News Buzzy’s been stolen?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedAccount55555

Well-Known Member
People saying this story is ‘over’ and the case is ‘closed’ are in an alternate universe. OCSO said TODAY this is an ACTIVE investigation and they can’t share anything more at this time. Doesn’t sound very ‘closed’ to me.

There’s nothing ‘black and white’ about the fact that we still don’t have a single report mentioning the state of the Buzzy animatronic itself.

If you’re not sufficiently stimulated by the diligent fact-gathering Disney fans are doing on this thread, go complain elsewhere.

The active investigation deals with the theft of the CLOTHES. There is no active investigation of the animatronic itself. The police would've had to turn that information over in the same public records request if any such report had been filed.
 

draybook

Well-Known Member
Dang, how did you manage to not be nervous? If I was in your shoes I wouldn't have handled it as well as you did.


I was scared as hell on the inside. Not just at being surrounded by big timers in
Dang, how did you manage to not be nervous? If I was in your shoes I wouldn't have handled it as well as you did.


The funny part is that the other guy who went to county with me started to cry when we were discussing our predicament out in the courtyard on our first full day there. I told him he better stow that crap away or don't do it around me. That's like blood in shark infested waters. As far as the legal part went, I knew I'd be cleared. I could start an entire thread about my run-ins with the local cops and it would be very entertaining. This dude, if guilty and found so, will most likely get probation and a lifetime ban from WDW.
 

TiggerDad

Well-Known Member
It appears to me the report seems to imply that he was free to leave the questioning. The officer stated after he said he was leaving he told him they were keeping his phone. Seems to me the response if he wasn’t free to go would’ve been something more along the lines of “you’re not free to go, you’re being detained”. Instead the officer simply said were keeping your phone, and this was apparently in response to him taking it. Again this is all speculation based on a short paragraph description so who knows.

I’m wondering if the bigger issue here was that he used the opportunity while the phone was in his possession to lock it. I recall reading stories on court rulings that defendants can’t be forced to unlock phones, which if that’s still the case in the right circumstances could render the warrant useless. Either way it would be interesting to have a better understanding of what happened here. Personally to me it’s sounds a little petty at face value and appears they’re either using the situation to create a charge against him or there’s something else to it.

The other factor of course being how stupid can you be to walk into a sheriff office for questioning like this with your phone.
I wonder if he brought his phone, and then placed it on the table, because he wanted to use it to record the interview.
 

Dragonman

Well-Known Member
I talked about this with my dad and had a thought. The incident report only mentions the clothes and hat as stolen, is it possible that Disney hastily removed both the Buzzy and Hypo animatronics themselves in fear of further theft?

If Disney wanted to remove them you would think they'd take the whole Hypo not just the head lol. Maybe though whoever removed it was unable to get the body out of the pit so they just said screw it and took the head.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
I talked about this with my dad and had a thought. The incident report only mentions the clothes and hat as stolen, is it possible that Disney hastily removed both the Buzzy and Hypo animatronics themselves in fear of further theft?

Sounds reasonable, but it appears that Martin shot down that idea...

So it sounds like someone stole his clothing, Disney said "Oh Shizzel" and then hastily yanked the AA for hopefully safe keeping.

I’m afraid not.
 

PREMiERdrum

Well-Known Member
The active investigation deals with the theft of the CLOTHES. There is no active investigation of the animatronic itself. The police would've had to turn that information over in the same public records request if any such report had been filed.

Not necessarily.

It's quite possible that, for documentation purposes, the potential theft of the figure would be organized under the original incident number from the stolen clothes. Since the U10 / documentation first page and any associated calls for service were already subject to disclosure, any further documents from that case wouldn't have to be released as part of an ongoing investigation.

-PREMiERdrum, who spent 12 years as a journalist in a mid-major market television newsroom, including investigative reporting and writing for print and broadcast
 

DreamfinderGuy

Well-Known Member
If they are taking the time to get warrants for homes and phones, they are investigating more than a $600 set of buzzys clothes. Might be several thefts or one large theft. Warrants are a pain in the Asshol.
I know this is your opinion and all, but that's basically word for word what BDD had said to me last night. It's still gonna be weeks before we can call this a closed case
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Now, are there any consequences when Disney bloggers and self-proclaimed "insiders" who won't name their sources have their rumor stories debunked? I don't think so. And I think most who claim they have sources really don't have any.

Well, I think it’s more of an issue of eagerness and excitement getting in front of precision. The young are more than happy to run and make noise about something even if they don’t have the actual details correct. Put a few of those types together... everyone sourcing the same flawed things... and the telephone effect... and we get the “Orlando police” arresting people for the wrong things in places where they don’t even operate ;)

The difference is many people would just say”well, close enough... you know what I meant” - while others would be like... “no you got all the facts wrong... even if you were in the right area code”.

Some people are just so eager, they don’t scrutinize or sniff test stuff before they run around and preach something as if it were gospel.

And others actually value credibility and precision :) Some people are just sloppy and don’t care.
 
Last edited:

sm3666

New Member
Question for those that know him-
Is BDD a former cast member? If not, what was he using to gain access to the parks? An AP? Friends discounts?
I know this much - he used to work attractions in Tomorrowland, then transferred to a role in entertainment tech. Those both really make sense because attractions gave him a knowledge of what rides look like behind the scenes, their controls, etc. And entertainment tech would probably teach him a lot about navigating backstage areas. Here’s some posts from a Tomorrowland attractions Facebook group that he was tagged in before his Facebook got deleted.
508D634D-F96D-4E84-AA96-FC45DEF489B8.png
8F14196A-AE70-4EA5-936C-57B6F8095D50.png
 
Last edited:

MouseBrayden

Well-Known Member
The active investigation deals with the theft of the CLOTHES. There is no active investigation of the animatronic itself. The police would've had to turn that information over in the same public records request if any such report had been filed.
Stop making definitive statements you don't know. Anything relating to the active investigation is redacted, including documents they can't provide at all, and including sections of the incident reports that have been provided so far. All we've seen is the unredacted info they CAN release, which you'd know if you had reached out and gotten the OCSO email. I sense getting all the facts isn't your main motive here given how conclusive your claims are when we still don't have a single document, statement, or anything official about the current whereabouts of the Buzzy animatronic.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom