The claim that Sandy Hook Elementary School’s parking lot was not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and as such is further evidence that the school was non-operational in December of 2012 isn’t a new one, but it is relatively minor, which is one of the reasons I haven’t pursued it as doggedly as usual. It’s not that I haven’t tried, it’s just that the experts I’ve reached out to over the years – and I like to try and speak with actual experts whenever possible, rather than speculate wildly – never really bothered to get back to me. But I’ve never stopped looking for definitive answers and now, with some help from the New England ADA Center, I finally have some. My persistence – or ability to profoundly annoy, depending on who are you – finally paid off.

Let’s start by taking a look at the actual claims that have made about the school’s lot by some of the usual suspects…

On page six of “Nobody Died At Sandy Hook: It Was A FEMA Drill To Promote Gun Control”, James Fetzer writes:

Here is a photograph of the school taken the day of the shooting. Notice that the handicapped parking areas are not properly demarcated with white paint and blue markings. There are no ‘above grade signs with white letting against a blue background’ that bear the words ‘handicapped parking permit required’ and ‘violators will be fined’, which means that Sandy Hook Elementary School was non-ADA compliant.

Later, on page thirty-two, “Dr. Eowyn” (aka Maria Hsia Chang) expands on that same claim quite a bit, writing:

Although the CNN image on the next page shows a wheelchair symbol painted on a parking space closest to the school’s front door, it is not painted in the now-familiar blue and white colors that have become ubiquitous certainly by 2012.

As an example, an August 22, 2011 article by Debbie Moore for My Parking Sign stated:

Americans with Disabilities Act signed in 1990 … details guidelines for every public area that needs to provide with ample accessibility options for the disabled….

ADA states the following rules that need to be followed while posting accessibility signs in designated areas –

The international symbol of accessibility should be posted on all accessible parking spaces marking the reserved spot. The accessibility symbol is the well-known picture of a person using a wheelchair on top of a blue background.

Van-accessible parking spaces to have additional ‘text’ or ‘sign’ below the accessibility symbol to mark the van-accessible area specifically.

Signs should be placed at such a height (at least 60 inches above surface) that they do not get obscured by any parked vehicles or other obstructions. ADA handicap parking signs (commonly known as Access Signs) posted must be viewable from the drivers’ seat of the vehicle and located right in view of parking spaces.

But aerial images of SHES’s parking lot, including the CNN image, show no blue-and-white signage for designated handicap parking spaces, which would make the school in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the subsequent ADA Amendments Act of 2008 that broadened the meaning of disabilities.

Fetzer revisits the claim one final time on page thirty-nine:

For those who are less familiar with the background of the Sandy Hook hoax, here is a summary of key aspects, which include ample proof that the school had been closed by 2008, which included that it was not compliant with Connecticut laws implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act, where there is a complete absence of the familiar white-and-blue parking areas and corresponding signage

Let’s start with the idea that the parking spaces themselves must be painted white and blue specifically. While Fetzer provides no source for his claim on either page, Chang’s is, which is – you guessed it – a website that sells parking signs. Why would a former professor cite a niche retail website rather than the actual, original ADA standards, which are easily found on the ADA website? Probably because they make no reference whatsoever to paint colors when describing either the symbols of accessibility (section 4.30.7) or parking spaces (section 4.6.3), which would explain why almost none of the handicapped parking spaces located at Newtown’s public schools were painted in such a manner:

Hawley School: white paint only.

Head O’Meadow: yellow paint only.

Reed Intermediate: white paint only.

Newtown Middle School: white paint only.

Newtown High School is the only school in the entire district to have had blue and white handicapped parking spaces back in 2012, and that’s only after they added an additional lot (and renovated their side lot) in 2010:

Satellite photos taken before renovations completed show Newtown High School’s handicapped parking spots were, like Hawley, Reed, and Newtown Middle School, simply painted white:

Are we expected to believe that only one of Newtown’s eight public schools – including all four elementary schools and both intermediate/middle schools – were non-compliant in 2012, and therefore non-operational? What about the former Chalk Hill Middle School, the building the Sandy Hook School students are alleged to have been secretly moved to prior to the shooting? Surely their parking lot has blue and white parking spaces, and is therefore is ADA compliant:

Ah, nuts.

So the blue and white paint claim is a total fabrication on the part of Fetzer and Chang, confirmed as such not only by my own research but by an ADA trainer and information and outreach specialist from the aforementioned New England ADA Center who told me via e-mail:

“The ADA Standards for Accessible Design do not specify the color of the lines and markings at accessible parking spaces.”

But what about the signs? The above satellite photos aren’t as useful in this case, though if I were to make a guess based on visible shadows (of lack thereof), there do not appear to be any signs posted at Head O’Meadow or Reed Intermediate. Luckily we don’t need to guess based on shadows as the same New England ADA Center employee mentioned earlier was kind enough to also shed some light on the actual requirements for handicapped parking signage:

“If the parking lot was built or has been paved or restriped since January 26, 1992, accessible parking spaces that comply with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design are required. The ADA Standards for Accessible Design do not specify the color of the lines and markings at accessible parking spaces. White is permitted. The Standards specify a sign on a post that is 60” min. to the bottom of the sign.

If the last work on the parking lot was completed before the ADA went into effect on January 26, 1992, only state law that was in effect at that time would apply. We do not have information on Connecticut requirements for parking lots that far back.”

There is no evidence that I could find that the Sandy Hook School parking lot has been paved or restriped since January, 1992. However, if you look at satellite photos taken of the school between August, 2010 and March, 2012, you’ll notice that stripes were added to the fire lane. Does that count as restriping? Not according to our ADA trainer and information specialist, who writes:

“Striping a previously unstriped yet existing fire zone by itself would not be considered restriping a parking lot.”

So there is no proof that the parking lot at Sandy Hook Elementary School was not ADA compliant in December of 2012. Or ever for that matter. It’s a silly claim to make in the first place as deniers like Fetzer, Chang, and Wolfgang Halbig do not dispute that the school was open and fully operational prior to 2008. And if signs are required without exception by the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (which went into effect in January of 1992) , then they tacitly acknowledge that the school would have been non-compliant for seventeen years. What’s four more at that point?

Of course that’s not the case. Even if it were, and the school had been non-compliant, what exactly would that mean? Can an elementary school be in violation of the ADA and remain open? A two-year federal investigation found that 83% of New York City’s elementary schools were in violation of the ADA, but obviously they did not shut them all down. So I once again asked the expert what non-compliance actually means in real life:

“An individual could file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice or the Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education. The agency would review the complaint. In a settlement, the district would agree to fix the identified issues, and there could be a fine. A school would not be closed due to the violation.

8 Thoughts on “Sandy Hook’s Parking Lot And The ADA

  1. Fetzer did have a source for the signs on his blog a couple of years ago.

    No mention of the blue and white being required for the parking lot though.

    In the Chalk Hill Photo there is definitely no shadow where there would be a sign, Wonder how Fetzer will explain that?

    • He won’t explain it. If he’s asked about it he’ll say something along the lines of “We may have gotten some minor details wrong but the evidence over-all points to a conspiracy”. He’s used the same shtick for years.

  2. John Doe on November 3, 2020 at 6:31 am said:

    To the people of this blog –

    Frankly, I think the whole idea that Sandy Hook was fake is insane and I’d like to believe that my theory is justly supported by the fact this post is about how parking lots are somehow connected to a mass shooting. But, I’d like to still try to be accepting of why all of you feel the way you do so bear with me here. Everything I’m about to say is true, believe it if you have any faith in humanity at all, or disregard it if you’re truly ignorant to hearing the word of others. I grew up in Newtown and was a student in the district when the shooting happened (I never went to Sandy Hook specifically). All of those children and adults were real people – that are now dead. I knew many of the families personally, and to be quite honest, really don’t understand how people still believe this was anything other than a horrific AND VERY REAL event. If you ask anyone from Newtown if it happened, and believe me it’s not a small town you’ll find someone, you will get a resounding yes and likely a slap in the face. The pain we felt that day was real and nothing was faked. Adam Lanza was the one and only shooter and is now dead. I blame this entire incident on Schools and Parents for not being conscious of the mental health of their peers and believe that while guns need to be restricted, they’re not the root of the problem. Lastly, I’d like to share a quick disclaimer that I’m not with any media or organization or some bullshit I’m just stoned and trying to help share my views and experiences with all of yours in order to help the affected families I know stop feeling pain from disbelievers and conspiracists accusing them of lies.

    Please feel free to ask me questions, I know literally everything about this shooting I was practically there.

    Some facts I can share with you about Newtown to help prove my story while protecting my identity:
    -The General store by the town hall has $1.75 egg sandwiches in the morning. They’re delicious.
    -The old town hall (edmond town hall) is now a movie theater and has showings for like $3
    -The state park on lake lillononah has some great rope swings and fishing spots if anyones into that
    -Our flagpole (in the center of Newtown) was built for some historical reason but is basically now known for the sheer amount of car accidents it causes.
    -The booth library is one of the older buildings in town and has an attic full of belongings of Mary Hawley – a wealthy widow who gave alot of money to the town around the founding. (Only reason I know this was from an elementary school field trip it’s not really relevant)

    • Shill Murray on November 3, 2020 at 4:41 pm said:

      Hi, “John”. Thank you for the comment and for making yourself available to questions. I appreciate it.

      Maybe I’ve misread, but I want to make sure you understand that I, as this site’s sole author and administrator, do not believe the shooting was faked. Like most level-headed folks, I understand that it happened, and that Adam Lazna was the lone offender. I’ve supported this conclusion by studying the available evidence in depth. I think that’s reflected in my work here.

      Speaking of, the purpose of this site has always been to investigate and debunk all of the conspiracy theories surrounding the shooting (and sadly there are plenty). I’m not sure if you read this particular entry in its entirety or just skimmed, but the reason I’ve written about the school’s parking lot, as silly as that seems, is because many conspiracy theorists have argued that it was not ADA compliant in 2012 and is therefore further proof that the school itself could not have been open when the shooting took place. Of course this is just one false claim of many, but again what I’m trying to do here is fact check everything (or at least almost everything), no matter how inconsequential. Though, to be fair, it was at least significant enough to be included in Fetzer’s wretched book (which I have also fact-checked, cover to cover).

  3. YOUR NOBODY on December 29, 2020 at 5:34 am said:


    • Shill Murray on February 5, 2021 at 11:07 am said:

      You’ve clearly read the comment policy, so maybe try actually abiding by it next time.

      If you still can’t understand why there’s no gore in the crime scene photos, feel free to consult the report’s redaction index. Or just look for one of my hundred or so previous comments on this exact subject. Not that it matters much as no one is actually naive enough to think that even the fully unredacted materials will satiate you goons. Of course they’ll immediately be dismissed as “fake”, which is what y’all have done with literally everything else for the past eight years. Like when Allan Powell and Kelley Watt hilariously claimed that the pool of blood on Nancy Lanza’s sheets was actually “pomegranate juice”. So you think the police and these parents are going to somehow circumvent the law and release these terrible photos just so a bunch of Internet whackadoos can claim that they’re “dummies”? Please.

      P.S. – Nobody gives a shit if you’re a big enough boy to look at photos of dead children. Luckily, it’s not about you. Get over yourself.

      P.P.S. – Out of curiosity, are you trying to suggest – in all caps, of course – that you are my nobody, or did you simply confuse “your” and “you’re”?

      • trev on April 5, 2021 at 6:25 am said:

        it funny how this debunking site has literally know hard facts at all and relies on insults and conjecture to imply validity, oh and pointing out one or two peoples mistakes and ridiculous claims does not imply that every person who actually found real evidence that the event did not happen at least the way it has been described, all adhere to those silly statements, I suggest reading many more books and improving your ability to think before throwing shade at people. If you like I could tutor you on formal logic, maybe some physics so you would not be so ignorant.

        • Shill Murray on April 21, 2021 at 3:21 pm said:

          Things had been so quiet around here for so long. It was really nice! But then I’m bombarded by three separate comments from you (maybe learn to self-edit before you hit that reply button, my dude), none of which are saying anything new or interesting or raise specific issues with the site’s material. So I’m going to do what you should’ve done from the onset: condense your thoughts into a single bout of binary diarrhea. And then I’m going to give you the business.

          Well, I guess I should blindly believe you and disregard all of the 100% irrefutable SCIENTIFIC DATA AND LAB RESULTS, that conclusively prove Adam Lanza did not fire ANY of the weapons found at SHES, INCLUDING the 10mm glock and sig.

          Gotta love this absolutely brilliant strategy of dismissing all of the official documentation except for the stuff that you mistakenly believe supports your claim. Also, if this were some sort of coverup, which I have to assume is what you’re suggesting, do you really think that they wouldn’t bother or remember to falsify the DNA reports in order to implicate Adam? Get real.

          So which lab reports are you referring to? Because supplemental DNA report III (CFS 1200704597, 00146690) names Adam as a contributor to the DNA profiles on the handle, trigger, and grip area on the slide of the Glock; the handle and grip area on the slide of the Sig Sauer; and on the 9mm Mec-Gar magazine. It also states that he cannot be eliminated as a contributor to the DNA profile from the Glock magazine as well as the trigger of the Sig Sauer.

          Supplemental DNA report IV (1200704597, 00146690) names Adam as the source of the DNA profile on the 9mm Mec-Gar magazine as well as the taped magazines. He is included as a contributor to the DNA profile from the Glock 10mm magazine, and he cannot be eliminated as a contributor to the DNS profile from the 9mm Sig Sauer P226 magazine, the Glock 10mm magazine, and the cartridges from the magazine.

          This is to say nothing of the fact that all of the guns recovered from Sandy Hook were purchased by and registered to one person: Nancy Lanza. That of course includes the now infamous Bushmaster (which Adam had posed for photos with and the instruction manual for which was found in his closet), which was found next to Adam and ballistics testing linked to all of the bullets, fragments, and shell casings that were recovered from the school and tested. Then of course there were the weapons and ammunition physically located on Adam’s body: eight magazines in his vest, the Sig Sauer in his left pants pocket, one live round of 5.56mm ammunition (like the kind fired by the Bushmaster) in his left cargo pocket, one shotgun shell in his right cargo pocket, two magazines in his left rear pocket, and two more in his right rear pocket. 253 live rounds of ammunition total. So I’d really, really love to hear who fired those guns, if it wasn’t Adam.

          having absolutely NO EVIDENCE of ANY MASSACRE

          Other than mountains of official documentation including death certificates, burial permits, dozens of statements from eyewitness to said massacre, etc., I guess you’re right.

          But wait – didn’t you literally just cite the “100% irrefutable” lab results (sorry – LAB RESULTS, all caps)? And now you’re telling me there is no evidence of any massacre? What exactly do you believe is contained within supplemental DNA report VI? Who do you think those twenty-six DNA samples – one for each victim located at the school – belong to? When that same report states that Lauren Rousseau is “included as a contributor to the DNA profile” on the pistol grip, shoulder stock, feed area and side of the Bushmaster’s magazine, how do you think that happened? What about Dawn Hochsprung “being the source of the DNA profile” on a 10mm cartridge? Or Rachel D’Avino “included as contributors to the DNA profile” on the PMAG magazine? Again, you yourself introduced these “irrefutable” lab results.

          or crime scene photos or videos of any blood or excessive bullet holes in the walls

          “Excessive” is bit subjective, isn’t it? How many bullet holes are to be expected and how many would satisfy you? Don’t bother answering; it’s a rhetorical question. We all know nothing is ever enough.

          As I’ve stated elsewhere, blood can be seen on pages 61, 71, 73, 161, 365, 428, 473, 475, 495, 622-624, 626-627, 636, 643, 663, 665 of Walkley’s scene photos. Bullet holes and bullet damage can be found on pages 54-61, 404-431, 448-454, 513, 622-624, and 626-630 of the same document. The really gory stuff has been redacted, as explained by the state’s redaction index, which plainly states that any “visual image depicting a homicide victim” is exempt under statue CGS § 1-210(b)(27).

          We do not need photos of the dead children nor or most researchers insisting on that no matter how much you push that lie out

          You still call yourselves “researchers”. That’s adorable!

          one can exclude photos of the actual deceased and still include ACTUAL relevant crimes scene photos

          Relevant to whom? Any remaining Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists? Why would anyone on their right mind kowtow to y’all? Anyone with half a brain knows you’re just going to dismiss whatever’s released as “fake”, so why bother putting that kind of awful material out there? Look at the large pool of blood visible on Nancy Lanza’s bed in multiple crime scene photos. What happened with that? It was dismissed as “fake”. Why would excessive amounts of blood at the school be treated any differently?

          video of adam shooting the front glass etc.

          Shouldn’t a “researcher”, particularly one as brilliant and learned as yourself, know that no such video has ever existed? It’s been discussed at length here, on this site that you’re commenting on, and that you claim is nothing but “insults”.

          There is no Valid reason whatsoever to redact or not release these images.

          There are, in fact, at least four very “valid” reasons: CGS § 1-210(b)(3)(B), CGS § 1-210(b)(27), Amendment 14 of the US Constitution, and Article 1 Section 8b of the Connecticut State Constitution. I’m not sure “because a bunch of Internet conspiracy theorists want to see them” is much of a rebuttal.

          Do actual real research before spouting nonsense drivel on the internet with a false sense of righteousness.

          Oof. This is the kind of cringey shit you see from teenagers who are trying their damnedest to sound smart. Truly embarrassing, particularly because “nonsense” and “drivel” are synonyms.

          you clearly have very limited intelligence and no real understanding of formal logic or debates, you makes ridiculous, blind assertions on nothing at all and simply insult anyone who disagrees with you as if you are an authority on anything except being a keyboard warrior, you have no valid points and bring nothing constructive to the conversation, you truly are a shill.

          How are you going to accuse me of insulting anyone who disagrees with me and then, in the same bloated sentence, call me a “keyboard warrior” (what?) and a “shill” (good one – definitely never heard that before)?

          it funny how this debunking site has literally know hard facts at all and relies on insults and conjecture to imply validity.

          I can’t even bother to begin to be insulted by this when the claim that this site is nothing but “insults and conjecture” is so demonstrably false that I have to wonder if you bothered to read anything at all before getting yourself worked up enough to vomit out three nearly-identical comments. If the site were mostly conjecture (or is it mostly insults? You weren’t clear), one would think it would be incredibly easy to include at least one particularly egregious example. And yet you’ve failed to do even that.

          oh and pointing out one or two peoples mistakes and ridiculous claims does not imply that every person who actually found real evidence that the event did not happen at least the way it has been described, all adhere to those silly statements

          You mean mistakes such as not knowing how to spell “no”?

          Yes, I am well aware that there are many “flavors” of Sandy Hook denier (although I think they all taste like shit). I’ve acknowledged as much, multiple times. I know a bunch of y’all don’t even agree with one another and are quick to eat your own as soon as someone is debunked or otherwise exposed as an absolute idiot, which is honestly hilarious but besides the point. If you hate being even tangentially associated with doofuses like Halbig and Fetzer that much, maybe it’s time to choose a new hobby.

          I suggest reading many more books and improving your ability to think before throwing shade at people.

          Yet you’ve provided no recommendations.

          If you like I could tutor you on formal logic, maybe some physics so you would not be so ignorant.

          Yet you’ve failed to cite a single “physics” error.

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