Tag Archives: Sandy Hook Elementary School

Newtown clerk refuses to issue Sandy Hook victims’ death certificates

Something really stinks about the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.

On February 5, 2013, I tried to order alleged mass murderer Adam Lanza’s death certificate from Vitalcheck, but got this message: “Sorry, this Death Certificate is unavailable.”

Now I know why.

John Voket reports for The Newtown Bee that Newtown’s town clerk Debbie Aurelia is refusing Freedom of Information requests from media and other sources seeking copies of all death records, including burial locations, of the alleged victims of the shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, as well as the death records of alleged mass murderer Adam Lanza and his mother, Nancy Lanza.

The New York Post, the Connecticut Post, the Associated Press, the Hartford Courant, and other media have put forth requests for official death certificates of Sandy Hook victims.

Death certificates are part of vital public records, which also include birth and marriage certificates. They are public domain documents that serve as a mechanism for upholding the integrity of information in which there is a public interest, as it relates to voting, citizenship, and receiving public benefits. Abuses of voting processes involving voters who, unbeknownst to the public, are actually dead, are legendary. Death certificates typically contain little information about manner of death beyond categories such as “natural cause,” “homicide,” “accident,” “suicide,” or “other.” News organizations utilize such records in crime reporting as a standard part of normal, often tedious, fact-checking procedures. Death certificates also contain the sworn statement of the medical examiner.

What Aurelia is doing is contrary to the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act (CFOIA) as codified in Chapter 14 of Connecticut General Status. [Click here for the CFOIA.]

Section 1 (5) of CFOIA defines “public records or files” as “any recorded data or information relating to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, received or retained by a public agency, or to which a public agency is entitled to receive a copy by law or contract under section 1-218, whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method.”
Sec. 1-210 of the CFOIA specifies that “Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public records and every person shall have the right to (1) inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours, (2) copy such records in accordance with subsection (g) of section 1-212, or (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212. Any agency rule or regulation, or part thereof, that conflicts with the provisions of this subsection or diminishes or curtails in any way the rights granted by this subsection shall be void.”
More than refusing to comply with Freedom of Information requests for the death records of Sandy Hook victims, Aurelia is working with two Republican state legislators, Representatives Dan Carter and Mitch Bolinsky, and the leadership of the state association of town clerks to craft a bill that would provide the press and public with limited directory information from death and marriage records, but would withhold the actual death and marriage certificates from review except by legally entitled immediate family members or their representatives.

As reported by Christopher Keating of the Hartford Courant, Bolinsky’s one-paragraph bill, HB 5733 – An Act Concerning Access to a Child’s Death Certificate, states that the copy of the public record could be restricted “when the disclosure of the death certificate is likely to cause undue hardship for the family of the child.’’

But Jim Smith, a veteran journalist who serves as president of the Connecticut Council on Freedom of Information, said his group will fight against the bill in its continuing advocacy for open government. The certificate, he said, is a straightforward, factual document that lacks the details of an autopsy report: “There isn’t anything in a death certificate that is going to hurt the deceased. It’s not like an autopsy report. It’s been public for centuries. It’s not going to invade anyone’s privacy. We understand people, especially in Newtown, are aggrieved, but it shouldn’t lead to shutting off information in a democracy. There’s no real reason to do it. If a kid dies, we ought to know why. We shouldn’t be hiding why kids die.’’

HB 5733 is sponsored by Rep. Mitch Bolinsky and co-sponsored by Reps. Brenda L. Kupchick and DebraLee Hovey, and Sen. John McKinneyall Republicans. Two days ago, on Feb. 23, 2013, the bill was referred to Connecticut state legislature’s Joint Committee on Public Health.

H/t Ralph Lopez of DigitalJournal.com


Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Another mysterious Newtown death

The Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre on Dec. 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, is rife with puzzling anomalies, one of which has to do with a spooky coincidence between Sandy Hook and the massacre in that Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. (For other Sandy Hook anomalies, see FOTM’s “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.)
The name “Sandy Hook” is written on a map in the Batman movie “The Dark Knight Rises” — the same movie shown in the Century theater in Aurora.
In “Dark Knight,” when plotters are determining where mayhem will erupt, police commissioner James Gordon (played by Gary Oldman) points to a map showing a targeted area identified as Sandy Hook, also known as “Strike Zone 1” where Gotham Stadium is located. where there is a Sandy Hook Bay. (Source: Digital Journal) While not Sandy Hook, Connecticut, it’s still kinda spooky that “Sandy Hook” is the only name penciled in large letters on the map.
Here’s another strange coincidence.
Scott Getzinger, a man who had provided props for many movies including “The Dark Knight Rises,” was killed in a head-on car accident last April. He was a resident of Newtown, CT.scott-getzinger-05
The Stamford Advocate reports that on the evening of April 7, 2012, a 46-year-old Newtown man who worked behind the scenes on numerous blockbuster films was killed in a head-on accident on the Merritt Parkway Friday evening.
Scott Getzinger, a property master who provided props for more than 25 films, including “Spider-Man,” “Independence Day,” “The Truman Show” and “The Dark Knight Rises,” died at Stamford Hospital after sustaining severe injuries.
Getzinger suffered multiple broken bones, but was described as conscious and alert after being cut out of the 2002 Ford F-150 pickup truck he was driving. State police initially characterized his injuries as non-life threatening.
The accident was reported at 7:02 p.m. when a 1999 Lexus RX300 driven by Alexandra Orteig, 18, of New Canaan lost control while traveling south on the parkway near Exit 36 and spun around, striking the center median guardrail and crossing over the highway into the northbound lanes.
Getzinger was driving northbound in the right-hand lane when the Lexus SUV slammed head-on crushing the front-end of his truck.
Orteig and a 17-year-old passenger also from New Canaan were also taken to Stamford Hospital. Orteig was admitted overnight and released Saturday. The passenger was not admitted to the hospital.
State police said the accident is under investigation and no charges have been filed. Getzinger’s family declined to comment.

Susan GetzingerSusan Getzinger

Several days ago, Getzinger’s widow spoke at a Bipartisan Task Force Public Hearing on gun violence prevention and children’s safety in the Newtown High School, Newtown, CT, wherein she claimed her husband was killed the night after she had protested local corruption in a previous public hearing.
Shepard Ambellas writes for the blog IntelHub, Feb. 5, 2013, that Susan McGuinness Getzinger, a resident of Newtown, has come forward regarding shady actions in the Connecticut school system.
Stating that her husband, Scott Getzinger, was killed in a fatal car accident the night after she protested local corruption at a previous public hearing, Susan called out the three top administrators of the Newtown School District and mentioned a law firm’s involvement.
In a disjointed and sometimes incoherent speech, Susan Getzinger said:
“You walk into your PPT or Educational Hearing, they are all in on it. The staff is told not to identify, they can’t pay their mortgage if they speak out against it. It’s wrong. Fix it. Dead Kid’s that’s the price got it? [,,,] Adam Lanza was the first victim cause he probably had medical problems, and the attorneys sealed the records!
Susan also said there were three schools in lockdown the day of the Sandy Hook shooting.
Another speaker quickly cut Susan off as she was swiftly removed from the podium.
Here’s the video of Susan Getzinger (very poor audio):
H/t FOTM’s Sunny

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

A computer forensics analysis of 2 Sandy Hook documents

This is a continuation (Part 5) of FOTM’s investigation into a curious document, Crisis Management Institute’s “Talking With Children About the Sandy Hook Tragedy,” which was uploaded to the Internet — and linked to the website of Arlington Local Schools, the Arlington Red Devils — four days before the massacre on December 10, 2012.
This is not just a matter for computer techies. Rather, this is a matter of grave import because the Obama regime and the Left are using the shooting murder of 20 elementary school children to justify (via appealing to our emotions) the most radical and restrictive gun control measures in U.S. history.
Before you read this post, please acquaint yourself with the posts that precede this one:

See also our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page for FOTM’s other posts on this tragedy.
FOTM is grateful to computer forensicist Peter Offermann for giving so generously of his time, expertise, and tireless labor to this inquiry.
computer forensics


The Arlington Local Schools Website from which these Google Cache records originated was designed by a commenter here on FOTM called Jeremy. Jeremy also developed the SpireCMS (sCMS) software, which is a Content Management System (CMS), that runs the ALS website.
SpireCMS is similar, but not identical to other brands of CMS software such as WordPress (WP), Blogger, TypePad, etc.
Because I do not have access to SpireCMS, I cannot test it directly. However all CMS programs have key capabilities that are required to qualify them as CMS systems. I have identified one important difference between SpireCMS and WordPress which I will clearly define during this article.
My tests which will be illustrated below were conducted in WordPress.

What I will attempt to do in this article is prove technically, that the two cache records, shown in summarized form below, were created before December 14, 2012. Doing so would prove someone had foreknowledge of the Shooting Event about to occur at the Sandy Hook School.

Jeremy claims that errors in his code forced the school to pre-date news items in order to get them to appear in the news stream. Jeremy did not offer any technical proof of this when asked to backup his claim. All we have is his unsubstantiated word about what happened. Because of the importance of the Sandy hook Event I cannot just accept anyone’s word that they made a mistake. I need to see concrete proof that indeed an error caused those Google cache records to appear.
Lacking proof from Jeremy I have done my best to reverse engineer what happened on the ALS website. I did this by using the many clues that are available when examining a website from the outside, if one is familiar with the technical aspects of computer software, CMS based websites, database functionality which is the core component of CMS systems, and Internet infrastructure.
In order to convince you that I am right, I need to simplify the explanation of what occurred at ALS to the point that a layman can understand it. In an attempt to do this I will break the explanation into individual related segments so each concept can be grasped by itself, instead of being confused with others.
1) Identify and explain the important elements on the 2 Google cache records. They tell us very specific things about the records. They will allow us to identify the date, possibly dates, the records were created.
2) Step through the process of creating such a news item in WordPress to illustrate how the website code handles these pieces of information.
3) Point out a key difference between how sCMS and WP treat such items.
4) Summarize the above to the point it demonstrates conclusively that the documents were created on the dates shown in the PERMALINK.
5) Disprove Jeremy’s claim that back dating a news item would cause what is shown in the 2 Google cache records.
6) Explain conclusively…

a) how the two document came to be cached by Google.
b) what the two dates on the cache records, Dec 18, 2012 and Jan 12, 2013 refer to.
c) The significance of the Google search return of Dec 13, 2012.
d) The findings, and non findings, in the WayBack Machine Archives of these news items.

This article will only contain stages 1 through 3.
Stages 4 through 6 will be dealt with later in the discussion below the article.


Below are 2 images that summarize the important elements on the 2 Google cache records.


doc 2 closeup marked
You can click the icons below to view the original screen captures of each page in order to verify that the important parts of those pages shown above are accurate. (Close the new window to return here.)
doc1icon doc2icon
Please notice the word PERMALINK in the two images above. In both items the word points at a URL, (webpage address) where the page referred to can be found on the internet as long as it exists.

DEFINITION OF PERMALINK https://www.techterms.com/definition/permalink

Short for “permanent link.” A permalink is a URL that links to a specific news story or Web posting. Permalinks are most commonly used for blogs, which are frequently changed and updated. They give a specific Web address to each posting, allowing blog entries to be bookmarked by visitors or linked to from other websites.

Because most blogs are published using dynamic, database-driven Web sites, they do not automatically have Web addresses associated with them. For example, a blog entry may exist on a user’s home page, but the entry may not have its own Web page, ending in “.html,” “.asp,” “.php,” etc. Therefore, once the posting is outdated and no longer present on the home page, there may be no way to access it. Using a permalink to define the location of each posting prevents blog entries from fading off into oblivion.

A section of the permalink/url is outlined in red in both documents. One of the circles in each document highlights /2012/12/10/.
Each document also has a second red circle surrounding a date. These circled dates are the ‘Published Date’ of the document. Notice they are different. One says December 10, 2012 and the other says December 13, 2012.
Both the ‘/2012/12/10/’ in the permalink, and ‘Dec 10, 2012’ in the published date are dates. The dates are just shown in a slightly different format.
When WP is configured to use /yyyy/mm/dd/ in the permalink structure an author cannot directly edit the /yyyy/mm/dd/ in the permalink.
However the author can cause the /yyyy/mm/dd/ in the permalink to automatically change by changing the ‘published date’ they can change in the document.
Within WP the date embedded in the permalink link will always match the published date of the article.
A WP author can either pre or post date an article to whatever date they choose BUT the permalink and published dates will always match.
that is…
If the news item was created on Dec 17, 2012 and was published on that day the permalink would contain /2012/12/17/ and the published date would show December 17, 2012.
If the author decided they needed to change the published date to a prior date they could change the published date to December 10, 2012. The permalink would then contain /2012/12/10/ and the published date December 10, 2012. Although a different date than the original date of Dec 17, 2012, within the edited item the dates would still be identical.
Because the permalink and published dates within WP are always identical it is impossible for a reader of a news item to determine on what date the news item was actually created. This is because the author can change both the visible date indicators to whatever date desired.
REGARDING SPIRECMS>————————————————-
sCMS uses the same date formats as WP but the way the permalink and published date relate is crucially different.
Notice that in the second document, the permalink has /2012/12/10/ BUT the published date is different at December 13, 2012. To create a document with such a difference is impossible within WP. In WP the dates will ALWAYS match.
Within sCMS the permalink is indeed permanent and always points at the date the item was first created. The author changing the published date does not change the permalink.
Within sCMS if the permalink states /2012/12/10/ it means that is the date that item was first created.
Within sCMS the published date can be set to whatever date the author desires in order to place it properly in the news stream but the permalink will never change.
SUMMARY STAGE 1 >—————————————————-
The above is not yet proven, it is only a statement made by myself. The following stages will provide the proof. I’m sure both Brant and Jeremy will hotly dispute my conclusion in the comments below. I look forward to answering all their questions then.
The critical thing to remember from this stage is…

Within SpireCMS the actual created date of a news item can be determined from the date embedded within the PERMALINK.


This stage will step through the process of creating a news item in WordPress to illustrate how the website code handles permalinks and published dates.
This stage will confirm what I said about WP above is true.
In a recent discussion about this, Brant produced several videos trying to demonstrate what I say about WP isn’t true, but all his tests were flawed, as they didn’t match the conditions in sCMS. Yes, WP can act differently than I said in some circumstances, but only when it is configured differently. When WP is configured to embed dates in the permalink it always acts the same.
I have not yet seen a reply video from Brant, after I specified he match the sCMS layout. I am curious to see if he managed to get WP to do what I could not.
I do not have the available bandwidth to easily produce videos. I also find videos about technical issues are not great at studying the subject at hand in detail because important information slips by too quickly.
For my demonstration of how WP acts when configured to embed dates into permalinks, I will instead use annotated screen captures.
Unfortunately to see the important information requires the images to be larger than fit comfortably in the layout of FOTM so they have been shrunk to fit.
To view the images at full resolution click on the image and it will expand. Use the back button to return to the article.
The first image below shows a news item post I made on Feb 7, 2013. I did not touch the published date and it automatically defaulted to the current date in both the published date and the permalink.
I clicked publish and then went to the news section of the site to view it. The result is shown below. notice the red markup I did. The dates are the same in both places.


(click the image above to see a full resolution copy)

I then went back and edited the news item by only changing the published date to January 7, 1999.
I pressed publish after setting the new date and again went to the news section to view the article.
The result is shown below. Both the permalink and the published date now say January 7, 1999. Though a different date than before, they are still identical.
This means that there is no clue on that page as to when the page was created. As a viewer it is impossible to know that it did not originate on January 7, 1999. Only the author knows for sure.


(click the image above to see a full resolution copy)

SUMMARY STAGE 2>——————————————————
In my tests above, I was able to return the published date back to the original date successfully while still making the news item visible to the public. In WP you can change the published date as often as you like and every time the permalink will match the current published date.
Looking back at the DEFINITION OF A PERMALINK suggests that WP permalinks don’t fit that description. In WP it appears possible to change the PERMALINK of an item whenever you feel like it. That’s not permanent.
There is an explanation for this seeming anomaly.
It is shown in the image below.


(click the image above to see a full resolution copy)

What is shown in the image above is the bottom of the editing page where an author writes material. it shows that WP automatically saves many copies of the same document in the background as an author works. This allows the author to go back to an earlier version if they make a catastrophic mistake.

Each news item in WP and sCMS is a record in a database. Each revision of a document in WP is also a separate record in a database.

A database is like a fancy spreadsheet which some of you might be more familiar with. The image below illustrates what a record looks like when shown in a spreadsheet. Database records can easily be moved back and forth between databases and spreadsheets.


(click the image above to see a full resolution copy)

The blue horizontal line above is one record in a database. It can store all the information needed to show a single news item. The RECORD is broken vertically into FIELDS such as shown in the last blue column on the right.

The information in each record is broken into pieces so that information common to all records can be easily accessed. The column titles show the field names. ‘Document name’ is in one field, ‘document text’ is in another and so on.

The section in red is the PERMALINK area of each record. In this example the permalink is composed of the contents of three different fields. Site Address, Document location, and document name.

If you look at the items in the rows numbered 107 thru 111 you will first see two news items listed that were on the ALS website during December 2012. The last 3 items at first glance appear to be duplicates of the news item we are discussing.

If you look more closely at those 3 items you will discover differences in the Document Location Field, first record has /2012/12/10/, second record has /2012/12/11/ the third record has /2012/12/12/. The Published Date field has Dec 10, 2012, then Dec11, 2012, then Dec 12, 2012.

The above illustrates that WP doesn’t actually break the rule that a PERMALINK be permanent. It only appears to do so. Each record, there are 3 for the same article above, always keeps its own permalink.

In WP what automatically happens without authors realizing it when they change the published date of a document, is WP creates a duplicate new record of the original document.

The difference between records can be as little as a new copy having unique permalink and published dates which are different from the original record. The text content of the different records could also vary.



In the image below I embedded the second Google cache record so you can see how it is different than what WP does. I found it impossible to get WP to match the Google cache of the Dec 13th, 2012 sCMS news item shown below.


(click the image above to see a full resolution copy)

SUMMARY STAGE 3>——————————————————-
The reason sCMS does not treat permalinks and published dates the same as WP is most likely because it does not keep different revisions of documents. I can’t say that for sure without having access to sCMS but it would technically explain why the PERMALINK doesn’t always match the published date in sCMS.
If the above is the case, then when an author edits a news item in sCMS, they always work on the original record of the first news item. sCMS does not automatically create revision copies in the background.
Because there is always just one copy of any news item in the sCMS database, unlike WP that can contain many copies of each news item, sCMS cannot allow the PERMALINK to change in order to preserve the sanctity of PERMALINKS.
In sCMS when an author changes the published date, it does not also change the permalink date.
For technical reasons beyond the scope of this article, the sCMS way of dealing with news items is superior to WP. It allows search engines to access changed news items more efficiently than WP. It also avoids breaking links to the article my other sites.
The above statement suggests that even if sCMS does implement document revisions, they chose to keep the original permalink intact in all revisions in order to get more reliable results from search engines and outside links.
I can’t tell which is the case but the Google cache record with a permalink date of Dec 10, 2012 and a published date of Dec 13, 2012 clearly demonstrate sCMS did allow the two dates to part ways. Computer programs are not like humans who can change their minds willy nilly. A specific process will always act the same.
There is no other logical explanation for the difference in dates on that Dec 13, 2012 Google cache record.
If that record was created on December 17, 2012 as Jeremy states, the permalink would show /2012/12/17/ and the published date would show, December 13, 2012, not /2012/12/10/ and December 13, 2012.
FOOTNOTE STAGE 3>——————————————————
While conducting these test in WP I conducted one other test which will become relevant later. I will add it here as it is somewhat related.
Jeremy claims there is a problem in his software with dating items. I wanted to rule out one possible source of error.
I wanted to confirm that if the person entering a news item, be it someone at ALS, or at CMI, had the date on their computer set incorrectly, the news item would still show the correct default date in the news item because it used the clock of the host server in San Antonio to get the current dates.
We discovered earlier in a previous article when doing a whois of the ALS site, that the host server in San Antonio also contained 25 other websites.
Jeremy stated that the dating issue at ALS was a bug that existed for quite a while but ALS personnel never informed him so he could fix it. It is highly unlikely that the clock on a server serving 25 websites was wrong for an extended period. In my mind that rules out a clock problem causing the problems at ALS.
The results of my test are shown below.
That’s it for this article.

Update (Feb. 9 2013):

Peter’s computer crashed again. He will respond to comments/questions when he has everything restored. Stay tuned!

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Who, Where are the Sandy Hook wounded?

Colorado Shooting VictimsAllie Young (l) and Stephanie Davies (r)

The AP photo above is of two young women — best friends — who were in that dark movie theater in Century 16, Aurora, Colorado, on July 20, 2012. Stephanie Davies, 21, had saved 19-year-old Allie Young’s life by applying pressure to Young’s gushing neck wound and helping her to safety. (Source)
There are other photos and accounts of the Aurora wounded, including a follow-up by the Denver Post half a year later, of Caleb Medley, a 23-year-old aspiring comedian who suffered a gunshot wound to the head. Medley was discharged from the University of Colorado Hospital on Sept. 12 and moved to an extended care facility in Denver. On Jan. 23, 2013, Caleb left the rehabilitation center and returned home.
For that matter, three days after the shooting, the media made much of Dark Knight actor Christian Bale visiting the hospital where many of the wounded were being treated. One of the wounded, Carey Rottman, posted on Facebook this photo of himself with Bale at his bedside:

Have you seen any photos or interviews with those wounded in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting massacre?

Why is that?
Not only have I not seen even one media interview or video of Sandy Hook wounded, I can’t even figure out exactly how many and who were wounded. Or how many and who are still hospitalized or had returned home.
According to Wikipedia, at approximately 10:00 a.m. on December 14, 2012, “Danbury Hospital scrambled extra medical personnel in expectation of having to treat numerous victims. Three wounded patients were evacuated to the hospital, where two children were later declared dead. The other was an unidentified adult.”
According to CBS New York, Dec. 14, 2013, “State Police Lt. Paul Vance said 18 children and six adults, including the school’s principal, Dawn Hochsprung, were pronounced dead at that scene. Two other children later died at the hospital. One other person was injured, Vance said. […] Authorities said there was one survivor, teacher Nancy Hammond, who they hope will be helpful to the investigation.”
CBS New York posted the photo below as that of Nancy Hammond (credit: personal photo):


But according to Wikipedia, it was a “Natalie Hammond, lead teacher in the [staff] meeting room,” who was wounded. Hammond had “pressed her body against the door to keep it closed. Lanza shot Hammond through the door, in her leg and arm. She was later treated at Danbury Hospital.”
Furthermore, “The police reported that a second adult was wounded in the attack, but that individual was not publicly identified.”
Newstimes.com also identifies the wounded teacher as Natalie Hammond: “Hammond was shot in the foot, leg and hand, but managed to crawl to safety behind a door. Lanza then went down the hall to two classrooms, where he killed 20 children and four teachers. Ten minutes later, Lanza fired a bullet into his own head.”
Hammond’s best friend of 22 years is Anika Sonski. Although Sonski had talked with Hammond after the shooting, she said she knows only the barest details of what occurred. “To protect Hammond’s privacy and that of her family,” Sonski will not talk about her wounded friend’s condition, prognosis or where she was being treated. Sonski said Hammond’s “family is in a self-imposed seclusion due to the barrage of media that has surrounded them.”
There you have it:

  • Three (or four) Sandy Hook wounded were taken to hospitals.
  • Two of the wounded were children, but they died. Names unknown.
  • One of the wounded survived — an adult school teacher named Nancy or Natalie Hammond. Age unknown; her whereabouts unknown. I can find no media interview with her.
  • According to one account, a second adult was wounded. Name, age, sex, occupation, whereabouts unknown.

The Sandy Hook wounded are important percipient witnesses to the shooting. Their testimonies can verify whether there was only one gunman or two or more; and whether Adam Lanza was the (or a) shooter.
But the media are not in the least interested in finding and speaking with the wounded, although it would be newsworthy and riveting.
By order of a Connecticut State Superior Court judge, law enforcement’s lips are sealed — for 90 days, until late March 2013. By that time, the already disinterested media will be even less likely to report on what the police know and finally can reveal.
And that may precisely be what government and the media are counting on.

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

SSDI changed Adam Lanza's date-of-death from Dec. 13 to Dec. 14, 2012 !!!

The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) is a database of death records created from the federal government Social Security Administration’s Death Master File Extract. SSDI data are available free-of-charge on genealogy websites, including GenealogyBank.com.
On January 20, 2013, I did a post on the curious discovery that, according to SSDI, alleged Sandy Hook mass murderer Adam Lanza had died on December 13, 2012 — one day BEFORE the massacre of 20 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. This was the information was on the website GenealogyBank.com:

Adam P. Lanza: Social Security Death Index (SSDI) Death Record
Name: Adam P. Lanza
State of Issue: New Hampshire
Date of Birth: Wednesday April 22, 1992
Date of Death: Thursday December 13, 2012
Est. Age at Death: 20 years, 7 months, 21 days
Confirmation: Proven

I took a screenshot of that GenealogyBank.com page on Adam Lanza, as a prophylactic in case the site scrubs or alters the page. As you can see (bottom right of the image below), I took the screenshot at 2:29 pm on 1/20/2013:

As recent as two days ago, on January 31, 2013, I again went on that genealogybank.com page and saw that the SSDI date-of-death for Adam Lanza was still listed as December 13, 2012.
I just checked the site again.
You’re not gonna believe this –

The date of death is now changed to December 14, 2012!!!!!!!!!

Here’s a screenshot I just took, where you can see that it was taken at 1:32 PM on 2/2/2013:

Adam Lanza's altered SSDI

It is also noteworthy that of the 28 people (20 children, 8 adults) who allegedly were killed on December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, SSDI had the date-of-death for 26 people (Nancy Lanza; 19 children and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School) as December 14, 2012. (There is no SSDI for one child victim, Ana Marquez-Greene.) Of the 28 people killed that day, only Adam Lanza’s date-of-death was December 13, 2012that is, until SSDI recently changed it to December 14, 2012.

In other words, according to the original SSDI entry, the man who we are told was the lone gunman who perpetrated the Sandy Hook massacre, had died the day before he killed his 27 victims!

Will wonders ever cease…. [Snark]

Update (Feb. 5, 2013):

As of today, another genealogy website, Ancestry.com, says SSDI has Adam Lanza’s date-of-death as Dec. 13, 2012. See “Ancestry.com still has Adam Lanza’s date-of-death as a day before the Sandy Hook massacre.”


Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Dec. 14 was date of death for every Sandy Hook massacre victim, except Adam Lanza

On January 20, I did a post on the startling information that Social Security Death Index, as conveyed by the website GenealogyBank, says alleged Sandy Hook mass murderer Adam Lanza had died on December 13, 2012 — a day before the massacre.
The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) is a database of death records created from the federal government Social Security Administration’s Death Master File Extract. Most persons who have died since 1936 who had a Social Security number and whose death has been reported to the Social Security Administration are listed in the SSDI. Unlike the Death Master File, the SSDI is available free from several genealogy websites. The “state of issue” refers to the state that had issued the Social Security number.
The SSDI is not error-free. WSMV.com reports in 2012 that Social Security mistakenly declares about 1,000 people dead every month who aren’t, according to one government report.
After my post on Adam Lanza, a reader sent FOTM an email asking if SSDI has death records on the 20 children and 6 adults whom Lanza allegedly had killed in Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14. So we looked into this. Here’s our report.
According to genealogybank.com, SSDI has death records on all but one of the 26 Sandy Hook victims:

  1. Charlotte Bacon: age 6; born Feb. 22, 2006; died Dec. 14, 2012; State of issue (SOI) New Jersey.
  2. Daniel G. Barden: age 7; b. Sept. 27, 2005; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI New York.
  3. Rachel D’Avino: At first we couldn’t a SSDI for her, but when we conducted a re-search for “Rachel Davino” (instead of “D’Avino”) we did find her SSDI: age 29; b. July 17, 1983; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  4. Olivia R. Engel: age 6; b. July 18, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  5. Josephine G. Gay: age 7; b. Dec. 11, 2005; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Maryland.
  6. Dylan C. Hockley: age 6; b. Mar. 8, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Maryland.
  7. Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung: age 47; b. June 28, 1965; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  8. Madeleine F. Hsu: age 6; b. July 10, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  9. Catherine V. Hubbard: age 6; b. June 8, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  10. Chase M. Kowalski: age 7; b. Oct. 31, 2005; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  11. Jesse M. Lewis: age 6; b. June 30, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  12. James Mattioli: age 6; b. Mar. 22, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  13. Grace A. McDonnell: age 7; b. Nov. 4, 2005; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  14. Anne Marie Murphy: age 52; b. July 25, 1960; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI New York.
  15. Emilie A. Parker: age 6; b. May 12, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Utah.
  16. Jack A. Pinto: age 6; b. May 6, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  17. Noah S. Pozner: age 6; b. Nov. 20, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  18. Caroline P. Previdi: age 6; b. Sept. 7, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  19. Jessica A. Rekos: age 6, b. May 10, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  20. Avielle R. Richman: age 6; b. Oct. 17, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI California.
  21. Lauren G. Rousseau: age 30; b. June 8, 1982; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  22. Mary J. Sherlach: age 56; b. Feb. 11, 1956; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI New York.
  23. Victoria L. Soto: age 27; b. Nov. 4, 1985; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.
  24. Benjamin A. Wheeler: age 6; b. Sept. 12, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI New York.
  25. Allison Wyatt: age 6; b. July 3, 2006; d. Dec. 14, 2012; SOI Connecticut.

There is no SSDI for one Sandy Hook victim: Ana Marquez-Greene, age 6. Ana was mixed-race; her father is jazz musician Jimmy Greene.
So we searched for her SSDI again, using two variations of her last name:

  • An SSDI was found for “Ana Delia Greene”: b. 1968; d. 2010; SOI Arizona.
  • A search for SSDI for “Ana Marquez” found 36 Ana Marquezes, none of whom was the age of Ana Marquez-Greene of Sandy Hook. 

The lack of a SSDI for Ana Marquez-Greene may be because her parents had not yet obtained a Social Security card/number for her.

Ana Marquez-GreeneL to r: Ana’s brother, Jimmy Greene, Nelba Marquez-Greene; Ana Marquez-Greene

Note that the Date of Death for all of the above 25 Sandy Hook victims, as well as Adam Lanza’s mother, Nancy Lanza, is December 14, 2012.
Of the 28 people (20 children, 8 adults) who allegedly were killed on December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, only Adam Lanza’s date of death is December 13, 2012 — one day before the massacre.
In other words, according to SSDI, the man who (we are told) killed the other 27 had died the day before!
Here’s the screenshot I took on January 20, 2013, of the SSDI for Adam Lanza on genealogybank.com, showing his date-of-death as December 13, 2012:

As recent as two days ago, on January 31, 2013, genealogybank.com still had the SSDI date of death for Adam Lanza as December 13, 2012.
I just checked the site again. You’re not gonna believe this – The date of death is now changed to December 14, 2012!!!!!!!!!
Here’s a screenshot I took, where you can see that I’d taken the screenshot at 1:32 PM, 2/2/2013:

Adam Lanza's altered SSDI

We also came across this piece of oddity: The media used a photo of a different girl, Lily Gaubert, for Sandy Hook victim Allison Wyatt.

Lily GaubertLily Gaubert

On her Facebook page, Cathy Gaubert says someone lifted her very much alive daughter Lily’s pic from her Flickr page and used it as Sandy Hook victim Allison Wyatt’s.
Only when Cathy Gaubert found out that her daughter’s photo was identified to be that of the dead Allison Wyatt that the media replaced the photo of Lily Gaubert with a photo of Allison Wyatt.

Allison Wyatt (real pic)Allison Wyatt

~Eowyn & Steve

Update (Feb. 5, 2013):

I ran all the victims on another genealogy website, Ancestry.com, and can confirm that the date-of-death for all of them, except Adam Lanza, is December 14, 2012. Unlike genealogybank.com that’s changed Adam’s date-of-death to Dec. 14, 2012, Ancestry.com still has the date as Dec. 13, 2012, according to SSDI.
I also found an obituary on Ancestry.com for Ana Grace Marquez Greene, died Dec. 14 2012. But I cannot find an SSDI for the girl on Ancestry.com, using variations on her last name of “Greene,” “Marquez-Greene”, or “Marquez.”

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

NY gun owners plan mass civil disobedience

After years of mass shooting incidents, it took the murder of 20 white school children in a prosperous town — the 5th safest city in America — in a non-crime ridden state to finally jump start the Left’s gun-control agenda into overdrive.
A month after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, New York governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law the first major legislative action in response to the massacre and the toughest gun control law in the nation. Called the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, the main provisions of the law include:

  • Bans possession of any high-capacity magazines regardless of when they were made or sold.
  • Requires ammunition dealers to do background checks, similar to those for gun buyers.
  • Requires New Yorkers who own assault weapons to register their guns with the state.
  • Requires any therapist who believes a mental health patient made a credible threat of harming others to report the threat to the state Department of Criminal Justice Services.
  • Tightens the state’s description of an “assault” weapon to just one “military rifle” feature.
  • Requires background checks for all gun sales, including by private dealers.

A week later, the state’s assault-rifle owners are organizing a mass boycott of the new law, which promises to be the largest act of civil disobedience in New York state history.
Fredric U. Dicker reports for the New York Post, Jan. 21, 2013, that Brian Olesen, president of the American Shooters Supply, one of the largest gun dealers in the state, said “I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes.’’
Leaders of some of the state’s 300 gun clubs, gun dealers and Second Amendment organizations are organizing the boycott — and the heaviest interest is in Suffolk County, the Capital District and the Buffalo region, sources said.
Officials estimate at least 1 million semiautomatic rifles are owned in the state. And come April 15, 2014 — when Cuomo is expected to be running for re-election — they all have to be registered with the State Police.
But authorities don’t know who has them or where they are located because the rifles have been legal but unregistered until now.
State officials will be nervously watching the registration figures to see how many gun owners comply, sources said.
“Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that,’’ said a Cuomo-administration source who added that officials expect “widespread violations’’ of the new law. Owners who refuse to register could face a class-A misdemeanor — punishable by up to a year in prison. The unregistered weapon could also be confiscated, which could be worth several thousands of dollars.
National Rifle Association President David Keene told The Post yesterday that he wasn’t surprised by the planned boycott: “While we don’t get involved in campaigns to resist the law, I will say this: Historic experience here and in Canada shows that when you try to force gun owners into a registration and licensing system, there’s usually mass opposition and mass noncompliance. I think it’s going to be very difficult for the governor to get mass compliance with this new law.”
The organizers point to a little-known guarantee of gun ownership contained in New York’s own “Civil Rights Law,” which was ratified the same year as the U.S. Constitution. The state statute says the right to keep and bear arms “cannot be infringed” — words that are stronger than the Second Amendment, which says it “shall not be infringed.’’
“They’re saying, ‘F— the governor! F— Cuomo! We’re not going to register our guns,’ and I think they’re serious. People are not going to do it. People are going to resist,’’ said State Rifle and Pistol Association President Tom King, a member of the NRA board of directors. “They’re taking one of our guaranteed civil rights, and they’re taking it away.’’

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Military drills frighten residents of Miami and Houston

Last Thursday, January 24, 2013, military Black Hawk helicopters swooped in the night sky over Miami, firing machine guns.
The Channel 7 reporter in the news video above said it was a “joint military training exercise” of the U.S. military and local police, to “partly meet some of the requirements they have to do” and, on the military side, to “prepare for some military drills they have to do, so they can make sure all their equipment are in check.”
Blah, blah, blah.
Did you understand a word of that?
Today, Jan. 29, 2013, military choppers did another “drill,” this time over southeast Houston, Texas, frightening the residents.
Shots were fired. Army soldiers, armed and dressed in fatigue, with what appeared to be live rounds, conducted a “multi-agency training drill” in an abandoned high school. Not just the citizens, but even the fire department hadn’t been notified.
So why is the military doing this, scaring the sh*t out of people?
The answer is what the black man in the Houston video said (1:19 mark):

“If this is to protect our kids, I’m all for it.”

20 children were killed (allegedly) in Sandy Hook Elementary School. And the answer is: Gun control! Ban assault weapons! Although it remains unclear whether the alleged shooter Adam Lanza actually used an assault rifle in the school.
But if this is to protect our kids, I’m all for it!
We’re being led like sheep to the slaughter.

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

Letter from a resident of Newtown, CT

The letter below was published on Jan. 10, 2013, in The Newtown Bee, the local paper of Newtown, CT, where the Dec. 14, 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre occurred.
It is also now confirmed — SURPRISE! [snark] — that government officials (including Congress, of course), law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel are exempted from Sen. Diane Feinstein’s assault weapons gun ban bill, by far the most ambitious of the number of gun-control bills introduced in the wake of the massacre.
H/t my friend Nancy

CNN #2 The school these police officers were running into is not Sandy Hook Elementary School. Aren’t you at all curious why CNN would do that? See “CNN deception: Live aerial footage of police running into Sandy Hook was of another school.

Elected Officials Are Fundamentally Dishonest

To the Editor:
This letter was forwarded to Barack Obama, John Boehner, Chris Murphy, Dick Blumenthal, Elizabeth Esty, and Harry Reid
I live in Sandy Hook, CT. My family and close friends weren’t harmed on December 14. That day impacted 26 families with an indescribable, staggering pain and anguish. For most of Sandy Hook, it merely affected us with an inescapable intensity of sadness and grief.
Gun control has long been a focus of many in this country. Though I’m not knowledgeable of all the nuances of the Second Amendment, based on the Founding Fathers’ circumstances, it had far more to do with enabling the citizenry to protect themselves against tyrannical government than against local psychopaths. It is about providing a balanced firepower so when King George’s successor came knocking on your door, you could fight back. Government today is no less inclined to abuse its authority than it was then. Based on the absurd and ongoing power grab that is present day Washington, it’s as threatening as ever.
That so many of you view the NRA with its resistance to further restrictions on firearms as intransigent lunatics has far more to do with how you conduct yourselves in office than it does with the NRA’s actions.
You in public office are fundamentally dishonest people. You lead lives of deception at every turn, structuring your lives as comfortably as you can while governing with an indifference and arrogance that is absolutely maddening. When the country is reeling from financial disaster, you waste a trillion dollars on a health care bill we can’t afford and you’ve never read. You claim it’s critical because health care costs are killing this country… no they’re not, you are! You are killing this country. You endorse the ongoing slaughter of millions of unborn children and whine when terrorists are water boarded. You can’t lecture us right in Newtown High School about not doing enough to keep our children safe, while simultaneously slaughtering the unborn. You fabricate the intense, media laden drama of the fiscal cliff and lack the courage to do anything about truly reforming the obscene gluttony of government. You know you’ll be out of office before the bill comes due… you don’t care and have no integrity nor honor.
You lie whenever and wherever you need to to move forth your agenda. Were you able, you would purge the US of guns… every last gun in the country, if you could. So please forgive Wayne LaPierre and those of us who don’t trust you as far as we can spit. You’re a dishonest lot, motivated by a distorted worldview. If mass murder prevention were truly your goal, you would welcome armed security wherever needed. It is outrageous that we protect our money with far more firepower than we protect our children.
I have never owned a gun, nor wanted to as intensely as right now. You’ll stop restricting guns when only you have them.
Brendan Duffy
4 Chestnut Knoll Drive, Sandy Hook January 8, 2013

Share and Enjoy !

0 0

How we know a guide on counseling children about Sandy Hook predated the massacre

This is the second piece by guest columnist Peter Offermann, on the Crisis Management Institute (CMI) pdf document puzzle. FOTM is grateful to Peter for giving so generously of his Internet technical knowledge and analysis.
Here is the first part of Peter’s analysis: “An Analysis of Anomalies on ArlingtonLocalSchools.com (Part 1),” Jan. 22, 2013.
For the background on the CMI document, see “Guide on how to talk to children about Sandy Hook 4 days BEFORE massacre,” Jan. 16, 2013. For FOTM’s other posts on the massacre, go to our “Sandy Hook Massacre” page.

CNN #2 The school these police officers were running into is NOT Sandy Hook Elementary School! See “CNN deception: Live aerial footage of police running into Sandy Hook was of another school,” Jan. 22, 2013.


By Peter Offermann
I will refer to 3 images in this document that show the anomalies in the Google cache records of The Arlington School’s News Items.
Document 1 is an image of a Google cache record showing a published date of Dec 10, 2012 which  states Google recorded it on Dec 18, 2012.
The URL below used to access the page imaged below – it now returns a 404 page error. Anyone that has copies of the image please keep it safe.
it could also be accessed from
by selecting to view the page.
It now returns….
Your search – inurl:https://www.arlingtonlocalschools.com/news/2012/12/10/talking-with-your-child-about … – did not match any documents. Reset search tools


DOCUMENT 2 below is  an image of a google cache record showing a published Date of Dec 13, 2012 which states Google  recorded it on Jan 12, 2013.
As of this writing, January 25, 6:21pm PT it is still available at the url below.

DOCUMENT 3  is an image of a google search return to a document Published  Date of December 13, 2013 the same as in Document 2.
The link to this page has been disappeared by google as of today.


I am going to explain to you in this article how those document came to appear on the internet on the Published Dates shown, December 10, 2012 and December 13, 2012. I will also explain how the search return came into being.
In order to do this I am going to ask you to suspend disbelief so you can follow the timeline explaining the documents.
Events like 9/11 have demonstrated that news items about them appear almost instantly after such events. Many are complex documents that would be impossible to create in that short a period of time. If someone is preparing a false flag the most effective period to introduce your desired interpretation of the event is immediately after the event while people are still in shock. In order to meet a tight deadline there are many trusted people working in the background preparing documents and then sitting and waiting to pull the trigger and make them public the moment the event is planned to occur. These people are scattered all over and working off their own script with a time to make their information public.
CMI (Crisis Management Inc) which had author permissions on The Arlington School Website as a contractor to upload their material to the website as needed. They could upload, create links to their material, and publish news announcements all from their own offices without anyone from the School being involved.
The School shootings that took place in Sandy Hook on December 14, 2012, were originally planned to happen on December 10, 2012.
If you check on a calendar you will see Dec 10 was a Monday and a school day so the event could have been planned for that date.

DECEMBER 10, 2012

Everyone involved with media material had the material prepared referring to the date Dec 10, 2012.
On December 10, 2012 someone at CMI was waiting to pull the trigger and publish the news item (Document 1) and related documents such as the pdf the news item announces.
For some reason the event was called off at the last moment.
Everyone who had planned to submit material was frantically called to NOT submit their material.
The message for some reason didn’t get through to CMI in time and they submitted the pdf, created the link to it, and published the news item shown in Document 1 .
The other anomalous documents predating Dec 14, 2012 that appeared all over the Internet originated the same way. (See “Sandy Hook RIP/donation webpages created BEFORE the massacre,” Jan. 8, 2013; and “Another Sandy Hook fundraiser that pre-dates the massacre,” Jan. 17, 2013. ~Eowyn)
Because of a technicality (RSS Feed) that is explained by the developer of the program that manages the Arlington Schools site a record of the document immediately left the site and was submitted to people hooked up to the feed as well as to Google which published the item for availability in their search engine. (see document 3)
Google took the opportunity while going to the site to capture the thumbnail of the page seen on the right of document 2 to also put it into their cache database.
In the Technical Discuss Thread at https://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/sandy-hook-phony-documents-open-thread/#comment-164225
Jeremy the developer of the software SpireCMS which the School uses to manage their website stated: “When a news item is created in our system, it is pushed out via an RSS feed and, Google has it indexed usually under 24 hours.”
The above means the article could be found on the Google search engine on that date and also in their cache shown in Document 1.
The search record was scrubbed by Google for this Dec 10, 2012 item, but events that took place on Dec 13, 2012 caused an identical entry to be made only with a published date of December 13th. I’m not sure why it wasn’t scrubbed by Google before today. It is shown in Document 3.

DECEMBER 13, 2012

The Sandy Hook Shooting event was rescheduled to this date and was again scrubbed. It Was a Thursday, also a viable date.
It was again scrubbed for some reason.
CMI  again did not get the word to not publish in time.
They published the news item again, on Dec. 13,  but this time with a published date of Dec 13, 2012 causing another RSS submission creating Document 3  and also a second cache record (Document 2).
Jeremy stated above that “Google has it indexed usually under 24 hours” which means Document 1 would originally have shown either “as it appeared on 10 Dec 2012 or possibly 11 Dec 2012.”
The December 13, 2012 (Document 2) would originally have shown either “as it appeared on 13 Dec 2012 or possibly 14 Dec 2012.”
No one in the loop realized there was an RSS feed on the news items at Arlington School and that the 2 pages (Documents 1 & 2) were recorded in the google cache.


Some bright Internet users discovered the cache records predating the actual events and all hell broke loose.
The people behind the false flag frantically tried to cover up these incriminating cache records  and the search return.
For technical reasons too complex to explain here, it was impossible to erase the records.
Publicly removing the cache document after they were found would also be suspicious.
As a temporary fix someone authorized by Google edited the records as below.
Document 1, which first read “as it appeared on 10 Dec 2012 or possibly 11 Dec 2012 was changed to read 18 Dec 2012” — a date after the events of December 14th. This document was still suspicious but at least is showed it was recorded after the event it announced.
Document 2, which first read “as it appeared on 13 Dec 2012 was changed to read “as it appeared on 12 Jan 2013” — a date after the events of December 14th. This document was still suspicious but at least is showed it was recorded after the event it announced.
To make these changes at Google would take no more than about two minutes. All that needed to be done is to select the records in the database and edit the field that holds the date Google recorded the record.

JANUARY 25, 2013

Google decided that the evidence implicating them in these events were getting too dangerous to leave available and removed them from public view even though that looks very suspicious.
This happened because I stated publicly that it is impossible for a document — published with an RSS feed request to Google — to take 30 days as shown in Document 2 and 8 days as shown in Document 1 after the developer publicly stated at  https://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/sandy-hook-phony-documents-open-thread/#comment-164225 : “When a news item is created in our system, it is pushed out via an RSS feed and, Google has it indexed usually under 24 hours.”
There is an enormous amount of corroborating evidence that I described before at Fellowship of the Minds.
If you find the information above compelling enough to look further, and if I survive to tell about it, this discussion will be continued.
That Google is currently scrubbing the evidence does not bode well for those publicly explaining it. Although Google can hide the incriminating evidence from the public, they cannot remove the internal traces from their servers. We who made screencaptures and didn’t clear our browser histories have evidence they existed to the last date we accessed it. Guard that information well.
I am going to stop here to let you consider what I said.


Peter continues to make his case that the CMI was uploaded online BEFORE the massacre, as a prosecutor would in a criminal trial. Please go to our technical discussion thread about this post, “Sandy Hook Massacre: The People v. Crisis Management Institute,” by clicking here.

Share and Enjoy !

0 0