The Devil is in the Details – 3

There is no Justice in the Absence of Truth

Without a preponderance of evidence to give a proper sentence of Justice to the wrongdoer the Law becomes an empty promise never fulfilled. No matter how bad the circumstances are in any murder case, high-profile or mundane, a man is innocent until proven guilty. When there is no resolution of the how, when and why, people are deprived of closure. When the facts do not support the critical function of formal proof, any conclusions so drawn, are no better then hearsay. Some people may prefer not to see the raw details, as graphic as they may be, but to draw a curtain of secrecy around even the bare minimum of supporting evidence is absurd.

Without a proper schematic of the school, a bare graphical description of what was done and with-out a corresponding time-line, to establish actions as occurred, the official story as a legal record starts looking like an empty plate. Yes, one could believe there is a hearty meal filling that plate, even as a single pea sits there all by its lonesome, but why pretend at all?

Why of course there are no pictures of the shooter entering the school. On a day they were expecting parents to come in and help in the classrooms, one might expect somebody in the office to be paying attention to WHOM is coming to the door. A pale, bone-thin man coming up to the door loaded with weapons might be a warning sign…. a single over-head shot is the only image of the  suspected  entrance point of the attacker. When a parent came to the door she noticed the glass busted outwards and was confused. If she did not see any shell-casings then she was not alone. Even the arriving officers failed to observe the obvious evidence. If there were no shell casings to be seen is the argument going to be the shooter picked them up to hide his entrance into the school? Is this not absurd as well to insist the attacker was hiding himself when he had nothing left to lose?

The second the shooter began his murder spree his life was basically over. What pressure existed that forced this suspect into committing himself to such an absolutely, unnecessary, unprovoked attack?  Try finding any pictures of inside the school. Few and far between. How did the attacker know anything about the layout of this school? His mom worked there of course. He was recognized as the son of the “k-teacher” and he was buzzed into the school. However, without this purposeful falsehood the shooter had to enter the school by blasting his way in… or he was let in by an accomplice. The authorities cannot have it both ways. They cannot lie about the “how” and then claim they speak the truth when the lie falls apart a mere news cycle later.

If the shooter was let in then he had the element of real surprise upon those so attacked. The staff did not see a shooter blasting out the front entrance window.  However, if the shooter took out the window from the inside to draw their attention, the actions of the staff running out into the hallway is logically sound. He ambushed them from inside the hallway.

The next sequence is not so clear. He is said to pass by the classroom where Roig, who was acting very quickly, has already barricaded the door. Instead, he heads directly to Rousseau‘s class. If the shooter is indeed Adam, it is easy to say he remembered the layout from the school and planned his attack. However, he could not have known who was in the classrooms or be sure the class arrangements had not significantly changed. For all he knew he was heading into a fourth grade class. If he knew who was in that classroom, there is a problem. A prior relationship exists. What is it?  He was a very angry man…? Angry about what?

When trying to establish who was in what class it became quite clear there was no evidence to be used as a guide. Two adjoining rooms is all there is to go by. Sandy Hook Elementary is set up as a square. All rooms are connected by the hallway. This was not made clear by the press.  Like so many other elements of this story there are so many accounts of what happened, it is not all that surprising nobody can agree on anything.

Some examples:

“Outfitted in combat gear, Mr. Lanza shot his way in, defeating a security system requiring visitors to be buzzed in. This contradicted earlier reports that he had been recognized and allowed to enter the one-story building. “He was not voluntarily let into the school at all,” Lieutenant Vance said. “He forced his way in.”

The lieutenant’s account was consistent with recordings of police dispatchers who answered call after call from adults at the school. “The front glass has been broken,” one dispatcher cautioned officers who were rushing there, repeating on the police radio what a 911 caller had said on the phone. “They are unsure why.”

“It was not enough: First responders described a scene of carnage in the two classrooms where the children were killed, with no movement and no one left to save, everything perfectly still.

Newtown and Connecticut emergency fire and law enforcement radio dispatch suggests arrival of law enforcement at scene; “front glass has been broken [unintelligible]. They’re unsure why.” RadioMan911TV, “Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Newtown Police/Fire and CT State Police,” Youtube, December 14, 2012.

Newtown and Connecticut emergency fire and law enforcement radio dispatch indicates “the shooting appears to have stopped. It is silent at this time. The school is in lockdown.” RadioMan911TV, “Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting Newtown Police/Fire and CT State Police,” Youtube, December 14, 2012.

On Dec 15th the official story was presented and reported:

….”The first classroom Lanza reached was teacher Kaitlin Roig’s. Alarmed by the gunfire, Roig hid her students in a bathroom and closed her classroom door.

Lanza passed by Roig’s classroom in lieu of substitute teacher Lauren Rousseau’s, shooting all 14 children who investigators believe were huddled and clutching one another in fear, in addition to Rousseau and a special education teacher who happened to be in the room.

Lanza next arrived at teacher Victoria Soto’s classroom, who is believed to have hidden her 6- and 7-year old students in a closet. When Lanza demanded to know where the children were, Soto tried to divert him to the other end of the school by saying that her students were in the auditorium. As six of Soto’s students attempted to flee Lanza shot them, Soto and another teacher in the room.

[Searching for survivors police found the remaining seven of Soto’s students still hiding in the closet. They told the police what had happened. ]

The two teacher’s aides who were killed were Mary Anne Murphy and Rachel D’avino. It was unclear which aide was in which room when they were killed.

The first officer arriving at the school found Lanza’s body near the door of Soto’s classroom.

The intense violence lasted about 10 minutes. (*9:28 a.m.- 9:38 a.m.)

Lanza fired at least three, 30-round magazines with deadly accuracy. Two of the people he shot survived. All of the victims were shot multiple times. ‘I did seven (autopsies) myself with three to 11 wounds apiece,’ Chief State Medical Examiner Dr. H. Wayne Carver III said Saturday. ‘Only two were shot at close range. I believe everybody was hit (by bullets) more than once.’” Edward H. Mahoney and Dave Altimari, “A Methodical Massacre, Horror and Heroics,” Hartford Courant, December 15, 2012.

Chris Manfredonia, alleged father of a 6-year-old Sandy Hook Elementary student, claims he is on his way to the school “to help make gingerbread houses with first-graders when he heard popping sounds and smelled sulfur.

The Pam Midlik interview clearly states she told the Dad, to go back to the class… is it possible the reports of a man shouting,”Let me in” was in fact this very same Dad? Otherwise another problem becomes another impossible moment.  The shooter has to be in the building by 9:28 for a ten minute shooting spree to be factual. If at 9:36 the shooter is already proceeding to murder the first victims there is only two minutes left. Pounding on a door cannot occur while the shooter is inside the class of Rousseau or Soto. If Soto slowed him down long enough for not just six kids to flee the class-room, but the additional four(they may not be from her class at all) as well, who are the six kids he shot as they fled? Right here we have seven in the closet, six and four out the door and six killed trying to run? 

Soto loved her 16 angels. The school enrollment records show 19 kids in four classes and 18 in another.  All 14 kids in Rousseau’s class are said to be killed.

[Updated for clarity and additional information]

If 6 kids in Soto’s class plus 14 kids in Rousseau’s does not add up to the correct number of reported victims plus survivors from these two specific classes, then there is a problem. That problem being too many kids were reported to have escaped from Soto’s class for there to be any victims in her class at all.  All early reports implied all her 16 angels were safe from harm, but these accounts were subsequently changed later in the news cycles. There were two accounts of a dying child being found in a pile of bodies [separate classes] and rushed out the door only to die en route to Danbury or shortly after arrival. This eye-witness reported students running from the school:

Colleen Poundstone, a resident of Riverside Road, which leads up to the  school, said she saw five kids – two boys and three girls – run through her back yard around 9:30 Friday morning.  She said they had come through the local park, Sandy Hook Athletic Club field, which is near the school.

Three patients (no information about then was released that morning) were transported to Danbury Hospital · December 14, 2012 at 8:47 am · … the time posted looks to be exactly one hour ahead of the actual crime itself. That is of course is impossible in regards to the official time-line. The facebook time-stamp must be reflecting the server time not local time:

{Elicia Dover How many being transported?
December 14, 2012 at 8:50 am
Tammy Liscio God bless
December 14, 2012 at 8:54 am
Orticari Carol Principal was the target, confirmed
December 14, 2012 at 8:54 am via mobile · 1
Ashley Marie bless those people and their families
December 14, 2012 at 8:56 am · 3
Vera Ioveino-Swett I thoughts, & prayers are with the victims parents, & kids at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
December 14, 2012 at 8:56 am}

The media reports are also not in sync with the facebook posts or the official time-line, per dispatch records:

“At around 10:30 a.m., three patients arrived, one after the other. As a fraction of the medical professionals on hand swung into action, the rest waited tensely. —Eighteen children, six adults and the killer were pronounced dead at the school. —Hospital officials were tight-lipped because of medical privacy rules, but according to reports, two children were pronounced dead within its walls. —*Connecticut police said there was one solitary wounded survivor, described as a female who worked at Sandy Hook Elementary School. She was said to be in good condition.

*This was not factually correct. Ms Hammond the lead teacher was also wounded. In addition, an un-identified woman was photographed sitting in the triage area before being placed into an ambulance. This might be Hammond but no reports have identified her as such.

9:43:45: “We have one female in Room 1 who has gunshot wound to the foot.”

This is in reference to the substitute K-teacher who has publicly never been named. Who she was subbing for is possibly Nancy Duffy, who is also known as Nancy Rogers:

“Our editor, Ken Tingley, grew up in nearby Seymour. He has many family members still there. His cousin Dawn Schwarz works at a local elementary school in nearby Ansonia. A friend of hers from high school, Nancy Ellen Rogers, works at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown as a kindergarten reading teacher. She called into work sick Friday.

Ms. Schwarz copied a post from Ms. Rogers on her Facebook page. Mr. Tingley read it and thought it should be shared with our readers.

“This touched my heart,” Ms. Schwarz wrote on her own Facebook page.

“Thanks for the memories, Nancy.”

This is what Nancy Ellen Rogers wrote on her Facebook page about the children and some staff members. We left it exactly as she wrote it:

Three patients were taken to the hospital—a boy:

“Police arriving at Rousseau’s classroom heard what sounded like a child’s moans from where the bodies of the children had collapsed together. Police had to move several bodies to reach an injured boy, who died en route to Danbury Hospital, the Courant reports.”

And the girl:

“Ana Marquez-Greene, aged six, died in hospital after being shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Read more:

Plus the unidentified, adult female. Another unidentified female victim did not go to Danbury for treatment:

“Bridgeport Hospital spokesman John Cappiello said one woman was brought  to the hospital from the Sandy Hook School shooting. Her injuries are not considered life-threatening, he said.” Read more: man-in-Newtown-4118505.php#ixzz2P3q4IPrt

A miracle girl simply walked right out of her class and right to her mom. When all of the conflicting eye-witness reports are taken into account there are more kids leaving the Soto classroom then officially enrolled, or established by media reports.

The ambiguities here can only be resolved if there are six classrooms and three of those classes of students being reported as if only two.

“The released search warrants were obtained on December 14, 15, 16,2012, within a short time of the shootings. Subsequent investigation revealed that shootings took place in two of the classrooms, not three, and that the shooter was not wearing a bullet-proof vest, nor was he a teenager.”

When the search warrant was released I was not surprised to see that three classes were involved, but no details or specifics to each class. What was surprising is just how quickly the reports of three classes became two once again.

How confusing can it be to differentiate between classrooms with victims and those with none?

The class of D’Amato is not being reported in the same regard as Soto or Rousseau and yet two students, specifically died in her class: “Daniel was in the first-grade class of teacher Amanda D’Amato, Chase Kowalski was in Amanda D’Amato’s class… and only  parents of students in her class should wait in a special room in the rear of the firehouse…. as the ones who were unidentifiable?

The interview also mentioned a document with 20 signatures.

Stephen says, “Then I got to the firehouse and the troopers made me sign a sheet of paper. I counted the signatures. There were 20 signatures. I had a sense then that my son was gone.”

“By 3 o’clock, the troopers came to us again and said the two kids who went to the hospital had perished,” Becky says.

Read more:

The parents of the two students(?) did not need to sign the sheet if it was  specifically only  for classroom identification… so did he count before he signed or after?

If before… his signature becomes number 21.

If after, which I will assume is what is implied… why did parents sign a sheet for identifying the children sent to the hospital before the victims had actually died? Wasn’t the purpose of this special room to identify the slain students by photographs only? Yet, he did not say he identified his child at all, “…We could give them descriptions so they could identify the kids.

If this was simply a document for confirming the number of deceased by parent verification of identity in the classrooms, his signature should have been number eighteen.

“And then Gov. (Dannel) Malloy came out and gave a speech and said he wasn’t gonna take any questions from the families of the dead kids,” Stephen says.  And that’s how they knew Chase was gone.

The statement of Gov. Malloy seems quite appalling. If he had no intentions of taking any questions from the parents what was the intended message? Parents have no right to ask questions? Or he just has no intentions of answering a question of which he has no answer. Either way a curtain has now been drawn  and parents are obviously not in the need to know loop.

At this point it should not be so surprising how long the winding road becomes to answer a few basic questions. The time of action is quite short and the shooter cannot be in two places at once. With no schematic of the interior that is accurate there is no way to verify the path as “assumed or implied” by the fragmented witness statements. The best that can be done is the elimination of any action not supported by results.

The shooter by the descriptions ‘110 to 120 pounds’ on a 5′ 10″ frame is closer to severe malnutrition than a physically fit twenty-year old male. The shooter was not wearing glasses(like his brother), but was later said to be wearing ear plugs. He could not have heard any answer to any question he asked. So why ask any at all? The Soto narrative, while very heroic sounding, is false by necessity of action. He did not need to pound on doors he had no time to open. He had no time to deviate from his intended plan of action. Therefore, he was in fact specific in his victim targets.  He was not shooting at random, but on purpose. Purpose reveals motive. He was intending to kill either Rousseau or D’Amato and every child in (her) class. So which one was it?

The miracle girl was quoted as saying… he was a very angry man. Which class was she really in? If she was in Rousseau’s class, where two children were removed barely alive, how was she missed? So many accounts of the 14 jackets and he killed them all… story draws a sharp line of reference. No class was listed as having only 14 students so at a minimum there had to be 17 jackets hanging on that wall… there is only one pile of bodies because these kids did not get hidden away in a closet. And the door was not locked.

Why does the shooter take out his uncontrollable rage on children he has never seen before that day?

Action and motive cannot be in absurd conflict and yet here they are with no resolution possible with certain specific pieces missing. A cold-bloodied killer cares not who crosses his path. A random cold-blooded killer does not commit suicide the very second he faces real danger. A coward might kill when circumstances are so in favor of the action that no possible consequence exists, but in a school? What motivates a coward to kill helpless children with no possible expectation of survival? A cold-blooded killer would have simply continued firing… in fact, he had a tremendous advantage if that was indeed his sole purpose.

A very angry man seeking revenge is another story. Once the act of revenge is done he having nothing left to gain has nothing left to lose. The shooter has only minutes to carry out his act… yet he over-kills his victims. Who is he really punishing? The normal instinct to protect clearly is not a part of this shooters mindset. He is not just defying the norm he is making a violent statement he has no intentions of sparing life, thus, no hostages and no survivors.

Why did an early report state the authorities did not know how or where Rousseau died? That statement made no sense. Just like finding the body of Nancy Lanza in the K-classroom made no sense. No kids were ever shot in the K-rooms and neither were any adults. Why make bold-faced lies about where bodies are found? Or the identity? The shooter is not making up lies the authorities are and for a reason. What would be such a reason?

How did so many kids actually escape from the Soto classroom? Why did she not lock her door? What if she thought her door was locked? She would have hid her students… but the killer burst in shooting her and only her before turning one of his weapons upon himself. His final act to escape his own choices and thus consequences. Her students saw her die, but they were not seen by police who witnessed the shooter duck into a room fire more rounds and then kill himself.  The police were already there and there is no way any kids running away from the Soto classroom could have been missed, much less, able to pass the dead bodies in the front area without running through pools of blood. Were those front doors locked just to entry or also exit?

The four kids picked up by the Mom on the way in to school had the same problem as the six as reported showing up at Rosen’s. They could not have left at any time except while the shooter was in another class. So was Soto speaking the truth…  most of her students had to be out of the classroom. Only a second shooter could have been asking her a question and heard by the students hiding in the closet. They did not assume it was Lanza, the authorities allowed the public to assume it was Lanza.

All of this activity is bracketed by three minutes after the police are at the entrance door and hear rifle shots. They came in from the sides and the front entrance.  What if the five kids who died trying to escape came from Rousseau’s class? But one was still barely alive and was scooped up and taken to Danbury. The remaining kids would be eleven. In D’Amato’s class 13 kids are killed outright, one is found barely alive and is taken to Danbury. The miracle girl leaves the class and goes straight to her mom without being seen by anyone else?

By this set of assumptions D’Amato has 15 students and Rousseau has 16 students. Both aides in these classes died trying to shield their students. Where did Rousseau actually die?  Why was the reporting on her death later than any other victim?

[Update] There is no evidence to suggest that D’Amato was injured, or even at the school that day.  I will leave this as an open question until such time some kind of reference to her settles the mystery.

Why would two shooters or more be attempting to kill one specific target while indiscriminately killing so many others?

If the authorities do not want to answer questions they clearly have no intentions of answering the ones nobody else wants to ask as well.

Next post— Was there another shooter besides Adam?


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses to “The Devil is in the Details – 3”

  1. Alice Says:

    “Three patients(kids only?) were transported to Danbury Hospital · December 14, 2012 at 8:47 am · … the time posted looks to be exactly one hour ahead of the actual crime itself. That is of course is impossible. Clearly is that three patients were taken to the hospital as reported. Plus the miracle girl.”

    This wording is unclear, it needs to be reedited.

    What is all this about a discrepancy in the time posted for the wounded being taken to hospital? Very strange.


    • megatronicsmedia Says:

      You are right — that paragraph was a bit awkward…. The facebook page of Danbury seemingly has a post-time an hour ahead of the official story. I tried to find if there was any verifiable method available to check the time-stamp as published… no results, but I am no expert in facebook time-stamp issues… I simply noted that it was impossible for the post to be made before the incident itself. Like so many other factors of the incident, this odd bit will not change the official narrative. If one were to take the logical path and allow the post to be an accurate local time-wise to facebook post an absurdity results… the shooting would have to have taken place an entire hour before it was nationally reported. I assumed the posting time was not an accurate reflection of when Danbury first knew of the incident.

      Danbury—8:47 am issues a post: —-To date, three patients have been transported to Danbury Hospital from the scene— this was so widely reported it was not in dispute. What was unclear was who these patients were and if one was an adult— which teacher. I had to find the answers by searching far and wide… like so many other aspects where only a sliver of information is given while entire “official narrative bites” are repeated extensively. This of course did not answer the question of why the post was too early, but once again if the post time was an hour or so ahead, the first patients would have arrived around 10:30 am … there is simply no resolution here without knowing why the time difference exists at all. If the victims were possibly brought out of the school by 9:50 am then the Posting time of Danbury, should reflect the arrival time of about 18 minuets later, maybe less at high-speed. To assume the victims did not leave the school until after ten am begs the question of why reports made it clear they were rushed out as soon as they were found.

      There is very little leeway here between actions as reported and time aspects as a result. Why were there no life-flight helicopters on the scene for the severely injured? Why were there no actual emergency personal checking all possible victims asap… after the lone-gun shooter was down? Normal procedures did not seem to be followed, but the scene was highly controlled. The reasons implied was due to the carnage no victims could be helped, but one girl did in fact walk out and she has never been identified. It is a very strange case indeed.


  2. gjordan741 Says:

    It is not just the timestamp and no life-flight helicopters. The absence of the helicopters brings up questions about the TRIAGE operations, or lack of triage operations, on-site that morning. Connecticut law has clear, detailed procedures for determining death under the law which intersect with triage procedures.

    There were no life-flights as there were NO triage procedures undertaken that day. Licensed physicians and registered nurses were barred from entering the school.


    • megatronicsmedia Says:

      Exactly— the “normal” emergency operations one expects, due to the nature of the emergency, were completely absent and the reason why makes no sense either by lawful procedures or necessity. The time-frame for the incident itself is a mere twelve minutes 9:30 to 9:42 by most accounts with dispatch audio records. What is really odd is that parents, who were on the scene, never mention seeing any ambulances arrive— there are two or three accounts of seeing the children being carried out, but the follow up observation/sentence as in— we watched the child quickly loaded up into the ‘waiting ambulance’ and whisked off to the hospital— are missing. Danbury went into lock-down and no media were allowed on site. This is simple proof there was exceptional control of access to the crime scene, the Lanza house on Yogananda street and the hospital.

      There is no ethical reason for barring emergency personal from entering the school and making every effort possible to save lives of wounded victims. The excuse as given is unethical and as you point out… there are very clear lawful procedures for dealing with extreme emergencies and no matter how bad, unpleasant, horrific the scene may be of the crime committed, such ad hoc emotional criteria has no consideration/weight for denying those same lawful procedures. Breaking the law to protect the emergency personal from seeing “carnage” is rather nonsensical— as this is a major function of their jobs period. They didn’t need protection and didn’t ask for it either— as you said, they were barred from doing their jobs— and who made that decision? Who had the authority to stop emergency personal from carrying out their lawful priorities? The stink arising from that decision alone is far worse than the crime itself. There is no public proof of any kind those students were killed, as reported, or died as claimed. Thus, that decision has actually prevented independent, verification of evidence in a crime scene, which is of course quite absurd and lawfully deficient.

      This aspect of the incident does not give credence to the official story. Which makes the quip from Dr. Carver all the more interesting. He knew the consequences for not following lawful procedures would indeed cause it all to come crashing back down on their heads. It is only a question of time.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: