Thx for posting.
Please note, the bodycam video (you see starting at 1m0s / BWC2-122104) itself has no audio. Youtuber jeffostroff just added and synced the audio line from another bodycam video, one with audio available, into his video.
Also note that the timestamp in the bodycam video BWC2-122104 is 12s ahead of time.
1 Like
Second shooter in the third vent.
I am adding every roof, vent, window, door and ventilation pipe that faces Trump to my model…
once the ballistic trajectories from each of these locations to each of the victims are know, we will immediately know which things are relevant and which are fairy tales…
these take into account wind speeds between 5 and 9 mph…
https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/pa/imperial/KPIT/date/2024-7-13
very little of what is mentioned in these hearings and articles/reports that are being written has any evidential value, he…
only the audio/video footage that confirms from several angles that a certain thing happened is to be trusted…
I do not consider/read/watch or listen to any of these things seriously…
I should have said: nominal father.
@vt1 argues it should be 14 s ahead, and I think he has the better argument. He synchronizes to the first shot of the some other video, while I related to the police cruiser.
1 Like
I don’t see vt1 making any comment on how much the timestamp of the bodycam video (BWC2-122104) is delayed. Maybe he has other post(s) where he examines the delay time. If so, would be nice you could share the link.
The determination of the bodycam video timestamp being 12s ahead of time is based on the Gray Hughes analysis.
By the way, Youtuber jeffostroff in his video also states the bodycam timestamp is 12s ahead, watch his video at 0:58 - 1:04
1 Like
@vt1 relates the bodycam time of BWC2-122104 to the first shot (“fire”) that can be heard in video 13, which is also the moment the woman at the fence turns around. He assumably relates this too to the first shot heard in the ham-handedly doctored police cruiser video. If the cruiser clock actually is in sync with time of day should be checked by other means. There is some interest to absolute times within context of geolocating moving audio sources, as for example the D Stewart video.
1 Like
Hi @bigtim
I came across this picture again. Have not seen it for a while.
What is the device on this guys head?
1 Like
Same type of night vision optic we’ve been discussing. It is in the “stowed” position, hinged out of the way. To deploy it at night the user just pulls it down into position over the eye(s). it attaches to some various types of bracket mounts on the front of the helmet. You can see the guy in the middle has a bracket but no optic.
Edited to add: These kevlar helmets are ballistic protection in nature, offering protection from pistols, most shotgun rounds, and small/medium caliber rifle rounds. Quite common. All also wearing some type of chest body armor, the two guys in camo probably wearing rifle rated ceramic or steel plates rated for rifles. Blue uniform officer likely wearing soft pistol/shotgun rated armor.
All 3 officers are carrying some variant of an AR15/M4 mostly likely chambered in .223cal/5.56mm rifles which would allegedly be effectively the same/similar to what Crooks allegedly used.
1 Like
Doesn’t it seem strange to you that this guy is walking around with a night vision on his head in bright day light? Any plausible explanation? The only reason that comes to my mind is the hypothesis we have discussed before in this post:
anxious to get your opinion on this one….
Per your question/theory:
- I don’t actually know if the optic lens is reflective, my hunch is that it is probably designed to not be reflective but I do not know. But for it to be super reflective it would require presumably a bright light shining on it, and in this case quite deep into the interior of the window/room it might theoretically be located within. I’m unware of a bright direct light shining into that room to illicit such a bright reflection. But there was a police SUV parked with white headlights on pointing at those windows… So I just cannot say for sure.
But it seems MORE probable to me that it it was an unlighted room, a cop might have just used a bright flashlight to quickly scan the room for a person/gun/evidence and moved on. That’s what the light appears to me to be.
- As far as this query:
Eh, I have seen that picture dozens of times and thought literally nothing of it. High probability either too lazy to remove it for this job, or there’s a outside chance he might just want it in case he has to clear a dark unlighted room (power outages do happen) or for some reason this daytime task turns into a nighttime task). Famously the Somalia Blackhawk Down incident, lots of guys left water, armor, and night vision behind (which would have all been life-saving useful) because they thought their mission was only a brief daylight one. It turned into a overnight fight for survival… A lot of LEO/Military have learned these lessons, so I don’t look too deeply into a guy wearing a relatively light weight but ultra useful night vision optic on his helmet.
Hi BigTim,
Thanks always for your detailed explaination:
A cop scanning the room for evidence 6 seconds after the first shooting and 10 seconds before the last 10th shot?
1 Like
That’s not always a good idea. The answers given by Acting SS Director Rowe during his senate hearing concerning e.g. comm “siloing”, a cellular network breakdown from 15:00 until 17:00 disabling drone operation, the existence of a unified command or their capability to perform EW were of value. I think Rowe is a quite honest person, but under pressure from well known types like Lindsey Graham, who explicitly wanted to see more heads roll, which brings Rowe in conflict with his assignment and his, I believe, true collegiality.
@Sorey (thank you!) provided me with a link to Rowe’s senate hearing. The QA session starts at 29:55. Just skip the statements from the FBI guy, they amount to nothing but regurgitated oatmeal gruel. I’m still looking for an official transscript.
1 Like
So, the light must be 1 of 3 things.
-
Generated from interior. Limits it to a flashlight or something reflective of a bright external source. There are finite explanations. Presumably the building was secured by LEO, so a flashlight is limited to a police officer looking for a suspect, or something very bright/reflective of outside light sources. In the most extreme, a sniper assassin climbing from his hidden nest using a flashlight to escape is plausible.
-
An exterior light source reflecting on the window. There are many phones, some of which might have a light, there are car headlights pointed in this direction, the sun is up and to the left of this image and possibly reflecting off a phone surface or some other bright reflective object.
-
These flashes do not line up with the sound-recorded gunshots. so perhaps the sound is not synched or it is some super suppressed firearm muzzle flash.
To my eyes it appears most like an interior flashlight, the owner of which could be a officer searching or a assassin escaping a dark room.
I remain open to any other explanation.
not at all!
none of the three letter organizations is to be trusted whatsoever…
rowe even suggested that Trump was injured by shrapnel of the teleprompters… as far as I know, the teleprompters were not injured whatsoever…
really… I gave these hearings a couple of tries, and within the minute I had to puke or go for an urgent number 2…
- Absolutely agree with your statement, Rowe being not at all a quite honest person.
- Would narrow that “none of the three letter…” in to the more upper ranks of these organisations. I think there are also some people in the lower levels (the ones who do the day in/day out work) that are pissed by the behaviour of the people in charge.
- I think that was FBI Wray who said that.
- True, if you cut out all the bullshit and asslicking, a 4h hearing can be shorted down to a 10min video with a bit of substance.
Well, as you know, we are evaluating hypotheses 2 which is the theory of two shooters and would agree with your Point 1 with the following theory: According to 3 independent studies, the back traced bullet points to the upper portion of the room from where the aggressive light is coming from (out of the window). So simply speculating the 2nd shooter is in that dark room (with a night vision device?), after the 3 shots are fired, he or they would quickly need to find the 3 shell casings, which would explain the aggressive swirling around of a flashlight 6 seconds after the shots where fired.
-
The reflection of a SUV lights of which Chris put this issue into the red zone, I would like to challenge as follows. Looking at one of the police body cam videos, we can see a SUV parked with their lights on. However, the lights in the windows are seen in two positions, in the beginning Crooks is frontal to the wall of building 6 and according to other videos there are no SUV parked behind him. In this position we can see lights out of the room. Then Crooks runs all the way behind a tree almost at the level of the parking lot. There again you can see the same lights coming out of the window. The angle of reflection is completely different. This is why I would like to claim that these lights are not reflections, but rather coming from inside the room.
-
I agree with the assumption that that no shots were fired through this window, due to the simple fact that all 8 shots were already fired. This point is obviously bogus.
can you provide us with these studies?