Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,162 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 252,813
Pageviews Today: 298,643Threads Today: 69Posts Today: 666
04:37 AM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject Sandy Hook - Can Anyone Pinpoint the Precise Location of Lauren Rousseau's Car?
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
So Adam was able to shoot many time in classroom without broking any windows.
Specially with a rifle in semi-automatic mode...

Ok, maybe he shoots from outside in the parking lot.
 Quoting: Fred 19517346

If so, then Sally Cox is not telling the truth. If Lanza made just "five...horrible popping noises" with his firearm before entering the school, and he squandered at least four shots by targeting Lauren Rousseau's car in the parking lot (a rather strange act, since he supposedly had never met Rousseau), then Lanza would not have been able to blast his way into the building.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 17586504

ohh.. i know that the witnesses stories didnt fit together.

but it happens often in real event, like car crash... often if you have 3 witnesses..you have 3 stories...
 Quoting: Fred 19517346

No, here we are discussing the account of *ONE* witness, and a speculation that, if correct, would inherently render that single account patently false. Also, with regard to car crashes, I have been a witness to two fatal car crashes, one of them involving a pedestrian whose disfigured body seemed to explode as it was hurled directly at my car. In both instances my recount of substantive details showed essentially no variance from that of other witnesses. If anything, the most remarkable aspect of our accounts was how uniform they all were. As an attorney, I have also found the notion of disinterested eyewitnesses telling wildly divergent tales rarely to apply to any real-life situation.

In this case, when Sally Cox stated distinctly that she heard a measured report of five popping noises, she was reporting a perception she registered in a calm, cool, and collected frame of mind. It was only later that she became alarmed, after she heard the secretary begin screaming. Even had she been flustered at the time of the original muzzle reports, one would not reasonably expect it to impact the accuracy of her statements. When one considers the fact that she was unalarmed and as cool as a cucumber at the time, it becomes obvious that we must completely abandon the canard of her testimony being altered by the stresses of the moment.

Witnesses are sometimes mistaken as to the identity of things observed, but they are rarely mistaken about the basic character of things that stand out to them and that they mark with great clarity and particularity. If you wish to state that Sally Cox had no idea of what she was observing with measured perception and particularity in a calm mind state, then fine, but then we are also warranted to reject absolutely everything else she has to say. We cannot cherry-pick here; either her most basic, deliberate, measured observations developed in a calm mental state are reliable, or they are not. If not, we are entitled to throw everything this woman says onto the rubbish heap. Likewise with every other witness to this event, and if we do that, ultimately we have nothing on which to base any assessment. If eyewitness statements may be cast aside, or reconfigured and reworked as we please, then are justified in recreating the entire body of evidence in any manner we see fit.

The effort to rationalize a series of impossible and irreconcilable contradictions on the basis of altering and recasting witnesses' accounts is worse than lazy, it is patently subjective and skewed. If you are free to paint over the canvas of eyewitness accounts as you see fit, then you truly are given a license to engage in unfettered fantasy, projection, and/or falsehood. That is no way to investigate anything, at least not with any real expectation of probative results. I submit to you that we should steel ourselves only to work with the evidence at hand, and when we find that evidence to produce impossibilities, we should look to disintegrity of account more readily than we do to rationalize everything in an attempt at harmonization. Sally Cox provided a single, measured account, one that either negates the possibility of Adam Lanza firing at Lauren Rousseau's car from outside the building, or is patently false (either deliberately so or otherwise). Period.
Please verify you're human:

Reason for copyright violation: