Category Archives: Sandy Hook massacre

Sandy Hook: The Highly Unlikely Suicide of Abe Dabela, Part 2.

This article concludes the two-part series on the murder of Abe Dabela, pronounced a suicide by Stephen J. Sedensky III. Readers are urged to read Part 1 before continuing further.

Above is a map of the crime scene where, on April 5, 2014, Attorney Abe Dabela died of a gunshot wound to the back of his head. Around midnight, he was traveling north on Umpawaug Road, a lonely two-lane strip, cloaked by trees. His overturned car was later found where the road crossed Mallory Lane, too small to merit mention of its name in the map above, but large enough to hide a car and allow a driver to lie in wait.

Part 1 of this series outlined the circumstances that preceded Dabela’s death:

  • His outspoken defense of the second amendment and property rights in at least three local venues.
  • His history of contention over a gun permit with Redding’s chief of police, Douglas Fuchs.
  • And, most significant to this article, the call he made to Wolfgang Halbig to discuss the 12-14-12 Sandy Hook incident approximately three weeks before his death. During this call, Mr. Halbig says that Dabela expressed concerns about Sandy Hook based on 16 questions Mr. Halbig had posed.

In June 2017, Danbury state’s attorney Stephen J. Sedensky, III ruled unequivocally that no homicide had occurred in Dabela’s death. Sedensky had already achieved notoriety as the overseer of the official report on the Sandy Hook incident, a document loaded with inconsistencies.

Sedensky’s ruling on Dabela’s death did not silence Dabela’s family who, in late 2018, were still seeking DNA samples from three firefighters who were later determined to have been at the crime scene.

Where there’s smoke. According to the Dabelas’ attorneys, “[Abe] Dabela had been intimidated by Redding firefighters at a local bar a few weeks before his death.”

Who were these firefighters? This has never been disclosed. But we can say for a certainty that Redding Ridge* Fire Department ambulance – as well as Douglas Fuchs – were present at another, possibly relevant event: the Sandy Hook event of 12-14-12.

We know this because it was documented in the investigation report that Douglas Fuchs submitted to the State of Connecticut. (The full PDF is provided below.) Three dates appear on the report:

  • February 20, 2013 is given as the date that Fuchs’s report was obtained by three Newtown police officers after being “left at the Newtown Police Department.” This date appears on the cover of the report.
  • 3/18/13 is given at the bottom of the report cover as the official “report date.”
  • 2/4/13 is given at the top of page 2 of the report as the “rpt date.”

This is confusing. Apparently it took over a month (from Feb. 20 till March 18, 2013) for Newtown’s Police Dept. to process the report after it was “left.” And it took Fuchs nearly two months (from Dec. 14, 2012 till Feb. 4, 2013) to write the report. In between was a gap of 16 days (from Feb. 4 till Feb. 20) while the report sat in a drawer. Why all the delays?

To review why Douglas Fuchs submitted such a report: He was present and very actively engaged at the Sandy Hook fire house and school during the time of the purported Sandy Hook massacre.

According to his report, he was in his police cruiser at about 9:30 a.m. on 12-14-12, headed to a meeting in the Hartford vicinity, when he overheard radio transmissions from the Newtown Police Department about a shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary. He offered his assistance through the Redding Police Dispatch.

Let’s examine some of the statements from Fuchs’s document and see where it takes us.

Fuchs’s children. As discussed in Part 1, Fuchs had children attending Sandy Hook Elementary School at the time. A glaring omission in his report is whether or not he sought information on their safety and whereabouts after hearing about the shooting.

CB: If he had, wouldn’t that be in the report? And if he hadn’t, why not?

Ambulances. “… I overheard another transmission on the Newtown frequency in which a Newtown Officer was asking for multiple ambulances as there were ‘bodies everywhere.’”

CB: As we know, those ambulances never actually made it to the school. Instead, they massed up at the firehouse on Riverside Drive, about a tenth of a mile away. So if there were “bodies everywhere,” where were the bodies? At the firehouse?

Firefighters. “The Redding Ridge Fire Department ambulance was also summonsed [sic] and met us at the town line as well.”

CB: Interesting. Fuchs seems to have rallied the Redding fire department to march on Sandy Hook. Remember: Abe Dabela was said to have feuded with some firefighters a few weeks before his death. Were they Redding firefighters? Was Dabela asking them about Sandy Hook?

Four Teachers. “On our way through Sandy Hook Center we encountered four Sandy Hook teachers who had fled the school … all requested that I transport them back to where the students were. I transported all four teachers to the Sandy Hook Firehouse on my way to the school.”

CB: This seems odd. If teachers had “fled” the school, why did they want to return? Had they simply fled and abandoned their students and, perhaps, felt guilty later? Do other police reports make note of four teachers who fled the scene, then returned later, courtesy of Mr. Fuchs? (A question we’ll address further down.)

Later in the report, Fuchs writes that “All staff from Sandy Hook School was gathered and each member was interviewed by the State Police in the firehouse.” How were they gathered? Did they all receive text messages on their iPhones?

According to Fuchs, there were stragglers running around in the Village, whom he transported. It’s quite logical to assume that other staff members also fled the scene and ran home. How is it possible that “all staff” were interviewed “in the firehouse,” unless they had all been informed previously to gather there?

White male suspect. “Upon arrival at the school I met with Chief Kehoe … There was a white, male who had been detained by the Newtown Police Officers and there was great uncertainty as to what, if any, involvement he had in the incident … this individual who was eventually turned over to the Connecticut State Police.”

CB: … And disappeared into the Sandy Hook swamp of permanent obfuscation. Was this the “gingerbread man” – Chris Manfredonia – the alleged father who allegedly went to the SH school to make gingerbread houses? Or was this the shadow man that police and their dogs chased in the woods behind the school at 12:23 p.m. according to this LIVE coverage WTNH report.

Reluctant to leave the scene. Fuchs describes how parents and concerned others were united with students in some detail. According to his testimony, parents and students alike began appearing at the firehouse. Toward the end of his description, this statement appears: “Once parents were reunited with their students, they were strongly encouraged to leave the firehouse to alleviate some of the chaos.”

CB: Apparently, according to aerial footage from the police helicopter, the majority decided not to follow orders; instead, they paced around the parking lot and circled in and out of the building.

Identifying the dead. Fuchs tells us that two students of the 26 dead – transported to Danbury Hospital – weren’t identified, despite a police investigator sending photographs of them by email. It seems odd, given the presence of “all staff” — wouldn’t one of them been able to identify these children? Remember the questions that Wolfgang Halbig posed about these children (see Part 1 of this series). They reveal that the children were left untreated for at least an hour at the school because medics weren’t allowed in. Wouldn’t someone have been able to identify them during that hour of ostensible agony while they lay dying?

Fuchs also describes how he assisted State Police with victim identification through the creation of files and “spreadsheets” that would “negate the need for one on one family identification(s).” In other words, thanks to Fuchs et al., family members would never have to look at their dead loved ones again in order to make the final identifications. Thoughtful of him.

CB: Missing from Fuchs’s description is where all of this activity took place. Never once does he mention going into the school to do this macabre work. From his description, it seems these actions were all electronic, happening on a computer somewhere. If he actually entered the scene of the crime, that information has been purposely omitted. There are no redactions, just what would appear to be missing information.

It’s also interesting that Fuchs et al. created “spreadsheets” of the victims. That same ugly word appears in the FEMA Exercise Plan Mass Casualty Drill scheduled for 12/14/12 that is duplicated in Nobody Died at Sandy Hook on pp. 219-238. On page 234 in Chapter 23 (Player Guidelines), the following appears:

“The drill evaluator is responsible for:

  1. Recording the drill information, including date and location of drill, number of players, etc. (see Excel-based data collection spreadsheet).
  2. Gathering the data collection spreadsheets from each player.

Other testimony. Thanks to Diane Jakopovik, another Sandy Hook researcher, we were able to check Fuchs’s report against other police records archived in the CT State Police Sandy Hook Shooting website.

These include the following:

(1) Report #00179629 (Newtown Police Radio Transmissions on 12-14-12.)

(2) Report #00040428 (Testimony of Sergeant Signore of the Redding Police Department)

(3) Report #00040345 (Testimony of Officer Heibeck of the Redding Police Department)

(4) Report #00251430 (Testimony of CT State Trooper Slaiby)

(5) Section 13 – Supplemental Reports (page 384 by Officer Jeffrey Silver)

Notable items from each of the above that confirm or contradict Fuchs’s report are listed below.

The Newtown Police Dept. transcript (1): At 10:14:02, the transcript refers to “two officers and an ambulance” from Redding as being “en route.” At 10:15:16 they refer to unidentified people “at Subway over there on Church Hill” who asked for “police presence.” At 10:16:05, it’s confirmed that the Redding officers were sent to address the situation at Subway.

The reports from Redding Police Sergeant Signore (2) and Officer Heibeck (3): Signore says they arrived at the Sandy Hook Fire Dept. at 9:45, whereas Heibeck says they arrived there at 10:00. Both accounts do not jibe with the police transcripts, which have the officers still “en route” at 10:14. Like Fuchs, both Signore and Heibeck mention the “white male” who was detained by state troopers. But neither of them mentions the “four teachers” in Fuchs’s report, nor do they mention people at Subway requesting police presence. Curiously, both of these reports list the same dates on their cover pages as the Fuchs report: February 20, 2013 and 3/18/13.

The report from CT State Trooper Ryan Slaiby (4): This intriguing report provides a secondhand account of a female teacher who allegedly fled the school. Trooper Slaiby says that “at approximately 12:05,” presumably on the day of the shooting, he received “a sworn written statement regarding the school shooting” from the teacher. Too bad the verbatim account by the teacher attached to his report is completely redacted. Slaiby plods along, however, and we get the picture: The female teacher and several others climbed out of a window and fled first to the Villa Restaurant, then eventually ended up in the Subway Restaurant at Glen Road and Church Hill. According to Slaiby, the teacher also stated that “a police detective from Redding drove them to the firehouse from Subway to account for their students.”

CB: Ah. Now it makes sense. The teachers ran hell-for-leather from one restaurant to another before remembering their charges, then begged for a ride back to the school.

Oddly or not, the date on the cover of Trooper Slaiby’s report is a mere day after that for Chief Fuchs’s report: 3/19/2013.

The Section 13 Supplemental Reports (5). Oddest of all the reports, perhaps, is this monster, containing literally hundreds of solidly redacted pages. But on the very last page – #384 – we find our quarry: one more salute to Chief Fuchs. The narrative, given by Newtown Police Officer Jeffrey Silver, is about the sorry state of affairs at 36 Yogananda on 12/23/2012, which we are told had not been “properly secured or cleaned since the initial incident.” Preposterous, you say? Well, you can thank our hero, Chief Fuchs, for his prompt intervention. Fuchs is credited with contacting a representative from Home Depot and arranging to have the haunted property boarded up and secured on 12/24/12, just in time for Christmas.

Conclusion. Douglas Fuchs’s report was finally part of the Newtown police record by March 18, 2013. Abe Dabela was murdered on April 5, 2014. In between those two dates, Dabela had plenty of time to review Fuchs’s report and to ask questions similar to those posed above. We can speculate as to whether his questions led to his death. But one thing is for certain: Dabela had questions about Sandy Hook. And those questions were never answered.

~C.

*Redding Ridge is a portion of Redding of historic interest. See http://historyofredding.net/HRreddingridge.htm

H/T: Diane Jakopovic, Alison Maynard, Tony Mead, Anne Berg and Wolfgang Halbig

~~~

“The trouble in this case is that everybody has been much too credulous and believing. You simply cannot afford to believe everything that people tell you. When there’s anything fishy about, I never believe anyone at all. You see, I know human nature so well.” – Jane Marple in The Body in the Library by Agatha Christie

Please follow and like us:
0
 

A real conspiracy: Wealthy Americans conspire with coaches, university & college entrance test administrators to rig admissions into elite universities

A friend, R., admonished and ordered me not to send him any posts on Sandy Hook after I sent him my January 8, 2019 post, “More evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Monroe, CT before the shooting massacre,” with documentary evidence from Wolfgang Halbig showing Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Chalk Hill Middle School in nearby Monroe, Connecticut, months before the December 14, 2012 mass shooting.

Instead of disputing my post with evidence or reasoning, R. called me an agent of Satan for trafficking in conspiracy theories, which he dismisses because he doesn’t believe in conspiracies and because so many conspiracy theories implicate Jews.

An aside: R., who was adopted as an infant by a childless German immigrant couple, recently learnt from a DNA-testing company that he is part Jewish, never mind the fact that we have good evidence that the results of these commercial DNA ancestry tests are unreliable. (See “DNA ancestry companies fake African ancestry for white people” and “Twins get some ‘mystifying’ results when they put 5 DNA ancestry kits to the test“.) R. actually said in an email before we ceased all communication, that he believes it’s his Jewish ancestry that accounts for why he’s so smart and got a Ph.D., whereas his (adopted) parents never went to college. Curiously, his dumb but hardworking and frugal parents managed to accumulate considerable financial assets from owning and operating a small business.

This post is about a very real conspiracy — by very wealthy Americans conspiring to rig college admissions so that their children get into élite universities, not on their own merits, but via bribes, fake college entrance test scores and fake athleticism. The bribe payments, in tens of thousands and millions of dollars per parent, were funneled into a fake non-profit so that the parents could claim them as charitable donations on their tax returns. All of which means this college admissions scam is also a scam perpetrated on U.S. tax payers.

To top it off, the ring leader of this very real conspiracy, William Singer, is Jewish.

Singer had already pleaded guilty and is helping the FBI gather incriminating evidence against his co-conspirators.

On Tuesday, March 12, 2019, 50 wealthy Americans — including Hollywood actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin, were charged in the largest college cheating “conspiracy” ever prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Below is the DOJ press release:

Dozens of individuals involved in a nationwide conspiracy that facilitated cheating on college entrance exams and the admission of students to elite universities as purported athletic recruits were arrested by federal agents in multiple states this morning and charged in federal court in Boston. Athletic coaches from Yale, Stanford, USC, Wake Forest and Georgetown, among others, are implicated, as well as parents and exam administrators.

William “Rick” Singer, 58, of Newport Beach, Calif., was charged with racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Singer owned and operated the Edge College & Career Network LLC (“The Key”) – a for-profit college counseling and preparation business – and served as the CEO of the Key Worldwide Foundation (KWF) – a non-profit corporation that he established as a purported charity.

Between approximately 2011 and February 2019, Singer allegedly conspired with dozens of parents, athletic coaches, a university athletics administrator, and others, to use bribery and other forms of fraud to secure the admission of students to colleges and universities including Yale University, Georgetown University, Stanford University, the University of Southern California, and Wake Forest University, among others. Also charged for their involvement in the scheme are 33 parents and 13 coaches and associates of Singer’s businesses, including two SAT and ACT test administrators.

Also charged is John Vandemoer, the head sailing coach at Stanford University, Rudolph “Rudy” Meredith, the former head soccer coach at Yale University, and Mark Riddell, a counselor at a private school in Bradenton, Fla.

The DOJ press release then describes three groups of conspiracies:

(1) College Entrance Exam Cheating Conspiracy:

  • Singer instructed his clients to ask for extended time for their children on the SAT and ACT college entrance exams, by claiming the children have learning disabilities in order to obtain the required medical documentation.
  • Once the extended time was granted, the parents asked that the location of the exams be changed to one of two test centers: a public high school in Houston, Texas, or a private college preparatory school in West Hollywood, Calif.
  • At those test centers, Singer had established relationships with test administrators Niki Williams and Igor Dvorskiy, respectively, who accepted bribes of as much as $10,000 per test to facilitate the cheating scheme by having a third individual, typically Mark Riddell, to take the exams in place of the students, to give the students the correct answers during the exams, or to correct the students’ answers after they completed the exams.
  • Singer typically paid Ridell $10,000 for each student’s test.
  • The parents paid Singer between $15,000 and $75,000 per test, with the payments structured as purported donations to Singer’s tax-exempt Key Worldwide Foundation charity.

(2) College Recruitment Conspiracy:

  • Parents paid Singer, under the guise of charitable donations to his KWF non-profit, approximately $25 million to bribe coaches and university administrators to designate their children as purported athletic recruits, thereby facilitating the children’s’ admission to those universities.
  •  Singer directed employees of The Key and the KWF non-profit to create falsified athletic “profiles” for these children — with fake honors, fake elite teams that they purportedly played on, and staged photos of the children engaged in athletic activity, such as using a rowing machine or purportedly playing water polo.
  • The fake athletic profiles were then submitted to the universities in support of the students’ applications.

(3) Tax Fraud Conspiracy:

  • Beginning around 2013, Singer had parents disguise bribe payments as charitable contributions to his tax-exempt non-profit Key Worldwide Foundaton (KWF), thereby enabling the clients to deduct the bribes from their federal income taxes.
  • KWF employee Steven Masera or another employee then mailed letters from the KWF to the parentss expressing thanks for their purported charitable contributions. The letter stated: “Your generosity will allow us to move forward with our plans to provide educational and self-enrichment programs to disadvantaged youth,” and falsely indicated that “no good or services were exchanged” for the donations. The parents then filed personal tax returns that falsely reported the payment to the KWF as charitable donations.

Below are the 50 individuals charged in the college admissions conspiracy:

  1. William Rick Singer, 58, of Newport Beach, Calif., owner of the Edge College & Career Network and CEO of the Key Worldwide Foundation, was charged in an Information with racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to defraud the United States, and obstruction of justice.  He is scheduled to plead guilty in Boston before U.S. District Court Judge Rya W. Zobel on March 12, 2019, at 2:30 p.m.;
  2. Mark Riddell, 36, of Palmetto, Fla., was charged in an Information with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering;
  3. Rudolph “Rudy” Meredith, 51, of Madison, Conn., the former head women’s soccer coach at Yale University, was charged in an Information with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud as well as honest services wire fraud;
  4. John Vandemoer, 41, of Stanford, Calif., the former sailing coach at Stanford University, was charged in an Information with racketeering conspiracy and is expected to plead guilty in Boston before U.S. District Court Judge Rya W. Zobel on March 12, 2019, at 3:00 p.m.;
  5. David Sidoo, 59, of Vancouver, Canada, was charged in an indictment with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. Sidoo was arrested on Friday, March 8th in San Jose, Calif., and appeared in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on March 11, 2019. A date for his initial appearance in federal court in Boston has not yet been scheduled.

The following defendants were charged in an indictment with racketeering conspiracy:

  1. Igor Dvorskiy, 52, of Sherman Oaks, Calif., director of a private elementary and high school in Los Angeles and a test administrator for the College Board and ACT;
  2. Gordon Ernst, 52, of Chevy Chase, Md., former head coach of men and women’s tennis at Georgetown University;
  3. William Ferguson, 48, of Winston-Salem, N.C., former women’s volleyball coach at Wake Forest University;
  4. Martin Fox, 62, of Houston, Texas, president of a private tennis academy in Houston;
  5. Donna Heinel, 57, of Long Beach, Calif., the senior associate athletic director at the University of Southern California;
  6. Laura Janke, 36, of North Hollywood, Calif., former assistant coach of women’s soccer at the University of Southern California;
  7. Ali Khoroshahin, 49, of Fountain Valley, Calif., former head coach of women’s soccer at the University of Southern California;
  8. Steven Masera, 69, of Folsom, Calif., accountant and financial officer for the Edge College & Career Network and the Key Worldwide Foundation;
  9. Jorge Salcedo, 46, of Los Angeles, Calif., former head coach of men’s soccer at the University of California at Los Angeles;
  10. Mikaela Sanford, 32, of Folsom, Calif., employee of the Edge College & Career Network and the Key Worldwide Foundation;
  11. Jovan Vavic, 57, of Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif., former water polo coach at the University of Southern California; and
  12. Niki Williams, 44, of Houston, Texas, assistant teacher at a Houston high school and test administrator for the College Board and ACT.

The following defendant was charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud:

  1. Michael Center, 54, of Austin Texas, head coach of men’s tennis at the University of Texas at Austin.

The following defendants are some of the parents involved in the conspiracy, who were charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud:

  1. Gregory Abbott, 68, of New York, N.Y., the founder and chairman of a food and beverage packaging company;
  2. Marcia Abbott, 59, of New York, N.Y.;
  3. Gamal Abdelaziz, 62, of Las Vegas, Nev., the former senior executive of a resort and casino operator in Macau, China;
  4. Diane Blake, 55, of San Francisco, Calif., an executive at a retail merchandising firm;
  5. Todd Blake, 53, of San Francisco, Calif., an entrepreneur and investor;
  6. Jane Buckingham, 50, of Beverly Hills, Calif., the CEO of a boutique marketing company;
  7. Gordon Caplan, 52, of Greenwich, Conn., co-chairman of an international law firm based in New York City;
  8. I-Hin “Joey” Chen, 64, of Newport Beach, Calif., operates a provider of warehousing and related services for the shipping industry;
  9. Amy Colburn, 59, of Palo Alto, Calif.;
  10. Gregory Colburn, 61, of Palo Alto, Calif.;
  11. Robert Flaxman, 62, of Laguna Beach, Calif., founder and CEO of real estate development firm;
  12. Mossimo Giannulli, 55, of Los Angeles, Calif., fashion designer;
  13. Elizabeth Henriquez, 56, of Atherton, Calif.;
  14. Manuel Henriquez, 55, of Atherton, Calif., founder, chairman and CEO of a publicly traded specialty finance company;
  15. Douglas Hodge, 61, of Laguna Beach, Calif., former CEO of investment management company;
  16. Felicity Huffman, 56, of Los Angeles, Calif., an actress on TV’s Desperate Housewives, and her spouse, actor William H. Macy, made a phony charitable contribution of $15,000 to have someone take the college entrance exam for her eldest daughter;
  17. Agustin Huneeus Jr., 53, of San Francisco, Calif., owner of wine vineyards;
  18. Bruce Isackson, 61, of Hillsborough, Calif., president of a real estate development firm;
  19. Davina Isackson, 55, of Hillsborough, Calif.;
  20. Michelle Janavs, 48, of Newport Coast, Calif., former executive of a large food manufacturer;
  21. Elisabeth Kimmel, 54, of Las Vegas, Nev., owner and president of a media company;
  22. Marjorie Klapper, 50, of Menlo Park, Calif., co-owner of jewelry business;
  23. Lori Loughlin, 54, of Los Angeles, Calif., an actress on the Netflix’s comedy Fuller House, and her fashion designer husband, Mossimo Giannulli of the Mossimo clothing line, paid $500,000 in bribe to have their two daughters recruited to the USC crew team, even though they had not previously participated in crew sports. On March 14, the Hallmark Channel severed ties with Loughlin; on March 16, Netflix decided to drop Loughlin from Fuller House;
  24. Toby MacFarlane, 56, of Del Mar, Calif., former senior executive at a title insurance company;
  25. William McGlashan Jr., 55, of Mill Valley, Calif., senior executive at a global equity firm;
  26. Marci Palatella, 63, of Healdsburg, Calif., CEO of a liquor distribution company;
  27. Peter Jan Sartorio, 53, of Menlo Park, Calif., packaged food entrepreneur;
  28. Stephen Semprevivo, 53, of Los Angeles, Calif., executive at privately held provider of outsourced sales teams;
  29. Devin Sloane, 53, of Los Angeles, Calif., founder and CEO of provider of drinking and wastewater systems;
  30. John Wilson, 59, of Hyannis Port, Mass., founder and CEO of private equity and real estate development firm;
  31. Homayoun Zadeh, 57, of Calabasas, Calif., an associate professor of dentistry; and
  32. Robert Zangrillo, 52, of Miami, Fla., founder and CEO of private investment firm.

If found guilty, here are the sentences for the above 50 defendants, based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors:

  • The charge of racketeering conspiracy provides for a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, a fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater and restitution.
  • The charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering provides for a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release, and a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the money laundering.
  • The charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States provides for a sentence of no greater than five years in prison, up to three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.
  • The charge of obstruction of justice provides for a sentence of no greater than 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.
  • The charges of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud, and of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud, provide for a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of 250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater.

Separated at birth: Parkland’s David Hogg (l) and Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza (r)

Star Political reports that the admission into Harvard University of David Hogg, a prominent anti-gun activist who became famous as a “survivor” of the Parkland school shooting on February 14, 2018, is now being questioned because:

  • The average SAT score of Harvard’s own admission statistics is 250 points higher than Hogg’s 1270 SAT score. According to ThoughtCo, although a combined SAT score of roughly 1400 will make you competitive at nearly any U.S. college or university, Harvard Univerisity is more demanding, being an exceptionally selective school with an acceptance rate of just 5% in 2017, the lowest rate among all U.S. universities. A 1400 SAT score is on the lower end of Harvard’s accepted student range.
  • Hogg was rejected by several lower-level universities compared to Harvard, including four University of California campuses where he had submitted applications — UCLA, UCSD, UCSB and UC Irvine.

Hogg being a “survivor” of the Parkland school shooting should also be questioned because, according to his own words, he was at home and got on his bike when he heard about the shooting. See “Parkland anomalies: David Hogg was at home during school shooting; interviewed girl before shooting”.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Sandy Hook families can sue AR-15 gunmaker Remington, court rules

March 14, 2019

The Connecticut Supreme Court today ruled that the families of those killed in the Dec. 14, 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., would be allowed to sue Remington Arms, the manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15 used in the attack. In a 4-3 decision, the court reversed a ruling of the lower court, Bridgeport Superior Court, which originally dismissed a lawsuit filed by Sandy Hook families against Remington in 2015.

The lower court’s 2015 ruling rested on the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The law protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. A one vote majority of the Connecticut Supreme Court, however, ruled that PLCAA did not shield Remington (and by extension all gun manufacturers and dealers) from being sued.

According to the Hartford Courant, the justices contend that the victims’ families are permitted to argue Remington’s alleged violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA)’

“We further conclude that PLCAA does not bar the plaintiffs from proceeding on the single, limited theory that the defendants violated CUTPA by marketing the XM15- E2S to civilians for criminal purposes, and that those wrongful marketing tactics caused or contributed to the Sandy Hook massacre,” Justice Richard Palmer wrote. “Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for further proceedings.”

“Following a scrupulous review of the text and legislative history of [the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act] we also conclude that Congress has not clearly manifested an intent to extinguish the traditional authority of our legislature and our courts to protect the people of Connecticut from the pernicious practices alleged in the present case. The regulation of advertising that threatens the public’s health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states’ police powers.” Justice Palmer added.

“Accordingly, on the basis of that limited theory, we conclude that the plaintiffs have pleaded allegations sufficient to survive a motion to strike and are entitled to have the opportunity to prove their wrongful marketing allegations,” Palmer concluded.

Connecticut law, the court wrote in the majority opinion, “does not permit advertisements that promote or encourage violent, criminal behavior.” While federal law does offer protection for gun manufacturers, the majority wrote, “Congress did not intend to immunize firearms suppliers who engage in truly unethical and irresponsible marketing practices promoting criminal conduct, and given that statutes such as CUTPA are the only means available to address those types of wrongs, it falls to a jury to decide whether the promotional schemes alleged in the present case rise to the level of illegal trade practices and whether fault for the tragedy can be laid at their feet.”

The families’ original lawsuit filed against Remington in 2015, alleged that the company manufactured and marketed a military weapon that ended up in the hands of a civilian.

Bridgeport Superior Court dismissed the lawsuit in 2016, declaring that it “falls squarely within the broad immunity” provided under the PLCAA.

“There is no need for a legal re-examination of the law,” said James Vogts, Remington’s attorney at the time. “Under the law, the manufacturer of the gun used by the criminal that day isn’t responsible legally for his actions.”

Some legal analysts now however say Remington might be held liable under the “negligent entrustment” exception in the law, which defines the “supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.

Major liberal me outlets, most notably The New York Times, seem positively giddy over the prospect of suing America’s firearms manufacturers out of business.

Times reporters Rick Rojas and Kristin Hussey called today’s Connecticut court ruling a “major blow to the firearms industry on Thursday, clearing the way for a lawsuit against the companies that manufactured and sold the semiautomatic rifle used by the gunman in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.”

They continued, “The lawsuit mounted a direct challenge to the immunity that Congress granted gun companies to shield them from litigation when their weapons are used in a crime. The ruling allows the case, brought by victims’ families, to maneuver around the federal shield, creating a potential opening to bring claims to trial and hold the companies, including Remington, which made the rifle, liable for the attack.

The 4-3 majority largely upheld arguments made by lawyers for Remington that the company is protected from suit in many instances. The court ruled, however, that Congress did not intend the PLCAA to preclude state law.

Ultimately, the majority said, the plaintiffs should have the opportunity to prove that Remington violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) by marketing a military-style weapon to civilians.

A Connecticut Superior Court judge dismissed the lawsuit in 2016, agreeing with lawyers for Remington that the case falls within the “broad immunity” gun manufacturers and sellers are afforded under the PLCAA. The state Supreme Court decision, however, paves the way for the suit to continue and for lawyers to access internal documents from the firearms companies.

Lawyers for the gunmaker argued that there was no way for Remington to assess the shooter, and therefore no way they could have known what the gun would be used for.

According to the Times, the lawsuit was originally filed in 2014 by nine families of the victims and a teacher who was injured in the shooting. It names gun manufacturers and distributors Bushmaster, Remington, Camfour Holdings LLP, as well as Riverview Gun Sales Inc., the gun shop where the shooter’s mother purchased the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, and the store’s owner.

Remington Arms filed for bankruptcy in March of 2018, which effectively stalled the lawsuit. In May 2018, the company announced that it had emerged from bankruptcy.

“The decision represents a significant development in the long-running battle between gun control advocates and the gun lobby,” the Times said. “And it stands to have wider ramifications, experts said, by charting a possible legal road map for victims’ relatives and survivors from other mass shootings who want to sue gun companies.”

Edify this morning called the ruling a “high-stakes challenge to gun companies, which have rarely been held liable for crimes committed with their products, and could mark a new front in the battle over gun regulations and corporate accountability. . . An eventual ruling against Remington could establish legal precedent, opening doors for more lawsuits against gun manufacturers, and expose the company’s communications about its marketing plans.”

The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action outlines the issue as follows:

On October 26, 2005, President Bush signed S. 397, the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.” Introduced by Sens. Larry Craig (R-ID) and Max Baucus (D-MT), this legislation is a vitally important first step toward ending the anti-gun lobby`s shameless attempts to bankrupt the American firearms industry through reckless lawsuits. Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Rick Boucher (D-VA) introduced similar legislation, H.R. 800 in the House of Representatives.

•These suits are intended to drive gunmakers out of business by holding manufacturers and dealers liable for the criminal acts of third parties who are totally beyond their control. Suing the firearms industry for street crime is like suing General Motors for criminal acts involving Buicks.

•These lawsuits seek a broad range of remedies relating to product design and marketing. Their demands, if granted, would create major restrictions on interstate commerce in firearms and ammunition, including unwanted design changes, burdensome sales policies, and higher costs for consumers. While the suits are unwarranted, the firearms industry has had to spend over $200 million in defense.

•Congress has the power-and the duty-to prevent activists from abusing the courts to destroy interstate commerce.

•The bill provides that lawsuits may not be brought against manufacturers and sellers of firearms or ammunition if the suits are based on criminal or unlawful use of the product by a third party. Existing lawsuits must be dismissed.

S. 397 provides carefully tailored protections for legitimate suits:

•The bills expressly allow suits based on knowing violations of federal or state law related to gun sales, or on traditional grounds including negligent entrustment (such as sales to a child or an obviously intoxicated person) or breach of contract. The bill also allows product liability cases involving actual injuries caused by an improperly functioning firearm (as opposed to cases of intentional misuse).

•The Congress has often passed limitations on liability for specific groups, including light aircraft manufacturers, food donors, corporations affected by “Y2K” computer problems, charitable volunteers, health officials, medical implant manufacturers, and makers of anti-terrorism technology.
These lawsuits usurp the authority of the Congress and of state legislators, in a desperate attempt to enact restrictions that have been widely rejected. Thirty-four states have also enacted statutes blocking this type of litigation.

~ Grif
Molon Labe

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Sandy Hook: The Highly Unlikely Suicide of Abe Dabela, Part 1.

Nearly five years have passed since the murder of Attorney Abe Dabela. But some previously unpublished information may remove some of the moss growing over the story of his tragic death.

~~~

Leafy, prosperous Redding, Connecticut, which sits near the middle of Fairfield County, was originally named “Reading,” not because of an especially literate population but because of one lawyer named John Read.

Read would help define the town’s boundaries in 1767, but soon after the town was named after him, a decision was made to change the spelling to plain, easy-to-pronounce Redding, obscuring reference to John Read – and literacy. Citizens were left with a name that strongly suggests the color red.

It hardly seems fair to Mr. Read. But there are far worse examples of injustice in Redding involving the color of blood.

A recent one concerns the death of a lawyer named Gugsa Abraham (Abe) Dabela, found dead in his crashed Mercedes SUV near his home in Redding at 2:11 a.m. on April 5, 2014.

Dabela had moved from New York City to Redding in 2011, renting a garage apartment owned by Peter Swan at 8 Indian Hill Road.

In the website named for him (justice4abe.com), Dabela is described as “gregarious” and “outspoken.” He was also witty and diligent. With a master’s degree in public health and a law degree under his belt by 2012, Dabela passed bar exams in New York and Connecticut. He was preparing applications for admission to the Maryland and D.C. bars, and had every reason to be gregarious and outspoken and witty and confident. But he would practice law for only a year before falling victim to a killer.

Three stops and a text message. Shortly before his death, 35-year-old Dabela visited two local restaurants within minutes of his home: the Little Pub in Ridgefield and the Black Cat Grille in Redding, both solid establishments with loyal clientele. It was later revealed (by friends of Dabela) that he also visited another pub, The Lumberyard Pub and Sports Bar at 2 Main Street in Redding (now permanently closed), although the police mysteriously omitted this information.

Map showing the restaurants Dabela visited the night of his death, Courtesy of Google Maps ©2019

At about 12:03 a.m., Dabela received a text message, which read: “turn he just didn’t.” The Yoda-like syntax was mysterious enough. Adding to the mystery, according to the case file and a report based on it by Crime Watch, the sender’s cell phone information was deleted after Dabela’s death, while the phone was in police custody.

The crash at Umpawaug and Mallory. While driving back to his home, Dabela swerved for unknown reasons, turning his SUV on its roof. He was pronounced dead less than a mile away from his home, not as the direct result of the crash, but from a gunshot wound to the back of his head.1 Whether the bullet was fired before or after the crash has never been determined, but the driver’s side window was completely shattered, and at the time he was shot, Dabela’s head was positioned near that window.

The crash site itself – on the corner of Umpawaug Road and Mallory Lane – merits close attention. Dabela was traveling north on Umpawaug toward his home on Indian Hill Road. (See map below.)

 

As speculated by researcher Anne Berg, the site would provide a perfect location for a staged accident, with the perpetrator blocking off Umpawaug and secreting his vehicle on Mallory, then just lying in wait to shoot through Dabela’s car window either before or after the crash.

Perhaps Dabela just didn’t turn in time to avoid the blockade, as presaged by the text message.

A case of police negligence. According to official sources :

  • Dabela’s blood alcohol level was 2.5 times the legal limit for driving.
  • Dabela was in possession of a firearm at the time of his death.
  • The gunshot wound was to the back of Dabela’s head.
  • Dabela committed suicide by a self-inflicted gunshot: this was the official conclusion before an autopsy was ever performed.
  • There was no suicide note.

It was also revealed by police that an anonymous 911 caller reported a rollover crash at about 1:36 a.m. without stopping to help Dabela.

But police negligence at the crime scene was the real shocker. It was so blatant, in fact, that Dabela’s family filed a lawsuit in April 2016, suing the town of Redding and various members of the Redding police department on 10 counts of civil rights violations. You can find the PDF of the case filing here.

Among the defendants were Douglas Fuchs, Redding’s chief of police; and seven of Redding’s police officers (Ryan Alcott, Mark DeLuca, Peter Quinn, Timothy Succi, Brandon Kaufman, Brittany Salafia and Michael Livingston).

The suit hinged on the family’s belief that Dabela’s case was mishandled and the murder covered up because of racism (Dabela was African-American), an opinion shared by the Connecticut NAACP, which assisted in the family’s investigation.

Other possible motives, while touched on, have not (in this writer’s opinion) been sufficiently explored, such as the fact that Dabela made no secret of his political views, which favored the second amendment and private property rights; and other opinions, which we shall explore later.

The case file includes a full account of what happened according to the plaintiffs. Here are some of the most glaring anomalies it reveals:

  • Dabela had no physical or mental health issues and no history of erratic or self-destructive behavior. Reports from those who observed him at the pubs the night of his death reflect a man in good spirits. And he had made plans with his landlord for a motorcycle ride the following day. Why, then, would he have committed suicide?
  • Dabela’s hands were never photographed and tested for residual gunpowder, as would be expected after such a death. Why? (His hands were originally bagged for this purpose, but later washed without residue testing. His jacket sleeves tested negative.)
  • A gunshot wound to the back of the head is normally attributed to homicide, not suicide. Why did the investigators rule out homicide even before the autopsy? Other facts contradict the suicide theory: The bullet entered the left side of Dabela’s head, yet Dabela was known to be right-handed.
  • A muddy footprint was found on the back of Dabela’s jacket. It’s hard to imagine how it could have been Dabela’s. Whose was it?
  • Dabela’s DNA wasn’t found on the trigger he allegedly pulled. The tests were performed twice with the same negative results.
  • Using a metal detector, the police found a bullet near the crime scene four days after the crash, but it wasn’t the bullet that killed Dabela. The bullet that entered his head was never found. A firearm was found in the SUV along with the spent shell casing of a .40 caliber bullet and a bullet hole in the back of the driver’s seat.
  • Hair evidence was found on the inside of the passenger window in Dabela’s vehicle, but was never tested for DNA or compared with other DNA evidence.
  • The police who discovered Dabela’s body in the vehicle neglected to secure the vehicle or establish a perimeter around the site to protect against evidence contamination. They did, however, place police tape around the entrance to Dabela’s apartment.
  • Whether Dabela was murdered prior to or after the crash is still unknown.

More injustice. In June 2017, Danbury state’s attorney Stephen J. Sedensky, III ruled unequivocally that no homicide had occurred. Sedensky had already achieved notoriety as the overseer of the official report on the Sandy Hook incident, a document loaded with inconsistencies.

Sedensky’s ruling on Dabela’s death did not silence Dabela’s family who, in late 2018, were still seeking DNA samples from three firefighters who were later determined to have been at the crime scene.

According the Dabelas’ attorneys, “[Abe] Dabela had been intimidated by Redding firefighters at a local bar a few weeks before his death.” Note that. It will become important below and in Part 2 of this series.

Rights infringed. Dabela had been the owner of two firearms that he was licensed to carry, but that distinction was not easily won. In Connecticut, obtaining a gun permit means taking an NRA-approved course, obtaining references, visiting a local police department to be fingerprinted, submitting to an FBI check, visiting the state police to obtain the permit, and paying generously at each stop.

From the Dabela vs. Redding lawsuit, we learn that Dabela was an outspoken gun rights advocate. In January 2013, he appeared at Redding’s police department with the requisite documents to obtain permits to carry concealed pistols. Despite meeting all of the requirements, Dabela’s application was delayed. The Chief of Police, Douglas Fuchs, told him that his references would have to be interviewed individually.

Pistol permits normally take eight weeks to process in Connecticut. So when Dabela’s permit was still in limbo by April 2013, he complained in writing to Reuben Bradford, who was then the commissioner of Connecticut Dept. of Emergency Services and Public Protection. Bradford lit a fire under Fuchs, who approved the permit shortly afterward.2

Up until his death, Dabela advocated for complainants with gun permit issues. From the case file: “Mr. Dabela had notable victories in Milford, Connecticut four months prior to his murder, and Stamford, Connecticut two weeks prior to his murder.”

Dabela’s other activities included motorcycle riding, frequenting local town hall meetings and conversing with locals about tax grievance issues. This was a person who talked – a lot – about political hot topics in public places and who helped people whose basic rights were being undermined. There’s nothing wrong with that. The question is whether it got him killed.

It may have been premonitory that Dabela began regularly carrying a gun during the last two months of his life.

An altercation. According to the case file, Dabela had a “heated argument” with a town finance official about property taxes two days before his death. To date, the police have not released the identity of this person.

Which town was this person from? Stamford? Milford? Redding? Newtown? Was this person ever investigated? Disagreements in bars between men usually erupt over women, money or sports. Perhaps a property tax squabble didn’t seem like an incident worth pursuing to the police.

A connection to Sandy Hook. Redding police chief Douglas Fuchs, a principal defendant in Dabela vs. Redding, was a Newtown resident who sent his children to Sandy Hook school.

After hearing a police evacuation exercise at the school on his cruiser radio, Fuchs says he responded to the shooting himself. He was interviewed by his alma mater, Brandeis University, about the role he played at Sandy Hook. According to the excerpt below, Fuchs was among the movers and shakers after the incident:

“Over the next 10 days, as Newtown’s police department recovered from the trauma, Fuchs, whose own children had attended Sandy Hook, managed a massive law-enforcement operation in support of the Newtown police and community. He supervised nearly 1,000 police officers from across the state who provided security for the schools and the victims’ families; escorted families to and from funerals; and handled the media, gifts and onlookers descending on Newtown.”

After the shooting, Fuchs says in the same article that he worked to reform gun laws, specifically to limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds. He is quoted as saying that “limiting magazines changes the game in a mass shooting. It’s something we can do that will save lives.”

Obviously, such reforms would have done nothing to save Dabela’s life. And it’s doubtful that Dabela would have agreed with Fuchs’s position if the two men had, say, walked into a bar and conversed.

Officer Death. Fuchs ran into more legal trouble over a suicide case in April 2016, when he allegedly prevented paramedics from helping a Redding man in extremis, claiming the shed where he tried to hang himself was “a crime scene.” The man, Peter Valenti, showed faint signs of life later, but died in the hospital. While an investigation was conducted over a lawsuit filed by Valenti’s family, Fuchs was put on administrative leave. Touchy-feely stories about Fuchs training guide dogs began to appear around that time. But Fuchs remained on leave until his early retirement in June 2018.

A phone conversation with Wolfgang Halbig. About three weeks before his death, Abe Dabela contacted Wolfgang Halbig, using a burner phone.

Following is Mr.Halbig’s account of the exchange (bracketed information is mine):

“He asked me if I could buy one [a burner phone] since he does not trust anyone in town.

“He wanted to know my thoughts on Sandy Hook. He read my 16 questions and he had concerns.

“We spoke and it appeared that I might be able to ask him to represent me with my CT FOIA requests, and never heard back from him.”

Mr. Halbig’s 16 questions3 were provocative enough for Dabela to make contact around the same time that he was alleged to have had an unpleasant encounter with three Redding firefighters. Coincidence? If so, why did Dabela feel compelled to use a burner phone?

Readers should mentally bookmark questions #10-12 on Mr. Halbig’s list (see below). These questions will become important in Part 2 of this series. But the entire set of questions is relevant and, in my opinion, should be regarded as evidence in the shooting death of Abe Dabela.

Shoeless in Redding. The novelist, satirist and social critic Mark Twain built his final home in Redding, CT and called it Stormfield. (You can see how closely situated it is to Abe Dabela’s final home and the crash site in the maps above.) Twain would live in Stormfield for a brief two years before his death in 1910, about the same amount of time that Dabela had in his modest garage apartment on Indian Hill Road.

Two witty but very different men from different times, and perhaps they would not have seen eye to eye on much. But I think Twain and Dabela would likely have agreed on the following quote by the former:

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

The truth, in this case, is still trying to find its socks.

~~~

H/T: Anne Berg, Alison Maynard, Wolfgang Halbig and Tony Mead

The author is indebted to all of the above-named, but particularly to Anne Berg, whose astute observations and research led her to suggest a potential connection to Sandy Hook in the tragic death of Atty. Dabela long before anyone else was willing to consider it. You can find her expository article here.

~~~

Footnotes:

1 It isn’t clear who declared Dabela dead.

2 It’s interesting to note that a letter from Bradford accompanied files released by the CT State Police in December 2013 on the Sandy Hook incident. Bradford said in the letter that the Sandy Hook investigation was closed. He would retire in the same week, after three years as “the first African American to lead the state’s largest police organization.”

3 Wolfgang Halbig’s 16 Unanswered Questions That Demand Truth on Sandy Hook first appeared on SandyHookJustice.com. They follow:

  1. Who directed the New Haven FBI field offices to classify [in the sense of restricting access to information about] the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting on Dec 14, 2012?
  2. Why would the FBI classify the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting when they did not classify the Columbine shooting, which also was a mass casualty shooting incident?
  3. Who on Dec. 14, 2012 was the Incident Commander (as required by the Federal Emergency Management Administration) in directing the mass casualty shooting incident at the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
    1. Who on Dec. 14, 2012 at the Incident Command Center made the ordering of porta potties a high priority, since they were delivered within 3 hours of the school shooting?
    2. Who ordered those porta potties from Southbury, Ct?
    3. When I called the porta pottie company after searching for over a week as to who and when they were ordered, I was told that it is classified and  they are not allowed to share that information with me.
    4. The next morning I received a phone call from the Southbury Police Department at my home telling me not to call that company again since I was harassing them.
    5. High priority for toilets — but not for Life Star Trauma helicopters or paramedics?
  1. Why did they not request Life Star helicopters, knowing that children and school staff were seriously injured and clinging to life? Who made the determination not to request them?
  2. Why did they not allow the paramedics and the EMTs inside the Sandy Hook School to treat the seriously injured or those children and school staff clinging to life? Who made this decision?
  3. Who declared all 20 children and six school staff members legally dead within the first 8 minutes?
  4. Who was the Certified Environmental Bio-Hazard Decontamination company contracted by the Newtown Public Schools to remove 45–65 gallons of blood, skull fragments, brain tissues, bodily fluids, blood-soaked carpets and any other materials to be decontaminated inside the Sandy Hook School?
  5. Why does an off-duty lieutenant from the Newtown Police Department refuse to leave his off-duty work assignment at a construction site on Dec. 14, 2012 when hearing that shots have been fired at the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
  6. Who at the Newtown Public Schools notified in writing (as required by CT law) all of the parents who had children attending the Sandy Hook Elementary School as well as every school staff member every school year of all the potentially life threatening chemical hazards? The school had high levels of lead paint throughout the entire building, asbestos in the ceiling and floor tile, asbestos in the insulation and very high levels of PCB.
  7. Who provided the urgent medical care to the two children who were not transported to the Danbury Trauma Center until an hour after the school was deemed safe for that 15-mile drive?
  8. Who treated those two children who had been shot multiple times (three to 11 times) since they did not allow the paramedics and EMTs inside the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
  9. Why did the parents of the two children who died at the Danbury hospital not allow their children to donate their organs to other children waiting for the gift of life?
  10. What happened to the 500 children and 60 school staff members from Sandy Hook Elementary School on Dec. 14, 2012? No videos show any evacuations.
  11. Who was the police officer calling in to the Newtown Police dispatcher stating in his words that he has multiple weapons, he has a rifle and a shotgun — and who had that rifle and the shotgun (as the chain of evidence should show) that was found in classroom eight (8)?
  12. At 9:45:21 am on Dec. 14, 2012, why would a police officer by the name of Lt. Vanghele from the Newtown Police Department after finding a kindergarten female child in the hallway make her go into room eight (8) and leave her? Room eight is a gruesome crime scene with dead children and school staff. Why?
  13. Why would two CT State Troopers enter room ten (10) at 9:55:31 am on Dec. 14, 2012 — a gruesome crime scene with dead bodies of children and school staff – and tell a kindergarten boy they found in the bathroom (whose name is redacted, but who is referred to as “them”) to stay and they will be back when it is safe?
Please follow and like us:
0
 

The FBI says Sandy Hook school shooting was on Dec. 13, 2012

We are told that on the morning of December 14, 2012, a lone gunman named Adam Lanza entered the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, shot and killed 20 first-grade students and 6 adults, then shot himself dead in the back of his head.

Adam Lanza’s December 13, 2012 Date-of-Death

One of the many anomalies about Sandy Hook is Adam Lanza’s date of death.

As I had first reported, on January 20, 2013, I went on GenealogyBank.com and confirmed a net rumor that Adam Lanza’s Social Security Death Index (SSDI) was listed as December 13, 2012 — a day before the shooting massacre.

Belows is a screenshot I took of the SSDI record on GenealogyBank.com as proof, in case the site scrubs the page. Note that I underlined in red “Date of Death Thursday, December 13, 2012” and painted the red arrow pointing to the time (2:29 PM) and date (1/20/2013) when I took the screenshot.

The information of Lanza’s strange 12/13/2012 SSDI went viral in the Alternative Media.

13 days later, on February 2, 2013, I discovered that GenealogyBank.com had changed Adam Lanza’s SSDI from December 13 to December 14, 2012. However, another genealogy website, Ancestry.com, was slower on the take and still had Lanza’s SSDI as Dec. 13, 2012.

But it’s not just genealogy websites. John Greenewald, Jr., of the website The Black Vault, obtained a Statement of Death by the Funeral Director for Adam Lanza, which also shows Lanza’s date-of-death as December 13, 2012. Greenewald explains:

As part of the research effort, The Black Vault filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for all documents relating to Adam P. Lanza, his death, and the social security record. Almost two months later, a response was received.

The Social Security Administration sent Greenewald two pages, both statements of death for Lanza by the funeral director.

The first, dated 1/15/13, showed Adam P. Lanza’s death occurred on 12/13/12; the day prior to the shooting. The second document, dated 1/24/13, showed Lanza’s death as 12/14/12, with a handwritten statement at the top, “Amended 1/24/13” and the initials “SMO.”

Below is a screenshot of the original Statement of Death by the Funeral Director, showing Lanza’s date-of-death as 12-13-2012. You can also see the Statement on The Black Vault, here.

Stranger still, the FBI‘s web page on “Active Shooter Resources” also has the Sandy Hook school shooting — and thus, the date-of-death of Adam Lanza and the 26 people he shot at the school — as December 13, 2013.

This is what the page says:

The reports listed below were not authored by the FBI, but links to the reports are being provided for general public information.

Here’s a screenshot I took of the page, showing the date (1/18/2019) and time (6:23 AM) when I took it, in the event FBI “memory-holes” the page. I painted the red arrows and underlined in red “12/13/12”:

Lastly, let us not forget that according to the FBI’s own crime statistics, no one died in Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 13 or December 14, 2012.

The FBI records crime statistics (“offenses known to law enforcement”), including homicides, for every state of the United States. This is what the FBI says about its “Crime in the United States” data:

Crime in the United States features data collected from law enforcement agencies regarding only those offenses known to police….

Since 1996, editions of Crime in the United States have been available on the FBI’s Web site, www.fbi.gov…. The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program staff are committed to improving their annual publications so that the data they collect can better meet the needs of law enforcement, criminologists, sociologists, legislators, municipal planners, the media, and other students of criminal justice who use the statistics for varied administrative, research, and planning purposes. For more information about how the UCR Program collects data, see About the Uniform Crime Reporting Program….

This is how the FBI describes the methodology of its Uniform Crime Reporting Program:

UCR Programs gather crime information from the law enforcement agencies under their domain and forward the data to the FBI. Forty-seven states in the nation have their own UCR Programs that streamline the collection of UCR data from local law enforcement agencies, ensure consistency and comparability of data, and provide a higher quality of service to the law enforcement community. Establishment of a UCR Program is not limited to state governments. Territorial, tribal, and federal agencies may also institute UCR Programs. Agencies in states without a program, i.e., direct contributors, submit their crime statistics directly to the FBI, which provides continuous guidance and support to those participating agencies.

In other words, the FBI obtains its crime statistics for Newtown, Connecticut, from the city’s law enforcement agency, i.e., the Newtown police.

Table 8 of the FBI’s Crime in the United States 2012 is for the state of Connecticut. As you can see in the screenshot below, which I had taken this morning, January 18, 2019, more than seven years after the Sandy Hook school shooting, Table 8 still shows zero (0) “murder and nonnegligent manslaughter” for the city of Newtown, CT, in the year 2012.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

James Fetzer answers Leonard Pozner’s defamation lawsuit

Leonard Pozner is the alleged father of alleged Sandy Hook child-victim Noah Pozner whose image, mysteriously, was among the posters of those who were killed by the Taliban in the Army Public School shooting massacre in Peshawar, Pakistan, on December 16, 2014, two years after Sandy Hook.

See “Sandy Hook Child Victim Noah Pozner Was Killed Twice! Also a Victim in Pakistan Taliban Shooting

Leonard Pozner has harassed bloggers and YouTubers with DMCA copyright-infringement take-down demands, and is successful at it. He has also sued Wolfgang Halbig and Alex Jones on Sandy Hook. Curiously, in his last lawsuit against Halbig, Lenny dropped the lawsuit when it came time for him to be deposed, under oath, which reinforces the skepticism by some who wonder if “Leonard Pozner” is a real person. For more on this, see “Sandy Hook’s Leonard Pozner sues Professor James Fetzer and publisher“.

On November 27, 2018, Leonard Pozner filed a defamation lawsuit against Professor James Fetzer and his publisher, Moon Rock Books, claiming that he, Leonard Pozner:

  1. Is a private citizen, instead of a public figure.
  2. Has been defamed by the defendants’ publication of an alleged death certificate of Noah, which Fetzer maintains is fake. See Leonard Pozner v. James Fetzer, et al.

As required by the court, Fetzer submitted an Answer to the lawsuit, in which he makes the following points:

(1) Leonard Pozner is a public figure: “Assuming he is a real person, the plaintiff styling himself as Leonard Pozner has thrust himself into the forefront of public controversy, and is, therefore, a public figure.”

(2) As a public figure, Pozner’s lawsuit against Fetzer, et al., “is therefore governed by New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U. S. 254 (l964), and Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U. S. 64 (1964),” which clearly specify that “defamation” must meet the “actual malice” standard — that the defendant(s) knowingly published a falsehood, with malicious intentions. In the case of the alleged Noah death certificate, however, Fetzer maintains that his writings on the death certificate “were written in good faith and were and still are for good cause believed to be true.”

(3) The following are the reasons why Fetzer maintains the death certificate of Noah Pozner, which Fetzer had received from Kelley Watt (who claims Leonard Pozner as the source), is inauthentic:

  • In the last two lines of paragraph 3, the type is clearly smaller in Box 3 than in the rest of the page.
  • A capital “A” in Box 12, Box 22, and Box 33 has a small flat in the pinnacle, yet the capital “A” in Box 12, Box 22, Box 26, Box 39, and Box 46 does not have a small flat in the pinnacle, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  • In paragraph 3, the spacing between “N” and “o” in Box 1 and Box 7 are clearly different, which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  • In the last two lines of paragraph 3, the “N” in Box 1 and the “N” in Box 26, are clearly not the same; and the spacing between “S” and “a” in Box 1 is clearly not the same as the spacing between “S” and “a” in Box 11 — all of which indicates fabrication and fakery.
  • Again in paragraph 3, the printing of the name “Pozner” in Box 1 is clearly different from the name “Pozner” in Box 20, which indicates fabrication and fakery.

Fetzer concludes his Answer as follows:

This suit has been brought for the illicit purpose of intimidation to prevent public knowledge of the truth concerning the events at Sandy Hook, and not for genuine legal relief for actionable harm done, and is therefore an actionable abuse of process. The defendant Fetzer reserves for himself and his co-defendants the options to counterclaim for abuse of process and/or to seek relief under Section 802.05 and/or under Section 895.044 of Wisconsin Statutes.

WHEREFORE, the defendant Fetzer demands that the plaintiff take nothing, that the complaint be dismissed, and that he be granted such further protection and remedy as may be necessary and proper, and allowed by law. He prays as well for like protection of his co-defendants, as is indispensable to protection of himself.

To read the entirety of Fetzer’s Answer to Pozner v. Fetzerclick here.

It is estimated that the legal expenses of Fetzer, et al., may total $20,000. Please help protect and ensure free speech by donating to their legal defense. Go to moonrockbooks.com where there is a “Donate” button.

And please keep Jim Fetzer and Wolfgang Halbig in your prayers.

Thank you.

For a free copy of James Fetzer, ed., Nobody Died at Sandy Hookclick here.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

More evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Monroe, CT before the shooting massacre

We are told that on December 14, 2012, a lone gunman, Adam Lanza, went to the Sandy Hook Elementary School (SHES) in Newtown, Connecticut, where in the space of 11 minutes, shot and killed 20 first-graders and 6 adults.

We are also told that after the massacre on January 2, 2013, SHES reopened in an empty school about 7 miles away in Monroe, CT — Chalk Hill Middle School at 375 Fan Hill Rd. — until a new swanky SHES was rebuilt with a gift of $50 million from the state of Connecticut.

$50 million for an elementary school!

It turns out that asbestos-contaminated SHES had been closed years before the alleged shooting massacre (see “Sandy Hook hoax: 6 signs that school was closed before massacre”), and Chalk Hill Middle School had been abandoned and empty since June 2011 (CTPost).

Thanks to Wolfgang Halbig, a former a law enforcement officer (U.S. Customs inspector and Florida state trooper), educator (public school coach, teacher, assistant principal and principal), and nationally-recognized school safety consultant, we have documentary evidence that SHES had moved to Chalk Hill Middle School at least months before December 2012, including invoices for food deliveries to Chalk Hill but billed to SHES.

See “Wolfgang Halbig has stunning evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School was closed months before ‘massacre

Recently, Mr. Halbig uncovered yet another piece of evidence.

All U.S. public schools and libraries are required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to use USAC Form 471 — a form designed to help schools and libraries to list the eligible services they have ordered and estimate the annual charges for them so that the Fund Administrator can set aside sufficient support to reimburse providers for services.

Note: USAC is Universal Service Administrative Co., which has a Schools and Libraries (E-rate) Program that provides discounts to keep public school students and library patrons connected to broadband and voice services.

Below is the FCC Form 471 for the funding year 2012 of Newtown Public Schools:

Note that the schools listed are:

  1. Middle Gate Elementary School
  2. Hawley Elementary School
  3. Head O’Meadow Elementary School
  4. Newtown Middle School
  5. Central Administrative Office
  6. Sandy Hook Elementary School
  7. Newtown High School
  8. Chalk Hill Middle School

Numbers 1-7 are in the Newtown Public School District (NPSD), as you can see in this screenshot I took of the drop-down menu under “Schools” on the NPSD website:

Chalk Hill Middle School is in Monroe, CT, and is not a school in the Newtown Public School District, so why is the school listed on Newtown Public Schools’ 2012 FCC Form 471 for the funding year 2012?

The FCC Form 471 must be filed during a specific application window each year. In general, the application filing window opens about six months before the start of the funding year and is open for about two and a half months. On USAC’s ebsite, it is stated:

Deadline: The FCC Form 470 must be certified in EPC at least 28 days before the close of the FCC Form 471 filing window for the funding year in which services are requested.

EPC = E-rate Productivity Center, the account and application management portal for the Schools and Libraries (E-rate) Program.

As an example, for funding year 2019, the FCC Form 471 application filing window is from January 16, 2019 to March 27, 2019 (source), and for funding year 2018, the application filing deadline was March 22, 2018. See this screenshot from the USAC website:

That means that for funding year 2012, the deadline for Newtown Public Schools to submit its FCC Form 471 was March 2012 — 8 months before the alleged shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and nearly 9 months before SHES was temporarily moved to Chalk Hill Middle School.

So why would Newtown Public Schools, in March 2012, include Chalk Hill Middle School — a school in Monroe, CT, which had been abandoned and empty since June 2011 — in its 2012 FCC Form 471? Unless, of course, Sandy Hook Elementary School had already relocated to Chalk Hill in Monroe by March 2012, if not earlier.

All of which leads to this question:

Since SHES had moved to Chalk Hill Middle School in Monroe, CT, months, if not years, before the shooting massacre, who, then, were the students and teachers whom Lanza shot to death at SHES in Newtown, CT, on December 14, 2012?

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Pro-gun control Dick’s Sporting Goods sales down 4%; will close 35 stores

Actions have consequences, and Dick’s Sporting Goods is discovering what its gun-control virtue-signaling costs.

But Dick’s billionaire chairman and CEO doesn’t give a hoot.

Dick’s first modified its gun-sales policy in the wake of the Sandy Hook false-flag shooting, saying it would no longer sell AR-15s and certain other semiautomatic rifles.

See “Wolfgang Halbig has stunning evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School was closed months before ‘massacre’

But Dick’s quickly circumvented its pledge by opening its outdoor-focused Field & Stream chain.

After the mass shooting last February at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, Dick’s was one of the first businesses in the U.S. to clamber on board the ensuing “March for Our Lives” gun-control movement by declaring they would stop selling assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, barr the legal sale of guns to those under age 21, and hire their own gun-control lobbyists to push for stricter gun laws nationwide.

On the Parkland shooting, see “Parkland school shooting: Eyewitnesses saw killer wearing different clothes” and “Application for ‘March For Our Lives’ permit was made months before Parkland school shooting”.

At the time, Dick’s paradoxically predicted that although the move could hurt sales, it would also draw more shoppers to its stores.

In August, Dick’s admitted that sales at stores open for at least 12 months  tumbled by a bigger-than-expected 4% during the second quarter. But Chairman and CEO Edward W. Stack put on a brave face, insisting he was confident sales would turn around.

See DCG’s “What do you know: Dick’s Sporting Goods misses 2nd quarter sales expectations

Alas, Dick’s drop in sales is continuing, such that the company may soon close down their entire Field & Stream chain of 35 stores across 18 states.

On September 15, 2018, Dick’s billionaire CEO Edward Stack, 64, told investors during the Goldman Sachs Retailing Conference that same-store sales dropped 3.9%, that its “decisions…on firearms” has hurt sales of its hunting and outdoors business, and that it may close its outdoor-focused Field & Stream stores.

Stack, son of Dick’s Sporting Goods’ founder Richard “Dick” Stack, said:

“Well, we’ve made that decision at the end of February, what we’re going to do with firearms. And what we said is, we would not sell any of the assault-style rifles, we wouldn’t sell high-capacity magazines. We’d never sold bumps stocks which turn a semiautomatic weapon into basically an automatic weapon, and we wouldn’t sell firearms to anyone under 21 years of age.

So that’s in February. It’s still a little early to tell…. So we’ve had some vendors who’ve decided based on our decision to not sell the assault-style rifle that was used in the Parkland shooting that they wouldn’t sell us…any firearms anymore…. We’ve had some other people who’ve indicated that they wouldn’t shop with us any longer. So we’ve got to take a look and we’ll assess this through this holiday season, if the brands are going to continue to or not. Some brands are not going to continue to sell us. If consumers upset with us, we will make a decision of what we’re going to do with Field & Stream.

My sense is that we can either take a look at closing that store, that concept or reconceptualizing it into a more of an outdoor type concept and…as we move into the end of the fourth quarter, we’ll make a decision as to what we’re going to do.”

Having admitted that Dick’s gun-control stance has hurt sales, Stack whistles past the graveyard by entrenching even deeper in the company’s sales-losing policy. He said:

“We’ve made some decisions on firearms in the past and we’ve had a pretty good idea of what these consequences were going to be. We felt that was absolutely the right thing to do. We would do the same thing again if we had a mulligan so to speak to do it again. And but at the same time, our business has been pretty good….

So has it had an impact on the foot traffic and people who were upset with us on this? Yes. Has it

impacted our profitability? No. We found ways to offset that. We’re…taking 10 stores this fall and taking firearms out of all of those 10 stores and reconceptualizing the footprint, the product mix….we’re going to test this in 10 stores and see what happens.”

On December 4, Dick’s settled an age discrimination suit stemming from its decision not to sell guns to adults under age 21, according to a report from Oregon Public Broadcasting.

H/t The Washington Free Beacon

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Sandy Hook’s Leonard Pozner sues Professor James Fetzer and publisher

Leonard Pozner is the alleged father of alleged Sandy Hook child-victim Noah Pozner whose image, mysteriously, was among the posters of those who were killed by the Taliban in the Army Public School shooting massacre in Peshawar, Pakistan, on December 16, 2014, two years after Sandy Hook.

See “Sandy Hook Child Victim Noah Pozner Was Killed Twice! Also a Victim in Pakistan Taliban Shooting

The name “Leonard Pozner” is between quotation marks because that persona may not be real. In fact, people search engines Spokeo and TruthFinder say there is no such person named “Leonard Pozner” in all of the United States.

Professor James Fetzer is among those who maintain that “Leonard Pozner” may in reality be an individual named Reuben Vabner, who is named by TruthFinder as one of the husbands of Veronique Pozner, the alleged ex-wife of Leonard and alleged mother of Noah.

To see Vabner’s pic on LinkedIn, click here.

Curiously, although Leonard Pozner is Veronique’s ex-husband and father of her child, he is not among Veronique’s possible relatives according to TruthFinder. But Reuben Vabner is.

More intriguing still is the search result obtained by Wolfgang Halbig in 2016, which shows Leonard Pozner’s social security number is that of a woman named Anna M. Maguire who had died on October 1, 1987 in zip code 02840, Newport, Rhode Island.

TruthFinder has very sparse information on Anna M. Maguire — no family members, no phone information, no social media — other than that she was born on Dec. 20, 1903; had lived at 10 Marin St., Newport, RI; and her social security number was issued in New York sometime between 1934 and 1951.

“Leonard Pozner” has harassed bloggers and YouTubers with DMCA copyright take-down demands, and is successful at it.

“Leonard Pozner” has also sued Wolfgang Halbig and Alex Jones on Sandy Hook. In his last lawsuit against Halbig, Lenny dropped the lawsuit when it came time for him to be deposed, under oath. Hmm . . . .

The latest “Leonard Pozner” effort at stifling free speech is his lawsuit against James Fetzer and his publisher, Moon Rock Books.

Below is a message from Fetzer, December 2, 2018:

As many of you will know, that’s me in the picture above, continuing my research at a recent JFK conference in Dallas last month.

And, as most of you know, I have dedicated my professional life to shedding light onto those events in our nation’s history—and in fact, world history—that have the power to shape what we think and do, including, of course, how future Americans—and citizens of other nations—interpret world events.

This is one of the reasons I—and several of my closest colleagues—created Moon Rock Books, which began with Nobody Died At Sandy Hook: It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control, after Amazon banned it in November 2015.

We’re now up to 12 books—with several more released each year—which cover the most pressing issues of our times: 9/11, the Moon landing, the Boston Marathon bombing, Sandy Hook, the JFK assassination, Charlottesville, Parkland, and many more. And the only reason we can continue to produce these important books is because of the support you provide when you purchase them.

My research has come under fire recently, where websites and platforms I had used to present my—and others—conclusions, have been attacked: loads of videos from YouTube have been deleted, my James Fetzer Facebook page has been scrubbed, and my entire blog, at jamesfetzer.blogspot.com—with 770 blogs posted since 2011—was taken down. Even those who have had me as a guest on their shows have been attacked!

A real 21st century-style book burning. Mike Adams of Natural News went so far as declaring me “The Most Dangerous Mind in America,” because I approach topics like false flags using the scientific method. Fortunately, I have reconstituted my online presence and salvaged most of those blogs at jamesfetzer.org.

Now, I—and my most trusted colleagues—face perhaps our greatest challenge: a lawsuit from Leonard “Lenny” Pozner, the alleged father of one of the children ostensibly killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School almost six years ago. Lenny, whose real name appears to be Reuben Vabner, is suing me, my series editor, Mike Palecek, and Moon Rock Books for defamation, his ultimate goal being to shut down our ability to publish and to stifle free speech.

I am not at liberty to reveal any more information now other than to say that we will be challenging his suit vigorously. We don’t know how yet, and we’re not asking for any donations to a legal defense fund. If you would like to help, what I suggest is that you do what you’ve done in the past: buy our books—for yourself and/or as gifts—to help to fund our defense, by clicking the image below.

Have a wonderful Holiday Season! Thanks for your support of Moon Rock Books and the search for truth, without which we lose our way.

Jim

James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.

Please support Jim Fetzer and free speech by purchasing his books from Moon Rock Books. Click here or slow-mail to:

Moon Rock Books
6256 Bullet Drive
Crestview, FL 32536

See also “Wolfgang Halbig has stunning evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School was closed months before ‘massacre’”. If that post is taken down, it is archived here.

About “Leonard Pozner,” see Bill Saive’s “The Chimera Lenny Pozner – Somebody’s Cyberpuppet“:

It is time the world knew what happened when Leonard Pozner sued Wolfgang Halbig, since the proceedings support the conclusion of many in the Sandy Hook Truth community that Lenny may not even be a real person, at all, but is somebody’s cyberpuppet.  In a nutshell, Pozner never appeared for a single hearing in the case, not even for his deposition when–after numerous delays–the court ordered him to submit to it.  Pozner dismissed the case right before that deposition was to take place.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Sandy Hookish: A patchwork quilt of charitable concerns.

Note: This article is based on collaborative research by Anne Berg, Alison Maynard and the author. Please note that extensive research, much of which is not included here, turned up surprising connections between places and people. Some may be merely coincidental while others may be significant. We have included them so that readers may be informed and arrive at their own conclusions. ~C

In Part 3 of our “Doors of Deception” series, we examined the connection between Room #5 at Sandy Hook Elementary school and the conga line photos by Shannon Hicks that helped build the myth of a police evacuation on 12-14-12. We concluded with our belief that a dual timeline was used, likely involving at least two dates for the photographic record.

In this post, we’ll go beyond the conga line in the Sandy Hook labyrinth – to points southwest and ultimately beyond Connecticut’s boundaries – to examine connections farther afield. If a common theme can be found for all that follows, we would have to settle on one word: Charity. Charity is a virtue, of course, but in the Sandy Hook story – indeed, in the story of our time – it carries other freight.

Let’s begin with an article from an obscure digital source from Oregon, the Bend Bulletin, titled “A Deeper Christmas in Sandy Hook.” The focus is on one of the conga line children, whose mother, Catherine Galda, has family ties to Bend. In the article, Mrs. Galda describes her experience after hearing about the lockdown at the school. After parking her car, she allegedly ran to the firehouse by foot where she met up with her daughter an hour later.

Mrs. Galda’s daughter, Hannah, isn’t clearly visible in the conga line because the child next to her has “her right arm stretched, obscuring Hannah’s face.” Hannah is in a pink top. The top of her head can be seen (based on her mother’s description) directly beneath the sleeve of the woman in the blue-and-white sweater:

The “Iconic” Photo. Photo Credit: Shannon Hicks, Newtown Bee/AP

We’re told that Catherine Galda is a career psychotherapist married to husband James Galda, a plumber (not of the Watergate variety). It’s an odd juxtaposition, but that’s not what caught our attention.

Got resiliency? Mrs. Galda interested us because of her involvement in the Recovery and Resiliency* Team in Newtown. Her LinkedIn profile is impressive, listing credentials as a psychotherapist and social worker.

After 12-14-12, the Department of Justice bestowed $7 million on the town for the purpose of “recovery care” for Newtown residents. Some 800 families are said to have received counseling under the multi-million-dollar federal funding, according to this article.

The same article describes what happened after the money dried up in 2016: Newtown assembled its own local team of mental health professionals:

“The disbanding of a federally funded trauma team that helps people deal with the Sandy Hook massacre has forced the town to improvise to ensure the recovery care continues.”

In other words, to ensure the continuing flow of funding.

The article points to grants from sources like Praxair, Newtown-Sandy Hook Community Foundation and the federal Victims of Crime Act. And the following caption beneath a group photo discloses who would become the new mental health duennas:

“Deb DelVecchio-Scully, front left, Melissa Glaser, front right, Catherine Galda, back left and Margot Robins are working on a long-term plan for Newtown, Conn., after a federally funded trauma team that helped people deal with the Sandy Hook shootings wraps up its work.”

Recovery addiction: “This is who we are.” “It is a huge challenge, but we need to accept our reality and find the pathway to the resources we are going to be responsible for providing for decades,” First Selectman Pat Llodra was quoted as saying in the same article. “We have to be honest about it and own it and say ‘this is who we are.’ ”

The article goes on to say that more people are coming forward “needing support every day” due to the massacre. The article appeared four years after 12-14-12. Let’s ask the forbidden question: How long can community “recovery” go on? Especially considering how many directly involved in the incident no longer live in Newtown.

And that includes Mrs. Galda herself.

A sudden move. The dream job of 2016 didn’t hold Mrs. Galda in town long, but led to greener pastures. From her LinkedIn profile and the article here, we learn that she migrated due south to become Director with Catholic Charities in November 2016. It’s not surprising that Mrs. Galda’s new position in Central Florida is mostly about trauma and its management. From the article:

“With Behavioral Health, we seek to be holistic, caring for a person’s mind, body and soul. We also provide resources and coordinated care. We also seek to remove the stigma that has made it difficult for people to seek help. We want to help people understand how mental health affects physical health. We also look beyond the immediate concern and find the root causes of a problem that are often the result of a traumatic episode,” said Galda.

The move to Florida was followed by the dissolution (on Hallowe’en of 2017) of a small business, Galda Holdings, LLC, that Mrs. Galda operated together with her husband, the plumber James Galda. The business was located at 15 Sand Hill Road in Sandy Hook, which may have involved the rental of a cottage situated on the property near the main house.

According to our research on Vgsi.com, the main property was one of those anomalies in Newtown that has a sale for $0 recorded on Christmas Day of 2009. Zillow puts the resale at $435,000 in September 2017, a nice return.

Other interesting facts about the former Galda property and business:

These may all be mere coincidences; we are merely noting them.

A General Electric connection. Charles lived not far from Newtown at the time when Shannon Hicks was photographing conga lines. But Charles is no plumber. According to his LinkedIn profile, he is Chief Information Officer of Technology Centers and Services, with global responsibility for GE Capital’s Technology Centers.

He has also been on the Technology Board of Danbury Hospital, where two children were allegedly brought and died after the purported massacre. (We never learned these children’s names.)

A charitable history. Why should an upper-level executive position with GE be of interest to SH researchers? Obviously, there is the fact that Adam Lanza’s father, Peter Lanza, was a higher-up at the light bulb company: VP of GE Capital as well as serving as a partner at Ernst & Young.**

More important, after 12/14/12, GE loaned expert employees to Newtown Town Hall to help manage all of the charitable donations and generally run things for a year. This reeks of corporatism, but no one seemed to mind. GE had already chipped in $15MM to help manage the overflow of charitable gifts.

With GE then situated in Fairfield and Stamford, and hundreds of high-level employees living in and around Newtown, giving them a place at the table must have seemed perfectly natural to town managers. Hadn’t the corporation earned its right to oversee the Sandy Hook charity ball? (See: https://www.sandyhookpromise.org/gala.) GE executives have sat on the boards of local charities for decades.

GE recently moved its headquarters from CT to Boston, causing consternation among the CT towns to which it once contributed hefty taxes. However, according to Wikipedia, GE Financial remains in Norwalk.

Charles Galda may be working elsewhere, having sold his Brookfield home in June 2018. Whatever the case may be, Charles, like his sister-in-law, left behind a record of notable charitable interests, including Walnut Hill Community Church (Bethel, CT) and the Center of Hope (Haiti). Out of curiosity spurred by Galda’s corporate and familial associations, we took a gander at both.

Walnut Hill Community Church, Bethel. This evangelical assembly, only a few miles from Newtown, is where Galda has served as an elder and member of the board of directors. In 2013, the church ran into some trouble in the form of civil suits on allegations of sexual abuse of a minor due to negligence by members of the church’s youth leadership. The perpetrator had already been arrested and sentenced in 2010. The 2013 complaint targeted the church itself, the senior pastor, the pastor of community life, the youth pastor and a former elder. Galda was not named, nor has he commented to our knowledge. We weren’t able to determine the outcome of these charges.

Center of Hope, Haiti. Charles Galda also lists among his accomplishments his service as a volunteer treasurer and director of the Center of Hope Haiti, Inc., which has somewhat straitened-looking headquarters in Stamford CT at 22 Vista Street. If you zero in on the sign, you’ll see that the building is owned by an establishment called the French-speaking Baptist Church.

Above photo from: https://gis.vgsi.com/stamfordct/Parcel.aspx?Pid=1865

The French-Speaking Baptist Church has another location in Stamford at 28 Adams Ave. Stamford. It looks a little down-at-heel:

Above photo from: https://gis.vgsi.com/stamfordct/Parcel.aspx?Pid=9508

Unfortunately, the Center of Hope isn’t listed by Charity Watch, since its revenue is below the threshold of $1million.

Charity Navigator lists it, but doesn’t rate it:

Oddly, the above entry (from Charity Navigator) lists the location as Middlebury, CT, not Stamford. Upon clicking the MORE INFO button, we found that the address there is a post office box: PO BOX 1150, MIDDLEBURY, CT 06762-1150. Hm? Why doesn’t the mail go to the Vista Street, Stamford address?

A search of Guidestar.org confirmed the above addresses:

Physical Address

22 Vista Street

Stamford, 06902

Payment Address

P.O. Box 1150

Middlebury, CT 06762

The distance between Stamford and Middlebury is 53 miles. Why not a P.O. box in Stamford? It just seems odd. And odder still is another mailing address for the charity on the opposite end of the continent, in Orinda, California.

You can find some of the financials on the Center of Hope at this link. For instance:

A focus on Hispaniola. Haiti and the Dominican Republic share the Caribbean island known as Hispaniola, roughly dividing it into halves, with a bit more turf on the Haitian side. It is a vortex of weather woes, disease and poverty, as well as slavery and human trafficking. See the following links:

https://www.businessinsider.com/flawed-arrangement-turns-haitian-restaveks-into-slaves-2014-8

https://www.ijdh.org/2010/10/topics/womens-issues/sex-trafficking-of-haitian-kids-exploding/

Hispaniola has been a focus for charity-minded former residents of Connecticut’s western region. Besides Center of Hope, we discovered two other charities with peculiar links to names that readers will recognize from the Sandy Hook incident. We present such facts as we were able to find not in order to accuse anyone of anything, but simply because we found the stories to be instructive, involving odd coincidences and unfortunate twists of fate.

  1. The Batey Foundation, 371 West Farm Rd. Bethlehem, NH USA 03574

This charity is described as “a non-profit, secular, and non-political entity focused on universal principles of human rights, social justice, and community service in the bateyes of the Dominican Republic.” Batey is said to provide scholarships, community support, work and cultural exchange services.

“Bateyes” are settlements around sugar mills, found in impoverished places like Cuba and the Dominican Republic. The foundation takes its name from this odd word. But it was another name that first drew our attention.

George Hochsprung’s first wife. Mr. Hochsprung was the third husband of Dawn Hochsprung, the former principal of Sandy Hook Elementary. His first wife, Janet (Walzer) Smith, works/worked at the foundation, as stated on her Facebook page.

The Batey Foundation is the brainchild of Janet Walzer Smith’s ex-son-in-law, Joshua “Sweat” Lawton, who was married to Amy Hochsprung, Janet and George’s daughter. Amy worked at White Mountain School in New Hampshire and, oddly, the address of that school is identical to that of the Batey Foundation.

Joshua Lawton is something of a social justice warrior according to his bio: “… he focused his studies on the enlightenment thinkers and changing ideas of equality, political independence, and personal freedom. Over the years Josh’s interests evolved into how existing economic, political and social structures affect the human condition, specifically in the world’s poorest regions.” It must be difficult working for such an ex-son-in-law.

The Batey Foundation was founded in 2009. See its Facebook page here. For the Batey Foundation’s IRS information, go here. Interesting. And, as far as we can tell, nothing seems to be unusual at the Foundation apart from having its offices tucked away in another small New England school.

  1. Health e Children International, Inc., 11 Orchard Lane, Ridgefield, CT

Of the charities we examined, Health e Children wins the blue ribbon for odd bedfellows and eerie coincidences. In some ways, it’s a ghost story, because the charity died an ignominious death.

Just last year, it still had a Facebook page, but this link has expired:

Here are two screen shots we obtained while the page was still up:

From 2011:

From 2012:

As shown, the Health e Children FB photo album contained pictures of Ugandan and Haitian people and scenes. The foundation was started on Dec. 21, 2005 by a once-married couple, both of them children’s healthcare professionals (Jens Haerter, physician’s assistant, and Patricia Jorquera, Board-certified pediatrician) in a modest-looking house in Ridgefield, CT. At the same address, the couple operated an entity known as Healtheclinic, Inc., a pediatric practice established to assist the “under-served.”

You can read about both foundations by clicking this link. Information about an Ecuadoran offshoot can be found at this link. 

Both tax-exempt foundations were abject failures according to this link. Health e Children, Inc. doesn’t even appear among listings of Ridgefield’s nonprofits. 

And there is zero income reported for Healtheclinic Incorporated. See the following URLs:

https://www.nonprofitfacts.com/CT/Healtheclinic-Incorporated-Healthechildren-International.html

https://www.faqs.org/tax-exempt/index-CT-Ha-He.html#ixzz42wZzdE2W

The strange case of the Burberry counterfeit lawsuit. Health e Children seems to have languished rather suddenly after being named as one of hundreds of defendants in a major lawsuit by Burberry Limited, the famous UK garment company. The charity’s website URL was replaced by this link. It led to this page, a notice of the lawsuit:

The complaint alleges that the defendants were caught selling counterfeit Burberry merchandise. See this link.

“Huh?” we asked. Must be some kind of mistake. But we checked the list of defendants at this link.

And, sure enough, there it was among hundreds of Chinese surnames and businesses with the word “cheap” in their names: Health e Children, number 632 on page 41.

Some context: Burberry apparently went on the warpath against counterfeiters as a 12/05/2012 Huffington Post article attests. (Note that date – the Sandy Hook event took place 9 days later. Just a coincidence, but interesting.)

You can find the Huff piece at this link.

From the article: “What lesson did we learn this week, class? Don’t rip off Burberry. Burberry was awarded $100 million in damages this week as Manhattan Federal court laid down the law on an extensive counterfeiting network.”

(The Huff piece attests that the Chinese were heavily involved in this case. In Feb. 2016, Burberry was in court again, this time to sue J.C. Penney Co., Inc. for copying its iconic check pattern.)

So, why was Health e Children named as a defendant in a counterfeit fabric suit? And why is that of interest to SH researchers? Once again, there is a befuddling and totally unexpected Hochsprung connection.

Janet (Walzer) Hochsprung ran a quilt shop out of 5 Front Street in Bethel, CT, as well as renting the apartments on the other side of the building (1,3 Elizabeth Street, Bethel, CT and, catty-corner, 101 Elizabeth Street, Bethel, CT) from January 2002 until at least 2008. (This info comes from the Bethel Tax Assessor’s record and BBB records, corroborated by other sources.)

The shop had multiple names over its duration (which went beyond 2008), including:

  • Homestead Viking
  • JH Homestead Quilts
  • JH Homestead Quilting
  • Homestead Quilts
  • HomeStead Quilts

The Bethel tax assessor’s office confirmed that there had been two owners of the Bethel, CT shop, although they never clarified whether these owners were partners or whether Janet (Walzer) Hochsprung sold the shop to the other owner, whose name is Vivian Hultgren. We also later found much evidence that Vivian Hultgren ran the shop beyond 2010.

Church ladies were recruited to sew frocks for poor Haitian children. We found evidence that the Bethel quilt shop advertised regularly for women to join a sewing circle that benefited Haitian children. In 2011, for instance, according to her FB page (https://www.facebook.com/HomesteadQuilts/), Vivian Hultgren recruited women (church ladies) to sew frocks for a charity. You can guess which one it was: Health e Children International.

Were the frocks made from counterfeit Burberry fabric and sold, rather than being donated to poor children? It’s just one of our questions.

Other questions were answered by one of the church ladies, whose name we are keeping anonymous for obvious reasons. She told us that two marathon sewing sessions took place at her church to benefit children in Haiti. The seamstresses made “children’s dresses and shorts.” The sewing sessions were coordinated with “a local group of doctors” (she couldn’t remember their names) who, she says, “took the clothes directly to Haiti” to benefit the children.

“They didn’t ship the clothes,” she said. “They actually took them directly to Haiti.”

On December 31, 2013 (a year after the Burberry lawsuit), the Homestead Quilts shop in Bethel, CT closed suddenly with only six days notice. And, on January 1, 2014, a website for a quilt shop with an identical name popped up in LaPine, Oregon – just 30 miles from Bend, Oregon, where this article’s inauspicious first paragraphs begin.

In February 2015, Vivian Hultgren was alleged to have died under circumstances that remain suspicious. We have no idea where the fabric bolts went, or the frocks, or the Burberry labels.

An Americares connection. From this link we learned the following:

 “AmeriCares of Stamford has signed on to help HealtheClinic by donating medicine for the clinic.”

Looking into AmeriCares, we confirmed its long, global reach.

From the website above we found: “Primary Care: a) Expand access to primary health services for low-income communities at AmeriCares Free Clinics serving the uninsured in Connecticut, at our comprehensive family clinic in rural El Salvador, and through mobile medical units in the slums of Mumbai, India.”

It seems that AmeriCares is very involved in serving the poor in Connecticut: “AmeriCares Free Clinics provide primary health care to the uninsured in Connecticut. Three clinics in Bridgeport, Norwalk and Danbury offer medical services to thousands of residents every year, thanks to the work of dedicated and committed volunteer doctors, nurses, interpreters and administrative personnel.”

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AmeriCares

But there is an undeniable dark side to AmeriCares. It has been connected with CIA activities, including child trafficking.

And it is linked to the Clinton Foundation. More at this link.

The road to Haiti is paved with Clinton connections.*** We mustn’t forget that the Clintons were instrumental in getting kidnapper Laura Silsby released after she was found guilty of illegally taking Haitian children away from their families. See this article.

From the article: “Of the Americans only Silsby was prosecuted, convicted, and released with “time served” although the prosecutor had recommended a six month sentence. Silsby was originally charged with kidnapping and criminal association, reduced to one count of arranging illegal travel.”

See also this article from zerohedge.com.

Shortly afterwards, human trafficking researcher Monica Peterson died in Haiti under suspicious circumstances.

See: https://govbanknotes.wordpress.com/2017/07/05/monica-peterson-suicided-after-exposing-clinton-human- trafficking/

From the linked article: “Monica Petersen was in Haiti working for the Human Trafficking Center and also previously worked for the Colorado Human Trafficking Council’s Data & Research Task Force. She died a few days ago under suspicious circumstances. Her friends on Facebook are looking for answers. Several close friends have made mentions on various FB posts that friends and family have no clear understanding of what happened to Monica except that she died on Sunday.”

 Other commentary from Petersen’s community can be found on FB here.

Blind faith, hope and charity. The charitable impulse is one of humanity’s most prized. In addition to being a virtue much extolled in the Bible, it is the universal voluntary and spontaneous expression of human compassion. Without it, we doubt very much that the human species would have made it this far. While we are not suggesting that charity had a twisted underside in all of the cases examined in this post, we are asking readers to take the closer look that such matters deserve.

And while we are in an asking mode, please also consider that humans under the influence of their best impulses – compassion, empathy, charity, etc. – are often least equipped to ask the right questions. That is why incidents such as Sandy Hook are quicksand for clear cognition. Most people simply cannot offer even a narrow seat to the critic within when the heart is occupying most of the floor space. The curious thing is that, in the case of Sandy Hook, this blind faith has been going on for years. “This is who we are.” But is it? We hope this post will, in a small and compassionate way, help to heal the blind.

~C.

 

Footnotes:

*Note how the words “resilience” and “resiliency” are gaining in popularity. To learn more about so-called “resilient cities,” go here for an interview of Deborah Tavares (of StoptheCrime.net) who knows the score on this subject:

Her point is that as long as the public perceives our country as being in a “state of national emergency,” people will accept infringements on our Constitutional rights and will succumb to the effects of psychological, nutritional, biological, climate and chemical poisoning. The point is to keep people in a constant state of psychological emergency and biological stress, so they are easier to control. Although Tavares talks mostly about biological, technological, climate and chemical controls, we are positing here that the psychological controls via false flags and hoaxes are all part of the same plan.

**On Dec. 16, 2012, Peter Lanza was called to testify in the “Libor Scandal,” in which banks were said to lie about interest rates to beef up their credit-worthiness:

“The Libor scandal was an event that saw banks lie about interest rate information to make themselves look more creditworthy. The Libor is a calculated average interest rate and used to give an average of the health of the overall economy. Obviously, dishonesty by the banks would affect the Libor rate and the corresponding financial view of citizens. Companies colluded to affect the Libor rate in the hopes that it would result in more business. Student loans and mortgages are just two of the financial products that would have been affected by the manipulation of the Libor rate.”

*** One could say that the road to Sandy Hook was paved with Clinton and Democrat connections as well. For instance, most FOTM readers know that SH parent Francine Wheeler was the personal assistant to Democratic fundraiser Maureen White (see https://memoryholeblog.org/tag/francine-wheeler). And Eric Holder was in Connecticut just before 12-14-12 (Nov. 27, 2012), meeting with Gov. Dannel Malloy to launch Project Longevity, purportedly formed to reduce gun violence in Connecticut’s cities. (See: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/project-longevity-launched-reduce-gang-and-gun-violence-connecticut-s-cities).

 

 

Please follow and like us:
0