1. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists make the claim that some residents of Sandy Hook got given free houses, presumably as some kind of compensation for taking part in some kind of "false flag" event. As evidence they point to local property tax records.

    Claim shown at:
    http://archive.is/4zeKl - jim fetzer on sandy hook
    http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/02/17/sandy-hook-free-homes-and-big-bucks-incentives-for-leaders-and-players/#more-9154^ - James Tracy

    The truth is there are very few Newtowners that DONT have $0 listed on their houses in 2009. Properties that were bought within the last few years show the sales price. All others show $0 sold on 12/25/2009.

    This is true of EVERY street in Newtown. and every other town in Connecticut I checked, although other towns have different dates. "Sale Price-$0"

    Seems James Tracy got his house for free as well, well in Florida they sell for $10. not $0

    James Tracy Tax page http://www.co.palm-beach.fl.us/papa/Asps/PropertyDetail/PropertyDetail.aspx?parcel=06434707070010280&^

    jt.

    Wolfgang Halbig Property record http://www.lakecopropappr.com/property-details.aspx?AltKey=3827243^ (doesn't have a $0 or $10 as he only bought in 2010. But if you click the actual deed it too says $10..this is a normal deed thing. the actual sale price doesn't have to be listed.)

    halbigdeed.PNG

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    [to check other towns just google "town, Connecticut" and on the town website choose Department/Assessor, then input any street name]

    [edit:updated property links
    heres newtown's new one http://gis.vgsi.com/newtownct/
    here's Southburys new one http://gis.vgsi.com/southburyct ]

    Southbury property database
    http://data.visionappraisal.com/SouthburyCT/DEFAULT.asp^
    Newtown Property database
    http://data.visionappraisal.com/NewtownCT/DEFAULT.asp^
    Waterbury Property database
    http://www.equalitycama.com/tvweb/mainsearch.aspx?city=Waterbury^
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.newtown-ct.gov/public_documents/NewtownCT_BOAAMin/2010%20Minutes/S02926958?textPage=1^
    board of assessment appeals 3/2010 < shows appeals of 2009 assessments.


     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 1, 2017
    • Like Like x 5
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Informative Informative x 2
  2. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    The point here is that there is a (False) claim of a 'conspiracy" by the United States government to "bribe" people by giving them houses, in order to cover up an alleged "false flag" event.

    It is shown to be bunk.

    When, after seeing the evidence, someone wishes to say, "Well not this time, but we know it probably does happen".

    Often a response to that claim would be one of gentle satire. Or, a request for specific examples, which if are unrelated to this topic, are best discussed separately.

    Satire is often misinterpreted as rudeness...but that depends on one's personal sensitivity.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  3. Holly Phu

    Holly Phu New Member

    NONE of those links are good, what does that say?
    [...]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 7, 2015
  4. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    Just deleted *a lot* of off-topic posts.

    Now...
    What do you mean the links are no good?

    (also deirdre cannot and did not delete any posts other than one of her own)
     
  5. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    it says you can't follow the directions i provided on how to look up town property records. towns change their website providers from time to time.

    hers newtown's new one http://gis.vgsi.com/newtownct/
    here's Southburys new one http://gis.vgsi.com/southburyct/

    TO FIND THIS YOURSELF: all you have to do for ANY town in AMerica is
    1. google "[town name, state] tax assessor"
    2. Look for appropriate link to property data

    3. Then type in any street name.


    ex: if you google "Southbury Connecticut tax assessor" you'll get this page. then scroll down and youll see "real estate information". I then type "fishrock road" since thats a road in Southbury and get:

    ss.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    And recording the transaction in the public record. Because if they were given houses as payment, the "government" wouldn't have at least put a fair market value number in there.

    My initial thought was that it was a new subdivision and new construction. When I look up what people paid for their homes frequently there is nothing in the Sale Price field if it is new construction or if they have owned it for a VERY long time. All states/counties/etc are different, and I wouldn't expect the average person who is not in real estate, or doesn't work for the town in an assessor/receivers office to know that. It is interesting to learn why these homes state $0.
     
  7. MickeyS

    MickeyS Member

    There was an interesting article on this by the fearless Eowyn of the Fellowship Of The Minds, but this posted on a site called "DC Clothesline" who actually gives the answer while trying to make the implication that this is "suspicious". This is the post.

    http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/02/14/strange-purchase-date-price-sandy-hook-homes/

    Within this post, which he attempts to appear to look simply curious, he references the same site that Deirdre did, and finds some "suspicious" entries of some of the victims involved in Sandy Hook and further researches ALL involved and finds what he seems to be alluding to as the jackpot, almost all involved are showing the same $0 sale price for 12/25/09. And instead of taking the next logical step and researching how many UNINVOLVED residents were showing the same strange sale price and date....he just leaves it at that. But he admits to contacting the Assessor's office, first by email, where he receives an answer as to possible reasons why $0 sale price would appear, but also gets a direct response as to why these dates in particular.

    This is an excerpt from the link above (I don't know how to indicate an "outside source")

    Which makes complete sense. Using the filler date of 12/25 would automatically flag the houses that would need to be re-evaluated as there would be no other transactions for that day. Much like a production scheduling position I held once at a foundry where any orders in the line that were halted for any reason were given a scheduled completion date of 9/9/99, so they would stand out and put all such orders in their own report when ran by date. (Of course this was in 94, and I had left the position before 99, and wondered since how they handled such jobs after that day lol)

    This combined with the information Deirdre provided regarding the next re-evaluation of these homes being scheduled for 2017, puts this claim to bed I do believe.

    I hope I explained this right, I don't get on here much, and maybe this has already been explained in another thread. Please correct me if I handled any of this wrong. I just fell into another stupid conversation with Eowyn and he brought up this claim about the sales of these houses so I decided to investigate.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2015
    • Like Like x 2
  8. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    thanks. yea i saw his email post earlier. I'm not sure i'm 'explaining' clearly either, based on what i was told (by a different employee) and then i found out they were thinking of switching to "in house" reevaluations.. that shouldnt effect the overall sales dates...but would jive with a "new system".

    I probably should have just skipped trying to explain it, especially since i dont know the technical terms for things, and just stuck to showing that this is the case for EVERY home in Newtown (not just sandy hook) purchased before Dec 2009. And is also the case in other towns and states ie. that a $0 or $10 "sales price" is often placed in lieu of actual sales price.

    I was new to debunking then, so probably confused the issue by trying to explain an irrelevant issue.
     
  9. MickeyS

    MickeyS Member

    Ohhhh, I gotcha :)