PlainDarkSedan
New Member
You, and others, seem to be terribly confused. Your burden of proof lies in courtroom law, and defendant conviction-not in investigation. In fact, in investigative techniques, you actually have it exactly backward.
Debunked: Sandy Hook: The Man in The Woods
- Thread starter skids
- Start date
- Status
MikeC
Closed Account
1/ Yes there is a minor part of the story - a policeman in the woods after the event is a minor part. Had it been a gunman it would be a major part...but it wasn't.
2/ Yes there is "that's all" - a question was asked, it was answered, and that IS all.
3/ Question, examination and investigation is EXACTLY what happened - asked, investigated and answered.
4/ Your imagination is not evidence, and is not even a minor part of this story - it is just speculation. And gratuitous references to other crimes do nothing except expose the paucity of your actual position.
MikeC
Closed Account
Well I'm certainly confused - because that makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Why has there never been any follow up on the "woodsman" by the media? I'm not a conspiracy guy, just a naturally curious person. If you want to put this to rest why not find the name of the individual and try to interview him wth! I found this thread by trying to find the ID of the individual but that was never released. The only thing that is going to end this thread and truly debunk the "woodsman's" active role in the tragedy would be his face on tv being interviewed and asked a simple question: "why were you in the woods that day?" Until that day; we are all blindly bumping into eachother in the dark. The woodsman have a role has not been debunked, yet. I hold out hope. WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE GUY, DAMN IT!?
Because it does not seem to be significant. Hundreds of people converged on the school directly after the shooting. There were multiple chaotic reports about people being detained, and they probably got conflated. There was Chris Manfredonia, and Detective Frank, and probably others. What's the big deal?
Scottyboi
Member
nobody knows what the men in the woods were doing, that's the problem, police said they'd find any and every possible solution and they didn't, end of story, the police calls tell of a man running into the woods and being arrested by police, when obviously the man wasn't running away from anything, in the video it looks as if they are running away as a group because the first man "chasing" the suspect is able to run up on him but he doesn't follow him, he runs left instead of going directly for him, the video that points out all six "critters" and the official report of the "off duty squad officer" in the woods is the most incriminating evidence of this whole investigation being erroneous
If the man in the woods was not important, then why would you expect any detail abotu the man in the woods?
The purpose of the investigation is not to dispel conspiracy theories. So if something has a banal explanation, then you are not going to hear about it, because it's irrelevant to the investigation.
Imagine for a second that there was no conspiracy. Now explain why your questions demand answers.
The purpose of the investigation is not to dispel conspiracy theories. So if something has a banal explanation, then you are not going to hear about it, because it's irrelevant to the investigation.
Imagine for a second that there was no conspiracy. Now explain why your questions demand answers.
Scottyboi
Member
I want to know why there are 4 men running away from a school where 26 people just died. I want to know why they ran through the woods instead of just going to their cars and leaving. I want to know why the person the cops caught in the woods was an off duty squad officer when he could've just flashed his badge. It disturbs me that these people weren't investigated. And I want to know why parents said Lanza's car had all four doors open when the parents got there. I want to know why I see four people running away from the school and two people in the woods seemingly waiting on these people. I want to know how lanza broke bulletproof glass. I want to know why a little girl who was in the school talked of cops being there before she heard gunshots. I want to know why a little boy smelled and saw smoke. I want to know why Chris smelled sulfur. I want to know why the surveillance video is withheld from us. It would stop all these theories.
MrOctober77
New Member
It would not dispel any theories. You and others would just come up with something else to question.
Scottyboi
Member
But it would. If we saw adam lanza walk up with a gun and shoot kids, it would tell exactly what happened. I'm not going off of theories, i'm going off of cold hard fact, video evidence, interviews of the real witnesses, the kids, police calls, backgrounds of every family involved, the videos that were released before the shooting, and the facebook pages made before the shooting. If you don't believe me that i've picked at almost everything and only try to find the truth, you have me all wrong. I would like to be proven wrong because atleast it's proof.
MrOctober77
New Member
If you have read these posts, those have been explained. You just choose not to believe
When the 911 calls were released, hoaxers of course claimed they were not real.
Keep threads on topic please.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/posting-guidelines.2064/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/posting-guidelines.2064/
Scottyboi
Member
i know to stay on topic, but you asked me why my questions deserved answers, which is off topic, so i gave you an off topic answer, and mroctober told me how I would come up with other things to question, which isn't providing anything factual, he stated his own opinion of what i would do even though he doesn't know me, I never said i don't believe these posts, and i never said these calls weren't real, is this a debunking site or an insult my intelligience site?
Josh Heuer
Active Member
Correction; this forum is to dispel bunk from bogus conspiracy theories. This truth you seek is only in the form of police reports, 911 calls and the like. That's all you'll get. If you think there is something that absolutely proves this was some form of a hoax or there was some cover up, then create a thread and be very specific on what you are claiming. But first search through threads already posted, you might find an explanation to what you are positing.
Pete Tar
Senior Member.
Which does not have video records. Who says it does?
Josh Heuer
Active Member
It's in the police report that was released a month or two ago; check one of the two stickies threads in this forum. The cameras did not record, they were only set up to be able to monitor people coming in.
Scottyboi
Member
this is too off topic and i don't want to go into it, but here http://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2013/01/08/where-is-sandy-hook-schools-surveilliance-video/
The forum is not here to answer arbitrary questions. Questions need to have some justification - specifically you need to show that the lack of a specific answer to a question has some actual significance.
You personally not being able to find the name of a particular person in a video is not a justification.
It has just been explained twice that there was no recording system. Just visual monitoring. If you ask questions, I'd appreciate it if you read the answers.
Scottyboi
Member
let's get back to the six men in the woods, the video shows four men running from the school and two men in the woods at around the same time that cops arrived, the 911 call says "2 shadows running behind the school" and it sounds like the cops go to chase the shadows, so the helicopter zooms in on the chase and shows 4 people running away instead of two, but nobody is "chasing" anyone, it looks like they are fleeing, and then two people show up in the woods, and it cuts, so I ask, do you think that this video is showing chris and the off duty officer running away? if yes, then where in the video does it show them getting briefly arrested? at what time did the video take place? At what time did the 911 call occur? and if it wasn't the cops, chris, and the off duty officer that was arrested, then who were these four men that ran away? and who were the two that were in the forest? i could believe they were cops scouting the area but it looks like the four all ran the same exact path, either to chase someone, or because they already had it planned...
Can you give a link to the video.
Scottyboi
Member
at 2:28 you can see a dog run after something else, but nothing really suspicious other than four men running into the woods and two men already being in there, then it cuts to someone already on the ground, we don't know if these videos were one right after another or anything, it's suspicious cause we were never told what the four running in the forest were doing, because they weren't chasing eachother and no1 was running away, so did they ever get caught?
Does not not seem reasonable that there was simply nothing important there, so they never told you about it?
JRBids
Senior Member.
It seems as if you would like a perfect timeline with all occurences explained to be published so that YOU personally can review it. I don't see what's so unusual about men running in the woods under the circumstances. What could be happening there?
Pete Tar
Senior Member.
It's a media chopper looking for anything that might be significant, you've seen that when reporters are at the scene and report on any tiny thing happening which often turns out to be nothing.
It's footage of interest in the context of a breaking story and gives them some footage to use for the report, but if it's not really anything important, they're less likely to feel the need to explain every movement they made. The fact it isn't addressed in the report makes it likely it's just part of the 'securing the area' they did.
It's footage of interest in the context of a breaking story and gives them some footage to use for the report, but if it's not really anything important, they're less likely to feel the need to explain every movement they made. The fact it isn't addressed in the report makes it likely it's just part of the 'securing the area' they did.
deirdre
Senior Member.
i want to know why you don't just read the police report. its a bear of a thing, almost 7,000 pages but im sure the incident report is in there somewhere. piece together a timeline and prove your theories. have fun.
Scottyboi
Member
the official report mentions chris and the off duty officer being "irrelevant" so why would they not put this other "irrelevant" occurence in the report? a cop got on a pedestal and said "any and all" and they did not hold up that statement with this part of the investigation
deirdre
Senior Member.
they did investigate its in the police report files. they even took him to the station which they idnt with others in the woods, and it wasn't Chris. your mixing your people up.
Scottyboi
Member
"I don't see what's so unusual about men running in the woods under the circumstances." What circumstances? That 26 people just died? That's not unusual? 4 Men running past the school through the woods instead of to their car when a shooting just occured? and one of em was supposedly from a different county? where was he going to run to? mecca? lol it just doesn't make sense. I can see headlines: "Out of county officer runs from cops through the woods" Outside of Sandy Hook elementary a few minutes after officers arrived to the scene, an off-duty officer runs from cops instead of showing his badge. Raises questions when cops find out he was from a completely different county. Now we have to question what he was doing there and how he got there.
BUT HE WAS NEVER QUESTIONED
Why would he run from cops when HE WAS A COP. He had his gun on him but he didn't have his badge? alright maybe believable
and
In a shooting wouldn't any off duty officer react to it like any other on-duty cop? you hear gunshots in a school but instead of being the hero cop you should be, you run from the scene? and from other officers? weird
and lastly
When and how did he get there, but better yet, why was he there? why was he at a school where a shooting of children just occured and he was from a different county and running away from it? and not driving away since he is "out of county". How did he even get home?
HE WAS NEVER QUESTIONED AND THERE HAS BEEN NO FOLLOW UP
deirdre
Senior Member.
dude you do realize the media helicopters didn't even get there until at least 10:45, maybe 11:00. I have no idea what youre talking about anyone running. no one was running. why odnt you read some of these threads and you'll get most of your questions answered. your confusing your conspiracy theories all up.
deirdre
Senior Member.
oh ok. my misread then. was the off duty guy in the prosecuters report? or was it the other guy, I don't remember. anyway ALL of it is in the state police report. here
http://www.ct.gov/despp/cwp/view.asp?A=4226&Q=537354
If you have questions about something, then please quote exactly what you have questions about, and provide sources. Don't just go by something you remember, or the account on some YouTube video.
- Status
Similar threads
