A terrible, terrible thing has happened and I’m sure more facts will turn up soon, but there are some very questionable things in the police reports that I’m reading in the papers now. Of course, it may the fault of the reporter, for leaving out things that he or she thought was too obvious to write.  Also, now that the “killer” has been identified as a Korean man and not a Chinese guy (poor Chinese guy) I’m wondering if the scenario of the jilted boyfriend still holds true.

1. One paper writes: Ryan Clark, a student from Martinez, Ga., who had several majors and carried a 4.0 grade-point average, said Vernon Collins, coroner in Columbia County, Ga.
=> Since when did coroners know GPAs? I’m sorry that Clark is deceased, but there are so many small details that put Clark in a very positive light while there are no other details on any of the other victims. There are hardly any sob stories on Emily Hillscher, for instance, the other student who was killed in the dormitory.

2. This wasn’t about the ex-girlfriend.
=> The second killing was planned, since chains were used the lock the door. Students said he was calm. If he were searching for just one target, like an ex-girlfriend, he would probably be tearing through the rooms trying to find her before he gets caught. But that wasn’t the case. It was like he was trying to take out as many people as possible.

3. Was it a game?
=> If the killer was on drugs or in a state of mental instability, maybe this was a game, like some sort of CounterStrike. 100 points for the professor, 50 points for the students, which would explain why he shot the professor first. Which would explain why he was dressed up the way he was. Maroon hat, black vest with ammunition….sound familiar?

4. Evidence can lie
=> Anyone who has watched the past two seasons of “Prison Break” will know that circumstantial evidence may not necessarily be true. Cho’s fingerprints were found on the guns and a gun receipt was found in his bag, but I won’t believe that it is 100  percent him until witnesses at the crime scene identify him. And did someone see him kill himself? Papers quote police saying that he committed suicide, but who saw it? Did police see it? Did students see it? As a journalist, I find it frustrating because these facts are written so matter-of-fact without any sources. 
I know this is an extreme conspiracy theory, but if no one actually saw the killer committing suicide, the Cho guy could have been framed. I mean, terrified as everyone was, an Asian guy wearing a maroon hat and black jacket would probably all look similar.  And witnesses said that they thought the guy was about 19. Cho is 23. Asians do have a tendency of looking younger than their age, but what if it was another Asian guy?

5. Killers love receipts?
=> What kind of killer would put the receipt of his gun (which even had the serial number erased) in his backpack? If he was planning on killing himself, there would be no need to carry around a month-old receipt because it’s like- duh- everyone knows that you did it anyway. But the receipt is so weird. It stands out as trying to emphasize that Cho and no one else bought the gun. And only one gun at that.

6. Don’t believe. Do the research
=> When asked if the two bombings on campus earlier this month were related to the murders, the police said that they “did not believe the two were related.” Hey. Don’t jump to conclusions. Bombs create mass destruction and so did the VT case. If there is no relation, show me the evidence. Maybe the bombs were a distraction. Maybe the dorm killing was another distraction. Hopefully, this was the end of such distractions.