Sandy Hook Elementary School was full of evidence that showed it to be an open and active school on December 14th, 2012. In Part One, I showed how the waiting area in the lobby was stocked with magazines from 2012, including one that had only been released 2-3 weeks earlier.

On page 74 of Walkley’s scene photos, there’s a small bin from the library on the floor, next to a LifePak 12 defibrillator/monitor. In that bin is a book titled “The Obstinate Pen”, which wasn’t released until April of 2012.

For more in the “Sandy Hook Elementary Was Open” series, please read:
Part One: The Lobby
Part Two: The Obstinate Pen
Part Three: Holiday Decorations And Calendars
Part Four: SMART Technologies
Part Five: Dawn Hochsprung’s Twitter Feed
Part Six: The 2011-2012 Scrapbook
Part Seven: Children’s Authors Visit Sandy Hook
Part Eight: Charitable Causes
Part Nine: The Library
Part Ten: 92 More Photos From Sandy Hook School
Part Eleven: 180 Articles Referencing Sandy Hook School, Written Between 2008-2012
Part Twelve: The Glass Display Cases
Part Thirteen: Google Earth
Part Fourteen: The November 2012 Scholastic Book Fair
Part Fifteen: Sandy Hook School Enrollment For 2008-2017

5 Thoughts on “Sandy Hook Elementary Was Open, Part Two: The Obstinate Pen

  1. John on May 1, 2016 at 10:25 am said:

    Claiming that because a book in the photo was from 2012 proves the school was still open? Again this is absurd.

    I don’t think you understand the Sandy Hook hoax believer’s theories. The books and classroom props to make them look like real classrooms were in my opinion moved into the likely abandoned Sandy Hook school in the months or perhaps weeks before December 2012. They did the setup to make the school look active. Similar to setting up a set for a movie and then shooting the scene once the setup is complete.

    The dates of any books in the classroom photos mean absolutely nothing, or please explain how they would.

    • Schminkles on May 25, 2016 at 7:18 am said:

      No evidence would convince you sanity deficient people.

      Old books? Proof the school was abandoned! New books? Staging!

      Parents not sedated, sobbing wrecks? They’re fakes! Families visibly anguished? Playing up for the cameras!

      Parents appear on TV? Paid shills whose children didn’t die!
      Parents don’t appear on TV? That’s because their child didn’t really die!

      No death certificates? Nobody died! Death certs available? Fakes!

      It’s ridiculous. There could be camera footage from every classroom, bodycam footage from each child, and some POV video from Lanza and you’d be screaming “IT’S FAAAKE! JUST LIKE THE MOON LANDINGS!”. You’d be saying there was too much/not enough blood, that the kids seemed too upset/not upset enough, that the bullets were actually squibs or blanks, und so weiter.

      It’s like watching a dog alternate between chasing his tail, and eating his crap – horribly attention grabbing, but truly disturbing

  2. Murray, I recently stumbled across your page and am currently enjoying it. But, Ive noticed you attack others viciously when they show signs they may be leaning more toward hoax or drill instead of real event. I have for many years thought it was a drill but i want to examine the evidence again and see if there is anything I missed or anything new. Your site has me seriously second guessing whether the school was closed or not. Im leaning more toward it was open now but, the reason I’m writing this is because i think its wrong to attack others just because they have a different view. I think there is some evidence that lends theory to both sides and we should set an example that we can discuss this topic without resorting to name calling and belittling. I think it takes away from the evidence you have presented here. Just my opinion, Im sure there are a lot of people like me that dont like thinking it was a drill and are looking for evidence to support the mainstream report without being belittled.


    • Shill Murray on October 14, 2017 at 1:41 am said:

      Hi Josh,

      I’m thrilled to hear that you’ve found the site useful, but I absolutely do not agree whatsoever with that idea that I immediately attack anyone that believes the shooting was a hoax or a drill. That’s just not true, at all. If you were to peruse the entirety of this site (as well as my Facebook page), I think you’d find plenty of examples of me engaging these folks in a very civil, respectful manner. Look at the recent back-and-forth I had with NotToday333, for example; I never once insulted them, not once that I can remember, even if I do occasionally belittle their ideas (and there’s a huge difference). But this is not a courtesy that I am willing to extend to everyone, and it all depends on how they approach me and/or the discussion. If someone comes here and calls me a government shill or a liar, then all bets are off, and I’m going to lay into them as best I can. I think that’s fair. Why treat them any differently than they treat me? These people aren’t here to ask legitimate questions or learn anything, so fuck ’em.

      In regards to the idea that the way I speak to some people “takes away” from the evidence I’ve presented here, I’m sorry but I think that’s rubbish. No insult that I can come up with – no matter how good – can alter the evidence. That’s impossible. Just because I call a Flat-Earther an “idiot” doesn’t mean that the planet has stopped being round. I go to great pains to back up my research (much more so than any denier), and a couple of goofy names aren’t going to change that. If someone is going to disregard the facts just because I call some knucklehead a “dummy”, then that’s on them, not me.

Leave a Reply to Schminkles Cancel reply

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

Post Navigation