As a Denver/Aurora resident, I have a LOT to say about the shooting

What would have a gun done against the armour he was wearing? Not much i would say.

Maybe look into that. You might be surprised...

Holmes court appearance

reply to post by texasgirl


Because it helps the prosecution's case and thats why Holmes needs a top lawyer to also dissect the CCTV film because no public offender is going to go out on a limb for him. I mean, look at her - young, barely enough experience yet Holmes parents can afford a lawyer for themselves - but not their own son who may end up on death row? If that was my son I'd be selling up everything to get him a big criminal lawyer. Would'nt you?

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by texasgirl

 

where I come from my eyes do not decieve me in a dark room - with a huge big lit up screen when there's a brightly coloured red head there. You just can't miss that fact because they're not exactly a dime a dozen where I live.

Hmm..that's possible, too. But lots of people were wearing costumes. I am intrigued that no one mentioned the guy sitting in front of them had red hair. Are we saying that the guy in the seat was NOT James Holmes? In fact, James Holmes was outside already dressed in battle gear and was waiting for the signal from the person who propped open the door? That is definitely interesting...

reply to post by texasgirl


Thats what alot of us are considering and not ruling it out

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by texasgirl

 

running from a horrid scene in panic is a normal human response for most when confronted with death or a major disaster......yet somehow mothers with young children respond differently by shielding their children and holding their hands.

Yes, I agree. Although I don't have children I know I would do the same thing. It's a protective instinct. I was responding about the people running the camera and the lights. They probably fled the scene in a panic and that's why the lights didn't come on and the camera was still running. Of course, I don't know this; it's pure speculation.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by texasgirl

 

Thats what alot of us are considering and not ruling it out

Okay, I see your point. I actually had it backwards, my theory being he received a phone call that triggered some kind of robotic response in his brain to open the door, exit and then get into battle gear. An MK Ultra type scenario, mind control. But the 'motioning for another person' account puts your perspective more plausible.

You can't pick him out because he wore a gas mask. I still believe there was possibly another person in that theatre working with him.

What if he was offered a part in a movie/experiment using a Batman character and was told his guns would be loaded with blanks. After realising his guns were loaded with the real deal, he tried to explain to Police who did'nt believe him and furious, spat at prison guards, blah blah. In the mean time, they drug him right up before his court appearance so he could'nt speak nor tell the truth that might harm the prosecutors case.

Possible?

That's the explaination i've started thinking about more less. Maybe he was zombied into thinking that this "experiment" was going to be fake, then he realizes that it's not!

reply to post by texasgirl

I was responding about the people running the camera and the lights. They probably fled the scene in a panic and that's why the lights didn't come on and the camera was still running.

I would say that is a rational explanation. It almost always becomes every man for himself in this type of situation. It seems no one even attempted anything but run or hide. Not saying I blame them though.

reply to post by roadgravel


I dunno, wouldn't your first reaction be to flick on the lights? I know it would be mine. Turn on lights, see the horror, run like hell.
Maybe not turn off the movie, but as soon as that smoke canister went off the lights would have been on. Didn't the witnesses say they thought it was part of some kind of movie effects? The movie employees knew it wasn't and would have turned on the lights right away.

Originally posted by LOVE444
reply to post by bluemirage5

 

Yea, its kinda crazy to me..I also found this thread here on ATS....pieces to the puzzle starting to come together?? Check it for your self..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

WOW! This is exactly what i was thinking. He has been here (i live in Colorado Springs) twice in the past month alone. I have not looked into it yet, but now i'm curious as to how many other visits he has made previous to these last two. hmmm... interesting...

Originally posted by mutantgenius
reply to post by roadgravel

 

I dunno, wouldn't your first reaction be to flick on the lights? I know it would be mine. Turn on lights, see the horror, run like hell.
Maybe not turn off the movie, but as soon as that smoke canister went off the lights would have been on. Didn't the witnesses say they thought it was part of some kind of movie effects? The movie employees knew it wasn't and would have turned on the lights right away.

I'd like to think that but I can see the person just running. The lights might have disrupted the shooter but it also might have help him see better.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by texasgirl

 

Because it helps the prosecution's case and thats why Holmes needs a top lawyer to also dissect the CCTV film because no public offender is going to go out on a limb for him. I mean, look at her - young, barely enough experience yet Holmes parents can afford a lawyer for themselves - but not their own son who may end up on death row? If that was my son I'd be selling up everything to get him a big criminal lawyer. Would'nt you?

Yeah, I am really bothered by the parents' reactions. I would move heaven and earth to help my kid. Also, why did she say it was her son that was the shooter? This whole thing reeks of being staged and that Holmes was a patsy.

reply to post by texasgirl


She didn't. The MSM corrected their "error" since.

reply to post by mutantgenius


Thank you.

It seem like the OP was correct.

The first picture of him says "I have ambition in what I'm studying"

The second picture of him in court with that stupid hair color just says, "Who am I? What am I doing here?"

Everyone needs to know the history of this guy and why the guy did what he did.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by texasgirl

 

She didn't. The MSM corrected their "error" since.

Oh, is that right? Thanks for correcting me. Do you happen to know what she said?

Wait, if we are to think that someone else opened the door and motioned for Holmes to come in and shoot then why are the witnesses saying he was 5'8" or 5'9" when in fact Holmes is much taller than that? Nothing makes sense here.

Originally posted by texasgirl

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by texasgirl

 

She didn't. The MSM corrected their "error" since.

Oh, is that right? Thanks for correcting me. Do you happen to know what she said?

The 'you have the right person' was her stating she was the mother of a person named James Holmes. If they are looking for his mother, she is that person.

I would speculate that the average person, in a dimly lit room, would do good to get a person's high with 6 inches of actual. An in this case, it was not an exercise to guess height. Thinking how tall is that man was one of the last things going on in their heads.

Originally posted by texasgirl

Oh, is that right? Thanks for correcting me. Do you happen to know what she said?

Here is an article regarding ABC's momentary (? perhaps common) suspension of journalistic integrity.

If you do a search, you can find other articles regarding the matter as well...