New court papers suggest Las Vegas shooter ranted about gun control days before shooting

hm1996

Moderator
Staff member
Hmmm, Jailhouse witnesses, all witnesses names redacted, sounds reasonable to me.

Quote:New court papers suggest Las Vegas shooter ranted about gun control days before shooting

By Associated Press

May 17, 2018 | 2:04am | Updated

New court papers suggest Las Vegas shooter ranted about gun control days before shooting

LAS VEGAS — Police documents released Wednesday about the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history included reports from at least two people who said a person they believed to be the gunman ranted in the days prior to last October’s Las Vegas Strip attack about the federal government and gun control.

The claims by those people and others could not be verified because the names of all witnesses were blacked out in the 1,200 pages of police reports and accounts that the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department made public after losing court battles to keep them secret.

Police and the FBI have not determined a motive in the ongoing investigation. Authorities said they believe Stephen Paddock acted alone and the attack had no link to international terrorism. Law enforcement refused Wednesday to provide any additional information, including refusing to say whether the reports were credible.

A jailed man who gave a statement in November to police and the FBI recalled a man he believed to be Paddock telling him that Federal Emergency Management Agency “camps” set up after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 were “a dry run for law enforcement and military to start kickin’ down doors and … confiscating guns.”

“Somebody has to wake up the American public and get them to arm themselves,” the man said Paddock told him less than a month before the Oct. 1 shooting that killed 58 people and injured hundreds. “Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.”

In a handwritten account, a woman said she overheard a man she later said was Paddock talking with another man at a Las Vegas restaurant just three days before the massacre. She told police that Paddock seemed angry about the 1990s standoffs at Waco, Texas, and Ruby Ridge, Idaho.

“At the time, I just thought ‘strange guys’ and I wanted to leave,” said the woman.

The documents released Wednesday detailed terror, confusion and compassion among people helping the wounded after gunfire rained from a 32nd-floor hotel room on a crowd of 22,000 people attending the Route 91 Harvest Festival concert on the Las Vegas Strip.

One woman told police she refused to leave her lifeless friend, whose eyes were still and lips turned blue, until a group of men picked her up off the ground and guided her to a fence. One left a red bandanna on her friend’s face.

A stagehand made a run for his pickup truck when he was suddenly surrounded by people begging for a ride away from the scene.

“I told them to get in however they could,” he said.

A woman who fell wounded said another woman who pushed her was shot five times. She decided to play dead.

“A good guy just grabbed me and said, ‘Love, you’re gonna die here if I leave you here,'” she told police.

A housekeeper at the Mandalay Bay described her discomfort at Paddock sitting at a table eating soup and staring at her as she cleaned his hotel room four days before the shooting.

Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said early this month the police investigation was not finished. He also apologized to the public for the release of information that he said would “further traumatize a wounded community.”

Police and the FBI refused to answer questions from the Associated Press about the account from the man who said he met with Paddock outside a Las Vegas sporting goods store after posting an online ad to sell schematics to convert semi-automatic guns to fire automatically.

The man said Paddock became upset and launched into a tirade about gun control when the man rejected an offer of $500 apiece to modify semi-automatic guns to fire automatically.

Clark County Commission Chairman Steve Sisolak, who shared the release of public information with Lombardo and FBI Special Agent in Charge Aaron Rouse after the shooting, told the AP on Wednesday he had been assured that no motive has been identified.

Sisolak said he hadn’t heard of the jailhouse account and he could not say whether it was credible.

Las Vegas police two weeks ago made public video from two officers’ body cameras showing police blasting through the door of the hotel suite where Paddock is seen motionless on his back with a pool of blood staining the carpet near his head and a cache of assault-style weapons strewn about.

Media outlets sued to obtain videos, 911 recordings, evidence logs and interview reports to shed light on the response by public agencies, emergency workers and hotel officials during and after the shooting. The department has not provided all the materials it collected.

https://nypost.com/2018/05/17/new-court-...efore-shooting/

Regards,
hm
 
They're just serving up more bologna to the gullible.

Conditioning the sheeple to believe that anyone who speaks about the abuse, waste, corruption, and fraud must be some sort of lunatic.
 
I found it a bit strange where the video showed the officers busting through the door to find him dead. Self inflicted perhaps? A staged setup maybe?
 
For the love of Jesus. This idiot took a bunch of weapons, killed a bunch of people, for no identifiable reason, other than he was a crazy sumbitch. No conspiracy, no staging, no cover-up, accept it for what it is.

There is zero reason for the FBI or Vegas PD to withhold anything other than y'alls snoopy asses who really don't have the right to see other peoples loved one laying dead in the street.
 
I don't believe a lot of people out there are buying the official story because of the inconsistencies and the narrative that comes along with the official story which helps to bring about all the conspiracy theory's.
 
Originally Posted By: littledawg

There is zero reason for the FBI or Vegas PD to withhold anything other than y'alls snoopy asses who really don't have the right to see other peoples loved one laying dead in the street.

Your opinion, and you are entitled to it. However, many disagree.
 
Originally Posted By: littledawgFor the love of Jesus. This idiot took a bunch of weapons, killed a bunch of people, for no identifiable reason, other than he was a crazy sumbitch. No conspiracy, no staging, no cover-up, accept it for what it is.

There is zero reason for the FBI or Vegas PD to withhold anything other than y'alls snoopy asses who really don't have the right to see other peoples loved one laying dead in the street.

I think sometimes the gov may tell the truth.
I have no idea how to tell when those times are.
 
Inconsistencies in what? The media (you all) want the story and you want whatever information they have right now, cause y'all feel entitled to it. So they give you what information they have at the time. Of course, some of it isn't going to be accurate, cause anyone with a lick of common sense knows they don't have all the information as fast as you demand it.

So after the fact, when they have compiled all the correct information from the hundreds of officers working the case and the thousands of pages; y'all want to cry foul because some of the information is "inconsistent", well duh, here is your sign.

If you have a family member or members laying dead in the street from this twisted sumbitches actions, would you think the media (viewers=you) are entitled to see that carnage? What right do you have to see these poor folks at the very worst moment of their lives? What constitutional right do you have that provides your entitled asses to see that footage?
 
Yeah the public needs to know what happened and the public has a right to know what happened.

It's called the First Amendment in what is commonly known as the Supreme Law.





 
Quote:"Yeah the public needs to know what happened and the public has a right to know what happened.

It's called the First Amendment in what is commonly known as the Supreme Law."

Now, that's what I call straight facts! Nothing more, nothing less.
 
I'm not saying you don't have the right to know what happened, but if you selfishly want it RIGHT NOW, then understand it isn't going to be 100% accurate. It is not realistic and extremely narcissistic to feel you have the right to know when you want to know.

You don't have the right to view the carnage of somebody else's family members lying dead in the street. You just don't or at least shouldn't simply because you want it. If it is ever entered into evidence as a public record (court), then you have the right.

Vegas Metro and Clark County Sheriffs Office serve as an example to the rest of the country. Are they perfect, no, but about as close as metro-law enforcement can be these days.
 
Back
Top