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: 9
17
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


You guys are reaching a little too far here.

A crime was committed. The videos are EVIDENCE. You DO NOT release evidence before the trial because you don't want to bias potential jurors or create extra sensationalism. By keeping the videos out of the public until trial, they are doing Jared some justice (which until he is proven guilty, he is fully deserving of).

This way, the evidence can be shown to a jury of his peers, and analysts/experts from the prosecution AND the defense can use these videos in presenting their cases.

Withholding evidence from the public until trial is a standard procedure. This isn't evidence of a conspiracy.

If you were on trial for a crime, you'd be thankful for such procedures.

Now, once the video is shown at the trial, it becomes public domain. Then we can view it all we want.

Quit reaching so far.




posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by josheboyxiii
 


if you would have read any of the nine pages of this thread you'd hear me address this issue multiple times. They are releasing certain pieces of evidence into the public like the confession note, and the Arizona sheriff's department talking about what is on the video, so frankly I think saying they have a legal right to conceal the evidence contradicts the fact that they are releasing certain pieces which tampers the jury regardless.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
As far as the tapes not being released because it's only been 2 weeks since the shooting...Think about 9/11. How many times did they air that on tv during the 2 weeks afterward. And there were 3000 people killed. So much for respect for the families. The lack of cell phone pics and videos is what has me questioning this situation. Think of all the school shootings...There are videos of those all over the news the day of the shootings...i.e. Virginia Tech. This whole thing is a little bizarre.



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

Originally posted by Piper96
As far as the tapes not being released because it's only been 2 weeks since the shooting...Think about 9/11. How many times did they air that on tv during the 2 weeks afterward. And there were 3000 people killed. So much for respect for the families.


Exactly, they tell us Loughner did it for political reasons because of political rhetoric (sheriff dupnik), then the FBI says he had a note that says he did it, then the Arizona sheriff's department says what is on the video we're not allowed to see. So the argument that they are trying not to prejudice the jury is quite laughable and contradicts how much they have already tainted the jury pool.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by josheboyxiii
 


How am I reaching too far by not believing what the media informs me happened? Why was it that the day of the shooting multiple witnesses said they saw a second shooter and even the sheriff on scene said he was convinced of it and now there is all of the sudden 0 speculation of it even though we have seen no factual evidence of the crime scene. How could a 22 year old who just got his first gun less than a year ago be so accurate and quick with a gun? How were 32 bullets fired from a 30 round gun? Why was Jared described as absolutley robotic and emotionless as he was being arrested and taken down by the crowd? I could go on but I have questions outside of what I have been told I should believe, that's not ignorance or reaching too far, it is called thinking for yourself.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
I find it very odd that with all the cell phones people have today not one video was released by the public. Were all those phones confiscated as well?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by phishybongwaters

Sigh.....

You can't release potential evidence before a trial. Now, come post back in 5 years after the trial when they still refuse to release the footage, or parts of it. THEN you can cry conspiracy. video evidence trumps eye witness testimony, as eye witnesses have been proven to be horrible. they release the video now it's on the net instantly, good luck getting any "fair" trial after that. the only people that need to see this video are the prosecution and defense, simple as that. Anyone else demanding it is doing so out of their own morbid curiosity. there are plenty of videos online of people being killed, must you watch him shoot a 9 year old?

Not everything is a conspiracy. Guess i must be a government plant for having this opinion righT?



edit on 1/19/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: errant mouse click


I beg to differ.
Every night on the news you see surveillance videos of criminals caught in the act BEFORE most of these criminals go to trial. Here!
An d Here!
But when the FBI gets involved all the sudden you can't see footage. Sorry not buying it. Besides, if this is the argument then there are millions of criminals that need a second trial. Just saying......



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by pondereternity77
 


Really? Did you really just say that? You are here backing up the folks that are crying conspiracy because of the LACK OF something..

Right now .. we have eye witnesses that put JL as the shooter.. We have a woman taking a magazine out of his hand.. We have the notes in his safe.. We have all of the people including his friend he called the night before (the one that didn't answer the phone, but when he heard about the shooting thought it was JL)

What exactly are you basing your theory on?? Lack of? Assumptions? Wild paranoid imaginations? Jesus Christ, this place is becoming insane.

I love a conspiracy as much as the next guy... But I can't throw logic and self respect to the side enough .... to just start spouting off opinions as facts and delusional fantasy as facts...



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by pondereternity77
reply to post by josheboyxiii
 


Why was it that the day of the shooting multiple witnesses said they saw a second shooter and even the sheriff on scene said he was convinced of it and now there is all of the sudden 0 speculation of it


It's the same old story, just like with JFK and Fort Hood, multiple shooters were suspected, indicating a conspiracy, then the multiple shooters are dropped and key evidence is hidden, indicating a cover up, then everything is pinned on a mental lone gun man, indicating a patsy or frame up, then starts the gun control legislation, where the government takes advantage of the manufactured crisis. Study JFK, it's right there in the open, you don't need a wild imagination just a little bit of common sense.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by pondereternity77
 


Nobody said they saw a second shooter.. Now I see why you are on that side.. Low comprehension skills..

They were looking for a 2nd person of interest.. A person in a hoodie seen running away..

This site should have circus music playing when you log in..



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Resurrectio
 


Oh, hello, you again, sort of noticed how you didn't answer my question after I nicely answered yours. Of course I'm not surprised. Just don't bother asking me any more questions until you've answered mine, okay?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Please ..ask me the question.. I saw you ask that 50 times.. I thought I answered the questions you had asked me.. But I suspect low comprehension skills caused you to miss my answer.. Ask again.. I will be happy to answer any question I have the answer to.

I just got back.. So simmer down little one.
edit on 1/20/2011 by Resurrectio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Resurrectio
 


So whatever happened to that second person of interest? Any leads or anything on that guy?

And it's most likely is a shooter given how many people were injured and how many bullets were fired.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by phishybongwaters
 


I don't think anyone wants to see a little girl shot, I think everyone just want Justice to be Justified and what if the video showed something different from what is being reported and if we were to see something different ignore it the poor litttle girl dies in vain. I agree about the video though, that's pretty normal to not release it until the court case. So conspiracy, who knows... I doubt it though...



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Yes they found that the 2nd guy was a cab driver.. next?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Resurrectio
 


Okay, why are you so concerned about me wanting to see the video? What does your desire hinge upon that is so adamant in trying to convince me to give up my hopes of seeing the video?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 

No official statement has come out saying 32 shots fired.. Also.. He was stopped while trying to reclip ... Who is to say he didn't go through 2 already..

Next?
edit on 1/20/2011 by Resurrectio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Resurrectio
 


So now whenever a cab driver takes a criminal to a scene of a crime the cab driver is aiding the criminal? Or is this an undercover cab driver?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


You are basing your theory on the lack of something.. Myself and others have explained how the lack of the video is normal..

next?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
i would just like to spread the word that i have just started a thread based on the premiss that the well known 'demonic' photo of Jared Loughner is nothing but a cut and paste of two memorial photos of 9/11 victim Andrew Brunn. i do not know how to embed photos so prompt help from anyone would be much appreciated. i believe the thread is the truth and am very sure it will stand up to scrutiny. i believe it deserves immediate attention as the implications of this could be enormous. thanks. pshea38.



new topics




 
17
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join