What do you think Paddock's motive was?

sscc wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

This is why I like to look at everything involving a case. Even down to the wildest, most nut job inspired conspiracy theories.

Some people just think outside the box and will catch or notice some totally random bit of info that others who take things at face value will miss. A lot of conspiracy theorists ideas come from legitimate facts, they just go about researching or thinking about things in a different manner.

Don't get me wrong some of these people are truly just out of their minds and will make crazy claims, but sometimes some will make connections and then you are like "DAMN how did I miss that?"

I appreciate you being open minded.  I am looking into every aspect until there's legitimate facts disproving something one way or another.  Right now the only facts we have are there are 59 people dead including Paddock, an injured security guard who won't answer hard questions, police withholding information/ineptness, and many pieces of evidence that do not support what little the police have shared (timeline, not near enough brass in the room to support 10 minute continuous shooting, and more).

You may be open to alternative truths but you have also discounted relevant facts. You have said that Paddock was inexperienced with weaponry even though there's no reason to believe that. You are saying that although he was found dead in the room where the shooting happened, surrounded by an entire arsenal that he purchased with his own money, that these facts do not support the conclusion that he was the shooter. I think that these are good reasons to believe that he was the shooter. Maybe there are other possibilities but it's not close minded to accept those facts as reasonable proof that he was the perpetrator (or at least one of them). It's true that some questions still need to be answered but so far, the evidence that he perpetrated this crime outweighs the evidence that he did not. Of course, if you want to say that you don't trust the information that has been released by official sources, then there's not going to be enough common ground to discuss evidence anyway because then you could say that these pictures did not come from the hotel room where the shooting happened or that this was not even the hotel room where the shooting happened to begin with.

There's evidence against him being an experienced shooter..... His own brother said it and the lack of evidence of him going to ranges or hunting is also evidence. You can buy as many guns as you want, over any time period you want, doesn't mean you know what the hell your doing.

All I know is that his body is in the room and the room is missing a shit-ton of casings, it's possible he shot 2-4 magazines tops. I haven't seen any high capacity magazines in the photos so that would be 60-120 casings which seem to be what's on the hotel room floor.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Thanks! You may believe what you want as well, I don't care either.

TheyAllFloatDownHere wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

Why is it a conspiracy theory when there's no evidence saying otherwise?

If you're going to delude yourself and believe that there's some sort of conspiracy or strange happenings afoot here, then by all means, go right ahead. After all, it's not my job to convince you otherwise and all things considered I probably wouldn't be able to change your mind anyway.

On the plus side, if indeed you're right you have full permission to tell me "I told you so, [insult of your choice]".  

Alot of these conspiracies are far out but in these cases with limited info and no motives law enforcement does act strange and hesitant and there are strange anomalies among the evidence but i do believe Vegas is an event in which no outside source was involved and that the conspiracy is the cryptic motives of stephen paddock and his why he did this to such a complex and planned scale

The fact that the motive is so murky undermines the idea that it's a conspiracy. It wouldn't make sense to plan something so elaborate and substantial while leaving that glaring hole for people to pick at. Even if you want to say the conspirators just forgot to fill in that little detail, they could have quickly and easily manufactured a plausible motive.

It would help if they shared their findings. Obviously things aren't going well if a judge has to have an order to not disturb the evidence at the hotel. Wonder what went disappearing there to make that have to happen?

If there were no other conspirators they would have just released the evidence cause the case is beyond closed if Paddock was the only person involved.

silentprocess wrote:

There's evidence against him being an experienced shooter.....  His own brother said it and the lack of evidence of him going to ranges or hunting is also evidence.  You can buy as many guns as you want, over any time period you want, doesn't mean you know what the hell your doing.

All I know is that his body is in the room and the room is missing a shit-ton of casings, it's possible he shot 2-4 magazines tops. I haven't seen any high capacity magazines in the photos so that would be 60-120 casings which seem to be what's on the hotel room floor.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Thanks!  You may believe what you want as well, I don't care either.

There's really no direct evidence suggesting that he was or that he was not experienced. Multiple people said that he was into guns over a period of years and his brother did not seem to be aware of that so I would assume that he didn't spend much time with his brother discussing guns and he is not a reliable source of information on his level of experience with weapons.

You're right that you can buy as many guns as you want without learning how to shoot but logically, why would anyone (who isn't selling guns for profit) buy a bunch of guns without ever learning how to shoot them? It seems more reasonable to me to believe that it was a legitimate hobby until he decided he was going to kill people, and then he went on an obsessive buying spree over the past year.

In terms of visiting ranges, I would guess that someone as private as Paddock might forego target practice at a range when he could practice shooting in a remote area, kind of like Eric and Dylan did. There was an article where they mentioned surveillance footage that showed Paddock driving off toward the desert in the week before the shooting heading in a direction that locals used for target practice.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
If it was an area that was frequently used by other people, we might expect to eventually hear from them how experienced he seemed to be, what sorts of weapons and accessories he was practicing with and more information like that. Unfortunately, Paddock was also a bit of a loner so he could have been the sort to drive off if there were other people there just to avoid having to interact with others. There's also the question of whether he could have found a remote area of his own in order to make sure that no one would disturb or observe him. When you live in the desert, it seems like it would be possible. Regardless, it's only been a few weeks since the shooting and Paddock has lived in many places. They may eventually release information indicating that he frequented ranges somewhere else, some time in the past.

Aside from that, I think the point curious2017 made in another thread is legitimate. Maybe you're right and he did only have minimal experience with shooting but even if that was true, there were so many guns in the room that he wouldn't have needed to know how to clear a jam anyway.

I believe it's likely that he did have some experience because he had reportedly been carrying a weapon since at least 2012/2013 but what do you make of these comments?

Quote :

And practicing in these clubs — something that Paddock, a high-stakes gambler and real estate investor, could afford — wouldn’t have been necessary for the carnage inflicted during the shooting, according to Cathedral City Deputy Police Chief Travis Walker, who led the San Bernardino Police Department SWAT team’s response to the 2015 terrorist attack in the city.

“At that distance, he wasn’t shooting for accuracy,” Walker said. “He was putting as much lead downrange as he could to attack that crowd. When you have that many people, and that big of a crowd, there wasn’t a whole lot of skill needed to impact the crowd.”

And that was made even easier by shooting from his hotel room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay on the west side of the Strip.

“It was like shooting fish in a barrel,” Walker said. “He was on the side of the exits. They were running toward the bullets.”

Paddock also made mistakes a trained person wouldn’t have, according to Oliva.

“A trained person would work on one platform and master that platform,” he said.” This guy brought 19 guns; he didn’t know which one was best. A trained person wouldn’t have the gun jam and put it aside; a trained person would clear that in one second. And a trained person wouldn’t use a bump stock; those are novelties.”

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

My other question is if Paddock didn't do the shooting, what is your explanation as to why he owned so many guns and why he bought so many over the past year?

starrwilliams wrote:

Exactly.  The independent media sites are willing to hear the truth from the eyewitnesses who were there.

It's an empirically proven flaw in human memory encoding during traumatic situations, not the truth. The "independent media" fans the conspiracy flames to collect ad dollars.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Weapon trafficking is a possibility. Obsessive compulsive disorder is a possibility. With the amount of money he had he may have bought them all to get into a 3 gun competition, were there any going on in Vegas during that time frame or a gun show where he was going to sell and/or purchase more? That would explain it as well, due to his inexperience he didn't know what to use so brought them all. Too many unknown factors to state specifically why.

The quote you posted show he was inexperienced as I stated. Paddocks (or whoevers) accuracy was pretty damn good though 58 kills with 120 or under rounds is damn accurate (as that's how many casings I estimated are in the room based on the released photos). If there was continuous firing for 10 minutes there has to be more casings somewhere, I'd like to see or know where those casings are.

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Weapon trafficking is a possibility.  Obsessive compulsive disorder is a possibility.  With the amount of money he had he may have bought them all to get into a 3 gun competition, were there any going on in Vegas during that time frame or a gun show where he was going to sell and/or purchase more?  That would explain it as well, due to his inexperience he didn't know what to use so brought them all. Too many unknown factors to state specifically why.

The quote you posted show he was inexperienced as I stated.  Paddocks (or whoevers) accuracy was pretty damn good though 58 kills with 120 or under rounds is damn accurate (as that's how many casings I estimated are in the room based on the released photos).  If there was continuous firing for 10 minutes there has to be more casings somewhere, I'd like to see or know where those casings are.

Again, I think drawing conclusions based on the photos is a huge mistake. One, if you look through the photos, they seem to all be showing the same shooting location, the one the body was found near. If most of the shots were fired from the other vantage point, you're going to come up way short. Two, they really don't show much of the scene. There are curtains, furniture, shadows, and the casings blend in pretty well with the carpet at some points.

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Weapon trafficking is a possibility.  Obsessive compulsive disorder is a possibility.  With the amount of money he had he may have bought them all to get into a 3 gun competition, were there any going on in Vegas during that time frame or a gun show where he was going to sell and/or purchase more?  That would explain it as well, due to his inexperience he didn't know what to use so brought them all. Too many unknown factors to state specifically why.

The quote you posted show he was inexperienced as I stated.  Paddocks (or whoevers) accuracy was pretty damn good though 58 kills with 120 or under rounds is damn accurate (as that's how many casings I estimated are in the room based on the released photos).  If there was continuous firing for 10 minutes there has to be more casings somewhere, I'd like to see or know where those casings are.

I agree that we know without question that more than 120 rounds were fired but no one ever said that those photos showed every casing in that room so we can't conclude that any shooting took place elsewhere. No other windows were knocked out in the surrounding hotels or we would have heard about it, so that's not an option. The only other option would be someone on the ground. Given that there were multiple recordings made and hundreds of people on the ground during the concert, don't you think video would have been captured or that we would have at least heard from people who actually saw additional shooters at ground level if that had happened? And I haven't seen any photos of casings on the ground where the shooting took place so I think we can rule out that possibility as well, if we rely on photos of visible casings to reveal where the shooter was standing during the shooting. Isn't the most reasonable possibility that the additional casings were not captured in the three or four photos that were leaked so far?

I understand that the quote suggests that he was inexperienced but it also suggests that the shooter did not need much experience given the circumstances. This official believes that Paddock could have pulled off the shooting with minimal training and that there are indications that this is what happened. I'd say that this possibility makes the question of how much training and experience he had less relevant and is another piece of information that would suggest that Paddock was capable of being the shooter but it doesn't seem to factor into your opinion at all, even though you originally made the point that the shooter must have had a lot of experience to support your theory that Paddock wasn't the shooter.

I'm guessing that's because you never believed that Paddock was the shooter anyway and because you now think that there were multiple shooters at multiple sites but again, if you take the facts that are being given, the simplest conclusion is that Paddock dabbled with guns enough to know how to use them in the manner that the shooter used them. If you add in the fact that he owned them, that he was found dead in the room where the casings were found, and that no casings were found anywhere else as far as we know, I don't see what's so mysterious about this situation.

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Thanks!  You may believe what you want as well, I don't care either.

Good, we understand each other then.

Good luck on your investigation, even if I don't agree with your conclusions.

People. many witnesses in the crowd claimed there were multiple shooters. Why don't you believe them? Have you listened to the audios of the gunshots? Watched the analyses that several people have done of the audio? There were different guns going off. As far as Paddock, he was probably a gun runner and got in trouble with the dealers and got himself killed in that hotel room. He may have fired some shots, but the evidence in the hotel room says otherwise, unless those photos I have seen are fake. No shell casings anywhere. If the photo of him dead is legit, that is not a suicide shot. He was murdered. Just like those 59 people were murdered and over 500 injured by terrorists in the crowd.

starrwilliams wrote:

People. many witnesses in the crowd claimed there were multiple shooters.  Why don't you believe them?  Have you listened to the audios of the gunshots?  Watched the analyses that several people have done of the audio?  There were different guns going off.  As far as Paddock,  he was probably a gun runner and got in trouble with the dealers and got himself killed in that hotel room.  He may have fired some shots, but the evidence in the hotel room says otherwise, unless those photos I have seen are fake.  No shell casings anywhere.  If the photo of him dead is legit, that is not a suicide shot.  He was murdered.  Just like those 59 people were murdered and over 500 injured by terrorists in the crowd.  

There are many shell casings visible in the photographs. Can you explain why that could not be a suicide shot?

I don't understand. You're saying that Stephen Paddock was running guns and coincidentally got killed by the people involved with that while a terrorist incident was going on at the concert or you're saying that he was selling guns to terrorists and they killed him before they went downstairs and started firing on the crowd? Why would Paddock have fired any shots in either case? Who broke out the windows and why?

In the audio analysis that has been done, is there overlapping gunfire or is there only one weapon being shot at a time? Can you link to the analyses that convinced you there were multiple shooters?

I'm not completely sure about this but maybe someone else knows: Did Paddock use different weapons at different times during the attack?

Did the witnesses in the crowd say they saw multiple shooters or did they think that they heard shooting coming from multiple directions and assume that there were multiple shooters? Was anyone able to describe the shooters and the type of guns that the shooters had? Can you link to the interviews? I'd be willing to look at the information but the reason I would also consider witness accounts to be less important than other evidence is that witnesses (especially when the witness is facing possible death) are known to be very unreliable, as a couple of other people have already pointed out.

Like I said in my post above, if there were terrorists in the crowd and you're concerned about missing shell casings, why weren't there any casings on the ground among the people in the crowd? If there were terrorists in the crowd, why didn't anyone capture them on video? If there were terrorists surrounded by a crowd of a thousand people, why didn't a single person try to tackle them once they realized that they weren't going to stop shooting and that there was essentially no place to hide?

I don't think it's logical to believe that anyone was shooting from the crowd, even if we stop at the fact that there were no casings on the ground.

Maybe there's still a possibility that there was another shooter in the hotel room working with Paddock who managed to escape (though I don't believe it) but I think that he had to know the shooting was going to happen and had to be involved because he scouted other locations and booked the room himself. If this was done by a group of terrorists, Paddock was one of them.

Considering the witnesses were panicking, getting shot at and most likely extremely confused, I don't think they're too reliable.

starrwilliams wrote:

People. many witnesses in the crowd claimed there were multiple shooters.  Why don't you believe them?

Every significant mass casualty event comes with eyewitness reports of multiple shooters. They're almost universally wrong.

Quote :

 Have you listened to the audios of the gunshots?  Watched the analyses that several people have done of the audio?  There were different guns going off.

He had 20 guns. There were different guns going off.

Quote :

As far as Paddock,  he was probably a gun runner and got in trouble with the dealers and got himself killed in that hotel room.

The shooter was already wealthy, earning millions of dollars a year from real estate. He made $5 million in 2015. Even if you want to speculate that he'd run up gambling debts he needed to pay, he literally had assets worth a small fortune. Houses all over the country, two planes, and who knows what else. So that claim doesn't make any sense.

Quote :

 He may have fired some shots, but the evidence in the hotel room says otherwise, unless those photos I have seen are fake.
 No shell casings anywhere.  

The photos show a small area of one shooting vantage point. You can't make any reasonable conclusion about the casings from those pictures.

It's a conspiracy? They would have dumped more casings in the room for you. There were other shooters on the ground? There would be casings all over the ground that people would have photographed and reported.

Quote :

If the photo of him dead is legit, that is not a suicide shot.  He was murdered.  Just like those 59 people were murdered and over 500 injured by terrorists in the crowd.  

How is it not a suicide shot? That's exactly what it looks like.

Didn't see your reply before I wrote mine but looks like we hit some different points.

sscc wrote:

I'm not completely sure about this but maybe someone else knows: Did Paddock use different weapons at different times during the attack?

Watching the coverage, law enforcement/ex-military commentators all seemed convinced multiple weapons were used at different times.

Quote :

Did the witnesses in the crowd say they saw multiple shooters or did they think that they heard shooting coming from multiple directions and assume that there were multiple shooters? Was anyone able to describe the shooters and the type of guns that the shooters had? Can you link to the interviews? I'd be willing to look at the information but the reason I would also consider witness accounts to be less important than other evidence is that witnesses (especially when the witness is facing possible death) are known to be very unreliable, as a couple of other people have already pointed out.

I just watched one of the "multiple shooter" videos and the witness says the first round of shots sounded very different from the shots that hit the concert. That makes perfect sense. The current timeline says the shooter fired at the airport fuel depot before turning to the concert.

All he mentioned otherwise was that people in the crowd were shouting that the shooting was coming from various casinos. They had no idea what they were talking about, so that's meaningless.

The other video I watched fixates on the shots sounding different in a taxi driver's footage in front of the casino. The explanation for that one seems very obvious to me: the shooter was using both of his vantage points, which were basically on different sides of the building.

Can't really blame folks for going full Alex Jones with how badly this case has been handled.

W.A.R. wrote:

Can't really blame folks for going full Alex Jones with how badly this case has been handled.

Are you referring to me? I have watched countless videos of the shootings, the press conferences law enforcement has done, and many other informative videos. I have not even gone near Alex Jones' site because I know how they can spin things the wrong way. An anonymous person from the police department stated the very facts that I pointed out about the gun running operation. There is way more to it than that, but that's the gist of it.

As far as me linking videos, y'all go do your own research. There is plenty out there on You Tube. If you question so much, I don't have the time to give all the information to you. There are videos of audio analysis, videos of eyewitnesses, etc. Have at it!

Also, explain to me why the FBI totally wiped clean all of the cell phones they got from people in the crowd? Multiple people said everything from that night was erased, including messages. This anonymous lvpd person stated that it was an FBI run operation and Paddock was undercover. When who they were dealing with realized it was an entrapment situation, they supposedly killed Paddock and did the shooting themselves. Why would the FBI do that to people's cell phones? Because they don't want anyone to know the truth about the situation.

starrwilliams wrote:

Also, explain to me why the FBI totally wiped clean all of the cell phones they got from people in the crowd?  Multiple people said everything from that night was erased, including messages.  This anonymous lvpd person stated that it was an FBI run operation and Paddock was undercover.  When who they were dealing with realized it was an entrapment situation, they supposedly killed Paddock and did the shooting themselves.  Why would the FBI do that to people's cell phones?  Because they don't want anyone to know the truth about the situation.

If the FBI deleting evidence is true then you are likely right, there is some sort of cover up going on.

starrwilliams wrote:

Also, explain to me why the FBI totally wiped clean all of the cell phones they got from people in the crowd?  Multiple people said everything from that night was erased, including messages.  This anonymous lvpd person stated that it was an FBI run operation and Paddock was undercover.  When who they were dealing with realized it was an entrapment situation, they supposedly killed Paddock and did the shooting themselves.  Why would the FBI do that to people's cell phones?  Because they don't want anyone to know the truth about the situation.

It's hilarious that you just claimed to be avoiding Alex Jones, because this claim actually originated with Infowars. The "evidence" supporting it? A single post on Facebook by one person who basically says they heard from other people that phones were wiped before being returned.

Of course, the claim is nonsensical in the first place. You sent a message on your phone? The recipient has a copy. You took pictures or videos? A ton of people have them automatically backed up in the cloud.

The rest of what you're saying is surely just as spurious, and I wouldn't be surprised if the "anonymous lvpd person" also originated with Alex Jones. If you've ever watched his show, he enjoys pretending that everything he says came from high ranking CIA, FBI, and military sources. It's total nonsense.

Even though those sources for the deleted phone data originated on facebook no one has been able to verify or discredit these posts. The images of the Facebook users who claimed their data was gone were blurred out so no follow up was possible from what I've read on snopes (even though snopes isn't the end all be all of credibility).

All I know is that it is true that the FBI collected phones and any other device concertgoers had.

silentprocess wrote:

Even though those sources for the deleted phone data originated on facebook no one has been able to verify or discredit these posts.  The images of the Facebook users who claimed their data was gone were blurred out so no follow up was possible from what I've read on snopes (even though snopes isn't the end all be all of credibility).

All I know is that it is true that the FBI collected phones and any other device concertgoers had.

If there had been a mass collection of devices and they were all returned wiped, you'd find more than one report. It's that simple. I wouldn't be surprised if the Infowars writer created the Facebook accounts himself and literally just made the exchange up.

The FBI certainly collected a substantial amount of property abandoned at the scene, including phones and other electronics. I'm not aware of any mass device collection otherwise.

One of the problems is that there is little to no reporting or new information, so all we have is what has already been released to go over. The other problem is it's plausible that the FBI would do that, which doesn't help matters.

On another note it would be pretty hard to prove that you had media of the shooting if it were deleted. Not saying it happened, just saying lol if you trust the FBI.

They aren't even talking about this on the news anymore.

W.A.R. wrote:

They aren't even talking about this on the news anymore.

They're still talking about it here in Vegas, but that's to be expected. In fact there's an entire section of the LVRJ dedicated to the shooting:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

starrwilliams wrote:

Why would the FBI do that to people's cell phones?  Because they don't want anyone to know the truth about the situation.

And the motive for that is....?

No, seriously, why would the FBI care if it was revealed that gun runners were responsible for what happened? There is no motive or higher reasoning for them to do so.

silentprocess wrote:

One of the problems is that there is little to no reporting or new information, so all we have is what has already been released to go over.  The other problem is it's plausible that the FBI would do that, which doesn't help matters.

On another note it would be pretty hard to prove that you had media of the shooting if it were deleted.  Not saying it happened, just saying lol if you trust the FBI.

It's actually not plausible at all. Thousands of devices from thousands of people who scattered, with vast amounts of amateur video that could reveal some glaring inconsistency already available? And one fuck up in the collection effort overlooking one damning piece of video destroys everything. I don't think any government agency is competent enough to do that.

curious2017 wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

One of the problems is that there is little to no reporting or new information, so all we have is what has already been released to go over.  The other problem is it's plausible that the FBI would do that, which doesn't help matters.

On another note it would be pretty hard to prove that you had media of the shooting if it were deleted.  Not saying it happened, just saying lol if you trust the FBI.

It's actually not plausible at all. Thousands of devices from thousands of people who scattered, with vast amounts of amateur video that could reveal some glaring inconsistency already available? And one fuck up in the collection effort overlooking one damning piece of video destroys everything. I don't think any government agency is competent enough to do that.

I did not say that they deleted all evidence from all devices, I'm saying it's plausible, knowing the credibility of the FBI, that some phones could have had data deleted. I'm not saying they did it, I'm saying that the FBI isn't trustworthy, look at the Uranium deal they were aware of in 2009 and did nothing.

silentprocess wrote:

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

So if I'm understanding your theory correctly, Stephen Paddock was a gunrunner, was murdered by other gunrunners, and after his murder, the gunrunners who killed him decided to shoot up the concert in Las Vegas (because?), and the FBI is covering up this information because they could be implicated in another scandal over arms dealers having guns the FBI sold to them on purpose.

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

Did I miss or misinterpret anything?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I don't have a running theory. You asked a question and I copied and pasted a link. You explicitly trust the government organizations investigating this case, I don't. That's the only difference.

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I don't have a running theory.  You asked a question and I copied and pasted a link.  You explicitly trust the government organizations investigating this case, I don't.  That's the only difference.

Would you ever believe anything they say or do you automatically reject it?

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I don't have a running theory.

Okay, just making sure.

curious2017 wrote:

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I don't have a running theory.  You asked a question and I copied and pasted a link.  You explicitly trust the government organizations investigating this case, I don't.  That's the only difference.

Would you ever believe anything they say or do you automatically reject it?

I believe things they say if there is irrefutable evidence. I am honestly astonished that I'm one of the few people here that find the activities and lack thereof of the police to be suspicious. Allowing the home to be robbed, putting a timeline out before they even knew what the timeline was, forcibly court ordered to not remove evidence from the hotel room, waiting an hour to determine if the shooter was active or not. I would say there's a complete lack of transparency at the very least. I find the law enforcements motives more questionable than Paddocks.

I'm not saying I believe every conspiracy theory out there because there's a lack of evidence in most of that as well, the problem is there's only a few pieces of evidence in the first place. If Paddock decided to go batshit insane and blow people away why not just share the details of the case and what they know as they know it, I'm assuming they aren't even sure if he did this alone at the very least or who else may be culpable.

I am saying I find this case bizarre and am not really leaning toward one theory or another, there's not enough information to determine anything on this case except there's 59 dead people, and lots of guns and ammo.

silentprocess wrote:

 I find the law enforcements motives more questionable than Paddocks.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  ^ That statement is me up one side and down the other.  Seriously can we like totally be BEST FRIENDS?!

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

I heard great minds think alike. Not to make anyone else in this thread feel inferior of course.

silentprocess wrote:

I believe things they say if there is irrefutable evidence.  I am honestly astonished that I'm one of the few people here that find the activities and lack thereof of the police to be suspicious.  Allowing the home to be robbed, putting a timeline out before they even knew what the timeline was, forcibly court ordered to not remove evidence from the hotel room, waiting an hour to determine if the shooter was active or not.  I would say there's a complete lack of transparency at the very least.  I find the law enforcements motives more questionable than Paddocks.  

I don't think any of that is suspicious. Obviously the police didn't "allow" the shooter's home to be robbed. That presumes they should have been continuously guarding every property the shooter owned even though they had already meticulously combed every single one of them for evidence that might be relevant to the case. Anything they wanted was seized long before the break in ten days after the shooting.

The timeline is simple incompetence. They caved to the intense demand for information without definitively understanding when events had unfolded. It's not the first time a shooting timeline has been confused and revised.

The court order has been completely misconstrued. Someone injured in the shooting filed a civil suit and moved to have MGM preserve all evidence relevant to the case. The order has nothing to do with the police investigation; it doesn't imply that there was any attempt to disturb or destroy evidence. It's standard practice in a civil law suit.

Quote :

I'm not saying I believe every conspiracy theory out there because there's a lack of evidence in most of that as well, the problem is there's only a few pieces of evidence in the first place.  If Paddock decided to go batshit insane and blow people away why not just share the details of the case and what they know as they know it, I'm assuming they aren't even sure if he did this alone at the very least or who else may be culpable.

I am saying I find this case bizarre and am not really leaning toward one theory or another, there's not enough information to determine anything on this case except there's 59 dead people, and lots of guns and ammo.

That's not how investigations are conducted. They'll release their findings when they've made conclusions. There's absolutely nothing suspicious about that.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Other cases have had information released much faster Sandy Hook and Pulse are good examples. Not all the information was released in regards to Sandy Hook but we knew more than we do about this case the same week the shooting happened.

I think it would be very safe to say the whole incident is complete and utter incompetence on the authorities part.

This is the first time I've seen a case where a suspects home was robbed during an investigation. I'm glad all the evidence was secured though, even though I have no clue how you know this.

Your right the court order was in regards to a civil suit. I read in an article that they also wanted to ensure the video evidence was secured. MGM would want to delete that evidence due to the civil lawsuit in case there are obvious signs on the video that makes them liable. Evidence is deleted all the time, ask Hillary.

We agree that the timeline is incompetence at least.

silentprocess wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  Other cases have had information released much faster Sandy Hook and Pulse are good examples.  Not all the information was released in regards to Sandy Hook but we knew more than we do about this case the same week the shooting happened.

Such as? My quick check of that claim indicated that a vast amount of Sandy Hook information wasn't released until three months after the event.

Quote :

I think it would be very safe to say the whole incident is complete and utter incompetence on the authorities part.

This is the first time I've seen a case where a suspects home was robbed during an investigation. I'm glad all the evidence was secured though, even though I have no clue how you know this.

How many mass shooters were widely reported to be worth millions of dollars? Whoever broke in presumably waited until all the police activity had ceased and did it hoping to find something valuable. It makes perfect sense.

As for the evidence, that's just how search warrants are executed. Anything potentially relevant to the crime is seized so that suspects, family members, friends can't alter or destroy it later. The police didn't leave that house without taking everything they wanted.

Quote :

Your right the court order was in regards to a civil suit.  I read in an article that they also wanted to ensure the video evidence was secured.  MGM would want to delete that evidence due to the civil lawsuit in case there are obvious signs on the video that makes them liable.  Evidence is deleted all the time, ask Hillary.

Deleting the video would actually allow an adverse inference that basically guarantees MGM loses the case, so no, they wouldn't want to do that. Sometimes destroying evidence is the dumbest thing you can do.

Mayb we could find info about him. Like he has been around for almost every major shooting in AMerican history. He could have writings like Lanza, 911 calls like Omar

-warrior wrote:

Mayb we could find info about him. Like he has been around for almost every major shooting in AMerican history. He could have writings like Lanza, 911 calls like Omar

Its only been a few weeks since the shooting. I expect that as time passes more information will come to light and we'll have a better understanding of Paddock.

STK wrote:

-warrior wrote:

Mayb we could find info about him. Like he has been around for almost every major shooting in AMerican history. He could have writings like Lanza, 911 calls like Omar

Its only been a few weeks since the shooting. I expect that as time passes more information will come to light and we'll have a better understanding of Paddock.

im also interested in that Campos guy and how the original and how the inital interaction took place

-warrior wrote:

Mayb we could find info about him. Like he has been around for almost every major shooting in AMerican history. He could have writings like Lanza, 911 calls like Omar

Maybe that'll be the case, and it'll become clear over time that he just set out to top every other mass shooter in American history.

If it's not then we're back to square 1.

This case has only gotten more complicated as the weeks have passed. We are still not one step closer to getting an actual, non speculated motive.

We have also not seen one video (a still even!) of Paddock in the most surveilled place on the planet.

They could usually tell you what someone ate for dinner 30 years ago by now.

W.A.R. wrote:

We have also not seen one video (a still even!) of Paddock in the most surveilled place on the planet.

I find that very odd as well.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

W.A.R. wrote:

We have also not seen one video (a still even!) of Paddock in the most surveilled place on the planet.

I find that very odd as well.

they have also butchered the fuck out of the reports..the story changes like daily

I believe that much like most shooters, he was looking for fame, I believe that mass shootings are what happens when narcissists don't achieve what they want in life, or do not get the attention of others as much as they want, so they look to violence to get what they want. Well, the active shooters. People like Ronald Gene Simmons have very different motives than this. But this is my theory. Just putting it out there.

They are still no closer to figuring out what Paddock's motive was after all this time.

In all honesty this case is still pretty much stuck at square one. They have the who and where, but can't find the why. They still have no real believable motive, just a lot of speculation and head scratching.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

They are still no closer to figuring out what Paddock's motive was after all this time.

We might have to wait like a year or two before a motive can be established.

QuestionMark wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

They are still no closer to figuring out what Paddock's motive was after all this time.

We might have to wait like a year or two before a motive can be established.

Probably longer the that. Meanwhile every conspiracy theorist crawls out of the shadows and makes countless Youtube videos about it.