FBI investigators say they have found no evidence that Orlando shooter had gay lovers

[DonViejo]

Source: Los Angeles Times

Since the shooting at an Orlando nightclub last week that left 49 people dead, reports have emerged that gunman Omar Mateen frequented the gay club, used gay dating apps and had gay lovers.

-snip-

On Tuesday, Univision aired a report in which “Miguel,” a man wearing a disguise to conceal his identity, alleged he had sex with Mateen after meeting him on the gay dating app, Grindr. He said Mateen had sex with other men too, including a threesome with a Puerto Rican who allegedly told Mateen, after having had unprotected sex with him, that he was HIV positive.

But investigators do not consider the man’s account credible, according to one senior law enforcement official with access to the investigation.

In seeking to verify the reports, federal agents have culled Mateen's electronic devices, including a laptop computer and cellphone, as well as electronic communications of those who made the claims, law enforcement officials said.

So far, they have found no photographs, no text messages, no smartphone apps, no gay pornography and no cell-tower location data to suggest that Mateen — who was twice married to women and had a young son — conducted a secret gay life, the officials said.

-snip-


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-orlando-gay-fbi-20160623-snap-story.html

[4139]

1. Strange

[stonecutter357]

2. Orlando Shooter's Lover Comes Forward

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017387642

[DonViejo]

4. The FBI is saying that guy is not credible...

On Tuesday, Univision aired a report in which “Miguel,” a man wearing a disguise to conceal his identity, alleged he had sex with Mateen after meeting him on the gay dating app, Grindr. He said Mateen had sex with other men too, including a threesome with a Puerto Rican who allegedly told Mateen, after having had unprotected sex with him, that he was HIV positive.

But investigators do not consider the man’s account credible, according to one senior law enforcement official with access to the investigation.

[jberryhill]

9. Is the FBI saying that?

[OnyxCollie]

3. He wasn't gay, so STOP SAYING THAT!

Remember: TERRA!!!

[uppityperson]

5. Thank you. Rumors and speculation often lead from unreliable sources.

[840high]

6. Yes. Some people fall

for rumors. I was berated by 2 posters all because I said I'll wait for FBI report.

[jberryhill]

7. The source of this story is... who?

[elleng]

8. WHO's on FIRST!!!

[uppityperson]

10. Source: Los Angeles Times. It's in the OP.

[jberryhill]

11. Do you understand the definition of "source"?

Who is the source of the information in the story?

You are implicitly claiming the source is reliable, and you have no fucking idea who it is.

It is merely what you have chosen to believe.

[uppityperson]

12. I am copy/pasting from the OP "Source: Los Angeles Times". I think the LA Times is reliable but am

willing to read more on them if you have it. From a reputable source, of course. No need to cuss at me.

[jberryhill]

15. It is clear you do not understand the definition of "source"

[uppityperson]

23. Take it up with the OP. It says "source" there, same word you are using.

Did you know I'm not the OP?

[jberryhill]

25. The source for the story is anonymous

What is the name of the person from whom the information forming the basis of the story came.

You had made a comment about "unreliable sources", suggesting that you might know something about the reliability of the source used by the reporter for the story.

This may come as a surprise to you, but s single word can have different meanings in context. It is quite obviously a story from the LA Times, so context would suggest that perhaps the question was driving at the source of the information for the story - who is not identified.

[uppityperson]

26. I meant latimes was a better source than the tabloids talking about a person claiming sex partnerhoo

Ok, now you get to either cuss at me again, or pretend to read my mind and say that isn't what I meant, or say thanks for clarifying.

[LostOne4Ever]

13. They state the source is the FBI. That is pretty reliable source.

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]Further, the LA times is a very respectable newspaper with multiple pulitzers and a history going back to the 1800's:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times#Pulitzer_prizes

Conversely, the accusations that he had gay encounters are all speculation (ex-wife), unnamed sources or hearsay.[/font]

[jberryhill]

16. Do you believe the New York Times is also a reputable paper?

And do you know who Judith Miller is?

So, why do these people in the FBI not have names?

[LostOne4Ever]

17. Yes I do believe it is a reputable paper

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]No, this wasn't by Judith Miller.

And the FBI do have names, it is just that those names are irrelevant to the story as they are as agents on behalf of the FBI. A government agency that is responsible for these type of investigations. An agency that we can hold accountable and who has a long history in this country.

Now your turn, why would anyone believe unnamed sources that cannot be held accountable with no history or accountability to the public (who are promoting a homophobic meme that it was a "self loathing gay* man" who committed this atrocity) over that of the FBI?[/font]


*A gay man who was married twice, had a child, and stalked women**. How very gay of him.


**If those other unnamed sources are good so should this.

[Bucky]

20. wouldn't it make sense to avoid staking ground on one side or another till more facts come in?

Maybe Miguel's legit and maybe he's a fraud as the FBI says. We should wait & see rather than assert one is right and the other wrong. Sure, it's more likely that Miguel conned Univision than the FBI missing some details in their investigation. On the other hand, it's not like Omar Mateen didn't have a reason for being clandestine & secretive about any affiliation with the gay nightclub scene, if that's true.

There were a lot of reports over the last few days about Mateen's double life. I don't think that's only an anti-gay stereotype. America has a pretty solid track record for producing gay-hating people with suppressed orientations. If it's the truth we should take no offense. If it turns out to be just rumors we should accept that. Nothing he did invalidates the real suffering and oppression of GLBT Americans

[jberryhill]

21. These are not statements made by the agency

When the FBI has something to say, the FBI says it.

When an individual in the FBI wants to influence reporting or scratch his or her ego, then he or she cultivates relationships with reporters.

The article is based on no statement of the FBI at all.

[Bucky]

18. Gnarrr!!! ME HATE FACTS!!

Berryhill, the fact that the NYTimes had one fucked up employee does not mean that every story they report is false or that they don't have a process for vetting news reports for accuracy. You sound like those boobs who "prove" the Democrats are racist because Robert Byrd was once in the Klan.

You've spent so much time in this thread accusing people of not knowing what a source is that you've forgotten when the word credible means. The LA Times and the FBI are credible, meaning that you can count on what they say to be believable until proven otherwise. Perhaps Univision News is also credible. But when the FBI discounts what Univision reports, we can assume they have a reason for doing so.

So you can either hold off opining, pending more information that can resolve the contradiction between Univision & the FBI, or you can jump to the conclusion that one has to be right and the other has to be wrong based on which you prefer to believe. But if you go with the latter option, then you do so at the expense of your credibility.

[jberryhill]

19. I'm not jumping to ANY conclusion

Please see the comment where I came into this thread.

It's the battle of the anonymous sources.

People are simply choosing what sources they want to believe, with no idea who they are.

And you are correct, the individual reporter and whether they are being used by others with an agenda, has nothing to do with the reputation of the paper.

But I find it interesting that you accuse me of jumping to conclusions, when I am not AT a conclusion.

[Bucky]

22. Well, you did conclude someone didn't know what a source was when they clearly did

[jberryhill]

24. No, and that person is still being obtuse

Yes, the article is from the LA times. Who was the source for the story. I do not believe that is a difficult question to understand.

It is an anonymously-sourced story, which is an odd thing to use when talking about "unreliable sources".

[ToxMarz]

14. who was twice married to women and had a young son

If I remember correctly John Wayne Gacy was married twice and had two children. And didn't have just one spurious outburst of murderous violence against young men.

[Behind the Aegis]

27. Conspiracy!

Most of those who say "truth will out" or "truthtopower" will ignore this out of hand as this puzzle piece is inconvenient.

[King_David]

31. They already denying it ...

[Behind the Aegis]

41. Of course they are.

Did you also notice the suspicious lack of posts/threads about this info? Too many must have really tired hands from patting themselves on the back and high-fiving each other and are unable to continue. When people were speculating, based on stereotypes, that he was gay, people couldn't crank our stories/posts fast enough.

[melman]

36. Not to mention

the Very Serious Lawyers with Very Serious Lawyering Credentials.

[sarcasmo]

28. Kick.

[Ash_F]

29. That guy gave a very detailed and seemingly genuine account

I would be surprised if he was lying.

[King_David]

32. I'm not surprised he was lying...

[Ash_F]

37. You don't know he was lying this is an unverified report.

[yardwork]

38. Why would you believe him instead of this?

[Ash_F]

42. Because we don't know who the official is and who they told.

The reporter does not even clarify if the unnamed official actually spoke the her, making this an unverified report. It is possible the reporter just got this third hand from social media. We don't know where she got it.


Article reading 101. I is very important for people to learn how to spot these things.


If we heard it from the official directly, that would be different. That would make it verified.


PS - Also I do not know if that guy from video interview was telling the truth, but I recommend the that you view it. It is just my feeling that would be hard to fabricate what he said.

[Night Watchman]

30. Of Course Not

Gotta keep those neocons happy!

[King_David]

33. Neocons were hoping the terrorist was a not Gay killer

Really ?

[TexasBushwhacker]

39. They were hoping he was a MUSLIM TERRORIST

affiliated with ISIS, not a gay man filled with rage and self loathing from being raised in a homophobic culture.

[King_David]

40. He was not a self loathing Gay ,

The insistence of such completely of any basis in truth is verging on homophobia.

[King_David]

34. No surprise...

The guy was a regular Gay hating heterosexual Islamic radical terrorist.

[King_David]

35. Relief ...Most of DU Gay posters called this .