Saturday, July 28, 2012

More weird stuff about the Batman massace

Previously, I had promised to speak of James Holmes' family, but that post will have to wait. We have received some fascinating new data:

1. The doctor. Holmes was seeing a psychiatrist, Dr. Lynne Fenton, a specialist in schizophrenia. A number of people are now asking a very reasonable question: Did she prescribe drugs? If so, which drugs, and what kind of side effects are associated with them?

It is possible that he had only one or two sessions with her. It is possible that she prescribed nothing. On the other hand, shrinks are pretty quick to recommend drug therapy these days. The "talking cure" is a thing of the past, or nearly so.

I suppose conspiracy buffs will read much into the fact that Fenton used to work for the Air Force.

2. The bloody trail. Photos of the crime scene -- specifically, the back of the theater -- reveal a couple of anomalies which should cause even the most resolutely non-paranoid to raise an eyebrow. The spadework has been done by some hard-core conspiracy spotters who, alas, have a bad habit of reaching their conclusions by way of the broadjump. 

That said, we must give credit where due. So check out two videos (here and here) by a guy named Thomas Brinkley, about whom I know nothing. Please apply your own personal filter to separate the wacky observations from the worthwhile ones.  

First: There is a strange blood trail behind the theater, one which the official story does not cover. Go here for a very clear photo of the scene, which was the basis of the first image below.

These photos clearly show a trail of blood beginning some ways away from the presumed attacker's vehicle. (The white car belonged to Holmes.) The blood spatter indicates direction: The victim ran toward the theater.

(Added note: When interpreting blood splatter, keep in mind that scallops, spines and secondary stains always point in the direction of travel, as this forensic handbook makes clear.)

We know that we are dealing with a female because pink shoes (flip flops?) were left near the doorway. Brinkley believes that the shoes belonged to a little girl, and that Holmes or a partner dragged her off to be raped. I do not accept that reconstruction. For one thing, the shoes look like they belonged to an adult. The length of the stride also indicates an adult victim.

Clearly, an unknown female victim was shot or wounded outside the auditorium, in the parking lot behind the theater, and she ran for safety toward the theater. Since the average width of a parking spot is 8.5 feet, we may calculate that she was wounded roughly 45 feet away from the suspect's car, and perhaps 65 feet from the exit door.

Why did she take the shoes off? Tentatively, I would suggest that she tried the theater back door, discovered that it was locked, didn't want to get trapped on the rear stairs, and thus desperately climbed the nearby wall.

The media has told us nothing about this victim, or what happened to her.

Most reports indicate that that killer exited the theater (for as-yet unknown reasons) and almost immediately ran into the cops, to whom he quietly surrendered. But something else must have happened.

This conundrum becomes stranger and stranger the more you think about it. We may one day receive a sensible explanation for that bloody trail, but right now we face a haunting mystery.

3. The gas mask. A gas mask was found a surprising distance away from Holmes' car.

Brinkley thinks that this is a second gas mask. Maybe, but I've seen no proof: It could be the same gas mask Holmes wore inside the theater. Still, the location is very odd. One snippet of a police dispatch includes the following exchange:
cop 1 – “I need a marked car behind the theater, Sable side,  suspect in a gas mask”

dispatch – “we need cars south side. suspect in a gas mask”

cop 2 – “Is that the dude in the white car nearby?"
So cops quietly went behind the building and saw Holmes sitting in his car. If the gas mask found on the ground was the one Holmes wore, then it looks like he got out of the car -- still wearing the mask -- and tried to run off to his right. He got about 210 feet away from the vehicle before taking off his mask.

But would those two cops just sit there and watch a guy a gas mask do this? Doubtful. So it seems more reasonable to posit that before any cop car showed up, Holmes walked or ran that distance, dropped his gas mask, and then -- for whatever reason (perhaps because he saw a cop car arriving) -- decided to go back to his vehicle and wait inside.

I'm still bewildered. Why would he run? Why didn't he simply leave the theater, go straight to his car and drive away? Did he chase a victim out of the theater? If so, why did he pass her and go 150 feet further?

The official story is that Holmes was arrested as he calmly stood beside his car.

When was the female shot or stabbed? It's hard to believe that Holmes would try to kill a woman in full view of two cops; the cops would be obligated to do something.

Again: We may one day have reasonable answers to these questions. Right now, we have a perfect right to ask: What the hell happened outside that theater?

If you can come up with a scenario that makes sense, please share with the rest of the class. I'm very grateful to Thomas Brinkley, even if I cannot go along with many of his presumptions.

(Note: I've somewhat rewritten this post -- especially the last bit -- since original publication. In fact, I've rewritten twice. Apologies! Normally, when I revise to improve the style, I don't bother informing the reader. But in this case, the revisions went beyond style.)
Are we back to two suspects again, with a co-conspirator helping out?

Serious questions about the nature of the therapy and what drugs were involved. Maybe the suspect is a fantastic actor, but if not, he certainly looked like he was having some kind of drug hangover in his court appearance.
I dunno, Joe--my reading of that blood trail is the opposite of yours. To me it's clearly leading away from the theatre, and the flip-flops probably got left behind because it's impossible to run in the damned things. Also, I've seen dudes wearing flip-flops, though I agree it's not that common a sight.
You are misinterpreting the blood spatter. Imagine you are running on a sandy beach. Which direction is the sand thrown as you run?

Behind you.
Anon, LoL...sorry, but the spatter shows someone heading TOWARD the theater.

"Scallops, spines and satellite stains are always in the direction of travel."

"The pointed end of the bloodstain ALWAYS points in the direction of travel."

Also see here:
There seem to be some flaws in your thesis that there was "clearly" a female victim shot in connection with the blood trail.

Firstly, I see no evidence of a female. I've certainly seen men, even this very day, wearing flip flops. Not pinks ones, granted, but that's hardly conclusive.

Secondly I see no evidence of a victim. Obviously no body, as you say no media coverage, no visible blood spatters on walls indicating gunshots wounds, although those could be out of shot, no evidence of pursuit by an assailant, none of those little evidence markers indicating the position of spent shell casings or the like.

Furthermore, the blood trail heads past the Holmes car. Did a female gunshot victim run upto and past her attempted murder to get to a potential entrance to the building? He couldn't have been headed to the car or he would have been unarmed, and if heading away from the car he would most likely head for the nearest "rear exit", away from the start of the blood trail. The only scenario which would allow a female victim would be if he had been heading to a non-optimum re-entry point for the building when he looked back and saw a woman, then shot her once and saw her run off but didn't pursue. It's unlikely but no impossible. As for dropping her shoes to climb the wall, there a police man in the second photo standing behind the wall, from the POV of the camera, so she could have just run around the corner. If she took her shoes off to climb to wall she chose to climb the corner, the hardest past of wall to get over, and the piece which would offer least cover if she was pursued.

Here's a question: whose is the gun between the flip flops? Because, I can't help noticing, it seems to have a pink magazine the same colour as the shoes. A normal, but bright pink, magazine, not a barrel magazine like Holmes supposedly used. It's only in one of the pics so presumably a police weapon, but that's quite strange, a pink magazine. As is just laying your police issue assault rifle in some blood between two pieces of evidence.

Perhaps it was actually a female assailant, somehow already covered in blood while walking from a car, other than that of Holmes, towards the entrance, wearing sex-disguising SWAT gear, women having lower average height and as you mentioned previously witnesses describing an attacker of 5'9'' rather than Holmes at 6'3''. Meanwhile Holmes stayed in his car in a psychiatrist-arranged narcohypnotic trance state. And, you know, she colour-coordinated her footwear and weaponry.

Not a likely theory, I'l admit, but not jumping to conclusions any more than the idea that there was a female victim there in the manner posited.
When you are moving forward which direction are your feet moving?

Try this - stand in a pool up to your knees and then get out and start running. See which way the water drops splatter.
Stephen, we may be living in an era when traditional sexual mores are breaking down. But...PINK FLIP FLOPS? To the movies?

It wasn't a dude. Yes, we can say that conclusively.
Anon: Sorry, but I'm right about the direction of the blood splatter. There's no need to conduct any experiments or to reinvent the wheel. The work was done ages ago. Bowhunters have always been able to tell from bloodstains which way a wounded animal ran. And cops know that the "spiney" drips point in the direction of travel.

Look it up. I've added a link to a definitive study.
Anon, you are an ASSHOLE who will be deleted on sight in the future. If you accuse ME of being one of those controlled demolition freaks -- even though everyone knows they hate me, and even though I have a ton of links ON THIS VERY PAGE RIGHT NOW going to sites which debunk that nonsense....

...well, you are an idiot. You can't see what is right in front of your fucking face.

Therefore, nothing you say can be of any interest.
Sorry folks: The preceding comment was one I wrote in anger after receiving an insulting note from an Anonymous Coward who simply cannot admit that he is wrong.

But I did not print the note. (I don't print comments that insult me. Why should I? This is MY site -- my home. I'm not paid to do this.) So you may consider the comment above to be a private message to someone who pissed me off.
If I were a shooter, I'd definitely color coordinate with my pink gun!

However, regarding flip flops I just want to say they may indicate Asian. Having lived in a primarily Asian neighborhood these things are ubiquitous. Everyone, all the time. I've seen young men in them all through the winter, snow, whatever. And they're probably less color conscious than other American men.

I can't see wearing flip-flops to a fight, tho. Strange.
Here's a theory.

Maybe the blood splatter only shows the net direction vector of the blood. What do I mean?

Consider arterial bleeding. It spurts. Pretty forcefully, in fact.

Could the bleeding person whose tracks these are have been going away from the exit door, while bleeding from an arterial wound that was spurting backwards toward the door?

As I take it that the normal 'front' splatter is simply from the velocity of the blood dripping from a person in motion (frontwards), the same might appear behind and opposite the direction of motion if the blood velocity were the result of the spurt.

I resort to this theory as simplifying the meaning of these tracks.

If this analysis might be correct, these tracks could be consistent with someone leaving the exit door, bleeding backwards from an arterial wound, getting into a different car, and then the gas mask at the far end of the building edge could be a discard from that car as it left.

The problem I see is that one would think the forward motion I hypothesize (away from the door) would show in the splatter pattern. But what if the forward motion was not as great as the spurting velocity the other direection, so there was still a net backwards (toward the door) velocity for the blood?

To simulate a bloody foot running, take a round sponge soaked with colored liquid to the point of dripping, then throw it with a little force at the ground in such a way that it strikes at an angle away from you. The spray emerges at the impact point and expands away from you in the familiar cone pattern. It's not ambiguous.

The sand analogy is useless because running feet on a beach aren't spraying new sand but instead are impacting what is already there.
"The pointed end of the bloodstain ALWAYS points in the direction of travel."

That refers to the direction of travel of the blood drop - not the bleeding victim/object.

If your hand is bleeding and you swing your arm back and forth, the blood will not travel in the same direction as your hand. Due to centrifugal force it will travel in a direction at right angles to the direction of your hand.

This is called "cast-off" blood. If you are swinging a bloody axe over your head you will leave blood drops on the ceiling.

When you run your feet are moving in the opposite direction of your path of travel. If your foot is bleeding you will leave a contact stain with each step, and as your foot pushes backward (to propel you forward) it will fling blood drops behind you.

If you get out of a pool and start running the water drops will make the same pattern - a wet footprint and some drops splattered behind each print.

The blood stains were made by a victim who was shot inside the theater and then ran out the exit door, past the police as they were arresting the shooter. That's why the pink flip flops were by the door - they came off as she started to run.

It also explains why the blood stains are progressively smaller as they move away from the door.

It also explains why the police haven't mentioned anyone being shot outside the theater.

Dexter and everyone else -- stop it. The matter has been settled. Was settled long, long ago. Unless you can point to a police forensic manual proving my contention wrong, then I will trust the material I have consulted. (And there are many more citations I could give beyond the two mentioned above.)

The spines of a blood drop always point in the direction that the bleeder was going toward -- not coming from.

Look it up.

If you want to prove that every detective in the freakin' world has been doing his job wrong for more than a century, don't waste time writing to THIS humble blog. Write a dissertation to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, one that cops will actually read.
I think the crenulation you speak of is a microscopic phenomena of an individual droplet, not a macroscopic phenomena. But I'm not a blood spatter expert.

Schizophrenia is a terrible disease. I had a patient once who was picked up by the police at the request of his parents. They found him with a hamster in his mouth. He told them his hamster was dying and he was doing hamster CPR. This after trying to defibrillate him with wires hooked up to a car battery.
mag is a standard 30 round STANAG in parkerized grey. if that's pink to you, get your eyes checked.

that said, police have many bright pink weapons. they're dummies. tehy also come in blue and red. plastic analogues designed to simulate weight and size of the real thing. if there was a pink mag or pink gun, i'd think nothing more than "dummy because the real one is been removed for safekeeping," y'know, like leaving live ammo in a gun.

anyways, i buy the theory about the girl running off, sometimes its just a cigar.
Thanks for the info, Fookbar, but...uh...about getting one's eyes checked: We were talking about the pink SHOES. Flip Flops, they look like. That was the only pink item in my post.
Stephen Morgan:
"Here's a question: whose is the gun between the flip flops? Because, I can't help noticing, it seems to have a pink magazine the same colour as the shoes. A normal, but bright pink, magazine,"

Him, not you. But if it makes you feel better, I thought you wrote that.

Needless to say, someone needs their eyes checked around here... I just had mine done 3 months ago.
this is thomas brinkley. I actually entertained some logical jumps in order to link it to the franklin scandal cover up, because I knew I was getting some coverage with what I was doing. I did this to help people understand the nature of corruption, and to help participants understand the nature of these psy-ops as ultimately being carried out by evil (and yes that is the appropriate term for child torture) men. Thank you for this blog entry I never saw. Later hearings actually say that gas mask was the result of a police officer having picked up a gas mask and "dropping it somewhere he doesn't remember". I referred to it as a "second gas mask" because early reports claimed holmes was in his gas mask when they arrested him. Also, in later hearings, they describe jessica ghawi as someone who was found behind the dumpsters0 implying that it was ghawi which (for whatever reason) tracked her blood back to the theater. Still very fishy. However, it is my belief this was an attempted abduction of a female and this person ditched the effort by stabbing the vic and slicing her across the mid section, at which point the perp fled the scene with her running the opposite direction. Please check my channel for even more incidents which have occurred since then. Thank you, sir
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?