Witness: Someone let gunman inside Colorado movie theater

reply to post by TKDRL


I just added the link also..

www.cbsnews.com...

reply to post by FlySolo


maybe he practiced getting geared up in his small car. don't underestimate the value of practice...it's effective.

and this person has the mental capacity to have accomplished all of the things he's about to spend the remainder of his life in prison for.

he's not of average intelligence; just because he didn't have an escape plan doesn't make him a total retard.

If you notice in the opening post pic, you will notice that the assault rifle has no shoulder strap. So how could he hold the rifle and throw canisters with two hands. Im not good at typing what I think so its difficult for me to write what I think, sorry

reply to post by ChillyHeatwave


Lean gun against the wall next to you, throw grenade, pick up gun and fire. not too difficult and would take just a few seconds, especially if he tear gas was strapped to his belt or chest.

reply to post by baddmove


So on one hand now, we got the story of being found just waiting by the car. And this one says he tried to slip and blend in with the other SWAT. Unreal eh?

reply to post by TKDRL


Yea, this story just gets weirder by the day.

maybe this whole event occurred so that America wouldn't pay attention to the Israeli's killed in a bomb attack in Bulgaria; possibly by Hezbollah and Iran.

I just saw a picture of Netanyahu on Fox looking sadder than usual. the look on his face was of a man that feels ignored and with no ideas of what to do next to get the worlds attention.

reply to post by michaelbrux


You make several faulty assumptions:

1) That they absolutely must have wanted to take video footage, and that if they didn't take such footage then there mustn't have been an accomplice.
2) That the footage would have been found and not taken with the accomplice who escaped the scene of the crime.

Do you guys start crap in here because it makes you feel better or something?

How exactly are we "starting crap"? We are simply postulating possible theories involving an accomplice. What if he really did have help and we all overlooked the obvious signs that he did have help, and the accomplice got away? It's best to explore this avenue in case there's something to it, and there are lots of things which suggests there could be something to it. So forgive us for asking questions.

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by FlySolo

 

maybe he practiced getting geared up in his small car. don't underestimate the value of practice...it's effective.

and this person has the mental capacity to have accomplished all of the things he's about to spend the remainder of his life in prison for.

he's not of average intelligence; just because he didn't have an escape plan doesn't make him a total retard.

You wouldn't have to practice suiting up fast if it wasn't a coordinated synchronized effort. Go in, buy your ticket, go out the back door and take your time getting ready.

What we don't know is the time between the "cell guy" and the time he came in. By you suggesting he had to practice getting suited quickly only points more towards a co-conspirator coordinated effort

Why is everyone ignoring the initial reports of him having two room mates that moved in about a year ago? Would they have not known about what this maniac was up to, or is outfitting an apartment with explosives normal behavior...

reply to post by michaelbrux

maybe this whole event occurred so that America wouldn't pay attention to the Israeli's killed in a bomb attack in Bulgaria; possibly by Hezbollah and Iran.

Or perhaps something even bigger and even more shocking than that, with even larger far reaching implications for everyone on the planet. Say... the LIBOR scandal which the MSM is conveniently ignoring. Now that story doesn't matter, there are more important things to be discussed, a highly emotional story with direct observable relevance to a lot of people. Not saying this isn't important (obviously I wouldn't be in the thread if I thought that), but I do agree with you that this event seems like a distraction from something more important.

Originally posted by MmmPie
Why is everyone ignoring the initial reports of him having two room mates that moved in about a year ago? Would they have not known about what this maniac was up to, or is outfitting an apartment with explosives normal behavior...

Didn't know that. Please do tell more. Links?

Originally posted by wrdwzrd
a few questions -

why take/fake a phone call? if your intent is just to murder people, just leave and come back. the fact that he made a big enough deal of getting the phone call so that people noticed means he wanted to be noticed.

this was the premiere of the film, how did he know when the shooting scene would start?

why choose a movie theatre across the street from a police station?

why wear all the body armor and mask? did he think he would end up in a fire fight with police and if so, why just wait at the car calmly to be arrested? why not "go out guns blazing?"

why booby trap the apartment? what does that achieve? and why bother to install hard to remove devices and other traps and then just tell the cops about it? isnt the point of doing that for them to enter the apartment and get hurt and/or killer by the traps?

these are just a few of things that Im wondering about....too many unanswered questions on this one....

I think it was covered that it appears to have not happened during the shooting scene. If you go back a few pages a witness states otherwise.

Originally posted by MmmPie
Why is everyone ignoring the initial reports of him having two room mates that moved in about a year ago? Would they have not known about what this maniac was up to, or is outfitting an apartment with explosives normal behavior...

Well according to this report, he had been planning this for about 4 months. So if they moved out a year ago there is no reason they would have been aware of it.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


Moved in or out?

If they moved IN a year ago, as per the poster you quoted, then the question remains.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


your theory of an accomplice is a wild goose chase.

you say he had a phone and stuck around because he wanted to witness the event, but didn't use the video capabilities of his phone to prove he was there to witness the event.

thus there was no accomplice.

anyone could claim to have been a witness to anything based on this theory.

for example:

Satan, or one of its staff, hacked my computer on November 1, 2005 and offered me a Treaty and Leader Exchange to end the war on terror.

no, I don't have evidence of this, but it happened.

do you believe me?

i suppose the upside of this is that ATS now has a topic for which endless threads will be authored for the next few years.

the accomplice at Theater 9; who let the shooter in through the exit door?

reply to post by michaelbrux


Taking video would be counterproductive if you didn't want to be caught, no?

Also, have you seen cam versions of pirated movies? They suck, and that is the lit screen with a real decent video camera. If you try to videotape, with a cellphone, in a dark smokey theatre, do you think you would be able to see a thing in said video?

As I noted on the first page, the timing is probably the most important factor. I've heard a lot of people say "the movie started at 12:05AM", but if Colorado is anything like it is around here, if the movie says "12:05", you're lucky to see the opening by 12:30, because it's the ads and previews that start at 12:05.

The biggest question to ask, when considering whether there was a second person is "does this scenario require two people?" and so far, the only thing that I've seen that sort of implies it is the smoke bombs coming from two different directions, which can be easily explained by either a) confusion, and one of the two got it wrong, or b) one of the two bounced off of something and the witness saw it on the bounce.

With that in mind, I don't see that there's a NEED for a second person. The gas mask way off to the side is odd, but a) that graphic is clearly wrong anyway, as the actual exit door used isn't indicated, and b) if that was the second guy's mask, where is the shooter's? Two masks on the scene would be a good sign that there were two people, but it appears that there is just one, and it's a bit of a leap to say that the shooter gave the other guy his mask and he managed to drop one as he ran off.

It is ludicrous to believe that there would be a second guy who would let the shooter in and then go calmly back to his seat and stand in the line of fire, particularly if tear gas is going off. That would just be suicidal.

Finally, to the guy who asked where the evidence of the object the shooter might have used to keep the door open, firstly, unless you're with the police department there, you have no way of knowing that they don't have such an object, and secondly, it's pretty likely that he didn't bring anything specific in for that, would have just used his phone, a shoe, or some other object he picked up on the way back in.

But, again, the timing is what's key, and we don't seem to have a good handle on that.

reply to post by TKDRL


you'd see a lot running people screaming and falling over one another.

that would be enough proof.

honestly, i'm surprised that no one in the entire theater thought to capture the event on their cell phones.

or after they escaped the theater. the only footage is from the news outlets showing pictures of people hugging one another.

this is the age we live in. people waiting to capture an infamous event on video so they can upload it to youtube and get 15 minutes on the Today Show.

Aren't Emergency door alarmed?