“Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”
Chapter Five, Part Two
By: “Vivian Lee, PhD”

“Lanza had reportedly compiled a spreadsheet 7 feet long and 4 feet wide in 9-point type detailing 500 victims of other mass murders. We are supposed to believe this, and, at the same time, that Adam Lanza was a shy, quiet kid who didn’t like noise and chaos.” pg. 72

How are these things mutually exclusive? Is there a more isolated, quiet, and non-chaotic activity than creating spreadsheets?

Adam loved videogames, especially “Dance Dance Revolution” (which he played for four to ten hours at a time) and first-person shooters. He was also fixated on mass murders, particularly school shootings.

One of the main symptoms of Autism is repetitive behaviors. From Autism Speaks:

“Repetitive behaviors can take the form of intense preoccupations, or obsessions. These extreme interests can prove all the more unusual for their content (e.g. fans, vacuum cleaners or toilets) or depth of knowledge (e.g. knowing and repeating astonishingly detailed information about Thomas the Tank Engine or astronomy). Older children and adults with autism may develop tremendous interest in numbers, symbols, dates or science topics.”

“Anderson Cooper is the interviewer in two notable instances: his conversation with the McDonnells mentioned above, and an interview with Veronique Pozner, remarkable for its green-screen effects such as Anderson’s disappearing nose.” pg. 73

That’s not how green screen works! Anderson Cooper’s nose isn’t green. What you’re seeing is the result of video compression. That’s what happens when you watch this shit on YouTube. Besides, again, what would using green screen even accomplish in this case?

“The nurse said that the gunman was the son of the kindergarten teacher, who was known to her and ‘an absolutely loving person.'” pg. 73

Surprise! This one is deceptive.

The school nurse at Sandy Hook is a woman named Sarah — or Sally — Cox, and she never said that the gunman was the son of a kindergarten teacher. Although their interaction was not captured by television cameras, WUSA reporter Andrea McCarren recounted her encounter with a “traumatized” Cox outside of Sandy Hook where she asked her “If it was known around the school that this young man — apparently a kindergarten teacher’s son — was an issue… whether he had any problems.” This wasn’t long after the shooting and McCarren was simply repeating one of the early rumors. If McCarren was in fact speaking to Cox, and it’s likely that she was, it’s entirely possible that she did not know whether this was true or not, at the time.

And despite the way that Lee structures this sentence, it was the kindergarten teacher that Cox was describing when she said that she “was an absolutely loving person”. She continued by saying that she was “a very caring experienced kindergarten teacher”, but Lee does not include that part because she really wants her readers to believe that Cox is talking about Adam Lanza, but that’s simply not true.

Here’s the segment, as it aired on television:

It’s worth noting that conspiracy theorists have been coming after school nurse Sarah “Sally” Cox for years with one failed accusation after another. They originally claimed that she was not a registered in the state of Connecticut, but they were searching the wrong name.

“In an embarrassing fiction, The Newtown Bee reported on December 14, 2012, that Dawn Hochsprung, the Sandy Hook school principal, told the paper that a masked man had entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots—more than she could count—that went ‘on and on.’ Of course, Dawn Hochsprung was allegedly killed by Adam Lanza and so could not easily have provided this statement.” pg. 74

The Newtown Bee fucked up. They fixed it. It happens.

“In fact, Dawn was said to have acted heroically, dying while lunging at the gunman—although one wonders who witnessed and reported this act of heroism.” pg. 74

Natalie Hammond reported it. Hammond survived and was with Dawn when this happened. This is public, well-known information. From Wikipedia:

“Principal Dawn Hochsprung and school psychologist Mary Sherlach were meeting with other faculty members when they heard, but did not recognize, gunshots. Hochsprung, Sherlach, and lead teacher Natalie Hammond went into the hall to determine the source of the sounds and encountered Lanza. A faculty member who was at the meeting said that the three women called out “Shooter! Stay put!” which alerted their colleagues to the danger and saved their lives. A teacher hiding in the math lab heard school janitor Rick Thorne yell “Put the gun down!” An aide heard gunshots. Thorne survived. Lanza killed both Hochsprung and Sherlach. Hammond was hit first in the leg, and then sustained another gunshot wound. She lay still in the hallway and then, not hearing any more noise, crawled back to the conference room and pressed her body against the door to keep it closed. She was later treated at Danbury Hospital.

This is corroborated by Natalie’s follow-up interview with officers Peters and Mudry in which she states:

Hammond stated that when leaving the room to enter the hallway, it was Dawn first, Mary second, and she was 10 ft behind Mary, with Dawn and Mary running together… Mary and Dawn were already on the ground and she knew that she knew they were gone. The shooter was standing about a foot or two away from them, practically on top of them.

Source: Investigation Report 1200704559-00040126 (Book 5, 00040126.pdf)

Is Lee really this ignorant of the case or does she think her readers are too stupid to look this up for themselves?

“Gene supposedly harbored six children who ran away from the school, rode to his house on a school bus, sat down on his lawn and proceeded to cry and tell him that their teacher, Miss Soto, was dead. Strangely, Rosen took the children inside and gave them some toys to play with, instead of calling 911 like any normal person.” pg. 74

Nearly every last bit of this is wrong. The bus driver (who was in her own car at the time and not the bus as she was off-duty at the time) encountered the four children — all of which had escaped from Victoria Soto’s classroom — on Riverside Road (which intersects with Dickinson) and stopped to help them. Gene Rosen, who lives next door to the firehouse, saw what was going on and came out to help. Lee neglects to mention that Gene, a retired psychologist, was able to get phone numbers from the children and get in touch with their parents. All four were reunited with their parents.

“The Gene Rosen videos are important for the official narrative, in that they corroborate many of its details… These incriminating videos are some of the best evidence that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax.” pg. 75

When there are inconsistencies, it’s proof of a hoax. When everything is corroborated, it’s proof of a hoax. You really can’t win with these dipshits.

“The only photo we have seen of any children being evacuated from the school was apparently taken earlier in the fall during a drill—no coats, smiling faces, leaves remaining on a few trees.” pg. 75

The children were not wearing coats because they had taken them off when they arrived at school, as one is expected to do. They then stored them away before they were forced to flee from a gunman. You obviously don’t go and get your coat in that situation. Didn’t an alleged “school safety expert” consult on this scam of a book? Come the fuck on.

You can see some of the kids’ coats (along with backpacks) hanging in Walkley’s scene photos:

Officer Rachel Van Ness notes how cold (as well as terrified) the kids were in her report (Book 6, 00001113.pdf):

“This Detective was then directed by someone to approach the building and begin escorting the children out and through the parking lot as they were released by Officers from within the building. This Detective ran to the sidewalk by TFC Gregg and observed the first group of children being led out of the building along with several staff members and teachers. The children were holding onto each other’s shoulders from behind and walking in a single file line as directed. This Detective observed that many of the children were crying and frightened, in addition to being cold…

As far as smiling goes… I want you to take a look at the girl in the blue top and tell me if that looks like a “smile” to you. Then tell me how many more “smiles” you see:

And these are the “leaves” that Lee speaks of:Yeah, That’s it: that tiny bit of green above the armed officer by the dumpster. Now I’m no botanist, but I’m relatively certain that those are conifers and Sandy Hook is surrounded by them. In fact, here’s what the other side of the school looks like:

A number of them can even be seen in the photo Lee misattributed to December 14th (the one that was actually taken on the 15th):

And you can also see a handful of them in this snowy photograph taken exactly one year after the shooting:

Jeez, if only there were trees that retain their green needles through the winter. I imagine such a tree would be very desirable around Christmastime. You could hang lights from it… or ornaments…

“No one’s breath has condensed into visible vapor (although the recorded temperature was 28 degrees F and frost appears on the ground in other photos).” pg. 76

1000% pure bullshit. The temperature was not 28 when this photo was taken. “Vivian Lee”, as per usual, provides no source for the weather that morning. But I actually give a shit about the truth, so I will:

The weather for Sandy Hook/Newtown, Connecticut on Friday, December 14th, 2012:
It had exceeded 28 before 4AM! By 10AM, which is when the school was evacuated, it had already reached ~36.

“Indeed, another photo appeared (Figure 29), showing what appears to be a preliminary staging for the famous ‘iconic’ photo released worldwide. Here also is the line of students but in a somewhat different order.” pg. 76

No, they’re just different students.

This claim is based off of the idea that the same two children appear in both evacuation photographs. Why re-use two of the children and swap the rest? Who the fuck knows? But this is what James Fetzer, “Vivian Lee”, and a disheartening number of other conspiracy theorists believe.

Fetzer and Lee make the absurd claim that these two children:


Are the same as these two children:

Their size varies so greatly due to the perspective of the photographs, but I scaled where necessary to also create these side-by-side comparisons:
Besides some vague similarities in clothing, it should be obvious that these are not the same children. The first child’s sweatshirt has a school logo or something similar printed on it: you can see the word “South” at the beginning and it looks like “Fat” or “Fal” on the second line. His hair is swept up in the front, off of his forehead. He’s wearing dark grey sneakers with a uniform sole and holding papers in his right hand. His doppelganger is wearing a sweatshirt with a fairly large design printed on the front. The design is of some unknown character, posing with a red skateboard. There doesn’t appear to be anything written on it. His bangs sit across his forehead, and he is wearing light blue running shoes/sneakers with a sole that tapers off at the front, like a New Balance sneaker would. There’s nothing in his right hand, and probably nothing in his left hand. His jeans are also noticeably lighter.

As for the second child,  he has dark brown hair. He is wearing a grey, long-sleeved shirt with what looks like it could be a collar, and dark athletic pants. His sneakers are black with a thin sole. His doppelganger has much lighter hair, albeit in a similar hairstyle. He is wearing a long-sleeved grey shirt and black or very dark blue athletic pants with a bright blue stripe that goes at least halfway down the leg. His sneakers appear to be light grey and the larger, white sole is pretty noticeable against the asphalt.

You’d have to be a lunatic to think that these are the same kids.

“But how did he get past the furniture, with all his weaponry, without moving anything out of position?” pg. 77

In this chapter alone, and according to Lee, Adam is simultaneously too small to carry three weapons and too big to maneuver between a table and chair.

On his way in to the school, Adam toppled over a flower stand (circled in yellow below) and moved a magazine rack, which is visible in the crime scene photos:

From there he would have had plenty of room to move between the furniture. As has been explained, he held the Bushmaster while the pistols and ammunition were in his vest and pants pockets. They would not have gotten in his way.

“Most of the individual images of the children released to the media are peculiar—numerous images have a curiously similar background of green foliage” pg. 78

Yeah, it’s almost like they went to the same school and a school photographer came in and took pictures of them using the same backdrop. Dipshit.

“Emilie’s red-and-black dress appears in both: once worn by Emilie in a Photoshopped family photo and then supposedly worn by her younger sister Madeline for the photo-op with Barack Obama.” pg. 78

Lee provides no proof that this particular photo has been “Photoshopped”, or edited. There isn’t even a source. Certainly other Parker family photos have been edited and Emilie’s mother, Alissa, has no problem admitting to anyone that it’s a composite. In fact, she posted about it on her blog, and even provided six photos from that session. Stuff like this is incredibly common, especially when children are involved.

Both of Emilie’s younger sisters — Madeline and Samantha — posed with President Obama during his visit to Newtown, but I’m not sure what the implication is here. Is Lee suggesting that Madeline is actually Emilie, or that her sister couldn’t have possibly worn the same dress? The family photo in question was taken in 2010; two years before Emilie was killed, which would have meant she was four years-old at the time… or the same age as Madeline in her photo with Obama. So ask yourself what’s more likely: that Emilie was still alive and able to fit into the same dress two years later, or that her younger sister — now the same age as Emilie when she was photographed wearing that dress — was wearing a hand-me-down?

In case you’re still not convinced, here’s a picture of Emilie Parker, aged six years-old, in 2012:

And here’s a picture of sister Madeline, aged four years-old, from her photo with President Obama in 2012:

“Photos of Victoria Soto have emerged as Photoshopped creations. Images of Soto were inserted into photographs in which she did not originally appear, and several shots of her face were created from a single photo.” pg. 78

Again, zero proof is provided that these images have in any way been manipulated, digitally or otherwise. The book’s source is a YouTube video. A number of photos of Ms. Soto exist, many of which show her inside of the school:

The well-known photograph of Soto’s class of first grade students is an elaborate composite, released in a small format, low quality image. Soto is wearing the exact same outfit seen in another photo with green foliage background, although there she faces the other direction; that image was merely flipped and inserted into the class picture.” pgs. 78-79

A composite comprised of which images? Unless the pictures from which they were derived can be produced, this is a totally baseless claim.

Yes, Vicki is wearing the same outfit in both pictures, but that’s not proof of anything other than the fact that she liked it. The idea that the photo was flipped is preposterous. Let’s start by looking at the class photo:

And here’s the “green foliage” photo:

Now let’s flip the “green foliage” photo and compare it to the class photo:

Not much of a match, is it? Vicki parts her hair to the left. This is evident in every single photo of her. Every photo. So not only does flipping her photo change her part to the right, but absolutely nothing else lines up: the angle, the shadows, her necklace, her hair, her smile, her eyebrows, etc.

“In doing so the creators had to reconstruct her right hand and did so poorly, cutting off her thumb with a vertical line. Ann Marie Murphy was also inserted, and her hand too is problematic.” pg. 79

What’s “problematic” about Vicki’s hand? The fact that you can’t see her thumb while she’s standing nearly sideways? Were all of these teachers hack Photoshop jobs as well?

Vicki’s hands aren’t even visible in the “foliage” photo, so why would they need to reconstruct them? Reconstruct them from what? The foliage photo cuts off above her elbows, so where does the rest of her body (including her hand) even come from in the class photo? If it were done in the reverse order, they’d already have a normal hand to work with.

And what about Ann Marie? There’s no foliage photo of her, so why is her hand problematic? How do you explain the shadows on the stage in the class photo?

“The hands of the children are blurry, their eyes are fuzzy, and square and rectangular defects appear on their faces—all unnoticeable in a small image but readily seen when enlarged.” pg. 79

Does “Vivian Lee, PhD” honestly not know how image compression works? Less than a page ago, she complained that this exact photo was “released in a small format, low quality image” and now she can’t seem to figure out why the small hands and even smaller eyes of the children are blurry when you enlarge it.

Here you go, “Dr. Lee”.

“In a likely sloppy slip-up, a photo of a real child, Lily Gaubert, who is apparently alive and well, was promoted in the media as an image of Allison Wyatt, an alleged victim. Lily’s mother supposedly discovered the error and made it public via Flickr.” pg. 80

It is indeed a slip-up, just not the kind that Lee is suggesting.

The mistake was allegedly made solely on the website of WJLA 7, which is ABC’s Washington, DC affiliate. So while “promoted in the media” is technically accurate, it’s a disingenuous stretch.

The offending URL no longer resolves to anything, but we can use the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine (Fetzer’s favorite!) to see what the site looked like on December 31st, 2012, which is the oldest available snapshot.


That is absolutely Allison Wyatt. Most interestingly, WJLA credits “musegal2, YouTube” for the photo of Allison while the other victims’ photos are credited to their families and the AP, among other more legitimate sources. And while the video is no longer there, a YouTube account belonging to “musegal2” did create a tribute to the kids at Sandy Hook in the days after the attack and accidentally used a photo of Lily Gaubert instead of Allison Wyatt. WJLA must have been unable to obtain a photo of Allison through other means and simply lifted it from the video.

“The ridiculously fraudulent photographs of Adam Lanza clearly do not depict a real person” pg. 80

They do not depict “a real person”? What does that even mean? Is he computer generated? A mannequin? There’s no explanation or proof; just a preposterous claim they expect their audience to just accept.

If Lee’s readers really want to find out why she believes the photos are “fraudulent”, they must first click on a link to a YouTube video (which I’m sure is monetized) by conspiracy crank Mike Powers, who decided to run with the baffling theory that Adam Lanza never even existed.

“As with Ground Zero after 9/11, Sandy Hook Elementary and all the evidence have been completely obliterated” pg. 81

No, the evidence was removed before the school was demolished. That’s not how this works.

Lee and Fetzer want you to believe that the idea of tearing down an elementary school in which twenty-seven people – mostly five or six year-old children – were shot to death is somehow suspicious. But this is something that the registered voters of Newtown decided and historically it lines up with what has happened to similar sites:

  • The Nickel Mines, PA schoolhouse where five Amish students were killed
  • The San Ysidro McDonald’s where James Huberty shot and killed twenty-one people
  • The Dunblane school gym where Thomas Hamilton shot and killed sixteen students
  • John Wayne Gacy’s house
  • Jeffrey Dahmer’s apartment building
  • The library at Columbine High School, which is where Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed ten of their twelve victims

Don’t forget that Fetzer has publicly stated he believes the Columbine incident to be entirely legitimate, and of course they would never demolish it unless they had something to hide, right?

“This would never have been tolerated if an actual crime had been committed—at least one that was meant to be investigated.”
pg. 81

The investigation was over. That’s why they were able to release a final report.

“Employees who worked on the project were required to sign nondisclosure agreements. They were not only prohibited from removing anything from the site, but they were forbidden from discussing publicly anything they may have observed or not observed during the demolition, such as an absence of bullet marks on the walls or blood on the floor of the classrooms.” pg. 81

The obvious reasons for an NDA have already been covered in part one.

Crime scene photos show bullet marks as well as blood. In the Walkley scene photos alone, blood can be seen on pages 73, 365, 428, 473, 636, 663, 665. Blood is also likely seen on pages 71, 622-624, 626-627, and 643. 622-624 and 626-627 show the ceiling of room 10, which is where Adam Lanza killed himself, so that may be his blood. Pages 636 and 665 also show blood above the white board, again in the room where Lanza shot himself. Part of Adam’s body is also visible on page 161, and it’s possible that’s his blood in the carpet. There also appears to be something pretty gory between Lanza’s body and the stool.

Fetzer claims that the bullet marks were actually made with a drill, but they would likely look all the same to construction workers.

“This is underscored by an article in the Newtown Bee, clear acknowledgment that Sandy Hook Elementary was old, unsafe, and not up to code at the time of the alleged shooting.” pg. 82

The Newtown Bee never said that Sandy Hook had been unsafe to occupy. Feel free to read the article for yourself. Higher levels of hazardous materials than expected were uncovered in construction debris, which is something completely different. This does not mean that a building is uninhabitable. Anyone who has ever worked with asbestos or even lived in an older home with asbestos siding knows this.

“Research has resulted in a ‘Sandy Hoax Surprise,’ a convincing youtube video by QKultra identifying eight alleged Sandy Hook victims and six brothers of victims singing in the Newtown children’s choir at the 2013 Super Bowl, February 3, 2013.” pg. 82

This is one of the dumbest claims of all-time. And that spans nearly every conspiracy theory that I’ve ever encountered. But what do you expect when your source is an anonymous YouTube user named “QKultra”?

The most prominent example provided on this page, by way of a still from a YouTube video, is of Dawn Engel. Or two girls that Lee claims are Dawn Engel.

Lee must think that her readers are too stupid or too blind to not realize that these girls look nothing alike. And in case it’s unclear due to the dubious quality of the provided example, here are better quality photos of Olivia Engel as well as the girl who performed with the Sandy Hook Elementary School choir:

“The newly recognized victims are all older than they appear in the photos released at the time of the ‘shooting,’ giving credence to the theory that the victims’ photos we were shown were outdated images.” pg. 84

Also giving credence to the fact that they’re not the same kids.

You can read more about this ludicrous claim here and here.

“The children in the Newtown choir, whoever they are, seem quite happy to be singing at the Super Bowl, smiling and running across the field after the event—giving no sign of the trauma they had suffered less than two months prior.” pg. 84

“We have no idea who these kids are, but they shouldn’t be happy” is what Lee is saying here.

“‘The “shooter’ Adam Lanza had no apparent motive, as even the 2013 final report acknowledged” pg. 84

The report says that there is “no clear indication” as to why Adam did what he did, but that doesn’t mean that a motive does not exist. I don’t know… is deeply troubled, obsessed with school shootings, and heavily armed not enough? If not, does this mean that the murders of John Lennon, Sharon Tate, and Rebecca Schaeffer, or the attacks on Ronald Reagan, Dan Rather, and George Harrison never happened?

“$50 million in Connecticut state funds allocated for the destruction of Sandy Hook School and rebuilding of a new school on the premises.” pg. 85

$49,250,000, but who’s counting?

This is covered in chapter two. Demolishing an old school and building a new one is expensive.

“And the Support Fund/United Way posted its condolences on December 11, 2013, which was three days before the actual event.” pg. 85

Your options here are believing that Google has inconsistent and occasionally inaccurate time stamping when dealing with active websites, as admitted by a Google engineer (see below), or a non-profit charity had advanced knowledge of a “drill” in Newtown, CT, and believed it to be a real event.

We can even demonstrate the former by searching Google for information about a “sandy hook conspiracy theory” and limiting the results to anything from 2011. As you can see in the screenshot below, a number of conspiracy sites pop up (including links referencing James Tracy’s firing from FAU as well as James Fetzer), all displaying dates from well before December 14th, 2012. Surely “Vivian Lee” does not believe that these sites had foreknowledge of the shooting, does she?

Again, these anomalies are never actually discovered before an event, which would certainly be noteworthy.

“The families have also raised additional funds through private organizations with their own websites—some of which were apparently advertised on the web in advance of the shooting.” pg. 85

See above.

“A 2014 Connecticut report on charitable donations lists organizations such as The Animal Center, Inc., Newtown Forest Association, Inc., Sandy Hook Arts Center for Kids, and Angels of Sandy Hook Bracelets, all raising funds for Sandy Hook Elementary.” pg. 87

Charities raising money for a bunch of murdered children? Definitely fishy. If the existence of charities is an indictment, then I guess cancer doesn’t exist and no one is starving in Africa.

“The continuing media blitz has created an impression that the Sandy Hook hoax was all about gun control. Meanwhile, however, the gun industry has benefited immensely.” pg. 87

This is true. Gun sales spiked dramatically after Sandy Hook. Years and years worth of planning, millions upon millions of dollars in hush money paid out, and the whole thing just backfired completely. And yet no one has spoken up. It’s just incredible!

“Beyond all these agendas, the Sandy Hook ‘massacre’ was an exercise in trauma-based mind control” pg. 90

This is the actual claim. This is how this chapter ends. Seriously.

2 Thoughts on “Fact Checking “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”, Chapter Five, Part Two



Please read before commenting.

Comment policy: Comments from previously unapproved guests will remain in moderation until I manually approve them. Honest questions and reasonable comments from all types of folks are encouraged and allowed but will often remain in moderation until I can properly reply to them, which may occasionally take a little while. Contrary to what some of you think, losing your patience during this time and leaving another comment in which you insult me won't do much to speed up that process.

The types of comments that will no longer be approved include the following:

1) Off-topic comments. Articles about The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine are not the place to ask about Hillary's e-mails or pizza shop sex dungeons. Stay on topic.
2) Gish Gallops. Don't know what a Gish Gallop is? Then Google it. And then don't engage in them. They are absolutely infuriating and there is no faster way to have your comment deleted.
3) Yearbook requests. Like I told the fifty other folks asking for them: I don't have them, and even if I did, I wouldn't post them. I'm not about to turn my site into some sort of eBay for weirdos, so stop asking.
4) Requests for photos of dead children. See above. And then seek professional help, because you're fucked up.
5) Asking questions that have already been answered. If you want to have a discussion, don't make it obvious that you haven't read the site by asking a question that I've already spent a significant amount of time answering. I'll allow a little leeway here if you're otherwise well-behaved, but please, read the site. There's a search function and it works pretty well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation