The shootings in France [Merged]

[dingodan]

Might be a mistake to assume there is any "logic" to this at all?

Is what I think personally.

 

[dingodan]

A competent killer has means to destroy a weapon, not just by cutting it up, but by melting it down so that it no longer exists - or losing it somewhere where it will never be found ( like the bottom of a very deep lake for example ). And what is Annency right next to?

If that's their plan, that's pretty smart, certainly not stupid. And if they go over the Swiss border then owning a gun is NOT suspicious, most Swiss have a gun as part of their National Service requirements and civil defence duties. It would be quite easy to dispose of it amongst the general level of gun ownership. There are probaly people who can reduce it to it's component parts, put it in a machine tool, and reduce it to swarf in minutes.

And in Switzerland their guns are locked in cabinets in their houses and people need a permit to own and carry a gun.

Are you suggesting that the existence of a lake nearby is evidence that this was a planned contract killing?

Mate, you have clearly started with your conclusion and are working backwards to support it.

Sorry, I just don't see the need. There is little to suggest anything other than a madman on the lose with a gun and for some reason, a desire to kill.

Was it the case that they left the U.K. suddenly or unexpectedly as you said before? I haven't seen anything about that yet.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

OK, maybe I am putting together a scenario to fit the facts, but that's whay a detective does. It's called reading between the lines.

Remote location, random local person killed near scene of crime, 15 shots fired, 6 victims, targeted at close range using pistol ( not a weapon of choice for a sniper ), semi automatic weapon which allows element of surprise ( not a shotgun that a farmer would typically use ), victims shot MORE than once (especially the one person who made an attempt to escape - that really means that the person concerned was intent on making sure NO-ONE could identify them), a possible escape route.

Anders Brevick scenario possibly, but he decided to to make a 'big statement' by planting a bomb as well - Michael Ryan - had a range of high powered rifles and continued shooting until he couldn't find any more victims - Derrick Bird - shot his twin brother before going on his spree. Toulouse shootings, terrorism determined as motive, again assailant wants to make 'maximum' impact.

Somewhere down the line this doesn't fit in to that type of event - it's too clean, too clinical, and the trail of destruction too limited. Usually a 'madman' gets cornered and surrounded, why has this one just stopped after 6 deaths. I'll speculate it's because any more shootings and he knows he'll be cornered - so maybe he's not as 'mad' as you think, if his intention is to disappear into the crowd. That's the methodology of an assasin.

 

[dingodan]

OK, maybe I am putting together a scenario to fit the facts, but that's whay a detective does. It's called reading between the lines.

Remote location, random local person killed near scene of crime, 15 shots fired, 6 victims, targeted at close range using pistol ( not a weapon of choice for a sniper ), semi automatic weapon which allows element of surprise ( not a shotgun that a farmer would typically use ), victims shot MORE than once (especially the one person who made an attempt to escape - that really means that the person concerned was intent on making sure NO-ONE could identify them), a possible escape route.

Anders Brevick scenario possibly, but he decided to to make a 'big statement' by planting a bomb as well - Michael Ryan - had a range of high powered rifles and continued shooting until he couldn't find any more victims - Derrick Bird - shot his twin brother before going on his spree. Toulouse shootings, terrorism determined as motive, again assailant wants to make 'maximum' impact.

Somewhere down the line this doesn't fit in to that type of event - it's too clean, too clinical, and the trail of destruction too limited. Usually a 'madman' gets cornered and surrounded, why has this one just stopped after 6 deaths. I'll speculate it's because any more shootings and he knows he'll be cornered - so maybe he's not as 'mad' as you think, if his intention is to disappear into the crowd. That's the methodology of an assasin.

A detective puts the facts together to build up a scenario. He or she does not start with the scenario, and then go in search of facts which support it. Sorry, you are no detective. There is "reading between the lines" and then there is "adding in your own lines".

For all we know the person involved did not select a suitable weapon for a military style operation, rather they used a weapon which they had to hand/could get their hands on.

The fact they tried to kill everyone does not "mean" that their intention was not to be identified, they may have just wanted to kill as many people as the opportunity would allow. And the fact that the victims were shot more than once means absolutely nothing.

I agree this does not look like some kind of politically motivated statement. But just because the perpetrators have tried to escape capture, does not automatically mean that this was an "assassin". A stupid and mental killer, or an incompetent thief, is just as likely to try to avoid capture, they are just less likely to be successful.

Careful, and well controlled speculation is all well and good, but you have strayed well far of that mark.

 

[Hillian1]

A detective puts the facts together to build up a scenario. He or she does not start with the scenario, and then go in search of facts which support it. Sorry, you are no detective. There is "reading between the lines" and then there is "adding in your own lines".

For all we know the person involved did not select a suitable weapon for a military style operation, rather they used a weapon which they had to hand/could get their hands on.

The fact they tried to kill everyone does not "mean" that their intention was not to be identified, they may have just wanted to kill as many people as the opportunity would allow. And the fact that the victims were shot more than once means absolutely nothing.

I agree this does not look like some kind of politically motivated statement. But just because the perpetrators have tried to escape capture, does not automatically mean that this was an "assassin". A stupid and mental killer, or an incompetent thief, is just as likely to try to avoid capture, they are just less likely to be successful.

Careful, and well controlled speculation is all well and good, but you have strayed well far of that mark.

Sorry but that post is just so ironic considering your ability to read conspiracy into almost anything.

No offence mate but adding your own lines is something you and Brunswick are bloody masters at.

 

[Storer 68]

There is so much wrong with this post. Starting with the fact that you have decided the assailant was one individual male.

Have you not considered that this could have just been opportunism, rather than assuming there must be a reason for that location, and those victims? why must there be?

If whoever did this was a professional, as you say, would they not have retrieved the cartridges which can later be used to identify the weapon?

You suggested earlier that maybe the passer by was killed because they were a witness, but would they kill a witness, and then leave other evidence at the scene? Sounds to me like the person responsible was either mental or stupid, or both. Not the characteristics of a competent career killer.

I don't think it was pure opportunism here, if it was why kill them? surely just brandishing a gun in that scenario wold induce enough fear to get hold of the car.

i wonder if this is a case of someone carrying out a killing to show a third party that they are capable of doin it. Doesn't really stack up in my mind but I can't work out a logic behind such a random event

 

[dingodan]

I don't think it was pure opportunism here, if it was why kill them? surely just brandishing a gun in that scenario wold induce enough fear to get hold of the car.

i wonder if this is a case of someone carrying out a killing to show a third party that they are capable of doin it. Doesn't really stack up in my mind but I can't work out a logic behind such a random event

If you have an angry type with a gun who is not getting their way, people can get shot. We don't know what happened but I struggle to see why a mother father and grandmother would be the targets of a planned hit.

It may turn out to be the case, but there is little to suggest that at this point IMO.

 

[Falkor]

the family are Iraqi's and have been in the UK since 2002

and a Swedish passport found in the car?

this is coming from the Live press conference on Sky and BBC now

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

And here's little 'ol me thinking that all the other threads on NSC that are based upon unfounded rumours, and half-truths presented as fact, allow me the opportunity to do a little idle speculation and fantasy Inspector Morse of my own.

No, no, no apparently, I've strayed into the realms of Colin Dexter, Frederick Forsythe and Dick Francis. I must be castigated for making such plot lines out, and must scrupulously confine myself to the highly edited version of information that the press are allowed to print.

Ah well, let it be so - now where did I put down my copy of 'Day of the Jackal'............

 

[Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ]

If you have an angry type with a gun who is not getting their way, people can get shot. We don't know what happened but I struggle to see why a mother father and grandmother would be the targets of a planned hit.

It may turn out to be the case, but there is little to suggest that at this point IMO.

Because one family member was the target, and the rest were witnesses

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Lack of evidence so far?

But that doesn't rule the theory out. At the time the statement was made there was very little evidence to support any theory.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

The public prosecutor is saying three of the four victims were shot in the middle of the head.

The owner of the car may be a 50 year old iraqi naturalised in the uk and been living here since 2002, but the police are not certain he is the driver.

 

[dingodan]

And here's little 'ol me thinking that all the other threads on NSC that are based upon unfounded rumours, and half-truths presented as fact, allow me the opportunity to do a little idle speculation and fantasy Inspector Morse of my own.

No, no, no apparently, I've strayed into the realms of Colin Dexter, Frederick Forsythe and Dick Francis. I must be castigated for making such plot lines out, and must scrupulously confine myself to the highly edited version of information that the press are allowed to print.

Ah well, let it be so - now where did I put down my copy of 'Day of the Jackal'............

That is fine mate, but try not to sound so sure of what you are saying, when there is no evidence to support it. Remind yourself that you are speculating as you type.

I am all for digging into things, as someone has just pointed out, I am the resident conspiracy theorist after all

 

[HovaGirl]

Piss poor police work.

I'm struggling to believe a crime scene can be left for 8 hours, all the while a 4 year old is hiding under the bodies.

Meanwhile, British police didn't find a dead child in the attic until 8 days after she went missing. Hindsight is terrific. Besides, if the little child was hiding, or thought dead, then she wouldn't easily be seen.

 

[dingodan]

Sorry but that post is just so ironic considering your ability to read conspiracy into almost anything.

No offence mate but adding your own lines is something you and Brunswick are bloody masters at.

Yeah or maybe you just don't read my posts, preferring to reach for the caricature of a "conspiracy theorist", before dismissing what I say out of hand.

I do actually try to stick to the facts, and if I am speculating I make it clear. And when I speculate, my speculations are drawn from the facts.

It's like you think there are only two ways, one way is to believe everything, and the other way is to believe nothing. How could I possibly believe one thing, and then not believe another thing?

It's called being discerning.

 

[HovaGirl]

They were a family on a camping holiday. The deceased are the mother, father and grandmother. They were reported missing by fellow campers Wednesday night.

How did the fellow-campers know they were missing and hadn't decided to stay the night somewhere else after a long day out? Were these fellow-campers their personal friends with whom they were on holiday or just people they'd got to know during their holiday? In which case, how did they know their plans?

 

[dingodan]

How did the fellow-campers know they were missing and hadn't decided to stay the night somewhere else after a long day out? Were these fellow-campers their personal friends with whom they were on holiday or just people they'd got to know during their holiday? In which case, how did they know their plans?

I would expect that they probably said where they were going and when they would be back or something like that. If they were intending to go somewhere which could be hazardous (a hike for example) the alarm could have been raised for those kind of reasons initially.

Maybe they needed to be back for a particular time for some reason, had some kind of arrangement or booking?

I am speculating.

 

[HovaGirl]

Surely your first thought is to go to the aid of the shooting victims, not hunting 15 spent cartridges which lets face it may have taken a while to find! and would have been found anyhow in the subsequent forensic evaluation of the scene!

Some police would have been looking for evidence, such as the spent cartridges, while others would examine the victims or question nearby people.

 

[HovaGirl]

I would expect that they probably said where they were going and when they would be back or something like that. If they were intending to go somewhere which could be hazardous (a hike for example) the alarm could have been raised for those kind of reasons initially.

Maybe they needed to be back for a particular time for some reason, had some kind of arrangement or booking?

I am speculating.

Of course, but unless they were on holiday with these fellow-campers who knew them very well, then any new acquaintances wouldn't be that confident of their plans, whatever the family had told them.

 

[Storer 68]

cartridges will link to the weapon used