It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sandy Hook Forensic Evidence

page: 13
206
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I'm no ballistics expert, but it does indeed seem that bullets came through that window from the outside. I would like to hear an official explanation for this.

I would also love to know what kind of phone app would alert some random guy to a shooting at SHES and how it would alert him so that he would arrive before law enforcement. Especially if he wasn't even in the same town. How would that app even work? Did a teacher decide to send out an alert via an app instead of calling the police? Does it monitor police scanners? What is the name of the app? That part of the story never made any sense to me at all.




posted on May, 14 2014 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: NickDC202
a reply to: Daedalus

100% genuine. I think you did a fabulous job with your response and, in doing so, assured the train stays on the tracks.


oh, well thanks for that.


a reply to: NickDC202

thanks for posting that, it clarifies much.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: borracho

that's wtf I'M saying...

"hmm..dude just shot this place UP....oh, this door's locked, moving right along, HERP-DERP!"

i mean, seriously?



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Charizard
I'm no ballistics expert, but it does indeed seem that bullets came through that window from the outside. I would like to hear an official explanation for this.


good luck...the case is "closed"



I would also love to know what kind of phone app would alert some random guy to a shooting at SHES and how it would alert him so that he would arrive before law enforcement. Especially if he wasn't even in the same town. How would that app even work? Did a teacher decide to send out an alert via an app instead of calling the police? Does it monitor police scanners? What is the name of the app? That part of the story never made any sense to me at all.


i've posed this same question before, in addition to "who/what was this guy?", because they can't even seem to get his identity straight.....first he's an out of town tactical officer, then he's a reporter, then he's just some guy that got an alert from an app...there's no answers for that either


it's almost as if, from the very start, the entire strategy of the media, and police, was to bombard the average citizen watching, with so much bulls**t, that they completely lose track of everything, and get confused, and either don't ask too many questions, or don't ask the right questions, or a bit of both...it's almost like they didn't imagine people like us would show up and cut through it all..
edit on 14-5-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus

originally posted by: DarksideOz
Well I am not saying I am 100% right


yeah, you are...



but what you suggests severally contradicts many of the information I have seen about the school.


such as?



The cameras are there


no, they weren't



but it appears as though they may of been having "technical" problems that day


based on what?



Before you laugh


too late for that, mate..


think back to 9/11 were 19 people went through Airport terminals yet not ONE was caught on camera, AT AN AIRPORT OF ALL PLACES.


or, the scads of other cameras in the area of the pentagon, that caught everything on tape, and the feds rushed in, and confiscated ALL of those tapes..

those are examples of instances where there were cameras present, and we were either lied to about footage, or we know for a fact that it was confiscated, and purposely disappeared...(by the way, i don't know what the hell you're on about, but cameras DID catch some of the alleged hijackers)

this isn't one of them....they didn't have a building-wide camera system...hell, they didn't have ANY camera system....just the one at the front door. and it didn't record. SHES didn't even have security guards.



And here we have a school that took extra security measures, yet failed to think of security camera's..........please !!!!!


if you use more exclamation points, maybe it'll make people believe you more..

what are these extra security measures you keep mentioning?



If they had cameras all over that school for Columbine back in the 90's, than you cannot tell me that this school didn't have enough camera's to get Lanza on film at least once in almost 20 years later.


yes, i can tell you that, and i am....they didn't have a camera system in, or on the building at the time of the attack.



I guarantee you here and now that if I went and broke into Sandyhook school to steal or cause damage, I would be caught on at least 5 different cameras.


it is physically impossible for you to break into SHES.



But then again, me breaking into Sandyhook doesn't fit into the plan of gun control, but a false-flag shooting does. Join the dots


and how is this a false-flag? which country are we trying to blame this on? i hate when people overuse, or misuse the term "false flag"...it doesn't mean what you think it means...

join the dots, indeed..


Umm, NO i am not. I think I now what I am saying when I am the one saying it. But this is ATS so I should expect that comment. I cannot say I am 100% positive, but I can say that I am 99% certain. The 99% certain means allowing the possibility of being wrong, much like your comment was wrong.

Such as the footage I have seen that reported that extra security measures had been taken, including security camera's.
Can you prove that only one camera was at the school ? Can you prove the footage I saw as wrong ?

The technical difficulties I refer to would of been the camera's that didn't happen to capture Lanza on film. Much like on other false-flag attacks where the culprits never seen to be caught on film anywhere near the event. You can ignore the patterns of false-flag attacks all you want, but don't take issue with me because you fail to see the pattern.

You say that they didn't have camera's at the time of the attack. Can you prove this, or this is just your opinion based on what you have read and seen. How is that any different to having the opinion I have based on what I have read and seen. You don't have to agree with me, but you are presenting nothing but your own opinion to disagree with me, while then telling my opinion is wrong. You say it is physically impossible to break into Sandyhook, but apparently it seems very easy to just stroll in with a gun[s].........hmmmmmm ok then ???????

And your last question has left me shaking my head at how you cannot see that this is a false-flag attack. Can you please tell me how this ISN'T a false-flag considering no one can prove the "shooter" was at the scene. Not to mention unknown men running from the scene and one later caught, but released without further questioning. Not to mention all the other holes [you may want to re-read the opening post in regard to some of those holes]. If it wasn't Lanza or his mothers DNA on the envelope addressed to the kids of Sandyhook, then who is it and why has that persons identity never been followed up ? Doesn't the presence of a extra person either suggest more people involved, yet the official story says it was Adam Lanza acting alone. Not to yet again mention the men running from the scene and later caught. Do you just ignore all these things do you ?
False-flag means an attack carried out by one group of people to be blamed on another person or group of people which then has an agenda [new tougher laws, or further loss of liberties and freedoms]. They get what they want, but they blame someone else so that we accept what they want a lot easier. A false-flag can still be carried out by the Government of a country to be used against its own people........HELLO 9/11.

And I am very sorry to burst your bubble, but NONE of the 19 "terrorists" were caught on film THAT DAY. The footage of lead "terrorist" Mohammad Atta was taken at another airport at an earlier date. This has been proven a long time ago. They used that footage at the time because no one was questioning the official story straight after the event. But further, deeper investigation found that this pic of Atta was taken at an earlier time, at another airport. SO, you are wrong.

If you still believe today that this was just Adam Lanza walking into a school [that is IMPOSSIBLE to break into according to you] and carries out a mass shooting. But, no footage anywhere of him at the scene. Other people running from the scene who had no logical reason for being at the scene. Police putting these people in the front seat of a police car before later releasing into the wild. An flicking the emotional switch as soon as action is called. Strange behaviour for a "grieving parent". Victims families have parts of their mortgage payed off, with no legal action being taken by any of the families ?

It's funny how the mass shootings seem to have backed off once the Government knew that it would take more than that to get the guns off Americans. I suppose its just a coincidence that whenever the US Government pushes for gun control laws, we seem to see a spate of shootings that would strengthen the argument. But then when the Government discovers that these things are just not going to achieve what they want to achieve, then all of a sudden the mass shootings dramatically drop off !

Can you prove that Adam Lanza was at the school that day ? But then again you fell for the Mohammad Atta footage so I would take any answer you gave with a grain of salt !



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
i've posed this same question before, in addition to "who/what was this guy?", because they can't even seem to get his identity straight.....first he's an out of town tactical officer, then he's a reporter, then he's just some guy that got an alert from an app...

Whatever the identity of this person of interest, they sure caused the Supervisory State's Attorney Warren Murray to get up there real fast.



edit on 14-5-2014 by 3mperorConstantinE because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: DarksideOz
Such as the footage I have seen that reported that extra security measures had been taken, including security camera's.
Can you prove that only one camera was at the school ? Can you prove the footage I saw as wrong ?


Yes, this was looked into extensively, read this: www.abovetopsecret.com...


The technical difficulties I refer to would of been the camera's that didn't happen to capture Lanza on film. Much like on other false-flag attacks where the culprits never seen to be caught on film anywhere near the event. You can ignore the patterns of false-flag attacks all you want, but don't take issue with me because you fail to see the pattern.


The one security entrance camera lacked the technology which would allow for recording the video images.



You say it is physically impossible to break into Sandyhook, but apparently it seems very easy to just stroll in with a gun[s].........hmmmmmm ok then ???????


The killer shot out the glass window adjacent to the front doors to gain entry into the building.


And your last question has left me shaking my head at how you cannot see that this is a false-flag attack. Can you please tell me how this ISN'T a false-flag considering no one can prove the "shooter" was at the scene. Not to mention unknown men running from the scene and one later caught, but released without further questioning. Not to mention all the other holes [you may want to re-read the opening post in regard to some of those holes]. If it wasn't Lanza or his mothers DNA on the envelope addressed to the kids of Sandyhook, then who is it and why has that persons identity never been followed up ? Doesn't the presence of a extra person either suggest more people involved, yet the official story says it was Adam Lanza acting alone. Not to yet again mention the men running from the scene and later caught. Do you just ignore all these things do you ?


The dead body of a shooter discovered with a self-inflicted gunshot wound and found with the weapons used in the shooting seems to demonstrate that a shooter was at the scene.

The DNA on the envelope and people detained in the woods are different issues which have been discussed; I'd highly encourage you to read the whole thread because you may be enlightened.



And I am very sorry to burst your bubble, but NONE of the 19 "terrorists" were caught on film THAT DAY. The footage of lead "terrorist" Mohammad Atta was taken at another airport at an earlier date. This has been proven a long time ago. They used that footage at the time because no one was questioning the official story straight after the event. But further, deeper investigation found that this pic of Atta was taken at an earlier time, at another airport. SO, you are wrong.


There is a whole sub-topic dedicated to 9/11 on ATS, you're welcome to discuss that there.


If you still believe today that this was just Adam Lanza walking into a school [that is IMPOSSIBLE to break into according to you] and carries out a mass shooting. But, no footage anywhere of him at the scene. Other people running from the scene who had no logical reason for being at the scene. Police putting these people in the front seat of a police car before later releasing into the wild. An flicking the emotional switch as soon as action is called. Strange behaviour for a "grieving parent". Victims families have parts of their mortgage payed off, with no legal action being taken by any of the families ?

- Again the shooter gained entry by shooting out the glass floor to ceiling window adjacent to the entrance of the school.
- If someone is shooting and you're scared, you'd run from the scene.
- Police often detain people during chaotic events to talk to them and either hold them for questioning or clearing them.
- People's grieving conjures up a spectrum of emotions. More importantly, that element is not related to the topic of this thread; if you'd like to discuss that aspect you should create a thread about that topic.
- Regarding the mortgages, again this thread is to discuss FORENSIC information and if you'd like to focus on mortgages please create a thread about that topic.
- Regarding the lack of lawsuits, again this thread is to discuss and analyze forensic details from the reports, if you'd like to focus on the lack of lawsuits you should create a thread focused on that topic.



It's funny how the mass shootings seem to have backed off once the Government knew that it would take more than that to get the guns off Americans. I suppose its just a coincidence that whenever the US Government pushes for gun control laws, we seem to see a spate of shootings that would strengthen the argument. But then when the Government discovers that these things are just not going to achieve what they want to achieve, then all of a sudden the mass shootings dramatically drop off !

There is nothing funny about mass shootings.


Can you prove that Adam Lanza was at the school that day?


His corpse in the building seems to prove he was at the school that day.



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: DarksideOz

i don't even know where to begin with this epic clusterfrak of a post.....

in this post(that i am replying to), you have repeatedly either misunderstood, or willfully ignored the deliberate meaning of what i said to you, you evaded questions, requests for substantiating information, and clarification of assertions. you ignored facts, made baseless assertions, assumptions, and deliberately misrepresented information, by way of using terms, with no regard for their definition.

i'll attempt to answer what you've said to me, instead of sidestepping all of it, like you did with my last post.



Umm, NO i am not.


yes, you are....you asserted that "the cameras are there", with absolutely NOTHING to back it...how do you know they were there?

if you check out elsewhere in THIS thread, or the "sandy hook skeptics travel to newtown" thread, you'll see nick reposted information from research he did for an old SH thread, that outlines information about the security upgrades at SHES, prior to the attack.



I think I now what I am saying when I am the one saying it. But this is ATS so I should expect that comment. I cannot say I am 100% positive, but I can say that I am 99% certain. The 99% certain means allowing the possibility of being wrong, much like your comment was wrong.


when you say "the cameras are there", that is an assertion that you are making a statement of fact. if you'd said "i believe there were cameras", or "there were probably cameras", or "there should have been cameras", then that's a statement that you're 99% certain, or at least leaving yourself open to the possibility of being wrong...but when you say "the cameras are there", that's 100% certainty....and makes your statement here look like backpedaling....



Such as the footage I have seen that reported that extra security measures had been taken, including security camera's. Can you prove that only one camera was at the school ? Can you prove the footage I saw as wrong ?


what footage? you hafta present some substantiating, or corroborating material to go with a statement like that....just making vague references to something you claim to have seen, doesn't make for a very solid argument..



The technical difficulties I refer to would of been the camera's that didn't happen to capture Lanza on film. Much like on other false-flag attacks where the culprits never seen to be caught on film anywhere near the event. You can ignore the patterns of false-flag attacks all you want, but don't take issue with me because you fail to see the pattern.


again, what cameras? i'm not failing to see ANY pattern....except the one where you keep misusing the term "false flag"..it's people like you, who make the rest of us look nuts, because you foam at the mouth, and scream "false flag" for EVERYTHING, with no regard whatsoever for what the goddamn term actually means...



You say that they didn't have camera's at the time of the attack. Can you prove this, or this is just your opinion based on what you have read and seen. How is that any different to having the opinion I have based on what I have read and seen. You don't have to agree with me, but you are presenting nothing but your own opinion to disagree with me, while then telling my opinion is wrong. You say it is physically impossible to break into Sandyhook, but apparently it seems very easy to just stroll in with a gun[s].........hmmmmmm ok then ???????


i suppose i could, but i really don't NEED to, because Nick already did..

and it is physically impossible to break into SHES, because it's been demolished....or do you want to say i'm lying about that too?

i'm bringing facts to the table...YOU are the one with nothing but opinions to show....i've been researching this event since about 4 hours after it happened...



And your last question has left me shaking my head at how you cannot see that this is a false-flag attack. Can you please tell me how this ISN'T a false-flag considering no one can prove the "shooter" was at the scene. Not to mention unknown men running from the scene and one later caught, but released without further questioning. Not to mention all the other holes [you may want to re-read the opening post in regard to some of those holes]. If it wasn't Lanza or his mothers DNA on the envelope addressed to the kids of Sandyhook, then who is it and why has that persons identity never been followed up ? Doesn't the presence of a extra person either suggest more people involved, yet the official story says it was Adam Lanza acting alone. Not to yet again mention the men running from the scene and later caught. Do you just ignore all these things do you ?


there is a MASSIVE difference between a "false flag", and a "conspiracy"....you seem to have the two confused....

false flag would imply that the attack is being blamed on terrorists, another country, or some other organization that the government wants to target...

a conspiracy is multiple persons, colluding, and acting in concert, to achieve a goal, or accomplish a task, usually of an illegal, or socially/legally dubious nature..

there are ELEMENTS of a false flag-style operation visible throughout this case, but to say, at this point in time, full stop, that it IS absolutely a false flag, is absurd...we still have a LOT more work to do..

continued next post..
edit on 14-5-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-5-2014 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2014 @ 09:18 PM
link   
continued from last

a reply to: DarksideOz



False-flag means an attack carried out by one group of people to be blamed on another person or group of people which then has an agenda [new tougher laws, or further loss of liberties and freedoms]. They get what they want, but they blame someone else so that we accept what they want a lot easier. A false-flag can still be carried out by the Government of a country to be used against its own people........HELLO 9/11.


that's KIND OF what it means....false flag is used as a pretext for war...conspiracies, with subterfuge are what is generally used to enact domestic change....like the assassination of John Kennedy, and later, his brother, Robert...these types of conspiracies can have ELEMENTS of a false flag operation, without actually being one...the only congruences, are their similarities..they're not the same thing. the jury is still out on 9/11, but if it was truly was carried out by, or done in conjunction with, the U.S. federal government, then that would make it a genuine false flag, as it was blamed on terrorists, and served as a pretext for war...just like the reichstag fire, or the gleiwitz incident, or operation northwoods(had president kennedy signed off on it, which he didn't, which is probably part of the reason they had him bumped off)....but now we're starting to stray off topic...if you'd like to continue this elsewhere, feel free to start a thread...i'd gladly participate.



And I am very sorry to burst your bubble, but NONE of the 19 "terrorists" were caught on film THAT DAY. The footage of lead "terrorist" Mohammad Atta was taken at another airport at an earlier date. This has been proven a long time ago. They used that footage at the time because no one was questioning the official story straight after the event. But further, deeper investigation found that this pic of Atta was taken at an earlier time, at another airport. SO, you are wrong.


there is video of hijackers at Dulles(flight 77), so no, i'm not wrong, but this is COMPLETELY off topic...again, if you'd like to continue this conversation about 9/11, and false flags in general, start a thread, i'd gladly participate..



If you still believe today that this was just Adam Lanza walking into a school


when did i say that?



[that is IMPOSSIBLE to break into according to you]


because it's been demolished



and carries out a mass shooting. But, no footage anywhere of him at the scene.


because there were no cameras to record him



Other people running from the scene who had no logical reason for being at the scene.


i'm so tempted to just start trolling you, and reply with something like "maybe they were out for a jog", because this tirade of yours is so absurd, and asinine....

but i'll refrain..

yes, there were other people at the scene, and they ran from cops, and they have yet to be satisfactorily identified, and that's EXTREMELY suspicious...



Police putting these people in the front seat of a police car before later releasing into the wild. An flicking the emotional switch as soon as action is called. Strange behaviour for a "grieving parent". Victims families have parts of their mortgage payed off, with no legal action being taken by any of the families ?


actually, it was more like people getting completely free houses, BEFORE the attack even happened...which is weird, all on it's own, and lends a bit of credibility to ATA's theory that maybe newtown is a repository for WITSEC protectees, and the people we saw in the interviews were, in fact, actors, being used as stand-ins for the actual families of the dead kids, because they can't very well put protectees on the national news...

i'm not saying this whole thing doesn't stink like the bathroom on taco night, and that there aren't a TON of inconsistencies (which constantine is doing a masterful job of bringing to our attention), and i have no idea why you would say that's what i'm saying...it's worth mentioning that there was one lawsuit, but it went away...



It's funny how the mass shootings seem to have backed off once the Government knew that it would take more than that to get the guns off Americans. I suppose its just a coincidence that whenever the US Government pushes for gun control laws, we seem to see a spate of shootings that would strengthen the argument. But then when the Government discovers that these things are just not going to achieve what they want to achieve, then all of a sudden the mass shootings dramatically drop off !


are you kidding? they haven't dropped off..we're just not hearing about them, because: they're not on the same scale as aurora or sandy hook, and because the media is too busy being fixated on the missing airplane, benghazi, obamacare, and a number of other things....



Can you prove that Adam Lanza was at the school that day ? But then again you fell for the Mohammad Atta footage so I would take any answer you gave with a grain of salt !


well, his car was there...and traffic cams caught it en-route to the school, and he's dead...and his hair is stuck in the front sight of the weapon that killed him...and his blood-soaked clothes were documented in the report....i mean, i'll admit, that's kinda flimsy, but it's a start....maybe i can't conclusively prove he was there, but you also can't prove conclusively that he WASN'T there...so it would seem we are at an impasse...
edit on 14-5-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 12:19 AM
link   


“Only the hand that erases can write the true thing”

―Eckhart von Hochheim (c.1260—1328)

link
edit on 15-5-2014 by 3mperorConstantinE because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Is that supposed to be Adam Lanza?



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 03:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

I seem to recall a mask being mentioned in the 911 call from an adult describing a shooter going past a window while one was inside. I might be off, but that's what I recall.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:01 AM
link   
a reply to: 3mperorConstantinE

The most striking thing about that video, to me, is that she's reading from cue cards. Why, for such a traumatic event, would one need cards? Something like that, you would think the details would be indelibly impressed in your memory for the rest of your life.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: starviego
Is that supposed to be Adam Lanza?


While I know of no photographs which I, personally, and to a reasonable certainty, could say are definitely of Adam—the picture posted in 4Chan's rapidly 404'd thread yesterday looks way more plausible than the pictures of the Lovecraftian, gaunt, Sanpaku-eyed, Adam Lanza with the color-changing irises, which the main stream media uses exclusively.

() while anything posted on /b should be taken with liberal amounts of salt, it's not like “I played StarCraft with Adam Lanza one year prior” is any less likely than a murderer anonymously offering to post the exact geographical coordinates to the body of a missing college student if the other posters could guess the numbers of their own posts … which, yes, did actually happen once, chillingly.
Her body was recovered later that evening.



edit on 15-5-2014 by 3mperorConstantinE because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: NickDC202
*snip*

Update:
Here is a letter from Dawn Hochsprung to the SH parents detailing the new security protocol for 2012:


Wait....that's dated the same date as the shootings? So, they posted new security measures the same day??? Interesting coincidence.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 04:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
*snip*

i've posed this same question before, in addition to "who/what was this guy?", because they can't even seem to get his identity straight.....first he's an out of town tactical officer, then he's a reporter, then he's just some guy that got an alert from an app...there's no answers for that either

*snip*


Interesting, because what I heard at the time was he was "hunting" in those woods, and released because they determined he wasn't involved. So, at least four different stories for the guy in the woods.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: 3mperorConstantinE
"If the government came in to your life and asked you to join a program what would you say?". - Not at all an unlikely thing for Lanza to ask as the FBI had been aware of him for 5 or 6 years since he hacked in to a protected government site. This was affirmed by Nancy on at least 2 occasions while speaking to others about Adam.

Since the FBI knew of him years earlier how can he be such a mystery man then with no online presence? Surely hackers of his talent would be important to keep track of if not utilizing their talents for the government.

Makes me wonder if they didn't have Adam working to catch pedophiles only to have him find a important person engaged in it. This would make him a prime target for extermination and make his use as a patsy doubly satisfying for the creeps he caught.

Given Lanza's computer skills and use of time something like this is indeed a very likely scenario.

Eta: The picture looks like the real Adam Lanza to me. Not the bug eyed monstrosity plastered on every front page. They did the same thing to Jared Loughner by photoshopping his face to make him look like Uncle Fester.
edit on 15-5-2014 by Asktheanimals because: added comment

edit on 15-5-2014 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
While I do not have much to add right now I want to say thank you so much for this post op! I have been a long time lurker here it is posts like this that originally brought me here and it is great to see posts like this are still around. Nothing but facts no assumptions or crazy accusations.

S.N. I am very intrigued like many by the letter and DNA. Also if anyone has anymore info on the bullet holes that hit the window from the outside and anything similar to that I would really appreciate it.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Hi everyone. I am still following the thread with interest. For those wondering about how the school was entered, I found that it helped me to understand more when I viewed the photos of the entrance, for instance. Here is a collection that people can consult.


edit on 15-5-2014 by aboutface because: typos



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: NickDC202
*snip*

Update:
Here is a letter from Dawn Hochsprung to the SH parents detailing the new security protocol for 2012:


Wait....that's dated the same date as the shootings? So, they posted new security measures the same day??? Interesting coincidence.


No, the Hartford Courant published the letter (which was posted to the SHES website in the FAQ section) on the day of the shootings. The letter was sent to the parents at the start of the 2012-13 school year.




top topics



 
206
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join