Grosjeans take on this asswipe:
https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/gamb...d-the-shooter/
Grosjeans take on this asswipe:
https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/gamb...d-the-shooter/
I used to rent weeklies at the Bridger Inn.
I remember that some tried to paint the shooter as an AP. I didn't think he was. I thought he was just a rich loser. But what has clicked with me in the Grosjean article is the crackdown on machine AP's on MGM properties after the Mandalay shooting. It looks like either execs or security seen the machine AP's as being the same type the shooter was. And he had been described in the press as an AP. So they cracked the whip on AP's.
"More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ
"More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/...ding-shooting/
It appears he was losing for the 2 years up to the shooting.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/...ding-shooting/
Like I said...speculation...
"Lombardo speculated that the financial losses might have contributed to Paddock’s decision to spray a country music festival with bullets, killing 58 people and injuring more than 500 others."
True that it’s speculation. He could have been winning and done the shooting. He was obviously nuts and stranger things have happened. Just seems to make more sense that he was losing as generally losing agitates people and winning generally puts them in a good mood.
Not sure why they never stated it for sure. Obviously the authorities should be able to tell via his financial records.
DiGenBen- Grosjean is suggesting the local press does know or could know but doesn't want to suggest that his gambling losses triggered this.
Still seems like the FBI would have made that public at some point?
When I was asked I said that based on what I gleaned from my meet up with him and the little I've seen since, he wasn't especially upset that he was losing money because he wasn't losing anything he didn't have. Rather, he was an angry habitual video poker player who just couldn't hit enuf iintermittent satisfaction-producing winners and who simply chose to lash out, and he chose his time and place to do that.
Why is this being brought up again?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)