GA - Winder - Apalachee High School school shooting, 4 dead, 9 injured *father and son arrested*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
" 'He would call Colt names to his face,'
says a relative of Colt's mother.

'Names that no boy wants to hear:
sissy, p***y, …
just names that were meant to break him down and emasculate him'.

'Colin always thought that Colt was too gentle and tender.
That’s why I believe he gave him the rifle'."

Agree 100%
Dad could not cope with seeing soft behavior and hearing the word gay. Old Skool idea to toughen up child with guns, shooting, insulting language and making him do the things his dad thinks makes the (heterosexual) man. (Seriously, what if Colt was questioning his sexuality?? )

should have let him play video games. It’s really quite normal. Not hurting anyone with pushing the button on controller.
 
Besides,
it is very rude to carry on conversation sitting while others are standing.
(Colin)

Also,
talking to somebody with hands hidden in pockets. (Colt)

After all,
they were talking to LE, not their buddies.

No manners whatsoever.

Jeez, what a family from hell!
:oops:

JMO
And didn’t offer his good ‘old friends a drink!
 
Moo..well dad won't be calling Colt a sissy etc anymore. Colt proved he can be tough
I think motive is important in this case, and it could be simple as this... coupled with not wanting to go to school. In my opinion I don't think bullying and name calling are what's going on here, I think this kid had an I'll show you attitude, a kind of...you want me to go to school, fine, I'll go to school.
 
However, in a news release issued two days after the Apalachee shooting, Jackson County Sheriff Janis Mangum said that “after speaking with Dr. Donna McMullan with the Jefferson City Schools On September 5, 2024, it came to my attention they had no record of being notified of a threat by Colt Gray who was enrolled there.” The miscommunication raises questions about whether the district could have forwarded that information to Barrow County Schools, which the suspect transferred to just two weeks ago.
 
Last edited:
Moo... children raised in environment where they are labeled as useless, you'll go nowhere, your a sissy or *advertiser censored*. Have no internal identity to ground on. They have internal hate and rage at themselves. Nothing matters, they have no future. Easier to live down to expectations....moo
 
Two questions … Colin answered door in underpants .. then went back in to get dressed.
1. When he returned did he say he had sat back down to watch TV (forgetting officers were there)? Was that an excuse as to why took so long to put on pants … or was delay because he hiding stuff/warning Colt. And think it’s odd didn’t invite them in.
2. What’s he drinking, don't recognize the can.
You don't have to let LE into your home without a warrant. It feels awkward to see Colin not invite the officers inside (and let the neighbors see him with cops on the porch), but it was his right so I honestly can't fault him for that.

I do fault him for his parenting, though! Please be assured I am NOT defending Colin.

jmo
 
Last edited:
I wonder why the school counselor was communicating about the concerns of violence by email with the mother that morning and not the father - I thought the father had custody. Did the school have both parents listed as the custodial parents in their files? Colt lived with his father, so assuming he had custody. If both parents were listed as custodial parents, then the school should have contacted both parents. If the father was the only parent listed, then it is odd that they were communicating this very important information to the mother and not the father. Maybe we will find out later that they also sent an email to the father or tried to reach him by phone as well.

Also, did the grandfather go to family court and try to get custody of his grandson, Colt? With everything he has been saying to the media, I would think that he would have tried to get his grandson out of the environment he believed that Colt was living in.
 
My amateur impressions:

I think the second officer to ask questions -after the first had pulled Colin aside - had doubts that Colt was being truthful. Perhaps he hoped that with Dad pulled way, the son would be more forthcoming. (ETA: if so, I think the officer’s gut instinct that the father was influencing the son was right.)

I think it odd that Colt’s father is seated while LE are there and that he is holding a drink can throughout, even after he goes back in to retrieve his phone after LE asked for his cellphone number. Like he is trying to appear calm, steady, and in control - taking it in stride.

(ETA: Colin also mentions a past event involving LE, when Colin’s stuff was all moved out of the house and placed out on the lawn. He attempted to elicit sympathy.)

Colt is rocking back and forth from one foot to another throughout most of the LE visit. He’s stressed, whether because LE are there or because Dad is and has told him how to respond (in a way inconsistent with the truth).

Both are wearing crosses on necklaces. Dad’s is fully exposed and Colt’s has only the cross part pulled out over the neckline of his shirt.

The whole thing looks like performance to me, like what you might expect from someone slithering away from the truth in hope of getting away with something. I think the second LE officer sensed it, but the first seemed all about closing down the matter and filing the report, and on to the next thing.

Colt survived the day of the shooting, as many don’t. I wonder if, in custody and for his own defense, Colt will tell LE anything that reveals Dad might have been lying (and might have asked Colt to lie) when responding to LE officers when they visited the two to ask questions in May 2023. And if so, what that might mean for Colt’s defense as well as Colin’s prosecution.
 
Last edited:
I wonder why the school counselor was communicating about the concerns of violence by email with the mother that morning and not the father - I thought the father had custody. Did the school have both parents listed as the custodial parents in their files? Colt lived with his father, so assuming he had custody. If both parents were listed as custodial parents, then the school should have contacted both parents. If the father was the only parent listed, then it is odd that they were communicating this very important information to the mother and not the father. Maybe we will find out later that they also sent an email to the father or tried to reach him by phone as well.

Also, did the grandfather go to family court and try to get custody of his grandson, Colt? With everything he has been saying to the media, I would think that he would have tried to get his grandson out of the environment he believed that Colt was living in.
Dad probably was listed as primary parent. Mom could have been listed as well or been an emergency contact. Dad had a construction job. He said in a 2023 interview that he worked on tall buildings with noisy cranes around him. He probably waited until breaks to check his phone.
 
" 'He would call Colt names to his face,'
says a relative of Colt's mother.

'Names that no boy wants to hear:
sissy, p***y, …
just names that were meant to break him down and emasculate him'.

'Colin always thought that Colt was too gentle and tender.
That’s why I believe he gave him the rifle'."

What a poor excuse for a father.
 
Agree 100%
Dad could not cope with seeing soft behavior and hearing the word gay. Old Skool idea to toughen up child with guns, shooting, insulting language and making him do the things his dad thinks makes the (heterosexual) man. (Seriously, what if Colt was questioning his sexuality?? )

should have let him play video games. It’s really quite normal. Not hurting anyone with pushing the button on controller.
I doubt there was actually any 'soft' behavior, and it seems that the father was the first one to emasculate him. This father seems particularly cruel. I don't think Colt was questioning anything but his own self-worth. And with a father like that, who could blame him?
 

Just like with Crumbly in MI, a teacher had done the right thing and notified the administration. In this scenario, it would make sense that this student should have been brought to the office immediately and his belongings searched. The administration through the school counselors knew that he was having mental health problems and was now speaking of shootings. A call to the parent should have occurred after the child was brought to office to discuss the conversation.

This kid made statements to a teacher. Texted he was sorry to his mother. The mother was right to call with the idea of getting to him immediately. Why did the school allow for that 1/2 plus time lag where there were no eyes on him?
 
If they didn't have the technology to make certain that those posts didn't originate from the child, and if they had no legal recourse to take it any further (sending it back to the FBI for further analysis, search warrant, etc.) then maybe laws should change to fill in that gap and give LE in that situation the authority to fully and completely verify facts. If the stories don't bear out, then the guns should be kept in the property room until such time as a father like Colin can show evidence of his genuine ability to secure any and all firearms and ammo. (ginormous gun safe with biometrics, etc) I strongly support the 2nd Amendment AND students' right to a quality public education in a safe setting. (No violence of any kind, no bullying, no fears of retaliation for simply telling the truth, etc., etc.)

this whole time I was under the impression FBI questioned him but was it just local LE?
 
Moo..well dad won't be calling Colt a sissy etc anymore. Colt proved he can be tough

did he call him a sissy?

ETA: I see the article now where he did.
 
Last edited:
Well, the goal here was to alert the parent to a concern. It was not supposed to be confrontational, after all, the child had not broken any laws. And LEO did their job, although, I think that the child should have been evaluated by a professional for danger to himself and others. And based on that assessment, a judge could have mandated counseling. They didn't go there.

Police are not professionally trained professional psychologists, and I think that the mental health aspect is often minimized by law enforcement. They really were making a "judgement" call on mental health, and should have made sure that the child was actually assessed by a psychologist. MOO.

I guess that they "assumed" that the parent was responsible and would take the alert seriously. I think that they could have also offered trigger locks at the time for his guns. Out of an abundance of caution. I know our police department has boxes of those, anyone who wants a handful can have them for free.
The child had broken laws if he made threats to shoot up a school--and that's what they needed to follow up on--a potential crime.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
2,818
Total visitors
2,973

Forum statistics

Threads
603,960
Messages
18,165,884
Members
231,901
Latest member
tankaroo
Back
Top