Influential Figures Surround Sandy Hook Crime Scenes

CHBoothBy Namesnot Mary
Text by James Tracy

New information suggests that important parties with ties to the Connecticut State Appellate Court, Newtown Savings Bank, the United Way of Western Connecticut, and even cable news powerhouse CNN own or are associated with properties in close proximity of the two principal Sandy Hook massacre crime scenes.

[Image credit: C. H. Booth Library]

Researcher Namesnot Mary notes that specific financial and social ties between such property owners would potentially allow them to exert significant control over the crime scenes at the Sandy Hook Elementary School grounds and the Lanza residence.

For example, 1 Riverside Road, located in the exact center of the intimate Sandy Hook village, appears to be owned by lawyer Hugh J. Lavery, a probable offspring of William J. Lavery. William Lavery is a powerful attorney and former Newtown resident who between 2000 and 2006 served as  Senior Appellate Court Judge. In 2006 Lavery became Chief Court Administrator of the Appellate, and in 2007 was appointed Senior Judge on the Court’s bench. Lavery has been closely involved in Newtown’s civic organizations, including the C. H. Booth Library and annual Labor Day Parade.

Most significantly, alongside J. Paul Vance Jr.’s position as Connecticut Claims Commissioner, William Lavery’s judicial position provides dual protection against litigation, prospectively allowing him to rule against any possible lawsuits or public records requests brought in Connecticut state courts concerning the December 14, 2012 Sandy Hook event.

Hugh Lavery’s daughter, Kaitlin Lavery, is a media industry veteran, having worked as a senior account executive at CNN, Turner Broadcasting, Univision, and Madison Square Garden Company’s FuseTV.

Among other findings, John Trentacosta, who owns the property next to the Lanzas’ 36 Yogananda Street residence, at 34 Yogananda, is President and CEO of Newtown Savings Bank and serves in an advisory capacity to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Newtown Savings’ Chief Financial Officer, William McCarthy, owns 12 Crestwood Drive, directly behind Sandy Hook Elementary.

William Lavery, Trentacosta, and McCarthy serve together on the C. H. Booth Library’s Board of Trustees, although Lavery presently occupies an emeritus post.

In his capacity at Newtown Savings, Trentacosta collaborated with the United Way of Western Connecticut to establish the Sandy Hook School Support Fund. Logged and dated web posts suggest the Fund’s announced founding predated the event by three days. Much like the subsequent rapid establishment of “One Fund Boston,” a single day after the Sandy Hook massacre, on Saturday, December 15, 2012, Trentacosta speedily announced the Sandy Hook Fund on his Newtown Savings blog.

49 thoughts on “Influential Figures Surround Sandy Hook Crime Scenes”

  1. Wasn’t there a great deal of activity at the Trentacosta house on the morning of the 14th? Seems like a saw video detailing numerous vehicles located at the Trentacosta home that morning, with a comparatively light turnout at the Lanza home next door.

  2. i hope everyone knows the depth of this hoax. I hope they are all found out. Great work NNM

  3. I would like to see an in depth assessment of the web posts, and there are several, that predate the actual event occurrence.

    If you can prove that any one of them is genuine, you would have irrefutable evidence supporting conspiracy and a elaborately staged event.

    There must be several high credentialed computer experts that could be tapped to examine the best evidence for comment.

  4. Thanks NNM, great work. It looks like you’ve identified the “steering committee”.

    As to Maestro’s question, yes there was an inordinate amount of police presence at Trentacosta’s house. While “Nancy” was supposed to be the victim, and her house the crime scene, all the interest seemed focused across the street.

    He was also briefly interviewed and stated that he hardly knew them.

  5. More dirt out of Sandy Hook…I’ll add some. Isn’t it curious that this dirt is being dug by a hardly-known independent researcher and not by the Oathkeepers, the National Rifle Association, the LIbertarian Party, or the John Birch Society? Isn’t it even more curious that these groups are predictably going to ignore this research, except for summarily dismissing it as some silly conspiracy theory if they get pressed to comment on it?

    And isn’t it most curious that the same groups can be predicted to keep hammering their gullible supporters with request for support because “gun rights are in danger because one crazy gunman did the Sandy Hook massacre and people just don’t understand that most gunmen do not massacre people?”

    Assuming Sandy Hook is really another act in a grand rendition of Plato’s cave, the above-mentioned watchdogs who do not bark are Platonic actors as dangerous as the actual corrupt government officials, paid actors, and mass media who knowingly spread false information. By their failure to act, they play an invaluable role in the success of the operation. Sandy Hook was unthinkable without their prior commitment to not blow the whistle.

    Sandy Hook’s dirt can be found in the least expected quarters. And that’s nothing compared to 9/11’s dirt. But this is another story.


      1. Don’t fall for that line of hogwash Patrick. One could say the same thing about ANY other organization – Susan G. Komen, Ronald McDonald House, NAACP, NOW, etc. They are single purpose organizations who don’t feel their chosen focus was significantly overlapped by Sandy Hook. As a member of two of those named organizations, I can tell you with some certainty that they are concerned because the event does seem to lead to the things with which they concern themselves. However, they mostly fight in court and in the halls of Congress. Investigation is not a part of their playbooks. Meanwhile, they are busy working against the actual and probably intended consequences of the events which have certainly furthered the cause of citizen disarmament and subsequent subjugation.

        Notice too that all four mentioned are ‘conservative’ organizations – no ‘liberal’ or statist organizations were selected for criticism, yet as I stated, ANY organization not involved could be criticized and accused for non-participation in Sandy Hook investigations. Even the CT departments concerned with child welfare should be pushing the investigations – but aren’t.

        I suspect Mr. Noel isn’t playing straight with us, else why not attack the commie government of the state? They are certainly the ones who SHOULD be investigating and aren’t. They did their cover-up work in the dark, labeled it as final, buried the evidence legally and physically, all before publishing it. IMO, Daniel is functioning as a distraction, intentionally or not.

      2. I question what you’re saying, dave. It strikes me that there is a conspiracy of normalcy these groups participate in, often without realizing it. It is the theme I developed here a couple weeks ago, in an article James kindly published (

        The idea is that organizations on both the “left” and the “right” function as gatekeepers, unconsciously, protecting the corrupted status quo while appearing to fight it. They actually strengthen the system by not questioning its legitimacy.

        Some months ago a little discussion arose here about Rand Paul using Sandy Hook, assuming it was a real event, to promote a position he held (since the government couldn’t prevent SHE…). Some were questioning his honesty. If WE all know the event never happened, certainly HE does, too, so it is disingenuous of him to use the “fact” of a fake event to make a rhetorical point about some policy that needs to be promoted.

        The four institutions Daniel mentions are exactly the ones that SHOULD be saying the emperor has no clothes on. The fact that they are legitimizing the corrupted state by their silence speaks volumes.

        You say that Daniel is being selective because he does not include leftie organizations in his list (also random non-political ones, for some weird reason), but that seems a false argument, if you understood the point Daniel is trying to make; these are organizations that want to reduce the state, to the point where false flags would be impossible. Yet they do not speak up when obvious hoaxes are used to grow the state. Why? Why don’t they point out the lie, which would go a long way to advance their supposed mission?

        On the other hand, leftie organizations, by definition, wish to strengthen, and grow, the state. False flag events serve their purpose.

        Leftists, as individuals, often can’t see this dynamic, and cling to the idea that there is nobility on the left, and that individualism is championed there. Of course, the natural end result of the leftist ideal is communism, best described in Orwell’s 1984. They are deluded. In their ideals, they are libertarians, but usually believe the leftist lie that libertarianism is fascism (what a joke that is! fascism is a form of socialism!).

        So why does not the Libertarian Party speak up, and perhaps persuade honest lefties who believe in individual freedom that libertarianism is their natural home, by publicly announcing that the MSM is lying about these false flags that the government itself is creating, and that there are no “lone nuts,” outside of the ones the secret government creates via MKUltra?

        That’s Daniel’s point, I believe.

    1. Funny you should mention this: I actually withdrew my membership to the John Birch Society over its refusal to question the official narrative of Sandy Hook and the Boston Bombing incidents.

      Though I have but the highest respect for some long-time members of the JBS (Samuel Blumenfeld being one), I can’t continue to support any group who isn’t willing to call out the players–or even bring up questions about–these (and other) outrageous events.

      1. I ran across a website of this positively rabid fellow who was digging up dirt and posting public documents – including addresses and phone numbers – relating to people who question the Sandy Hook event and others. I spent enough time there to get my blood pressure up. That’s what that side does – no logical debate – just attack and degrade.

        I can only think that some of these entities know what they are up against (recent past – IRS audits, raids, public condemnation, etc.). Hopefully some of these organizations will discover ways in which to chop the head off this beast.

    2. Excellent points, Daniel. I just visited your site too, and started perusing your 9/11 book, which looks to be quite the masterwork. I like the way you’ve pointed out all the gatekeepers, especially on the left. But I barely scratched the surface of what you’ve written, so I’ll be back to devour much more…. Cheers!

    1. Yes, that is a good article by Swan, there were a lot of details I had forgotten.

      This SH drama is convoluted, but the great research being done out there is beginning to reveal the web of actors that concocted it. I appreciate that James featured this, thanks James!

      The teacher who lost his job because of his views regarding the event, Adam Heller, has hired an ardent mouthpiece, Michael Sussman.

      I’m glad he is not taking this lying down.

      1. Not quite sure which side Lee Higgins is on. The paper he reports for is The Journal News (Gannett) located in White Plains, NY. After the Sandy Hook incident the paper published names and addresses of local NY gun owners. In return bloggers published names and contacts for The Journal News staff. The paper then hired armed security guards for its protection.

    2. Tony – thanks for this link. This keeps inconsistencies such as these fresh in readers’ minds. It was especially interesting that the Yoganada roadblock is confined to the Trentacosta residence and the neighbor describing Nancy and family as having a pool (basically describing theT’s house). There are so few people w/firsthand accounts of relationships with the Lanza family members.

  6. The most logical explanation for the loud, distinctive 9:46:54 a.m. gunshot would seem to be that an NPD officer (or arriving CSP officer) fired a weapon down the hall. Distant/muffled shots can be heard before this very loud shot; I now feel these distant shots were coming from room 6 or 4, possibly being fired at the playscape area (where Captain Rios still, for some reason, had Manfredonia detained–7 long minutes total). At any rate, the loud shot at 9:46:54, which contains no verbal exchange of any kind, matches best to the NPD officers who were crouched around the lobby corner looking down the north hall. This explains why no one says anything before or after the shot, and why the shot is much closer to Rick Thorne’s cell phone than the other shots. It also likely explains why Rick doesn’t react–he knows at this point there are officers in the lobby monitoring the north hall. He may even know it’s an officer doing the shooting. This also explains the bullet “from a second handgun” found later in the north hall–they attribute it to a perp using a second handgun once and once only, but of course it matches far better to an officer’s weapon–meaning the officer fired a handgun. Don’t know if he was firing at someone, or just sending a warning shot, but at least another big piece has finally, I believe, been put into place. Slowly but surely, we’ll get there.

  7. Sorry–that should have read “sounding like it was fired in the playscape area.” NPD officers for some reason feel there’s suddenly a threat near the playscape area around the end of the 9:46 a.m. minute. Shots fired inside rooms 4 or 2, for example, could sound as if they were coming from the outside of the building near the playscape. And from room 2, he could actually fire at the playscape; it’s a corner room. At any rate, whatever’s happening, Cario and others race toward the playscape area after the volley of distant shots or near this time. The threat can’t be Manfredonia, unless for some reason he wrestled Rios’ gun away from him, and Rios walks Manfredonia out at 9:48, still cuffed. So what caused officers to suddenly rush the playscape, and just after shots were heard? I think it’s a guy firing in a room, and that this person then comes back out into the quiet hall, not realizing officers are crouched in the lobby. When the guy comes out of a room, they fire at him and he ducks back into another room.

  8. I’ve done a little digging of my own into Nicole Hockley. Turns out, she had a double major in college: English and Theater. Another actor! What a surprise!

    I did not find any true “smoking gun” in my research, and there weren’t any direct ties to obvious malfeasance that I could find. However, Nicole Hockley certainly seems to be a New World Order/Agenda 21 type: According to her online resume, while employed as the Marketing Director for the Hartford in UK, she “redefined PR and Thought Leadership strategies.” Later, for a short time, she was employed as Senior Marketing Consultant with a UK non-profit called The Carbon Trust, “specialists in accelerating the move to a low carbon economy”, where she interacted on a monthly basis with UK Department of Energy and Climate Change.

    What I found most interesting were a few of the details relating to the Hockley’s foundation, Dylan’s Wings of Change (“DWC”), which was set up shortly after the S.H. tragedy, to support children with autism spectrum and related disorders. Sometime after its creation, the management of DWC was handed over to the New Venture Fund (“NVF”), itself a public charity that “was established in response to demand from leading philanthropists for efficient, cost-effective and time-saving project-implementation and intermediary services”. From what I can tell, NVF provides fiscal sponsorship to nonprofit organizations, and helps coordinate small-grants programs.

    According to the NVF website, “NVF supports a range of public interest projects, the majority of which focus on conservation and global health….NVF has also managed programs focused on voter registration, public policy, disaster recovery, education, and music and the arts. NVF has experience managing multiple multimillion-dollar small-grants programs focused on a variety of critical public interest causes.” I have not yet determined why NVF would be interested in a small-time project like DWC.

    NVF appears to be quite a big deal. The principals involved in NVF are players in the global game, and include a CFR member, a past Executive Director of Public Affairs for the UN Foundation, and others. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has given NVF grants totalling over $31.8M since 2012 alone, mostly for global policy and advocacy, and global education. So again I have to ask: what is NVF doing with the kind of chump change that’s being generated by DWC?

    1. A big deal indeed. According to NVF’s About Page:

      The New Venture Fund, a 501(c)(3) public charity, supports innovative and effective public interest projects. NVF was established in 2006 in response to demand from leading philanthropists for an efficient, cost-effective, and time-saving platform to launch and operate charitable projects. We execute a range of donor-driven public interest projects in conservation, global health, public policy, international development, education, disaster recovery, and the arts. More than half of the 50 largest US grantmaking foundations have funded projects hosted at NVF, including 8 of the top 10.

      NVF is overseen by an independent board of directors that has extensive experience in philanthropy and nonprofit management. NVF is managed under an administrative agreement with Arabella Advisors, a leading national philanthropy services firm that helps philanthropists and investors find innovative ways to achieve greater good with their resources. NVF has collaborated with Arabella on successful projects for many of philanthropy’s leading players and institutions, and the two organizations share a commitment to evaluation and measuring impact.

      1. This begs the question: why would so many philanthropists feel compelled to partner with NVF? The idea that some donations may not be what they seem tickles my brain. At some level, could acts of “philanthropy” in fact be shakedown or protection money paid by the uber-wealthy in order to stay in the game unharmed? Sorry if this is baseless conjecture – just brainstorming…

  9. Good research!

    We cannot forget the retired senator Joe Lieberman who stepped right up to help and took an ‘unpaid’ role to advise the Sandy Hook Fund on how to spend the money.

    Earlier this year it was announced Former Sen. Joe Lieberman has joined the private equity firm Victory Park Capital, where he will serve as chairman of the firm’s Executive Board.

    Here’s what the VPC says about its investors:

    We are privileged to have a collection of highly sophisticated investors, including asset management firms, pension plans, endowments, insurance companies, wealthy families and operating executives. The senior members of the firm are also meaningful investors in our funds.

    He did land a lawyer’s job in 2013 and promised to stay 3 years, perhaps this former Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security group can multitask with several jobs!

  10. Here is yet another story about an autism spectrum disorder support group set up after the Sandy Hook shooting, from the Newtown Bee:

    Note that this one was sponsored by the Booth library.

    Martin Bryant, the alleged Port Arthur gunman was also diagnosed, after the fact, as potentially “autistic”, as was James Holmes.

    It is all too clear that ‘mental health screening’ for gun ownership is being cued up to undermine the second amendment.

  11. I was watching FOX news NY and a commercial came on for Governor Andrew Cuomo, it was about him helping the Super storm sandy victims in Long Beach, NY. They show the Governor hugging a man who looks just like Gene Rosen. I also found it rude that you would meet a Governor and not remove your sunglasses. There are 2 pictures of this man with the Governor and it looks like the same man to me.

  12. It seems clear now that Sandy Hook parents (some at least) are gearing up for suits against Newtown. Some are going public with a checklist of ways in which Sandy Hook School could have prevented 100% of the deaths that day–but didn’t.

    Suits *should* be (also) filed against Stephen Sedensky, the CT State Police, and others who tampered with evidence, lied in sworn statements, failed to establish Unified Command, etc. But it looks like Malloy’s administration has successfully convinced the parents that filing against the state would be fruitless (because Lt. J. Paul Vance’s son would just deny them permission to file), and therefore they should concentrate on Newtown itself.

    My question is this, though: how do they expect to get much money from Newtown?

    Is Newtown just a sacrificial PR lamb–bring the hammer down on them, seemingly, with the state quietly filling Newtown’s coffers over and over–a coffer that can be “sued” until the parents are satisfied?

    Nothing happens without a reason–what’s the message in suing Newtown? Obviously the state has more money than Newtown, so what’s the spin going to be?

    I have one prediction: money, money, money for security companies.

    Safe Havens, for example, which is working with the parents in some capacity to prepare for these suits, happens to offer security training for schools.

    Can you imagine the clenching panic that will grip all American school districts as they watch Newtown Public Schools’ budget drain, and *individual administrators* losing their life savings in vicious lawsuits?

    Can you imagine a single public school in America not going ape and demanding (translation: funding) immediate lockdown training ad nauseum?

    For a long time I’ve felt dis-ease at the “lockdown mania” that’s gripped our public schools; though it could be interpreted as some sort of sinister shift to a siege mentality, it could also simply be companies trying to make a buck–lots of bucks. Security makes exponential profits–cops love it, security firms love it, federal safety-type offices love it–everyone wins, as the citizens of each town, one by one, fork over tax money for frantic safety training and psychotic drills.

      1. Is it just me Anne, or does anybody else see a potential “conflict of interest” when one serves as the gate keeper for state lawsuits and joins a personal/employment injury firm?

        Hopefully he has stepped down from his state appointment. We all know that Governor Malloy would not want even the appearance of impropriety.

        As to the various “philanthropic” entities above, we should remember that it is easy to “give” when one is “compensated”. Did I mention that the opium crop in Afghanistan is at a record level? Sorry, when one gets old sometimes these mental lapses happen.

        I have to say, although maybe I’ve just become sensitized to it, that Connecticut keeps coming up more and more as a “clearing house” for government largesse. I’m having a difficult time just logging the links. For such a small state it seems odd.

      2. Lophatt, thanks for pointing that out. I was thinking of mentioning it, but it would just be one more negative point coming from me. Junior still runs the office of the claims commissioner. I am trying hard to find something cheerful and positive about the state to report. They seem to leave the part east of Hartford out of the loop. That must be a good thing.

        Out of the loop now is also the chairman of Newtown Board of Education.

        “NEWTOWN — Newtown Board of Education chairman Debbie Leidlein has stepped down from the position. At the board’s June 30 meeting, Leidlein said events in her personal life have made it difficult to give all of her attention to the work. Leidlein had served as chairman since December 2011.”

        One more bit the dust last month. United Way Northwest region is the neighbor of Western region in Danbury affiliated with Newtown charities:

        “The executive director of the United Way of Northwest Connecticut has been fired, according to sources. Stephanie Barksdale, who served since November 2010, was reportedly put on administrative leave and recently let go.”

      3. That’s interesting. So Mr. Vance can decide if someone “has the right” to sue the state, but he works representing injury compensation clients? I hope I didn’t get that right.

        Ms. Leidlein has “personal issues” and had to leave. Being a Board of Education chairman is not a depressing occupation when its raining money. Strange.

        Lastly, Ms. Barksdale is “placed on administrative leave’. That implies some problem. It sounds like she wants to talk, but can’t.

        This has the flavor of a putsch. They certainly seem to have a high degree of control. I imagine if one starts to ask questions they are handed over to one of the mental health groups for “evaluation”.

      4. Hmmm, wonder if he is no longer claims commissioner…or he shouldn’t be. It seems to be an inherent conflict of interest to work both sides of the fence. Not that it stops most in gubbermint positions.

  13. From the article above:
    “William Lavery, Trentacosta, and McCarthy serve together on the C. H. Booth Library’s Board of Trustees, although Lavery presently occupies an emeritus post.”

    There was a slight upheaval last fall when a new library director wanted to implement changes that did not meet with approval. He resigned after
    less than three months on the job.

    From Danbury News Times:
    “Fields was criticized for making too many changes, including the elimination of a research librarian position held by a longtime employee, Andrea Zimmermann, which prompted immediate public clamor. Some staff members, speaking on the condition they not be identified, also said he imposed some new staffing rules without consultation and that the atmosphere in the library had changed from what many longtime patrons have come to expect. At least one staff member said there was a sense that the trustees did not properly consider the administrative staff in place when they hired Fields from the Shelton library system.”

    Longtime employee and author Andrea Zimmerman was given the task of archiving the mountain of letters that arrived in Newtown after the event.

    A new library director was recently appointed. One that will fall in line with Newtown traditions. Brenda McKinley is also affiliated with the local new age magazine “The Newtowner”, a publication heavily involved in healing and featuring some interesting contributors.

    Brenda McKinley, the creative nonfiction editor of The Newtowner, said one of the pieces to be published was written by a librarian who was present at the school the day of the slayings.
    McKinley said it was a crossover piece, nonfiction but poetic in delivery. The librarian, a Sandy Hook resident who had children in the school at the time of the attack, wrote a list of thank yous.
    The first line reads: “Thank you 1950s engineers who unknowingly designed the library storage closet that could hold 18 kids and 4 adults.”
    Everyone seated at the table let out a slight gasp after the line was read. McKinley said the submissions she has received have been, for the most part, beautiful.
    “Working through our tears, but they’re really just amazing,” McKinley said.

Comments are closed.