I mean this pic.
1 Like
You know, looking at this pic
and then the official pic…I do not believe it.
Where is all of that spray from the front of his face on the bodycam pic? The infamous ear is obviously f’ed up in bodycam but perfectly in tact in every detail in official pic.
1 Like
It wasn’t the initial cam. It was one of the body cams from second round of officers going up on the roof- possibly the one where the woman medic Michel goes uo with the guy too. They talk with officers inside AGR before they head up.
It may even be the one with weird FBI guy
Anyways, they are standing on the west side of the body and the officer in question is on the east side and his pants look bloody. Someone pointed it out weeks ago.
1 Like
I will check. Because…what reason would there be obvious debris on his pants? Until we see the extent, (given the blood pattern we have been shown) unless the head of the body brushed his pants…idk.
Or the goop. I wondered if he had to kneel in the goop explosion to ziptie.
Why wouldn’t he just go to the other side? Who knows?
Nothing the locals did at AGR made any sense.
1 Like
Not funny, but funny…the “goop”. It’s a fricking crime scene of gigantic importance! You are just going to kneel in the “goop” and then just dryclean your evidenced pants?! I suppose.
1 Like
@bumblebeeez That is the initial bodycam I watched again. I could not see bloody pants. I will try again. You actually saw this? Or saw a post with this?
I saw a post with a screenshot of it where he did appear to have a wet right pants leg, knee/thigh area.
I remember why: everyone was trying to find out which officer bled in the bathroom!!!
1 Like
Makes perfect sense.
My bad, it was left leg. See? Above yellow inset. Someone had combined stills to get around the blur.
1 Like
That image was somebody’s attempt to unblur it by making a composition from a bunch of video frames.
1 Like
Right, but there is blood all over left thigh of dark uniform guy.
Yes. Great recollection! But…they will question this pic because someone doctored it. So…back to their “real” vidoes I go to find this image. But, from this to me it looks like he wiped his bloody hand or something.
Ah, OK. I think that’s probably Shaffer, right?
From the original Chuck Grassley bodycam release I see nothing.:
But, it reminded me at the end of the video they ask about if the guy in the white van survived?! Still checking video.
https://ussen-my.sharepoint.com/personal/gillie_maddox_grassley_senate_gov/_layouts/15/stream.aspx?id=%2Fpersonal%2Fgillie_maddox_grassley_senate_gov%2FDocuments%2FPublic%20Content%2FBeaver%20County%20ESU%20Full%20Bodycam%20Footage%2F2024-07-13%20Beaver%20Co%20ESU%20Bodycam%201.mp4&ga=1&referrer=StreamWebApp.Web&referrerScenario=AddressBarCopied.view.1a24b9c3-4e9a-4bb8-b13e-7a0478f0f024
1 Like
I couldn’t find any in originals either.
So either the color was changed during their attempt to create the non-blurred image or the colors of the video would have to be changed to pick it up.
I wouldn’t be shocked if he did have blood on him. There was lots of it.
You know, it’s weird. The back images of Crooks head really don’t look like major damage and I do think that would have happened if the sniper actually had the kill.
Someone was theorizing that maybe the kill bullet hit the stock of the rifle, but there’s no way. It had to be the first shot, #9, taken by the swat guy because Crooks is sitting up for the kill shot,#10, and the rifle would not have been in line with the shot.
It is super weird that Crooks didn’t try to get away or use his IEDs or try to shoot any more than he did. Usually those types of people keep going until they are taken down or they take themselves out.
I would not be shocked if he had blanks and thought he was part of a drill.
I would not be shocked if he thought he was part of a guaranteed operation.
It makes no sense to trust the FBI investigation. They’ve already been caught lying and there’s zero reason not to expect that to be continuing.
9 Likes
I could be wrong because I’m not cunning enough to understand all their machinations, but I read the recent FBI update where they said it wasn’t their “role” to mean “don’t worry, we’re not going to pursue this into dangerous territory”.
1 Like
You are right. There is more blood behind and below the year in the bodycam picture, and the ear is not distinct.
1 Like