“Nobody Died At Sandy Hook”
Chapter Eleven
By: James Fetzer and Kelley Watt
When I saw that the title of this chapter was “Are Sandy Hook skeptics delusional with ‘twisted minds’?”, I thought “Great! This will be the easiest chapter yet! I’ll answer ‘yes’ – or ‘yes, of course’ if I’m feeling particularly chatty – publish, and move on!” But it turns out that there are actual claims being made here and while the majority of them are rehashed from earlier chapters, a couple of new ones rear their ugly head… heads?
Ol’ Jimmy kicks things off by quoting himself, which is always a bold move.
Page 178
Fetzer and Watt revisit the claim that none of the bullet fragments could be matched to the Bushmaster, which is something I’ve already covered in Chapter Eight, Part Two. Again, while the bullet jacket surfaces were severely damaged and corroded due to shoddy firearm maintenance, they had no problem linking all of the recovered shell casings to the Bushmaster. From the official report:
These two bozos also make the claim that, “Under these circumstances, it would have been impossible for the alleged shooter, Adam Lanza, to have been convicted in a properly conducted court of law for his alleged offense”. This is, of course, complete lunacy. Ignoring the fact that the shell casings were forensically linked to the Bushmaster, Adam’s clothing and weapons both contained blood spatter from his victims:
Document 00122048.pdf from the supplemental reports (CHS 1200704597) catalogs the numerous blood stains on each item of clothing.
These two knuckleheads also dust off the goofy claim about Shannon Hicks evacuation photographs for what I believe may be the third time. They even offer up their comparison photos again in such incredible resolution that you’ll believe you were there yourself:
Seriously. That’s how they are published in this book. And that’s blown up to 137%! The photographs presented here are so small and so blurry (possibly intentionally) that Fetzer and Watt could convince their readers that these photos depict a Sasquatch. The truth is that these children look nothing alike and are wearing completely different clothing. I dove far deeper into this claim in Chapter Five, Part Two, if you’re interested.
Page 179
Fetzer and Watt claim that a real evacuation would have unquestionably resulted in numerous photographs showing hundreds of students in the parking lot. There are multiple problems with this suggestion: 1) The children were evacuated in groups — not simultaneously — and through multiple exit points. The scenario proposed here, in which hundreds and hundreds of students would have exited the front door at roughly the same time, simply did not happen. And no one other than deniers have ever suggested that it has. 2) Video evidence of the evacuations has been redacted due to the fact that it shows a large number of minors, and releasing such information violates Amendment 14 of the US Constitution as well as Article 1 Section 8b of the Connecticut Constitution.
Also:
Adam Lanzan, huh? Tell me more about the highly educated researchers who wrote this book, James!
“Search for any parent displaying real grief. It’s not there.” pg. 181
Yeah, no “real” grief here, scumbag.
It’s also here on page 181 that we get to witness an extremely popular denier tactic in action: after declaring a lack of publicly available death certificates as evidence of a cover-up, James Fetzer is presented with a copy of victim Noah Pozner’s official death certificate. But it is conveniently declared a “fake”, which is a pretty serious accusation to level against Lenny Pozner (who released the certificate to the public) if not the entire state of Connecticut, depending on the implication. Lenny Pozner, in case it isn’t obvious, is Noah’s father. Confusingly, Fetzer and Watt occasionally place Lenny’s name in quotations, suggesting that’s not his real name, but never extends the same indignity to his son. Mr. Pozner is such a popular target for denier lies and harassment he engages pieces of shit like Fetzer more so than any other Sandy Hook parent.
When it comes to actually explaining why he believes the death certificate is a forgery, Fetzer prefers to let a couple of goofs named Dennis Cimino and Bob Sims do the heavy lifting for him. Bob Sims writes:
“I am rather surprised, according to the copy you posted, that any branch of government was still using typewriters at all, when computers can do it so much better.” pg. 182
Why would this surprise anyone? From the book “The Typewriter Revolution”, published in 2015:
“For starters, can you see any reason for the government typist to change the ball back and forth on the IBM machine I must assume was being used” pg. 182
This is a pretty asinine assumption to make. Of course a far more reasonable explanation would be that it was done on multiple typewriters. Since death certificates can be completed in multiple sittings (if certain information is not immediately known) and by multiple people (medical personnel, funeral directors, medical certifiers, and finally registrars), it should even be expected. The entire process is outlined in the CDC’s “Funeral Directors’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting” which breaks down the different items on a death certificate and who they are to be completed by. Ultimately, these items are pretty evenly split between the medical certifier and the funeral director; the former provide information regarding when time and date of death, cause and manner of death, and autopsy information, while the latter are responsible for providing personal information (name, DOB, residence, etc) as well as place of death. The medical examiner will then add additional information regarding the cause of death before filing it with the state registrar. There’s absolutely nothing anywhere that says that these people cannot use disparate typewriters.
Looking at Noah’s death certificate — and even comparing it to that of Adam Lanza — you’ll notice that the information represented by different typefaces is broken up very logically. For instance, all personal information is one typeface, suggesting it was all entered by one person: the funeral director. But information regarding cause of death, manner of death, etc, is in another. This information would have been entered by a medical certifier.
“For example, look at the very top in Box 3, where the date is posted. Why is that type clearly smaller than the rest of the page?” pg. 182
Yes, it’s smaller than some of the other type, because it was done on a different typewriter. But the size of the type in box 3 is entirely consistent with other instances of this type (presumably entered by the medical certifier), as seen in boxes 37, 38, and 49. Most of the items entered with this typeface are letters, so there isn’t a whole lot to compare it to:
“Now look at the capital ‘A’ in Box 12 for Residence (Alpine). It is identical to the capital ‘A’ in Box 22 for Mailing Address (Alpine). It is also identical to the capital ‘A’ in Box 33 for Funeral Home.” pg. 182
Yes, this is correct. All of those items were entered with the same typewriter. Again, all of these items can logically be grouped together and would have been entered by the funeral director.
“Note that the capital ‘A’ in question above in three different boxes has a small flag at its pinnacle. Compare that to the capital ‘A’, without the small flag in Box 4, Time of Death, Box 26, City or Town, Box 27, County of Death, and Box 39, Time Pronounced, and in Box 46, Time of Injury.” pg. 182
Yes, this type is different from the items entered by the funeral director. However, these five “A”s all match one another and are items that would have been entered by the medical certifier.
“Compare Box 1, ‘Noah,’ with Box 7, ‘November,’ and you will clearly see that the spacing between the ‘N’ and the ‘o’ is quite different.” pg. 182
Yes, the kerning in box 1 is different from the kerning in all other items. It’s also crooked while the other items are not. So what? Maybe they typed his name and then, realizing it was a bit wonky, fixed it. There’s no explanation as to why this is indicative of a hoax. If the document were forged, wouldn’t it make infinitely more sense for them to have banged it out in one shot, on one typewriter/computer?
“Compare Box 1, the ‘N’ in ‘Noah,’ with Box 26, the ‘N’ in ‘SANDY.’ They are clearly different.” pg. 182
Yes, they are completely different type, produced by two completely different typewriters. Box one would have been entered by the funeral directory while box twenty-six would have been entered by the medical certifier.
“Compare Box 1, ‘Samuel,’ with Box 11, ‘Sandy,’ and again, the spacing between the ‘S’ and the “a” is clearly not the same.” pg. 182
Second verse, same as the first.
“Compare the name “Pozner” in Box 1 with “Pozner” in Box 20, clearly not the same.“ pg. 183
Same exact type, same exact size, different kerning. Again, so what?
“Moreover, Noah Pozner’s ‘death certificate’ states that ‘No autopsy was performed’, while the ‘official report’ states, ‘All the victims were given autopsies’. We know they cannot both be true. It would be tempting to presume that one of them is accurate and the other a mistake. But insofar as they are both predicated on the presupposition Noah Pozner and 19 other children actually died at Sandy Hook, they both appear to be false.” pg. 183
The death certificate does in fact say that no autopsy was performed, and that’s true; the Pozner family chose not to have an autopsy performed on Noah due to religious reasons. And Alison Peters does state in the official report (Book 9, 00274772.pdf) that “I received the autopsy reports for the twenty-six (26) victims of the Sandy Hook School Shooting”. But simply mentioning the potential discrepancy is where master researchers Fetzer and Watt leave off. After all, they actually answered their own questions and pursued the truth, it would mean the end of their little scam.
Unsurprisingly, Lenny Pozner was also curious about this potential mix-up, so he crafted an e-mail to Dr. James Gill, the Chief Medical Examiner for the state of Connecticut. In his reply, Dr. Gill’s wrote:
Pages 183 through 186 are submitted by a woman named “Kelly”. I have no idea whether this is the “Kelley Watt” credited with contributing to this chapter as the names are spelled differently, but this is the 2nd large chunk of this chapter written by someone other than James Fetzer. It’s a hell of a scam he’s got going here.
“Kelly” describes five weeks worth of conversations she had with Lenny Pozner. While providing zero evidence (as per usual), James Fetzer suggests that this may actually be someone playing the part of Lenny while also having unprecedented access to family photos and the like. What’s so odd about this story to me, as a normal person, is that “Kelly” continually asks Mr. Pozner to provide her with intensely personal items for no reason other than the fact that she doesn’t believe his son was murdered. But when Lenny graciously shares every piece of requested information, she immediately dismisses it as “fake”. And I guess we’re supposed to leave with the impression that Lenny is the bad guy here because he finally reaches his breaking point and turns on this awful piece of human garbage after she admits to making a donation to his charity with the sole intention of joining a class-action lawsuit against it at a later point.
As one would expect, a couple of patently false claims are made during the course of this story:
“The following Monday he sent me an email telling me to check my inbox and sure enough, much to my surprise, he had posted all the things I asked for on his lenpoz.com website. However, the photo was not of his wife in the hospital, nonetheless, he did post a photo of Veronique with the two newborns in her arms. The death certificate I believe stated he was ‘never married’ which I thought odd.“ pg. 184
The death certificate says no such thing. Furthermore, it lists both parents as having the last name “Pozner”.
“Speaking of his wife I asked him about Veronique working for the State Department in some capacity to disarm the country of Switzerland and he told me she never worked for the State Department but was a nurse, to which I asked for her nursing certificate (which he sent). Since Veronique’s mother worked for the UN, I decided to call the office in the US Embassy and disguised myself as a foreigner to ask for Mrs. Veronique Haller. I was told that ‘she had left her post in 2013’ (after she had been discovered working there for gun control in Switzerland).“ pg. 184
SandyHookFacts.com has this one covered. Needless to say, it’s complete bullshit.
“Meanwhile, Noah’s mother has claimed that she has released a photograph of his body. But no one I know can find it. So where is it?” pg. 186
More bullshit; Veronique has never said that. SandyHookFacts.com covered this one as well and just in case you don’t feel like scrolling all the way to the bottom of the linked article, the short version is that “Kelly” is confusing a comment made by the mother of Emmett Till with Veronique Pozner, which is a pretty, pretty stupid thing to do.
Chapter Eleven
By: James Fetzer and Kelley Watt
When I saw that the title of this chapter was “Are Sandy Hook skeptics delusional with ‘twisted minds’?”, I thought “Great! This will be the easiest chapter yet! I’ll answer ‘yes’ – or ‘yes, of course’ if I’m feeling particularly chatty – publish, and move on!” But it turns out that there are actual claims being made here and while the majority of them are rehashed from earlier chapters, a couple of new ones rear their ugly head… heads?
Ol’ Jimmy kicks things off by quoting himself, which is always a bold move.
Page 178
Fetzer and Watt revisit the claim that none of the bullet fragments could be matched to the Bushmaster, which is something I’ve already covered in Chapter Eight, Part Two. Again, while the bullet jacket surfaces were severely damaged and corroded due to shoddy firearm maintenance, they had no problem linking all of the recovered shell casings to the Bushmaster. From the official report:
The Bushmaster rifle was found in classroom 10. The Bushmaster was tested and found to be operable without malfunction. All of the 5.56 mm shell casings from SHES that were tested were found to have been fired from this rifle. All of the bullets and fragments, recovered from SHES and the OCME that were tested, with the exception of those mentioned immediately below, are consistent with having been fired from the Bushmaster rifle. They could not have been fired from the Saiga-12, the Glock 20 or the Sig Sauer P226.Furthermore, if the event were staged (it wasn’t) and the official report bogus (it isn’t), then that means authorities had full control over the narrative. And if that were the case, why would they intentionally fill the report with such confusing verbiage? Why include something capable of raising these types of questions and concerns? It makes absolutely no sense.
These two bozos also make the claim that, “Under these circumstances, it would have been impossible for the alleged shooter, Adam Lanza, to have been convicted in a properly conducted court of law for his alleged offense”. This is, of course, complete lunacy. Ignoring the fact that the shell casings were forensically linked to the Bushmaster, Adam’s clothing and weapons both contained blood spatter from his victims:
Document 00122048.pdf from the supplemental reports (CHS 1200704597) catalogs the numerous blood stains on each item of clothing.
These two knuckleheads also dust off the goofy claim about Shannon Hicks evacuation photographs for what I believe may be the third time. They even offer up their comparison photos again in such incredible resolution that you’ll believe you were there yourself:
Seriously. That’s how they are published in this book. And that’s blown up to 137%! The photographs presented here are so small and so blurry (possibly intentionally) that Fetzer and Watt could convince their readers that these photos depict a Sasquatch. The truth is that these children look nothing alike and are wearing completely different clothing. I dove far deeper into this claim in Chapter Five, Part Two, if you’re interested.
Page 179
Fetzer and Watt claim that a real evacuation would have unquestionably resulted in numerous photographs showing hundreds of students in the parking lot. There are multiple problems with this suggestion: 1) The children were evacuated in groups — not simultaneously — and through multiple exit points. The scenario proposed here, in which hundreds and hundreds of students would have exited the front door at roughly the same time, simply did not happen. And no one other than deniers have ever suggested that it has. 2) Video evidence of the evacuations has been redacted due to the fact that it shows a large number of minors, and releasing such information violates Amendment 14 of the US Constitution as well as Article 1 Section 8b of the Connecticut Constitution.
Also:
Adam Lanzan, huh? Tell me more about the highly educated researchers who wrote this book, James!
“Search for any parent displaying real grief. It’s not there.” pg. 181
Yeah, no “real” grief here, scumbag.
It’s also here on page 181 that we get to witness an extremely popular denier tactic in action: after declaring a lack of publicly available death certificates as evidence of a cover-up, James Fetzer is presented with a copy of victim Noah Pozner’s official death certificate. But it is conveniently declared a “fake”, which is a pretty serious accusation to level against Lenny Pozner (who released the certificate to the public) if not the entire state of Connecticut, depending on the implication. Lenny Pozner, in case it isn’t obvious, is Noah’s father. Confusingly, Fetzer and Watt occasionally place Lenny’s name in quotations, suggesting that’s not his real name, but never extends the same indignity to his son. Mr. Pozner is such a popular target for denier lies and harassment he engages pieces of shit like Fetzer more so than any other Sandy Hook parent.
When it comes to actually explaining why he believes the death certificate is a forgery, Fetzer prefers to let a couple of goofs named Dennis Cimino and Bob Sims do the heavy lifting for him. Bob Sims writes:
“I am rather surprised, according to the copy you posted, that any branch of government was still using typewriters at all, when computers can do it so much better.” pg. 182
Why would this surprise anyone? From the book “The Typewriter Revolution”, published in 2015:
Why do typewriters still get made at all?Even the Wall Street Journal published an article titled “Death Keeps Typewriters Alive, Clacking” back in 2013 regarding the use of typewriters by funeral homes. The CDC even mentions typewriters in the most recent revision to their “Funeral Directors’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting”:
Because there are some niches in business and government where they still get used. Typewriters fill out forms and envelopes in a variety of situations. Police may type up paperwork such as reports, property receipts, and warrants. The NYPD and seventeen other New York City agencies use over a thousand typewriters today, to the amazement and scorn of many. (“They still have a function and your belief that typewriters have gone away is just erroneous,” said pugnacious Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2012. “It’s like books. Some people, believe it or not, still read books in paper.”) Prison inmates, forbidden to use computers, use typewriters with transparent shells that can’t hide contraband. Libraries type labels. Funeral homes type official death certificates. You may find typewriters lurking at hospitals, banks, law officers, or dentist’s offices. Even spies and diplomats use typewriters for sensitive documents, to avoid electronic theft and snooping.
Make the entry legible. Use a computer printer with high resolution, typewriter with good black ribbon and clean keys, or print legibly using permanent black ink.And Richard Polt — the author of “The Typewriter Revolution” — wasn’t kidding about the proliferation of typewriters in New York government: here’s an article about it from the New York Post.
“For starters, can you see any reason for the government typist to change the ball back and forth on the IBM machine I must assume was being used” pg. 182
This is a pretty asinine assumption to make. Of course a far more reasonable explanation would be that it was done on multiple typewriters. Since death certificates can be completed in multiple sittings (if certain information is not immediately known) and by multiple people (medical personnel, funeral directors, medical certifiers, and finally registrars), it should even be expected. The entire process is outlined in the CDC’s “Funeral Directors’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting” which breaks down the different items on a death certificate and who they are to be completed by. Ultimately, these items are pretty evenly split between the medical certifier and the funeral director; the former provide information regarding when time and date of death, cause and manner of death, and autopsy information, while the latter are responsible for providing personal information (name, DOB, residence, etc) as well as place of death. The medical examiner will then add additional information regarding the cause of death before filing it with the state registrar. There’s absolutely nothing anywhere that says that these people cannot use disparate typewriters.
Looking at Noah’s death certificate — and even comparing it to that of Adam Lanza — you’ll notice that the information represented by different typefaces is broken up very logically. For instance, all personal information is one typeface, suggesting it was all entered by one person: the funeral director. But information regarding cause of death, manner of death, etc, is in another. This information would have been entered by a medical certifier.
“For example, look at the very top in Box 3, where the date is posted. Why is that type clearly smaller than the rest of the page?” pg. 182
Yes, it’s smaller than some of the other type, because it was done on a different typewriter. But the size of the type in box 3 is entirely consistent with other instances of this type (presumably entered by the medical certifier), as seen in boxes 37, 38, and 49. Most of the items entered with this typeface are letters, so there isn’t a whole lot to compare it to:
“Now look at the capital ‘A’ in Box 12 for Residence (Alpine). It is identical to the capital ‘A’ in Box 22 for Mailing Address (Alpine). It is also identical to the capital ‘A’ in Box 33 for Funeral Home.” pg. 182
Yes, this is correct. All of those items were entered with the same typewriter. Again, all of these items can logically be grouped together and would have been entered by the funeral director.
“Note that the capital ‘A’ in question above in three different boxes has a small flag at its pinnacle. Compare that to the capital ‘A’, without the small flag in Box 4, Time of Death, Box 26, City or Town, Box 27, County of Death, and Box 39, Time Pronounced, and in Box 46, Time of Injury.” pg. 182
Yes, this type is different from the items entered by the funeral director. However, these five “A”s all match one another and are items that would have been entered by the medical certifier.
“Compare Box 1, ‘Noah,’ with Box 7, ‘November,’ and you will clearly see that the spacing between the ‘N’ and the ‘o’ is quite different.” pg. 182
Yes, the kerning in box 1 is different from the kerning in all other items. It’s also crooked while the other items are not. So what? Maybe they typed his name and then, realizing it was a bit wonky, fixed it. There’s no explanation as to why this is indicative of a hoax. If the document were forged, wouldn’t it make infinitely more sense for them to have banged it out in one shot, on one typewriter/computer?
“Compare Box 1, the ‘N’ in ‘Noah,’ with Box 26, the ‘N’ in ‘SANDY.’ They are clearly different.” pg. 182
Yes, they are completely different type, produced by two completely different typewriters. Box one would have been entered by the funeral directory while box twenty-six would have been entered by the medical certifier.
“Compare Box 1, ‘Samuel,’ with Box 11, ‘Sandy,’ and again, the spacing between the ‘S’ and the “a” is clearly not the same.” pg. 182
Second verse, same as the first.
“Compare the name “Pozner” in Box 1 with “Pozner” in Box 20, clearly not the same.“ pg. 183
Same exact type, same exact size, different kerning. Again, so what?
“Moreover, Noah Pozner’s ‘death certificate’ states that ‘No autopsy was performed’, while the ‘official report’ states, ‘All the victims were given autopsies’. We know they cannot both be true. It would be tempting to presume that one of them is accurate and the other a mistake. But insofar as they are both predicated on the presupposition Noah Pozner and 19 other children actually died at Sandy Hook, they both appear to be false.” pg. 183
The death certificate does in fact say that no autopsy was performed, and that’s true; the Pozner family chose not to have an autopsy performed on Noah due to religious reasons. And Alison Peters does state in the official report (Book 9, 00274772.pdf) that “I received the autopsy reports for the twenty-six (26) victims of the Sandy Hook School Shooting”. But simply mentioning the potential discrepancy is where master researchers Fetzer and Watt leave off. After all, they actually answered their own questions and pursued the truth, it would mean the end of their little scam.
Unsurprisingly, Lenny Pozner was also curious about this potential mix-up, so he crafted an e-mail to Dr. James Gill, the Chief Medical Examiner for the state of Connecticut. In his reply, Dr. Gill’s wrote:
Dear Mr. Pozner,You can view Dr. Gill’s e-mail to Lenny Pozner on SandyHookFacts.com.
We define “autopsy” as an external and internal postmortem examination. When the internal examination is not done, we call this an external examination or external postmortem examination. Unfortunately, in my cover letter to the State Police, I incorrectly used “26 autopsy reports” and this was then later included in the State Police report. I am sorry for the confusion this has caused you and I have contacted Alison Peters of the State Police to let her know.
Pages 183 through 186 are submitted by a woman named “Kelly”. I have no idea whether this is the “Kelley Watt” credited with contributing to this chapter as the names are spelled differently, but this is the 2nd large chunk of this chapter written by someone other than James Fetzer. It’s a hell of a scam he’s got going here.
“Kelly” describes five weeks worth of conversations she had with Lenny Pozner. While providing zero evidence (as per usual), James Fetzer suggests that this may actually be someone playing the part of Lenny while also having unprecedented access to family photos and the like. What’s so odd about this story to me, as a normal person, is that “Kelly” continually asks Mr. Pozner to provide her with intensely personal items for no reason other than the fact that she doesn’t believe his son was murdered. But when Lenny graciously shares every piece of requested information, she immediately dismisses it as “fake”. And I guess we’re supposed to leave with the impression that Lenny is the bad guy here because he finally reaches his breaking point and turns on this awful piece of human garbage after she admits to making a donation to his charity with the sole intention of joining a class-action lawsuit against it at a later point.
As one would expect, a couple of patently false claims are made during the course of this story:
“The following Monday he sent me an email telling me to check my inbox and sure enough, much to my surprise, he had posted all the things I asked for on his lenpoz.com website. However, the photo was not of his wife in the hospital, nonetheless, he did post a photo of Veronique with the two newborns in her arms. The death certificate I believe stated he was ‘never married’ which I thought odd.“ pg. 184
The death certificate says no such thing. Furthermore, it lists both parents as having the last name “Pozner”.
“Speaking of his wife I asked him about Veronique working for the State Department in some capacity to disarm the country of Switzerland and he told me she never worked for the State Department but was a nurse, to which I asked for her nursing certificate (which he sent). Since Veronique’s mother worked for the UN, I decided to call the office in the US Embassy and disguised myself as a foreigner to ask for Mrs. Veronique Haller. I was told that ‘she had left her post in 2013’ (after she had been discovered working there for gun control in Switzerland).“ pg. 184
SandyHookFacts.com has this one covered. Needless to say, it’s complete bullshit.
“Meanwhile, Noah’s mother has claimed that she has released a photograph of his body. But no one I know can find it. So where is it?” pg. 186
More bullshit; Veronique has never said that. SandyHookFacts.com covered this one as well and just in case you don’t feel like scrolling all the way to the bottom of the linked article, the short version is that “Kelly” is confusing a comment made by the mother of Emmett Till with Veronique Pozner, which is a pretty, pretty stupid thing to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment