The implication of this testimony is that the accomplice may have also been firing into the audience. It would help explain the 70 casualties, an amazingly high total, even for a packed movie premiere. It would also mean that the accomplice is still on the loose.
This is eerily reminiscent of the Columbine shooting, where over 100 witnesses reported three shooters (http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/columbineeight.php?q=columbineeight.php), but only two were ever mentioned again after the second day of the investigation. Which begs the question, why wouldn't the police want to catch everyone involved in these massacres? And why would the media not investigate such obvious questions that their own reporters have uncovered?
This is eerily reminiscent of the Columbine shooting, where over 100 witnesses reported three shooters (http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/columbineeight.php?q=columbineeight.php), but only two were ever mentioned again after the second day of the investigation. Which begs the question, why wouldn't the police want to catch everyone involved in these massacres? And why would the media not investigate such obvious questions that their own reporters have uncovered?
This ABC news report from the night of the shooting confirms the suspicion of a second gunman.
