I’m not sure what portion of the timeline you are referring to, or specifically which shot, but here is the video evidence of Crooks turning his head between shot 9 and shot 10. Go to the 3:20 mark.
Here is the video featured in the News Nation broadcast. (See the 4th comment from the top for confirmation that Piper Grimley is Jon Malis.)
The still shot they took must be from somewhere around the 0:28 mark. I don’t have good enough resolution on my laptop to clearly recreate it for you from the original video.
Both screenshots show redish composite rails and aluminum rungs. Both show a 10-foot ladder having 9 rungs. When it was under the tree, being videoed from ground level, the rungs are almost parallel to the ground and shaded by the tree, and therefore you don’t see the sunlight reflecting off them as much. When it was seen against the roof, videoed from above by a helicopter, the aluminum rungs were angled and able to reflect much more sunlight, which could be seen due to the higher vantage point.
And you left out the post for the broken gate on the right hand side of the screenshot. Don’t forget that, it is key to identifying the tree it was under.
Jeez, just make stuff up out of whole cloth. You come up with some Super Secret Secret Squirrel ammunition that no on has ever seen or heard of. Why aren’t you special, bless your heart.
You don’t know common American step ladders. It is either a faded red or orange fiberglass ladder with aluminum steps most likely rated for 300 lbs. By the number of steps, it is probably a 10 foot ladder. Anyone in the US who has spent a lot of time around construction or industrial sites has seen that ladder lots of times.
Why should it be unrealistic to greatly reduce the range by increasing the air resistance, reducing the weight and using a particularly suitable material (perhaps rubber)?
It must also be assumed that custom-made ammunition could have been used for such a political assassination attempt.
The question of whether it was possible to have Crooks shoot with ammunition whose projectile could only travel 80 meters should therefore not be so easy to answer.
Apart from that, there are no videos that clearly show that Crooks was aiming precisely at Trump.
Fair enough. Just keep in mind that there was a tree that blocked the view between Hercules 2 and the eastern part of AGR building 6, and we know Crooks didn’t have any kind of special equipment that might have allowed him to tell where the team was.
Once again. It is up to you to prove your Hypothesis, not for us to disprove it.
The rest of us do not have to assume anything. Assumption is not part of the scientific method.
The problem with the huge supressor and special ammunition required is that there should be virtually no demand for it. Therefore, in all probability, there will be no such offers on the market. So it can only be considered theoretically. I don’t have the knowledge for that. That’s why I’m pointing out these possibilities here, so that perhaps some expert can look into it and answer whether something like this could be implemented in practice.
I didn’t know that it was forbidden to develop a hypothesis further. I am truly sorry about that!
I didn’t know how an AR-15 worked, but you explained it to me. Without a projectile, the case cannot be ejected automatically. Many thanks for that!
Voltaire said, “If you wish to converse with me, define your terms.” (One of my top 2 favorite quotes!)
George Carlin said, “Let’s use the language we all agreed upon.” One of his classic rants.
Let’s get semantical, shall we? C’mon, it’ll be fun. I need to refresh my understanding of the distinction between some of these terms myself anyways.
“Assumption” is a word that has more than one definition, and definitions differ depending on which dictionary you use, and the context within which you use it. Myself, I try to be very careful how I use the term (and probably misuse it from time to time unintentionally), because people understand it differently. It’s like the word “argument” in that respect. If I can use a more accurate term, like speculation or inference (two I use a lot) I’ll use that.
Merriam-Webster describes a hypothesis as an assumption, though perhaps more correctly a type or form of assumption.
Others make a clear distinction between an “assumption” and a “hypothesis.”
In addition to distinguishing it to the terms “hypothesis” and “theory,” there is also the term “presumption” that it should be distinguished from. Again from Merriam Webster:
I did not watch carefully the helicopter footage, so I registered in my mind it was an alu ladder. (Human fallibility.)
I have a 5 feet ladder from wood (approx. the same height of me) and I can carry it verically. My father had a way taller ladder which is very difficult to bring in vertical position.
Later two men carry that ladder horizontally. So there is a question: why they have stood it up? It is not clear on the image, perhaps they stood it the fence line over/above to climb?
English is not my mother tongue. I have most of it translated with deepL. This probably results in inaccuracies from time to time. But I don’t think that’s important.
A normal suppressor with a length of about 30 cm and a diameter of about 7 cm can reduce the sound by about 30 dB.
Why shouldn’t a suppressor that is 4 times as long and 14 times as wide achieve double the reduction?
Perhaps that would be physically impossible. It could be. But in principle, I don’t think such an assumption is completely unrealistic.
The same applies to the special ammunition required, the projectile of which would only fly 80 meters. Why should this be ruled out without being able to explain it?
I cannot drop the possibility of other shooter. Maybe it was too early when Collins arrived and the professional sniper didn’t want to be unfold.
(When an ordinary cop [Max Walker] dies, it is just a statistical data - Senator Aaron McComb.)
I explained my thoughts on that in my analysis. They almost certainly carried it to the fence from the north bar where they were told some ladders were stored. They could not carry or push it through that locked and bent up gate, so they would have had to lay or throw it over the fence, like the CAT #1 operator did with the black tactical ladder.
Once they crawled through the gate, they had to grab the ladder in a way to that they could carry it like the two officers they passed it off to did. So, they might have stood it up to get a better position for them both to grab it from, such as if one guy picked it off the fence it was laying against in the vertical position. If it was thrown over, perhaps they stood it up just to make sure it didn’t get twisted in the fall. Both logical explanations. Given the timeline in the bodycam that shows them bringing it to AGR 6, they would not have had enough time to do anything else with it.
Now that I’ve done my research and analyzed where that ladder was at when the screenshot was taken, when it was there, and why it may have been in the position it was in, do you suppose the person who provided that screenshot as evidence of a second shooter in a tree will do the same to prove his assumption to be true? Don’t hold your breath. He’s clearly not serious about getting to the truth, but rather supporting his theory regardless of how valid his evidence is. But I digress.
