LVMPD Releases 2,100 Additional Pages of Evidence — More Answers and Even More Questions
On Wednesday May 23rd, 2018 the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department carried out their third release of Las Vegas Shooting evidence. This release consisted of officer reports, additional witness statements and dispatch logs.
The officer reports detail what occurred the night of the shooting through the eyes of the officers and what the officers saw as they moved along the Strip. The reports provide even more of a glimpse into the events on the ground than the public has had in the past, which allows for a much clearer overall picture of the events on the night of the shooting.
The documents also indicate that police initially believed that there were multiple active shooters conducting a terrorist attack along the Las Vegas Strip. However, as the night progressed and they investigated 9–1–1 calls of shooters and reports of people with guns coming from other hotels such as NYNY and Tropicana, one by one these calls proved to be unfounded upon their arrival.
Patrol Officer Gallegos describes seeing injured concert-goers flooding out of the venue asking for direction on where to go. He tells about a good samaritan who drove up in a truck and asked the officer if he could help. Gallegos was then able to direct the injured into the bed of the truck and instructed the driver which hospital to take them to. As more civilians with vehicles arrived to assist, Officer Gallegos made decisions on severity of injuries, which hospital could properly treat that degree of injury, and then directed the drivers to the appropriate medical center.
The officer also details noticing business suites with broken out windows. Upon inspection, he found more injured parties hiding from the gunfire whom he also helped get to a civilian’s vehicle and headed to the correct place to be treated.
Another officer, K. Parenteau, was assigned to calling back individuals that had called 9–1–1 and may have had further information. This officer’s account of his actions that night includes the names of the people he called and their responses. The names have been redacted.
One female caller said she dialed 9–1–1 because she saw a suspect with black “battle dress” uniform pants on standing calmly while everyone else was running. Her observation of such abnormal behavior during an active shooter event, prompted her to call 9–1–1 and report seeing a possible shooter.
Another caller parked at 105 Reno called to report hearing shots on East side of the venue.
Parenteau then provides the account of someone he spoke with who claimed to be Marilou Danley’s ex-brother in law. This man appears to have provided contact information for an unidentified male (due to redaction). The officer attempted to call the number he was given for the unidentified male numerous times. All of those calls went unanswered and all voicemails he left went unreturned.
New information also revealed by the latest release is that there was a third account regarding the actions of Officers Varsin and Hendrex. This new account was provided in a statement given by Officer Cordell Hendrex himself. Varsin and Hendrex are the two officers that were in the Mandalay Bay security office at the time of both Jesus Campos’ call to report the L bracket on the 32nd floor stairwell door as well as when Campos radioed the exact location of shots fired to be room 32–135.
The knowledge that these two officers were perhaps the first to know the exact location of the shooter, induces questions as to why they did not immediately broadcast that information and respond right to that location to stop the shooter and further loss of life.
The conflicting information and questions surrounding these two officer’s response to such a deadly massacre coupled with the realization that some LVMPD officers did not activate their body cameras, left the public wondering if Varsin and Hendrex’s actions that night would be documented or not.
For this reason, the revelation in Hendrex’s statement that “rookie” officer Elif Varsin, did in fact activate her body worn camera while they were still in the security office is a key piece of information in this document release. In light of the three conflicting stories, the release of that body camera footage will be the only way the public will ever know which story is the true story.
Perhaps the most shocking revelation from this evidence release was an LVMPD communication event search that lists an update via “units” in the control room, wherein it is stated that room 32–135 is occupied by possible suspect Stephen Paddock and three females. Assumingly from the visible part of this document showing #1, #2 and #3 with redacted information after each number, the three females names are then listed by the officer giving the update.
This is the first time information about other people being in Paddock’s hotel room has ever been offered to the public.
In fact, the exact opposite was previously implied in the LVMPD Force Investigation Team report. Page 45 of the FIT report states “Several items of evidentiary value were collected for DNA analysis. At the time of this report the DNA evidence collected has not yielded any significant results or indication that anyone else was in the room.”
With each evidence release, the public finds inconsistencies with information that Las Vegas authorities have been providing as absolute fact since the night of the shooting. Is the public being purposefully mislead in an effort to conceal something or could this be LVMPD protecting an “open investigation” that all details of which will be provided once it has concluded?
As it stands with the information given in this Wednesday’s press release, there will be another evidence release next week on May 30th, 2018.
