Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum

A place to discuss the Columbine High School Massacre along with other school shootings and crimes.
Anyone interested in researching, learning, discussing and debating with us, please come join our community!
 
HomeHome  PortalPortal  CalendarCalendar  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 The small questions thread

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1 ... 17 ... 30, 31, 32  Next
AuthorMessage
cakeman



Posts : 59
Contribution Points : 4885
Join date : 2018-07-26

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:52 pm

Do you mean when Dylan entered the cafeteria after they started shooting? Or on the CCTV? or some other time?

I'm assuming you mean Dylan walking down the stairs and into the cafeteria. The easy answer is because you have to be closer to check on them. You can't check them from the hill. But that would insult your intelligence, so I must be missing the point.

Also, if we go with the cliche "Dylan was the suicidal one, Eric was the murderous one", it's probably better for the suicidal one to go up close to the bombs if somebody has to do it. Seems to me Dylan also goes closer to the bombs on the CCTV; with what he does on the CCTV you could maybe challenge the view that Eric was the bomb guy. He seems to fiddle with it, while supposedly he does no such thing when he went down the stairs and into the cafeteria. Did he even shoot or point his weapon? From what I understand he just walked back and forth in front of the teachers lounge or whatever and saw people run up the stairs and grinned a bit.

It is a part of that day which piques my morbid curiosity though, and does tie into my  rejection of the "shoot from the cars" idea, but not because of how close one has to get.  "wait near the cars, bombs dont explode, then they walk to the hill for 'plan b' and shoot from the elevated spot on the stairs" is the usual narrative of that day. If that's the case, I wonder why check on the bombs? Didn't they already know they hadn't exploded? Isn't that what "plan B" implies? Either they go off or they don't.  Though I've also heard the clocks weren't so precise that you would expect that bombs to go off at say exactly 11:17, and so it has me wonder if they thought the bombs had gone off already or were about to, and thats why they started shooting. But then again, it's not like they would have ignored the lack of a sound of a big explosion or two people sitting eating lunch rather than reacting to bombs, so they probably did have a plan B, but plan A was bombs go off while on the stairs and start shooting, and plan B was bombs dont go off while on the stairs and start shooting anyway. I don't think plan A was to shoot from the cars.

People are fleeing up the stairs in the cafeteria (is it more hip if I say commons?). Then something like Dylan reports to Eric, and they eventually work their way to the west entrance, though are met in between by officer Gardner. Makes me think as above that Eric's position at the top of the stairs is for people running up the stairs rather than into the parking lot, contra both shooting from the parking lot. But then it seems like they miss aside from some ankle shot every student they shoot at before entering the library?

The other notes outlining a timeline on a day planner are said to be Eric's quite often, but say "go to Reb's house" or some such as if it were Dylan, does end "wait near cars".  I don't know whether that one or "go to outside hill. wait" was the later one but you know I'd bet on the latter and if it could be proven it was the former I'd count it as evidence that I'm an idiot and all the investigators and governor's report and history channel were right.

But also, if they never planned to shoot from the cars, then presumably Dylan's walking down the steps was not only to check on the bombs.  One cafeteria entrance could be shot at easily from steps, the one Dylan entered and Sean Graves laid in. Maybe they planned to shoot at that entrance for quite a while, but the others and say the school's south entrance  as well would need somebody at the bottom of the steps, or walking past the carnage to the south entrance. You also can't see the cafeteria until you go some ways down the steps, which raises again whether they thought the bombs had gone off, and Dylan's going down the steps was interrupted by seeing the bombs failed for the first time. Of course, either one going down the steps or to the south entrance would take you near the car bombs, especially Dylan's car. It somewhat contradicts the earlier point about shooting from the cars being risky given the car bombs, though there's still the issue of the cafeteria bombs and people running the other direction. I think they figured people would be dying to get out rather than run up the cafeteria stairs but eventually learn that they get shot unless they run the other direction, as they did, and then they would enter the school, as they did.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Majk



Posts : 8
Contribution Points : 1000
Join date : 2018-10-20

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:08 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
As you know E&D planted their bombs in school at 10:58-10:59 and then they apparently went back to their cars waiting for the explosion. Shooting started at 11:19. Brooks Brown says in his book that he talked to Eric as he pulled over and was getting bags out of his car and that the shooting started "five minutes later". So according to Brooks version he met Eric minutes before 11:00 but the shooting would not begin for the next almost 20 minutes. So is Brooks wrong about the timeline?

Brooks does not say Eric was walking back to his car, he says he pulled into the parking lot, and thought it was weird that he came to school after skipping classes. Not that his car was already there. The cafeteria bombs were most likely already planted. If they planted the  bombs just before 11, they left to "gear up" or whatever between 11 and the conversation with Brooks.

If Brooks saw Eric pulling into the parking lot that would mean that he didnt plant the bombs yet. Why would E&D plant the bombs and then go back to the car and go somewhere? It was said in the very beginning that E&D planted the bombs at about 11:15 and the shooting started at 11:19. So when Brooks said that they met 5 min before the shooting started that would all make sense. But now we know that E&D planted their bombs at 10:58-10:59. So if Brooks really met Eric in the parking that would take place at about 10:55. That gives us 23-24 min before the shooting starts. Brooks sayd in his book that Eric started shooting 5min after their conversation was over. So either Brooks was waiting for more than 20min after the conversation with Eric to see whats about to happen or hes just simply lying about the whole "get out of here I like you know Brooks"
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lizpuff
Off Topic Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 2149
Contribution Points : 34034
Join date : 2016-03-02
Age : 30

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:18 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
As you know E&D planted their bombs in school at 10:58-10:59 and then they apparently went back to their cars waiting for the explosion. Shooting started at 11:19. Brooks Brown says in his book that he talked to Eric as he pulled over and was getting bags out of his car and that the shooting started "five minutes later". So according to Brooks version he met Eric minutes before 11:00 but the shooting would not begin for the next almost 20 minutes. So is Brooks wrong about the timeline?

Brooks does not say Eric was walking back to his car, he says he pulled into the parking lot, and thought it was weird that he came to school after skipping classes. Not that his car was already there. The cafeteria bombs were most likely already planted. If they planted the  bombs just before 11, they left to "gear up" or whatever between 11 and the conversation with Brooks.

If Brooks saw Eric pulling into the parking lot that would mean that he didnt plant the bombs yet. Why would E&D plant the bombs and then go back to the car and go somewhere? It was said in the very beginning that E&D planted the bombs at about 11:15 and the shooting started at 11:19. So when Brooks said that they met 5 min before the shooting started that would all make sense. But now we know that E&D planted their bombs at 10:58-10:59. So if Brooks really met Eric in the parking that would take place at about 10:55. That gives us 23-24 min before the shooting starts. Brooks sayd in his book that Eric started shooting 5min after their conversation was over. So either Brooks was waiting for more than 20min after the conversation with Eric to see whats about to happen or hes just simply lying about the whole "get out of here I like you know Brooks"

We don't know Eric and Dylan's exact timeline apart from when they planted the bombs. I Have seen it speculated before that the boys might have planted the bombs then went to the park to gear up then came back to the school. This could make sense being that Dylan for example was wearing the flannel found in his car and didn't appear to be wearing any of his "gear". If that were the case then Brooks very well could have seen Eric pulling into the wrong parking lot at that time.

As such Brooks has made himself out to be a liar and it is impossible to believe him at times. I do believe he did see Eric that morning. His story on that has never changed. But of course no way of knowing with him

_________________
Hold me now I need to feel complete
Like I matter to the one I need
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:41 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
Do you mean when Dylan entered the cafeteria after they started shooting? Or on the CCTV? or some other time?

I'm assuming you mean Dylan walking down the stairs and into the cafeteria. The easy answer is because you have to be closer to check on them. You can't check them from the hill. But that would insult your intelligence, so I must be missing the point.

Also, if we go with the cliche "Dylan was the suicidal one, Eric was the murderous one", it's probably better for the suicidal one to go up close to the bombs if somebody has to do it. Seems to me Dylan also goes closer to the bombs on the CCTV; with what he does on the CCTV you could maybe challenge the view that Eric was the bomb guy. He seems to fiddle with it, while supposedly he does no such thing when he went down the stairs and into the cafeteria. Did he even shoot or point his weapon? From what I understand he just walked back and forth in front of the teachers lounge or whatever and saw people run up the stairs and grinned a bit.

It is a part of that day which piques my morbid curiosity though, and does tie into my  rejection of the "shoot from the cars" idea, but not because of how close one has to get.  "wait near the cars, bombs dont explode, then they walk to the hill for 'plan b' and shoot from the elevated spot on the stairs" is the usual narrative of that day. If that's the case, I wonder why check on the bombs? Didn't they already know they hadn't exploded? Isn't that what "plan B" implies? Either they go off or they don't.  Though I've also heard the clocks weren't so precise that you would expect that bombs to go off at say exactly 11:17, and so it has me wonder if they thought the bombs had gone off already or were about to, and thats why they started shooting. But then again, it's not like they would have ignored the lack of a sound of a big explosion or two people sitting eating lunch rather than reacting to bombs, so they probably did have a plan B, but plan A was bombs go off while on the stairs and start shooting, and plan B was bombs dont go off while on the stairs and start shooting anyway. I don't think plan A was to shoot from the cars.

People are fleeing up the stairs in the cafeteria (is it more hip if I say commons?). Then something like Dylan reports to Eric, and they eventually work their way to the west entrance, though are met in between by officer Gardner. Makes me think as above that Eric's position at the top of the stairs is for people running up the stairs rather than into the parking lot, contra both shooting from the parking lot. But then it seems like they miss aside from some ankle shot every student they shoot at before entering the library?

The other notes outlining a timeline on a day planner are said to be Eric's quite often, but say "go to Reb's house" or some such as if it were Dylan, does end "wait near cars".  I don't know whether that one or "go to outside hill. wait" was the later one but you know I'd bet on the latter and if it could be proven it was the former I'd count it as evidence that I'm an idiot and all the investigators and governor's report and history channel were right.

But also, if they never planned to shoot from the cars, then presumably Dylan's walking down the steps was not only to check on the bombs.  One cafeteria entrance could be shot at easily from steps, the one Dylan entered and Sean Graves laid in. Maybe they planned to shoot at that entrance for quite a while, but the others and say the school's south entrance  as well would need somebody at the bottom of the steps, or walking past the carnage to the south entrance. You also can't see the cafeteria until you go some ways down the steps, which raises again whether they thought the bombs had gone off, and Dylan's going down the steps was interrupted by seeing the bombs failed for the first time. Of course, either one going down the steps or to the south entrance would take you near the car bombs, especially Dylan's car. It somewhat contradicts the earlier point about shooting from the cars being risky given the car bombs, though there's still the issue of the cafeteria bombs and people running the other direction. I think they figured people would be dying to get out rather than run up the cafeteria stairs but eventually learn that they get shot unless they run the other direction, as they did, and then they would enter the school, as they did.


I thought witnesses said that while Eric came in shooting they saw Dylan come in and just start yelling. I’m just trying to figure out where they initially wanted to start shooting. Because the Hill of course is way too far but their cars make sense..

I’m just trying to remember the witness statements I’ve heard read and comparing it to the timeline they wrote out

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cakeman



Posts : 59
Contribution Points : 4885
Join date : 2018-07-26

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 7:48 am

Screaming, if you mean the checking on the bombs, during the initial shooting outside, before they've ever exchanged gunfire with the police, that's just Dylan. Dylan walks down the stairs, shoots Daniel R. and Lance, and walks over Sean. Investigators speculate this was to check on the bombs, but I think that's an inference. All that is a fact is he took a few steps forward, watched people run up the cafeteria stairs, and went back up the stairs to meet with Eric, who was shooting the whole time. That's when Anne Marie Hochhalter is shot, while Eric is shooting on the hill and Dylan is off doing whatever he is doing in the cafeteria.

Also, I agree shooting from the cars makes sense, elevation and risk aside. However, I think even elevation and not getting hit by glass could have been enough to make them decide to shoot from the hill at the top of the steps. If it wasn't, I still have excuses. Maybe one or both planned to eventually come down the stairs, like Dylan did. If they did that, then they have people running either direction covered, while from the cars they only have one. What if their victims were to flee out the west entrance while they were shooting from the parking lot?

Majk (and Lizpuff), it certainly doesn't logically follow or something that he had not planted the bombs yet. If they planted the bombs at 10:58 or whatever and CVA is correct that the "tape change" and 11:14 time for planting the bombs is wrong, fine - that doesn't mean they didn't go away to gear up after 10:58 and return to the school before 11:19. Literally exactly what their notes said they would do: "walk in, set bomb at 11:09 for 11:17, leave, drive to clemete [sic] park, gear up, get back by 11:15".

It's fine to doubt Brooks story. "Did the exchange between Brooks and Eric really happen" is kind of the classic first intermediate Columbine research question, and both Eric and more importantly Nate who wasn't a murderer both considered Brooks a compulsive liar. However, saying that Eric pulled into the parking lot, in the wrong parking lot just before the massacre only supports his case, and there's no reason to say the bomb planting had to be at the same time as the Brooks conversation just because it happens to be if we accept the orthodox police timeline.

In fact "he was holding a 20 pound bag and walked into the cafeteria" isn't what the witnesses describe at all. He pulled in and walked to the hill at roughly 11:10 is what they describe - almost as if the bombs were planted at, say, 10:58, and so had already been done, and the witnesses missed that part. Almost like what I am trying to convince Screaming of, that shooting from the hilltop was Plan A.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 7:53 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
Screaming, if you mean the checking on the bombs, during the initial shooting outside, before they've ever exchanged gunfire with the police, that's just Dylan. Dylan walks down the stairs, shoots Daniel R. and Lance, and walks over Sean.  Investigators speculate this was to check on the bombs, but I think that's an inference. All that is a fact is he took a few steps forward, watched people run up the cafeteria stairs, and went back up the stairs to meet with Eric, who was shooting the whole time. That's when Anne Marie Hochhalter is shot, while Eric is shooting on the hill and Dylan is off doing whatever he is doing in the cafeteria.

Also, I agree shooting from the cars makes sense, elevation and risk aside. However, I think even elevation and not getting hit by glass could have been enough to make them decide to shoot from the hill at the top of the steps. If it wasn't, I still have excuses. Maybe one or both planned to eventually come down the stairs, like Dylan did. If they did that, then they have people running either direction covered, while from the cars they only have one. What if their victims were to flee out the west entrance while they were shooting from the parking lot?

Majk (and Lizpuff), it certainly doesn't logically follow or something that he had not planted the bombs yet. If they planted the bombs at 10:58 or whatever and CVA is correct that the "tape change" and 11:14 time for planting the bombs is wrong, fine - that doesn't mean they didn't go away to gear up after 10:58 and return to the school before 11:19. Literally exactly what their notes said they would do: "walk in, set bomb at 11:09 for 11:17, leave, drive to clemete [sic] park, gear up, get back by 11:15".

It's fine to doubt Brooks story. "Did the exchange between Brooks and Eric really happen" is kind of the classic first intermediate Columbine research question, and both Eric and more importantly Nate who wasn't a murderer both considered Brooks a compulsive liar. However, saying that Eric pulled into the parking lot, in the wrong parking lot just before the massacre only supports his case, and there's no reason to say the bomb planting had to be at the same time as the Brooks conversation just because it happens to be if we accept the orthodox police timeline.

In fact "he was holding a 20 pound bag and walked into the cafeteria" isn't what the witnesses describe at all. He pulled in and walked to the hill at roughly 11:10 is what they describe - almost as if the bombs were planted at, say, 10:58, and so had already been done, and the witnesses missed that part. Almost like what I am trying to convince Screaming of, that shooting from the hilltop was Plan A.



Cakeman, thank you! That is what I was talking about. Something was kind of getting jumbled in my head about the timeline when it began. I appreciate the info!!

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Holloka

avatar

Posts : 35
Contribution Points : 16734
Join date : 2017-01-25

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:10 pm

So I was snooping around aimlessly and I bumped into this thread from eons ago (2010) on a doom site where they briefly discuss Eric's Uac labs (it's a wad he made). I spotted this post of a guy who seemingly had the displeasure of having to put up with Eric for a while, at least online. I was wondering if anyone had any info on Eric's (and/or Dylan's) supposed online presence on Ant inc.? Was he really a member? And who was his "patsy" the post refers to? Very Happy The script-kid level "hacking" sounds like Dylan, but then again, it could be anyone.

Scroll down a bit and look for the post by a member named "Csonicgo".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

the post by csonicgo:
 

If unfamiliar here's a summary of what that community looked like:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

ant inc summary:
 

So, any info on this, anyone?

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Beware of this and that.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Mon Oct 29, 2018 6:35 pm

The second could be Dylan.

Do you remember what Robyn said about Dylan and getting banned from AOL?

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Lizpuff
Off Topic Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 2149
Contribution Points : 34034
Join date : 2016-03-02
Age : 30

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:29 am

I would believe that. It seemed Eric was desperate to get any sort of comments about his wads and asking for feedback all the time. At the same time he thought they were the best wads ever and we know he couldnt take any criticism so that would make complete sense that he would "stalk" those that didnt like his levels

_________________
Hold me now I need to feel complete
Like I matter to the one I need
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:33 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
I would believe that.  It seemed Eric was desperate to get any sort of comments about his wads and asking for feedback all the time.  At the same time he thought they were the best wads ever and we know he couldnt take any criticism so that would make complete sense that he would "stalk" those that didnt like his levels


Eric did tend to have some over reactions.....

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ShadowedGoddess
Other Crimes Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 6163
Contribution Points : 74417
Join date : 2017-03-03

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:42 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
I would believe that.  It seemed Eric was desperate to get any sort of comments about his wads and asking for feedback all the time.  At the same time he thought they were the best wads ever and we know he couldnt take any criticism so that would make complete sense that he would "stalk" those that didnt like his levels


Eric did tend to have some over reactions.....



NO NOT petty should have been my middle name Eric!   Haha

_________________
''I have been astonished that men could die martyrs for religion—I have shuddered at it. I shudder no more—I could be martyred for my religion—Love is my religion—I could die for that.''                                                                                                                                      
                                                        -John Keats (1795-1821)

“Love never dies a natural death. It dies because we don't know how to replenish its source. It dies of blindness and errors and betrayals. It dies of illness and wounds; it dies of weariness, of witherings, of tarnishings.”

                                                        - Anaïs Nin
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:47 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
I would believe that.  It seemed Eric was desperate to get any sort of comments about his wads and asking for feedback all the time.  At the same time he thought they were the best wads ever and we know he couldnt take any criticism so that would make complete sense that he would "stalk" those that didnt like his levels


Eric did tend to have some over reactions.....



NO NOT petty should have been my middle name Eric!   Haha

Lol!

I am in shock too. Who would’ve thought?

For all of Dylan’s faults he had the patience of a ... I don’t want to say a saint but a lot of patience.

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Tommy QTR
Top 10 Contributor


Posts : 1691
Contribution Points : 29929
Join date : 2017-12-28
Age : 16
Location : My own personal Hell

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:52 am

When were the suicide pics released?

_________________
"Hungerford must be in a bit of a mess. I wish I had stayed in bed."

-Michael Ryan

"Loneliness has followed me for my whole life."

-Travis Bickle

"I don't have a single friend and I won't in the future. I'll be ignored because I'm ugly. I'm lower than trash because at least the trash gets recycled."

-Tomohiro Katō

"I will become a serial killer, a mad killer. Why? Because I am frustrated and I do not want to die alone, because I have had a shitty life. I want to feel powerful and free just once."

-Richard Durn

"A beautiful environment can be the darkest hell if you have to experience it all alone."

-Elliot Rodger
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ShadowedGoddess
Other Crimes Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 6163
Contribution Points : 74417
Join date : 2017-03-03

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Oct 31, 2018 4:55 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
When were the suicide pics released?


To my knowledge they were leaked sometime around March of 2002.

_________________
''I have been astonished that men could die martyrs for religion—I have shuddered at it. I shudder no more—I could be martyred for my religion—Love is my religion—I could die for that.''                                                                                                                                      
                                                        -John Keats (1795-1821)

“Love never dies a natural death. It dies because we don't know how to replenish its source. It dies of blindness and errors and betrayals. It dies of illness and wounds; it dies of weariness, of witherings, of tarnishings.”

                                                        - Anaïs Nin
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cakeman



Posts : 59
Contribution Points : 4885
Join date : 2018-07-26

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:14 am

They were leaked probably when you say, but the issue for National Enquirer was June 4, 2002.

What's the date of the incident with ketchup in the commons? If it was senior year, for what is the 'revenge in the commons' Dylan is talking about in Eric's yearbook?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:31 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
They were leaked probably when you say, but the issue for National Enquirer was June 4, 2002.

What's the date of the incident with ketchup in the commons? If it was senior year, for what is the 'revenge in the commons' Dylan is talking about in Eric's yearbook?

It was their junior year, Sue mentions the month I think... but I don't remember if it was before or after the van.

I always assumed that "January Incident" was the van and "Revenge in the commons" was due to the ketchup incident and various other incidents that probably happened throughout their HS life.

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cakeman



Posts : 59
Contribution Points : 4885
Join date : 2018-07-26

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:10 pm

So did I, but Sue implies it was senior year with "there was another incident, junior year" as I recall, and there is a newspaper account saying the ketchup thing was weeks before the massacre, caught on the CCTV.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Oct 31, 2018 1:47 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
So did I, but Sue implies it was senior year with "there was another incident, junior year" as I recall, and there is a newspaper account saying the ketchup thing was weeks before the massacre, caught on the CCTV.

Interesting. I didn’t catch that.

Let me see what I can dig up

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cakeman



Posts : 59
Contribution Points : 4885
Join date : 2018-07-26

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:03 am

Check it out Screaming. This article:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Says it was caught on video just weeks before the shooting. Who knows where they got that from, though.

On page 189 of Sue Klebold's book, she relays the ketchup incident. It is in the chapter about his junior year, but she just starts it off "One day..." and next says " "Tom and I were aware of another incident. Junior year..." and talks about freshmen messing with his car. That can probably be interpreted as "Another junior year incident, like the one I just recounted" which is probably correct, but if the newspaper cited above isn't full of crap and given she just says "one day" like she doesn't remember precisely when, then it might be interpreted as "There was another incident, in his junior year unlike the one I just recounted."

Probably just the newspaper was wrong and conflated stories of the CCTV during the massacre with  the ketchup incident. Though whenever it happened, and given all that was released, it is a bit surprising we don't have the CCTV of that event.

And of course it's the natural explanation for the "revenge in the commons". Is it true what Larkin says, that the bombs were placed where the jocks sat? or was it more to do with taking out the pillars and/or being in the middle of the commons?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:24 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
Check it out Screaming. This article:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Says it was caught on video just weeks before the shooting. Who knows where they got that from, though.

On page 189 of Sue Klebold's book, she relays the ketchup incident. It is in the chapter about his junior year, but she just starts it off "One day..." and next says " "Tom and I were aware of another incident. Junior year..." and talks about freshmen messing with his car. That can probably be interpreted as "Another junior year incident, like the one I just recounted" which is probably correct, but if the newspaper cited above isn't full of crap and given she just says "one day" like she doesn't remember precisely when, then it might be interpreted as "There was another incident, in his junior year unlike the one I just recounted."

Probably just the newspaper was wrong and conflated stories of the CCTV during the massacre with  the ketchup incident. Though whenever it happened, and given all that was released, it is a bit surprising we don't have the CCTV of that event.

And of course it's the natural explanation for the "revenge in the commons". Is it true what Larkin says, that the bombs were placed where the jocks sat? or was it more to do with taking out the pillars and/or being in the middle of the commons?


Thank you!

The bombs were under the tables, it was confirmed by someone I trust...

Whether those tables were close to the pillars... I don’t know.

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
sscc
Top 10 Contributor


Posts : 1197
Contribution Points : 30084
Join date : 2016-02-27

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:44 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
And of course it's the natural explanation for the "revenge in the commons". Is it true what Larkin says, that the bombs were placed where the jocks sat? or was it more to do with taking out the pillars and/or being in the middle of the commons?
I wrote out a post asking about this but I didn't get any responses.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I still don't know the answer. Maybe someone from the school made a statement about this at some point but if not, the police did ask cafeteria witnesses where they were sitting. If someone were to go through the statements and figure out which "type" of kids were sitting in the area, it may be possible to infer whether "jocks" were really being targeted with the placement of the bombs.

...But that would be work, and based on Eric's drawings and the centralized location of the bombs, I still think that it's more likely that the goal was the highest number of casualties without regard for who the victims would be.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ShadowedGoddess
Other Crimes Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 6163
Contribution Points : 74417
Join date : 2017-03-03

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:53 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
But that would be work, and based on Eric's drawings and the centralized location of the bombs, I still think that it's more likely that the goal was the highest number of casualties without regard for who the victims would be.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] This is what I've always thought as well. That the bombs were placed where E&D thought/assumed they would do the most structural damage, bringing down the pillars, hoping the library would come crashing down into the cafeteria.

_________________
''I have been astonished that men could die martyrs for religion—I have shuddered at it. I shudder no more—I could be martyred for my religion—Love is my religion—I could die for that.''                                                                                                                                      
                                                        -John Keats (1795-1821)

“Love never dies a natural death. It dies because we don't know how to replenish its source. It dies of blindness and errors and betrayals. It dies of illness and wounds; it dies of weariness, of witherings, of tarnishings.”

                                                        - Anaïs Nin
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cakeman



Posts : 59
Contribution Points : 4885
Join date : 2018-07-26

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:54 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
And of course it's the natural explanation for the "revenge in the commons". Is it true what Larkin says, that the bombs were placed where the jocks sat? or was it more to do with taking out the pillars and/or being in the middle of the commons?
I wrote out a post asking about this but I didn't get any responses.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I still don't know the answer. Maybe someone from the school made a statement about this at some point but if not, the police did ask cafeteria witnesses where they were sitting. If someone were to go through the statements and figure out which "type" of kids were sitting in the area, it may be possible to infer whether "jocks" were really being targeted with the placement of the bombs.

...But that would be work, and based on Eric's drawings and the centralized location of the bombs, I still think that it's more likely that the goal was the highest number of casualties without regard for who the victims would be.
I might just do that some time to see if they say. Also will look through to see if Ralph Larkin gave any reason for it - but he unequivocally states it was the jock tables. Very interesting questions in your post. Similar questions I have, and some good insight I had not considered like the second drawing not including the tables. Of course, the plan evolved over time as well, so while they cared more about the pillars during the time of the drawing who knows if they opted for it on that day.  Looking at the pictures again in your post, it looks to me like it was just the middle of the cafeteria and/or taking out the pillars.

I did not know investigators thought it was in fact their own tables. Opting for that as the least suspicious or most familiar place for them to be makes some sense. Given how long it was planned, maybe it is the other way around and those were their tables because it was where they wanted to plant the bombs.  That wasn't their lunch period was it? So, it was suspicious for them to be at any table.

Worse still, even though the drawings put them next to the pillars, you would think if they cared about the pillars, they would have constructed four bombs, one for each pillar, unless they thought two was enough.

Not sure we can even say 4 instead of 2 was too risky for detection, considering that apparently bombs were also placed in the kitchen.  That's rarely mentioned, and I wonder how that was incorporated into the plan. That is, if it was for any reason other than fear that the kitchen might be a safe place to hide from the bombs. Though, it doesn't seem like it would be. Surely that answers why they went into the kitchen while recorded by the CCTV, something which perplexed me for years.

I had not heard that they would eat in their cars. That's pretty depressing if so. I've known people who felt so ostracized that they eat in the bathroom. Though I don't think he was eating and maybe he just preferred to eat in the car, that's probably contradicted by the "Eric in Columbine" video, especially the part where he is sitting and talking to a girl and seems a bit more engaged in conversation, if not the whole thing. He would be in his car rather than talk at the lunch tables with those people, presumably. I guess you could say he would rather be in his car but was doing some secret massacre plotting in the cafeteria that day, but I doubt it unless he was unreal at multitasking.

One reason I would be interesting in settling whether that was the jocks table or they really expected the library to collapse is for the curiosity of the massacre in the library. We all know to the people there it seemed like they at least spoke of targeting jocks, and I go back and forth between whether they expected the bombs to go off on their own or not, and if they did that throws the whole scenario of "they started shooting because the bombs didn't go off" into question.

On the one hand, why think they would go off on their own if they didn't go off when they were timed to do so? Then why shoot at them?

On the other, why did they say everybody in the library was going to die from the bombs unless they thought they were bound to go off on their own? Why shoot at them later only after the library massacre and not even going straight to them but after roaming about a bit, ensuring most of the library would flee before they went off, contradicting their earlier statements, unless they initially thought they would go off during the library massacre? The one that gets me the most flack; why even start shooting outside unless they thought the bombs did or were about to explode? Why do that just two minutes after they were supposed to do so, or not expect them to go off while in the library, if like e. g. Krabbe says the timing devices weren't to-the-minute precise? He seems to say they wouldn't have necessarily gone off at 11:17 and they would have known that.

If they expected the library to come down, and they expected the bombs to go off on their own for some reason but did not know precisely when, then the whole "their shooting at the bombs was their first suicide attempt" is wrong. The library massacre was their first suicide attempt, and is probably why they chose the library for it. It would explain why they walked in with confidence as the witnesses described. Can't imagine there was any confidence that the cops would not rush in.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
icanmakeuhappy



Posts : 9
Contribution Points : 2025
Join date : 2018-09-29
Age : 18

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:38 pm

I read somewhere Dylan was left handed and Eric was right handed. Is that right?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Jenn
Forum Owner
avatar

Posts : 2513
Contribution Points : 57724
Join date : 2013-03-13
Location : A place where it always snows.

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Tue Nov 06, 2018 10:57 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
I read somewhere Dylan was left handed and Eric was right handed. Is that right?
Yea, that's right.

_________________
"Oh well, whatever, nevermind".
Back to top Go down
View user profile
miketheratguy

avatar

Posts : 201
Contribution Points : 5309
Join date : 2018-10-15
Age : 40
Location : USA

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:11 am

Eric and Dylan's dominant hands can most easily be seen in the cafeteria footage.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Vallutaja



Posts : 12
Contribution Points : 1205
Join date : 2018-11-02

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:27 am

How many of the killed people were actual jocks, I wonder?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Screamingophelia
Miscellaneous Moderator & Top 10 Contributor
avatar

Posts : 4310
Contribution Points : 72065
Join date : 2017-08-25
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:35 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
How many of the killed people were actual jocks, I wonder?

“Jock” at Columbine was a super broad term. You could be just friends with a jock to be considered a jock. It was more of a clique thing I think. You could be an athlete but not a jock.

I think Lauren, Corey and Isaiah (maybe Matt?) did some sort of sports. Whether they were considered jocks was another story.

_________________
"And you know, you know, you know, this can be beautiful, you say you're numb inside, but I can't agree. So the world's unfair, keep it locked out there. In here it's beautiful."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
thelmar

avatar

Posts : 141
Contribution Points : 9310
Join date : 2018-07-15

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:46 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
How many of the killed people were actual jocks, I wonder?

“Jock” at Columbine was a super broad term. You could be just friends with a jock  to be considered a jock. It was more of a clique thing I think. You could be an athlete but not a jock.

I think Lauren, Corey and Isaiah (maybe Matt?) did some sort of sports. Whether they were considered jocks was another story.

Yes, Matt Kechter played football, like Isaiah. The difference between a "jock" and someone who did sports were that the "jocks" were viewed as the clique that thought they were better than everyone else, whose identities were sort of wrapped up in the fact that they played a sport. These were the kids more likely to be involved in bullying. I think, at Columbine, most of the negative connotation "jocks" were likely football players.  
On the other hand, you had kids who participated in sports but didn't act like jerks or think the school hierarchy should revolve around them. I think this was the majority of the student athletes at Columbine, but as planning for NBK became more finalized, I don't think they were really distinguishing between the two groups.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
James411



Posts : 225
Contribution Points : 32746
Join date : 2015-06-19

PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   Fri Nov 09, 2018 3:24 pm

One thing I been thinking about is what if Eric and Dylan did the columbine shooting on the last day of school sometime in may instead of april. I mean eric was 18 he could have bought more ammunition and strong weapons. So why april I wonder??
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: The small questions thread   

Back to top Go down
 
The small questions thread
Back to top 
Page 31 of 32Go to page : Previous  1 ... 17 ... 30, 31, 32  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Scarlett Vixen & Her Small Herd
» The Small Print ((Open))
» Puppetry Questions
» Zack:. -Small body, big heart! (Scroll)
» Death in a small town

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum :: Columbine High School Massacre Discussion Forum :: Thoughts on the Shooting-
Jump to: