Other Forensics of the Assassination Attempt

Citizens Investigation Trump Shooting
425

Here is a link to a post I did in “Audio & Video …”
I made an interactive graphic on Desmos where you can see the locus of points where a second shooter might be, provided you have a second microphone of fixed and known location; just by measuring the time gaps between, say shots 3 and 4 (or shots 8 and 9) on recordings from different microphones. And provided one sound source location is known.

Should be able to identify location of shots 10, 9, and if 123 vs 45678 are different locations. If you have more than 3 recordings (from different places), should be able to triangulate and get a fairly accurate spot.

426

my initial assessment was the one on the left is photocopied, i don’t think they changed his face i think they removed something. the curvature of the ear appears to be wrong, after about 15 minutes i lost entrist since the bullets are infinitely more traceable. Hope that helps

427

im not asking you to look anything up. you volunteered your opinion. i have the information on the cyclic rate; you need not trouble yourself.

428

Hi @cmartenson

Saw your video today. It was a good video. I had the same idea, a shooter under the roof, but don’t know what the interior is like. If it’s an open ceiling then… The reason I thought this was from DJStew’s video. Look at the first 3 shots then the next 5.

First 3 shots have a faint echo. It starts with a sonic boom then about 0.03 seconds later there’s the muzzle blast. It’s faint and hard to spot. About 0.213 seconds after that, there’s an echo but it’s faint. What’s significant is the volume along with the spectrogram.

image
image909×809 135 KB

For an echo, you expect lower frequencies to come through better than higher frequencies. The higher the frequency the more quickly it’s absorbed. I can think of but one reason for this: The sound passed through a small opening. When sound passes through a small opening, higher frequencies pass right through. Lower frequencies will diffract more, which means they spread out. That leaves less energy to reach DJStew.

The echo is about 0.21 seconds, which is about 70m. The width of building 6 is about 25m. So the echo of the muzzle blast would bounce off the far wall, reach the shooter (50m) then about 20m down to DJStew. So that’s the only reflective surface that lines up.

The next 5 shots have no echo. When the video first came out, it really stood out to me. I guess now there’s two strong data points that support a shooter in the attic hypothosis.

Edit: Brain fart. Ignore the 20m distance down to DJStew. Both sounds traveled that distance. 50m or 70m is within the error range.

429

It’s been a long time since I looked into sonic cracks. IIRC, every time a super sonic bullet passes a fixed object there is a crack. IE, if a bullet passes a tree in it’s line of filght, there is a sonic crack at that location.

430

From the moment I saw the flashes in the window of the Stewart video, I thought it was likely a LEO checking the room after shots were fired. Very logical explanation. It just dawned on me that he might have done so due to hearing a shot from that vicinity, such as one from the ceiling crawl space. Just one more possible data point to support that theory if that’s what the flashes were.

1 Like
431

I watched John Cullen on the “Coffee and a Mike” Show on Rumble from 7/30/2024

He said he took the Dave Stewart video, slowed it down to 1/10 speed and put through an audio processor. He finds something like 10 or more subsonic, suppressed rounds fired before the audible Shot #1 as we have been calling it was ever fired. He believes these came from multiple locations including a first floor window of Building 6, a sniper in a tree, probably another in another tree, and one on the water tower. The first shots were fired at both CS teams on the cow barns. He believes a shot from the South cow barn (silenced) took out Crooks: a few frames show a bullet on 2 consecutive frames speeding in the direction of Crooks. He believes Crooks was dead before Shot #1 was fired.
The theory is that the shooter in the first floor window realizing that Crooks was dead, switched to an AR 15 and took shots 1,2,3. He says the crack-boom of .22 seconds correlates with the front edge of building 6 rather than the center of the roof. By the way, .22 seconds vs .212 seconds is a difference of 16 feet, suggesting 45678 may have come from one of the trees.

After Trump stood back up, more subsonic suppressed rounds were being fired.
He says a shot from the secret counter sniper location killed the sniper that was on the water tower - this was a 488 yard shot.
He also posits that the person firing multiple subsonic suppressed rounds from a 1st floor window, then an AR15 for shots 1,2,3 and then possibly more subsonic rounds may have cut his hand on broken glass while picking his brass, put his weapons away, went to the bathroom to clean up his bloody hand and then made up a story about climbing up to the metal roof and having the shooter point his gun at him. In other words, the shot that hit Trump’s ear was fired by someone wearing some kind of uniform. There was someone in the AGR building wearing Secret Service insignia.
This explains the CS teams on the cow barns flinching and reacting, there is also some footage showing the North barn team counter sniper changing his position to the right by 20 or 30 degrees apparently targeting the trees.
Crooks may have believed the snipers would be all taken out before he started shooting.
As to why the subsonic rounds all missed: he suggest the rounds would be 4 times the weight of an AR 15 round and going only 900 ft/sec so more susceptible to wind. He also thinks some of the injuries to civilians may have been from the various snipers on water tower or trees.

There is also a short video on youtube with multiple screens synced up:

John Cullen again. If you go to 5:13 in that video, you’ll see something happening with a curtain moving in a first floor window of building 6 (2nd from the right).

432

The Senator Ron Johnson timeline (five different sources) and Senator Chuck Grassley’s records - in particular the BC ESU post-action report - give a ton of information.

One theme that glows is how local ESU/LEO were diligently, repeatedly sending specific info out to SS “command” and “SS sniper team leader”, who were the only passthrough to SS snipers; however, how SS command and SS sniper team leader delayed the transmission of info to snipers, distracted snipers by EMAILING info rather than radioing it, and diluted info by referring to suspect in “perimeter” of AGR rather than specifically the photo of Crooks or the fact that Crooks was on the roof for 3+ minutes.

2 Likes
433

Hi Chris,
where can I find the most accurate positioning of recordings and the cleanest videos?
This new video from Piper, has anyone downloaded it in a location where I can access it?
(for some reason those youtube browser plugins don’t work for me)
Ernst.

1 Like
434

It’s a great idea to gather all the highest-quality versions of evidence in one place. It would help people collaborate, and it will help us avoid inadvertently degrading them as we transfer them around, or losing them as YouTube censors them or whatever. I can help set this up if Chris wants it, or this forum software may provide a way to do it.

435

That is exactly what I just thought up. We need a data-czar. (but not the kind that completely and utterly f**s up any given task)
Also that should include a spreadsheet with known locations. X,Y coordinates. Let’s say Don’s mic is at 0,0 then we can measure from there (in m! no imperial units allowed :smile: )
Something like that.

436

There should be at least 3 separate copies all in different locations.

1 Like
437

No, that will take care of itself. We need one location to draw from and if something happens to that location everyone of us will have copies. We just need a single collection/distribution point.

438

Here is a link to the Piper video.

1 Like
439

I’m just talking about backups of known good copies. So they’re safe from any type of disaster, natural or man made. Also not connected to the WWW.

440

Are you talking about personal experience? I really would like to know at what distance the sonic crack can be heard when gun calibers are at play. There are apparently many military guys here, and some of them should have been in combat situations, are veterans. Somebody once wrote (and I don’t remember where I did read this), that you learn that you are targeted when you hear sonic cracks nearby. But how much is nearby?

441

I have been following Chris’ videos on the assassination attempt for a while and as always Chris has done a great job.

However, I believe the echoes are not as straightforward proof as it might seem at first glance - and rightly so, Chris only mentions that the echoes’ incongruences “need to be explained”.

I am attaching a quick sketch that I put together that, in my opinion could very easily explain the incongruences in the echo delay differences.

I didn’t take any elements of the scene, terrain or actual buildings in consideration, but the sketch is only meant to explain the concept of how such incongruences could easily be explained.

echoes
echoes1920×1398 68.4 KB

Sketch explanation:

  1. Let’s consider the camera (and mic) have moved from point A to point B between shots 1-3 and 5-9.
  2. Let’s also assume there are two reflecting objects (surface A and surface B)
  3. The audio of the shot would reflect on these surfaces and propagate mostly likely as shown on the sketch.
  4. This means not only different echoes signature can be heard depending where the mic is at, but the delay from shot to echo would vary depending on the distances of surfaces A and B to the shot location.
  5. So by moving from point A to B, the mic could have easily captured two different echoes from two different objects, even if the shots originated from the same spot/gun.

–

In terms of audio sounding different, unfortunately I think that is highly inconclusive when considering it has been captured by moving smartphones. Regarding smartphones recordings, we need to consider a few things (and I know, I designed a few of those):

  • Most smartphones around have 3 mics or more
  • Normally one is omnidirectional and the other ones are directional mics

The sounds captured by these microphones are modified via software to optimise for different functions of the phone (video calls, voice recognition, video and audio recording, etc.).

So when video recording the smartphone software is constantly messing up with the audio in order to optimise it for whatever it “thinks” will give you the best output.

For video, normally clear audio of someone speaking is the most important feature, so there is a LOT of NOISE REDUCTION going on, which could definitely affect the sound signatures of background noises, especially if the device is on the move and pointing at different directions.

I believe all smartphone audio captures are good to look at, but ONLY the stage microphone recoding can give reliable data for audio analysis.

Just wanted to share my 2 cents on this.

1 Like
442

I guess his head was lifted up.

443

Question: a shooter shold keep his mouth open? I don’t think so.
Why sould have he opened his mouth at that moment?

444

Which left side is right?
I guess one of the images in mirror.
But here you can see both eyes.

thomas-matthew-crooks
thomas-matthew-crooks736×472 77.3 KB