LV Shooting : Campos Disappears before TV interviews set for Thursday night.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I'm no expert on men's fashion,...but who buttons the collar button w/o a tie, these days?

Although you might see some GEEK characters on TV wearing top buttons buttoned - I must confess that I am Guilty...
I've got a bunch of new shirts that are too big (inherited) so the only way to make 'em look right is to button the top.
In my defense I'll state that they are all polo type shirts, not dress shirts. And I don't ever wear purple.

ganjoa

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes, that's a cane he is leaning on. Not only that, but what about this bit here:

Why is something apparently 'painted' over here?

Has anyone tried zooming in on the award to see if the name on it matches his registration on the Nevada Security licensing place, the one that had his name as 'Larry' Jesus Compos?

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Well, it's the only thing that easily explains all of the following:

• The lack of any realistic motive or reasoning attributable to Stephen Paddock.
  
  
• The fact that, after careful listening to several videos made during the event, there were clearly at least wo different weapons being fired alternately, based on both pitch, waveform ('crack'), and cadence.
  
  
• Why Paddock used two windows, one in an adjoining room he was not renting.
  
  
• Paddock's lifestyle/income versus his stated occupation(s).
  
  
• Paddock's reported amazing winning record in games known to be some of the lowest payout games in the casino.
  
  
• Paddock's obsession with gambling.
  
  
• The sheer quantity of weapons and accessories found in Paddock's suite, including bump stocks, bipods, tripods,etc.
  
  
• The use of cameras to monitor the hallway.
  
  
• Suicide when there is ample evidence Paddock did not expect to die.
  
  
• The careful planning that went into arranging the event, yet several simple issues that seemed to be contrary to a carefully planned itinerary.
  
  
• Paddock's extremely private lifestyle, even where neighbors and family were concerned.
  
  
• The timing discrepancies in the official story.
  
  
• Why the shooting apparently stopped before the police entered the 32nd floor.
  
  
• The choice of target (country music festival, typically right-leaning, Trump-supporting gun owners).
  
  
• The apparent apathy of the Mandalay Bay staff leading up to the event.
  
  
• The claim of responsibility by ISIS (if the 'customers' were terrorists working in conjunction with the US government).
  
  
• The speed at which authorities declared no international terrorism connection.
  
  
• The speed at which the gun control issue was raised after the event, and the extension of the event to cover unrelated gun issues (silencers, more background checks, etc.)
  
  
• The choice of location (probably arranged by the customers).
  
  
• The previous similar situations in other towns (attempts which for one reason or another were never executed).
  
  
• Now, why Jesus Campos suddenly stood up his interviews.

Nothing else seems to fit.

TheRedneck

Now they're saying that the 6 minute gap between Campos getting shot and the crowd being fired on is wrong, and i'ts being disputed by MGM!!!

They're saying it was only 40 seconds of a gap! This sounds to me like they realized that the 6 minute gap made NO sense without the official story being a complete LIE.

This 40 seconds could either be an attempt to clean it up, or it could be MGM bucking the "official story".

I tried zooming in on the pic, I can't make out a single letter. Completely illegible unfortunately. would be nice to be able to read it

a reply to: Tekaran

This guy is supposed to do an interview and never shows up? Things just keep getting stranger and stranger. I feel the FBI is trying to cover something up.

What with the dispute of the timeline of the shooting between MGM and the Sherrif's office, he probably re-thought giving an on air interview and being put on the spot and in the middle of the dispute; that's like being put interrogated on the witness stand, and any you would be strictly held to any answers you provided.

Everything you say will be scrutinized and picked over, and due to the chaos surrounding the night, his own timeline is probably fuzzy. Or he was "in on it." I know I wouldn't give any public, taped interviews about something so sensitive and with so many questions still unanswered. Hell no.

So, he was probably advised not to give it (whether through a lawyer or someone in the FBI/SO), he was intimidated or threatened, or he simply decided himself not to give it, or..

a reply to: Vasa Croe



Very bad posture possibly, but even his face looks odd, like if he is confused on why he is actually taking a picture. Interesting character need to get to bottom of it.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Calm down...it was meant to be light-hearted. Sheesh.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: SlapMonkey

• The claim of responsibility by ISIS (if the 'customers' were terrorists working in conjunction with the US government).

This is a big point for me--for one, it seems as though the claim from ISIS got glossed over and discredited soooo quickly that most people don't even know that the claim was made. From my memory, though, I can't recall a time that ISIS claimed responsibility for something that they did not do. On the other hand, though, I have seen a few instances where I thought that ISIS would be proud to claim responsibility and did not.

I don't think that the claim would be made if it wasn't true. Sadly, though, I do think that the claim would be marginalized and forgotten about by authorities here for nefarious reasons.

How bad is it that I see more integrity in a terrorist organization's claim of responsibility than in our own federal agencies' claims?

Jesus...

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Maybe he is a mossad operative, and that is why he goes by Jesus (Gee-zus), not (Hay-zues)...

a reply to: SlapMonkey
I've heard a few people claim that "ISIS will take responsibility for anything" or words along those lines, but in my experience that's not true. It seems to me that whenever ISIS claims responsibility, it always turns out that at a minimum the person was in contact with ISIS agents.

In this case, I think the ISIS claim means it's likely that the shooters (probably 2 - 3) were ISIS. The story is still too confused to be sure whether Paddock or Campos were ISIS, Feds, arms dealers, or just unlucky.

Anyone wanna bet he "committed suicide"?

a reply to: Liquesence

That doesnt explain why he went down there and left just before the interview. If any of those were the reason he would have just declined and not gone. I wonder who was with him before he left. Who could have spoken to him there or seen him show up in the first place.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: FamCore

...he bolted at the last minute when all of these national stations were ready to roll?

That he bolted last minute is the tell. Good for him. Who wants to be eaten by soulless carnivores calling themselves newscasters?

Every frigging person near to this tragedy is a secret gubment plant now? The conspiracy rumor mill is running overtime, as usual.

Things are the way they are and not the way you perceive them.

# 891

originally posted by: trollz
Anyone wanna bet he "committed suicide"?

Like shot himself in the back of the head with a shotgun?

a reply to: RickyD

Yeah, I don't know. Maybe he got a phone call or a text from his lawyer, or the someone with the FBI, or some other threat? Perhaps someone showed up and threatened, advised, or coerced him.

Or maybe he had every intention of giving the interview but at the last minute seriously reconsidered and baled like a runaway bride?

I don't know, but they are all possibilities.

a reply to: Liquesence

I guess he could have had a change of heart on his own, however I lean towards someone advising or directing him not to. It had to be last min if someone else made him not do it. That's why I mentioned who may have been with him before he left. I guess someone could have called him when they found out it was about to happen though. It keeps him from being seen with someone who might be suspected as coercing him but phone calls and texts leave trails...

I know it's fun to think of these extreme scenarios like JC is the real shooter and he killed SP at around 10pm that evening. But I would say the most logical explanations are one of the following.

* He's under extreme pressure from MGM/MB to keep quiet because what he says can cause the company millions in lawsuits if his interview makes it clear that the hotel response time was not very timely

* He's a nervous kid who isnt used to the attention and doesnt at all want it but he's a "hero" so he's expected to be on camera. He simply could have cold feet about being on national TV.

* He witnessed something that doesnt exactly match up with the official story and he is scared. Maybe he saw or heard a second person in Paddock's room. Something along those lines and he doesnt exactly want to challenge the FBI on the matter. I'd be scared too.

a reply to: Tekaran

Since the day following the shooting, I've been saying that Campos was involved in my opinion...

a reply to: Vasa Croe

That makes more sense than what we're hearing... I was thinking Campos and Paddock got into a fight about something, Campos shot him, a struggle for the pistol ensued, Campos got shot in the leg but eventually got the best of the old man, got him down, put his bloody knee to his chest and then shot him in the face. Carried out the killing and then played the hero.

Still no footage of the hallways yet either. The FBI being silent really solidifies the theory of a potential search for 19 other ISIS recruits. Can't let them know they're being hunted. Hmmmmmmmm