I should add that while it could be a first name, none of those end in r, at least for the 5 counter-snipers.
1 Like
Dog with a bone! 
Fantastic work Vegas! This is super comprehensive and helpful! Thank you!
1 Like
You’re welcome! And thanks again for all your digging.
I think we’re getting closer to understanding who some of the Secret Service team members were, and I plan to dig deeper with you on some of the information you provided earlier. Especially since I found that description of the advance planning trips in Acting Dir. Rowe’s opening statement, mentioned in the linked post below. That shines a whole new light on it for me.
1 Like
Yes, I’m convinced of your Elantra find. That’s not a Sonata on their driveway.
@redranamber @sorey
By the way, as a curiosity, have you guys noticed the person in orange t-shirt next to the blue truck wearing dark shoes? Am I seeing things?
3 Likes
That was great thinking, doing the comparison that way! Thank you. One more confirmation we’re talking about an Elantra and not a Sonata, and this time from a vehicle parked in Crooks’ driveway. (I worded it that way because one of the trolls in this forum is likely to claim it could have been a friend or relative’s car. 
)
Oh, almost forgot. That does appear to be someone in an orange shirt.
2 Likes
To be fair: Stewert video looks at it before, looks away, looks back, and window is weird.
The only other video is the body cam, it looks away as the officer runs back to the vehicle.
The only one is the Stewert cam and like I said: weird as hell.
Good derivation 
For me the only question left is: was the Hyundai Elantra across the road of AGR6 parked there by Crooks and is it the car from the FBI evidence photos with the alleged explosives inside?
Hope at some point they gonna confirm this. If they don’t confirm, where else was his car with the explosives found?
4 Likes
Hi BigTim,
I have seen you have posted many arguments challenging my hypothesis and frankly speaking, I was overwhelmed each time because you claimed 6 – 8 things at the same time and I was also busy the last couple of days.
Maybe if you claim one thing at a time and we debate it then maybe we come to an agreement or simply agree that we disagree and we can move on from there 
.
So, may I suggest taking one of your main challenges namely, I claim the shot from window 2 is clear and collision free, having presented documents that justify my findings. You present a photo which seems to be in the perfect angle to debunk my theory?
Sounds like a fair debate?
In the beginning when I was seeking for accurate data for my CAD module, I made the same reflection you did, namely I took a more or less good picture from the rally, and I traced the contours from that and imported it into my CAD. But I had to learn the hard way that every time I took a picture as a reference, it came out to be totally inaccurate. Here are the main reasons why:
The only pictures I could use with success up to now, are the ones that are PERFECTLY front view, or top view. In addition, the element needed to traced needs to be in the middle of the camera.
Why is that? Because every cell phone today using the standard lens has an integrated wide angle. You can tell, when taking a family picture, the people in the middle always look good and the people all the way to the side of the picture look fat and distorted. I am not talking about the super wide-angle modus that emphasizes this phenomenon even more.
The standard lens also has wide angle. Let’s ask ChatGPT:
I learned it the hard way using pictures for my CAD modul, which I would like to demonstrate as follows:
I got this perfect picture from @rough_country_gypsy and told to myself: finally, a good front faced picture of building 6 with all windows and Vents and it looks like a pretty good “front view” to be able to use.
So, I simply set the roof to our known dimension of 144 feet, knowing that length from Google Maps and traced all windows:
Looks perfect! But then came @schroederized with his method which is much more accurate, namely he simply counted the number of panels on the roof and divided by the length of the roof. So, we have a total length of 144 feet divided by 72 panels giving us a standard roof panel of 2 feet.
This is very simple and straight forward. This shows us that window 3 is exactly at 60 feet.
So, comparing the two methods “tracing off a picture” and the “schroederized method” we can conclude: The accuracy of schreoderized is “dead on” and comparing with the “tracing off a picture” method gives us a near 3-foot error! Totally unusable for what we are looking for.
Another thing that needs to be addressed is that you can turn the camera in any direction you want, giving you a complete misleading assumption of how the situation really was. So, I took my CAD simulation and put the left bleachers into see-through mode, and I was able to turn the camera exactly in the same position you are presenting your picture, even though I proved to you on the same CAD system that the shot from window 2 and 3 is collision free.
So, at least I personally can conclude with the above long explanation that pictures are useless to evaluate any accurate trajectories. The method that needs to be applied is the schroederzied method.
I presented with my drawing that the shot is collision free using the “schroedrized method”:
So, what do you think, can we agree on this one? 
If not, let’s not lose any more time and just say we disagree.
https://x.com/JG_CSTT/status/1835877940476690530/photo/2
Jason Goodman’s apparently gotten an unblurred photo of Eduardo Castro to work with and pegs him for this guy. Would probably still call this unconfirmed until we know more. But this is interesting as EC is our drone guy.
And found his “phone call” with “EC”.
Crowdsource The Truth on X: “The gloves are off. After two assassination attempts in as many months, I’ve decided to reveal the identity of @SecretService @usairforce Counter UAS operator in Butler, PA and my phone call with him. Why did acting director Rowe lie about Rafael Eduardo Castro’s participation? https://t.co/RdjLor1Hyh” / X
I dunno…
1 Like
Nope, it’s a total waste of time. No windows were opened and there’s no shooting angle as obvious from the images from the victim’s vantage. This is red category and wasting a lot of people’s time debunking it. Notice most people don’t even respond and are ignoring this theory because it’s obvious to everyone.
1 Like
Good catch on the update regarding Eduardo. I’m personally having a little difficulty with the comparison of him to the agent at the rally depicted, due to the different angles of the nose and ears, and will review the bodycam footage to find different angles to compare with.
Edit: And I want to listen to Goodman’s phone call to see if maybe he’s being played with disinformation. That’s a possibility.
I am currently working through the advance team evidence to get a better understanding of the SS operation team. I’ll share what I come up with, but for now I’m thinking Meredith Banks is the Site Lead, not the Lead Agent.
1 Like
It’s honestly a very short (around a minute, maybe a little more) and disappointing ‘phone call’. I’m not impressed with it, to say the least.
Okay, that phone call doesn’t confirm anything other than he called a guy named Eduardo on a phone number used for official business. In his previous post about the call, and releasing the alleged photo, he misleads his followers into thinking he had credible evidence for his identification of Eduardo by saying: “I spoke with this mystery counter UAS operator earlier.”
What is the source of the photo of Eduardo? He doesn’t state it his x.com posts. He might in his broadcast, but I’m not sure if I care to listen to it after hearing the phone call. I would have to see the original source of the photo before I consider it any further for ID of the SS UAS operator
Edit: He also posted this photo on x.
1 Like
I find myself really on the fence about his information and posts, over sensational, arrogant, lacking certain aspects at least I would consider as common sense, some things I can see but others seem way out of place, if not flat out wrong.
3 Likes
His arrogant, pompous nature aside, I am only interested in any hard evidence he uncovers. I don’t like to discount that evidence due to the source, though I’m definitely going to give evidence he uncovers a more thorough examination going forward. In other words, I need to get back to my own first principles.
When it comes to accepting evidence, the following three verification steps should be performed:
Authenticity – Evidence must first be verified too be in its original form, or proven to be an unmodified copy, redactions notwithstanding. If something is fabricated, forged, photoshopped, or otherwise modified, it should not be considered valid.
Veracity – Next, evidence must be examined for accuracy. If the evidence conflicts with itself, or is contradicted by other evidence, that needs to be taken into consideration when utilizing that evidence for analysis purposes.
Conformity – Finally, evidence must conform to the overall sequence of events and be in agreement with other evidence. Otherwise, it has to be considered inaccurate for analysis purposes and utilized accordingly.
4 Likes
I watched Goodman’s YT show with John Cullen about his phone call with Eduardo, but he doesn’t get into that until his portion for subscribers only. Not for me! I’ll hold off on his ID of Eduardo for now. It’s not that important in the overall scheme of things anyways
3 Likes
Here is my detailed visualisation of what I found out about the movements of the different key players from the time Crooks was first spotted on the roof by a bodycam and shot #10, allegedly by a counter sniper ontop the southern red barn, that killed him.
Please note that in this analysis I only focus on outdoor activities on the southern and eastern side of AGR6.
Since I cover a 3.5 minutes time span, often by the second, I came out with 49 slides. So I hope it’s not too much, otherwise just skip a few. To catch the details you might have to zoom in a bit.
Feel free to let me know if you find any errors, thanks.
Edit: for the ones who prefer it, here’s a pdf that also offers better quality when you zoom in.
Protocol of the last 3.5 minutes.pdf (6.8 MB)
Great, you made it to the end 
Here is a little bonus for all Fighters:
1st shot, cartridge case ejection
10th shot, devastation
8 Likes
Fantastic job! Thank you for sharing your hard work.
(You get the prize for most images in one post, too. 
I might stop doing my 4 slides in 1 now.)
2 Likes
But we still don’t know, why or how Collins was informed 8 minutes before.
Maybe the zz top guy should confess, why he was sitting at the retaining wall and hwo has benn contacted with Crooks.
