Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

WATCH: Police Prevents Witness of Boeing 777 Crash from Speaking to Reporters

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   
WATCH: Police Prevents Witness of Boeing 777 Crash from Speaking to Reporters

Vid Title...Not my claim.

I honestly don't know if this is something brewing but the vid maker believes it is. The reporter even states the Police are stopping him from speaking.

But, was the cop just trying to get testimony before the kid spoke so that he could get it first hand? Or...was he trying to shut him up?

On another note, why does the cop grab him physically and lead him away? Not asking but rather pulling and then steering?

This was the moment I thought there may be something else.

But who knows right?



I'm not coming to any conclusions until something else surfaces tho. Just thought it was an interesting clip and an even more interesting clip title. And after all...This is ATS.


Peace

edit on 7-7-2013 by jude11 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
That's an awfully large leap there.

"were you on the plane, we need to speak with you for a moment"

How the host interprets that as "not allowing him to speak to the media" is beyond me.

It's like people don't use their brains any more.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
That's an awfully large leap there.

"were you on the plane, we need to speak with you for a moment"

How the host interprets that as "not allowing him to speak to the media" is beyond me.

It's like people don't use their brains any more.


I am of the same mind. It is a large leap.

I watched the vid a few times and am a little disturbed with the cop's actions with actually grabbing the kid who is only a victim/witness. This is why I put it up. Strange behavior born out of frustration, weariness? Could be as innocent as that.

Honestly, I have no opinion as of yet tho.

Could be nothing or???

Peace



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


I don't make much of the arm-grabbing. My guess is that he wasn't fully cleared to leave a victims/passengers area for insurance documentation. Nefarious coverup? Doubtful. Glad to hear you picked up on the host's brainwashing technique. Look for it everywhere.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   
They sure shut him down quick as a flash, didn't they? lol.... I don't see anything nefarious here but shut down would be the right term I think. It's not at all uncommon for exclusive interviews or whatever else coming with cash offers, as just one concern. If he agreed to and moved to fulfill just one of them before talking to officials about what he'd seen? Then I'd sure hope he'd seen nothing important because it would always be questionable for credibility later.

They need to know if someone saw a "smoking gun" of a little detail they may not even be aware was important to have seen ...before it all gets mushy in the feeding frenzy and whirlwind of coverage, IMO.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
They sure shut him down quick as a flash, didn't they? lol.... I don't see anything nefarious here but shut down would be the right term I think. It's not at all uncommon for exclusive interviews or whatever else coming with cash offers, as just one concern. If he agreed to and moved to fulfill just one of them before talking to officials about what he'd seen? Then I'd sure hope he'd seen nothing important because it would always be questionable for credibility later.

They need to know if someone saw a "smoking gun" of a little detail they may not even be aware was important to have seen ...before it all gets mushy in the feeding frenzy and whirlwind of coverage, IMO.


I'm guessing you're right in this case. At least I hope so.

Had to post the vid tho. Just in case someone sees something different from myself. I mean, I'm not exactly known for trusting cops too much around here...


The cop's actions do lean towards asking the questions IMO.

Peace



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


the reason that the authorities wanted the witness away from reporters is simple :

reporters ask leading and loaded questions to get sensationalist sound-bites , these questions can distort the witnesses testimony

the real investigators ask neutral questions - and mostly just let the witness talk

it really is that simple



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
He might be lead on, he might tell complete and utter bs. but none of that negates 1st amendment rights. The cops if they had to talk to him could've waited for him to end his interview. Instead they grap him and take him away. That's assault.






top topics



 
3

log in

join