Cinderella’s Fake News Forum: #1

Occasionally, Cinderella will be posting items on the Sandy Hook 12-14-12 Event that give you, the reader, a chance to exercise your wits in determining whether or not a news story or social media item (posts, Tweets and messages) is true or false.

Most will be small items not previously closely examined in the continuing Sandy Hook narrative. Some may seem trivial to the point of pettiness, but Cinderella has found that many tiny hanging threads eventually unravel a whole sweater, especially if the sweater is cheaply made.

We’re calling these little threads Cinderella’s Fake News Forum. Cinderella will do her best to provide  background, research and commentary to aid you in your reality check journey. As always, feel free to ferret out more facts on your own and share them with us.

News Item #1: Tweet by Erica L. Lafferty, December 6, 2016.


In the item above, Erica L. Lafferty asserts that she dressed the post-mortem, bullet-riddled body of her mother, Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung, for her funeral. True? False? Let’s examine some of the facts.

The body. This is the central point. If someone says she “dressed” a body, the casual listener automatically assumes there is a body to be dressed. Not necessarily. Click here for a host of reasons why this may not be true. Click here for information on how corpses can be faked. And click here for another interesting article on a similar subject.

The dress. According to this source (New York Daily News), Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung had an open casket funeral on December 19, 2012 – five days after the Sandy Hook Event – in which her reported body wore “a green silk dress and black cardigan.” So Ms. Lafferty is ostensibly referring to this particular dress and sweater in her Tweet.

The funeral. We are told in this article (Washington Post) that Mrs. Hochsprung’s funeral took place at the Munson-Lovetere Funeral Home in Woodbury, Connecticut. By Connecticut state law, Munson-Lovetere would be the party responsible for handling the death certificate and all subsequent matters concerning the body. (See The law, below.)

The reported body’s transfer. After the funeral, Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung’s reported body was transported over state lines to Halgas Funeral Home in Broadalbin, New York, and was buried a day later (12-20-14) in the Broadalbin Union Mills Cemetery. You can read about such facts and the evidence supporting them here. Note that the town clerk of Broadalbin, with whom we spoke by phone in October 2016, expressed bewilderment as to why she does not have a death certificate or burial transport permit in her files for Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung.

The law. What does the State of Connecticut have to say about transporting, cleansing and dressing dead bodies? Well, quite a lot actually. From this official Connecticut Judicial Branch website, we found these passages (most relevant language in my bf italics):

“Connecticut law requires a licensed funeral director or embalmer to be involved in a number of ways throughout the burial or cremating process including the death certificate; removal, burial and transit permits; removal of the body; and transporting, washing, and wrapping of the dead body.

“PREPARATION AND TRANSPORTATION OF DEAD BODIES / Public Acts enacted in 2007 (PAs 07-104, amended by PA 07- 252) established requirements for transporting, handling, and cleansing dead bodies. These acts set out a number of specific requirements addressing how a dead body must be transported, washed, embalmed, wrapped, and disinfected. The law also prohibits an embalmer or funeral director from removing a dead body from the place of death to another location for preparation until the body has been temporarily wrapped (CGS § 19a-91(a), (b)).”

Of course, the State of Connecticut doesn’t have a spotless record in enforcing its laws where funeral directors/embalmers are concerned.  Here is one egregious example.

The procedure. Dressing a dead body is no picnic for the squeamish and hyper-sensitive. All the more so if the dead body is, as Erica claimed, riddled with bullets. That is because certain things must happen first that only a professional is fully equipped to handle. A post-mortem examination in the case of murder victims, for instance, then transport to a qualified funeral home. If embalmed, the body must be bathed, drained of blood, infused with chemicals and bathed once more. The eyes must be fitted with “eye caps” to hold them closed. Makeup is applied to the face. And while family members are called upon to supply the clothing, they don’t normally dress the body.

For obvious reasons, in most circumstances, families leave the cleaning, draining and dressing to the professionals, and are required to do so by certain states.

But there are some hardy do-it-yourselfers for whom such a task might be an experiential adventure. They step out of their normal milieu, perform tasks for which they aren’t qualified, then mount the podium to tell others all about it. George Plimpton, for instance. Remember him?

The bullets. Erica doesn’t tell us how many bullets riddled her mother’s body. Yet, if the murder happened as has been alleged, surely she knows this fact. It seems odd that, to our knowledge, this detail has never been disclosed by someone so personally invested in the authenticity of the Sandy Hook event and the issue of gun control.

On the day of the shooting, Dawn Hochsprung herself was reported by the Newtown Bee to have said that the shots fired were “more than she could count,” and went “on and on.” The statement was retracted by the Bee three days later as an error. But the cache date on the article (12-13-12) told a different story. (Click here and here.)

It should be stated that the exact number of bullet wounds are recorded somewhere in the autopsy report; however, in Connecticut, such data are not available to the general public without the written consent of a family member or a court order.

Key questions.

  • Was there a dead body belonging to Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung?
  • If so, was it dressed by her daughter Erica L. Lafferty or not?

If your answer to one or both of these questions is, “No” or “I’m not sure,” then you should pursue the Sandy Hook matter further on your own through as many sources as are available to you. Cinderella’s Broom is the least of these. Here is another. And another. And another. And another. And another. And on and on and on and on it goes, more by now than we can count.



One thought on “Cinderella’s Fake News Forum: #1

Comments are closed.