Who is the father who fought with Sandy Hook staff 12/13 and whose wife was in a meeting with staff 12/14 when shots were fired?

that's rather ignorant of you to believe!

I one star based on mood, op's tone, my reaction to the story, or just cause I don't effin like you.

to believe that a one star rating means something more than a one star rating is absolutely insane, and delusional

So he had a child when he was 14 years old?

I don't think Adam was as shy as we were lead to believe.

Protesteth too much comes to mind.

Why would anyone care what someone thought of their one-star, if it's given "just cuz?"

It's not just the one-star - - - it's the speed of the one-star. Instant.

It's like being on the Tibetan forums; mainland Chinese guys are paid to babysit and keep a lookout for any thread that's too anti-government, and give it an instant thumbs-down.

Yes, because a thumbs down is soooo powerful. You are clearly over thinking this.

That, or you have been drinking the Flavor-Aid.

Well, a thumbs-down is powerful enough to receive a paycheck from Beijing, lol.

I know a stock market guy in NY, originally from HK, who does this for a second job. Propaganda is valuable, and propaganda in the social media context is no exception!

There are actually posters tacked up in Chinese cities advertising for the job, which is generally titled "internet commentator." The Chinese public calls these people "5 mao dang," or "the 50 Cent Party," based on the fact that the first city to offer such a job paid 50 cents per post. Started in about 2005.

Unfortunately, the US has taken a lesson from Beijing in "public opinion guiding."

If you doubt it, go to some Tibetan YouTube videos and see how many of them have thumbs-down compared to other topics.

From an earlier thread:

If we accept the statements that Manfredonia--a father of a student--was the man proned put, and that Camo Man, detained in the woods, was an uncle, you have two male relatives attempting to flee the scene together, both detained by police but then released without any fuss (and being allowed to sit in the front of the squad car).

Then, two alternate perpetrators are hastily found--Ryan and Adam Lanza. These two are meant to take the place of the two arrested individuals, because at that point, cops protecting Manfredonia and Uncle think there will be evidence pointing to two shooters.

Once it becomes clear they chose badly--Ryan has too good an alibi--they reduce it to one shooter, and prevent any EMTs entering for as long as it takes to change the scene to reflect one shooter. Meanwhile, kids are dying as they try to quickly fudge the scene. It ends up taking way too long, and they freak, knowing that EMTs will be able to tell that some of the kids could have been saved. A that point, they can have no witnesses, so EMTs are kept out for good. It now takes a very, very long time to figure out how to cover up their own cover up, and they announce bodies will be "left in the school until Sunday," which is a statement that, all by itself, should have every EMT and LEO in the nation questioning this operation.

But no one would do this, right? Would the Connecticut State Police expend all this effort to swoop in and cover up...oh wait...the fact that their fellow off-duty officer, a disgruntled uncle in cahoots with a disgruntled father, just shot up a school?

Novia said both Ryan and Adam were in his tech club. He said he worked with Adam extensively to help Adam overcome his (to hear Novia tell it, severe) disability.

Novia would be the perfect candidate to come up with the idea of trying to pin it on the Lanzas; is there any buddy connection between Novia--head of security for Newtown school district--and cops, including State Police? How about between Novia and a digruntled uncle cop, in particular, and between Novia and fellow school-systems worker, Manfredonia?

Novia is in a perfect position to have a specific relationship with both these proposed individuals. And now Novia is going on and on, publicly, about how messed up Adam was.

A bit of background:

School CCTV System Passes With Flying Colors

By Joe Freeman | November 01, 2004

School CCTV System Passes With Flying Colors
The effects of events like Sept. 11, 2001 and the Columbine High School tragedy of April 1999 are long lasting — and far-reaching. While seemingly localized on the surface, the implications of these tragedies reach across the world and are still felt today.

One of the environments most affected by these events is schools, where the need for increased security and the protection of people and property resonates stronger everyday in a post-9/11 and post-Columbine world. More and more school officials are turning toward advanced security like CCTV surveillance.

While the need is obvious, such security suggestions are often met with adversity. Privacy advocates might argue about the implications of a CCTV system in a school. What do cameras represent? Do they violate a basic right to privacy that students, teachers and staff share under the U.S. Constitution? Do they make people feel like they’re under suspicion?

Legal experts might wonder if a school could be sued for using cameras. Financially minded opponents might argue about expenses: How much does video surveillance cost? Where will the money come from to pay for it?

When Newtown (Conn.) High School officials began working to implement a CCTV surveillance system, Security Director Richard Novia encountered all these obstacles. Still, with creativity, good policy-making and help from a consulting firm, Newtown’s surveillance system has answered its critics, proving to be effective in both cost and function.

Set in the rolling hills of the Berkshire Mountains, Newtown, Conn., is a beautiful community located in Fairfield County — the wealthiest county in the U.S. — from which executives commute daily to Wall Street and Madison Avenue. The center of town, dating to 1705, is on the National Register of Historic Places.

Despite the picturesque setting, officials at Newtown High School, which educates 1,500 students, were particularly mindful of security after the tragedies of 9/11 and Columbine. As a result, Novia began researching an updated emergency response plan and soon set his sights on a video surveillance system. After viewing film footage of the Columbine massacre, it was clear a LAN-based video surveillance system would be of help to first responders because they could remotely access hallways, lobbies and other internal areas to monitor any problems.

Novia conducted weekly workshops for teachers and staff and promoted the idea of cameras with Superintendent John Reed and business executive Ron Bienkowski. While there was initial reluctance to the idea of school cameras, Novia pointed out that their presence would equal 10 security officers patrolling the school corridors on a 24/7 basis. This was important since there had been behavioral violations during the school day and theft and vandalism in the off-hours.

Before any of these concerns could seriously be addressed, a string of unlucky events occurred. A fire destroyed a school restroom. It contaminated the ventilation system and destroyed wired systems, causing the facility to be closed. Then, somebody flooded the third-floor science labs. Water ran down the walls and collapsed ceilings on the floors below, causing the closure of the building’s entire wing. Repairs amounted to $500,000.

Novia investigated and identified the culprits, who chalked the capers up as pranks. The students were arrested, but all attempts at restitution through the courts were of little economic benefit to the school. By now, the idea of video surveillance, despite its costs and privacy implications, wasn’t so far-fetched to school personnel and the Board of Education.

Novia researched the cost of a video surveillance system and was presented with six estimates in the $100,000-or-more range. Still, the proposals did not meet Novia’s requirements after he invested a great deal of time educating himself on networks, digital systems, site analyses and surveillance operations. Further, many of the offerings involved “no-name” brands he did not trust.

Novia calls himself a “control freak” for doing his best every day to protect people and assets while not interrupting the education process. Because he protects teenagers from each other as well as from outside threats, he wanted a system that was in-house, self-contained and tamper-proof.

It had to deliver safe and secure storage of high-resolution images while providing instant review. It also had to be user-friendly because school personnel who might use it are educators, not necessarily “techies.” Lastly, it had to be maintained by existing security staff in collaboration with the school’s IT department.

As Novia puts it, security industry research and consulting firm J.P. Freeman Co. then “fell out of the sky.” Through his reading of Security Sales & Integration, he discovered the company — and it was right here in Newtown. The firm met with Novia, informed him of the great video systems now on the market and, as a resident of Newtown with an interest in the school’s welfare, offered to do a site survey.

J.P. Freeman Co. suggested to Novia that he attend the next American Society for Industrial Security (ASIS) trade show to gain more industry knowledge. It then presented him with a system design that he said surpassed his expectations. It was state-of-the-art technology offered by some of the best names in video security. The company offered him the opportunity to test each product before any purchase was made.

Superintendent Reed [just returned this year to Newtown schools and left as suddenly]; principal Bill Manfredonia [say what?]; vice principal Jules Triber; and Bienkowski, the business executive, met with J.P. Freeman Co. to discuss the system. The company described it as a test of what can be accomplished with a custom-designed surveillance system using first-class products from leading manufacturers. The companies interested in participating in the test were Panasonic of Secaucus, N.J.; Clovis, Calif.’s Pelco; Toshiba of Irvine, Calif.; and Surrey, British Columbia, Canada’s Silent Witness (now part of Honeywell).

Since the system was an unplanned budget item, the school decided to have its electrical contractor run the Cat-5e in the removable ceilings and terminate it at the surveillance and control points. Even with that cost-saving measure, the school could find only enough money for 32 cameras and three DVRs out of the 48 cameras and six DVRs the company felt necessary to provide full coverage.

Panasonic provided the DVRs, and Pelco, Toshiba and Silent Witness/Honeywell, the cameras. The Pelco cameras were outdoor pan/tilt/zoom models, the Toshibas were both indoor and outdoor units, and the Silent Witness equipment was solely for interior use. The equipment was paid for, rather than gifted, to maintain real market conditions for the test. J.P. Freeman Co. also made provisions for Novia to receive instruction at manufacturer locations.

Installation Provokes Students Eager to Buck the System
The school’s investment was publicized in area newspapers, leading to mixed reviews by parents and school personnel still concerned about privacy as well as, undoubtedly, inciting a challenge to some prank-oriented students. Before the cameras, the school normally assembled weekly reports of items missing or damaged and of unknown persons wandering the campus.

Broken windows and vandalism were common events, and with a $10,000 property insurance deductible and no suspects, the school could not recover repair costs. Consequently, the annual damage/repair budget was $30,000. Once the video surveillance system was installed, the $30,000 annual expense almost disappeared, and the unspent funds are now devoted to new and improved doors and other school security items.

Then the real test started. In a community of fairly well-to-do students, 90 percent of whom will attend college, it was inevitable that some clever students might want to prove something. Some might have peer-pressure problems and need to express their personalities; others simply don't like regimentation or discipline and might be inclined to destroy it when they can. After installing the cameras, several incidents were recorded.

Custodians found two smashed skylights over the school's Olympic-sized pool. There were sneaker prints on the broken skylight frames. This could have been lethal since a fall from the roof could easily have ended in death. The cost of repair was $4,000. Just a few hours later, three youths were identified in the video footage and arrested.

Compensation was made for the damage. The culprits couldn't believe they were caught in the video. One said, "it was dark and we went around the cameras."

One student was mad at another and keyed both sides of the other's new car. With the act caught on video from the outside PTZs overlooking the parking lot, the guilty boy agreed to a lengthy suspension and paid $2,800 to repaint the new car.

A creative student had been lurking in the halls, drawing lewd pictures on the corridor walls. Dressed in a large shirt and hood to hide identity, a blond tress suddenly fell from the hood and a camera revealed that the culprit was a girl, not a boy. Apprehension soon followed.

A known sex offender drove onto the campus and entered through a rear door left open for field activities.

He was literally caught with his pants down watching girls participate in an athletic event in the gym [really classy writing there, guys, but anyway]. He fled but was apprehended. He remained in denial until his adventure was revealed frame-by-frame in the passing video of 12 cameras that tracked him constantly. The footage was turned over to the courts to document the person as a social menace.

Students now rarely leave campus without a pass as they commonly did previously, or even smoke a cigarette near a camera. Substance abuse and aggressive behavior have declined. Bullying in the weight room has stopped, and the campus is now graffiti-free [Nirvana!!]. Locker-room theft has been virtually eliminated with none reported at all so far in 2004 after several arrests were made. Access control with traditional, mechanical doors is now easier since all doors are under surveillance.

One video capture did not even occur on school grounds. Across the street from the school, more than 100 yards away, is a foreign car garage where a man tried to steal a car from the lot. The camera caught him breaking into the car, and he was arrested. It is now not uncommon for a teacher or school executive to inquire, after an event occurred, "Did the video catch it?" Inevitably, the answer is yes.

The municipal police in Newtown have an officer assigned to the high school as the school resources officer. The officer's job is to respond to calls from Novia and other staff members regarding crimes like vandalism and theft. He investigates, makes arrests and determines what legal action should be taken. The working hours of this officer could be used in other areas of law enforcement if the high school did not demand his time. As a result, the officer's high school time is a cost to Newtown's residents and is buried in the tax rate.

After the video surveillance system was installed, the officer claimed that the system "not only helped to reduce the crimes that had been so ongoing among the student body, but that it has done a good job of facilitating increased campus safety."

The success of the video system is now unquestioned. Even when the school decided not to monitor the cameras during school hours to avoid violation of privacy, the system has quelled bad behavior. It alerts students to the constant presence of the cameras, and the afterschool monitoring documents whatever events occurred that day, ensuring enforcement will follow.
All students now feel secure on school grounds, according to [Saint] Novia. The system has received his complete blessing, and also the eventual approval of the school staff that was originally a bit reluctant ["Bite me, BOE!"] to consider video surveillance. No privacy issues have emerged at all. The staff and student body have accepted the positive aspects of the system, and the school has recognized the resulting money saved for the school's operating budget.

[Saint] Novia estimates the system has easily paid for itself in only its first year. Unlike [costly, unnecessary jobs for] guards who must be paid every year, a video system is paid for just once, and those savings extend each succeeding year until the system is upgraded or replaced - in about eight years, according to J.P. Freeman Co.'s research on the average replacement cycle. With the money the school has saved in its maintenance budgets, it is now ordering 16 more cameras and two DVRs to eliminate some blind spots, expand exterior viewing coverage and enlarge its recording capacity.

Since installation labor was paid from within the school's existing operating budget, the system equipment itself cost Newtown just less than $60,000 for several products: Panasonic WV-CW474S cameras and WJ-HD500AV/240 DVRs, Pelco PT570P cameras, Toshiba IK645-A cameras and Silent Witness V28R and C12CC600 cameras.

From an objective research perspective on the Newtown experience, there is everything to be gained and nothing to lose from a well-designed system. Although met with initial disapproval, the installation has been a success. "Our goal is to provide a safe environment for our students and staff. We use our video footage only if questions or issues arise with regard to student safety or protection of school property," Manfredonia said. "We are very pleased with this service and our security system."

Reed, the now-retired superintendent, echoes Manfredonia's [who??!] opinion. "We've always been proud of the openness and availability of the high school," he explains. "Students and parents use the school at many times of day, so we needed to have a record of that activity as well as what transpired during the school day, and I am happy to hear that it has worked."

[link to www.securitysales.com]

====

Postscript: According to then-and-now Superintendent Reed, as a result of Sandy Hook, security camera systems will now be installed in ALL Newtown schools. All.

Cui bono?

[link to www.newtownbee.com]

P.S. Since the NHS video surveillance system is clever enough to catch even activity across the road--where's that footage of the purple van driving up to NHS the morning of 12/14 as reported by several?

According to CBS2 reporter Tony Aiello--who, incidentally, has covered a number of other crucial Sandy Hook stories including the Barth house fire--the Sandy Hook shooter was buzzed into the school by the principal who recognized the shooter as the "son of a colleague."

Could it have actually been the nephew or brother in law of a colleague?

Bill Manfredonia was principal of Newtown High School, and Jeanette Manfredonia (on Yogananda St) is a current teacher at Newtown High School.

Couldn't it have been that the shooter was buzzed in based on being a relative of a colleague?

Some police reports have the shooters entering at 9:30 a.m:

"Police said the gunman entered at 9:30 a.m. and the shooting was over in about 10 minutes."

[link to www.usatoday.com]

School doors are probably locked, as Sally Cox clearly stated, every morning at 9:15 a.m.; Thorburg may have come before 9:30. Nute's first dispatch isn't until 9:36; what happened during the first six minutes of shooting?

Where did those 911 calls go?

CSP are making a big deal about the time it took NPD to wait for ten shots; what about those first six minutes?

While without further evidence there remain other possibilities, at this time there is one, and only one father, who best fits the description of the Sandy Hook shooter.

He was there 12/14--fleeing the scene, in fact--and his wife was there, too.

How many people 1) had a daughter at SHS, 2) have relatives who are teachers & therefore "colleagues" of SHS staff, 3) were AT Sandy Hook when the shooting started, and 4) had a wife who was ALSO at SHS, 5) were caught running away from the scene with another man who 6) was said by POLICE to be an "uncle of a girl" at SHS?

It's kind of staggering, really. If that's a coincidence, it's the biggest coincidence of the entire, sordid day.

And if you were the relative and or father of a child there as the shooting began, wouldn't you be trying to locate and get your child out of there, not run away through the woods?

You are SO right, and any parent here knows WE would be the ones breaking glass.

Because this father was standing outside the school on his way to make gingerbread, right? And the glass was ALREADY SHOT OUT OF THE BUILDING, right? Enough to get "Adam" in - so why didn't the dad and uncle go right in through the hole?? Or reach around an open the door like the shooters allegedly did?

No...they say the giant, gaping hole, heard someone shooting at their daughter/niece (who, btw, was completely unharmed that day), and--ran around the back side of the building. Because that's a better way to reach her, right?

What, and have to break out a bunch of windows and then climb through those windows and then find her?? Are you kidding? If ANYONE here heard shooting inside a school where their daughter was, I have no doubt they would run straight into the building through the gaping, broken, front entryway glass and STRAIGHT at whatever asshole was doing the shooting.

Dawn Hochspruing ran AT the shooter. But this guy runs away from the noise and behind the school?

Give me a break. You are SO right. A real dad would never do this.

Oh yeah - and the uncle kept running - all the way to the woods. Because he was trying to reach his niece.

I truly and honestly am still open to the Vollmer thing. But there is just so much more to go on with this other angle.

If you have time, it might be interesting to go back through internet history and look at where the Vollmer theory was first raised. I realize a lot of threads will be people genuinely considering the Vollmers as suspects, but I bet a few aren't.

Then ck out the internet eruption over whether Manfredonia was "wearing camo." There was practically an entire online cult devoted to making posts about "personally talking" to Manfredonia and "proving" he wasn't wearing camo.

As if, you know, not wearing camo proved he didn't do it.

It was like the one, tiny desperate fact they thought could save him from suspicion...and he/they shouted all over the internetz about it.

A little too loudly, imo.

I really don't care if he was wearing camo. He was arrested fleeing the scene along with another guy who is probably a male relative.

Here's a classic, apologist example:

"alan alda's sleeve • 8 months ago −
Well, Chris Manfredonia has given a statement, to the LA Times. According to the LA Times report, he arrived at the school while the shooting was in progress, about 10:35am, to, as he said, make gingerbread houses. Another class was doing it at 2:30pm, but his was doing it at 10:45am. He ran around the playground side (not the gym side) of the building when he heard shooting inside because his daughter's classroom was in the back on that side. He couldn't get in, but police arrived within minutes, and so he was detained for about 10 minutes by police, positively ID'd, and released. He was never in the woods, was not wearing camo pants, was never put in a police car. He was reunited with his daughter."

Aside from the fact the times are way off, police were still talking about Manfredonia much later in the day--over the air. LONG after 10 minutes from his apprehension.

It's true, he wasn't in the woods, probably wasn't wearing camo. That's because his buddy was. His buddy who is an "uncle coming to see his niece" and who, like Mr. M., was running WITH him away from the scene.

"They're coming at me, down Crestwood!!...I've got a subject, I've got him proned out...!"

And then he says (I'm imagining), "By the way, the other guy who ran past you and you're now pulling out of the woods is straight up--he's with me. Just stick him in the front of the squad."

"And when he looks in parents eyes and says, 'I didn't do it,' don't worry about that -- cuz he doesn't know what 'it' is any more than I do. All we know is we didn't do it."

From Fox 43, Central PA:

“CBS News reports that a potential second shooter is in custody and that SWAT is now investigating the home of the suspect...A witness tells WFSB-TV that a second man was taken out of the woods in handcuffs wearing a black jacket and camouflage pants and telling parents on the scene, “I did not do it.”

That home would, indeed, be on Yogananda. Just not 36 Yogananda. And the home of the other suspect (the one cuffed on the ground on Crestwood) would be just around the corner.

Access to both, in fact, would be blocked by police sealing off access to "36 Yogananda."

And if it's NOT them, fair play, but that's some really, really bad luck...or, really good.

So what of the 13th - were the M's there?

As it turns out, one interview with Mrs. M quotes her as saying that just the day before, Thursday, she was "wrapping presents" for Mrs. Hochsprung and other teachers.

Possibly a story set in place to justify her presence at the school Thursday, should it ever come up?

Vance later said there was "no evidence of any altercation." Nice little dodge there, but of course what he's pretending to be referring to is that there was no evidence of any altercation between LANZA and staff.

Multiple sources cite an altercation with SOMEONE on 12/13, however:

====
Senior law enforcement correspondent John Miller has been talking to his law enforcement sources; he joins me now for more. John, are you hearing anything abut this "altercation?"

John Miller: "Yeah, I spoke to a senior law enforcement source this evening about that, and he said 'What we're focused on, was there was some kind of argument between people in the office, and people in the office of that school are dead today." He said, 'The key is to figure out if Lanza was part of that, present for that involved," and he said right now they don't have any indication that he was."

[link to www.dailymotion.com]
====

Sorry, that should read, "...present for that, involved."

As of three weeks ago, Mr. M. is leaving the high school he has worked at for 16 years.

[link to www.fairfieldcitizenonline.com]

He's moving on to another school.

Isn't it kind of an odd time to switch high schools, though? The year just started up - to leave now?

Apologies to all innocent people standing unfairly in the spotlight's glare, but in the absence of a real investigation, we have little choice.

Well--we have a choice. We can say, "Ah well, Sandy Hook happened, someone did it, let's move on."

But apathetic and disengaged is not a good way to be.

Vollmer works directly for Michael Bloomberg.

Bloomberg was out and about screaming for gun control within an hour or two of the Sandy Hook event. Yet he neglected to mention that his event planner's (Vollmer) mother teaches in the school. Politicians never fail to personalize events and issues to further their agendas...well, except this one time. I find that omission to be a little more than peculiar.

My money is on Bloomberg being the mastermind behind Sandy Hook, and I think he was hoping to not only help accomplish gun control, but to take credit for it as the cornerstone of his 2016 presidential run

Scott Vollmer actually worked for Waldorf Astoria Hotels at the time of the shooting, for what it's worth. Asst. Director of Food & Beverage.

It seems clear to me that a family--father, in particular--was in dispute with the school. This father had a dispute so significant, in fact, that it involved four staff members--three of whom were shot the next day. Eyewitnesses (obviously employees of the school, and/or the wife of the man in question) reported the 12/13 fracas to investigators on 12/14.

Why would it even be brought up?

Think about it: where did the information come from that there had been a fight at the school the day before?

The people saying that, the staff of Sandy Hook, walked past the dead body of Adam Lanza.

Why would they look down, see a dead guy they've never seen before, and say, "Well...there WAS this fight yesterday with the husband who's wife we were meeting with today when first shots were fired."

They wouldn't. The shooters got away. The reason staff brought up the 12/13 fight to media and police is because they clearly felt it was related.

The fight was with a father, whose wife met with staff the next day, and then those staff were shot. There were more than 90 other teachers the shooter could have shot--but he chose the ones with whom a fight happened the day before.

One teacher was so unnerved by the fight and threats 12/13, that she unexpectedly stayed home.

Eyewitnesses said one shooter wore camo pants and a dark jacket; a guy in camo pants and dark jacket was yanked out of the woods. He'd been running with Manfredonia.

Media and police said it was "a brother" who got pulled out of the woods. Months later, police said the guy in the woods was an "uncle who came to see his niece."

I don't think it could be much clearer that Mr. M. and his brother (or brother in law) are the prime suspects. I'll definitely accept Scott Vollmer as an additional suspect.