The girlfriend of Las Vegas mass murderer Stephen Paddock released a statement to the public through her attorney, Matt Lombard. He’s the kind of grubby looking guy one might consider as likely to have terrorists in his client list or to be a spokesperson for CAIR.
In the statement Danley says the type of things that are present in any boiler plate public address of this nature. She claims she’s “devastated by the deaths and injuries that have occurred,” saying her “prayers go out to the victims and their families and all of those who have been hurt by these awful events.”
Danley sanitized and distanced herself throughout the statement, using the term awful events rather than a personal reference such as “the brutal, horrific and senseless murder and injury of hundreds of innocent people by my evil, sociopathic boyfriend.”
The statement sounds much more like a PR exercise in damage control than anything else, as some of the experts explain later in the video. She denies any involvement or failure to alert authorities, saying, “He never said anything to me or took any action, that I was aware of, that I understood in any way to be a warning that something horrible like this was going to happen.”
The statement says that he unexpectedly offered her a trip back to the Philippines, which she took him up on, to visit family and friends, but then it goes on to talk about the $100,000 he sent. It says, “While there, he wired me money, which he said was for me to buy a house for me and my family. I was grateful but honestly, I was worried, that first, the unexpected trip home and then the money was a way of breaking up with me.”
So she’s sort of a victim too, we’re supposed to think. There’s no explanation as to what form the notification from him that it was a gift intended to buy a house for her and her family came in. Was it a two sentence note that accompanied a transfer? Did she not respond with a phone call or an email?
Of course they talked, he had refused to talk to her and she is being honest, she would have included that in her comments. Everyone in the Philippines has a cell phone and it’s easy and inexpensive to buy a load for international calls. So she was in communication with him during the period following her departure and prior to the shooting. A position that she had been cut off in terms of communications isn’t supported.
She closes the statement by saying, “Anything that I can do to help ease suffering and help in any way, I will do.” Maybe she could start by donating that $100,000 for funeral or other expenses to the victims, if she’s really serious and means what she says.
Wolf Blitzer has a few experts in the field of terrorism and investigations who are less than convinced by her statement.
The most important questions that an investigator might ask and which is certainly one they have discussed was whether he was a convert to Islam. Is she a Muslim? Would she consider it her duty to lie to police about that portion of their relationship or conspiracy? Was she the source of his radicalization if it happened? Where in the Philippines did she travel to, and who did she meet with while she was there? Do any of her contacts have connections to terrorism?
Thank you for reading and sharing my work – Please look for me, Rick Wells at https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/, https://gab.ai/RickRWells, https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RickwellsUs and on my website http://RickWells.US – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US – not dot com, and also follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.