Slashdot Mirror
Audio Analysis Brings New Revelations From Kent State Shooting
a_nonamiss writes "The Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting today on new forensic analysis by audio scientists Stuart Allen and Tom Owen on a recently discovered audio tape from the Kent State shootings. The analysis suggests that four shots from a .38-caliber pistol were fired 70 seconds before the National Guard opened fire on a crowd of student protesters, killing four and wounding nine others. The alleged shooter, student Terry Norman, was hired by the FBI to take photos of the protesters. It has been known for some time that he had a .38-caliber pistol on his person the day of the shootings, but he has always claimed that the gun was not fired during the protest, a claim that was backed up in sworn testimony from authorities at the time."
hmm FBI employee shoots his weapon to get something started and then plausibly denys it. nothing to see here.
on that note. never take a flower to a gun fight. when an armed person(legal authority or otherwise) tells you to stop, leave, get out of his face, and you don't have a weapon. you leave, period. you don't just stay there thinking they are not going to shoot you because you are "peaceful". they don't know that and they probably don't care.
Definitely a fair point. However, if someone starts waving a gun around and firing shots, that's a good way to whip up a crowd of angry people into a fury, where the guardsmen might have legitimately felt threatened. 70 seconds is probably too long for him to have been directly responsible, but just about the right amount of time to have been a crucial catalyst.
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
Here is a direct link to the actual story in the Cleveland Plain Dealer: "Kent State tape indicates altercation and pistol fire preceded National Guard shootings (audio)"
--it should have been in TFS.
I am far more bothered by the fact that a) Mr. Norman was on the payroll of the FBI at the time and b) authorities (may have) lied under oath about the fact that Mr. Norman discharged his weapon during the protest. This implies that the FBI was at least indirectly involved in the massacre and directly involved in the cover-up.
I'll give you that Mr. Norman probably didn't directly trigger the massacre, although shooting a gun in a crowd of angry people probably didn't contribute to happy peaceful feelings at the protest. However, the government at the time seems to have actively and knowingly participated in a cover-up. This bothers me a lot. It should bother everyone. A lot.
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
Read more carefully. While the officer was seen opening Norman's gun by a camera crew, it seems they weren't filming at the time. The reason the new analysis is interesting is that it contradicts the FBI's claim that that gun was not fired, while matching up well with eyewitness accounts ("oh my God, he fired four times") which were made by people with no knowledge of the tape.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
But feeling threatened is no excuse to start picking off uninvolved, unarmed people hundreds of feet away at random. "Someone in the crowd may have a gun, so shoot them all to be safe"
My brother was a student at Kent State and there the day of the shooting. He had always insisted that the guards did not fire first.
Should have shot all of the traitors.
Except where would Obama get his advisors?
if you think shooting "traitors", such as those college kids, is acceptable, then shouldn't you be shot now for your opposition to Obama?
nice logic!
Reporter: We want to interview Terry Norman. Where is he?
FBI Liazon: He's deceased.
Reporter: Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. When did he die?
FBI Liazon: Tomorrow.
Looks like the FBI fired first.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Sniper fire from a .38 Special revolver? Not likely. Doesn't even sound similar.
"Don't worry about those bullets coming from an unknown shooter, men, they're only 38's!"
Spend any time with the justice system and you will see this for yourself.
It's not just Hollywood nonsense. Cops actually act like this. It's probably not limited to American cops either.
Cops won't even make their lies terribly believable. They benefit greatly from the respect they get from most people.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
No one, the Ohio National Guard included, is debating whether the guard opened fired and killed protesters. This is unequivocally true. The question here is whether sometime before the guardsmen open fire if someone else in the crowd fired shots contributing to the shooting by either riling the crowd towards violence or causing the guardsmen to feel threatened and thus clear the area with violence or both.
More from TFA:
The new analysis of the audio recording lends credibility to existing evidence that Norman fired *his* gun. It's no longer just a case of his word against that of a bunch of hippie protestors, and warrants the further investigation that is now taking place.
I don't care why you're posting AC
He is working on a blog post about it now.
Home of The Suki Series
At some point, the soldiers selected targets and fired on them. No matter what the "tension" or "provocation," those men placed their cross-hairs on people who were obviously not a threat and executed them.
I would love to hear, in the soldiers' own words, how they picked their targets.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Ever been hit in the face with a thrown rock? It won't just leave a bruise; you WILL require surgery, and pray to God you don't have a fractured skull or spinal column (the likely result if the rock busts through your teeth into your mouth).
This sounds as if you were hit on the face with a thrown rock. Were you?
I actually researched this once, in the context of the Israeli soldiers killing Palestinian rock-throwers and justifying it with the claim that stones were "lethal weapons."
No Israeli soldier was ever killed by a Palestinian throwing a rock at him.
As it turned out, Slate had an article on the more general subject ("Getting stoned: how many police officers have been killed by rocks?"), which reported 3 police officers killed by rocks, 1 of them thrown, since 1792, and none in the last 70 years (out of 18,983 fatalities). Police departments teach that a rock isn't deadly beyond 50 feet.
I can't imagine how a policeman wearing riot gear, which includes a helmet and face shield, could be killed by a thrown rock.
(Actually, I was hit in the face myself with a thrown rock, by a neighborhood kid who was pelting my house with stones. He broke the window I was looking through. I had a minor cut from the glass, but no serious damage. I caught the kid and brought him home to his parents, who were profusely apologetic and fixed the window.)
Was hit in face with a rock. Lost an eye.
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo