Did first Sandy Hook 911 calls get misrouted or delayed, while shots were fired?

Sedensky said the 911 tape content would violate victim privacy--but he never listened to the tapes.

The FOI commission did listen to the tapes, and said they don't violate victim privacy.

Sedensky said the 911 tape content would jeopardize the investigation by prejudicing a law enforcement action--but he never listend to the tapes.

The FOI commission did listen to the tapes, and said they don't jeopardize the investigation.

It's not the content. At least, not the content of this small subset of 911 calls, which apparently only consist of landline calls.

If it's not the content, what is it?

If the calls didn't exist, I really don't think the FOI commission--all those people--would just blithely pretend they exist. I DO think, judging by the panel's awkward reactions when talking about the tapes, that there must be literally only two or three calls--if that. I think they thought that was odd.

However many calls we're talking about, it is their TIMING that may be at issue.

What accounts for the panel's (it seemed to me) stunned, anti-climactic reaction to the tapes? Could it be the small number?

What about the TIMING?

Were the landline calls initiated at about 9:15 a.m., when Rosen said he heard automatic gunfire, and when neighbors on Yogananda St said police were already taping off the Lanza house?

Were shooters able to shoot for a full 15-25 minutes before first police dispatch?

Were those first calls REALLY landline calls, or did landline calls only come AFTER the shooting was over?

Look through the media interviews and reports--a lot of effort is made to say that this or that worker "grabbed the desk phone and pulled it under the table."

There's something up with the landline calls, the cellphone calls, their timings, and the *differences* between those calls.

Yes the woman on the panel that asked " are there more calls?" and " so the calls we have listened to are the only calls that the AP is looking for?"

I thought it was odd that 2 counsel people asked which responded first State police or Newtown police.....

I think Santa took the call, but his reindeer were out partying, so the Police were late to arrive and help out.

Great point.

I think their subdued demeanor (the panel's) reflected personal discomfort at what they had heard (not so much the content, but timing), and how this forced their worldview to change suddenly. It's not a good feeling--I think we've all been there.

The Newtown story has been going straight downhill since day 1, and now it's in freefall.

While traumatic, this is a good thing. No true healing can take place in an atmosphere of deceit and pretense.

The agitation from the one man on the committee was very evident when he found that nobody had listened to the calls( when he had ) before making the blanket statement that they should not be released.

It's like they really want the public to know what happened and they are dismayed that the state and Newtown are holding back.

Do you think the Sedensky is trying to filibuster so nobody will ask for the other 911 calls?

I think there are problems with all the 911 calls.

I just don't understand why Nute seems to be making his first dispatch to a 9:36 a.m. cellphone call from outside the front door of the school--and from people who are not staff, but visitors.

Shouldn't there been a call from inside the school first, landline or cellphone?

Just how long had shooters been shooting already when Nute received Sibley's call?

There is some kind of maximum rounds-per-second problem. There is something that the "156 rounds" are sandwiched into--some parameter that is immovable, both at the front end, and back end, of the shooting time.

For some reason, the state needs to account for ten shots. So it's saying Newtown "waited for ten shots."

There's something about that number, and whatever the 911 calls reveal about that number.