Mike Powers Sandy Hook Interview Debunked Part II
This article is a response to an interview by Joyce Riley of Mike Powers regarding the shooting at Sandy Hook. I am going by the transcript put out by insanemedia. It isn't word for word, but is for the most part pretty close. It was getting long so I am going to split it up into two parts.This is Part II. The part of the interview reviewed in this part begins at the 39 minute mark. Part I of my review is here.
CAUTION: I have not suffered a personal loss from this tragedy and so at times speak about some of these issues very bluntly. More so than someone might if they were affected by the shooting. Please keep that in mind. I in no way want to cause anyone additional grief.
Simultaneous mass casualty drill
Mike Powers: "You have one call and get a massive level of response, which is one of the reasons that there are people out there suggesting that this was actually part of a mass casualty drill, that was taking place 35 min. away from Sandy Hook.”
The alleged "mass casualty drill," also often referred to as an alleged "active shooter drill," or "terror drill" is in reference to the following event listed on the State of Connecticut's Department of Emergency Services & Public Protection's website.
This event, however, was not a drill. It is clearly listed as a class or course. Here you can find a description of it. And in fact you can actually take the class online if you want to. Taking a 30 person free class open to just about anyone, it seems, and morph it into a massive government conspiracy driven mass casualty drill is wildly inventive.
Part of the allure of this piece of evidence is the fact that it was taught on the same day as the shooting. And that may be coincidental if the class hadn't also been taught five other times. Some might also find it peculiar that the class has suddenly been stopped being taught, but again it is important to understand the context of the class. It was taught exactly six times for a reason. Once for each of Connecticut's five regional EMS Councils and one additional time on the weekend for anyone who could not make a weekday class. See the schedule below.
Putnam County Active Shooter Drill
There was also an actual active shooter drill that was taking place nearby on the same day that some people also find suspicious.
By grim coincidence, even as the terrible events were unfolding in Newtown on Friday morning, the Putnam County Emergency Response Team (“ERT”) happened to be assembled for regular training in Carmel, and team members were at that very moment engaged in a mock scenario of an active-shooter in a school.
Carmel, NY, is over 20 miles away from Sandy Hook, so I'm not sure how "nearby" I'd consider that, but more importantly, the Putnam team didn't even respond to Sandy Hook.
When news broke of the Newtown shooting, the Putnam County ERT commander called Newtown Police and offered to have the ERT respond to the Sandy Hook school, but that response was not needed because Connecticut police had already secured the scene.
Considering that they didn't even respond, it again, seems pretty inventive to attach it any sort of relevance. And again, while it may seem coincidental that it was taking place the same day, it is important to recognize that these sorts of drills are always taking place.
While it isn't specific to Putnam County, you can, for example, check upcoming events for New York's Department of Homeland Security Emergency Services and you will find they have "Active Shooter" exercises on Feb 4-5, Feb 7-8, Feb 15, Mar 4-5, Mar 7-8, Mar 26-27, etc.
Mike Powers: "...at 9:37, they said the first call came in, at 9:41 was the initial dispatch that they gave to the responding officer, that said they believe what appears to be gunfire from outside the school. Okay, that was a huge red flag. If they hear gunfire outside of the school, why did not any of the neighbors hear it and why didn’t they call?”
This part is a little confusing. At first I thought Mr. Powers was suggesting that officers reporting hearing shots fired outside of the school. Listening to the audio, however, I think he was simply saying that the officers were outside the school from where they heard shots.
The early mentions of shots fired from the radio traffic are shown below. It appears that Mr. Powers is referring to the call that comes in at 9:40:30.
9:35:53 a.m. - Dispatch: “Sandy Hook School, Caller’s indicated she thinks someone is shooting in the building.”
9:36:15: “The individual I have on the phone is continuing to hear what he believes to be gunshots.”
9:40:30: “Shooter’s apparently still shooting in office area. Dickerson Drive.”
It is not, however, clear who is providing that information or where they are. There is no way to tell if it is an officer right outside the building. Even if it is, being able to hear gunfire that close to the building does not mean neighbors would be able to hear it. And as has already been mentioned, we do not know how many calls came in to 911.
Mike Powers: "Secondly, you’re going to tell me that [your guy's] standing right outside [your] window? You can look at Google Earth, you can go to Newtown Connecticut, find the school, it’s not hard to do guys, check the helicopter footage use your minds eye. [offices are always at the] front of the school, you want to tell me you didn’t hear a guy bust out hundreds of shots and you couldn’t tell it was gunfire?
This part is also a little confusing. The transcript was off a little bit. He seems to be suggesting that people sat in the office completely oblivious to hundreds of rounds of gunfire, which is of course ludicrous. Hate to repeat it but we don't know who did or didn't call 911.
Joyce Riley: “We are talking about the law enforcement response to the scene, there was an exercise taking place about 25 miles from there so conveniently everybody had their military weapons and equipment ready to go at that time."
Actually, they do not use live weapons and ammunition during the drills, so they may have been inconveniently farther away from their real gear then they otherwise would be. I don't really know. Either way, as has already been mentioned, they did not respond to Sandy Hook, so the point is moot.
Mike Powers: "Adam Lanza allegedly heard them coming, or noticed them coming, and offed himself. That was allegedly the end of the gunfire, which we also found to be a blatant lie.”
Which part exactly is supposed to be a lie? That Adam "offed himself?" That the gunfire ended after Adam offed himself?
Mike Powers: "...you can hear the police officers saying they are coming right at me, there are two of them. Teachers reported they saw 2 shadows coming up the left side of the auditorium there, there is raw helicopter footage where you can see police chasing someone off into the woods."
There are several pieces of information which suggest that there were people outside of the school on the day of the shooting. (1) the report by a teacher of shadows running past the gym (2) several police dispatch audio clips(3) video of police allegedly chasing someone in the woods (4) testimony of a man being led out of the woods (5) a handcuffed man by the police station (6) a man in camo pants, and (7) a handcuffed man in the front of a police cruiser.
Most of this evidence is pretty hazy. It is also important to point out that many of these alleged individuals could be the same person. The camo pants man could very well be the man led out of the woods and the man who was handcuffed in the cruiser.
People being outside the school or in the woods is not terrible surprising. It is only by a leap of the imagination that these alleged people become additional shooters or CIA handlers or aliens or whatever else they can come up with.
There are some explanations for the people who were allegedly detained, but, for now, I find them as hazy as the evidence that they existed in the first place, so I see little reason in putting too much effort into it. Quite simply there just isn't enough evidence to examine.
Lt. Vance has said that people may have been detained, but there were no additional arrests having to do with the incident.
Lt. Paul Vance: "If we found anyone that was in the woods cutting wood there would be -- they would be detained pending the investigation. So there were no other arrests associated with this investigation that occurred. OK?"
Mike Powers: "...you can see an officer removing a weapon from the trunk which amounted to be Christopher Rodia’s car. They ran the plate. Now they are trying to say, oh it was Radio crosstalk, it wasn’t actually Rodia’s car. Well, absolutely it was.”
Police dispatch audio of the Sandy Hook shooting was put on YouTube by Radioman911TV from tracks provided by RadioReference.com. In the video description, Radioman911TV specifically makes the following comment:
*NOTE: This recording also contains police radio traffic from Fairfield County unrelated to this incident. Please read the letter below posted with permission from Greenwich PD with regards to one aspect of this.
Your upload to YouTube relative to the Newtown CT Shooting radio traffic has caused quite a stir as it relates to a Mr. Christopher Rodia. I'm not sure where you sourced your feed, but the traffic related to Mr. Rodia is from a 800 MHz six-channel trunked LMR system in use in Greenwich, CT. Greenwich is approximately 45 miles away from Newtown. The Greenwich system carries only municipal Greenwich traffic (public safety and non-public safety) and is in no way connected to the state's 800 MHz trunked system or Newtown's.
I am certain of this because after the matter (and all of the Internet Conspiracy Theory buzz - just google "Christopher Rodia") was brought to our attention, we went back and checked our recordings for December 14. In addition to just recognizing the voices involved as Greenwich Police Officers and Dispatchers, we have all of the audio from our recording system that matches all of the "Rodia" traffic (and some of the other unrelated-to-Newtown casualty call traffic that occurs at the same time.)
In any event, I'm sure you'll want to help clarify this matter. The "Rodia" traffic is definitely contemporaneous - but from miles away. This has unfortunately additionally clouded an already confusing and emotional issue. Worse, it has brought considerable (and wholly undeserved) angst to Mr. Rodia. Anything you can do to help clear this up would certainly be appreciated.
Feel free to message me back with any questions. I can also be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Capt. Mark Kordick
Commander - Operations Division
Greenwich Police Dept.
Radioman911TV then also specifically states that some of the recorded audio is unrelated to the incident.
"There is routine CT State Police and municipal radio traffic taking place during this recording, so not everything heard is related to the incident."
Even without knowing this, it seems pretty obvious that there is radio traffic in this recording that is not related to the Sandy Hook incident. The "notify DOT they got a speed limit sign down" (@9:56:53) is a good example.
Mike Powers: “I don’t know of a single jurisdiction that does not have any emergency tactical frequency, that they switch to. See basically what happens on a day to day basis, you have traffic officers who are out there on patrol, you will have a primary operating frequency with city county dispatch. If something goes down, you will be directed by dispatch, to switch to a secondary frequency, so that they don’t clog up the primary net..."
I don't know if this is true or not. It sounds logical, however. Either way it isn't relevant. The recording collects audio from more than a single frequency.
Overall, it seems pretty clear. Christopher Rodia was stopped in Greenwhich on a routine traffic stop near to the time of the shooting. The car with license plate 872-YEO was the car at the scene of the crime, not Rodia's car.
Adam Lanza's trunk
Mike Powers: "A couple days later, as the RAW helicopter footage came out, and what the mainstream media had done, they zoomed in very very tightly on that one individual that was pulling the rifle out of the trunk.”
Pulling something out of the trunk seems far more interesting and relevant than are random figures in a parking lot. Seems reasonable to focus on that.
Mike Powers: “When you see the RAW helicopter footage, there are 4 other identities, whatever agency they were with at this point. Unidentified people standing right next to him that were wearing full chemical gear."
Well, it was either full chemical gear or just $5 disposable Tyvek coveralls. Those are basically the same thing, right?
Mike Powers: “And it is just one of those bizarre things, why would they conceal that from the general public in their initial reporting, when they showed you how he pulled that rifle out of the trunk?"
If they had been zoomed out rather than focused on the trunk, than Mike Powers would now be complaining that they were trying to hide whatever was pulled out of the trunk. Focusing on what is of greater interest is not an attempt at deception.
Mike Powers: "All of a sudden, here comes the RAW helicopter footage and there are 4 guys in CHEM gear. What did they think they were going to find in the back of that car?”
It's entirely possible that they were wearing full Chemical suits. Maybe they were worried about finding something in the car. However, it seems much more likely that they were simply wearing suits typically worn by crime scene units. Women showing up to the crime scene in skirts and high heels only happens in TV Land. In real life, a protective suit is standard gear that not only protects the crime scene from contamination but also protects the wearer from the crime scene.
Mike Powers: "The initial report said it was 2 handguns, a Glock 10mm and a Sig Sauer. Then they said they found an AR15 in the back of the car out in front of the school, but that this weapon had not been brung into the school and was not used. They reported this ALL day long. Then they realized why not take full advantage of the tragedy, and this is when they reported that the AR15 had indeed been brung into the school.”
I'm not sure there is anyone out there who would claim that the media did a good job that day. All of the major networks got at least one major piece of information wrong, including NPR, which I generally think is the best of the bunch. This incorrect information included Nancy Lanza being a teacher at Sandy Hook, the weapons used/brought into the school, and the number of victims, among other things.
If Mr. Powers would like to make the case that the media did a poor job, than this evidence might be helpful, but evidence of a conspiracy, it is not. Unlike the media narrative, the official narrative has been perfectly consistent.
Mike Powers: "When we started hearing this, 11 shots, and here you have to start thinking in physical dimensions, you are talking about little tiny kids. They would have been blown to pieces. With 11 shots, there wouldn’t be a whole lot left, not at that range.”
The number of times each victim was shot is one of the biggest points that is consistently misreported by just about everyone. Unless, Dr. Carver has made statements elsewhere, this is the only statement made regarding injuries:
Dr. Carver: "I only did seven of the autopsies. The victims I had ranged from 3 to 11 wounds a piece. I only saw two of them with close range shooting. But, you know, that's a sample. I really don't have detailed information on the rest of the injuries."
Not only did he only do the seven autopsies (at the time of the statement) but he specifically said wounds, not number of times shot. While I am assuming that all the wounds were from bullets, they may not have all been primary wounds. They could have been wounds from bullets (or bullet fragments) which had passed through other targets, ricocheted, etc.
Does any of that really matter? No, not really. We don't know what condition the bodies were in. Some of them could have been in very bad shape, but "blown to pieces," I think Mr. Powers has been watching too many movies.
Joyce Riley: “According to reports, Nancy Lanza and Adam went to the gun range to shoot these weapons, yet when they went to all the gun ranges in that area no one has ever seen her or him at a gun range shooting weapons. Nobody can verify that they had been to a gun range."
Ms. Riley's claim that they "went to all the gun ranges" is not substantiated by any evidence. The link included only documents having gone to a single range. Ms. Riley mentions that the Wall Street Journal contacted every range withing 50 miles and found no evidence of Nancy or Adam having visited them (not in the transcript, but is in the audio). I have seen this claim repeated in many places, but I have found no actual link to the Wall Street Journal actually having done that. As far as I can tell this is simply a fabrication.
There is, on the other hand, reports by officials that they did in fact visit gun ranges.
The Newtown area also seems to have some issues with informal gun ranges in the area, and some of these reported informal ranges are less than 3 miles away from the Lanza home. It is possible that the Lanzas went to one of these ranges.
So far, the evidence for or against the Lanzas visiting gun ranges seems tenuous at best.
Joyce Riley: "...could I reasonably pull off 4 – 11 shots per child?”
It has already been mentioned, but it is worth repeating. The ME, Dr. Carver, only said that there were 3-11 wounds per child of the seven autopsies he himself performed. That doesn't mean there were 3-11 wounds per victim, nor does it mean that every wound meant a bullet was shot. Single bullets could have caused multiple wounds. Nor, do we know the wounds suffered by the other victims who Dr. Carver did not perform autopsies on.
Mike Powers: “I’m going to say absolutely not. I can give you a list of several reasons why. Number one, first and foremost the physiological trauma on the human nervous system of discharging this amount of rounds. You have to think about the weight of the weapon, between 6-10 pounds, you are talking about weightlifting. He allegedly done this hundreds and hundreds of times according to a reputable source, that is the Connecticut State police LT Paul Vance. This is my first reason to say no."
Personally, I think, Mr. Powers is exaggerating the alleged difficulty in operating the AR-15. I have watched a number of videos on YouTube of small children firing AR-15s, and as has already been mentioned numerous times, we have no idea what the physical stature or capabilities of Adam Lanza were at the time of the attack.
Even if he was relatively weak, Mr. Powers should be perfectly familiar with the affects of adrenalin on the system. There is no reason to suspect Adam wouldn't have been juiced up enough to give him the capacity to manage what was a relatively short event.
Mike Powers: “I have actually spoken to a couple of psychiatric professionals about it, and they said when it comes down to shooting in adults, it’s not unbelievable, but there is a psychological block that comes into play when children are involved. Even with the most psychotic individual. Could he have done it? I just honestly do not believe so."
This is a strange point to make. Unless Mr. Powers believes that no children actually died (which he might) than someone did in fact kill a bunch of kids, which means that someone in fact must be capable of it.
Plus, it isn't like it hasn't happened before: Kelly Elementary School, Carlsbad, CA; Amish school shooting, Bart Township, PA; Dunblane school massacre, Dunblane, Scotland; Cleveland school massacre, Stockton, CA; Oakland Elementary school shooting, Greenwood, SC; Hubbard Woods school shooting, Winnetka, IL; Kandahar massacre, Panjwai, Afghanistan; to name a few. Seems pretty clear that shooting children is well within the realm of psychological possibility, unfortunate as that may be.
Why did no one see him approach?
Mike Powers: “How is it, that a person wearing all this scary stuff and a mask and a rifle, pistols, plenty of magazines and God only knows what else he had on him. HOW is it possible for this to have happened? How many people are on average [in a school office] at any given time?”
Joyce Riley: “Exactly, on the school ground, kids are late for school or whatever. Somebody must have seen that scary guy coming in.”
Well, for one, he parked right at the front entrance. It is also reasonable to assume that he made sure no one else was outside at the time. Is that possible? I don't really know, but unless Mr. Powers has performed some sort of analysis to determine the prevalence of people outside of elementary schools in the early morning, he doesn't know either. Anecdotally, I drive by elementary schools, and other schools, on a regular basis and it seems to me that, in general, there usually are not people loitering outside.
Mike Powers: “Well the entire front entry of the school is made of huge panes of glass. Even law enforcement guys admit it that upon their arrival, the glass was intact. They in fact shot their way in, busted the glass to gain access. That tells you right there, if he would have compromised the front door of the school, why wouldn’t the responding officers just walk in?"
At this point, Mr. Powers seems to just be making stuff up. One of the first radio calls we hear by an officer arriving at the school states that the glass at the entrance is broken.
0936 Units responding at Sandy Hook School. The front glass has been broken. We're unsure why.
To my knowledge there are no reports that officers "shot their way in." There are reports of officers breaking windows to gain entry to the building, but no specifics as to where those entry points where. From a Dec 15, 2012 news conference:
Lt. Paul Vance: "...as the rescue crews arrived, the active shooting teams entered the school, they entered the school from several different points, and it necessitated forcing their way in to gain access...Hence, law enforcement broke many windows."
At that same conference, Lt. Vance was asked about the shattered glass at the entrance and this was his reply:
Lt. Paul Vance: "We have established the point of entry. I can tell you it's believed [Adam] was not voluntarily let into the school at all, that he forced his way into the school. That's as far as we can go on that."
In another interview on Dec 15, with Lt. Paul Vance and Lt. George Sinko (Newtown police), Lt. Sinko echoes the sense that Adam made his entry by breaking through the window at the front entrance.
Lt George Sinko: "It appears that [Lanza] shattered the glass adjacent to the doors to enter the building."
And so officers entering through the front obviously would have just walked in.
Mike Powers: "Why is it that the people inside those rooms, where those big huge panes of glass are, I mean you see this guy standing in this imposing stance, and not one of the teachers managed to pick up a cell phone?”
That is assuming that someone actually saw him. Reports suggest that staff were in a meeting at the time. And even if someone saw him, his breach more than likely was very rapid. They may have been shocked. They may have ran for cover or hid. They may have called 911. As I've said numerous times, we just don't know how many calls came in.
Additionally, it is hard to tell, but it appears that the office is off to the side a bit and not facing the front entrance directly. Even if it does, that doesn't in anyway mean that someone is sitting there with eyes on the entryway.
There's no such thing as bravery
Mike Powers: "The school psychiatrist and the principal Dawn Hochsprung went out to bravely encounter this mad man shooter, coming through the door. You know what I’m just gonna call one massive immeasurable stinking steaming pile of bull. I don’t care who you are, you are not going to walk up to somebody, dripping in guns and masks, you are not going to walk up to somebody like this, like 'hey young man, you should stop what you are doing right now!' Yeah right you’re going to run like hell.”
You know what is a "massive immeasurable stinking steaming pile of bull"? The fact that Mike Powers, an alleged super Rambo guy, US Naval Law Enforcement, US Army Infantry reconnaissance, counter-proliferation, wilderness survival, personal defense, tactics and firearms trainer, doesn't believe in bravery.
How about the recent shooting at Taft High School, where teacher, Ryan Heber, not only didn't run away, but managed to convince the shooter to drop his weapon, even after shots were already fired.
Or the 2011 Tucson shooting that included Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The shooter was subdued by unarmed bystanders, one of whom was a 74-year-old veteran who had already been shot.
Or the Deer Creek Middle School shooting. After shooting two students, the shooter was tackled and subdued by a teacher, David Benke.
Or the Weston High School shooting. The shooter was first disarmed of his shotgun by a school custodian. The shooter still armed with a revolver was then confronted by the unarmed principal who was shot but still managed to get the gun away from the shooter. The Principal, John Alfred Klang, later died from his wounds.
Pine Middle School shooting: Gunman confronted by unarmed teacher, Jencie Fagan, who convinced the shooter to put his weapon down.
Campbell County High School shooting: Gunman disarmed by unarmed teacher.
Columbia High School shooting: Two teachers, John Sawchuck and Michael Bennett, charge towards a shotgun barrel to disarm a gunman. One teacher later says, "We don't think we did anything unusual. As an educator and as a father, you protect kids. That's what we did."
Rocori High School shooting: Gym teacher, Mark Johnson, confronts a shooter who had already shot students and ordered him to surrender.
Fort Gibson Middle School shooting: Gunman subdued by unarmed teacher, Ronnie Holuby.
W. R. Myers High School shooting: Gunman subdued by gym coach, Cheyno Finnie.
Bethel Regional High School shooting: Two teachers, Reyne Athanas and Robert Morris, try to convince gunman to put his weapon down even with a gun pointed at them.
Frontier Middle School shooting: Gym coach, Jon Lane, enters a classroom where shots were fired and offers to be gunman's hostage, then is able to disarm gunman.
Seems to me that lots of heroes step up in these types of events, and, personally, I think Mr. Powers owes them an apology.
How was illegal AR-15 registered in CT?
Mike Powers: “They are talking about how all these weapons were registered to Nancy Lanza, I had actually called a couple people who had spread that message. I said you guys in Connecticut have an assault weapon ban in place, so how do you legally register an illegal weapon?"
If Mr. Powers really has the experience he claims to have than there is no way he can honestly ask this question. He would know the answer as well as anyone.
The federal "assault weapons" ban worked by banning either specific names and models of guns or by banning weapons with certain features. A weapon was banned by features if it had two or more of the following features: pistol-grip, bayonet mount, folding or telescoping stock, flash suppressor, or grenade launcher. The Connecticut ban is similar to the federal ban. You can see its specifics here. The Connecticut ban does not specifically ban by name the Bushmaster XM15-E2S allegedly used by Adam, so as long as it passed the feature ban, it was perfectly legal in Connecticut.
The photo below shows an AR-15 being displayed at a legislative subcommittee hearing to review gun laws, at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, CT, Monday, Jan. 28, 2013. It is a Bushmaster AR-15 allegedly of the same make and model used by Adam Lanza. Note that it only has one of the features from the list above (a pistol-grip).
Some Gene Rosen bashing
Mike Powers: “One point that [Gene Rosen] made in his multiple attention whoring interviews with the media..."
I think Mr. Powers is beginning to show his true colors.
Mike Powers: "...he said I heard a Staccato fire, pop pop pop. There is 2 questions I would like to pose to him: 1. If Adam Lanza was inside the school, it’s feasible to suggest that the noise of the discharge of the weapon would be suppressed, at least sufficient enough to keep Eugene from hearing it..."
It is relatively well-established that Adam shattered the glass next to the door to gain entry. It is highly likely he did so by shooting out the glass and so some shots would have been fired outside. It is also possible that the shots in the entry lobby were audible from Gene's house, but the shots from deeper in the school were not.
Mike Powers: "...if he was all the way the up the street in his residence, nearly a tenth of a mile away."
Is a "tenth of a mile" supposed to sound far? Because it doesn't sound far to me at all. In actuality, Gene's house is approximately 1,000 feet from the entrance of Sandy Hook Elementary, so that would be about a fifth of a mile. not that Mr, Powers seems terribly interested in accuracy, but I thought I'd mention it.
Mike Powers: "Second question to him would be: Sir, if you heard Staccato gunfire, coming from an elementary school, why the hell did you not pick up your phone and call ? Never once in his multiple interviews, did he state that he called Sandy Hook Elementary school, or Sandy Hook dispatch to report the crime. It’s the little details that matter.“
It's funny that Mr. Powers would say that "little details matter" when he is consistently innacurate with almost every single detail. Gene Rose, for instance, did NOT say he heard gunfire coming "from an elementary school." He simply said he heard gunfire and attributed it to obnoxious hunters.
I'm not sure where Mr. Powers lives, but where I live, if I called the police every time I heard gunfire, I'd be on the phone all the time, especially during hunting season. And being that Sandy Hook generally has zero crime, it isn't surprising that someone hearing gunshots would think obnoxious hunter vs. mass murderer at the elementary school. Linda Lyons, walking her dog near the school that morning, also heard shots but dismissed it as hunters.
Some Robbie Parker bashing
"Look at the guy by the name of Robbie Parker, and I hope and pray to God Mr. Parker that my voice is landing on your ears right now, because I’m deliberately calling you out, right here right now.”
Mr. Powers and Ms. Riley spend a fair bit of time on Robbie Parker bashing, but I am just not going to address it. There is no right answer for dealing with grief. There is no right way to behave after a tragedy. Until someone who is an expert on reading body language and grief management comes forward and says that there was something fishy about Mr. Parker's behavior, than I consider this contention to be pure meanness.
More of the possible is impossible
"you are talking about the physical impossibility of the timing that’s involved in this. With every second that ticks by, it makes the official story stink more and more and more. Do I believe he had enough time to pull this off? No, I do not.”
What one believes is irrelevant. As has been discussed in Part I of my review, an expert shooter could stand in a classroom door and accurately fire 90 rounds in 15 seconds. It is unlikely Lanza was anywhere near this proficienct, but even if it took him four times longer, that's still only a minute. If his movements to the two classrooms both took a minute and he spent a minute at each classroom, that's only four minutes he needed to carry out his attack. Now, I am not in anyway an expert, but, from what I do know, I see no reason that Adam's attack was anywhere close to an impossibility.
Additionally, Mr. Powers makes a comment in his interview (not in the transcript) where he states that Adam breaching the building would have taken up near 40 seconds. This to me sounds like a tremendously long amount of time. He could have fired 6 quick shots while walking up to the window and not even broken stride, which would have put him well into the building in under 10 seconds from the time of the first shot. If perhaps I am giving Adam's skill a bit too much credit, than I think Mr. Powers is giving him far too little. The reality is probably somewhere in between. My only point is that I see no impossibility in the timeline and, so far, Mr. Powers has only presented his opinion, which I just don't find very compelling.
Joyce Riley: “The school nurse, Sally Cox said that she was still locked in the closet at 1pm, before they brought her out. Now it seems to me, that Law enforcement would clear a facility in an event like this taking place. Why did this woman say she was locked in a closet until 1 pm? How could that possible happen?”
Sally Cox's testimony actually is a bit puzzling. That the officers clearing the building would miss her is surprising. Still, considering the frenzy of the event it certainly isn't an impossibility. Perhaps after doing a headcount they realized someone wasn't accounted for and went back in to double-check. Odd, yes, but not proof of conspiracy.
"I’m not ready to be lectured about my gun rights, and how I’m expected to give up my entire life, much less then 250 years of the nations privileged rights and traditions...It’s time for the American People to wake UP and realize that the Presidency has been usurped. We are under attack. We are literally at war for our freedom right now, this very day...Ladies and Gentleman all I can tell you, whether you believe it or not, whether you subscribe to it or not, this nation is currently a nation at war..."
Well it took a while, but now, finally, Mr. Powers has uncorked his jar of crazy sauce.
It is interesting that Mike Powers is so interested in putting everyone and everything having to do with Sandy Hook under a microscope, and yet he himself seems to be the only enigma present. Who is this guy exactly? His bio offered by Joyce Riley is quite impressive and yet a search for any mention of him outside of this interview turned up absolutely nothing. We can postulate that he is operating under a pseudonym, but, personally, I find that unacceptable. Since he is essentially being presented as an expert, there needs to be some way to challenge his credibility and he has offered none.
In this case it probably doesn't matter, because we have so much testimony by which to evaluate him. For the most part he seems to follow what is a rather typical conspiracy theory playbook. He starts with a pre-determined narrative (government conspiracy) and then attempts to cherry-pick information to support his claim. A teacher seeing shadows, for instance, becomes secondary shooters, despite there being a multitude of other explanations.
As for his alleged expertise, I find it hard to believe he is being honest. His claim that Adam Lanza was carrying his body weight in kit, is stupefyingly daft, and his apparent ignorance of some AR-15s being perfectly legal in CT just doesn't square with a person of his supposed knowledge.
He consistently presents difficulties as impossibilities. The difficulty of a small-framed person finding appropriate tactical gear is presented as if it were a near impossibility, and he consistently is simply wrong. His claim about home-schooling requirements in CT, for example, or his claim that the front glass at Sandy Hook was intact when officers arrived. The first is factually wrong, and the second is completely unsubstantiated by any evidence.
One thing he does do adequately, up until the end, and aside form a couple of comments, is to actually avoid specifying any agenda. For the most part he does at least focus on actual pieces of evidence, which makes his political tirade at the end somewhat unfortunate and in my opinion seriously taints his objectivity.
Overall, I consider his testimony to be exceedingly poor. He forces evidence to fit a narrative, invents evidence, sensationalizes the ordinary, turns minor difficulties into insurmountable obstacles, is on several occasions factually wrong, makes several statements that call his expertise into question (without providing a way to verify his credibility), and very clearly states an agenda which presents a significant barrier to objectivity.
More by this Author
An analysis of the propaganda techniques used by Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, in his essay "Stand and Fight."
America has nearly four times the weight in carriers compared to the rest of the world combined. The only countries with carriers who can even be considered as potential adversaries are Russia and India, whose two...
A look at historical sex ed funding as well as current (2011) funding. Examines student attitudes regarding sex ed based upon surveys from the site sex etc.