“Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”
By: Nick Kollerstrom

“No-one has been able to get into the Sandy Hook elementary school to verify if there are any bullet-marks, bloodstains etc” pg. 209

No one! Well, except for police, EMS personnel, and parents of the victims. Surely Nick Kollerstrom can’t be surprised that an elementary school where twenty-six people – including 20 five and six year-old children – were violently murdered was not open for public tours… right?

Regardless, if he really wants to see the bullet marks and bloodstains (and he doesn’t, otherwise he would have), he can simply reference the following pages in Detective Arthur Walkley’s crime scene photos:

Bullet marks/damage: 54-61, 404-431, 448-454, 513, 622-624, 626-630
Blood: 71, 73, 365, 386, 392, 393, 428, 457, 473, 475, 495, 622-624, 626, 627, 636, 643, 663, and 665

“Perhaps a shootout DID NOT ACTUALLY HAPPEN THERE, it was just an illusion. Kids heard bangs, that’s all we can say.” pg. 209

No, that’s absolutely not “all we can say” because we know that the children who escaped from classroom ten not only heard “bangs”, but actually saw Adam Lanza (though most of them describe him differently, as children are prone to do) shoot and kill their teacher, Victoria Soto, as well as their classmates. Their interviews are available throughout Book 5 of the final report. Here’s an excerpt of one such interview (Source: Book 5, 00198959.pdf):

[Redacted] stated he is a [redacted] class, which according to [redacted] is just several doors down from the principal’s office. He said that had just finished writing class when he heard loud shooting coming from the hall. After a few moments, the classroom door opened and a “bad man” entered the room and started shooting everyone in class.

[Redacted] said the shooter was dressed in “army clothes” and was firing a “bazooka”. He thought the shooter had dark skin and a beard.

[Redacted] said he saw his teacher [redacted] get shot and said she was “dead”. He also said he saw at least two of his classmates get shot and referred to them as “dead” as well.

Natalie Hammond, who was shot in the hallway along with Dawn Hochsprung and Mary Sherlach, also came face-to-face with the shooter. Her multiple statements to police can also be found in Book 5 of the final report.

There’s also the school secretary, Nancy Cox, who saw the shooter through the window separating the main office from the lobby. Here’s an excerpt from her statement (Source 5, 00007937.pdf):

Around 9:35 I heard a louse noise, which sounded like glass breaking. I thought one of the glass casings in the hallway had fallen over. I was going to call the school custodian, but then I heard it again and looked up. When I looked up from the desk through the office glass window that looks out to the lobby I saw a man standing in the lobby facing down the primary wing (hallway) to the 1st grade and 2nd grade classrooms. The man appeared white and was wearing a soft rim type hat, sunglasses (dark), and he was holding a rifle type gun with a long barrel.

Then of course there are the 911 tapes in which we can hear the gunshots with our own ears; we don’t need to rely on “bangs” heard by children.

In spite of all of this, Kollerstrom is absolutely correct about one thing, though: a “shootout” did not occur at Sandy Hook Elementary School. But a shooting did, and there is an enormous difference.

“The Mail Online 6 January shows this image, subtitled: ‘Chaotic scenes at the school as police work to secure the area and bodies are carried out of the school.’ But look carefully, no bodies are here, only some duffle bags–and some are doubting whether this is the school car-park.” pg. 210

This is the image Kollerstrom is referring to:

The reason why there are no bodies at this triage area has already been covered, multiple times, so I’m only going to focus on the absurd idea that this isn’t Sandy Hook Elementary School.

First of all, logically (there goes that word again), what benefit would there be to staging this photo anywhere other than the school (which has been available for four years, according to Fetzer)? Certainly that would only complicate matters further. Much like the rest of this book, the whole idea doesn’t make a lick of sense. Secondly, anyone who honestly doubts that the above photo was taken in the parking lot of Sandy Hook is an idiot, plain and simple. Using the helicopter footage taken by Channel 12 that day, we can see that it is very obviously the same location:

“The Sandy Hook Elementary School was in an up-market area of Connecticut, shown by the large majority of its children being from Jewish families. It would have had high-security equipment including CCTV cameras. We have as yet not been shown images from the time of the crime (curiously vague, but said to have been three minutes around 9:45 on 14 December).” pg. 210

It’s kinda weird to claim that the majority of the children in Newtown are from Jewish families, especially when Sterling’s Best Places says that it’s not true, but okay… whatever. The claim regarding the security system is an ancient one, and the truth (still) is that Sandy Hook’s security system, installed in 2006, never had recording capabilities. So any rumored footage from the school simply could not possibly exist.

For more on the school’s security system, please see Chapter Five, Part One.

“There are no images of a ‘crime scene’ with bullet-marks in walls or through windows.” pg. 210

There are at least fifty such images. See above.

“There is no reason to suppose that the 20-year old autistic Adam Lanza had any expertise or practice in using guns” pg. 210

There’s no need to suppose anything when we have:

  1. Numerous photographs of firearms, firearm literature, and ammunition from inside the Lanza household (see: Sec_4_Primary_Scene.pdf, available as part of the final report).
  2. Sign-in sheets from shooting ranges showing the signatures of Nancy and Adam Lazna:
  1. Statements from eyewitnesses (including an NRA instructor as well as retired law enforcement) placing Adam and his mother in said shooting ranges:
  1. A large number of online postings from Adam, detailing his knowledge of firearms.
  2. A statement from family friend, Marvin Lafontaine, who describes Nancy Lanza bringing a five year-old Adam over to his house in order to shoot high-powered air rifles. (Source: Book 7, 00196017.pdf)
  3. A lengthy statement from Adam’s father, Peter Lanza, given to police and focusing on the family’s history with firearms. It’s a fairly long statement, so I won’t re-print it here, but it’s document 00006579.pdf in Book 7 of the final report. Anyone who (mistakenly) does not believe that Adam was very familiar with firearms should start here.

“The car allegedly driven by him to the school turned out to belong to a shady felon, with FBI ties.” pg. 210

Nope! Here’s the TL;DR version:

The two communications in bold above are what have caused the erstwhile conspiracy theorists to get their knickers in a twist. They claim that, together, the comments constitute ‘clear evidence’ that Christopher Rodia owned Nancy Lanza’s car. But, taken in context, i.e. that both communications are part of a continuum of Connecticut State police communications on the morning of the SH shooting that include State Police responses to the shooting AND things like traffic stops by police who are NOT involved with the response to the SH shooting, and that both types of communications are naturally interspersed…well the rational conclusion then is that Rodia was just one of several people who were stopped in their cars by a CT. State police officer somewhere nowhere near Sandy Hook school.

“The story of the rifle used–the Coroner averred that all injuries had been made with the rifle, then it was found to have been placed in the back of a car outside the school–can never make any sense.” pg. 211

It doesn’t make any sense because the only weapon found in the Civic was the shotgun, which was placed there by Officer Pena after he originally discovered it in the back seat of the car. The rifle remained with Adam.

“On the day of the event, starting at 9.00 am, a FEMA exercise ‘Planning for the Needs of Children in Disasters’ took place in Connecticut not far from Sandy Hook. “ pgs. 211-212

As already covered in Chapter Five, “Planning for the Needs of Children in Disasters” – which took place ~30 minutes outside of Newtown – is a classroom course (not a “drill” or an “exercise”) focusing on assisting children in the event of a natural disaster, and has absolutely nothing to do with school shootings or the like.

“7. Film pre-announcement of the event…  The 2000 film ‘The Sandy Hook Lingerie Party Massacre’ has the killer strike in the aftermath of a hurricane.” pg. 213

I don’t really have much to say about this one, but I wanted to include it because it’s just so stupid. For the record, there’s also a Sandy Hook in New Jersey, which is where this ridiculous movie takes place.

“On December 19 the Connecticut State Police assigned individual personnel to each of the 26 families who lost a loved one at Sandy Hook Elementary. ‘The families have requested no press interviews,’ State Police assert on their behalf” pg. 214

As documented in Chapter One, a number of families spoke to the press. This is a weird claim to make seeing as how much mileage this book has gotten out of Robbie Parker’s December 15th press conference.

“The Mother has been hyped as an Apocalypse-expecting gun-toting food-storing freak (as a prelude to demonising gun-owners in America, the whole point of this exercise).” pg. 214

By who, exactly? Unsurprisingly, there’s no source for this straw man these quotes. If Nancy Lanza was a prepper, she was a particularly terrible one as the crime scene photos from the Lanza household offer up no evidence of this.

“The security forces averred that they had removed the bodies from the school in the middle of the night: had they?” pg. 216

Who are “the security forces”? Because this isn’t true. Photos show a truck from the medical examiner’s office pulling a large refrigerated trailer and leaving Sandy Hook in broad daylight on December 15th:

It’s clear that the photo was taken early on the 15th as the “Everyone Must Check In” sign has not yet appeared at the firehouse and there is still frost on the ground.

According to Chief State Medical Examiner Dr. Wayne Carver, the last of the bodies left the school at 10:30PM that night, long before “the middle of the night”.

2 Thoughts on “Fact Checking “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”, Afterword

  1. Steve on April 6, 2016 at 12:41 am said:

    Great job again, Thank you for reading that “book” so we don’t have to.

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 allowed and encouraged but will sometimes 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. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.

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

1) Off-topic comments. An entry 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? Educate yourself. And then don't engage in them. They are an infuriating waste of everyone's time 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 just stop asking.
4) Requests for photos of dead children. See above. And then seek professional help, because you're fucked up. These items are unavailable to the public; exempt from FOIA requests; and in violation of Amendment 14 of the US Constitution, Article 1 Section 8b of the Connecticut State Constriction, and Connecticut Public Act # 13-311.
5) Asking questions that have already been answered/making claims that have already been debunked. If you want to have a discussion, don't make it painfully obvious that you haven't bothered to 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 fairly well.

Leave a Reply

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

Post Navigation