, OK? This type of weapon is not, uh … the bullets are designed in such a fashion that the energy—this is very clinical. I shouldn’t be saying this. But the energy is deposited in the tissue so the bullet stays in [the tissue].
[In fact, the Bushmaster .223 Connecticut police finally claimed was used in the shooting is designed for long range field use and utilizes high velocity bullets with a muzzle velocity of 3,000 fps, the energy of which even at considerable distance would penetrate several bodies before finally coming to rest in tissue.]

MORE HERE

Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax and Anti-Gun “Psy Op” | Veterans Today


Sandy Hook: Huge Hoax And Anti-Gun Psy Op | Alternative

on January 31, 2013 byMark Horne Sandy Hook: Is The Lone Gunman A Lie To Manipulate The Public?

There is a great deal of “noise” surrounding the Sandy Hook massacre. I’ve noticed that when I search on twitter I see people making confident declarations about what happened that were based on earlier media reports of the story that afterward got changed. I had always thought that the internet helps us learn things, but in this case, older versions of events that have been discarded are still alive and well in the search engines.


There are, additionally, some people asserting that the Sandy Hook massacre is some kind of hoax involving actors or even green screen cgi footage. I don’t find any of this credible. I do feel some of the interviews come off as rather artificial, but I think that is because grieving is private and it is being televised to the public in an Oprah-like fashion. Basically, all our “news” agencies (so-called) have become talk shows. In general, the way Sandy Hook has been treated has been to maximize a sense of unreality about the entire event. We are shown no documentary or photographic evidence. We’re just told what happened (for today) and then treated to a shameless campaign for gun control.


With so much “noise,” is there any signal to be detected? I count as “noise” anything I can’t possibly figure out: like the way both Ryan and Adam Lanza were placed at the shooting in an early report, or the school nurse who reportedly said the shooter’s mother was a kindergarten teacher and that she made eye contact with the shooter, but later told a different story. Until the media actually decides to do some investigative reporting, much of the stuff I hear can only be “noise.” I have no way to interpret it.


But what about this interview with Katie Couric? Barbara Sibley is a professional copy writer who is located in Sandy Hook and who seems like a plausible witness. She says that she had to return to the school because her son forgot an item. When she arrived on the campus, she claims she saw the black Honda Civic sitting with all four doors open and black sweatshirts strewn on the ground. Why would a lone gunman need to open all four doors? It is very easy to envision several shooters bursting out of the car, throwing off the sweatshirts they had used to hide weapons. (Here is a version of her story that leaves out the detail about the car doors.)


Note that early on there were several mentions of more than one shooter. Some explanations have been offered in some cases, but nothing definitive has been said, other than the raw assertion by the police that there was only one shooter.

Were other shooters in the vehicle? I have no idea. But it is one of the few pieces of testimony that we get to hear first hand. Frankly, I have a hard time believing that someone as small as Adam shot his way into the school, or dispatched all those people so quickly. Since the gunman was wearing a mask, there is no reason to expect a witness to remember seeing his face.

(By the way, why does a lone gunman on a suicide mission need to cover his face?)


Also, I’ve never understood why, if Adam Lanza had such a great arsenal available to him in his own house, why he attempted to buy his own rifle. Perhaps that story will turn out to be false. Maybe. But as far as we know it is as likely to be true as the story that Nancy Lanza owned all those weapons. Without further investigation, these discrepancies mostly create “noise,” but they open enough doubt to allow for the possibility that other shooters were involved who had their own weapons.


Maybe Adam did open all the doors and leave sweatshirts strewn around all by himself. But maybe not. The government and the media has been pushing gun control on the premise that a kid became a crazed killer using his mother’s guns on his own. We really have no reason to be confident that we know it happened that way. How can we trust people who, when they hear bombshell testimony from a witness, show know curiosity about what she says? Katie Couric here’s about a car with all doors left open and black sweatshirts and she never even shows curiosity? I don’t understand how that is possible. Yet Katie, like all the other journalists, refused to do more than give us human interest stories. All of the “reporting” is obviously aimed at manipulating the audience emotionally in arouse submission to the government as it subverts the Second Amendment.


Journalists should be investigating rather than pushing a political agenda.


Sandy Hook: Is The Lone Gunman A Lie To Manipulate The Public? : The Last Resistance