Yep, I pin that as either an unintentional leak due to big mouths at the shooting range they all probably go/went to (Clairton), or some sort of mischief…
1 Like
One thing I keep thinking about… could it be that the top of Crooks’ rifle stock broke because his cheeck/head was so forcifully thrown against it from the bullet that killed him? That part of the rifle stock is where a shooter presses his cheek against (the arm being on the other side). The plastic couldn’t take it.
1 Like
No, I don’t think that happened. The plastic is not that fragile.
2 Likes
Sgt, can you explain something to me. In this photo of the rifle they show the chunk taken out of the stock. What is the black section that appears to be under the broken section of stock in the photo with the backpack and the rifle broken down? Any idea? I’m assuming that’s a removable part of the stock.
So he went to the range a day before to collect information?
Did he know they would tell him, or just hoped to hear something (as usual)?
There is the buffer tube screwed into the back of the lower receiver and the stock which slides over it and is adjustable for length. A piece of the stock has been broken/blown off it. You squeeze the lever in the center and it retracts a pin. There are 6 little holes in the bottom of the buffer tube the pin goes into, to lock it in different positions for length.
3 Likes
Thank you for the explanation. So clearly that’s the state the stock was in, which is what I assumed.
Those slots in the stock are different places a sling can be threaded through. With that you can see the weak point where the upper part broke off the rest of it. The stock was slid back to it’s longest position and the internal empty part is where it broke off.
1 Like
I speculate he went there the day before primarily to check his zero. If ESU officers were also members of that range, and he knew about it or knew them directly, some information leakage could have happened at some point in time. Crooks visited the range 40 times in the 12 months prior to J13, a significant ammount. I’m at around 20-25 visits since August2023 on a new range and I’m already a known face…
2 Likes
Have you ever seen a good picture of which you wanted to post online, but simply look a bit fat? Well, there are many tools to help you make you look a bit slimmer, but if by chance a straight pole or fence is behind you in that picture, people notice that you definitely applied photo shop, because the straight pole suddenly becomes bent towards your stomach!
Well let’s imagine that somebody wanted to pull Crooks shoulder back a little adding the riffle recoil for a shot he did not take? Having nice straight long hair might be a problem and maybe the hair would look like this (see second picture) (source newest TMZ video online):
Let’s all step back and concentrate on the most controversial topic in this forum, namely did Crooks shoot all 8 shots or is there a 2nd shooter?
The fact that if we would have a clear video showing that Crooks shoots the first 3 shots and then 4-8, I think we could all stop working on hypothesis of a second shooter. The strange thing is that we don’t have any video evidence that shows that. However, I am sure the redcap guy in the below photo is filming everything clearly. Who is that guy and where is his video that can prove the case? Shouldn’t we go looking for him and simply ask if we could see his original video?
I would like to put out a hypothesis, which is open for debate. Anybody can try to debunk it, and we can have an open discussion on this topic.
Having found out with 90% chance that Ross is not the person who is shooting the TMZ video, the only guy that remains is Redcap. If you still think Ross is the person who is filming the TMZ video, please go look at this topic:
Here is my hypothesis:
-
Redcap films the TMZ video
-
On that video you can clearly see that Crooks does not shoot the first 3 shots, but he does shoot shots 4-8
-
Somebody adds the “Semper Fi” guy in this video and covers up all 8 shots to make you think it is Ross who is making this video
May the discussions begin……
Looking at the lengths the DS has gone, going after J6 people.
If it is a cover up, wouldn’t they be willing to go to even further lengths?
2 Likes
Suggestions for the Timeline
@RawRoku post #1363
Version 1.04 Timeline. WONDERFUL! A very, very useful document.
Just found Peak Prosperity the other day. Found Timeline today. Read it beginning to end twice. Learned a lot, but, didn’t understand a few things. And have a few suggestions.
Orange colored text is “Opinions from Footage” What does that mean?
LEO. Suggest first use of this be “Law Enforcement Officer (LEO)”
Camo. Suggest first use of this be “Camoflage military uniform (Camo)”
At 18:13:23 “Six units disembark …” units? Maybe “people” or “personell” or “uniformed humans”
Ben Shaffer, … of Washington regional SWAT [last page]. Can’t find "Washington regional SWAT ".
“AGR building” sometimes means Bldg 6, other times the whole complex. Confusing.
ESU. Suggest first occurrence be "Beaver Emergency Service Unit (ESU, i.e. sniper team) was requested to support Butler ESU. Later the combined force was referred to as “Beaver County SWAT Team”. In this context, a “unit” is a group of pseudo-military employees.
Grassley. Senator Chuck. (R - Iowa) on 7/8 we have “the Grassley Document” Elsewere we have other matter provided by the Senator. What, multiple releases? Maybe a footnote giving dates of releases?
That’s the end of my proofreading notes. The pacman shape of the SS perimeter bugs me. Who chose it. When? Why? Admittedly these are questions outside the scope of the Timeline. But, oooh I want to know.
I vote against adding more images.
That is the Washington County SWAT’s name.
Both Butler County and Beaver County has ESU units. That is what they call their expanded SWAT teams.
Lots of places have moved on from calling their units SWAT.
San Jose, CA PD calls their SWAT, Mobile Emergency Response Group and Equipment (MERGE) Unit.
It is, what it is.
ETA: I would suggest we use BeC-ESU for Beaver County and BuC-ESU for Butler County if we’re going to shorten their names.
1 Like
I think you’re demanding/expecting more of this video that it is capable of providing. It was a shaky cell phone video taken from some 300 to 450 or so feet away, with a lot of visual and audio interference, and has been uploaded to the internet so probably gone thru one or more layers of compression.
Add to that, as I have explained, the AR15 barely recoils. When I initially saw this video I also expected to see evidence of recoil (because I did not appreciate the distance the video was taken from). Having reviewed it now many times, assuming it has not been altered, I am 75% sure I see a brass casing and about 30% sure I see Crooks body recoil at his shoulder and feet. Recoil, however, at this distance with the video capabilities would be imperceptible.
For illustration, watch this high quality close up video of Jerry Mikulek (gun expert) firing a similar AR15. You can barely see a few parts of his body move, perhaps less than 1 centimeter. Just his shoulder, loose parts of his shirt on his arm really. This light recoil is not going to cause hats to fly off, hair to flop around like a windstorm, etc. I think this has been repeatedly explained but the rifle just does not cause a person to recoil much, nor does it cause big blasts of smoke either. I doubt you’d be able to see this level of recoil from 100+ yards away zoomed in on a shaky low res cell phone video.
Professional camera equipment, at close range, during a known planned firing drill, barely shows him recoil and small quick puff of smoke from the rifle. Now go back 100 yards and record it on a shaky mobile phone video with a lot of audio/visual interference putting strain on the camera, and upload a compressed version to the web. I doubt recoil or smoke is going to register, heck the shell casings are barely registering.
I’m just trying to explain to you that you’re looking for evidence that may be nearly imperceptible and rushing to conclusions that may be faulty based on the lack thereof…
Also, please stop spelling it “riffle,” it’s spelled “rifle.” Thank you!
1 Like
So are you saying his hair looks legit?
What, specifically, are you expecting his hair to do?
Crooks was apparently 6’4" laying in prone position, and experienced shooter.
Here’s much smaller framed women with long hair, novices, shooting the AR15. Barely any recoil perceived and their hair is almost motionless from recoil to the extend I could conclude Crooks hair movement if any is going to be imperceptible at this distance with the limits of cell phone camera video then uploaded to the internet.
2 Likes
In 1973 BCT (Basic Combat Training) a Drill Sgt held a M16A1 against the chin of the smallest person in my class. He was standing to the side, holding it with extended arms, his thumb on the trigger, and burned off a 20 round mag on Full Auto. This was to show how little kick the M16A1 had
1 Like
My brother was Army infantry in the 1980s and shared a similar story to put at ease those recruits scared of guns, by firing the M16 with the butt resting on his nose. And in fact the correct shooting position (how I was taught in the Army) for the rifle is with the shooters nose against the charging handle. Crooks head was clear to the rear on the stock of the rifle, showing somewhat of a novice firing position. Which is odd…
3 Likes
Yep, NTCH, Nose To Charging Handle.
Looking at some peoples’ position on the stock of a AR just looks awkward to me. That and leaning back away from the rifle. Where you should be leaning into it. They look like they’re afraid of the rifle. My stance is similar to a classic boxer’s stance.
1 Like