Holmes had TWO roommates! EVIDENCE that MSM is rewriting the official story before our eyes!!!

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Police and FBI agents were called to the University of Colorado Anschutz medical campus in Aurora on Monday morning after the psychiatrist, who is also a professor at the school, reported receiving a package believed to be from the suspect. Although that package turned out to be from someone else and harmless, a search of the Campus Services' mailroom turned up another package sent to the psychiatrist with Holmes’ name in the return address, the source told FoxNews.com.

Having a hard time understanding that the psychiatrist called FBI about a suspicious package, but it was a false alarm, but they searched the mailroom and magically found one from him.

Huh? Just... just... HuH???

Spokeo Results

Spokeo isn't the best, probably, but maybe someone could snoop on a service like Spokeo. We've got his address. One of those information services will list his room mates by name, I bet. I can't do that search. Anyone want to take the task on? (Just for curiosity sake..... )

James Holmes
1690 Paris St., Apt. 10
Aurora, Colorado,

One thing that I keep hearing parroted ever since the first day, is that no one wants to know anything about the killer because they don't want to "make him a celebrity."

This is an old idea... people are tired of killers being treated like celebrities... but now it's being used as an excuse to meditate on his name and face and crimes while shrouding everything else about him in secrecy. It's so perfect.

For instance, Anderson Cooper, that first day, was meditating on James Holmes, showing the killer's face, masturbating to every detail of the massacre, but Cooper refused to say the name "James Holmes" or talk about James Holmes' past because Cooper "didn't want to make a celebrity out of him." Um... how about NOT spending all day focused on it, Andy? Of course, we all know the reason why: Distraction, agenda, fear, etcetera. Well, now we can have all that and protect the secret past of this new Manchurian Candidate.

And yes, the story does keep changing. One thing that stood out for me is that the news initially said that...

1) He tossed some tear gas into the theater
2) He went outside of the whole building
3) He waited for people to run outside in order to shoot them.

As soon as I heard that, it made no sense to me. It shouldn't make any sense to anyone who has ever been to a movie theater. Every movie theater that I've ever been to has four exits, two leading outside and two leading into a hallway. So if the gunman is outside the whole building, then how is he shooting people in the interior hallway? And how did he get through the emergency exit? As well as the rest of the typical questions.

Now they're saying that he was already in the theater, went out through the exit, and propped it open, got suited up and got guns and then went back inside to toss the gas and then shoot people.

This still makes no sense! Why would he gas them and make them run before shooting them? Wouldn't it make more sense to simply shoot them and not have to wear his gas mask? And don't forget that the movie theater still has four exits. Who was blocking the other three exits?

The original story actually made more sense, since that's what police will do. They will gas a place to make people run out. They tried to make it seem as if he gassed people to disorient them. Police don't gas a place while they're in it to disorient criminals, as it only minimizes the visibility of police.

This story shouldn't have made sense to the police or reporters on the scene that first 24 hours, either. If he waited for them to run outside or even into a hallway, why are all the bodies inside the theater?

But no matter what makes sense and what doesn't, they changed the story at least once already. Whomever made up this story obviously has never been in a movie theater before and thought that it was just one room with one door leading in and out of the building. Whoever thought this also thought that the Joker had reddish orange hair like a normal clown.

And now this mysterious killer has a bunch of room mates.

::sigh::

In addition, this secrecy will also help draw out the story even longer. The news can keep coming up with "breaking news" long after the massacre.

reply to post by HolographicPrincipal


I think it's click with a lot of people. It's BAD BAD BAD, but it's probably just BAD BAD BAD journalism, not a conspiracy to hide information or spread disinformation.

Originally posted by new_here

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Police and FBI agents were called to the University of Colorado Anschutz medical campus in Aurora on Monday morning after the psychiatrist, who is also a professor at the school, reported receiving a package believed to be from the suspect. Although that package turned out to be from someone else and harmless, a search of the Campus Services' mailroom turned up another package sent to the psychiatrist with Holmes’ name in the return address, the source told FoxNews.com.

Having a hard time understanding that the psychiatrist called FBI about a suspicious package, but it was a false alarm, but they searched the mailroom and magically found one from him.

Huh? Just... just... HuH???

edit on 7/25/2012 by new_here because: (no reason given)

Maybe JH left a crazy message for him, the guy then got a weird package, the rest is self-explanatory.

reply to post by new_here

Having a hard time understanding that the psychiatrist called FBI about a suspicious package, but it was a false alarm, but they searched the mailroom and magically found one from him.

weird aint it?

I guess they don't check the mail either.

The source said the package had been in the mailroom since July 12, though another source who confirmed the discovery to FoxNews.com could not say if the package arrived prior to Friday's massacre. It was not clear why it had not been delivered to the psychiatrist. The notebook is now in possession of the FBI, sources told FoxNews.com.

Read more: www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Originally posted by new_here

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Police and FBI agents were called to the University of Colorado Anschutz medical campus in Aurora on Monday morning after the psychiatrist, who is also a professor at the school, reported receiving a package believed to be from the suspect. Although that package turned out to be from someone else and harmless, a search of the Campus Services' mailroom turned up another package sent to the psychiatrist with Holmes’ name in the return address, the source told FoxNews.com.

Having a hard time understanding that the psychiatrist called FBI about a suspicious package, but it was a false alarm, but they searched the mailroom and magically found one from him.

Huh? Just... just... HuH???

edit on 7/25/2012 by new_here because: (no reason given)

Maybe JH left a crazy message for him, the guy then got a weird package, the rest is self-explanatory.

Don't get ahead of yourself by speculating a new fact into existence.. You talk about bad journalism but then make something up out of thin air. I'm sure they would have included the part about Holmes leaving him a message if he indeed did.

Fact: Journalism is getting worse as Internet reporting gets better.
Fact: Journalists today regularly point fingers at competitors to discredit other media outlets. (Think ABC News and Brian Ross reporting the killer was affiliated with the Tea Party. Source: www.politico.com...)
Fact: News agencies scrub past stories to look better in a historical context. (Think the long tail or evergreen nature of Internet reporting - this is the biggest massacre in the US, it will be viewed through the lens of history and these outlets want to be remembered as solid sources).

Besides the obvious witnesses that would exist to support the roommates theory (there are no witnesses that claim he had roommates), journalists are lot sneakier today than in the past because everything becomes a living document when published to the Internet. And in the the rush to break news in a seriously competitive environment, more mistakes are made today than ever before (thanks 24 hour news cycle).

Here's a theory, whatever media outlet that reported this fact got the wrong James Holmes and found an innocent guy with two roommates. Upon realizing this, they scrubbed that portion of their story to not only cover lazy reporting, but to protect themselves from the finger pointing that would surely ensue from their competitors.

Originally posted by jude11

While i have to agree that a lot of the story is highly suspect, we may be on the wrong path here. Why wouldn't they just shoot him you ask? If he is kept alive, so is the public interest. And does this not distract us from what was so prevalent on the net just days before?

Iran, Libya, Syria, Russia, China...ring any bells anyone?

That has all died down quite a bit since this event hasn't it? Keep him drugged in court and there is little danger of him telling his own name, let alone the truth.

We'll all be watching it unfold in the news, on conspiracy sites and in the televised trials (guaranteed it will be) while putting off the rest of the World so maybe a conspiracy was created on purpose. Kind of like " Let's see what's going on in Asia today...oooh, look at the shiny button."

Keep us busy.

IMO

Peace

edit on 24-7-2012 by jude11 because: (no reason given)

I totally Agree with the distraction/misdirection of the public's interest. It looks highly suspect and it seems to be the way our government is currently working.

Originally posted by Jason88
Fact: Journalism is getting worse as Internet reporting gets better.
Fact: Journalists today regularly point fingers at competitors to discredit other media outlets. (Think ABC News and Brian Ross reporting the killer was affiliated with the Tea Party. Source: www.politico.com...)
Fact: News agencies scrub past stories to look better in a historical context. (Think the long tail or evergreen nature of Internet reporting - this is the biggest massacre in the US, it will be viewed through the lens of history and these outlets want to be remembered as solid sources).

Besides the obvious witnesses that would exist to support the roommates theory (there are no witnesses that claim he had roommates), journalists are lot sneakier today than in the past because everything becomes a living document when published to the Internet. And in the the rush to break news in a seriously competitive environment, more mistakes are made today than ever before (thanks 24 hour news cycle).

Here's a theory, whatever media outlet that reported this fact got the wrong James Holmes and found an innocent guy with two roommates. Upon realizing this, they scrubbed that portion of their story to not only cover lazy reporting, but to protect themselves from the finger pointing that would surely ensue from their competitors.

edit on 25-7-2012 by Jason88 because: (no reason given)

Journalism and internet reporting are one in the same. Internet reporting is journalism.. and Journalism is Journalism. So half of your statement would be correct in my opinion. Journalism is most definitely getting worse... If it's even possible to get worse than it already is.

There was no finger pointing happening with this deletion of information. Not even an omission of false information. Several news outlets, not just one, have removed that information entirely without explanation.

Also if the media went through the trouble of removing the information, do you think they would be giving any witnesses that could testify against it a chance to tell everyone?

Are you also insinuating that they found a 2nd James Holmes at the same exact address reported to be the REAL Holmes' address?

Lastly. You're are okay with the media making complete changes and deletion of information without any explanation?

Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber

In the fall of 1958 Theodore Kaczynski, a brilliant but vulnerable boy of sixteen, entered Harvard College. There he encountered a prevailing intellectual atmosphere of anti-technological despair. There, also, he was deceived into subjecting himself to a series of purposely brutalizing psychological experiments -- experiments that may have confirmed his still-forming belief in the evil of science. Was the Unabomber born at Harvard? A look inside the files

Kaczynski told me that the Henry A. Murray Research Center of the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, although it released some raw data about him to his attorneys, had refused to share information about the Murray team's analysis of that data. Kaczynski hinted darkly that the Murray Center seemed to feel it had something to hide. One of his defense investigators, he said, reported that the center had told participating psychologists not to talk with his defense team.

www.theatlantic.com...

In case you think it can't happen.

Originally posted by MRuss
I was on the fence, too, but you've given us something to think about. Great work. Great post.

It's so hard to decide what is true anymore.......

How about the report from a WITNESS that said he saw another man open the exit door for Holmes? That got buried, too, just as quickly.

edit on 24-7-2012 by MRuss because: (no reason given)

Because most of the time eyewitness accounts are usually not very reliable and everyone has a different version. How many witness said "they saw someone open a door for the shooter", I mean heck I have heard a bunch of different stories like the shooter kicked the door open or bought a ticket and prop the door open behind him. I

Originally posted by ZiggyMojo
Journalism and internet reporting are one in the same. Internet reporting is journalism.. and Journalism is Journalism. So half of your statement would be correct in my opinion. Journalism is most definitely getting worse... If it's even possible to get worse than it already is.

There was no finger pointing happening with this deletion of information. Not even an omission of false information. Several news outlets, not just one, have removed that information entirely without explanation.

Also if the media went through the trouble of removing the information, do you think they would be giving any witnesses that could testify against it a chance to tell everyone?

Are you also insinuating that they found a 2nd James Holmes at the same exact address reported to be the REAL Holmes' address?

Lastly. You're are okay with the media making complete changes and deletion of information without any explanation?

I'll disagree with your analysis of my first statement. Internet reporting, such as bloggers or the tremendous job the crew did over on Reddit, are not journalism (Reddit left up all their errors in total transparency but produced the most detailed document on this event). They are everyday citizens that sometimes don't understand fact checking. But, yes we agree that quality journalism as profession is going down the toilet.

My guess is the information was so bad that once everyone realized it held no truth in reality all the outlets scrubbed it so as to not look foolish.

I'm insinuating that lazy reporting meant they got the wrong address even though they shouldn't have. (I'd bet public records show another James Holmes in that area with two roommates. If you find that, then there's your problem and you've id'd what the news outlet erroneously reported).

I know MSM has to do whatever it can to stay relevant and competitive; so yes if there were witnesses to the existence of his roommates I know it would be ***BREAKING NEWS***

Lastly, no I am not in favor of the media scrubbing away their errors, but it is a reality in today's Internet-driven world.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


He being a dolt was reported long ago. And, he didnt get a scholarship-he had a grant.
Bit different.

I'm pretty sure alot of online journalists will go back and edit their stories after posting them. I have caught conspiracy theory websites doing it and MSN websites doing it too, I guess it happens more then we think.

reply to post by Jason88


Well the original address cited is also the one still given as Holmes' address. So I'd imagine they had the proper data. Whether or not those roommates were previous or current is another discussion though. I would tend to believe they were previous roommates and that's why data was removed. BUT.. And a big but.. Why would they be so diligent as to correct and explain mistakes for the mother's statements and redact them. As well as minuscule details like the fact that his college presentation was on RNA as opposed to DNA... Then completely obliterate other data such as the two roommates without any explanation or redact.

I don't see the logic there, and I also feel it leaves some room for suspicion. It is also irresponsible on their part as their duty to the public is to inform us and inform us factually. Without the facts or knowing the truths, any story can be slanted or changed to fit an agenda. The facts and fallacies will get so intermingled that there will be no differentiation between what is real and what isn't. At this point they can make anything true, and we are the victims. For they will use the media to influence and inspire the population.

reply to post by lordtyp0


It was also reported that he had a Master's Degree and was going for his PhD. You don't get that far by being a dolt.

Originally posted by MauiStacey
Excellent post OP.

I've thought this entire story has reeked of a staged event since it happened.

Nothing seems right about it. All the witnesses seem like they are reading a script and no one has the proper emotions.

I hope people are able to save some of the inconsistencies they find online for use later.

When I mention to people I know that they think this is staged event they ask me what the hell is wrong with me. Nothing is wrong..... I'm just aware that most of the stories meant to cause fear and take away are right are made up stories.

It's a sad time we live in.

Your observations are quite correct. Depending on who is attempting to engage me in a discussion of this travesty...I find I have to modify my entire thought-mindset in order to avoid conflict~just like with 911, and other official media production story lines. It takes people right out of their comfort zone if/when they are reminded that the stuff they heard on the television and radio just isn't necessarily true!

I heard a clip of only 1 witness, one 'Jennifer'. What I heard was shaky...my ears were saying 'uh-uh'. I didn't listen to any other heads, and the television's been unplugged for a while. What I heard seemed like cued emotions, which ought to have been present earlier in the testimony, all of a sudden coming out along with a 'I'd give my life', right when the victims were brought up. But it completely contradicted several minutes of what she'd just spoken.

I am very picky about what I let my ears call 'true'. Bad habits are formed, even as good ones are forgotten. I appreciate your observation on the televised bank of witnesses. If your ears are strong, I think one can afford to monitor televised coverage of events. But those with weak brain/ear connections will not attempt to pick apart discrepancies, and will go right with the current.

reply to post by cheezydik


Yes, yes you do.
Plenty of dolts out there with doctorates.


Edit to add:
All it takes is memorizing crap from a book and putting it on paper when asked.
There are so many even PhD levels out there that nobody is really impressed anymore in the job market.

Remember: Average IQ doesnt mean you scored a 100, it means you were completely average on the bell curve and thus were marked at 100. Similarly with Unniversity programs, some you classes you can score 50% on every test and as long as more people got less than you-you get an A.

reply to post by Stormdancer777



I agree, why did he send it to a phyciatirst? why was the first package suspicous, then it was ok but they searched for more ? kinda strange.

ps AND it sat untill the police found it? it was there since around July 12? thats a dang long time for mail to sit around.