(ANTIMEDIA) — On Monday, police dramatically changed the official timeline of how the Las Vegas shooting began. Last week, officials claimed Vegas gunman Stephen Paddock shot Jesus Campos, a security guard at the Mandalay Bay hotel, after Paddock opened fire on concertgoers in Las Vegas, leaving 59 dead and hundreds more injured, going so far as to credit Campos with halting the bloodshed.
The police had previously credited the Mandalay Bay security guard with stopping the 10-minute assault, even telling the media a story about Campos steering Paddock’s attention away from the concert crowd. They now say Campos was shot before the shooting began.
On Monday, police revealed for the first time that the Vegas gunman actually shot the hotel security guard “six minutes before” the Las Vegas massacre began at 10:05 p.m. Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said Paddock shot Campos before the mass shooting — at 9:59 p.m. — and that police now have no idea why the gunman stopped attacking the crowd.
Lombardo also said investigators found “some evidence of medications” they believe Paddock used and that he had started drilling a hole next to his hotel door. Officials declined to comment on the medications they suspect Paddock was taking and said they weren’t sure what the hole was for.
In the previous timeline of events, police said they were not in a hurry to enter Paddock’s hotel room because Jesus Campo had halted the shooting. According to the LA Times, this raises “new questions about why police weren’t able to pinpoint the gunman’s location sooner.”
As reported by the Associated Press, it remains unclear what led the timeline of events to change a week later and what impact the change may have on the investigation.
The narrative switch will surely ignite even more conspiracy theories attempting to explain the Las Vegas shooting.
Since you’re here…
…We have a small favor to ask. Fewer and fewer people are seeing Anti-Media articles as social media sites crack down on us, and advertising revenues across the board are quickly declining. However, unlike many news organizations, we haven’t put up a paywall because we value open and accessible journalism over profit — but at this point, we’re barely even breaking even. Hopefully, you can see why we need to ask for your help. Anti-Media’s independent journalism and analysis takes substantial time, resources, and effort to produce, but we do it because we believe in our message and hope you do, too.
If everyone who reads our reporting and finds value in it helps fund it, our future can be much more secure. For as little as $1 and a minute of your time, you can support Anti-Media. Thank you. Click here to support us