Well, I think one of us hasn’t. Could you link us to your best source for the SS denying taking a shot?
Edit: just checking my own memories, here’s the NY Times from a few days ago saying the SS took the kill shot. https://archive.ph/RDAR7
Edit 2: @intolerance Hi, not trying to bug you, but I’d appreciate it if you’d answer this. Seems like a pretty important point we should agree about.
Hey man, chill, we all agree with you. You just misinterpreted our reaction to when you said “because they’ve told us SS snipers never fired a shot…”. We read this “they” as the official story as seen on the media. And the official story is that Hercules took him out on the 10th shot, and that the 9th shot was the one that made Crooks move, as told by The Post’s reporting.
Mk 13 Sniper Rifle with Nightforce ATACR 7-35x56 Scope, that’s what Hercules had.
The math I got from shot 10 puts the shooter at a minimum of 93 meters ( 102 yards) away from DJ Stewart if that 10th shot was from 5.56 and about 100 meters (109 yards) if it was 300win mag or .308. But this math was a quick-n-dirty thing using 0.17 secs of crack-thump for the 10th shot… It relies on that being the exact time on the audio waveform. If it were 0.13 secs then it would 75-80 meters, for instance.
Hi everyone! I’m new here. I sorta skimmed through this thread and was wondering if anyone has analyzed the audio that were recorded from the police cruiser that pulled up to the #6 building? Also, there’s new video of the snipers on the south barn (body cam) from someone coming out just south of the south barn. Is it ok to post links here. Both videos are available. Thanks and sorry if this has already been posted.
Hi, welcome. The big 12 bodycam videos just came out recently, so I think not much audio analysis has been done on them yet, or at least not yet presented by Chris.
One thing that struck me about the AGR 6 door dashcam video is that the echoes on the first 3 shots are heard quicker than on the 8th shot. I’m just using my ears and haven’t pulled it into an audio program yet, but I think that’ll probably turn out to be right. Edit: I dunno, I brought the clip into my audio editor and it looks to me like the echoes are 0.145s after the shots.
If you think data might be new, please post it. The worst that’ll happen is that it’ll be redundant, no big deal.
This might help but the audio hasn’t been released yet. It also shows the CS on the south barn turn and reposition with about 1:15 before TC fires from #6
that’s the bodycam of their Lieutenant. given his location, it is possible that he recorded audio, but since he was around so many Secret Service agents, it is possible that they muted all audio to prevent sensitive information from getting out. then there is the possibility that he just never prompted his camera to start recording audio, since I think we have at least one other bodycam with the same deal.
So for my proof that’s the Lieutenant.
Bodycam BWC2-122104
Bodycam BWC2-122104
Lower right: Matthew Pearson
Per the PD website.
Hi sir, I have zero knowledge about audio analysis. Thank you for the info. Have you seen this video? I think I hear a ricochet after the ninth shot. Maybe. It also sounds like two more shots right before the 10th shot. I hope someone can shed some light on this. I wish I had more knowledge about audio and ballistics.
calm down lad
Hey guys, shouldn’t the intensity of the sound tell something about the distance due to attenuation?
Here is a [link]( Sound Propagation and Acoustic Barrier Calculator - NoiseTools.net) of a noise attenuation 2D model.
Yes, but the position & location & type of microphone and the material in between the source and the mic have more impact.
I have added that dashcam audio to my sources. But as it came in late and is from a non-trusted source (government) I do not give much weight to this audio.
That first bodycam of the officer that was boosted up to see TMC, I thought that was very theatrical. Did anyone else feel the same? I find it hard to believe that that would be 100% authentic.
I computed the difference in “report” times that would be required to make the south barn true for shot 10. In brief:
something + [0.159 0.137 0.163 0 ] seconds.
This is not an invitation to goal seek, but rather, a grid which, if impulses snap to it, might lessen the work of finding them.
The method can be audited in the attached PDF.
S10_barn_check_helper.pdf (240.2 KB)
There is a line of analysis where the answer to “how … clocks were sync’d” is “no need to.”
So far, I have not seen anyone show concrete results of doing such. Dr. Martensen hints about this line of thinking in the video. The analysis I am suggesting is to calculate the shot-to-shot delay in the recordings from various positions. To summarize the basic logic: if (A) all the shots are properly identified in all recordings (i.e. we all agree that the recordings being analyzed all have shots 1-8), and if (B) none of the sources of audio nor receivers of audio moved, then (C) the shot-to-shot time intervals must be the same.
Again, if A and B then C must be true.
The interesting result of the analysis would be that we find C not to be true. In my opinion, C is not true, but its close enough to set an upper bound on how far B might have moved. Something like 25 feet, but maybe larger.
The most interesting result is if there is an analysis showing that not only is there is a difference in transit times at various recordings between, say, shots 1 and 4, that maybe it is also possible to put a LOWER bound on the corresponding distance. (a lower bound implies two separate source positions, i.e. two shooters.)
I am looking on this forum to see if anyone has done that analysis (and not seen it) and am trying to find enough data and remember enough math to do it myself.
Hi J. and Greg. Does this model consider the bullet deaccelerating or at a medium velocity?
Great. There would be no difference if only one person comitted all the shots.
TDOA analysis (see @greg_nichols work) has suggested that neither shot 9 or 10 came from either barn. Both came from just north of the audience/white tents, maybe near the red farm equipment. The same TDOA is also not quite precise enoough, as far as I can tell, to be certain whether shots 123 and 45678 all came from Crooks position vs near that position. Some of that imprecision is due to moving microphones.
So if it is true that the kill shot (which I assume is shot 10) came from the south barn (Hercules 1, I think), then this suggests the TDOA analysis for shot 10 is way off.
Either the TDOA is wrong, or the conventional wisdom that SS snipers on the south barn delivered shot 10 is wrong. They cannot both be correct.
I think its worth looking in more detail at the shot-to-shot delay times of the set of 1-3 versus 4-8. I generally agree with your analysis that they are close enough across recording positions to put an upper bound on how far apart those sources might be from each other. And I am very interesting in taking TDOA to more detail for the first 8 shots.
I think that a detailed computation that establishes the arrival times with more digits of precision might result in establishing a lower bound for differences in source positions that is above zero and physically plausible. I am not saying this result is guaranteed, but I am saying your youtube video does not establish shot-to-shot delay times in a way that unequivocally establishes a common source position for all of 1-8. (It literally concedes the opposite, but I can argue that the upper bound you conclude, 2m, is too low because of the very problem I pose: its not trivial to establish shot-to-shot delay accurately.)
Experience at a gun range (like Chris M has, and I share a little bit) makes it really hard to hear the recordings of those reports of 1-3 followed by 4-8 and then conclude they all came from the same gun. That feeling, of course, is a danger that might make someone like me likely to see something that isn’t there, but Chris M is experiencing the same problem. I think it remains at least plausible to consider that Crooks fired zero of the shots (has anyone found a recording of recoil or muzzle flash? I haven’t seen any yet.)
Direct evidence of a 2nd Shooter:
Visual: We have a fairly good video of Crooks in prone with shouldered rifle on the rooftop from location of source 4 west of Crooks. The first shot shows zero recoil movement of Crooks, even things he cannot control like his hair. Not any observable movement, repositioning for the followup shot, etc. I went shooting yesterday and have shot ARs for 2 decades and can confirm even a light recoil AR will cause some movement.
Forensics: First count of the shell casings, while casual, was 5 shell casings. Not 4, not 6. FIVE. Only later on the roof is the count of 8 given. Very suspicious.
Audible: The shots are NOT from the same gun, location, and hence person. They are too distinct in sound and that distinction cannot be explained. We have multiple sound/source analysis including some of the early ones by Chris that support more likely than not there were two weapons that day, some theories show more than two but I think at least and probably two. I wouldn’t bet too heavily on sound pinpointed location due to too many unknowns and variables.
We have video of Crooks prone during shot 1, and presumably then shots 2 and 3. Then there is a pause, but instantly after he shoots 4-8, we have more video of him prone and then killed in the same prone position. It appears highly likely to a near certainty Crooks was in the exact same prone position and orientation during all 8 shots. Given this, there is no human, physics, mechanical, echo, or auditory explanation that the first 3 shots sound remarkably different than shots 4-8 (except possibly different ammunition, but I doubt it).
Circumstantial evidence:
If we agree that this was an inside job (for which there is overwhelming direct and circumstantial evidence), then it stands to reason that there’s zero chance the powers that put this in motion and allowed it would bet everything on Crooks succeeding without a backup plan to wit, a professional shooter with similar Crooks line of sight and trajectory to ensure it got done.
He didn’t miss. He hit Trump 1 CM from a lethal hit. It appears that divine intervention, a unpredictable head turn and possibly a last moment gust of wind moved his head enough and pushed the bullet enough to not be a direct fatal hit. Trump then ducked down.
Quite directly and obviously the FIB and CYA is crooked and it is for the same reasons in the last 6 years:
Face it, the FIB/CYA is a criminal cartel run by totally corrupt evil people and is not going to tattle on themselves for their own failed assassination attempt, similar attempts they routinely do globally to disrupt and interfere in elections around the world for more power/wealth/influence.
i agree with this. I’ve been shooting guns for 2+ decades, including the AR15 in 5.56mm. I conclude from my ear, and from reviewing audio analysis, shots 1-3 are different than 4-8. Period.
These differences could be explained by different ammo, perhaps. But what a remarkable coincidence that 1-3 (different cadence and sound) are different than 4-8.
These differences could be explained by a rifle muzzle closer/father from a echo-ey metal roof or other objects to change the direction or type of echo. But we see from videos Crooks is in the same position for shot 1 as he is following shot 8 and there was no time to change positions sufficiently between shots 1-8 to seemingly account for a vast auditory difference. Nothing other than a different rifle/location/shooter accounts for the delay in echo or the obvious auditory differences in the shots/snicks.
One final point of strong circumstantial evidence: If you believe as I do that this was an inside MIHOP combined with LIHOP operation, there’s zero chance they would rely solely on disposable 20 year old Crooks. They’d put a professional shooter in a separate but relatively close unobserved position with the same class of weapon and similar trajectory to try to mask a 2nd shooter.
I can only conclude from the direct and circumstantial evidence these were at minimum two different rifles in different positions, requiring there be at least 1 additional assassin.
The analysis in question is called Time Difference of Arrival (TDOA) processing. It is based entirely on the travel of the muzzle blast, at the speed of sound, to the microphones. It does not involve bullet speeds at any point, and (if done right), avoids use of the shock wave ‘cracks’ that precede the arrival of the report.
It is very robust when there is a clear line of sight between the gun and the microphone. When the way is blocked, you get a complicated mess of refraction, echoes, and flanking paths (e.g., air → steel → air again). When the way is clear, the direct path, being the shortest, always arrives first, and subsequent echoes can be ignored.
When the recordings do not have a common clock (to the millisecond), TDOA must be calibrated by assuming the source of one shot. Then the rest can be located. Recent discussions give Crooks shot #1, and see what results.
My impression is that they are (once again) trying to make fun of everyone who is trying to understand what really happened at Butler Farm.
