Columbine Shooters
by DCDave

Washington Times, July 30, 1999, p. A6

Inquiry finds killers had no help in school

By Dan Luzadder
Denver Rocky Mountain News

JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo.---Final ballistic reports show no evidence of a third gunman at Columbine High School, sources close to the investigation said.

In addition, the sources said, there is no evidence from the crime scene to show that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold had help from anyone inside the school in carrying out their April 20 attack.

Dozens of witnesses interviewed by police after the crime claimed that from five to eight individuals participated in the shootings that left 15 persons dead, including the killers, and more than 20 injured.

WHOA! HOLD IT! STOP RIGHT THERE! Forget about the additional 13 paragraphs of the article detailing the results of the ballistics, forensics, etc., tests coming down from on high, all of which we are to take essentially on faith. What's this about the DOZENS OF WITNESSES who said there were FIVE TO EIGHT SHOOTERS?

If I weren't rather active online I would have to say that this is news to me, as it would have to be to any regular reader of The Washington Times or The Washington Post or consumer of TV or radio network news. How could so many people be so utterly wrong about what they saw? The article doesn't even speculate. It just gives us the revealed truth from the "sources close to the investigation."

And since when do witnesses "claim"? Doesn't that word better apply to parties to a dispute, to people who have a particular agenda, a particular axe to grind? Witnesses don't "claim." They testify, or they say what they saw or perceived in some other way. So why the loaded language? Is the writer suggesting that things will somehow be better for the witnesses if there were more than two gunmen? Will the survivors get more insurance money? Will the other students get college scholarships? Will teachers get promotions?

And why do they wait until now, with this one little bump-and-run mention, to tell us what all these witnesses said to police right after the tragedy occurred? Might this not be a case of:

"Benevolent" News Management?

A public allowed to get too smart
Is a recipe for confusion,
So they can't see the troubling part
Without our bland conclusion.

DC Dave

David Martin
Auguat 3, 1999

The Bird The Bird Columns DCDave's Homepage DCDave's Column DCDave's Column 3
The Bird Poetry DCDave's Poetry DCDave's Poetry 7
newsgroup: alt.thebird email: