So It's Back To First Principles (Part 1)

[sonjax6]

After reviewing James Copenhaver’s latest interview, I’ve changed my mind and decided his arm wound probably did come from a bullet from the AGR 6 building, or in a close line with that trajectory. I had thought his scar was pretty much on the outside of his arm, but it seems it’s more toward the back of his arm. The lady on his left is one of Mr. Comperatore’s sisters or his mom.

If I remember right flamecensor believes that the first audible shot hit Mr. Trump’s ear and then Mr. Copenhaver’s arm, and I am inclined to agree now. We disagree on where that shot comes from.

Mr. Comperatore’s video shows Mr. Trump pretty much looking straight toward him when he was shot, so the bullet has to come from Mr. Comperatore’s position, give or take about 10 degrees, since Mr. Trump’s ear was hit, but no other skin on his head.

Using this overhead shot from TV station WHYY we get this:

Yes, with an overhead photo we have to be aware there is a third dimension (when objects are higher or lower vs objects shown) , but the effect when drawing lines that are pretty much straight up and down the photo is minimal.

People have objected to the “fence problem” of the 3rd window, but I’ve decided that the very top of the window would have a vantage above the fence. I cite a still from one rallygoer video:

The fence post of the outer fence is at or a little below the subjective level of the middle window, and the person videoing the scene is a foot below the 6 foot high inner fence. Raise his vantage point 12 inches, and that middle window would appear 4 inches higher versus the outer fence (assuming a 1:3 ratio). Consider that the stage and Trumps ear were 10 feet high versus the 6 foot height of the fence in front of the videographer. That’s a 48 inch difference. with a 1:5 ratio in distance, that gives the top of the window another 10 inches above the top of the near fence when looking at Trump’s ear on the stage.

[daniel59]

@sonjax6

If I remember right flamecensor believes that the first audible shot hit Mr. Trump’s ear and then Mr. Copenhaver’s arm, and I am inclined to agree now.

If that were true, then the bullet that hit the railing would have had to have been fired from a tree, as John Cullen suggests. Even if it had been a subsonic bullet, the muzzle blast from that shot would have been audible on all the recordings.

That’s why I think this theory is nonsense.

The muzzle blast can only be reduced by about 30 dB with standard suppressors. And very large suppressors would simply not fit on a tree.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

[flamecensor]

@daniel59

the muzzle blast from that shot would have been audible on all the recordings.

No, 5 muzzle blasts were audible on Dayve’s recording, beginning with Trump’s words, " …a bit old, that chart".

[daniel59]

@flamecensor

muzzle blasts were audible on Dayve’s recording

However, the muzzle blasts should be audible on all recordings.

[flamecensor]

@daniel59

However, the muzzle blasts should be audible on all recordings.

If muzzle blasts were hundreds of meters north of the stage, Inaudibility is understandable to me.
Also, I think most of them ‘looked’ louder on the right channel from Dayve’s phone.

At least one, I think from Mia Kopps’ video, wasn’t on Dayve’s, and was between Trump’s words,
“right out of thee…”
and
“…government services…right out of border patrol.”
I listened repeatedly on Dayve’s, and couldn’t hear it.

[daniel59]

@flamecensor

If muzzle blasts were hundreds of meters north of the stage, Inaudibility is understandable to me.

At a distance of 300 meters, the sound reduction is approximately 48 dB.

And with a conventional suppressor, the muzzle blast of an AR-15 is approximately 130 dB.

[roger-knight]

I agree with @daniel59. We have multiple video recordings that show the first shot grazes Trump’s ear, and others that clearly show the same shot impacting the corner of the bleachers—nearly hitting TOB. Initially, we had two separate videos supporting these points, but since Comparatore’s video surfaced, we now have a single piece of footage showing the bullet grazing Trump’s ear and striking the bleacher corner in the same frame sequence. We’ve already analyzed this video together, and a careful frame-by-frame count confirms that sequence of events.

@roger-knight

I already answered the same question that came from phiphi-the-frenchie.

---

Arguments Supporting Scenario 2:

Claim: The first shot hits Trump’s ear, then Copenhaver’s arm.

Evidence Presented:

1. Copenhaver moves his left arm during shot 1.
2. In his interview, he states that shot 1 hit his arm.

---

Response to These Arguments:

1. Copenhaver moves his left arm during shot 1:

This argument is weak. Every person in the top row visibly reacts to the first shot—especially the man in the white shirt who dives toward the bleacher floor. If we interpret every movement as a direct hit, we would have to conclude that nearly everyone in the top row was shot, which is clearly not the case. Startle responses to gunfire do not equal ballistic impacts.

2. Copenhaver’s interview claim that shot 1 hit his arm:

While we respect Mr. Copenhaver’s account, eyewitness testimony ranks lowest in evidentiary reliability (especially in high-stress situations), particularly when compared to video or forensic evidence.

Additionally, if shot 1 truly struck his arm, then it could not have also impacted the bleacher corner. The bullet trajectory makes this scenario physically impossible according to ballistic analysis. As @daniel59 correctly noted, invoking a phantom bullet from the trees to explain the bleacher impact only highlights the implausibility of this claim.

---

What the Evidence Actually Shows:

We now have HD photographic evidence indicating that Copenhaver was struck during the volley of shots 4 through 8.

If you review the footage, you’ll see him visibly recoil and fall during this later sequence. His reaction is sharp and immediate during these impacts—not during the first shot. Additionally, we have identified three bullet impacts on the banners in that area, and one bullet remains lodged in Copenhaver’s body. All of this points to a hit during the 4–8 shot interval.

Here is this picture with the bullet impacts in the banner:
https://cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/gmg/NP2LAIOFK5ASVHDDJ6C2WFE2UQ.jpg

---

Final Challenge:

We have now provided clear, corroborated evidence that shot 1 did not strike Copenhaver’s arm. What remains to be shown is this:

What specific evidence exists that excludes the possibility that Copenhaver was hit by one of shots 4 through 8?

Unless such counter-evidence can be produced, the conclusion that he was struck during this later volley stands on firmer forensic and visual grounds.

[flamecensor]

@daniel59

the muzzle blast of an AR-15 is approximately 130 dB.

I never considered that an AR was used for the suppressed shots.
The shots at 18:11:15 and at 18:11:25 could be 45 caliber, suppressed.
The shot at 18:11:05 was, according to Marine Sniping Instructor, Clay Martin,
“300 Blackout subsonic ammo, through a suppressor.”
That was the most subtle shot for me to hear, and sounded like two papers being stapled together in an office.
But Dayve’s phone had been pointing East down the fence line, and he whipped the phone North at the sound.
You can quote decibel values, but I could hear 2 dozen shots from Dayve’s microphone that I couldn’t hear from the PBS, RSBN broadcasts.

[flamecensor]

@roger-knight

Startle responses to gunfire do not

end with a gunshot, that left a scar.
That wasn’t a ‘startle response’. That was the first of 2 gunshots suffered by Copenhaver in less than 2 seconds.
Here’s a 34 frame closeup of his arm(and abdomen) in the 1 1/3 seconds after Trump asked, “what happened?”

[roger-knight]

and which shot hits the bleacher corner?

[flamecensor]

If you insist on calling the bullet that hit both Trump and Copenhaver “Shot 1”, then the bullet that hit the rail is “Shot 0”.
With that numbering format, then “Shot -24” was fired when HorseLady began her ride East.

[flamecensor]

@roger-knight

What specific evidence exists that excludes the possibility that Copenhaver was hit by one of shots 4 through 8?

Conclusive evidence exists, including statements by Feldman attorneys that the first 2 seconds showed Copenhaver(and Dutch) “getting shot.” (Tom Llamas’s words on NBC).
Or, watch Shot 3 again:
Elon said it was ‘graphic content’…not because it was a “startle response”, but because it showed a shot to Copenhaver’s abdomen.
Can you see fluid spraying inside his shirt?

[sonjax6]

Have you ever looked at Hercules 2 counter sniper testimony? Take a look at if you have not yet. The earlier and longer of the two is the senate testimony:

Hercules-2-Counter-Sniper_Redacted.pdf

He said there were suppressed shots that passed close to his left as the audible shots started. This is a professional trained in recognizing ballistics. His partner said he thought the shots were to his right.

Then there is the matter that the telehandler’s hydraulic line was hit in manner that the fluid shot out to the north east.

You seem to dismiss Copenhaver’s reaction as a reaction to the railing shot, ignoring the fact he was in fact shot twice. He believes he was shot at the time audible shots started. If he had a “startle” reaction, wouldn’t it be more of a whole body reaction, or a reaction of his right arm, which was touching the back railing?

There is a fair amount of evidence of shots coming from two different sources, and while I don’t claim to know where that railing shot came from, it wasn’t the same shot that hit Trump’s ear. As my illustration shows, backtracing a line from the back corner to Trump’s ear leads to either the eastmost vent of the AGR building or a position too far to the east of “Crooks”.

That eastmost vent is a problem in my opinion. A hypothetical shot from there that hits Trump’s ear, then the bleacher corner would have passed VERY close to Mr. Comperatore. It’s hard to imagine him - and everyone around him - not hitting the deck immediately. Also, in his video, you can see a few of the people in the foreground turning extra to look past Mr. Comperatore’s right shoulder - including the young guy in the “Trump” cowboy hat, the older guy in the light blue dress shirt with the dark red tie, and the young guy in between those two.

[roger-knight]

So you’re asserting that Shot 0, which struck the corner of the bleachers, was a suppressed shot (a “ghost shot”) that occurred prior to Shot 1, which hit Trump’s ear and then Copenhaver’s arm. However, as @daniel59 correctly pointed out, suppressed shots are still audible.

I also asked an AI about this, and the response I received casts further doubt on your claim.

I believe anyone would notice something as loud as a rock concert, so I find your claim to be weak and lacking solid evidence. While I respect your opinion, I will continue the investigation without spending too much time on this particular point. For now, let’s leave it at this: we simply disagree on the matter.

[flamecensor]

@roger-knight

suppressed shots are still audible

As I typed minutes ago, I didn’t hear them on PBS or RSBN.
I did hear them on Dayve’s…not easily for the shot at 18:11:06, and not easily for the 5 shots starting with ‘a couple of months old’…(much extraneous noise, with Collins yelling at Dayve) but there were 3 shots from 18:11:28 to 18:11:29, a slight pause, and then 2 more at 18:11:30 or 18:11:31…hard to hear anything after that…
Have you heard these 3 shots, between your ‘volleys’ of ‘3’ and of ‘5’?

[roger-knight]

@sonjax6

There is a fair amount of evidence of shots coming from two different sources, and while I don’t claim to know where that railing shot came from, it wasn’t the same shot that hit Trump’s ear.

So, do you share the same opinion as @flamecensor and John Cullen that there was a suppressed shot (a “ghost shot”) that occurred before Shot 1?

[sonjax6]

@roger-knight

So you’re asserting that Shot 0, which struck the corner of the bleachers, was a suppressed shot (a “ghost shot”) that occurred prior to Shot 1, which hit Trump’s ear and then Copenhaver’s arm. However, as @daniel59 correctly pointed out, suppressed shots are still audible.

I also asked an AI about this, and the response I received casts further doubt on your claim.

I believe anyone would notice something as loud as a rock concert, so I find your claim to be weak and lacking solid evidence. While I respect your opinion, I will continue the investigation without spending too much time on this particular point. For now, let’s leave it at this: we simply disagree on the matter.

I don’t claim the bullet that hit the railing was suppressed, whether subsonic or supersonic. I WILL say that David Dutch is on record as saying he didn’t hear gunshots until after he was shot. I’m not sure how that works with the shots being amplified from Trump’s microphone.

The Hercules 2 counter sniper said he thought the shots were suppressed, as he couldn’t hear the rifle report, but supersonic as he COULD hear the crack of the bullet whizzing by.

Free AI is not to be trusted whatsoever. I’ve had a couple of run-ins with Grok being totally stupid. It told me

1. “the girl at the fence” (Margo Martin) was a conspiracy theory.
2. The music critic at the Washington Post never savaged Harry Truman’s daughter’s song recital by saying there were few times one could be sure she would achieve her goal which was to “make it to the end of the song”. It still claimed that was not what the critic said EVEN AFTER I POINTED OUT A FREE SOURCE ARTICLE THAT QUOTED THE REVIEW.
3. Claimed that the bullet that hit Ronald Reagan fragmented and then said it didn’t fragment when I mentioned I didn’t realize it fragmented.

Chat GPT is known to “hallucinate” sources for articles.

There is a video out there where a couple of guys go behind a hill with a mic and record the sound of various bullets whizzing by. The sound of a blackout 300 is literally softer than the sound of fly buzzing around that you hear soon afterwards.

What Does It Sound Like To Get Shot At By Subsonic Bullets?

[flamecensor]

@sonjax6

I WILL say that David Dutch is on record as saying he didn’t hear gunshots until after he was shot. I’m not sure how that works with the shots being amplified from Trump’s microphone.

David Dutch sure looks as if he heard SupersonicShot1 East of himself.
Watch his head turn in the split second before he’s hit and downed:

[daniel59]

@roger-knight

Site Reconstruction of the Assassination Attempt

The 1350.2 elevation is beyond (north) of the peak approximately where the shooter’s head supposedly was. 1351.7 was an estimate of where the shooter’s head would be above the point noted above. The ground elevation south of the building is around 1337 but the terrain dips to 1334 starting at 1337 30ft from the building and sloping down toward the building, leveling off to 1334 about 10ft from the building. The building footprint is carved out of the surrounding terrain. [AGR1] Source of dat…

sluggo used the USGS National LiDAR Dataset. Can you obtain this data?

[roger-knight]

@sonjax6

I don’t claim the bullet that hit the railing was suppressed, whether subsonic or supersonic.

If the bleacher strike came from a separate shot, where is the sound? All microphones clearly capture only three shots. There’s no audible trace of an additional round that could account for a separate impact on the bleachers.

You’re relying heavily on eyewitness testimony, but as Chris pointed out, such accounts are highly unreliable under stress and shouldn’t be the foundation of our analysis. In situations like this, ballistics and video evidence are far more trustworthy and objective sources of information.

---

In Summary:

• A second, silent shot contradicts both established ballistic principles and the available audio recordings.
• Suppression may reduce muzzle blast but does not eliminate the sound entirely — especially not the supersonic crack or the impact of a bullet striking metal.
• Eyewitness reports cannot override concrete visual and audio evidence, particularly when they conflict with recorded facts.

---

At this point, I feel we’re going in circles on this issue. To resolve it definitively, I made a frame-by-frame comparison of both videos, side by side. When you watch them in sync, you can literally see that the first shot is the one that hits Trump’s ear and the bleachers — at the exact same moment.