I am not sure why it took so long to release those videos. Where they tampered with? It seems like they could have released them immediately after the shooting.
I’m not attempting to debunk the Vegas conspiracy by any means, but I think the delay relates to the civil lawsuit against the casino/hotel. I would imagine their legal team delayed the release as long as possible Bc once it’s public info, Plaintiffs in the case don’t need discovery for it, and it leads to more discoverable information.
Regardless of what’s on the videos, it confirms my suspicion all along: no reasonable person would have seen this guy making 30 trips Home, coming back with new bags each time(heavy bags), and not been suspicious. It’s just not possible, even the dumbest human on the staff would have found his behavior abnormal.
Sure, but there were other events in which the videos were released in a more timely manner. The entire investigation was suspicious from the very beginning. I mean, if you stay in a Vegas hotel, then staff will enter your room at least once every 24 hours. This is policy. They become really suspicious otherwise.
I have no idea about the Mandalay but Hooters didn't try to enter my room for 72 hours. There are these little signs you can hang on your door knob that say Do Not Disturb.
I think that really only got stated/emphasized for Wynn's resorts after this happened. I regularly leave DnD signs up for a few days when I'm at a hotel room and find they are generally respected.
The thing is, though, in the first days of this, staff that were interviewed said they had been in and out of the room. This was dug up back when we found the receipt that put Paddock in the room days before it was regularly reported.
Yes but in those other events you are talking about schools, or other state owned locations, sovereign immunity and other considerations means lawsuits just aren’t as common.
Like I said I’m not debunking the conspiracy because the videos do beg the question: “are these just the most oblivious employees in the world, or is there another explanation that involves a willful ignorance of what was happening?”
One if the most insidious coincidences about 9/11 is that the towers were just purchased by a man who took out an insurance policy for triple the purchase price. He ate breakfast in the towers every day before 9/11 but miraculously wasn’t there the day of. His family and close friends also miraculously avoided the building too.
All I’m saying is the delay is best explained by the lawsuits against the hotel. There were probably NDAs signed by all employees after the fact to prevent leaks, strict oversight of what was given to law enforcement, etc.
The Hotel. The hotels parent company. The hotels insurance company. The hotels parent companies insurance company. The State of Nevada. The City of Las Vegas. The estate of the Shooter. The Concert promoters. The Performers. A few others.
If paddock did it, how are these parties you listed responsible? Are the people who were shot also on trial? What about the guests at the hotel? Are teachers or board on trial for school shootings?
Here it is again: As for Paddock. Each of those listed were currently being paid during a criminal act. Therefore can be sued. Either in Criminal or civil cases. Most will be Civil Cases.
Possible Negligence in the Case of the State. Not keeping track of weaponry.
Is the state required to keep track of guns, or the owner? What if he purchased in a different state, is that state now liable? You can't truly believe that any organization has the resources to track the activities of every individual. I have a gun that was given to me for Christmas, I do not have to register it, therefore the state cannot track - with the idea that i am not presumed guilty, without first proving so. What would having a record of purchases have stopped? Do you have a specific case that went to trial where a venue was held responsible?
You speak with such certainty, so I am trusting you to really show me the light here. If I'm wrong I truly would like to know.
Is the state required to keep track of guns, or the owner?
Yes, the state is supposed to have a record of every gun, who it is sold too and who owns it.
What if he purchased in a different state, is that state now liable?
You can make a case for each state the gun was in because he is supposed to declare firearms when crossing any state line. Movving weapons across state lines is legal if they know you are doing it and if those guns are legal in that state. Various states have various gun laws and what is allowed to be owned.
You can't truly believe that any organization has the resources to track the activities of every individual.
Actually I do. The NRA is supposed to keep a list as is the ATF and the FBI.
I have a gun that was given to me for Christmas, I do not have to register it, therefore the state cannot track - with the idea that i am not presumed guilty, without first proving so.
This is wholly Wrong. Guns given as gifts have to be registered. And therefore can be tracked. Any gun not registered is now illegals and is a felony In most states depending on nature of firearm.
What would having a record of purchases have stopped?
Absolutely nothing, except if the guns were legal it would put up a red flag to the FBI and other Law agencies of a known ammo dump in the area.
Do you have a specific case that went to trial where a venue was held responsible?
The ATF tracks the guns, only to the point of licensed seller to first purchase, but no other forms of purchase.
Show me where a state was sued over a gun that was originally purchased from a licensed seller, was used in a crime.
NRA does not, they fight against this type of thing. ATF and FBI just proved how wrong you are with the (alleged) Florida school shooting.
You are 98% wrong, only right in new York, cali and Colorado, but this hasn't really helped these states turn the tide have they?
Again, look at what happened in Florida, they actually told them that this was going to happen... multiple times!! If that doesn't help what would?
Haha post from december.. but what was the outcome? I can sue you for being an idiot, but it doesn't mean I will win... dig deeper.
You are simple minded, reading headlines to speak with such certainty, I generally do not name call, but I felt as if I gave you multiple chances to stop the flow of shit from spewing out your mouth. How incorrect and narrow you are, the problem is that you were given an opinion with the invention of social media, not allowing natural selection to do as it should with stupid.
2% is still truth. Good for legal Battles. And what tide are we supposed to be turning? Gun deaths are down per capita.
We we told of terrorist attacks of 9/11 and did nothing. That is not new. Law enforcement is about Justice not prevention.
I was not looking at outcomes. I was looking at who was sued.
Of course I am simple minded. That is why I am here. To read what critical thinkers think. Narrow is still a view. Natural selection is being stopped by technological advances. Otherwise I would have been done in by a fungal infection long ago. Damn antibiotics.... ruing the world. Science, it ruins everything.
Seems like this guy just wants to argue with you. I think it's very clear to many of us why all of those entities would be sued (and are). The video was obviously packaged and sold by a PR crisis firm hired by MB hoping it'll do some good to repair their image.
For instance, nowhere in the video (that I saw) do you see an employee handle a bag.
I'm not too familiar with how Vegas works. But is the Mandalay bay ever that empty? I really don't know. I'm only assuming there would've been more people around in the gambling and bar shots.
No. The title of that article is of course misleading. It does not show him "filling his suite with guns".
It's a compilation of video of a man who frequented that casino for months/years. There are no time stamps on these videos. Those are pieces of luggage that could have anything in them, maybe just clothes. And maybe those clips are taken over the course of several different visits to the casino.
The NY times got exclusive rights to these videos, given to them by MGM. The release of this content makes the whole vegas event even more shady as fuck.
I don't think the delay is really all that alarming. This video evidence is owned by the hotels & casinos. Aside from LE getting a warrant to seal them, they are their videos to do as they choose. Why would they release them without having authorities scour through them first. ?
I believe this was part of the footage dump ordered by the judge last month. Indicated bits and pieces of audio/video evidence would be released over the next 30 days or so. This release seems to coincide with that timeline. Unsure, really.
It was released (sold) by MGM--- probably packaged by a crisis firm to repair their image (no employee handles bags that I saw).
The LVMPD is required to release the all the video (even boring parts) and 911 calls in full. I am assuming for the length of Paddock's stay and possibly day after. 911 calls probably the day of. They were required to delete or blur any identifying information (faces, addresses, etc.) from videos and calls. At first they said this would cost them something like 500k. I believe that was thrown out.
At the time the order came down the LVMPD said it would take 6 months to do all this. We (or the news agencies) will get far more at that time. Hope this helps.
I feel like these are legit. These video snippets are from private security cameras owned by the various hotel & casinos that he visited leading up to the event.
A) the hotels aren't going to release that video prematurely until a "thorough" investigation was completed. This allowed officials time to review the footage, ask any questions they wanted, and "clear" the hotels of any specific wrong-doings(i.e. lawsuits).
B) Just like any other big event like this, the majority of footage of the event taking place is from witnesses cell phone video. Those leak like wildfire, as we saw youtube lighting up right after. Similar to the recent Parkland shooting, the only video we saw was some kids Snapchat that got out before it could be locked down for any evidence.
Unfortunately, this video only shows what we basically knew, logically. "There had to be video of him lugging all these guns and ammo in suitcases up to his room"...Boom, there it is.
The thing we may never know is what led him to this point. We don't see any mysterious meetings in these videos. We don't see anything really to dispute the fact that this guy carried this thing out on his own. As much as we'd like to see that, "Ahh HAA, we knew the 'deep state' was involved...", it is not out of the realm of possibility that this guy just did this on a whim wanting to go out with a bang.
Once you've had all the money you could need, experienced everything you cared to experience, why not go down in flames like that? Perhaps he was just after the post-mortum notoriety for some reason. People may not have known his name from Adam before, but you can bet his name will not soon be forgotten, sadly.
"We don't see anything really to dispute the fact that this guy carried this thing out on his own"
You realize you are only seeing what MGM and NY Times want you to see, right? This is a hand selected tiny sample of video clips with no time stamps. To counter your point, we see nothing to dispute that this man was a framed patsy that had nothing to do with the shooting. It can go either way.
The Hotel. The hotels parent company. The hotels insurance company. The hotels parent companies insurance company. The State of Nevada. The City of Las Vegas. The estate of the Shooter. The Concert promoters. The Performers. A few others.
48 comments
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
I am not sure why it took so long to release those videos. Where they tampered with? It seems like they could have released them immediately after the shooting.
1 chuggles6 2018-03-30
I’m not attempting to debunk the Vegas conspiracy by any means, but I think the delay relates to the civil lawsuit against the casino/hotel. I would imagine their legal team delayed the release as long as possible Bc once it’s public info, Plaintiffs in the case don’t need discovery for it, and it leads to more discoverable information.
Regardless of what’s on the videos, it confirms my suspicion all along: no reasonable person would have seen this guy making 30 trips Home, coming back with new bags each time(heavy bags), and not been suspicious. It’s just not possible, even the dumbest human on the staff would have found his behavior abnormal.
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
Sure, but there were other events in which the videos were released in a more timely manner. The entire investigation was suspicious from the very beginning. I mean, if you stay in a Vegas hotel, then staff will enter your room at least once every 24 hours. This is policy. They become really suspicious otherwise.
I agree. His behavior is abnormal.
1 Warden_de_Dios 2018-03-30
I have no idea about the Mandalay but Hooters didn't try to enter my room for 72 hours. There are these little signs you can hang on your door knob that say Do Not Disturb.
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
My understanding is that you cannot have the Do Not Disturb sign on for more than 24 hours. They will send security to investigate.
1 aleister 2018-03-30
I think that really only got stated/emphasized for Wynn's resorts after this happened. I regularly leave DnD signs up for a few days when I'm at a hotel room and find they are generally respected.
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
Gotcha! I watched an interview by some casino CEO who said that they check regularly.
I think it was this video I watched. At about the 2:30 minute mark.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/10/08/steve_wynn_we_profile_or_inspect_or_examine_everybody_that_enters_the_building.html
Maybe your experience is different. Maybe they went into your room and you did not realize it. I have no idea.
1 aleister 2018-03-30
Neither us of will ever have an idea on that, but I have an idea what's going to be said when asked on TV ;)
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
Sure!!!
1 Warden_de_Dios 2018-03-30
Steve Wynn has some high end hotels. My experience with hotels in Vegas are places much much cheaper then that place
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
I have only been there a few times. After a couple of days, I am more than ready to leave. LOL.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-30
The thing is, though, in the first days of this, staff that were interviewed said they had been in and out of the room. This was dug up back when we found the receipt that put Paddock in the room days before it was regularly reported.
1 chuggles6 2018-03-30
Yes but in those other events you are talking about schools, or other state owned locations, sovereign immunity and other considerations means lawsuits just aren’t as common.
Like I said I’m not debunking the conspiracy because the videos do beg the question: “are these just the most oblivious employees in the world, or is there another explanation that involves a willful ignorance of what was happening?”
One if the most insidious coincidences about 9/11 is that the towers were just purchased by a man who took out an insurance policy for triple the purchase price. He ate breakfast in the towers every day before 9/11 but miraculously wasn’t there the day of. His family and close friends also miraculously avoided the building too.
All I’m saying is the delay is best explained by the lawsuits against the hotel. There were probably NDAs signed by all employees after the fact to prevent leaks, strict oversight of what was given to law enforcement, etc.
1 Joe_LeFlores 2018-03-30
Right, so it makes more sense that the clips are from several different vacations over several months.
1 suza727 2018-03-30
Yes. I think many people are getting this video confused with any LVMPD videos that have yet to be released.
I, like you, believe this was packaged by a PR crisis management team at MGM.
LVMPD videos and calls will eventually be released (they said 6 months) and will give us at least a little more information. One would hope.
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
Released video evidence can be grounds for dismissal because it can alter a jury's impartiality.
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
They do it all the time...
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
Yes, and it is a terrible idea.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
Who the fuck is on trial here??
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
The Hotel. The hotels parent company. The hotels insurance company. The hotels parent companies insurance company. The State of Nevada. The City of Las Vegas. The estate of the Shooter. The Concert promoters. The Performers. A few others.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
If paddock did it, how are these parties you listed responsible? Are the people who were shot also on trial? What about the guests at the hotel? Are teachers or board on trial for school shootings?
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
Okay you are deflecting. I listed all parties that have a degree of responsibility. You started listing victims.
As for schools, this is an attack on a government installation. This changes things: but lets not forum slide.
Try to stay on topic.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
Mkay.. I did ask, how are these parties held responsible?
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
I answered that in my second response.
Here it is again: As for Paddock. Each of those listed were currently being paid during a criminal act. Therefore can be sued. Either in Criminal or civil cases. Most will be Civil Cases.
Possible Negligence in the Case of the State. Not keeping track of weaponry.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
Is the state required to keep track of guns, or the owner? What if he purchased in a different state, is that state now liable? You can't truly believe that any organization has the resources to track the activities of every individual. I have a gun that was given to me for Christmas, I do not have to register it, therefore the state cannot track - with the idea that i am not presumed guilty, without first proving so. What would having a record of purchases have stopped? Do you have a specific case that went to trial where a venue was held responsible?
You speak with such certainty, so I am trusting you to really show me the light here. If I'm wrong I truly would like to know.
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
Is the state required to keep track of guns, or the owner?
Yes, the state is supposed to have a record of every gun, who it is sold too and who owns it.
What if he purchased in a different state, is that state now liable?
You can make a case for each state the gun was in because he is supposed to declare firearms when crossing any state line. Movving weapons across state lines is legal if they know you are doing it and if those guns are legal in that state. Various states have various gun laws and what is allowed to be owned.
You can't truly believe that any organization has the resources to track the activities of every individual.
Actually I do. The NRA is supposed to keep a list as is the ATF and the FBI.
I have a gun that was given to me for Christmas, I do not have to register it, therefore the state cannot track - with the idea that i am not presumed guilty, without first proving so.
This is wholly Wrong. Guns given as gifts have to be registered. And therefore can be tracked. Any gun not registered is now illegals and is a felony In most states depending on nature of firearm.
What would having a record of purchases have stopped?
Absolutely nothing, except if the guns were legal it would put up a red flag to the FBI and other Law agencies of a known ammo dump in the area.
Do you have a specific case that went to trial where a venue was held responsible?
Orlando
It is a wide world out there. Arm yourself.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
The ATF tracks the guns, only to the point of licensed seller to first purchase, but no other forms of purchase.
Show me where a state was sued over a gun that was originally purchased from a licensed seller, was used in a crime.
NRA does not, they fight against this type of thing. ATF and FBI just proved how wrong you are with the (alleged) Florida school shooting.
You are 98% wrong, only right in new York, cali and Colorado, but this hasn't really helped these states turn the tide have they?
Again, look at what happened in Florida, they actually told them that this was going to happen... multiple times!! If that doesn't help what would?
Haha post from december.. but what was the outcome? I can sue you for being an idiot, but it doesn't mean I will win... dig deeper.
You are simple minded, reading headlines to speak with such certainty, I generally do not name call, but I felt as if I gave you multiple chances to stop the flow of shit from spewing out your mouth. How incorrect and narrow you are, the problem is that you were given an opinion with the invention of social media, not allowing natural selection to do as it should with stupid.
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
And still with the name calling.
Tracked guns - Check
Getting off topic again
I guess I was wrong on the NRA
2% is still truth. Good for legal Battles. And what tide are we supposed to be turning? Gun deaths are down per capita.
We we told of terrorist attacks of 9/11 and did nothing. That is not new. Law enforcement is about Justice not prevention.
I was not looking at outcomes. I was looking at who was sued.
Of course I am simple minded. That is why I am here. To read what critical thinkers think. Narrow is still a view. Natural selection is being stopped by technological advances. Otherwise I would have been done in by a fungal infection long ago. Damn antibiotics.... ruing the world. Science, it ruins everything.
1 suza727 2018-03-30
Seems like this guy just wants to argue with you. I think it's very clear to many of us why all of those entities would be sued (and are). The video was obviously packaged and sold by a PR crisis firm hired by MB hoping it'll do some good to repair their image.
For instance, nowhere in the video (that I saw) do you see an employee handle a bag.
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
Yes, sometimes I spend too much time feeding the Trolls.
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
As for Paddock. Each of those listed were currently being paid during a criminal act. Therefore can be sued. Either in Criminal or civil cases.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
So if they were doing the concert for charity, would they be at fault?
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
Actually, they could use this as a defense. Promoters & Performers and even the venue could use this to stop any civil litigation against themselves.
It is hard to sue for money, when there is no money to be had.
1 suza727 2018-03-30
I agree. But, it's my opinion this won't go to trial. They're going to pay.
1 parappa88 2018-03-30
I'm not too familiar with how Vegas works. But is the Mandalay bay ever that empty? I really don't know. I'm only assuming there would've been more people around in the gambling and bar shots.
1 Warden_de_Dios 2018-03-30
The police report had paddock gambling until 7 am at least once. The Mandalay being empty late at night isn't odd.
1 parappa88 2018-03-30
Ok. I really don't know. Thanks.
1 Joe_LeFlores 2018-03-30
No. The title of that article is of course misleading. It does not show him "filling his suite with guns".
It's a compilation of video of a man who frequented that casino for months/years. There are no time stamps on these videos. Those are pieces of luggage that could have anything in them, maybe just clothes. And maybe those clips are taken over the course of several different visits to the casino.
The NY times got exclusive rights to these videos, given to them by MGM. The release of this content makes the whole vegas event even more shady as fuck.
1 Twiggy6276 2018-03-30
I don't think the delay is really all that alarming. This video evidence is owned by the hotels & casinos. Aside from LE getting a warrant to seal them, they are their videos to do as they choose. Why would they release them without having authorities scour through them first. ?
1 RoostasTowel 2018-03-30
Did they say why the released them now.
And who edited them into this montage.
Was this a FBI release or the hotels doing so?
1 Twiggy6276 2018-03-30
I believe this was part of the footage dump ordered by the judge last month. Indicated bits and pieces of audio/video evidence would be released over the next 30 days or so. This release seems to coincide with that timeline. Unsure, really.
1 suza727 2018-03-30
No. This was released by MGM.
1 suza727 2018-03-30
It was released (sold) by MGM--- probably packaged by a crisis firm to repair their image (no employee handles bags that I saw).
The LVMPD is required to release the all the video (even boring parts) and 911 calls in full. I am assuming for the length of Paddock's stay and possibly day after. 911 calls probably the day of. They were required to delete or blur any identifying information (faces, addresses, etc.) from videos and calls. At first they said this would cost them something like 500k. I believe that was thrown out.
At the time the order came down the LVMPD said it would take 6 months to do all this. We (or the news agencies) will get far more at that time. Hope this helps.
Oh, and I don't think the FBI is involved.
1 Twiggy6276 2018-03-30
OP here...
I should have shared my thoughts first...
I feel like these are legit. These video snippets are from private security cameras owned by the various hotel & casinos that he visited leading up to the event.
A) the hotels aren't going to release that video prematurely until a "thorough" investigation was completed. This allowed officials time to review the footage, ask any questions they wanted, and "clear" the hotels of any specific wrong-doings(i.e. lawsuits). B) Just like any other big event like this, the majority of footage of the event taking place is from witnesses cell phone video. Those leak like wildfire, as we saw youtube lighting up right after. Similar to the recent Parkland shooting, the only video we saw was some kids Snapchat that got out before it could be locked down for any evidence.
Unfortunately, this video only shows what we basically knew, logically. "There had to be video of him lugging all these guns and ammo in suitcases up to his room"...Boom, there it is.
The thing we may never know is what led him to this point. We don't see any mysterious meetings in these videos. We don't see anything really to dispute the fact that this guy carried this thing out on his own. As much as we'd like to see that, "Ahh HAA, we knew the 'deep state' was involved...", it is not out of the realm of possibility that this guy just did this on a whim wanting to go out with a bang.
Once you've had all the money you could need, experienced everything you cared to experience, why not go down in flames like that? Perhaps he was just after the post-mortum notoriety for some reason. People may not have known his name from Adam before, but you can bet his name will not soon be forgotten, sadly.
1 Joe_LeFlores 2018-03-30
You realize you are only seeing what MGM and NY Times want you to see, right? This is a hand selected tiny sample of video clips with no time stamps. To counter your point, we see nothing to dispute that this man was a framed patsy that had nothing to do with the shooting. It can go either way.
1 RMFN 2018-03-30
Asking the right questions right here.
1 rodental 2018-03-30
No timestamps on the videos of Paddock moving luggage.
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
In 2018, I'm hard pressed to believe that a gas station has color cameras and well established money pit has black and white.
1 pby1000 2018-03-30
They do it all the time...
1 sampsoniteLuggage 2018-03-30
Who the fuck is on trial here??
1 Cobra-Serpentress 2018-03-30
The Hotel. The hotels parent company. The hotels insurance company. The hotels parent companies insurance company. The State of Nevada. The City of Las Vegas. The estate of the Shooter. The Concert promoters. The Performers. A few others.
1 suza727 2018-03-30
I agree. But, it's my opinion this won't go to trial. They're going to pay.