Recently released, "Also Sunday, state police said investigators have still been unable to definitively tie Cho to the dormitory where the first two victims were found. One of Cho's guns was linked to the first shooting, but authorities have no other evidence that ties him to that crime scene."
Do you think it is possible and/or probable for there to be another shooter who accompanied Cho during the first shooting, or aided him in some way? That is what this evidence loosely suggests, to me.
2007-04-22 14:53:02 · 8 answers · asked by Chris K 4 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
That's a good theory. They did not appear to be concerned that no suspect was known at the first scene. No one thought he was out of place at the school post office. There could have been a hand off but they obviously are not competent enough to
do anything else anyway.
2007-04-22 15:14:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They said ballistics show that the same gun was used in the initial shooting, and the second shooting 2 hours later. In my mind, this pretty much seals the deal that he was the guy who used the gun in both places. Unless they have finger prints on the weapon other than Cho's, I'd say the odds of there being another shooter involved is minimal. Reports have said that people saw Cho leaving the dorm area after the initial shootings took place.
2007-04-22 21:57:32 · answer #2 · answered by fonzarelli_1999 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Police are careful in making statments and providing evidence so they say no other evidence ties him to the first crime scene. Other people have even questioned who took the photos and videos that Cho Seung-hui sent to NBC.
Although it is possible that there was another shooter, Cho was described as being a "loner" throughout his entire life, so it is highly unlikely that he had an accomplice.
2007-04-23 04:53:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's what I think too. Perhaps it was the first victim's boyfriend? It's all just too strange. WHy did Cho just shoot only two at that dorm. I have a feeling theres another shooter but what Cho did was so obvious people are only focused on him as the killer due to his videos.
2007-04-22 22:06:39 · answer #4 · answered by Sarah 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This reminds me a bit of the lone gunman theory that was concluded by the Warren commission investigating the JFK assassination. Despite reams of investigatory reports that show grave errors and omissions, the media (today) is still reporting that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman. The editors are so afraid of losing their jobs that they would report a falsehood rather than take a chance at offending their sponsors.
The media is so afraid of being wrong or out of step with the prevailing winds of the popular-truth, that they take the easy, safe, and cheap way of reporting whatever is handed to them by the "authorities." We saw how quickly they bit on the Florida vote reversal during the last presidential election, despite polling numbers that are indisputably reliable.
The only in-depth, investigative reporting we really see are those that pass the muster of not offending the wealthy corporate sponsors. Typically, the investigative reporting is focused on the small-time scam artists or common pedophiles. Whatever happened to Enron and their tight connections to politicians at the white house and captial hill? (Oh yeah, now I remember, those documents were destroyed with the demolition of WTC 7.)
How can you be surprised by the lack-luster performance of the media. It's up to courageous individual witnesses and researchers to discover the truth despite the cover-ups. Even if prestigeous professors risk their careers to assert the truth, somehow, our infamous media fails to report. Verifiable stories are surpressed every day by editorial staffs througout the country. Who knows the media's motivation. I believe most of it is based upon fear. Sometimes the media stories are just to cover up incompetence. We are now all wired to believe nothing that the media has to offer, and there is good reason for this.
I'll wait for someone to publish a video explaining how the VT shooter was in fact a patsy used to coverup a CIA black ops project.
Shall we all believe it? I'll probably give it as much credence as the mass media stories. Can you blame me? I'm a skeptic.
2007-04-22 22:21:44 · answer #5 · answered by Skeptic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
With the evidence now, it is possible there could be another shooter, but it is unknown. I personally think there was another person involved
2007-04-22 22:25:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not yet.
2007-04-22 21:56:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
hope not
2007-04-22 21:58:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋