Sandy Hook affidavits remain sealed

page: 10
17
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions




posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



edit on Wed Jan 2 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: 15a) Offensive Content: You will not Post forum posts, private messages, PODcasts, blog entries, videos, images, and other supported content, links to images or use avatars and/or signatures that are unlawful, harassing, libelous, privacy invading, abusive, threatening, harmful, hateful, vulgar, obscene, and/or disruptive. You will not use text, images, avatars or link to images or domains that contain gore, mutilation, pornography or illegal content. Doing so will result in removal of your Post(s) and immediate termination of your account. Terms and Conditions of Use--Please Review



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Listen up



ATS Terms and Conditions

15a) Offensive Content: You will not Post forum posts, private messages, PODcasts, blog entries, videos, images, and other supported content, links to images or use avatars and/or signatures that are unlawful, harassing, libelous, privacy invading, abusive, threatening, harmful, hateful, vulgar, obscene, and/or disruptive. You will not use text, images, avatars or link to images or domains that contain gore, mutilation, pornography or illegal content. Doing so will result in removal of your Post(s) and immediate termination of your account. Terms and Conditions of Use--Please Review

Do not invade peoples privacy and post their private photos on ATS.



posted on Jan, 2 2013 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen

Originally posted by Vaedur

Sandy Hook affidavits remain sealed


www.ctpost.com

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 ...
(visit the link for the full news article)


"information 'not known to the general public'"...as in:
1) AR-15 rifle found in trunk loaded and unfired?
2) 4 handguns found in school?
3) 2 shooters seen in the school by LE?
4) Lanza had no gun residue on his hands?


So as was suggested earlier maybe there really IS a still ongoing investigation and that is the reason for any real details coroborating the OS not being released (rather than an official coverup), Perhaps (just think of it) MAYBE there are some loyal local people (or higher up) that will just never allow the *People In Charge* to railroad them. I have to wonder if any families involved are truly free to come and go at will and speak with whomever they wish. Perhaps they are but I got to wondering what IF they were in some way put under 'custody' (for their own good of course...hmmmm) and maybe are not really free to interact and talk about what they know.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by FirstCasualty

No matte what possibilities i try to come up with i just cant find one that explains showing no compassion for one of your children in a family photo. I can't grasp it.


What other possibilities did you consider?

What about it can't you "grasp?"



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by sconner755

Originally posted by FirstCasualty

No matte what possibilities i try to come up with i just cant find one that explains showing no compassion for one of your children in a family photo. I can't grasp it.


What other possibilities did you consider?

What about it can't you "grasp?"


I'm having a block here, why don't you help me out.

In case your just a kid and you have trouble reading ill spell it out again. pay attention this time...

WHY IS THE FATHER NOT EMBRACING THE CHILD ON THE RIGHT???

did you get that?

Ok now this is the creative part. Do you know what creative means? good, lets move on.

I'm trying to think of reasons why this is the only family photo that I have seen where a child that young is left without being embraced and how come the mom has a free hand but the child is on the fathers side.

I can admit that im having trouble coming up with logical reasons for this.

Do you think you can help me out?



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 5 2013 @ 11:47 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 04:35 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





top topics
 
17
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join