Aurora shooter - possible defense to walk

Obviously we actually know little of this event other than what's reported in the media. The police so far have been very careful to not release much of any information to the public and also have not allowed the media access to items and information such as a mug shot or statements made by the alleged shooter. They have made few statements regarding the event in general.

Yes I said alleged shooter, because thus far, there is nothing of hard evidence, that we are privy to, that indisputably identifies this guy Holmes as the "shooter." All we do know is he was arrested outside of the theater with "legally" owned guns, dressed in tactical gear. However, even discounting the fact that the shooting took place in a darkened theater filled with smoke or some noxious gas, the shooter was covered from head to toe with the aforementioned gear and thus cannot be positively identified in a lineup.

Other facts we know about this person and event are, he owned lots of ammunition and his apartment was rigged with explosives. Some conflicting information also suggests a person other than Holmes, initially opening the exit door of the theater, which lends to possibility there was at least one other person involved in this event. This is where I'm wondering what forensics will turn up and this is where the conspiracy comes in.

What if it's found that his weapons weren't discharged that evening? What if he has no powder residue on his clothing? What if the bombs and equipment in his apartment do not have any of his identifying markers on them such as fingerprints? Can they still claim he's the shooter? In addition, the police made some statement regarding Holmes informing them of his apartment being rigged with explosives. However, since we don't know exactly what he said, is it possible he made a statement that could be something like this? "Why are you arresting me for shooting people? I'm being setup. I wouldn't be surprised if my apartment is rigged with explosives." This would cause the police to believe there were explosives present and to proceed accordingly, but he doesn't admit to in fact, planting explosives.

We know he is a gifted individual who was tops in his class throughout his scholastic career. We know he was pursuing a doctorate in neuroscience and had a particular interest in “fantasy vs. reality,” and “Subjective Experience.” Is it possible that he may have been involved in this event, but not as the shooter, but instead set himself up to look like the shooter, knowing that they could never find evidence he was indeed the shooter? Can he possibly be attempting to prove some theory he believes, though it obviously would be a very disturbed and sick undertaking? Was there someone other than Holmes that is the actual shooter that has now vanished back into the fabric of society?

I know this is all speculation, but this is also the Skunk Works forum for such ideas. Until we know more about the hard evidence, it's still possible he wasn't the person pulling the trigger.

If he wasn't the shooter, then he should have opened fire on the shooter and became a hero.

I have a hard time believing any random person has their apartment rigged to blow like he did. And at this point...even if he wasn't the shooter, he would still be the shooter. Somebody would have to take the fall IYKWIM.

But you are right. The evidence isn't all in yet, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there was indeed another shooter.

reply to post by Bilk22

With all due respect, you may have missed it in the mass of threads and endless flood of posts there for awhile but I'd posted a Air Sensor photographed near the apartment scene, sniffing for WMD, given his background. The Chief of Police told the world yesterday that the evacuations and such at local university labs were precautionary while they did a physical on-site accounting of everything, even after determining he had no access in his routine business.

My point here is to consider the distinct possibility that things happened in this case which would normally not happen for days or more. Specifically, I'm guessing they checked his body armor and other clothing for everything they could on their little sensors to see if it's tell them what was inside the apartment.

Now, if my line of logic here is workable, then a total absence of the evidence he should have been literally covered with from firing the 3 weapons would have rung alarm bells to every cop who saw or heard of it. If for no other reason than they STILL had a theater full of dead, dying and horribly wounded. If HE didn't have evidence all over him, well, someone else did and they would have been lose.

Not a bad idea in other cases, but this one went with everything from the word go. I think they have him 6 ways from Sunday. Although the Gag order is going to start more theories than ever should have existed, Idiots on that.

Unless he has a baseball sized brain tumor (which I doubt) this was a preplanned operation to promote disarmament of the civilian populace.

Compare how the police treated Charles Whitman in 1969 to this guy.
If the police bring them in alive it was a planned privately funded operation. No bodies = (same thing planned and staged).

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Bilk22

 

With all due respect, you may have missed it in the mass of threads and endless flood of posts there for awhile but I'd posted a Air Sensor photographed near the apartment scene, sniffing for WMD, given his background. The Chief of Police told the world yesterday that the evacuations and such at local university labs were precautionary while they did a physical on-site accounting of everything, even after determining he had no access in his routine business.

My point here is to consider the distinct possibility that things happened in this case which would normally not happen for days or more. Specifically, I'm guessing they checked his body armor and other clothing for everything they could on their little sensors to see if it's tell them what was inside the apartment.

Now, if my line of logic here is workable, then a total absence of the evidence he should have been literally covered with from firing the 3 weapons would have rung alarm bells to every cop who saw or heard of it. If for no other reason than they STILL had a theater full of dead, dying and horribly wounded. If HE didn't have evidence all over him, well, someone else did and they would have been lose.

Not a bad idea in other cases, but this one went with everything from the word go. I think they have him 6 ways from Sunday. Although the Gag order is going to start more theories than ever should have existed, Idiots on that.

No disrespect intended, but I'm not following anything you're attempting to say here.

Any one looking for conspiracy theories here needs to find a life.

You have to accept that SOMETIMES a news story is just a news story. Period. I agree, that it is certainly possible that he wasn't the shooter, but he hasn't come out with much of a statement of innocence if he wasn't.

Originally posted by VforVendettea
Unless he has a baseball sized brain tumor (which I doubt) this was a preplanned operation to promote disarmament of the civilian populace.

Compare how the police treated Charles Whitman in 1969 to this guy.
If the police bring them in alive it was a planned privately funded operation. No bodies = (same thing planned and staged).

Well that's not what I was looking at with my post, but what would Holmes be getting out of it if it's as you claim? He disappears after sentencing with a new life and lots of money?

Originally posted by babybunnies
Any one looking for conspiracy theories here needs to find a life.

You have to accept that SOMETIMES a news story is just a news story. Period. I agree, that it is certainly possible that he wasn't the shooter, but he hasn't come out with much of a statement of innocence if he wasn't.

He hasn't made a statement? No of course not. He's not entitled to make a public statement. That's what trials are for.

reply to post by Bilk22

Okay, to put it simply, there is no way he didn't do this. He was covered from his carrot hair to his boot soles in gunshot residue and probably more than a little blood and gore. They said he started with a shotgun....then moved to the .223's at point blank. He had to be covered in evidence, to keep this PG-13 and respectful to the dead.

They scanned everything for blocks in all directions for Chemical or Biological Weapons. Due to him. That would have absolutely included everything, down to his underwear. They know, then, he had all the evidence he should have.

If he'd NOT been covered in all this gore and evidence, the world would know it, because the largest manhunt in the history of our nation would have kicked off moments after they realized the Joker wasn't the shooter.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Bilk22

 

Okay, to put it simply, there is no way he didn't do this. He was covered from his carrot hair to his boot soles in gunshot residue and probably more than a little blood and gore. They said he started with a shotgun....then moved to the .223's at point blank. He had to be covered in evidence, to keep this PG-13 and respectful to the dead.

They scanned everything for blocks in all directions for Chemical or Biological Weapons. Due to him. That would have absolutely included everything, down to his underwear. They know, then, he had all the evidence he should have.

If he'd NOT been covered in all this gore and evidence, the world would know it, because the largest manhunt in the history of our nation would have kicked off moments after they realized the Joker wasn't the shooter.

You don't know any of what you posted, as fact. Period.

reply to post by Bilk22

I believe they have the right man, but it's nearly impossible to prove anything at the 100% level without the slightest bit of doubt.

Thanks very much for raising this. I don't think you're right, but I really appreciate the mind stretch, it's good for me. (And, maybe, for all of us.)

reply to post by Bilk22

Nope... The Police Chief could be lying. The FBI Spokesmen could be lying and the eyewitnesses could all, across the board, be mistaken or be outright lying. That's a lot of people with nothing to gain....but okay, all that could be happening, and it must be for a conspiracy to be possible where THIS man didn't kill a dozen people and stopped only because his weapon jammed.

I'm thru and off for awhile. This has gone from awkward in conspiring while the bodies are still warm and this psycho was already in custody to threads now starting to actually pose things like this or go further to making excuses or suggesting he's entirely innocent and a patsy.

Nope.. We all have a point and I'm not being banned for reacting to the anger this level of posting is starting to generate. Deny Ignorance is supposed to be a motto, yet it's not been very easy to see in practice lately. THIS story, in particular, is setting new lows and just making me sick,

Good evening to everyone and I'll be back later..or tomorrow.. or in a few weeks. I don't know. This just isn't what I come here for and I've had it. We're making a party out of ignorance, not denying it..and this is but ONE of many threads standing as mute testimony from just the last few days. I may just stay off.... This isn't the site I signed onto when I made my account.

Its quite interesting, also the media was very keen to state on Sky News "He Was Caught Red Handed".

Forensics however, will be able to match bullets to guns etc...

then there will be DNA evidence and such like. I don't think he will get off for this, but its very creative thinking.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Bilk22

 

I believe they have the right man, but it's nearly impossible to prove anything at the 100% level without the slightest bit of doubt.

Thanks very much for raising this. I don't think you're right, but I really appreciate the mind stretch, it's good for me. (And, maybe, for all of us.)

Well thanks. I think everyone has questioned why someone would do such a thing or what could bring them to that point to do so. There have obviously been many conspiracy theories put forth. I just thought there was another angle that could be explored based on what we actually do know about him.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Bilk22

 

Nope... The Police Chief could be lying. The FBI Spokesmen could be lying and the eyewitnesses could all, across the board, be mistaken or be outright lying. That's a lot of people with nothing to gain....but okay, all that could be happening, and it must be for a conspiracy to be possible where THIS man didn't kill a dozen people and stopped only because his weapon jammed.

I'm thru and off for awhile. This has gone from awkward in conspiring while the bodies are still warm and this psycho was already in custody to threads now starting to actually pose things like this or go further to making excuses or suggesting he's entirely innocent and a patsy.

Nope.. We all have a point and I'm not being banned for reacting to the anger this level of posting is starting to generate. Deny Ignorance is supposed to be a motto, yet it's not been very easy to see in practice lately. THIS story, in particular, is setting new lows and just making me sick,

Good evening to everyone and I'll be back later..or tomorrow.. or in a few weeks. I don't know. This just isn't what I come here for and I've had it. We're making a party out of ignorance, not denying it..and this is but ONE of many threads standing as mute testimony from just the last few days. I may just stay off.... This isn't the site I signed onto when I made my account.

Who suggested anyone was "lying"? There's no direct evidence yet available to the public, my friend. One must wonder why you would participate in forums dedicated to anything other than mainstream ideas, if it offends your sensibilities.

Originally posted by Bilk22
I know this is all speculation, but this is also the Skunk Works forum for such ideas. Until we know more about the hard evidence, it's still possible he wasn't the person pulling the trigger. [/quote



Even if he wasn't the one pulling the trigger per say he was at least an accomplice, so either way hes going away for one or the other...he wont walk

edit on 23-7-2012 by behindXtheXveil because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by babybunnies
Any one looking for conspiracy theories here needs to find a life.

You have to accept that SOMETIMES a news story is just a news story. Period. I agree, that it is certainly possible that he wasn't the shooter, but he hasn't come out with much of a statement of innocence if he wasn't.

Er you seem to be in the wrong place buddy this is a conspiracy theory site a mindspace where people are free to explore their thought processes surrounding events. Get off your high horse and join in constructively or go back to CNN mainstream and stop trolling those who want to explore the information.

Originally posted by TheMindWar
Its quite interesting, also the media was very keen to state on Sky News "He Was Caught Red Handed".

Forensics however, will be able to match bullets to guns etc...

then there will be DNA evidence and such like. I don't think he will get off for this, but its very creative thinking.

I think the point of my thread is, what if the forensics don't match? What if he was a participant they can't tie any of the evidence to directly, but only circumstantially, such as the stuff remaining in the apartment? I guess I was looking at this in regard to his expertise and interest in suspending or altering reality and perception. I could see a movie with this as the theme. I'm sure there are movies or books with something similar, where the obvious perp is not per design by that same person, like some sick game.

Red Handed? Well his whole body was sprayed with red paint, but so far he was caught outside the theater with legally owned guns. Until we see more hard, direct evidence, this is a theory I'm looking at. It's as valid as any of the other conspiracies and may even be tied to them. This is a site that considers such things I believe.

reply to post by Bilk22


I have just commented on another thread that Holmes looked pretty well sedated when he appeared in court. He looked as if he didn't realise where he was or what was happening;
BBC News - Aurora
I was just thinking ... what if he actually was set up?

What if he was heavily sedated for some time before the shootings?

Imagine this scenario:
The real shooter legs it out of the exit door which he himself unlocked earlier (this is why witnesses saw someone open it, this person is the real shooter in this scenario. He allowed himself to be seen but not identifiable). Then cops arrive with the already sedated Holmes (they had earlier dressed him in all that tactical stuff), and sit him in his car. Cops then 'pretend' to find Holmes in his car just sat there, and they 'lead him away quietly'. Holmes is too doped up to protest throughout, too 'out of it' to know what has even happened. And this is the reason he was 'found' just sat in his car, and the reason he allowed himself to be 'led away quietly'. They have to keep him doped up so that he's unaware, compliant, and unable to resist.

And now in court, he still is too doped up to protest, and he probably will be until he's sentenced.

The version we're being told, well it just doesn't fit. Too many 'why's'. Too many things that don't sit right and leaves us puzzled and scratching our heads. A saying comes to my mind - 'if a story isn't making sense, it's usually because it isn't true'.

A 'set-up' scenario makes more sense to me.

The thing is, if he has been set up - who is behind it? And why?

If he's declared mentally unfit to stand trial, this will provide the ideal opportunity to lock him up in a secure psychiatric clinic and keep him doped up until he dies. This ensures he never talks. But we will have to wait and see what transpires.

Originally posted by doobydoll
reply to post by Bilk22

 

I have just commented on another thread that Holmes looked pretty well sedated when he appeared in court. He looked as if he didn't realise where he was or what was happening;
BBC News - Aurora
I was just thinking ... what if he actually was set up?

What if he was heavily sedated for some time before the shootings?

Imagine this scenario:
The real shooter legs it out of the exit door which he himself unlocked earlier (this is why witnesses saw someone open it, this person is the real shooter in this scenario. He allowed himself to be seen but not identifiable). Then cops arrive with the already sedated Holmes (they had earlier dressed him in all that tactical stuff), and sit him in his car. Cops then 'pretend' to find Holmes in his car just sat there, and they 'lead him away quietly'. Holmes is too doped up to protest throughout, too 'out of it' to know what has even happened. And this is the reason he was 'found' just sat in his car, and the reason he allowed himself to be 'led away quietly'. They have to keep him doped up so that he's unaware, compliant, and unable to resist.

And now in court, he still is too doped up to protest, and he probably will be until he's sentenced.

The version we're being told, well it just doesn't fit. Too many 'why's'. Too many things that don't sit right and leaves us puzzled and scratching our heads. A saying comes to my mind - 'if a story isn't making sense, it's usually because it isn't true'.

A 'set-up' scenario makes more sense to me.

The thing is, if he has been set up - who is behind it? And why?

If he's declared mentally unfit to stand trial, this will provide the ideal opportunity to lock him up in a secure psychiatric clinic and keep him doped up until he dies. This ensures he never talks. But we will have to wait and see what transpires.

Well that's sort of a slant on my scenario. However I still suspect he's involved, but in a more nefarious/devious way based on his background. It's possible he's feigning his condition. Drugs would be easy to detect with testing. But feigning dementia is more difficult to prove without extensive psychoanalysis.