VY have you seen the John Cullen and interview of the Redheaded Lady saying shooter killed on water tower……. She says guy came up to her in golf cart (per her cart is full of water he is presumably distributing) and showed her pictures of two freshly dead guys (shooters?)
You’re missing my point. I was replying to this post you made.
“Perhaps the commonly available M193 ammo is loaded in such a way that it is designed to be loaded in an “accuracy node” for carbine length barrels. This is just a hypothesis that would need to be tested.”
My post about the origin of M193 ammo was to this point. Nothing more, nothing less. Since then I have found out how to use the green box quote feature.
They switched to a faster twist rate for heavier/longer bullets. They picked the 1:7 twist because of the M856 tracer round in cold weather.
1:7, 1:8, & 1:9 are the most used twist rates currently in AR type rifles. This allows use of 70gr-80gr projectiles. The heavier bullets preform better at longer ranges past 500 meters. When SOCOM started using 77gr Mk262 cartridge for longer distances with the Mk12 rifles, it was found to have better terminal performance in the SBR Mk18 rifles compared to M855, too.
For that picture (referencing post 76), the white splot looks like a reflection. I think the red is behind the window. What’s the time stamp on this?
Interestingly, the red has horizontal striping that is reminiscent of mini blinds. I have not seen that in any other screen shots.
Now, why would we only see a reflection in the top half of the window? That doesn’t make any sense. I’m starting to remind myself when I look at these “window 3” screenshots that the FBI had this phone for 2 weeks. They had ample opportunity to modify the images on it.
The photo you are using as reference is tilted. If we were to rotate it 10 degrees or so counterclockwise, that window won’t appear to be so far beneath Trump’s ear. Then, if you figure Trump leaned over a little when he looked at the chart, his ear would have been a little lower than it appears here.
The window is definitely at about the right spot left-right wise (24 feet to the right of the spot behind Trump). The spot where Crooks is found dead is way too far to the right. It remains to be seen what the correct origin of that first bullet really is. It does seem that a spot a higher than the window looks to be the right height, but the top of building 6 is too high.
Consider the roof of the building as the horizontal reference, it would still be going up, even if you consider other hit points in Trumps ear. If the first bullet hit Trump and David Ducth, it did not come from that window.
1 Like
@the-right-to-know You asked about the ladders and roof access. This video shows a detailed analysis of the ladders and roof access by the police:
TL;DW; Two ladders and pallet were brought and used by police to access roof. 5’ ladder mentioned in news that Crooks bought nowhere to be found and likely left at home due to being too short.
(19m20s)
What are you basing that on?
If Trump is 6 ’ 4" standing on a 5 ft podium and the other guy is 5’10" to 6’ standing on a 6 to 7 ft elevated bleacher, then if he is shot in the stomach and arm: there isn’t much elevation there or they are similar heights.
Not to mention, the bullet may be dropping its parabolic trajectory at that point.
I’m basing on the fact that is James Copenhaver footage.
The bullet coming from that window would go above James Copenhaver camera. Therefore, above David Dutch.
That’s not how that works.
You have to actually measure the heights of each location. You can’t use camera angles.
Those windows are about 7 foot at max height. A shot taken at 5 to 6.5 feet barrel height doesn’t need much upward angle to reach Trump.
The guy in the bleachers stomach would have been similar height to Trump’s ear or slightly above, assuming a roughly 7 to 7.5 ft height for a 10 row standard bleacher.
Someone awesome will probably do the math on it.
To John Goodwin - I’m almost 100% sure the video you linked to in your latest post, which is a production of Jeff O’Stroff, is misinformation produced by the “deep state”.
It could be. Until something else comes out, this shows the most reasonable explanation of the ladders that I’ve seen. Would be glad to change my mind if you find contrary evidence. I have no dog in the fight of proving anything to anyone for an event I didn’t attend.
So much crazy talk about ladder. According to FBI testimony they have ladder but refused to disclose where they first found it, but added they found the bloody receipt in Crooks pocket. A latter report stated the ladder was found 50 miles away near his home.
These things don’t make sense. If you bought a ladder night before would you put receipt in your pocket next morning and head to venue 50 miles away without ladder?
This just goes to show you that nothing is off table just because of a report or publishing by media etc.
1 Like
You should actually watch the full videos I linked to in my post - that will change your mind. Jeff O intentionally fails to broadcast the full Dave Stewart video that shows all the LEO’s moving away from the pallet ladder to rush behind the trees - however, Jeff O says all LEOs accessed the roof via the pallet ladder, when they actually didn’t. The guy’s a government hack. He’s the same guy that said earlier the bicycle under the tree belonged to Crooks - when it didn’t. If he’s not a government hack - he’s just not very good with his investigation!
2 Likes
Explain to me why you can’t use camera angles?
Let’s assume some things:
1 - The photons of the photo reach the same spot in eyepiece of the camera of James Copenhaver.
2 - The photons travel in a perfect line.
3 - Trumps ear is below the top of the roof projection by 0.43m.
4 - The distance of David Dutch is 165m, and Trump is 140m away from the shooter.
5- For measuring distances in the photo I’m using this:Measure in photo online ‐ eleif.net
Therefore, with some basic trigonometry, at David Dutch position the bullet trajectory would pass 0.5m below James Copenhaver camera eyepiece.
That is very near the bullet hit on David Dutch.
1 Like
First, you don’t know where the camera is actually positioned, not with a high degree of accuracy.
Second, you don’t know what distortions are occurring with that potato camera.
Third, bullets follow a parabolic trajectory: that has to be calculated given many variables. It isn’t a straight line.
Fourth, I wouldn’t feel comfortable accepting what bullets hit where and when until far more analysis has been done with regards to both the audio, video, and any other evidence available.
It makes way more sense to calculate trajectories based on known variables like the window, podium, and bleacher heights than to try and use a blurry pixelated phone video that was shot from “somewhere” in the general area of the side bleachers.
2 Likes
I do not know if Jeff showed it, or someone else did, but it’s my understanding that:
- 4 LEOs went up a pallet and used it as a ladder
- Some other ones went up a little black ladder
- A bigger ladder was brought
- Next group was about to go up the little black ladder and instead went to the bigger ladder.
I could have the timeline and facts wrong, though.
Everyone is using photo matching for obtaining positions. Like this one I used to obtain the distances.
Is that photo distorted? Of course it is, but it is the best we got. By that you are assuming that every 3D model is not accurate also.
The elevation position of the camera, I can agree with you that it could differ but not much more than 0.15m. That’s one of the reasons used a circle of probability in David Dutch.
For The bullet deviation caused by gravity can be estimated by ballistic calculators, by my calculations around 0.08m of down deviation for 165m considering that it hit Trump at 140m.
The wind will only alter horizontally not vertically.
So it does not change any assumption here.
There’s a massive difference between a birds eye overview of a consistent image and a single potato phone footage.
Like I said, I’ll be more comfortable waiting for detailed analysis that looks at all the evidence. After all, why not?
Every other models are using a lot of assumptions. For example, some people might be considering the location of the top of hold on the bleacher to be the height of the bullet because their considering only this video as evidence.
Like this 3D model:
But the height is much lower and is off to the side either.
We don’t even know if David Dutch was shot two times or one. That might explain his two hands stopping the bleed.
Thats the kind of evidence the forensics police should be after. But we probably won’t have it.