The Real Sandy Hook Tragedy Begins Now: Arrests Called For

by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB

The day of the Sandy Hook school massacre -- December 14, 2012 -- is not a tragic day, as there were no deaths. There was no shooter. There weren't six staff members who tried valiantly to save the 20 children. It was an ordinary Friday. The massacre story is fiction.

There have been many false flag events in the US and elsewhere. Some are pure fiction, such as the crash of Flight UA93 in Shanksville Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. No plane fell to the ground there -- whether by an unskilled Arab hijacker making a booboo in the cockpit, or by patriotic passengers manning up to the call "Let's roll." A script writer did the whole thing (though it's likely some of the named passengers were killed, elsewhere).

Other events are mainly fictional but include visible deaths. In regard to Australia's "Lindt Chocolate Cafe hostage-taking," in December 2013, I can vouch for the fact that Man Haron Monis, the hostage taker, was an insider playing a part. The media drama that went on all day was faked, but in the end two people died: Tori Johnson the cafe's manager, and Katrina Dawson a barrister.

See my book "Inquest: Siege in Sydney." The gunman, Monis, was probably shot dead by police, although there's a small chance he was allowed to escape.

In regard to the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting, I have recently written a book, entitled "Unreality." I won't recap it here. That is, I will not go over the evidence that the school parking lot on the day of the event was empty of any wounded or otherwise attacked children.

Citizen investigator James Tracy, ex-state trooper Wolfgang Halbig, and emeritus professor James Fetzer have proved to the satisfaction of any intelligent layperson that the shooting did not take place.

That should be cause for anger -- merely that bold-faced lying by police, media, and politicians. How dare such people make fools of the public? But now I feel more than anger -- I feel sorrow, as the courts have let us down and this means we have lost a beautiful, beautiful thing in our American civilization.

No, wait a minute. Fear is starting to set in as the predominant emotion. You know, in Australia -- my other home -- authorities recently released footage of the new concentration camp for Covid non-compliers. It's called Welcome Camp. Or Camp Welcome. Or something. Yep, surrounded by high fence with barbed wire.

In sum, the news today on the Sandy Hook cases, from two courts, is causing varying proportions of anger, sorrow, and anxiety. Dammit. So needlessly! Can't people get their tongue around the word "truth" anymore?

Fetzer's Defamation Case

The real Sandy Hook tragedy now [February 17, 2022] concerns decisions made this week in two separate courts. The first is the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to go along with lower court rulings against James Fetzer for defamation

The second is a decision by a Connecticut court to approve a settlement in which the gun manufacturer will pay $73 million dollars to the bereaved families. They are NOT bereaved -- and the public apparently knows this, according to many caustic comments on the Internet.

James Fetzer, in his role as an internet journalist and book writer (author of several philosophy books and editor of 6 conspiracy theory books) has the right of free speech. We can agree on that, can we not? Free speech is sometimes considered the basic right in America since it allows us to be vigilant AGAINST BAD GOVERNMENT. That is its proud purpose. There are umpteen precedents in court cases to say "Speak your mind, O Citizens."

Still, if a journalist, or anyone, defames a person, that person is entitled to sue for damages. As every man and his cousin knows, the way a defamer may get off the hook, in court, is by using "the truth defense." He shows that his statement, however insulting or hurtful, was correct. Maybe every cousin doesn't know that nowadays, so I am spelling it out here. But the judges and all the judges' cousins are aware that truth is a defense against a claim of defamation.

In this case, Leonard Pozner, an allegedly bereaved dad stepped forward and said he was hurt when Professor James Fetzer published a statement that the death certificate which he, the dad, had uploaded to the Internet, as proof of his son's death, is fake. The dad construes Fetzer's comment as defaming, as it effectively labels the dad a liar.

Hold on here for a minute. Doesn't the supposed defamation really consist of Fetzer saying the child was not killed? Yes, I think that is the crux of the matter. (By the way, the same dad says he had to change residence several times as conspiracy-type folks were harassing him. I find that pret-ty hard to imagine.)

Fetzer earnestly refutes the Sandy Hook narrative. He, along with co-editor Mike Palecek, produced a nice thick volume with the defiant title "Nobody Died at Sandy Hook: It Was a FEMA Drill To Promote Gun Control." You can't get much clearer than that, regarding Fetzer's position on the deaths of twenty children.

In the book, dated 2015, he shows, and criticizes, one child's death certificate ('D/C') that was proffered by the aforementioned dad. Fetzer points to three different fonts used, which he in good faith believed was highly unlikely in a state-issued death certificate.

What really matters is that James Fetzer, the defendant in this lawsuit, was "kept out of court." That is a huge no-no in this dear land of our forefathers. Fetzer yelled that he did NOT defame the dad, as claimed, and that he has two expert witnesses available to criticize the D/C, yet he was not given a chance to deal. The judge made a summary judgement in favor of the plaintiff. Fetzer did not even get the standard privilege of Discovery. Why not?

The question of the authenticity of the D/C should have been put to a jury, and it wasn't.
Well, OK, mistakes get made every day, but we have modes of redress such as appeals courts. Fine. Off Fetzer goes to the state appeals court -- but is likewise dismissed without the grant of argument. He also took the appeals court decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, by request for review, but was ignored.

I forgot to mention the money. After the trial court judge made the summary judgement, he assembled a jury to decide on the amount payable. The jury awarded $450,000 to the dad. In the same case, Fetzer was also hit with a $600,000 amount for breach of a confidentiality agreement, so he now has liens against him for $1.1 million.

What did he do wrong? Nothing. He is absolutely allowed to say that he finds a death certificate or any other document to be fake. He can say so in print. I can say so in print. You can say so in print.

You can print that Secretary of State Colin Powell was a liar when he told the UN that the US had proof that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. You can use the word "liar." Rest assured the law protects you. We need people to catch liars.

Oops. Are we talking past tense? As I said, I am feeling anxious. Am I going to find myself behind barbed wire? Has the US ceased to support Rule of Law? Did the Wisconsin Supreme Court throw in the towel today? Can judges no longer be bothered to protect us? Do they let someone put on a $1.1 million lien without considering the well-established truth defense? Did the judge himself get threatened with barbed wire if he enforced proper law?

Eeks!

The Lawsuit against the Gunmaker

Meanwhile, in a hotel in Connecticut on Tuesday February 16, 2022, an attorney called a press conference to announce that an out-of-court settlement has been reached in a large lawsuit. I am not referring to Prince Andrew having settled out of court with a plaintiff named Virginia Giuffre. I am referring to the "bereaved" families' suit against the maker of the gun allegedly used at Sandy Hook school. The case is called Soto et al v Remington/Bushmaster.

This case is as phony as a three-dollar bill. In a recent article (on February 13, 2022 at RumorMillNews.com), I listed this Soto case as one of the four ways we can be sure the shooting never happened. The other three are the watcher's photo, the policewoman's affidavit, and a revelation from the late Robert Steele that when he was a CIA officer overseas, he did false flags and told the participants they must lie in court. He called it "legalized lying." (Steele admits this in his online book "Sandy Hook Truth.")

Why do I claim we can tell, from this very lawsuit against the gunmaker, Remington, that things are dicey? It's because when the families sued the gunmaker, the gunmaker did not holler "Show me the proof." Today they agreed to hand over $73 million dollars for their part in the deaths of children without even collecting autopsy evidence or photos of the damage done, or reports by any eyewitness. Per the official narrative, the gunman had two pistols in his pockets, a Glock and a Sig Sauer -- couldn't those have been the guilty guns?

Second Amendment

But I need to step back a minute and talk about me and guns. You know, berettas, Glocks, shotguns, Smith and Wesson, magnum, etc. I barely know one from the other. I have never touched a gun. I'm all in favor of the Second Amendment. Here it is: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Goody.

Do I agree with gun-control legislation? Wouldn't I like there to be a way to prevent the Adam Lanza's of this world from killing 20 first-graders? Excuse me, what Adam Lanza? What 20 first-graders?

I'd warmly support a law against bullets that lodge inside a human body in such a way that they can't be removed. No doubt that sort of thing is already listed in the Geneva Conventions as inhumane and unacceptable. Indeed, I'm against land mines since you can't see them on the ground, and they interfere with children's play.

Maybe I would agree with legislation if it had practical measures to prevent the marketing of guns to young people. For that matter I'd like there to be criminal penalties for advertisers who incite murder -- undoubtedly such penalties already exist. Hmm, so couldn't we accuse the media of incitement each time they tell a false story of murder and mayhem, causing young people to believe murder and mayhem are normal -- thus encouraging violence?

That's an aside. I just wanted to denude this article of partisan politics. My beef about the Settlement is that all parties knew the thing was fake, so let's address only that.

Soto et al versus Remington

A few years ago, some of the families obtained a payout on their claim against the insurance company that held the homeowners' liability insurance at the home of Nancy Lanza, mom of the alleged gunman, Adam. Nancy was the owner of the fictive offending weapon that got fired at children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut on that famous day. I have not read that insurance case; it did not go to court.

Nine families, in 2014, sued the gunmaker Remington Arms, producer of the Bushmaster rifle. At first these plaintiffs -- Soto et al -- were turned back because the law gives gun manufacturers some immunity. On appeal, however, Remington was found to lack that kind of immunity in the circumstances that prevailed (fictionally) at Sandy Hook. This Soto case has been pending for a long time; the plaintiffs originally asked for $215 million in damages.

There are nine, not 26, families in the case. Three are families of the 6 allegedly deceased teachers or staff members, namely Rachel D'Avino, Mary Sherlach, and Victoria Soto. Six are families of the 20 kids who allegedly died: Dylan Hockley, Noah Pozner, Lauren Rousseau, Daniel Barden, Benjamin Wheeler, and Jesse McCord Lewis. There was a wounded-not-killed teacher when the case was first filed, Natalie Hammond, but she dropped out. (Goodonya, Natalie.)

One additional part of the Soto et al v Remington case, which is also called the Soto et al v Bushmaster case, concerns the husband of teacher Mary Sherlach. He is entitled to file not only for her murder -- on behalf of her estate -- but also to file for the loss of consortium he will endure for the years ahead. I have not heard how the settlement split those amounts.

It is noteworthy, by the way, that not only did Remington "kiss up" in this matter, its fellow members of the gun manufacturing industry did not seem to raise an eyebrow. Worse yet, the various sports associations that we would expect to be -- pardon me -- "up in arms" have not been heard from. One such association has its national office in Newtown CT.

'Mazing.

I think true Second Amendment activists will have to stick up for the Constitution without waiting for support. All Americans should be constitutional sticker-up-fors. Gotta pull your weight if you want the benefits of a republic. (See my 2021 book, Keep the Republic, linked below.)

What To Do Now?

People laugh at me because I believe in law. I find it hard to imagine an alternative. A lawless society would be unlivable. As I said, Australia has already built a Welcome Camp. Oh-oh.

James Fetzer can still get his case overturned, if people support him. I mean he can take it to the Great Nine on the basis of that court's own precedents regarding the truth defense. Picture it -- SCOTUS rules that Fetzer does not have to pay damages for defamation because his allegation about a fake death certificate was correct. [All faint.]

Nah, actually SCOTUS doesn't rule on a case if the complaint is that someone was deprived of a trial -- it would just get remanded to the lower court for a trial by jury. Which will more than suffice for Fetzer.

As for Soto v Remington, the money will change hands this week. Perhaps Soto's lawyers are slated to get a third -- $24 million, give or take a mil. Well, it was hard work, wasn't it?

My guess is that each of the nine plaintiffs won't get much. I speculate (having watched movies like, say, The Godfather), that there are many silent partners waiting for their bit.

I'm going to check my brakes in the morning.

Based on my sincere belief that the entire "massacre" was fictional, the various comings and goings at courthouses must have had pressure put like mad. That's why I call this "the real Sandy Hook tragedy." It is sad beyond belief that we have lost our third branch of government, the sorter of disputes, the reviewer of law, our world-envied judiciary. Sad, sad, sad.

The title of this article includes the phrase "Arrests Called For." You can call Nine-One-One -- there is no shortage of law against the obstruction of justice. Start by googling for 18 USC 1501-1521.

There's even the crime of "misprision" at 18 USC 4. It doesn't mean you'll miss out on going to prison. It means you can indeed go to prison for failing to report a felony. I learned about it from the late great Rodney Stich some years ago at Rumor Mill News.

Put it this way: If someone had just broken into your home and stolen your grandmother's precious jewels, you'd be straight onto the phone dialing 911, wouldn't you?

Nota bene: Someone has just broken into your home and stolen one of your grandmother's precious jewels.