California Shootings Elliot Rodger Conspiracy.

originally posted by: starviego
What a kooky coincidence, eh?


Isla Vista witness Sierra Swartz, actress:

i1.ytimg.com...


Boston Marathon witness Sierra Schwartz, who knew Dzhokhar Tsarnaev from Acting class:

www.youtube.com...

LOL!

Sierra Swartz is ONE OF THE TWO WITNESSES WHO ORIGINALLY SAID THERE WERE TWO PEOPLE IN THE CAR!

In the post before you are offering her testimony as direct evidence of what happened.

So, what are you saying now? They hired an actress and had her contradict the conspiracy's "official story"?

originally posted by: starviego
What a kooky coincidence, eh?


Isla Vista witness Sierra Swartz, actress:

i1.ytimg.com...


Boston Marathon witness Sierra Schwartz, who knew Dzhokhar Tsarnaev from Acting class:

www.youtube.com...

But are they the same person?





My initial impression is they aren't. But there are some facial similarities.

Shot 5 times, but only a bandaid on her thigh. Can't bear to finish college now, but can do interviews. Her Hero wears a #notonemore shirt, how handy to have one of those already. Her parents (not much of a family resemblance) don't have much to say, other than this should not have happened and why did this shooter slip through the cracks. Can we never get some real emotion in an interview these days? The interviewer sure didn't bother to ask any questions about where she was shot and her injuries, I guess that would have been impolite, she's apparently just so glad the 9mm bullet that went through the victim's thigh under that bandage, did not rip her leg up at all and there was no need for major bandaging, nevermind the 4 other shots she received. It's just so touching to see a story told from such a simple perspective, I hate it when then bore us with details-sarcasm for dull minded.
Whatever this puff piece is, it's not journalism, it's propaganda. Some youtuber commentors mentioned this girl is a drama student or actress, though I didn't check. Again, the interviewer might have been considerate and asked her what she was studying at college, that she's now walking away from. It would have been a nice touch, but no such luck.

Whatever. The news is not news.

"Shot 5 times"

And released from the hospital just three days later. It's a miracle!!

originally posted by: SunnyDee Some youtuber commentors mentioned this girl is a drama student or actress, though I didn't check.

Yup, she is also an aspiring actress:



Coincidence, of course.

originally posted by: Moresby

But are they the same person?

Obviously not.

But "truthers" frequently don't seem to let truth gat in the way of a good story.

originally posted by: SunnyDee
Her parents (not much of a family resemblance)]

This is just another in what will no doubt be a long series of unfounded personal attacks on the victims of this shooting.

Oh, I know. This family is fair game because they allowed themselves to be interviewed.

And if no one granted any interviews that would have been evidence of a conspiracy too.

originally posted by: starviego

Yup, she is also an aspiring actress:

Coincidence, of course.

Who would have thunk it? A young woman in Southern California who is an aspiring actress. It's got to mean there's a conspiracy.

Assuming this is true and she actually is an aspiring actress, so what? Are you implying she wasn't shot? How about the other two girls who were next to her who are dead? Were they actresses, too?

What is a plausible scenario for what went down in front of the sorority house if Bianca De Kock is just acting and wasn't really injured?

originally posted by: DelMarvel
What is a plausible scenario for what went down in front of the sorority house if Bianca De Kock is just acting and wasn't really injured?

As critics, it is our job to point out the anomalies and contradictions of this case. Our job is not to solve the case, as we will never have all the info.

Interesting how you defenders of the official version won't back up your own theories with evidence, but just harp on the conspiracy theories.

How do you EXPLAIN the:

--lack of blood in the black BMW?

--lack of window glass in the car Elliot allegedly collided with?

--the shipping crate marked 'glass' in the deli-mart before the shooting?

--the bicycle that wasn't there but then was there the next morning?

--the bodies that weren't picked up until the next day?

--the lack of rubber on the front tire of the BMW or anywhere else on the street?

... etc. etc.

Edit: This is a response to Starviego's penultimate post on the last page. For some reason I've messed up quoting him. Sorry for the hugely unweildy post.

originally posted by: starviego

Direct evidence:

--At least three witnesses said there were two people in the car.


Circumstantial evidence:

--That loopy unrealistic motive

--Unlikelihood of Rodger's being able to kill three people in his apartment unnoticed.

--Police dispatch tapes indicating some police units were being deliberately kept out the area.

--Reinforced police presence on the streets of Isla Vista that night, as though the police were expecting something.

--An unusually high degree of accuracy measured by the casualty count of a shooter who was driving and shooting at the same time.

--Unnecessary involvement by the Feds, seen only in these highly publicized mass shooting incidents.

--Also the previous mental health 'treatment,' always seen in these types of cases.

--Immediate and heavy push for more gun control.

--Lack of any forensic or eyewitness evidence linking Elliot to the crime.


And if you say this has all been 'debunked,' please provide details on how it has been 'debunked.'


---------------------------

Your turn:

What happened to the back window of the black jeep Elliot allegedly ran into?

The window is GONE. Every last bit of it. No shards, no pieces.

originally posted by: starviego

Is this a wind-up?

Direct evidence: --At least three witnesses said there were two people in the car.

So what? Many more witnesses said there was one person in the car. Perhaps two people in a high stress, real time situation didn't recall the events accurately shortly after being in a life/death situation.

--That loopy unrealistic motive

There is no realistic non-loopy motive to run around stabbing, shooting and running over people. Mentally ill people do this because they're delusional.

--Unlikelihood of Rodger's being able to kill three people in his apartment unnoticed.

It's probably the case he didn't rouse them and invite them to battle him one after the other in a Bruce Lee style mass fight. Stabbing is relatively silent. We don't know how, where or when he stabbed them.

--Police dispatch tapes indicating some police units were being deliberately kept out the area.

Dunno about this one - the reports are sketchy though. You got a credible source?

--Reinforced police presence on the streets of Isla Vista that night, as though the police were expecting something.

So, the police where both strategically advancing and withdrawing (as per your previous) point to create this event?

--An unusually high degree of accuracy measured by the casualty count of a shooter who was driving and shooting at the same time.

As this thread notes, only a few people were shot - guns weren't the problem here, of course. How many rounds did Rodger fire versus hits? A source too, please.

--Unnecessary involvement by the Feds, seen only in these highly publicized mass shooting incidents.

I know nothing about this, tbh. Perhaps as it's a federal crime? I dunno.

--Also the previous mental health 'treatment,' always seen in these types of cases.

Millions of people have diagnosed and undiagnosed mental health issues - of varying severity. Perhaps unsurprisingly, random mass murders (consider that) are committed by mentally ill people.

--Immediate and heavy push for more gun control.

Perhaps people are either sick of guns being used to commit these sorts of crimes. Obv if a gun was not available he'd simply have used a knife - something you yourself express doubt over in the initial few murders. Guns make it easy for a sad little loser to kill a load of people. That's a fact.

--Lack of any forensic or eyewitness evidence linking Elliot to the crime.

Except of course the numerous eyewitness accounts of Ellior Rodgers, his body being in that BMW and the entire wealth of materials explaining his motivation.

Honestly, ffs.

edit on 1-6-2014 by KingIcarus because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-6-2014 by KingIcarus because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: starviego
As critics, it is our job to point out the anomalies and contradictions of this case. Our job is not to solve the case, as we will never have all the info.

In other words, your "job" is to make allegation after allegation and never have to back up anything you say with any kind of logic.

Perhaps two people in a high stress, real time situation didn't recall the events accurately shortly after being in a life/death situation.

Or maybe the witnesses were correct.

There is no realistic non-loopy motive to run around stabbing, shooting and running over people. Mentally ill people do this because they're delusional.

Mass ragers normally do follow some sort of profile: that of an angry, embittered person whose fuse has been burning for a long time, oftentimes exacerbated by a 'trigger event' like loss of job/home or death of a close relative.

Stabbing is relatively silent.

But screaming, yelling and fighting for your life are relatively noisy.

Dunno about this one - the reports are sketchy though. You got a credible source?

truthfrequencyradio.com...

As this thread notes, only a few people were shot - guns weren't the problem here, of course. How many rounds did Rodger fire versus hits? A source too, please.

I don't know, but there were at least 10 gunshot victims. Have you seen any pics of expended shell casings?

Millions of people have diagnosed and undiagnosed mental health issues - of varying severity. Perhaps unsurprisingly, random mass murders (consider that) are committed by mentally ill people.

That is generally a post-mortem diagnosis, and hence of little value.

Except of course the numerous eyewitness accounts of Ellior Rodgers, his body being in that BMW and the entire wealth of materials explaining his motivation.

Witnesses described a shooter, but did not ID him.

His body was in the car? How do we know that?

His motivation is something entirely new under the sun. If "not getting any" was motive for mass murder, half the people in this country would snap.

originally posted by: DelMarvel
... never have to back up anything you say with any kind of logic.

Dude, you're starting to sound like a broken record.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: starviego
As critics, it is our job to point out the anomalies and contradictions of this case. Our job is not to solve the case, as we will never have all the info.

In other words, your "job" is to make allegation after allegation and never have to back up anything you say with any kind of logic.

Pointing out "anomalies and contradictions" is not making allegations.

a reply to: starviego

I apologize for the delay in my response-i wanted to get to a full computer instead of responding to a post like this with the limited capability of a phone.

I want to thank you for taking the time to list these out. You are the only one who has taken the time to do so, and I appreciate it, as it should lead to a little more fruitful conversation.

Now, lets analyze a few of these:

--That loopy unrealistic motive
--Unlikelihood of Rodger's being able to kill three people in his apartment unnoticed.

These two are immediately removed from the equation, as they are nothing more than opinions, which do not count as evidence (though, i would consider evidence backing these opinions, if you wish to provide).

*The following are some of the things posted that I have further questions about:

--Police dispatch tapes indicating some police units were being deliberately kept out the area.

Can you provide links to the tapes? I am not disputing the claim whatsoever, I simply have not heard them, which makes it tough for me to comment on them.

--An unusually high degree of accuracy measured by the casualty count of a shooter who was driving and shooting at the same time.

Do we have any accounting for how many shots were actually fired? Its hard to claim 'accuracy' without those numbers.

--Lack of any forensic or eyewitness evidence linking Elliot to the crime.

Doesnt his body count as forensic evidence?

*The next few are some that can easily be disputed:

--Reinforced police presence on the streets of Isla Vista that night, as though the police were expecting something.

It was a holiday weekend, near a college campus. This is not out of the norm in any way. Nearly every city has increased police presence during holiday weekends.

--Unnecessary involvement by the Feds, seen only in these highly publicized mass shooting incidents.

Thats simply not true. The feds are involved in far more crimes that just the highly publicized ones.
www.fbi.gov...
This, again, is nothing out of the norm.

--Also the previous mental health 'treatment,' always seen in these types of cases.

Im not sure what you are getting at here. Doesnt it stand to reason that people that would commit such crimes have mental health issues?

--Immediate and heavy push for more gun control.

"never let a good tragedy go to waste". That people with an obvious agenda see a window to push that agenda is not evidence that the event itself was a set up.

*Now, that leaves us with this:

--At least three witnesses said there were two people in the car.

As with all of these scenarios, I consider 'second shooter' notions to be the ones with the highest likelihood of being true. That said, if there WAS a second shooter, I have to wonder what that proves.

*As for your pics of the window, the logical conclusion, to me, is that the shattered pile of glass on the ground next to the car, is, in fact, the window from the Jeep. If the window shattered from the impact of the BMW, physics dictates that the jeep itself would have been pushed forward, leaving the window further behind the jeep than if it had just dropped out (the pics show that the glass on the ground next to the BMW is tinted-which means it DEFINITELY isnt from the windshield of the BMW).

Pretty cut and dry, honestly.

originally posted by: starviego

As critics, it is our job to point out the anomalies and contradictions of this case. Our job is not to solve the case, as we will never have all the info.

But "truthers" can have all the info needed to explain many of the "anomalies and contradictions" but don't ever bother.

For example, the Sierra Swartz/Sierra Schwartz issue: One could easily determine that these are actually two real individuals who merely have similar names.

You could probably prove that just by using the internet. In a few hours. That's not going to happen. Instead, this piece of "evidence" goes onto the lists and youtube videos that will circulate on the web where, as you say, the "critics" aren't required to carry out any research to its honest conclusion. They just keep throwing s**t against the wall hoping something sticks.

And a lot of it does.

originally posted by: starviego

Direct evidence:

--At least three witnesses said there were two people in the car.

.

There was Sierra Swartz who subsequently changed her story.

There was Michael Vitak who also said it was so dark he couldn't see the faces of anyone in the car.

Who is the third witness?

And if we're accepting the credibility of Michael Vitak as a witness, he also said he saw one woman being shot to death and another wounded.

Im a little lost as to what insinuations are being made by pointing out that a victim is an aspiring actress.

Can someone elaborate?

*** ATTENTION ***

I would like to remind everyone to stay on topic and discuss the topic and not each other. Thank you. Carry on.




(Do not reply to this post.)

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
Im a little lost as to what insinuations are being made by pointing out that a victim is an aspiring actress.

Can someone elaborate?

Crisis actor(s).