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.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Sedensky said in his applications that the affidavits contained information "not known to the general public" and that premature disclosure would "seriously jeopardize the outcome and success of the investigation" by "divulging sensitive and confidential information" known only to investigators.
Although no arrests have been made and "none are contemplated," Sedensky also said the possibility has not been ruled out, and that releasing the information would make it difficult to solve crimes ...
Sedensky also said the possibility has not been ruled out, and that releasing the information would make it difficult to solve crimes that others might have committed..
Sedensky said in his applications that the affidavits contained information "not known to the general public" and that premature disclosure would "seriously jeopardize the outcome and success of the investigation"
Originally posted by stirling
Since they have a dead shooter, maybe they are looking at other covenient crimes to hang on the guy.....
Seriously though, the smashed computer is the key as far as i can tell......its the one wierd item that has me fascinated......i believe it was done to protect someone...
Should they reconstruct the hard drive, i am thinking they may find that Adam had some kind of mentor......
Originally posted by Vaeduri wonder what other kind of crimes have been committed..
Originally posted by Ladyk74
I find this very interesting. I took note, that they now mention Nancy Lanza’s car was parked in the garage, they also say " the car Adam Lanza drove to Sandy Hook elementary", which now not necessarily means that the car was Nancy’s as stated before! Of course she could have had more then one car.
It was suggested to me before, that the media had it all wrong and the info was not released for very good reasons, which would support a theory that there might have been another shooter.
Sedensky also said the possibility has not been ruled out, and that releasing the information would make it difficult to solve crimes that others might have committed..
Sedensky said in his applications that the affidavits contained information "not known to the general public" and that premature disclosure would "seriously jeopardize the outcome and success of the investigation"edit on 28-12-2012 by Ladyk74 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by bknapple32
I agree. I couldn't think of a reason to smash the computer.
You do realize that a reporter wrote the article, right? And since the search warrants are sealed the reporter's wording of the article has zero bearing on your theory about the car being owned by somebody else.
Make sense?
The search warrants are sealed.
The reporter doesn't know who owns the car.
The "interesting" wording makes no logical sense. Nice try though at keeping your theory going. Guess you'll have to wait 90 days. That's a lot of time for speculating about conspiracies and cover-ups.
Did you ever think logically about the 2nd shooter theory? If the police suspect a second shooter is on the loose and collectively they agreed not to inform the public, they would all be fired and/or possibly prosecuted.
Keep up the great research!
Sedensky also said the possibility has not been ruled out, and that releasing the information would make it difficult to solve crimes that others might have committed..
i agree. You can not use logic as to whysomeone commits ab illogical act.
Originally posted by DelMarvel
Originally posted by bknapple32
I agree. I couldn't think of a reason to smash the computer.
To quote the Boomtown Rats on the subject of school yard shootings:
"They can see no reasons
'Cause there are no reasons
What reason do you need to be shown"
Lanza wasn't necessarily acting rationally and there could be any number of seemingly illogical reasons why he smashed his computer.
Originally posted by Vaedur
Sedensky said in his applications that the affidavits contained information "not known to the general public" and that premature disclosure would "seriously jeopardize the outcome and success of the investigation" by "divulging sensitive and confidential information" known only to investigators.
Although no arrests have been made and "none are contemplated," Sedensky also said the possibility has not been ruled out, and that releasing the information would make it difficult to solve crimes ...
Originally posted by sconner755
Originally posted by Ladyk74
I find this very interesting. I took note, that they now mention Nancy Lanza’s car was parked in the garage, they also say " the car Adam Lanza drove to Sandy Hook elementary", which now not necessarily means that the car was Nancy’s as stated before! Of course she could have had more then one car.
It was suggested to me before, that the media had it all wrong and the info was not released for very good reasons, which would support a theory that there might have been another shooter.
Sedensky also said the possibility has not been ruled out, and that releasing the information would make it difficult to solve crimes that others might have committed..
Sedensky said in his applications that the affidavits contained information "not known to the general public" and that premature disclosure would "seriously jeopardize the outcome and success of the investigation"edit on 28-12-2012 by Ladyk74 because: (no reason given)
You do realize that a reporter wrote the article, right? And since the search warrants are sealed the reporter's wording of the article has zero bearing on your theory about the car being owned by somebody else.
Make sense?
The search warrants are sealed.
The reporter doesn't know who owns the car.
The "interesting" wording makes no logical sense. Nice try though at keeping your theory going. Guess you'll have to wait 90 days. That's a lot of time for speculating about conspiracies and cover-ups.
Did you ever think logically about the 2nd shooter theory? If the police suspect a second shooter is on the loose and collectively they agreed not to inform the public, they would all be fired and/or possibly prosecuted.
Keep up the great research!
Just have to try and stir up stuff with your sarcasm, I see who you are.
Originally posted by dc4lifeskater
good luck ever seeing the real paperwork.. if anything ever is released it will be heavily modified... they need time to work on it you know..
you may be correct there. maybe they ran out of black ink to blackout info and are awaiting a shipment.
Originally posted by Sek82
When they say it could jeopardize the investigation, what they are really saying is that they are stuck in damage control mode and many people know it.