Washington County Sheriff's Office helps thwart school shooting plot in Indiana, authorities say
Earlier that week, the Washington County Sheriff's Office investigated a 19-year-old woman from the Town of Addison who ultimately was not behind the plot but helped lead authorities to the main suspect, according to a Feb. 14 news release from the sheriff's office.
The Addison woman had been part of Discord group about school shooters with the main suspect, who had possessed weapons and photographs of previous mass shooters, according to an anonymous tipster.
On Feb. 12, Trinity Shockley, 18, was arrested in Mooresville, Indiana, and confessed to both the school shooting plot and a desire to murder her friend, according to the sheriff's office.
Shockley, who goes by the name Jamie, was charged with one felony count of conspiracy to commit murder that does not result in death, according to Indiana court records. She also faces two felony counts for threats to commit terrorism.
She is being held without bond, although a contested bond hearing is scheduled for Feb. 18.
According to the Washington County Sheriff's Office:
An anonymous tip about threats to commit a school shooting on Valentine's Day was received on Monday, Feb. 10, by the Sandy Hook Promise Violence Hotline, an anonymous tip line launched by parents who lost children in the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
Hotline operators forwarded the tip ― which attributed the shooting threats to two social media accounts on Discord and Snapchat ― to the FBI.
The FBI had a difficult time tracking the Discord account, but was able to trace the Snapchat account to the 19-year-old woman from the Town of Addison, Washington County Sheriff's Lt. Tim Kemps told the Journal Sentinel on Monday.
The agency passed the tip to the Wisconsin Department of Justice and the Washington County Sheriff's Office Dispatch Center, the release said.
The 911 dispatcher working at the time recognized the seriousness of the threat and immediately contacted the shift supervisor to place the Addison suspect's house under surveillance.
Investigators worked throughout the evening on Feb. 10 to communicate with the tipster who was in real-time communication with the actual suspect in Indiana and shared screenshots of their conversations that included pictures of weapons, magazines, a tactical vest, and screenshots of the suspect's bedroom which had numerous photographs of past school shooters.
The next morning, the Sheriff's Office Multi-Jurisdictional SWAT team conducted a search warrant on the 19-year-old's residence.
She fully cooperated with authorities, and investigators quickly learned that she was not the person making the reported threats, and there were no local schools at risk of being targeted. Instead, she was connected to the actual suspect via a social media chat group about school shooters.
Investigators returned to the informant and coached them into obtaining the true suspect's phone number, which revealed their actual location in Indiana. This information was forward to the FBI's Indianapolis Field Office.
Shockley was arrested in Mooresville on Feb. 12.
Washington County Sheriff Martin Schulteis expressed deep gratitude toward both the tipster and his own agency. 'As I sit back and think about the gravity of this investigation and what horrific outcomes could have occurred if it does not play out the way it did, I cannot help but be humbled by the dedication and performance of my staff,' Schulteis said in the release.
The Sheriff's Office said no charges related to the shooting threat are expected to be filed against the 19-year-old from Addison, as authorities have not uncovered evidence to suggest she was connected to the school shooting plot, Kemps told the Journal Sentinel.
On Monday, Kemps said the Sheriff's Office is still conducting a threat assessment but has so far not uncovered any threats of violence from the Addison woman.
Asked about the tipster, Kemps said they were a person involved in these groups out of interest in true crime.
"It was someone monitoring these groups, I think, to do good," Kemps said. "They certainly did good in this instance. When they were concerned that there was actually something going on, they reported it immediately."
Contact Claudia Levens at clevens@gannett.com. Follow her on X at @levensc13.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Wisconsin authorities helped thwart a school shooting plot in Indiana
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
WILLIAM SHIPLEY: What the Durham Annex tells us about the Russiagate hoax
On July 31 and Aug. 1, The New York Times ran two stories pouring cold water on the release of the previously classified "Annex" to the Report of Special Counsel John Durham dated May 23, 2023. But the authors – Charlie Savage and Adam Goldman – misdirected their readers' attention from the start to a non-issue, with the help of a literally false headline claiming Durham found certain documents in the Annex to have been "faked" by Russian intelligence. That's the basis upon which the Times, Washington Post, Politico, network news, and other legacy media have myopically focused their reporting on the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation of President Trump – which we know was "faked" by the FBI, CIA, and Obama White House. Part of Durham's investigation looked into why the FBI did NOTHING – literally – after first receiving the Russian intelligence information in late July 2016, as contrasted with how the FBI reacted to information nearly 60 days old received from an Australian diplomat about a meeting in a London bar. The Annex includes previously classified information on the receipt of "Special Intelligence" throughout the first part of 2016 from a friendly foreign government, showing Russia's seemingly real-time knowledge of the inner machinations of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. The Annex is a document authored by Durham's team. Since the source documents upon which the Russian memos were based were not provided – or at least not made public – the accuracy of Russian memos' paraphrasing/referencing to the source documents is unknown. All those qualifiers go to the work of "analysis" – what is this document, where does it originate, what does it say, what does it rely upon, can it be corroborated separately, what is our level of confidence in accepting the contents as accurate at face value, etc.? Two items that have attracted the most attention, and which the Times' stories focus on, are "emails" purportedly written by Leonard Bernardo, dated July 25 and July 27, 2016. Bernardo worked for a George Soros-related entity. His emails were hacked, and he had communications with senior Clinton campaign officials. The Annex does not have actual "emails" as you might find them on Bernardo's computer or a recipient's computer – they have none of the typical email formatting. What they appear to be are "retyped" versions of the text in the body of emails into a Russian language memo, the Russian memo was translated into English, with Durham "cutting & pasting" the English translation into his report. The July 25 "email" includes the allegation that Hillary Clinton approved a plan conceived by a "foreign policy adviser" to "vilify" then-candidate Donald Trump by falsely linking him to Russia Pres. Putin. As for the Russian language memo – we don't know the date -- Durham provides an English translation that includes the following: "According to data from the election campaign headquarters of Hillary Clinton, obtained via the U.S. Soros Foundation, on July 26, 2016, Clinton approved a plan by her policy advisor Juliana Smith … to smear Donald Trump by magnifying the scandal tied to the intrusion Russian special services in the pre-election process to benefit the Republican candidate." The Russian memo says next "As envisioned by Smith…." This suggests that maybe among the documents supporting the memo is a description of Smith's plan either by Smith herself or someone else familiar enough with the details to describe it. "As envisioned by Smith, raising the theme of 'Putin's support for Trump' to the level of the Olympic scandal would divert constituents' attention from the investigation of Clinton's compromised electronic correspondence." The Russian memo, which had to have been written after July 27 since it had contents from a July 27 email in it, describes precisely what followed over the next 100 days leading up to the election – establishing "Putin's support for Trump" was the goal of the supposed "plan." The Russian memo goes on: "…by subsequently steering public opinion towards the notion that it [the public] needs to equate 'Putin's efforts' to influence political processes in the United States via cyberspace to acts against critically important infrastructure (resembling a national power supply network) would force the White House [read "OBAMA"] to use more confrontational scenarios vis-à-vis Moscow…." The memo says the Clinton campaign will seek to blow up the significance of Russian election interference – which happens in every election – by equating it to an attack on vital national infrastructure, and link Putin and Trump together in the effort, i.e., any election interference by Putin is really a proxy for an attack on democracy by Trump. Either the Russian intelligence services are clairvoyant and should be playing the lottery every week, or they wandered into a trove of correspondence between people associated with the Clinton campaign describing precisely the game plan executed by the campaign, and White House, CIA, and FBI on its behalf. The July 27 email attributed to Bernardo is also relatively short in terms of what Durham sets forth as the verbatim text taken from the Russian memo, and it confirms that Clinton approved "Julia's idea." The Times' authors falsely reported that Durham called the two Bernardo emails "fake" – and said that they were "concocted" by Russian intelligence. Hence, according to the Times, all the controversy surrounding the release of Annex materials was made irrelevant by that finding. But Durham didn't conclude the emails were fake. What did he conclude? His team's "best assessment" was that they were "composites" – some portion of the text of each was taken from other sources and combined into the text that appeared under Bernardo's name as an "email." It is clear that Bernardo did not write them, i.e., they are not "authentic." But it is also clear that some amount of the content in each was accurate – and predicted events that would unfold over the next 100 days. Durham reached that conclusion only after a long and involved process designed to understand both what the emails were, and how much of the content of the Special Intelligence was accurate. Everything – and I mean everything -- Durham did to answer those questions were things the FBI chose to NOT DO in or after August 2016. Durham asked intelligence analysts – FBI and CIA presumably – if the emails appeared authentic. Most said that they did. Some noted that Bernardo was, in fact, a victim of hacking by the Russians, so it would not be surprising if his emails were in the Russians' hands. It was noted by some that the Russians could have fabricated or altered the original information taken from the source documents. Just the fact that some analysts believed the emails appeared to be authentic should have been enough to push the FBI into action. But it did nothing. Durham interviewed Bernardo and showed him the emails. The FBI never did that. Bernardo said he did not recognize them, and there was language in them that he would not have used -- specifically the sentence "Later the FBI will put more oil into the fire." Judging intelligence translated from a foreign language is tricky. Bernardo denied using that phrase, but how far off is that from a very similar phrase more commonly used by a native English speaker – "Pour gas onto the fire"? Bernardo's original document would have been in English – then translated to Russian – then the Russian version translated back to English. That's how "gas onto the fire" ends up as "oil into the fire." Bernardo also said he did not know who "Julie" was as referenced in the July 25 email. But he noted that the final sentence in the July 25 email – that "things are ghastly for US-Russian relations" was phrased as something that he would write. Durham gathered documents with grand jury subpoenas and search warrants. He looked for the documents obtained by Russian hackers. As for the July 25 and July 27 emails, Durham did not find those among the emails of the Soros Foundation. But he found other emails – either emails or attachments to emails sent by people other than Bernardo – with language identical to Bernardo. Specifically, a passage in the July 25 email was taken directly from an email written by Tim Mauer, who worked for the Carnegie Endowment as a cyber expert. Mauer had never seen the Bernardo emails but agreed that one passage was taken from an email he had sent to colleagues at Carnegie – also hacked by the Russians. Durham also interviewed Julianne Smith, who was a Clinton campaign foreign policy advisor, and who did involve herself in efforts to amplify the threat of the Putin-Trump relationship to U.S. national security. It is noteworthy that Durham begins this portion as follows: "Smith stated she did not specifically remember proposing a plan to Clinton or other Campaign leadership to try to tie Trump to Putin and Russia." That phrasing is never accidental – "did not specifically remember" leaves much room to extricate oneself if a document emerges later that says what it is you claim to not remember. Agents are trained to note such phrases exactly as stated by the person being interviewed. Smith did say "it was possible" she had proposed ideas to campaign leadership "who may have approved those ideas." Again – Durham is showing her emails about a "Clinton Plan" she supposedly hatched, and she cannot be confident what other documents he might have that he isn't showing her. While she didn't remember much of anything about anything, the one thing she was certain of is that she would never have made a proposal that had as part of its execution the involvement of the FBI in furtherance of the effort. Prior to Durham, the FBI did none of this – and has never offered an explanation for why. THAT was the point made by Durham's Annex.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Former NFL running back convicted on 6 felony counts in record-breaking dog fighting operation
A former NFL running back was convicted on six felony counts for operating a large-scale dog-fighting trafficking venture following a multi-day trial in Oklahoma. The U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Public Affairs announced the conviction of Leshon Johnson, 54, who was convicted of violating the federal Animal Welfare Act's prohibitions against possessing, selling, transporting, and delivering animals to be used in fighting ventures. The announcement stated that Johnson, who played five seasons in the NFL with three different teams, surrendered to the government the "190 dogs seized in this case." "This criminal profited off of the misery of innocent animals and he will face severe consequences for his vile crimes," Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement. "This case underscores the Department of Justice's commitment to protecting animals from abuse — 190 dogs are now safe thanks to outstanding collaborative work by our attorneys and law enforcement components." FBI Director Kash Patel added: "The FBI will not stand for those who perpetuate the despicable crime of dogfighting. Thanks to the hard work of our law enforcement partners, those who continue to engage in organized animal fighting and cruelty will face justice." The conviction came from an unsealed indictment in March, which went into detail about Johnson's operation at "Mal Kant Kennels." There was evidence delivered to the federal jury that showed Johnson bred and trafficked "champion" and "grand champion" fighting dogs. "Authorities seized the 190 dogs from his property, which is the largest number ever seized from a single individual in a federal dog fighting case," the announcement read. Johnson had a prior dogfighting conviction from the state in 2004. He pleaded guilty to the crime in 2005, where he received a five-year deferred sentence. Two years later, the NFL was hit with another shocking dogfighting scandal, as Atlanta Falcons star quarterback Michael Vick pleaded guilty to his involvement in a fighting ring and spent 21 months in prison. Johnson now faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each felony count. "Dog fighting is a vicious and cruel crime that has no place in a civilized society," U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Wilson for the Eastern District of Oklahoma said in a statement. "I commend the hard work of our law enforcement partners in investigating this case and holding the defendant accountable for his crimes." Johnson, who became a star at Northern Illinois University, was a third-round pick by the Green Bay Packers in the 1994 NFL Draft. He didn't serve a large role in Green Bay, who ended up moving on from him midway through the 1995 season. Johnson joined the Arizona Cardinals, where he would see most of his career yardage on the NFL stage. He started eight of his 15 games in 1996, rushing for 634 yards with three touchdowns, while catching 15 passes for 176 yards and a score. Johnson spent one more season in Arizona before joining the New York Giants in 1999, where he played in a backup role. He also played in the XFL after his time in the NFL was over.
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Jeffrey Epstein victims rip feds over handling of case: ‘I am not a pawn'
Two victims of Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking ring blasted the Trump administration over the notorious case Monday, with one accusing the Justice Department of prioritizing protection of the dead pedophile's rich friends over the women he abused. 'I am not sure the highest priority here is the victims, justice for the victims or combating child exploitation,' read one of the two letters submitted in Manhattan federal court. '… Rather, I feel like the DOJ's and FBI's priority is protecting the 'third-party,' the wealthy men by focusing on scrubbing their names off the files.' 3 Two victims of Jeffrey Epstein have criticized the Trump Administration's handling of the notorious case. Getty Images The second letter slammed the feds for meeting last month with Epstein's convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell — who was subsequently rewarded with a prison transfer one week after the shocking sitdown. Two judges are now weighing the government's bid to unseal transcripts of testimony by law enforcement agents before grand juries who handed up indictments of Epstein and Maxwell in 2019 and 2020, respectively. The DOJ has promised to redact the filings to protect victims. But one of the victims who wrote to US District Judge Richard Berman asked for their lawyer to review any ''suggested' redactions' before they are made public. '[T]hey are the ones who also know the victims, their names, their truths and their stories unlike the Unites States Government who did not and does not even care to know our truth,' their letter read. 'They would rather ask a convicted imprisoned sex trafficker/abuser for information,' the victim added, referencing Maxwell. 3 One of the victims ripped DOJ for meeting with Epstein's convicted madam Ghislaine Maxwell rather than with victims. SDNY The same victim described feeling 'disdain, disgust and fear' at the administration's response to the Epstein saga. 'I wish you would have handled and would handle the whole 'Epstein Files' with more respect towards and for the victims,' the letter reads. 'I am not some pawn in your political warfare. 'What you have done and continue to do is eating at me day after day as you help to perpetuate this story indefinitely.' 3 US Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to release a set of juicy Epstein files, but backtracked months later. REUTERS The victim who accused the administration of shielding Epstein's circle of 'wealthy men' from scrutiny requested Berman have 'an approved third-party review these documents to ensure that NO victims names or likenesses are revealed through this release. It is imperative with the scrutiny over this media frenzy that the victims are completely and entirely protected.' In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi hyped up the release of a cache of Epstein documents that she suggested would reveal juicy details of the notorious financier's sickening crimes. But she later backtracked, saying that no further disclosures would be warranted after the FBI and DOJ released a July 6 memo stating that Epstein, 66, killed himself on Aug. 10, 2019, while awaiting federal trial and did not keep a 'client list' of associates who abused girls as young as 14 — contrary to widespread speculation. The about-face caused an uproar among many of Trump's supporters. On July 17, Trump ordered Bondi to request the release of the grand jury material — which represents a tiny fraction of the files the government says it has about Epstein. Berman, who had been overseeing Epstein's criminal case before his death, had given the government until 11:59 p.m. ET Monday to clarify whether the DOJ wanted grand jury exhibits unsealed in addition to transcripts of testimony. The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
