Review of Randy Brown's book

Screamingophelia wrote:

The information we have already is pretty gruesome, and we have the video of the library after the bodies were removed... plus the 911 call and the accounts from the 11k, so I am not sure what else Randy would have access to than that.

Perhaps crime scene photos of the bodies? We know LE would have had to have taken photos for evidence. I've always heard rumors that photos were passed around Littleton in '99, but I never believed them. However, if anyone had access to something they should not have it would be Randy.

Its not easy to get a hold of it, but, honestly, if Im going to offer my opinion on Randy Browns views, its that so far he has expressed views that are faar too simplistic. He argues that bullying causes school shootings. Ehh.. Thats not entirely true, either. What might be true- and I certainly believe in this theory- is that bullying is a factor in many school shootings. But its a factor combined with other factors. On a side nøte, I tend to be a bit sceptical towards the viewpoint that the two werent bullied. I know that Frank Ochberg says they werent. I havent heard Mary Ellen O'Tooles or any other experts take on this. Its complex, given that Ive only read and watched a handful of interviews from friends, plus, Sue Klebold, regarding the bullying and/or harassment. Some have argued that they were, in fact, bullied. Others have dismissed it. I think Robyn Anderson stated in the 11K documents that she never did see them getting picked on.

Alas, yeah, its complicated, because friends and family provide different statements and some experts have denied it. Given I only like to research the issue and Im not a Psychologist or criminologist I cant answer that question on a professional level. Also, given that they oftentimes commit suicide, I think its hard to get the full answer to why or how.

I would argue that I think bullying was a problem at Columbine HS. To the extend that the media projected it with articles such as 'The cult of the athlete' (which I believe was picked apart several years in the aftermath). But, atleast, some of it must have been true. Even Dave Cullen argues that it was a signifant problem at Columbine. So does Peter Langmann( he argues that plenty of Kids suffered long term severe harassment, but that many of the more prominent bullies gratuated the year before). If we examine some of the statements made by friends of the killers.

Nathan Dykeman:
Im sure that there are probably interviews in the 11k documents as well. Nate Dykeman I found only one interview of, and he seems to say that Eric got more bullied than Dylan.

Nathan Vanderau and cup of fecal matter. Ive found this interview and he actually references the TCM and says that 'they got picked on pretty badly'.

Chad Laughlin- says he saw Eric and Dylan bombarded with Ketchup(the ketchup incident). Sue Klebold says that he had Come home with spots of ketchup on hes shirt. She argues that this was the ketchup incident.

Sue Klebold: Dylan said that the jocks gave Eric hell, whereas they left him alone.

I dont think people should buy into Cullens theory selectively. But I also dont think so when it comes to any sources of information. I trust that Cullen knows hes stuff given that he spent years talking to people and the investigators themselves. I also think that hes fiercest critics get what he says,
wrong, from time to time. Yet, I also thing that the media jumps too easily on one particular persons take on the story and represents it as the ulimate truth. To be honest, I think Peter Langmann has a more accurate approach, when he says that there are different factors for a school shooting to take place. And this seeems a lot more reasonable, imo, over the years Ive read and researched this issue. To simply narrow it down to depression or bullying- thats Just trying to find a clear cut answer. Lots of people are bullied or depressed or both and dont shoot up a school. So, there has to be more to the story than Just one answer. And, yes, Bullying has been seven as a factor along with many of them coming together.

Another thing is that Randy Brown, himselves has said some really bizarre stuff that I just cant make sense of.

- That Erics father was emotionally abusive

- That he wasnt a psychopath because thats Just too simple.

IDK Where to begin with this but.

1: IDK Where this is coming from. Now, I havent read Wayne Harris' journal of hes son, but from most of what I know they were actually good parents, by all accounts.

2: I know this has actually been covered before and people can honestly disagree with this. But I find it puzzling how anyone that is not a Psychologist are going to examine someone like Harris and Klebold. If the majority of experts agree that climate change is real(which it is) , I would accept basic science on the mwrit of what most experts agree on. I dont think its a debate every commin man or woman should try to dispute. The only people that should dispute this are experts themselves, imo. Even if it can be argued that diagnosing the dead is a bad idea. I havent seen that many experts disputing that Eric Harris had a severe lack of empathy. Which brings me to the Second analogy of why Randy Brown is actually wrong: When he argues that people say this because its simple- quite the opposite in fact.

Now, I know very little about psychopaths. But most information available to the public does suggest that most psychopaths are not violent. I think this implies that for a psychopathic shooter there has to be more than Just the fact that they are psychopaths. And heres Where Peter Langmann argues that not only are the psychopaths of this category psychopaths. They are also asaistic psychopaths. And on top of this, social factors, such as the van break in can trigger the factors.

So, when Randy argues that its easy- I would say, for the most part, its completely the opposite. Even Mary Ellen O'Toole, that put together the report of a threat assessment perspective gives a complex Outlook on murderers and serial killers and etc.

Hi Cyrinus.
Yes Randy does state that a source sent him the crime scene photos of the bodies.
But that was separate to what he tries to describe without description.

The excerpts from his book relate to a box of files "a large bankers box" from CBI who were pressured on behalf of a Mr. Salazaar, a DA I believe.. I could be wrong about his title but wanted to give a quick reply to you. (Mr. Salazaar being more favourable to Randy's pursuit of the truth)

I will admit to not having ever completely gone through all the publicly available evidence myself but I found his references here kind of noteworthy. But that's why I wondered if it was just the known gruesome... publicly available... known or otherwise... As his notes predate many data dumps and reflect his own emotional journey.

Also, is it hard to get hold of this book in some places?

No matter how much you know about Columbine, it’s definitely worth picking up this book for a read. Ironically I am also at the 64% mark on the Kindle Fire and there are all kinds of little facts/inside information throughout.

@ Cyrinus, Randy does claim in his book that an anonymous source left a folder full of photos in his mailbox, in which includes the photos of all those killed. A few days later the press got ahold of these pictures. Randy swears that he was not the person who leaked them and that those working close to the case- not just Jeffco, but also Lakewood, Arapahoe, etc.- freely circulated these photos.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it should be fairly obvious that the reason why Eric let Brooks go is because he didn’t want to blow his cover too early. ‍�

Turf wrote:

So it could be a sensitive reaction to forensic realities but it seemed to me that he wanted to hint at something beyond that?

Cyrinus wrote:

Screamingophelia wrote:

The information we have already is pretty gruesome, and we have the video of the library after the bodies were removed... plus the 911 call and the accounts from the 11k, so I am not sure what else Randy would have access to than that.

Perhaps crime scene photos of the bodies? We know LE would have had to have taken photos for evidence. I've always heard rumors that photos were passed around Littleton in '99, but I never believed them. However, if anyone had access to something they should not have it would be Randy.

I don't think Randy is trying to say that he has forensic details that are any more gruesome than what we already know. I think he's implying something, rightly or wrongly, that suggests that the nature of the killings were far more sadistic than most of us are imagining. Study the words he uses very carefully here:

Turf wrote:

This report shows the violence of Eric and Dylan. Eric and Dylan were killers in the worst sense. They were cruel, horrible, miserable rotten kids that killed without regard to humanity...................
This report takes the theoretical shootings in the library and turns them into killings beyond understanding, and deserving of hate and anger..............................................

"killers in the worst sense" "cruel, horrible, miserable rotten kids" "killings beyond understanding, and deserving of hate and anger"

Now compare this to what he says in a different part of the book:

dreadpiraterobers2020 wrote:

I would be remiss, in my duty to tell the truth, if I did not mention one very obvious fact: The weapons, during the killings, were fired as single shots. There was very little semi-automatic fire. There would be a single shot, and then nothing for a few seconds, 10, 15 seconds or longer. Then another shot. This was not a madhouse. This was a calm and collected killing.

dreadpiraterobers2020 wrote:

There were shots fired slowly, deliberately, and with a lot of time in between them. There are single rounds from weapons, fired at a slow pace, relishing the killing. Eric and Dylan took their time, and they enjoyed it. The delays, the time, match very well with the comments, the “wahoo’s” and excitement of the killers.

Combined with the fact that the shots are allegedly very spaced out and the fact that Randy's hatred and disgust for the pair only intensified after reading the report, I think it's obvious he's trying to say that Eric and Dylan were deliberately shooting at least some of their victims to injure, not kill, and this was done in order to inflict as much pain as possible.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.],
I totally concur with your conclusion.
For pretty much the points you suggest.
Certainly considered that at the time.

Yet still had to ask!
Thanks.

true_crime wrote:

No matter how much you know about Columbine, it’s definitely worth picking up this book for a read. Ironically I am also at the 64% mark on the Kindle Fire and there are all kinds of little facts/inside information throughout.

@ Cyrinus, Randy does claim in his book that an anonymous source left a folder full of photos in his mailbox, in which includes the photos of all those killed. A few days later the press got ahold of these pictures. Randy swears that he was not the person who leaked them and that those working close to the case- not just Jeffco, but also Lakewood, Arapahoe, etc.- freely circulated these photos.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it should be fairly obvious that the reason why Eric let Brooks go is because he didn’t want to blow his cover too early. ‍�

That's interesting! I always thought those rumors were just that, rumors.

true_crime wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it should be fairly obvious that the reason why Eric let Brooks go is because he didn’t want to blow his cover too early. ‍�

How is that obvious? They blew their cover early by beginning shooting early and outside whether it was Rachel or Patti or Brooks. That's why the cafeteria was empty. It's saying he didn't shoot Brooks to avoid exactly what happened anyway. That doesn't make sense, and seems to me to forget about the bombs as people so often do.

More likely, he had only about 10 minutes until they went off, so he couldn't be dicking around with Brooks much about the missed test. Then there's also the issue of sparing 1 to tell the story before the whole thing kicks off, as NBK suggests. If it even happened.

QuestionMark wrote:

Combined with the fact that the shots are allegedly very spaced out and the fact that Randy's hatred and disgust for the pair only intensified after reading the report, I think it's obvious he's trying to say that Eric and Dylan were deliberately shooting at least some of their victims to injure, not kill, and this was done in order to inflict as much pain as possible.

I've heard people say e. g. Kacey had a washer in her shoulder, so that must have been shrapnel from a pipe bomb rather than the gun. Actually, they removed the shot from some and put in glass and washers and etc. to make the wounds even worse. Val's injuries in particular show that.

And of course i'll keep my mouth shut about what else I think that implies, if there's even more evidence that the library massacre wasn't about merely finding the room with the most people to kill.

I honestly feel like Ive heard enough from Randy that I have to say I think there are better sources out there. Nothing personal. I Just think that given he lived through it and was probably traumatized by it, its understand able that hes not objective.

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

I've never heard/read anything like what you just wrote.

That is very interesting.

Could you PM me?

Thanks.

It is also interesting to me whether - assuming it happened, that Eric meant "I like you now" as in these past few weeks going to Perkins or whatever, or this very second for idk having the stones to be ribbing me while im about to be a mass murderer

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

I'm also interested in learning more about the 2002 Ballistics Report.

I recently submitted a Colorado Open Records Act Request to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

I've attached a screenshot.

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

Here is also a link to a 2002 Westword article on the Report: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Copied text from article

Going Ballistic

ALAN PRENDERGAST | OCTOBER 31, 2002 | 4:00AM

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold weren't the only ones engaged in a shooting spree at Columbine on April 20, 1999. Denver police officers were generous with their own ammunition that day, firing at phantoms and pumping rounds into a school full of trapped students long after the killers were dead.

The official story of police actions at Columbine, as set forth in officers' statements and investigative reports, gives the impression that most of the police shooting occurred during exchanges of gunfire with the killers. Harris fired on the first responding officers from the west doors of the school, and both he and Klebold opened fire from the library at least twice over the next forty minutes. Jefferson County's official report states that the "majority" of the shots fired by police were directed at the west entrance and the library windows: "This was done when shots were exchanged with the gunmen, and when law enforcement and medical personnel were evacuating students."

But ballistics records, including documents released by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation more than three years after the shootings, tell a different story. Most of the police rounds recovered at Columbine were found well inside the school, along a major east-west hallway and around the library. The vast majority of these bullets were fired by Denver police officers as cover fire to protect their own, even though there was no gunfire coming from the building at that point, because Klebold and Harris had committed suicide almost an hour earlier.

Officially, the police fired a total of 141 shots at Columbine. But that figure is a rough estimate at best; statements by individual officers indicate they could have fired as many as 162 rounds. Fewer than a hundred fired bullets and fragments recovered from the school were identified as "consistent" with police weapons, and only a handful of those bullets were ever positively linked to individual officers' guns. Many of the police rounds don't appear on evidence maps that have been released by Jefferson County and may never have been properly accounted for.

None of the police bullets hit Harris or Klebold, and none of the 188 shots fired by the gunmen wounded any police officer. But the actual exchange of gunfire between cops and killers accounts for a small percentage of the total. Of the five dozen police bullets and fragments that can be accurately mapped, more than 80 percent turn up in places that suggest they weren't part of any gunfight at all. They were sprayed down hallways and into classrooms after Harris and Klebold were already dead, whizzing near wounded victims in the library and posing a potential risk to dozens of students and teachers trapped elsewhere on the west side of the school.

There is no evidence to suggest that anyone was actually injured by police fire. But the ballistics evidence is sharply at odds with early media reports concerning police actions at Columbine, as well as with the official sheriff's report, released a year after the shootings. Among the most disturbing details:

• A rescue squad made up primarily of Denver SWAT members fired repeatedly into the west doors and the library around 12:45 p.m. The shooting was supposed to cover officers as they checked on one wounded and one dead student outside of the school. Denver Sergeant Dan O'Shea reported seeing a suspect hurl an explosive during the rescue operation, followed by a "muzzle flash" as the suspect fired on police; Vince DiManna, the Denver SWAT captain, reported that he "felt a concussion/heat on my right side." Actually, Harris and Klebold had killed themselves shortly after noon, and the hostile "fire" reported by the officers may have been ricochets from their own guns. Two of O'Shea's bullets traveled the length of the hallway to the east side of the building, not far from where another SWAT team had begun a room-to-room search of the school.

• At least one Denver police bullet took an unusual right turn and ended up in the hallway outside the library (A on the accompanying map). Was it a bizarre bank shot -- or, contrary to their reports, were officers firing down the north-south corridor as well?

• Other police bullets ripped through rooms north of the library and into the library itself, where at least two survivors of the massacre, Patrick Ireland and Lisa Kreutz, lay wounded. One police bullet was found buried in a counter near slain student Kyle Velasquez (B).

• Another bullet fragment was found lying on top of the bloody shirt of library victim Steven Curnow (C). There is no indication that the bullet was responsible for any wounds to Curnow, who was killed by a shotgun slug fired by Harris. But the fragment doesn't match the killers' ammo; it's similar in size to the base of a .223 bullet, and the only people firing .223 rounds that day were four police officers.

• After the shooting began, most of the students in the cafeteria fled in a panic. A few, however, remained huddled under tables and can still be seen on the surveillance videotape when Harris and Klebold enter the cafeteria and set it on fire at 11:45 a.m.; others were hiding in nearby kitchen storage areas for most of the afternoon. Curiously, one of the police bullets recovered from the cafeteria appears to be from the gun of Neil Gardner (D), the school resource officer and the first Jeffco deputy to arrive on the scene. (Because of the deformed nature of the .45 slug, the match is not exact, but the rifling characteristics eliminate every other weapon fired that day except Gardner's.) Several of Gardner's bullets were also found in the library. Gardner's report makes no mention of firing into either of those places. The sheriff's report, issued a year later, notes that Gardner fired on the suspects in the library but offers no explanation for the bullet in the cafeteria.

Other areas yielded no bullets where one would expect to find some; for example, several officers recalled firing into the teacher's lounge, but no police bullets were found there.

Despite the questions raised by so many mystery bullets, officials were quick to absolve responding officers of any possible recklessness that day. In the summer of 1999, long before ballistics testing was completed, Jefferson County District Attorney Dave Thomas commended the Denver police for "their swift and decisive action" at Columbine and concluded that all of their gunfire was "utilized as a precautionary measure for entry and security purposes."

The Denver Police Department's own Firearms Discharge Review Board agreed. Without interviewing all of the officers involved or inspecting any documents beyond the officers' own reports, the board concluded that all seven Denver officers had fired their weapons "within the policy and procedure" of the department.

And what is that policy? Asked by a Lakewood investigator if the "suppression fire" sprayed into the high school that day reflected "normal training," Denver police officer George Gray replied that such fire was called for anytime officers felt there was a possible threat from unseen shooters, a scenario SWAT teams have trained for since the "VanderJagt episode" -- a reference to the Denver officer who was ambushed and killed by a skinhead in 1997. "That's what we felt was necessary to do to safely pull the victims out of there," explained Gray, who fired 29 rounds at Columbine.

The scenario disturbs Columbine parent Randy Brown, who's spent countless hours studying the ballistics trail left behind by the killers and the police that day. "This is one of the horrible secrets of Columbine," Brown says. "Denver SWAT policy allows SWAT members to fire into a school, a business, a house or a condo to protect themselves, even if they're not being fired upon. Their safety comes before yours. It makes you rethink the idea of calling 911 in an emergency."

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

Surely,
but then seeing the trouble Randy went through and the connections involved, not to mention the gravity of the informations...
I would expect it's as easy to find as hens' teeth or rocking horse manure....

Maybe I'm wrong, I often am!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Your post seems to have been garbled to the point where I can't read what you're trying to say. Could you edit it to make it clearer, or make a revised post? Thanks.

Screamingophelia wrote:

Was there any mention of the infamous "Dylan, you're Jewish" part of the Basement Tapes?

On the reddit AMA, someone (maybe from here?) asked, "Was the "you're Jewish" line said by Eric really as bad as Sue makes out or was it more surprise than hate?"

And Randy replied,

Quote :

"More a slight surprise. Certainly not a threatening look."

Exactly what I would have expected.

thelmar wrote:

Screamingophelia wrote:

Was there any mention of the infamous "Dylan, you're Jewish" part of the Basement Tapes?

On the reddit AMA, someone (maybe from here?) asked, "Was the "you're Jewish" line said by Eric really as bad as Sue makes out or was it more surprise than hate?"

And Randy replied,

Quote :

"More a slight surprise. Certainly not a threatening look."

Exactly what I would have expected.

That doesn't surprise me either!

I didn't think he would want to kill him over it, but i imagine Sue interpreted anything about Eric a lot more negatively after...

It was supposedly the basement tapes. I remember Judy Brown said this in an interview.https://www.timesofisrael.com/columbine-shooters-had-tense-moment-over-passover-mother-says/

Urk, WTF is up with this article, though?

thelmar wrote:

milennialrebelette wrote:

As far as the football trophy I'm sure my sister knows, she was varsity poms captain her senior year. There's no reason the Browns would know that, they did not know the Ketcher family and had no involvement in any of the sports.

If you wouldn't mind asking her, I'd love to know her take on it. In interviews I've read from the Kechter's around that time, it seemed like they felt that Columbine winning that big game was an important part of the healing, of helping to bring the community together to focus on something more positive for a change. If that's the case, I can completely see them donating the trophy back to the school to be shared by all of the kids as a reminder of something good.

I just realized I never responded to this. My sister says they gave it back to the school because that's what Matt would have wanted, to give it to his team. He was very proud to play football at Columbine. The Ketchers finally cut ties with the Browns. All the ranting by them about the awful jocks and awful enabling coaches etc they didn't bother to care enough or know enough about Matt to realize he was a jock, he was a football player and the Browns were going around claiming a relationship with the Ketchers for validity points while blaming the shooting on Matt and his teammates and coaches who he and his family adored. His little brother was "adopted" by the varsity football team and it was q huge part of his healing after his older brothers murder.. Then they lied about the trophy in this "book". Just another example of the Browns being too self centered to even try not to know anything about the victims families they try to insert themselves into and used.

They do kind of strike me as a bit biased in how they potrsy things. I dont doubt that bullying was a serious problem at Columbine. But to paint it as though these two Boys targeted people solely because they Where bullied is almost like saying school shooters are not bullied at all.

Both extreme ends gets it wrong.

At that Im not really sure Eric and Dylan in fact were bullied or that we Will ever know the answer, given that Frank Ochberg has stated that they were not bullied. I do get the impression, however, that Columbine did have their fair share of bullying problems. But, its all so confusing. Which is why I stopped Reading about it for a while. It was actually useful to put my mind off of it, for a change.

Turf wrote:

Hi Cyrinus
Yes. (It's 64% area of Kindle)

And it could be that I'm reading more into it when perhaps simply, the forensic details of wounds just bring more of a taste of reality..but..

"This is a very sad and upsetting report.
It describes the wounds of the victims.
It gives a very detailed analysis of details that I wish I did not know, and that you do not want to know.

This report shows the violence of Eric and Dylan. Eric and Dylan were killers in the worst sense. They were cruel, horrible, miserable rotten kids that killed without regard to humanity...................
This report takes the theoretical shootings in the library and turns them into killings beyond understanding, and deserving of hate and anger..............................................

This report shows things beyond understanding, and beyond what you want to know.
In truth you do not want to know more than that. I will not write more than that.
It is beyond me. It is beyond what I can do or want to do. It is not something I can write about. It is not something that I should write about.

If I did, someone might read it, and believe me, you don't want to read it. or know it.
No matter how curious you are, you would be sorry that you learned this part of the Columbine tragedy.

I will not write it. I will not tell you that part of the story
I ask you to learn that lesson from these words alone."

So it could be a sensitive reaction to forensic realities but it seemed to me that he wanted to hint at something beyond that?

Weird. In other interviews he says that 'Dylan was a nice, young man'.