Connecticut Elementary School Massacre

[chump]

No one wants to talk... about Shh... co.

http://memoryholeblog.com/2013/01/28/an ... nnecticut/

An Inquisitive Couple's Viit to Newtown Connecticut

We then went to the offices of The Newtown Bee, the community’s weekly newspaper, where we spoke with the editor, Mr. Curtis Clark. Mr. Clark did not offer a warm reception and stated from the start that they were concentrating the paper’s efforts on healing efforts and that he had little time. I told him I was there to follow up on The Bee’s report that stated, in part, “A man with a gun who was spotted in the woods near the school on the day of the incident was an off-duty tactical squad police officer from another town, according to the source.” I asked who this officer was, and why he was in the woods.

Mr. Clark told me that there was a number of “conspiracy theories floating around” and “some of them even suggest that the shooting didn’t even happen.” Furthermore, “Snopes.com debunks many of these conspiracy theories.”...

... Next, we proceeded to the Newtown Police Department. After entering I walked up to the glassed-in safety window, picked up the phone on the wall and asked the attendant on the other side if I could speak with the Communications Officer. I explained why. He directed me to The Newtown Bee.

I advised him that The Bee had directed me to them and he asked me to have a seat. The room was rectangular with doors on both ends. Then, a male and female police officer simultaneously entered through each door. I addressed the female sergeant, telling her I would like to know who was the off duty tactical officer The Bee reported on on December 27. A male officer I was not addressing repeatedly ordered me to remove my hands from my pockets.

The female sergeant told me that the man detained was the uncle of a student at the school who had gone to get his niece. I asked about the police scanner audio where the dispatcher reports that a caller from inside the school saw “two shadows” run by the gym at the back of the school.

Additionally, an officer apparently arriving at the scene stated

“I’ve got ‘em (sic). They are running at me down Crestwood.”

Crestwood Drive borders that backside of the school beyond some woods. The sergeant told me that this was the confusion of the day and that there were not two individuals. “It was just someone that went crazy, killed a bunch of people and then killed himself,” she said consolingly.

[Iamwhomiam]

This jives with what was earlier reported and I believe it appears somewhere much early in the thread.

[elfismiles]

a close relative just sent me a sand hook ("did this really happen") conspiracy video link ...

after wading thru the 30 minute video I did find one single tidbit I'd not heard and which escalates ta-weirdness tho only slightly:

Bridgeport, Connecticut FEMA's course work for the day of the shootings?

Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection
Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security

Dec 14, 2012

FEMA L-366 Planning for the Needs of Children in Disasters

The goal of the course is to enable participants to improve their community’s mitigation and emergency operations plan specifically regarding the needs of children. The course will provide them with the information needed to address the unique needs of children prior to, during and following disasters. It will also provide them guidance and direction on how to form coalitions and how to become advocates for the unique needs of children in all aspects of emergency management.

After completing this course, participants will be able to:
• Articulate the importance of providing for the needs of children in disasters in your community’s current emergency management plan.

• Explain what is required to keep children safe in emergencies and why those needs are unique.

• Explain the assumptions, concept of operations, organization and assignment of responsibilities that address the unique needs of children prior to, during and following disasters.

• Explain the planning components necessary to address the unique needs of children prior to, during and following disasters
• Incorporate the unique needs of children in disasters into Emergency Operations Plans

• Identify stakeholders and organizations that can assist in preparing for the needs of children in disasters.

• Initiate steps to form coalitions and build teams that have a stake in keeping children safe in disasters

The target audience for this course is local and state emergency managers and planners, Child Services Agencies, NGO’s, Child Care Providers, Schools, and Faith-based Organizations.

1. As of October 1, 2012 anyone applying for FEMA courses must obtain a FEMA Student Identification (SID) number. For more information and to obtain a SID go to: https://cdp.dhs.gov/femasid/

You will need this number to complete the course application form (119-25-1) that will be filled out at the beginning of the class. FEMA certificates will be mailed to participants after completion of this course.

2.Class size is limited to 30. Please sign up as soon as possible to guarantee a spot in the class of your choice.

3. There are no prerequisites for this class.

4. There is no cost for the class and lunch is on your own.


Please watch this short video on how to setup an account.

http://www.ct.gov/demhs/lib/demhs/train ... ation.html

Location: 2800 Main Street, Bridgeport, CT
This event is 46 miles from you (06106).

9 AM - 4 PM
Contact: Christopher Ackley
Email: christopher.ackley@ct.gov
Phone: (203)-696-2640
5 of 40 seats still available
Last day to register: 12/13/2012
Sorry, you may not register for this event.
Input your zip code to calculate the distance to the event:

http://www.ct.gov/demhs/ical/eventDetai ... CD83CDC9C7

[Elihu]

whitehouse response to the piers deportation petition
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti ... t/prfh5zHD

We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to improve mental health and well being reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his views on this important issue.

yeah. that's what it did.

the msmfedgov's same old new perspective : "we know there's alot of crazy people out there. this particular perp was particularly mixed up. he was on drugs, exposed to alot of virtual violence, just went cuckcoo (our scientists are analyzing his brain right now). and more and more of you are experiencing this everyday. in response, we are going to emphatically suggest that you all disarm yourselves. as the remaining possessors, depictors and perpetrators of weaponized violence (the exploding kind from high in the sky is particularly funny, hehe, we're working hard to bring more of that to where you live!) we will in essence be the wardens of a giant insane asylum errr mental health facility! we'll let you out when you're better we promise..."

[DrEvil]

Just for the sake of clarity - here's the actual quote, without Elihu's edits:

We recognize that the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, sparked an intense, and at times emotional, national conversation about the steps we can take as a country to reduce gun violence. In fact, your petition is one of many on the issue, and President Obama personally responded by sharing his views on this important issue.

And a question for the 2nd amendment fans here: Why do you keep blaming everything but the guns for gun deaths? Isn't it obvious that less guns means less death by guns?
Just look at any other country with strict gun laws. It works. Period.

Edit: Forgot capital E in Elihu. Sorry!

[Elihu]

And a question for the 2nd amendment fans here: Why do you keep blaming everything but the guns for gun deaths? Isn't it obvious that less guns means less death by guns?
Just look at any other country with strict gun laws. It works. Period.

yeah but is it the means or the end? we'll still be a bunch of de-fanged nut cases! and not that two wrongs make a right but the gov itself is damned near off the leash with the violence it is perpetrating. how long do you think the tissue paper between afghanis basically everyone that's not western and us western world citizens is going to last? and it's not the gun's fault. guns have no fault.

i finally heard something the other day re the 2nd amendment that crystallized it for me. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

if you go back to the unsophisticated concept of "necessary to the security of a free State", you immediately perceive the falsity of the argument "you don't need an ar15 to shoot a squirrel...!". hunting is not now nor ever has been the point. the point is parity of weaponry with the central gov. you could even say that if the central gov would disarm (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!) the citizens likely would too!!!!
no prob on the capitalization...

[DrEvil]

First off: "guns have no faults". Yes they do. They exist

But seriously - I do agree with you that the US government isn't exactly the nicest one around, and could use some serious clipping of nails, but on the other hand - one of the reasons police etc. feel they need to arm themselves to the teeth is because odds are the guy they're about to arrest is also armed to the teeth (When it comes to the number of guns per 100 person, the US is in a league of its own. It's something like 80 guns per 100 person. Second place is Yemen with around 50).

I just don't think more guns is the answer. It's a downward spiral, and someone needs to break it before it blows up in all your faces.

I also get the impression that there's a huge difference in attitudes about guns between the US and pretty much every other western country. If I were to tell people where I live that I plan on buying a gun for self defense, they would probably laugh, and when they realized I'm serious; ask me if I've lost my mind or something. Just the idea of owning a gun for self defense is met with scorn and ridicule, just like it should be.
I honestly can't sympathize with someone who wants to own a tool that has one purpose: to injure and kill other living beings. The only exceptions I can agree to is hunting and sports. And you don't need an assault rifle for either (If you can't kill an animal on your first shot you shouldn't be hunting in the first place).

[Elihu]

hunting is not now nor ever has been the point. the point is parity of weaponry with the central gov.

although the point holds for today, i think this is not technically the Constitution's original meaning (2nd amendment). I think it's original meaning is what we speciously call today "national security". Each state's citizen militia was to provide it's own external security and then collectively as needed. there never was to be a grand standing federal army much less a MIC. the dawning of the day when the citizens assert this right against their own federal government means national suicide. there can be no other outcome to the infringement or assertion of that right. can there?

[Elihu]

I just don't think more guns is the answer. It's a downward spiral, and someone needs to break it before it blows up in all your faces.

I also get the impression that there's a huge difference in attitudes about guns between the US and pretty much every other western country. If I were to tell people where I live that I plan on buying a gun for self defense, they would probably laugh, and when they realized I'm serious; ask me if I've lost my mind or something. Just the idea of owning a gun for self defense is met with scorn and ridicule, just like it should be.

i agree with all that.

The only exceptions I can agree to is hunting and sports.

yeah but who are you or i to say? they exist, it's an unpleasant reality. and i make no distinction between a citizen or a government. ban em? ban em all, no exceptions. it's like repairing the brakes on your car. you want to get that right you know?

[DrEvil]

it's like repairing the brakes on your car. you want to get that right you know?

Yes, but I'd rather at least try to fix them, and not just hope that they hold for one more day.

But I don't really see any good solutions to the problem. There's too many vested interests, too much money and prestige, and just too many damn guns already out there.
Any change will have to involve pragmatism and compromise, and it will probably take decades before you really start seeing the effects (And a crap-load of shoot-outs), and that's just way too long for any politician to care about.

[barracuda]

It appears that the Connecticut search warrant motions in the Sandy Hook shooting have been published on Scribd.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/118254284/Lan ... ant-motion

The search warrant affidavits are still under a 90-day seal.

[stoneonstone]

Er, if it's a slam-dunk, and there's a dead perp, why the seal?

The only real reason I can fasten on is to get past the limited period of time wildly discordant facts wrinkle up noses on a smell test. After 90 days,...hey, that's shiny mister!

[beeline]

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/342829

Sandy Hook DA cites 'potential suspects,' fears witness safety


Connecticut State's Attorney Stephen Sedensky has argued that unsealing warrants in the Sandy Hook case might "seriously jeopardize" the investigation by disclosing information known only to other "potential suspects."
Sedensky said that unsealing the warrants would also:
""identify persons cooperating with the investigation, thus possibly jeopardizing their personal safety and well-being." "
The statement by the CT prosecutor's office is the first indication from state authorities that Adam Lanza may have not acted alone. The statement was made in support of a motion to continue the seal on the results of five search warrants for 90 more days.
CT State Police Public Affairs Officer Lt. Paul Vance said in an official press release on December 16th that:
"The male subject identified as the shooter at Sandy Hook Elementary School has been identified as ADAM LANZA DOB: 04/22/92; he resided at 36 Yogananda Street. His cause of death was gunshot wound and his death is ruled a suicide."
However, neither Vance nor the CT Attorney General's office have ever ruled out the possible presence of other suspects. The New Haven Register reports Vance as having said: "Whenever you conduct an investigation you don’t speculate as to where it’s going to take you, as I said, we’re going to look at every single thing, every piece of material and we’ll take it from there."
The CT State Attorney General's Office is handling the investigation of the mass shooting, in which 20 children and 8 adults died last December 14th.
The motion to extend the seal on the records for 90 days was granted by Superior Court Judge John Blawie, who wrote in his decision that:
""The court finds that due to the nature and circumstances of this case and the ongoing investigation, the state's interest in continuing nondisclosure substantially outweighs any right to public disclosure at this time,""
The warrants were for searches, on different dates, of the Lanza home, and of Adam Lanza's mother's two cars. One of the cars, a 2010 black Honda Civic, was the vehicle which Lanza allegedly drove to the crime scene. The other, a 2009 silver BMW, was parked in the garage attached to the Lanza home. The court motion seals the affidavits stating what was found upon execution of the warrants for another 90 days, until late March.
Little else is known about what the authorities may be referring to in support of the motion to seal the affidavits for another 90 days beyond the normal statutory allowance of 14 days. Lt. Vance did say in a press conference on December 15, 2012, somewhat apologetically for not being able to answer all of the reporters' questions, that there were "some cards that we're holding close to our vest."
State's Attorney Sedensky wrote in the motion that:
"“No arrests have been made and none are currently anticipated, but have not been ruled out.”"
Sedensky said:
""There is information in the search warrant affidavits that is not known to the general public""
An image of the key passages in the court motion is below. The entire document has been uploaded at Scribd by the New Haven Register, the venerable New England newspaper associated with the home of Yale University.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/118254284/Lanza-warrant-motion

[barracuda]

The statement by the CT prosecutor's office is the first indication from state authorities that Adam Lanza may have not acted alone. The statement was made in support of a motion to continue the seal on the results of five search warrants for 90 more days.

Just to be clear, Sedensky's statement regarding "potential suspects" was reported on December 28th, when the motion to seal the warrant affidavits was ruled upon by Judge Blawie. Old news.

[beeline]

Just to be clear, Sedensky's statement regarding "potential suspects" was reported on December 28th, when the motion to seal the warrant affidavits was ruled upon by Judge Blawie. Old news.

Ah, had not seen that, thanks.