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.

 

Judge accused of creating 'unusual shroud of secrecy' in movie theater shooting case

page: 2
33
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Milkflavour
 


I absolutely believe that the media are most likely inclined to make this story another money-maker for their accounts receivable department. It is what they do in many of these high-profile tragedies.

Since the truth is that "Press" no longer serves the public interest, and are in fact proudly "entertainment driven," they lost their moral high-ground to declare "the people have a right to know" - at least on our behalf. Whenever they invoke that outdated phrase, they really mean "We need to sell ad space and our owners and clients want to use this incident to drive sales."

It's a phenomenon that most judges haven't dealt with properly in the past. Of course, some judges, especially the "political" ones LOVE the spotlight.... go figure.




posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Okay, so everyone that goes to a movie theater brings their cell phone. (Don't get me started on that rant.)

So why have no cell phone videos or even pictures been posted anywhere? Are we to assume nobody at the theater took a picture? In this day and age?



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousCitizen
 


It's is customary and polite to turn off phones whilst watching cinema entertainment to avoid bothersome interruptions. Besides that when the bullets starting being fired people don't want to be standing around taking photos savvy.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by judus
Your correct.

The more cloak and dagger the whole affair is, the more the conspiracy becomes heightened.

The people should demand the information and get to the bottom of what really happened.


Do you think he deserves a fair and honest trial? If evidence is even leaked it could influence a juror.

Let's all use a little logic on why the Judge would ask for secrecy...



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
well there's another discrepancy in height. We've been told 6'3 , 5'9 and now 5'11. I think prisoners are measured, so maybe this is correct....but maybe not. The officer also describes him as having hazel eyes and brown hair.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
Okay, so everyone that goes to a movie theater brings their cell phone. (Don't get me started on that rant.)

So why have no cell phone videos or even pictures been posted anywhere? Are we to assume nobody at the theater took a picture? In this day and age?


Oh...I don't know it's not like they were in a very enclosed building with minimal walking area and being shot at in the dark and probably a bit busy TOTALLY FREAKING OUT for it to occur to one of the victims hmmm maybe I should get some video of this to post on boobtube...

I am thinking my last thought while bullets are whizzing by my head is to take a photo, nope pretty sure it is HOW THE HELL DO I GET OUT OF HERE!
This is not like it happened on the street where you might have felt you had a safe distance to catch a clip.

edit on 9-8-2012 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
the height discrepancy doesn't bother me nearly as much as the hair color in the report. obviously we know it is not naturally red.. however was he writing the report off a drivers license, going by his own observation, either way if he was claiming to be the Joker he would have said "red" or they took it off his DL which would state Brown, either way, it is a discrepancy. His eyes clearly seem blue in the mug shot, however lighting can play a lot however I will say I have hazel eyes and they would never be misinterpreted as blue which his clearly are.. now again I know when I have been really drunk they turn bright green so drugs could change the color.. I do believe the two pics are the same person I personally can't explain all the convoluted info.. did anyone take a look at the two reports I posted earlier in this thread and why on earth the pic of the gas mask has been photo shopped.. one shows a white object in the picture, the more recent show that object photo shopped out.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
ps, I have never seen a report or an actual DL that states he is 6'3" nothing indicates he was quite that tall, anyone have a link?



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
timesofnews.co...

you can clearly see in this pic he is not 6'3" use your own judgement, my son is 6'4" and is clearly taller than everyone he stands next too.. unless this is a camp of Amazonian women I would discount that and go by his own match.com and adultfriendfinder adds he says in one he is 5'11" and the other 6'



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tindalos2013
reply to post by AnonymousCitizen
 


It's is customary and polite to turn off phones whilst watching cinema entertainment to avoid bothersome interruptions. Besides that when the bullets starting being fired people don't want to be standing around taking photos savvy.



Just guessing that you're not from the U.S.? Not everyone here is polite and, shall we say, clever.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by MiaWallace
www.nydailynews.com...

newyork.newsday.com...

Please take a look at both of these links from news agencies, why are most of the photos out there altered of the gas mask, what is the white thing next to original photo and why was it photoshopped out and by? whom....


It can be seen in both photos. As to what it is? I have no clue. Looks almost like some type of coveralls thats disposable. I used to wear something similar when i painted for a living whenever we sprayed primer.

Edit: On second look it looks like something like a trash bag or something similar.
edit on 9-8-2012 by gwm32683 because: Added another comment.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by gwm32683
 


I believe MiaWallace was referring to the white silvery thing just to the right and right next to the gas mask where the strap is seen. Not the white bag looking thing in the background. I don't think it was edited out but perhaps moved and another photo taken. The two pics look to be at slightly different angles suggesting they aren't the same and even taken at different times.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Terrormaster
 

I totally agree they may have been taken at different times and different angles however, it seems strange nonetheless. If the white item was there at one photo it should have been tagged as evidence as well.. I just don't get it, and I am sure and ATS will be able to see the photo shop, as the first photo appears there is white substance on the ground as well as the mask itself, If it is a different angle it sure looks cleaned up to me. There is a line blurred in the bottom of the photo that appears fabricated as well as where the white object was



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   
P.S. Carlie Richards and mother were the ones who spoke to media.... she is suspicious.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
where are the rest of the witnesses? just curious?



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by MiaWallace
 

she is an actress/model who was on a shoot that day and her blog screams of dirty laundry.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Nevermind, I was looking at the charge information checked female. Maybe that was for a victim.
edit on 9/8/12 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I don't know anything either way Spirit it is just strange that she is the only witness/survivor who has opened their mouth since.



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 9 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   
They're worried about a fair trial? This is the stuff they released already:

1. He was seeing a shrink
2. He sent something to a shrink
3. He had a certain mental illness
4. He wasn't doing well in school during the year
5. He flunked his exams
6. He dropped out of school
7. He had a profile on a adult dating site.

How exactly are they trying to protect his privacy?



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join