A leaked House Intel Committee document reveals the existence of a second Las Vegas shooter – Australian concert producer Brian Hodge.
Hodge was staying in the room next door to Stephen Paddock during the Mandalay Bay massacre, and deliberately misled authorities during his testimony and purposely disabled geolocation tracking on his cellphone during the attack, according to documents.
Newsmediawatchdog.com reports: “Several discrepancies and inconsistencies in Hodge’s testimony to LVMPD and interviews are expounded upon in great detail, and it is even mentioned that he withheld information from law enforcement.”
Laura Loomer, an investigative journalist, obtained a photo of Hodge’s Mandalay Bay invoice which revealed the actual room he was staying in (32-314) at the time of the shooting. This contradicts his original claim that he stayed in room no. 32-134; the one right next to Paddock:
The Sentinel provided some additional details regarding the room situation:
“Room 32-134 was also paid for under the name of Marilou Danley, Paddock’s girlfriend. The report appears to connect Hodge to both locations, presenting evidence that he may have been attempting to obfuscate his actual location during the time the shooting took place. Analysts contributing to the report presented evidence indicating Hodge was actually staying in both rooms, which would account for his multiple conflicting testimonies to police and reporters.”
In addition to Hodge, another suspect was listed in the leaked report. His name is Mehmet Kokangul and he owns a restaurant in Albuquerque, New Mexico – a place Hodge reportedly visited:
The area where Kokangul originates from is supposedly a well-known ISIS hot spot. Given this fact, the FBI has still not chosen to continue to further investigate this individual.
Other screenshots were posted in The Sentinel’s article:
The outlet concluded with the following:
“As this evidence was leaked, the source’s identity is being withheld for their safety. Members of the House Intel Committee did not respond to request for comment, but given the vast amount of sensitive data contained within its 52 pages, it seems highly unlikely this is a forgery. We will continue to update this story as new information becomes available, and will release more pages from the report after they are examined by our tech experts to determine if photos were manipulated.”