Aurora Massacre: Another Effort to Discredit Growing Suspicion of the Official Story

by Scott Creighton

The recently released Motion to Intervene supposedly from a victim of the Aurora Massacre is as fake as the Sorcha Faal “LIBOR” connection and the various Jonathan Lee Riches scams. But there’s a lot to be learned from this obviously desperate attempt to discredit the ongoing unofficial investigation of the Century 16 massacre. It infers that the victims are all “government actors” and prostitutes and claims the police chief and lead prosecutor blackmailed a victim into perjuring himself then shot him at his home. Key to this fraud is the fact that it names Phillip Anschutz as being behind all of this and that is clearly designed to discredit various unofficial investigations which have come to a similar conclusion.

Aside from looking at how it was written and who it actually serves, the fact is, the judge should never have released it in the first place since pretending to be a victim and sending in a false statement to a court is a crime in itself. The letter is key evidence in a felony and announcing to it’s creator that the court is now looking for him gives him a certain advantage to escape detection that any judge in his right mind would never do.

Releasing that document and the judge’s subsequent finding is highly unusual and hinders the investigation while serving only to openly discredit that GROWING majority of people in the country who find SERIOUS problems with 1. the official story of the Aurora Massacre and 2. the increasingly disturbing manner in which the prosecution of James Holmes is being handled.

Philip Anschutz and his various business dealings have come under a certain amount of scrutiny since the unofficial investigation of the Aurora Massacre took off following the July 20th attacks. Turns out not only were most (if not all) of the military gear that Holmes supposedly used during the attack were delivered not to Holmes’ apartment (which he had just recently moved into) but in fact they were delivered to the Anschutz Medical Campus where Holmes went to school and worked. Also, Anschutz just happens to be in direct competition with Century 16 theaters in Aurora since his company owns Regal Cinemas. also, since we are on the subject, most of the incriminating information coming out of the “official” investigation seems to originate with the medical campus itself and of course, none of it can be verified since the judge issued the gag order and sealed the evidence in the case. Examples:

  1. Holmes email claiming he was leaving the school
  2. Holmes failing his classes
  3. Holmes not getting along with other students
  4. “Stick figure drawing confession” “found” in campus post office
  5. Holmes trying to call this psychologist minutes before the attack

All of this information is currently unverifiable and all of it, each piece of the “evidence” being used to try Holmes in the court of public opinion, comes STRAIGHT from the institution directly owned by Anschutz.

As if that wasn’t damning enough, consider this… the latest in the Holmes case involves a letter than was supposedly sent by a victim of the shooting which purports to claim that a vast “Illuminati” conspiracy is behind the event and that the victim is not really a victim of the Century 16 shooting, but rather he/she was shot by the Aurora police chief, Dan Oates and Dist. Atty. Carol Chambers in order to frame Holmes. The letter also goes on to suggest some if not all of the victims are fake (actors) and that Philip Anschutz and his corporation are partially behind it all.

Where did the story first make it’s way to the public?   which is owned by… wait for it… wait for it… Philip Anschutz

Other business ventures

  • Forest Oil
  • Pacific Energy Group
  • Regal Entertainment Group, the largest movie theater chain in the world, with approximately 6,000 screens. Anschutz owns more than half of the company, which is a collection of former bankrupt chains.
  • Union Pacific Railroad (Anschutz is the company’s largest shareholder, with a 6% stake.)
  • Clarity Media Group, a Denver-based Publishing Group which includes:[25]
    • The San Francisco Examiner (purchased in 2004)
    • The Washington Examiner, which was spun off from a number of D.C. area suburban dailies.
    • The Baltimore Examiner, which launched in April 2006 and was shut down in early 2009. (Anschutz has trademarked the name “Examiner” in more than sixty cities.)
    •, a hyper-local web portal where citizen journalists write on local topics, from news to blog-like stories.

The Examiner article claims that it’s a remarkable development, this fake letter sent to the judge in the Holmes show trial and then goes on to list some of the various theories the unofficial investigators have developed over the past month or so.

“Corroborating much of a recent Conspiracy Examiner story maintaining the situation as potentially being another horrific (rogue government faction) conspiracy and possible false-flag event, the newly discovered evidence, thrown out of court by Judge William Sylvester days later, details stunning accusations against billionaire Philip Anschutz, Police Chief Dan Oates, Arapaho County Dist. Atty. Carol Chambers and, according to the alleged victim, the Illuminati as being potential co-conspirators in the crime.

The stunning accusations, dated August 27, reveal a startling story by the claimant as having been visited at home by police chief Dan Oates and Dist. Atty. Carol Chambers where they forced the unnamed individual to testify as a fake victim of the shootings, under the threat of being arrested for prostitution and escort services and charity fraud, for the purposes of garnering an easy conviction against alleged shooter James Holmes. But not before being shot by the police chief in “non-life-threatening areas” of the body, according to the motion, to appear as having been shot by James Holmes himself. The motion also claims that it is likely some of the victims in the theater were merely paid actors working on behalf of the conspirators and wants multiple individuals involved in the situation to take polygraph tests to prove their innocence.” Jeffrey Phillips

I don’t know who Jeffrey Phillips is, but you can go here to read something he did about Dave Mustaine (ooooo a celebrity) in which he links to someone’s website claiming that Holmes’ father was going to testify on the LIBOR scandal… yep… that Sorsha Faal disinfo that popped up a month ago. Apparently everyone EXCEPT Jeffrey Phillips has figured out that BS a while ago, but… again… I digress.

You can go here to read the short, one paragraph Motion to Intervene in the Holmes case as well as the judge’s reply to it.

The judge in his reply makes it very clear that they have already established that the victim who supposedly sent the letter had no part in it. Which is pretty easy for a court to determine.  It’s about as simple as a phone call or a 10 minute ride in a car.

And let’s face it, whomever wrote that and sent it, would NEVER have simply done so without going WAY public at the same time or before because, OBVIOUSLY… if the police chief shot them once….

So, why fabricate a letter which would be so easy to discredit immediately? Who would do such a thing and include in it such inflammatory statements that the police and prosecutors are teaming up to frame Holmes and faking victims who are actually prostitutes and even shooting people themselves?

Other suppose (sic) victims in this case are government actorsplease donate to my charity…”

Who would write such a ridiculous letter and send it to the courts?

And why would they include the statement “James is being framed by Phillip Anschutz, police chief Dan Oates, and the illuminati (sic)”?

The key to understanding who wrote the letter is looking at how it was handled. When the judge released it, he released key evidence in a new crime in and of itself. He tipped off the culprit who is now probably in Dubai or somewhere non-extradition.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn’t releasing this fraudulent motion constitute a crime in itself? Does it make the judge an accessory after the fact? Does it provide aid and comfort (and a head start) to the criminal?

Should releasing this document disqualify the judge from sitting on this case?

All good questions.

But one thing it does do, it makes any suspicion of Phillip Anschutz seem like crack-pottery and to that end it’s immediately written about by none other than one of Anschutz’ own publications….

what a coincidence.

54 Responses

  1. As I wrote in the other thread, these phony loony-bin letters and motions are a variant of the “crazy witness” tactic used to derail the Garrison Kennedy conspiracy trial. They are designed to make any skepticism of the official story seem crazy. If enough people start asking too many difficult questions, look for Conan and SNL to start making jokes about the crazy letters/motions. Pretty soon skeptics will learn to keep their mouths shut if they want to keep their friends. These people are very predictable — the problem is that their tricks always work.

  2. It won’t work with all of us… we will still search for more ways to tie the shooting to someone besides Holmes….. stirring the pot is worrying them…… we’ll stir it more….

  3. isnt that breaking the gag order?

  4. I was thinking myself that possibly someone had crafted the story and submitted it to the court, then the same person had released it to the press claiming it was coming from the Judge’s office. However, there seem to be actual, easily-verifiable court documents with the Judge stating (in the last line) that this issue is not subject to the gag order.

    The move clearly damages any effort to use alternative defense strategies and if the defense was planning on using any of the suspicious discrepancies, or even any of the proven distortions of the truth, as part of their defense, one has to imagine they would have objected strongly to this release.

    As an aisde, while having a look at Anschutz media holdings I came across this description of him:

    “Anschutz is an extraordinary, ruthless and hard-headed financial predator. American business magazine Fortune described him as ‘the greediest executive in America,’ while he’s also been accused of ‘blatant profiteering’ by New York’s attorney general.”

  5. Scott, you bring up some great points. And, I agree that the letter and its language, how it was released and by whom it was published pretty much establishes that this is a planned execution of a hit piece, aimed at people who are not only questioning the official narrative, but also actively pursuing the truth.

    I just want to caution against dismissing the “operation crackpot letter” as just that though.

    If we were to eliminate all the obviously preposterous “fillers” of the story (Oates personally seeking out, threatening, and soft-shooting this person) what we get is the core theme of the story: Fake witnesses!!!

    It is a very calculated move… If we accept the premise that this letter is indeed a hit piece, why would they choose THIS storyline to carry it out and not something else? After all, their swiss cheese of a storyline has more holes than cheese. They could have picked some other aspect of the story.

    I feel this means one of two things… The less likely (in my opinion) possibility is that there actually are NO fake witnesses involved surrounding the Aurora killings. So, they see this as a weak point and bring this up to fuel further attention to it by “doubters”. Somewhat like the holographic planes hitting WTC story… Basically drawing attention to a non-existing conspiracy to use as a honeypot for the swarming conspirasists…

    I am leaning towards the second option. Which is that there are indeed one or more fake witnesses whom they have used to construct the official narrative, as well as to push the real witnesses and their testimonies out of the limelight and out of the way. Since her background is the only verifiable part of the letter, I have to assume there is a certain level of truth to this person’s illegal lifestyle. By wrapping the fake witness story around a highly compromised character easily dismissed by the society at large because of her lifestyle (prostitution and escort services and charity fraud), and carefully employing all the buzzwords, in one single paragraph, (conspiracy, rogue government faction, false flag event, stunning accusations against Anschutz, Oates etc, and the cherry on the icing: THE ILLUMINATI) which imply some level of “crackpottery” …

    Seems like they have attempted to place the “invisible shield of shame” around this fake witness angle so that any legitimate investigation in to the matter can be automatically dismissed as some outrageous claim by us kooky nutcase theorists… And, if my assumption is correct, it’d mean that this is their weak spot… If not the only one, at least one of the weakest…

    I’d say, even if the first option is the case, we would have not much to lose by pursuing the fake witness angle… A modest assumption would be that there are at least 600 witnesses who have some valid information to share. I am not sure if the number of people we have heard from (fake or real) is around 20…

    • I fully expect that there are several witness plants involved in this event. Certain people could have been staged in other theaters and in the chaos that ensued they claim to have been in Theater 9.

      Problem with that though is that none of them come right out and claim they can identify Holmes’ face as the one behind the mask shooting people.

      More likely the responders and investigators on the scene coached the witnesses and victims to say what they saw.

      But it isn’t really necessary in this case. In the case of April Gallop, they did their best to tell her she saw a 757 stuck in that one room in the Pentagon that she walked out of while she was telling them she didn’t. They need such efforts in something like that.

      But in this case people saw a guy decked out in military grade protective gear shooting people. And that’s the story and that’s what happened. No tweaking needed.

      But that’s not the story of the letter… it doesn’t say the witnesses are fake… it says the VICTIMS are fake… big difference.

      If you want to marginalize the unofficial investigation, just have them continue to repeat that they don’t believe the victims are real.

      People have an emotional attachment to such events via the victims… dismiss them, and you excommunicate yourself from your target audience.

      They did the same thing a few years ago for awhile in the fake Truth movement. it was pretty offensive in my opinion, but they will do anything to discredit people who question the official line. And this is just an effort in my opinion to apply that tactic to this situation.

      I’m sure some witnesses have popped up who are less than credible and saying whatever they have been told to say. Some people can be easily persuaded to believe what they are told they saw.

      And I am sure that some witnesses may be out there at this point deliberately sending unofficial researchers on snipe hunts.

      I do know that someone already tried to mislead a bunch of people by creating fake “actor” pages for some of the witnesses and actually had to use screenshots from their news appearances as their headshots on the fake pages. So we need to be careful what you turn up.

      Again, they didn’t really need fake witnesses in this too much. They had a theater full of people who were starring right at the screen when he came in and walked right in front of them for a few seconds doing nothing but waiting for the tear gas to ignite. Then he opened fire. He opened fire for 60-90 seconds and he calmly left through the back door. I’m not sure how many other ways that story can be told.

      I promise you this.. they didn’t have 3 or 4 shooters in there. That makes about as much sense as TV Fakery and Ray Beams from Space. They didn’t need it first of all, and secondly they would have had to have the ENTIRE theater packed with fake witnesses to cover that one. So, you tell me, what did they really need to plant witnesses for?

      Maybe afterwards to claim he was dropping out of school or to say he was a loner no one liked… that kind of thing perhaps, likely. But in there? I don’t see it. Not needed.

      • This is a great article Scott. I’ve been thinking all along that this is a misdirection technique. Indeed a way to make us all seem like silly extremists. In fact, it seems that folks are going so far as to suggest the Holmes family does not even exist.

        It seems that every time someone finds something that can in fact be discussed that truly indicates inconsistencies within hours we have an extreme bogus story line that captures everyone’s attention which REMOVES our focus.

        It’s interesting that you bring up Anschutz owning this publication. The article was written very well. And ..I think.. did it’s job. As the writer hints that the case should be further discussed and more media attention given to it ….all because someone with a pen wrote a motion.

        Seems to encourage this type of behavior. Maybe this will keep us busy for the next little while. When we all start to talk about actual facts …well then… someone will be super quick to write another motion!

        • It seems that every time someone finds something that can in fact be discussed that truly indicates inconsistencies within hours we have an extreme bogus story line that captures everyone’s attention which REMOVES our focus.

          An absolutely on point observation. Again, I hate to make the comparison, but look at what happened with the RJ Lee Group came out with their study of the Composition and Morphology of the 9/11 Dust Samples… they stated the molted metal proved it was a “combustion event” and that there was no way to explain the immense heat needed to create such physical evidence, and immediately BYU paid Jones to come out with the thermite distraction which lasted for years.

          A great observation in this case chaebai

      • Great comments and great website which I just found.

        Most of what you are writing really resonates with me.

        But can you extrapolate on why you think those in the “truth movement” that pushed the fake victim angle are fake themselves?

        For instance, what are your thoughts on September Clues vs. Let’s Roll Forums? I was impressed by both sites at one point. Now I see September Clues as being “fake” while I think Let’s Roll has some of the best research.

        Is Let’s Roll fake? There has been some interesting drama between Let’s Roll and September Clues recently and I have to say I wonder about Let’s Roll simply because I find myself being drawn to it and the drama itself is suspicious.

        But I have found some gems on Let’s Roll and have to say it does appear to me there is substantial evidence that many of the 9/11 victims were fake. The hollow towers research is compelling to me as well. As is the evidence of media fakery and cgi.

        I wouldn’t be shocked if Let’s Roll is fake but boy they did a good job if this is the case. I believe September Clues is fake but like other deceivers contains 90% true information to put people on the hook. Seems to be similar to what you claimed happened with the dust and the thermite claims. Maybe they saw that people were exposing the fake victims and use of media that day so they came up with a 90% true September Clues honey pot to steer these people in certain directions.

        Love to see your thoughts on it and I appreciate you working through these issues. It’s exactly what I’ve been interested in.

    • The theater sat 300 not 600 and the shooter never went out the front door of the theater so the other people in the other theaters would not have seen him, thus they are not witnesses.

      I’ll tell you the only real witness I need to hear from… the missing security camera tapes, which again, are never mentioned even by that “conspiracy theorist” working for Anschutz’ Examiner. Funny how he doesn’t seem to mention those.

      • I thought the theater sat 415 people according to that girl who worked there 1 day a week. Also the security cameras from the theater from police cars and what about the 911 calls (not dispatch but the actual phone calls).

      • Actually, some people claim that the person dressed up in a batman costume being escorted out the front doors of the theatre in that initial cell phone video was the shooter. So I don’t think we really know definitively whether or not the shooter went out the front door.

        • That person in the Batman costume looked really diminutive in stature to me, almost like an adolescent, and he wasn’t wearing body armor or combat gear. I kind of doubt he was the guy, but am aware that some bloggers mention that the policeman escorting/pushing him out of the building is carrying what may be the same type of assault rifle as was found at the exterior exit with the same type of clip (and suggest that it was later planted out back). I think the cell phone vid. is a bit too grainy to tell for sure re: the rifle. Nothing to see here, imho.

          • True, but people also weren’t allowed to exit through the lobby, they were pushed back and told they couldn’t go out that way. Why? These bloggers who insinuate that was the shooter in the cell phone video, also say that they may have used that time to have him change from the combat gear into that costume. Also, we don’t know what was underneath the costume.

          • Watch the video before you just laugh it off. There is something up with the person who was walked out. Why is that person being escorted by a police officer? And this video, courtesy of Chris P on this forum, also discusses it.

          • Maybe that guy wasn’t the shooter, but do you think that that costume could hide something like a goatee?

  6. Wow wasn’t aware that Anschutz owns the examiner good work. You did a good job fleshing out this fake motion thing. Great point about the judge aiding and abetting the criminal too.

    • Chris, you have reached out to speak with people that loaded video of that night. Here is the guy that interviewed that blonde girl that worked there one night a week. He finally responded to question if it was uploaded that night.

      His response was “Yes it was sorry that it has taken me so long to respone. And I had just meet them that night and had filmed many differenet stories from other victims this one was just the most detailed”

      So he had filmed many different stories!

    • Thanks chris p. Anschutz is one of those powerhouse behind the scenes families you rarely ever hear about. I think Gray came across some info on Phillip that is interesting as well. He’s not a very pleasant individual, a pure neoliberal robber baron type. Before I started researching him and his organizations, I had a hard time concluding that this plan would have been approved from the top, but now? I can see it.

  7. Latest news says victims are filing a class action lawsuit against Cinemark. Interesting…..

    • So when they arrest Holmes the arresting officer says they have an open door to theater 9. I am wondering if anyone knows why/how the door was open.

      Also, it seems strange that the arresting officer doesn’t mention that suspect seems sedated.

      • The door was most likely propped open by extending that metal bar on top that is attached to the suspension system to close the door slow (I don’t know what you would call that)

      • I guess that is why the judge sealed the evidence in the case. That would be spelled out in the arrest report. But it is strange that we don’t have a scanner report making mention of it. However, once he was in custody, the primary focus on the scene seems to have been to determine if there was another shooter at large and the care of the victims. Not surprising that they didn’t take up radio time describing his condition. He was in custody, they moved on…

  8. Scott Creighton

    I understand where you’re coming from regarding it making sense to only have one shooter. However, you have to ignore several witnesses for that to be true. The biggest contradiction to that theory is multiple witnesses saw the gas canisters come from two different directions. One from the rear exit, and one from the hallway of one of the entrances. I won’t get into WHY they needed multiple people involved. I need you to get on the same page that there WERE two or more people involved.

    These are two witnesses who saw the gas canisters come from two different places:

    This was a response I got from a youtube user who was there:
    “Yeah I was in the room towards the top two rows. From what I saw, I thought there were two shooters because one smoke canister came from the exit and the other came from the hallway. It was dark, so I could be wrong, but there were definitely two canisters and I did see that guy who took the call open the door. I don’t remember if he walked out or sat down again, but shortly after the guy with the guns came in and started shooting.”

    At about the 12 minute mark, witness mentions multiple people spotted around the shooter.

    “Easily could’ve been 3-4 shooters, multiple calibers were going off”

    Blue SE Police Scanner:
    “Aurora cruiser 49. Talking to people making statements, it sounds like we had two shooters, one who was in theater 8 seated, another one who came from the outside into theater 9. Sounds like it was a coordinated attack”.

    • “Aurora cruiser 49. Talking to people making statements, it sounds like we had two shooters, one who was in theater 8 seated, another one who came from the outside into theater 9. Sounds like it was a coordinated attack”.

      Two people does not make two “shooters”. What the quote above states is that one guy was in the theater, opened the door, and another came in… it does not state that two people were firing at the same time. In fact, what the officer failed to understand was that the one guy IN the theater was seen LEAVE the theater before the (singular) shooter entered the theater.

      Ergo, one shooter.

      correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t the witness above make the claim that one guy came in and tosses a canister from the stage left exit and then another guy comes in from the stage right exit? Problem there is that there is only one door stage left. Truth is, we know that the assailant came in, tossed on canister, quickly crossed and tossed another stage right side as well. That’s the entire basis of his claim, the directions from which the canisters come from, both coming from the screen end of the theater, one door on the stage left side…

      Ergo, one shooter.

      Multiple calibers going off? Obviously he had three guns with him whoever it was. A shotgun, a pistol, and the AR-15… multiple calibers.

      Ergo, one shooter.

      How many witnesses described the events as being one guy who calmly walked through the crowd shooting? 20? 30? All fakes? All liars? No.

      one shooter.

      They didn’t need more. they didn’t want more. They used birdshot for god’s sake… they didn’t want a slaughter house, it wasn’t a tactical raid on a crack house… they wanted causualites and some fatalities, but not Armageddon.

      They had the one patsy to take the fall all set up, the lone gunman nutjob story in place, why risk it when they didn’t really need a body count that high?

      Sorry… seems like one shooter to me.

      • Actually none of the witnesses know whether or not the guy with the goatee who opened the door left the theater. He most likely did.

        The witness I spoke to on Youtube said that one of the gas canisters was thrown from the HALLWAY, which was the entrance into the theater. My guess is that this was thrown by the person in the blue and white plaid shirt with a gasmask. This wasn’t the same person who opened the door for the shooter most likely since he came from theater 8.

        What do you make of the female witness in the batman shirt who said she saw multiple people standing behind the shooter? She did say it seemed like only one gun was going off.

      • Also, all of your logic for why it makes sense to only have one shooter is solid. However, why would they decide to have 4 shooters at the Sikh Temple Shooting and not the Century 16 Shooting?

      • Have you seen this yet? I found a radio transmission from another police radio channel. Lot of stuff on here we haven’t heard

  9. By talking about ‘false/fake witnesses’ – whether it has any slither of truth in it doesn’t matter – Just having that ‘out there’ now – ‘fake witness’ means whenever a witness says anything that doesn’t go along with the officlal line the people will just believe its ‘one of those fake witnesses LOL!’ …It’s all psychological – just the mere mention of the words and linked to Aurora has done the damage now. No one will take anything seriously that doesn’t follow the officla story…Media, as you say owned by Antchutz, is completely to blame. This PROVES that something ELSE happened/and is going on with this case and Holmes is 100% the patsy!

  10. The problem I have with Anschutz being involved in all of this is why? Because the Century 16 theatre was competition? For such a rich powerful man he had to resort to this to beat the competition? That seems extreme to me. In the grand scheme of life for this guy, I doubt one theatre is going to make or break him.

    • no one said that the competition with Century 16 was the primary motivation for this event. But considering how involved the Anschutz school is with the development of the entire Holmes narrative given the fact that the event did take place at a competing business, one has to consider if they didn’t make the choice which would benefit Anschutz as a secondary bonus. and it makes sense.

      • It *has* been thrown out there by people as being a possible motivation, and that’s all I was stating. In my opinion, that theory is extreme. That’s all I’m saying.

        • Certainly not ‘motivation’. Just another item seemingly lending weight to avenues of inquiry. Anschutz certainly moves in certain circles. Maybe just a useful tool. Maybe there’s a bigger fish. But Scott is quite correct to keep pointing these things out.

          • The ‘why’ has to do with what Scott refers to as the ‘destabilization campaign’, or what I’d call, at this point, ‘agenda steering’.
            Aurora may be read in part as an opening salvo, a debut.
            It also comes out of a discussion taking place way above the little heads of us ‘mere mortals’ (sarc).
            As to the exact nature and extent of Anschutz’ part in this. Lines, connections and ‘interests’ are certainly there, but on the other hand it could also be said to be a little out of character. At this point, at least to my mind, it remains a problematic but open question.

  11. APD Chief Dan Oates worked his way up to head of NYP intelligence and then after 21 years resigned his job in August 2001 just before 911.
    After that long why would he quit?
    What did he know?
    Where was he during the 1993 WTC bombing?
    He is the missing link to 911

  12. Has anybody else seen this traffic ticket photo of Holmes? I remember that there was initial thoughts that the license plates of the white car were Tennessee plates, but the images below look to be Colorado plates (119 ROC)

    • The tag and car shown in your link are the same as the car and tag parked in back of theater 9…… so where did police notice a Tennessee tag?

      • Jan,

        I don’t believe that the Tennessee tag was noted by police, but there were MSM reports which reported it as a possibility. I think that it is equally as important to disprove unsubstantiated facts/theories as new information becomes available. I only made note of the TN plates because I remember looking into it in the days following the shooting based on the MSM reports and the fact that the plates were not visible in the Denver Post images.


  13. Great 9news piece about this:

    He made cookies for postal inspectors lol

  14. The ticket was issued 10 days before the shooting. Three things I notice are: 1) No tape holding trunk closed. 2) JH’s hair is dark, not orange. 3) Long side burns & is he growing a goatee or is that a shadow?

    • These photos were released to get people used to the ridiculous idea the Holmes was the man with the goatee that let the shooter in

      • I’m afraid Chris P that to some, the photos will have that exact effect. When I viewed both the photo & the video, it was actually the first thing that I noticed. This is just my own observation & I realise that it could be shadowing although, I don’t think so. Either way, considering the photo was taken 10 days prior, it’s probably a moot point. However, the prosecution may not agree, have it enlarged & if it is a goatee, use it to help their case.

  15. That is a shadow… unless men grow goatees way …under their chin.. you can see his side burns… and the softer shadow under his chin… and the dark shadows around his collar. ….there is a clearer picture:on the link that AuroraLies, left in his/her comment . click on the pic of Holmes and enlarge it to 250%… it is a shadow.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: