Page 38-39
Higgins: So is this accurate testimony? Explain to us what happened in that 9 seconds and what you observed through your optics and with your eyes.
King: So after – after observing the rooftops, I’m probably going to get into more than probably what you – so when I went ahead and I – we kept hearing someone’s on the roof, I was observing the rooftops, didn’t see anything on the roof. I turned to [my partner] and said “he’s probably behind a tree”. If I don’t see him on a roof, he’s probably behind a tree. Kept looking, kept looking. I could see the local police moving on the ground. Something was still going on. (This bit about hearing someone is on the roof is VERY interesting. Higgins grills him on it, and he tries to weasel out of it by saying maybe he heard someone in the crowd yell it.)
I had my rifle in my tripod on the rooftop. When the first shot rang out, I identified the location that Crooks was at, put my binos down, got my rifle. At the time that I was getting into my rifle and getting the lase of Crooks, that’s when I assumed the three rounds and the five rounds went off.
And then as soon as I had my lase and my DOPE for the target, I took the shot. Immediately followed – put a second round into the chamber. Noticed that Crooks disappeared from the line of sight and stayed on that until I realized he wasn’t coming back up.
page 75
He’s being an idiot, trying to say every obstruction is different, so you can’t generalize.
Page 89
Q: Okay. Make it clear. When did you observe that locals were moving around with guns drawn?
King: That was after [redacted - probably Hercules 2] made the call that local — the locals were [redacted - probably working] something at the 3:00.
Q: Okay.
Q (someone else): Okay. So my next question is, did you notify the security room or anyone else via radio at that point that you were observing this situation with the locals?
King: No I did not. (Higgins doesn’t come back in to grill King on this, and whoever is questioning him doesn’t try to pin him down as to why he doesn’t think it’s important to tell Trump’s personal detail about it.)
He contradicts his earlier testimony about initially seeing Crooks through binoculars on page 101.
I’m sort of skimming this one, but it’s the transcript of the counter sniper that killed Crooks, so they aren’t worried about when the AGR building was cleared off.
From certain angles the first 3 shots sound slightly different from 5 others. So maybe he just pulled back the muzzle from the ridge. Damn, the west side footages are too shaky. He maybe slided backward after the first volley, but thet cannot be 4 or 5 feet.
(A few years ago I tried to play with waves, so I wrote a 2nd order differential equation and asked the computer to solve it. Wolfram Alpha recognised that it was “wave equation” but its solution was a polynomial. Geeez, nobody methioned that before in the school. I was surprised, but it checks up. So I tried to find if there are any other solutions - and there was.)
They weren’t worried about a possible additional shooter(s)?
By the way, it was stated earlier thet he had been spotted at the magnetometers, with range finder (porbably in his hand). ESU director was in the security room and he could not recall it was reported.
I’ve been still thinking about the sound. How a gunshot makes its sound.
I had to learn philosophy in high school, and remember a couple of things. Dialectics for example. And when the quantity turns to quality. Let’s try this way. Velocity dependent processes. Each system has (at least one) charasteristic relexation time. When we compress the air slowly, no sound occurs. But do it faster and faster. Molecules collide onto each oder quickly. But it is not like they collide to the rigid wall, cuz the pushed molecules start moving and they collide to the next molecules. So it is not just an instant thing, these subsequent collisions take some time. Grumble? What is the right word? Then the barrel emphasises some frequencies like a whistle does.
We don’t have to solve a differential equation, since it is not given (yet). Probably someone knows it already. (It might be the opposit of, what Feynman called the equation of dry water.)
I appreciate the last couple of videos you linked. The videos of the Hercules 2 team are just adding inches of scroll to an already bloated thread, though.
Anyway, it would appear that Mr. King got off his binoculars BEFORE shots started. In the testimony from pages 38 and 39, he sure makes it sound like he was using the binoculars at the moment shots started, but he doesn’t say that specifically.
I do NOT consider him to a reliable source. The fact he was put on desk duty for at LEAST 4 months adds to my suspicion that even the Secret Serivice thinks he screwed up big time. I wonder if the counter sniper team leader has also been put on desk duty? I’ll read his House testimony transcript next.
I think usually there is a psychological examination after someone used a deadly force.
I also think it happened too quickly, he was not prepared for that. There was not - I mean - he didn’t get an explicite warning before.
Uhm. Blasko testified that the secret agent with him had talked into his wrist when he showed him the photos. But the emergency director cannot recall any reports inside the security room. Was there another? Or, uh, someone said, Pearson has been equipped with portable radio, so it is no matter he left his post. So, maybe the agent in charge was not necessarily inside that security room, might be on the field.
Something annoys my nose, let me explain it.
I think grade B corraborates - well, it is not a logical inference. It is not a binary yes/no switch to do some deductive primari logic decision. It is rather like equalizers, when those sliders are a little bit shifted to yes from neutral position.
I don’t want to say that differential EQs is a big mess, just bc I don’t want to say that. I was 18 y/ő when I found a book on this topic, and nobody warned me. Then I decided I don’t want to be an expert of differential equations. My strategy is, whenever I have to solve one, I’ll get the book out of the shelf and find the appropriate method.
Well, it was said in Star Gate, roughly: I will go through that bridge only when I reached it.
So that grade B corraborates he was a smart guy, but not the genius of the century. But it is not the whole story. Did he decide on his own to learn that topic, or someone suggested to him? Anyone warned him that it is a difficult class? Like: deep water, only for good swimmers.
By the way, emergency services director wasn’t inside the security room at that time. He went to take some photos with Mt. Trump, then he went to eat.
However, he cannot recall any reports when he was in the security room (except the anti-drone problem).
Another Recognition Tools update. This one identifies the two USSS protective intelligence agents, the PI Advance and Site PI, along with the Site PI’s PSP counterpart.
The PI Advance drove in the motorcade to the site, and is seen walking along it in the NTD video upon arrival, but got left behind when it left for the hospital. He was also seen near the Site PI along the south side of the venue per the testimony of both.
The Site PI described the golf cart ride along the north barn captured by Dave Stewart, who personally knew the name of her PSP counterpart. She was also seen along the south side of the venue after shots were fired in the Mia Kopps video.
I have finally completed a full read through in detail of the Timeline analysis! Very comprehensive, and I found all kind of fascinating tidbits that I either didn’t know before or hadn’t considered! Again, thank you for all the work you put into this, it is magnificent! I do have a handful of notes, I’ll post them up here momentarily.
Do you have good reason to believe the ASAIC is Nick Menster, despite Susan Crabtree reversing her identification of him and saying it was not him? I can certainly believe she simply was told to lie and say it wasn’t him, but do you have something to go on?
Here’s a few of my initial thoughts and notes as far as the timeline goes. It’s funny, even as I go about reviewing it and uploading, I find little things to edit. Even some things I had thought of and wound up removing because I was able to actually think through it or visually find what I needed to negate or explain a thought I had. And this is now only 11 pages, and I only removed maybe 5-10, I can only imagine what it must have been like working on the actual timeline!
Valid question, to be sure. In the article quoted in the bottom right corner of my slide, she identified Menster’s role or position on the protective detail, ASAIC. She reversed her ID of the 1st agent in the “body bunker,” who she was initially told was Menster, stating that it was a Hispanic agent instead.
Who she was first told was the 1st to pile on was Menster. The agent I show as Menster was the 1st one on, based on the video evidence and the ASAIC interview transcripts.
Below is the order of who joined the body bunker. Note that I got the one on my slide furthest to the right wrong, he was the 6th not 5th. I have to question, who in that group looks Hispanic? If not the guy I show for Menster, then who, and why does the video evidence not show that agent being the first to pile on? Which source of Crabtree’s is correct, the first or second? Is that source as credible as the ASAIC himself?
The deciding factor for me is a combination of the video evidence of who was first, ASAIC testimony where he stated he was the first on, and Susan Crabtree’s article naming Menster as the ASAIC.
