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.

 

FBI won't release Jared Lee Loughner video. Therefore, coverup

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   




“It’s pretty evident to me that Judge Roll was a hero … if Judge Roll had not pushed Mr. Barber his wounds might have been fatal,” Nanos told the Journal . “Judge Roll‘s actions are of a man trying to save another man’s life.”

...the video does lead investigators to think that Giffords was the target because it shows a man running past a concrete pillar, and shooting Giffords at close range.
“There’s no hesitation. Once he gets around the pillar, it’s obvious what his intent is. That’s why we believe his target was exactly who we thought it was,” Nanos told the Journal.


So they can't release the video because that would make the jury impartial so they say everything that happened on the video? Well that's illogical. Now everyone on the jury will know that Roll was a hero and further make Loughner guilty, which I'm not denying, just saying it's a poor argument as to why they can't release the video.

Plus do you notice how they are overdoing it with making it seem like Gifford was the real target? Sort of like they want us to think that...




posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
First off, the release of the video could very well prejudice the jury pool (at least the defense would claim that). Secondly, it is not the FBIs tape to release, the tapes belong to those business establishments and private citizens that filmed the tragedy. Furthermore, If/when the videos are released, it will be on the terms of those business establishment's, in which, they will likely profit off of the videos by selling them to TMZ, Inside Edition or the likes. Lastly, no one has a right to see them, except those involved in the trial and those who own the footage. Personally, I hope they never release them. That's all this world needs is more murder porn.

My 2-cents



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
First off, the release of the video could very well prejudice the jury pool (at least the defense would claim that). Secondly, it is not the FBIs tape to release, the tapes belong to those business establishments and private citizens that filmed the tragedy. Furthermore, If/when the videos are released, it will be on the terms of those business establishment's, in which, they will likely profit off of the videos by selling them to TMZ, Inside Edition or the likes. Lastly, no one has a right to see them, except those involved in the trial and those who own the footage. Personally, I hope they never release them. That's all this world needs is more murder porn.

My 2-cents



If/when the videos are released, it will be on the terms of those business establishment's,


If you would have read the attached article you would know you are wrong.


...The tapes are in the custody of the FBI...


I also thought the tapes belong to those businesses, but strangely, the fbi has them. Hmm, interesting, huh? So I guess the release won't be on the terms of the business.

And as for prejudicing the jury I've addressed that in enough posts: they won't release the video but they describe every detail of it? Prejudicing the jury to think Gifford's was the main target and Roll is a hero for taking a bullet for another man? Give me a break, at least read the article before you comment.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
I am proud of ATS for not flagging this GARBAGE!

It has barely been 2 weeks and you want the video released? Or expect that it should be?

Please dig deep into your common sense and please use a brain filter next time you decide to make a decision!



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Resurrectio
I am proud of ATS for not flagging this GARBAGE!

It has barely been 2 weeks and you want the video released? Or expect that it should be?

Please dig deep into your common sense and please use a brain filter next time you decide to make a decision!


duly noted

so I'm not supposed to have conspiracy theories on the world's largest conspiracy theory website? I'm sorry should I be talking about Lady Gaga instead?
edit on 19-1-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Why do people keep assuming this.. YES this is a conspiracy site.. Don't you think, these "theories" with zero facts dilute the actual conspiracies? Shouldn't threads be held to some sort of logical standard?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by filosophia
 


Why do people keep assuming this.. YES this is a conspiracy site.. Don't you think, these "theories" with zero facts dilute the actual conspiracies? Shouldn't threads be held to some sort of logical standard?



zero facts, huh?

FBI has video
won't release

It's as simple as that.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
so I'm not supposed to have conspiracy theories on the world's largest conspiracy theory website?


I would suggest posting in the conspiracy theory forum, rather than US Political Madness, if you want to discuss a conspiracy theory.


Originally posted by filosophia
zero facts, huh?

FBI has video
won't release

It's as simple as that.


Again, the FBI has collected the videos as evidence. The videos do not belong to the FBI. The FBI can not release them without the owner's permission. When they are done with videos, then they will return them to their rightful owners, as is customary for such cases. Furthermore, I challenge you to prove to us that any of the owners of the videos have made demands to have them returned and those demands have been denied. It's as simple as that.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
In this world of phone video, cameras etc there has been nothing released from the scene of the crime. With all those people around somebody woulda snapped something during or afterwards. Did they confiscate everybody's phones for evidence??



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
www.cnn.com...#/video/bestoftv/2011/01/19/exp.nr.kastigar.az.shooting.tape.cnn?hpt=T1

Pima county sheriff dept Richard Kastigar on CNN saying there are dozens of different angles from different cameras. Yet no video shown.

Then, at the very end of the video, the anchor woman asks if the sheriffs handed it over to the FBI to not impair the trial, and then the video cuts off before he has a chance to respond!



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by filosophia
so I'm not supposed to have conspiracy theories on the world's largest conspiracy theory website?


I would suggest posting in the conspiracy theory forum, rather than US Political Madness, if you want to discuss a conspiracy theory.


Originally posted by filosophia
zero facts, huh?

FBI has video
won't release

It's as simple as that.


Again, the FBI has collected the videos as evidence. The videos do not belong to the FBI. The FBI can not release them without the owner's permission. When they are done with videos, then they will return them to their rightful owners, as is customary for such cases. Furthermore, I challenge you to prove to us that any of the owners of the videos have made demands to have them returned and those demands have been denied. It's as simple as that.


Interesting challenge. I can however show you two videos that were taken down

wn.com...
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
oh please people, a nine year old girl was murdered, find me 12 people in the world who has not heard of that and who don't already think he is guilty. You people who say they can't release the video because it would be tampering with the jury, try and find 12 people who haven't heard this story. Go ahead, I'd like to see that.
edit on 19-1-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


It is the law and is in place to protect people across the board. They are not going to change it for this high profile case. Evidence is not supposed to be aired in the media before the trial. I know the police and district attorneys commonly do. However, they are not supposed to. If the judges were doing their jobs many people would not go to jail because of these leaks.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81

Originally posted by filosophia
oh please people, a nine year old girl was murdered, find me 12 people in the world who has not heard of that and who don't already think he is guilty. You people who say they can't release the video because it would be tampering with the jury, try and find 12 people who haven't heard this story. Go ahead, I'd like to see that.
edit on 19-1-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


It is the law and is in place to protect people across the board. They are not going to change it for this high profile case. Evidence is not supposed to be aired in the media before the trial. I know the police and district attorneys commonly do. However, they are not supposed to. If the judges were doing their jobs many people would not go to jail because of these leaks.



okay but they did release evidence. They are talking non-stop about the case so how does that not prejudice the jury? You seem to be implying that releasing the video is somehow damaging to the case even though the only known (sic) suspect is in custody so please tell me how exactly releasing the video would hurt the case? Plus they are already "leaking" everything on the video.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Let me just reiterate here: regardless of the law and how much they are wielding a double standard here (media and government screaming loughner did it but at the same time they don't want to release the video to make an impartial jury), the fact remains that the crucial evidence is in official custody and now they are placating to the American public by giving a play by play from those deemed worthy enough to view the video. So enjoy it America, listen to what your officials say, they have the video evidence, you can't watch it, but they've seen it and they'll tell you everything there is to know. Don't ask questions. Don't investigate. It's all for the sanctity of the law.

By the way no one has yet to prove to me the video isn't being covered up. All you did was sugar it by saying it's necessary to avoid an impartial jury which is laughable. So, anyone care to debunk this simple claim:

FBI has video
won't release.

Please, debunk away.
edit on 19-1-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


What I'm saying is that there is actually a law in place to prevent this in many places. They are not going to break or change this law just because it is a high profile case.

I know they are leaking all kinds of stuff to the media. Legally they are not supposed to be doing that. Unfortunately the judges stopped trying to stop it years ago. A person is supposed to get a fair trial from a jury of their peers. How can that happen with the police dumping evidence in to the media?

I don't believe it should be done in this case or any other. I don't care if the sole suspect is in custody. Sole suspects have been released from jail years later because of evidence that came out.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by filosophia
 


What I'm saying is that there is actually a law in place to prevent this in many places. They are not going to break or change this law just because it is a high profile case.

I know they are leaking all kinds of stuff to the media. Legally they are not supposed to be doing that. Unfortunately the judges stopped trying to stop it years ago. A person is supposed to get a fair trial from a jury of their peers. How can that happen with the police dumping evidence in to the media?

I don't believe it should be done in this case or any other. I don't care if the sole suspect is in custody. Sole suspects have been released from jail years later because of evidence that came out.


I know it's the law, it's the law for the FBI to confiscate video surveillance of false flag attacks. You're preaching to the choir. I know it's the law, standard operating procedure. Just like with 9/11 and JFK.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


If you were to see the video, and confirm that it was JL doing the shooting... Could you listen to ALL of the evidence objectively??



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by filosophia
 


If you were to see the video, and confirm that it was JL doing the shooting... Could you listen to ALL of the evidence objectively??

Can't anyone admit when they are wrong anymore?

If we haven't seen the video when the trial is over.. Then by all means, start spouting off baseless conspiracy theories...


well at that point they wouldn't be baseless would they?


I'd love to see the video, can you hook it up for me?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


You are truly ignorant... Just admit that you jumped to conclusions...IT HASN'T EVEN BEEN 2 WEEKS ...

Jeesh - Why do you feel as though they owe you ANYTHING? They don't ever have to release it..



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Very true... At that point, i would at least entertain the idea of a conspiracy.. But now, 2 weeks later?? Come on..

My favorite quote "There are ZERO "life points" for finding a conspiracy in everything"




top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join