Pretty clear the security guard was not going anywhere, and we have no idea what sort of condition he was in or whether he was able to communicate with anyone. Was he conscious? Was he staying motionless and silent for that matter, since he had no good means of escape.

He had been shot. He was not in a good position. Do you think one of 200 bullets might have also taken out his communication device (if it worked that well in the building)?

Whether, when events unfolded, anyone with a line of communication to anyone relevant would have thought "hey, what happened to that guy who went to check on that door?" when staff is in full "save the chips" mode, is an open question.

The cops found him there when they arrived.

There are a lot of possibilities, why does this "imply the cops were informed of his presence"?

200 bullets were shot through the door? And he wasn't hamburger?

What am I missing here?

Officer is lucky

See pic below.

with all the wild bullets spraying?

If true, he probably wasn’t directly outside the door. The killer had cameras set up in the hallway.

Surgery to remove the bullet was required.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/us/security-guard-las-vegas-hotel/

At this point, I don’t trust anything we’ve read about the guard being shot.

I don’t understand how the timeline (guard shot before or after massacre) could flip after more than a week.

Editing to add that the hotel has a strong incentive to limit communication from its employees, due to the likelihood of lawsuits from victims’ families.

He couldn't have been too far away to be struck if all of the shots were fired through the door.

'Quite a way down the hall' makes no sense.

And this is the report I have read numerous times.

"When Campos approached Paddock's suite, the shooter "fired through the door, striking Mr. Campos in the upper right thigh," said Hickey who is president of the International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America.

He faced well over 200 rounds, said Sheriff Joseph Lombardo of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police on Wednesday. "It's amazing that that security guard didn't sustain additional injury."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/us/security-guard-las-vegas-hotel/

"When Campos approached Paddock's suite, the shooter "fired through the door, striking Mr. Campos in the upper right thigh,"

a lot of things do not make sense...

The security guard was shot in the legs through the door, right?

Which means that asshole (I won't repeat his name) was already lying prone on the floor with his bump fire semi-autos on their tripods ready to fire. (otherwise, the security guard would have been shot in the chest)

BUT, supposedly the windows are not yet broken by his "hammer" (or hammer-like tool).

so, did he get into firing position, see the security guard in his monitor, shoot the security guard in the legs (presumably using a pistol) and THEN stand up to go to the window(s) and break them?

And if the security guard was shot in the legs and survived, why didn't the hotel security and therefore the police know exactly what room he was in... why all the reports of the responding "swat" team have to clear every floor between 28 and 32 before confronting him in his room AFTER the automatic fire (10 minutes from start to finish) had ended?

And if he hadn't started firing on the crowd and shot the security guard first... wouldn't hotel security have responded to that incident within a couple of minutes,,, and then why didn't the responding security officers or police hear the sound of the bump fire assault weapons and decide to shoot their way into the room and end the threat?

Also, police dispatch got the first reports of an active shooter at the concert venue... would not the hotel have reported the security guard being shot first?

I am confused by this.

The other scenario made much more sense to me.

Not a direct hit. Evidently the guard was not directly outside the door.

But who knows. I am dubious about all info from LVPD at this point.

Surgery was required to remove it.

He was hit by stray shrapnel while walking down the hall and wasn't at the door.

That makes total sense. I'll just ignore all of the reports to the contrary and stop debating this.

But you do have to avoid jumping to conclusions on the basis of a report from "some guy who is a union official" who might not have a grasp of the relevant details, and whose statement you quoted does not imply proximity to the door.

The guard was found when police got there, and the guard directed them to the door. If he was lying just outside the door, as opposed to, e.g. taking refuge around a corner down the hall toward the elevator banks, then he wouldn't have had to direct anyone TO the door.

And, yes, some "reports" from various people will conflict, and that often happens because of gap-filling assumptions.

I thought you said they were hiding something from the public. You OK with that?

Why was the security guard at the scene? What prompted him to go to Paddock's room?

Though not shooters room.

Here is the door. 200 rounds to the top half of the door and he was shot only in the leg? There are less than 10 bullet holes in the bottom half, and it looks like none in the other intact door.

This is weird as fuck.

Luckiest dude on the planet.

The poster upthread clued me in on why the guard was there in the first place, but do we know why he went to Paddock's door specifically?

I can only imagine that he was standing to one side of the door, rather that right in front of it.

When I'm done guessing and wringing my hands, and maybe making a few baseless accusations, THEN I'll have an ear for these facts of yours.

Everything I've posted has been reported as fact.

Nowhere has it been reported the guard was hit by shrapnel. It was reported to be a bullet that required surgery.

Nowhere has it been reported the guard was down the hall. It was reported he was outside the door.

Nowhere has it been reported the gunman opened the door to shoot. It was reported he shot THROUGH the door and you can clearly see the bullet holes.

I have no problem with speculation, but some of flies in the face of logic.

Carry on.

Yes, he was outside the door. I agree with that. What you read into that report is that he was adjacent the door.

"It was reported he shot THROUGH the door"

Yes, it was also reported that it was some 200 rounds. The door does not look like it has 200 holes in it.

When you say things like "it was reported" you have to ask yourself how would that fact be known. It's not as if a reporter was sitting there watching it, so the "report" depends on second hand accounts, which often get garbled. If the door looks like it has a few dozen holes in it, and the hallway looks like 200 shots were fired, then what do you suppose happened there?

"It was reported to be a bullet that required surgery."

Again, the magic of "it was reported" does not make it a fact. From whom was the report made?

Initial reports are often wrong, because of the way that people unconsciously weave inferences into the things they say without realizing there was a range of other possibilities. That kind of "speculation", as opposed to making conclusory statements, actually helps to avoid reaching incorrect conclusions.

On the morning of 9/11 "it was reported" that a bomb had gone off at the State Department. It simply didn't happen. That's not because people are making stuff up, it is because we are constantly, without realizing it, interpreting cognitive inputs. Could someone in a building with a view toward the west have seen rising smoke from the Pentagon in the direction of the State Department, and incorrectly concluded that the smoke was rising from the State Department? Yeah. Because judging the distance of things in the sky is something that humans are really bad at doing.

You are seeing a "contradiction" between it having been reported he fired 200 shots into the hall, and that he had shot through the door which does not seem to have 200 holes in the portion we can see. It is not "speculation" to suggest that (a) nobody was watching him fire those shots, and (b) the statements "he shot through the door" and "there were 200 shots" can both be correct, even if he did not fire ALL 200 shots through the door as opposed to firing some shots through the door and some shots through the doorway.

But to go from "the guard was shot first" to "therefore the police had to know his location" requires a lot of assumptions, when there is a range of reasons why the guard's location and condition may simply not have been known after he was shot. That's all.

My initial question was simply "How does him being shot first imply that the police knew his location?" as suggested in the OP.

He was alert, responsive and reportedly helped evacuate adjacent rooms before being told to go to the hospital.

Logic would say he was able to immediately report it upon being shot, giving both his and the shooter's location.

I don't see how "logic" says that.

I suppose if someone is at the end of a hallway shooting down the hall and wounding me, then if I've been able to hole up out of the line of fire, I might want to not move or make a sound until other help arrived, or get off of that floor asap. If he was at a point where he couldn't get to an elevator - which his remaining on the floor suggests - then he's going to be stuck there until he can safely move.

I've never been shot, and I'll bet you haven't either. Neither, I'd further bet had he until that night. But if he had no functional device with which to communicate (which could be due to damage during being shot at and getting out of the way, or due to the structure of the hotel and his position in it), and otherwise didn't pass out for a spell, which are possibilities NOT EXCLUDED by the reported facts, then I don't see how "logic" excludes those scenarios.

Being pinned down by fire, being rendered unable to communicate, or being momentarily incapacitated by a violent attack when he thought he was just going to check out a routine alarm just don't strike me as being "illogical" on the facts reported thus far.

The police contact with him picks up when they find him upon arriving at the floor. Upon their arrival, they don't know when he was shot and in what order, and they certainly don't interrogate him in detail on the subject, since they have an immediate job to do.

Then, he gets shipped out by ambulance for surgery, so by the time the responding officers have given their recollection of finding him there, really at what point in time do you suppose he is available to give a detailed account of what happened to him? "Logic" would suggest that he was not available to give a detailed account of much until much later on.

"He was alert, responsive" - yes, when the police showed up and found him there. What he had gone through between being shot and them showing up is a blank. I was "alert and responsive" 15 minutes after a concussion one time, but what happened between going over the handlebars and then being in the back of an ambulance is pretty much a blur to me.

It all makes total sense now that you've hypothesized it 10 times, with nothing whosoever to back up your speculation.

I'm not married to any particular conclusion on what may have went on with him.

You were concluding that if he was shot first, then he necessarily had to have communicated his position and condition to someone.

That conclusion is not supported by anything, since there may be any number of reasons why he could not or would not have done so.

Do you see the difference between leaping to a conclusion and not leaping to a conclusion?

I am questioning, and still looking for an answer to the CONCLUSION reached in the OP and by others that if he was shot first then he NECESSARILY had the ability and means to report that fact to someone.

And, yes, recognizing that there could be any of several different hypothesis is very different from ruling them all out.

You are saying that if he was shot first then "LOGIC" requires that he would have reported that fact. No, it doesn't require any such thing.

Doesnt look like 200 rounds went though that...more like a few dozen if that.

The door with the bullet holes is the other door - laying on its side

Study it a bit...

My point being, where is the evidence of 200 rounds? The other door has none that I can see.

I think we agree here...

He may not have known what the shooter had inside the room but didn't he have time to tell cops exactly where the shooter was?

This timeline revision really makes you scratch your head.

Maybe this is why. This shooter basically had free rein to do whatever the fuck he wanted for over an hour. SMH.

are revealing.. the media driven hero narrative is falling apart if they allowed him to reign terror unobstructed for an hour.. not that it matters much.. most Americans have already moved onto the next shinny object..

Because it’s still a better narrative for Metro than “Police Useless; Unarmed Guard Heroically Stops Shooting While Multiple Cops Wait for SWAT”

Cover up is a shitty turn of phrase, though, because it implies some sort of scheme or conspiracy. I think it’s the same fools I’ve known most of my life covering their asses.

They have been very consistent since the beginning about the Campos.

He was investigating a "door ajar" alarm on that floor. The cause and nature of that alarm are unknown - we don't know if this alarm was related to Paddocks activity or not.

As he approached - he heard the sounds of an electric drill. Not sure if this was drilling or screwing.

We don't know what triggered Paddock to fire through the door. It sure sounds like he was firing blindly - if it was 200 rounds. Did he think SWAT was already there?

Campos' presence may have hastened the attack - Paddock thinking they were on to him before he really set things in motion.

We also don't know what Campos did after being hit - presumably he would need a few minutes to escape before being able to report.

Changes the story a bit - but I don't see this a big deal.

Had rallied the police officers and had assisted them after he had been shot. He intimated that the police were already on-site at that time. It was made to sound that he gave his all until they signaled he needed to get to the hospital to treat his wounds.

The Chief stated that the security guard was a hero. Not that the timeline diminishes that accolade, but it was given in a completely different context than what we're reading today.

I read that the guard who was shot informed hotel security of what had happened. That's good.

But it still took the police almost an hour to arrive. That turned out to be really awful.

So, more questions:
-- Why was there no immediate response by hotel security?
-- Did hotel security inform the police when they learned of the shooting?
-- If not, why not? And if not, why did they not respond?
-- If so, why did it then take an hour or so for the police to respond?
-- And why did he shoot for only 10 minutes? And when did he shoot himself?

Granted, I have no experience in emergency response. Maybe it's not unusual for it to take an hour to respond to a shooting of this magnitude without risking police lives. But hundreds were being shot. Surely that might have sped things up.

I get that this investigation is going to take a long time. And it does look like the LV sheriff is doing a decent PR job under difficult circumstances. But who investigates the response? And when is it appropriate to do so?

My guess is that the hotel casino has clamped down on all employees and stopped all communication with the media. I think that’s why there was this confusion about the guard timeline. I notice that neither the guard nor any other hotel employees has given any media interviews. There is a lot of information we will never hear.

Meanwhile, the LAPD is speculating too much.

and according to reports it was another hour before "swat" got up there to find him dead.. so much for the quick response per our diligent media.. not a good look