So It's Back To First Principles

[khunter]

Hello Roger.

I have looked into the issue of the ground level of the bleachers in more detail. I have been using a very specific programme to evaluate ground elevations. For me it is an exceptional program and appears to give very accurate data. The website is called: randymajors.org

It allows you to mark lines on the ground for detailed ground profiles, and also allows you to download an Excel spreadsheet of the data points themselves.

I enclose along with this message a screenshot detailing my evaluation of the bleachers.

The blue rectangle is the precise mapping as near as I could get it for the exact perimeter of the bleachers in terms of position and orientation. The program itself mapped the ground elevations along the perimeter line, as shown in blue.

I marked the corners of the rectangle as A, B, C, and D. The program generating a graph for the entire perimeter, which is at the bottom of the screen. I further added the corner point letters next to the graph also, indicating their various ground levels with a black blob.

The results were quite fascinating. It would appear that there is a rather sudden change in gradient of about 1 foot cutting through the bleachers position. The very front of the bleachers are positioned on a very level piece of ground that is about 1335.6 ft above sea level.

Almost one full side of the bleachers (A-B), and all of the back of the bleachers, are at a level about 1 foot less than this. Interestingly enough, the position of the wheels near the back of the bleachers are in the middle of this low position.

If you look to the data points to the right of the image, you will see that the wheels have a ground elevation of some 1334.72 ft.

You have stated that it is best to use the wheels as the key point of reference for the ground elevation that we are seeking, and I see the rationale behind this.

As a result of this, I believe the correct value above sea level for the ground height that the bleachers rest upon should be this value: 1334.72 ft. Of course this certainly does differ from the value that you propose, of 1336.32 ft.

[prayingpatriot]

@vegaspatriot

Woods, Nicol, and Murcko we know.

This guy was supposed to be Murko. No one has verified the prosthesis issue. Can someone explain. It doesn’t fit.

PrayingPatriot

RawRoku

6d

The head and face stuff seems to match. But here is my new problem. Look at the pic when he stands up. Look at his legs. His left leg.

Now at the uniformed guy pic legs. ??? Does he have a prosthesis?

[brian60221]

We should try hard to find another photo or video of Murcko. I was only able to find the one image.

[vegaspatriot]

I found the full-sized version of the photo on the Jackson Township Police Facebook page. His stance is such that his left leg is back, and his right is forward. The way his pants are impacted by that stance would differ for each leg. It appears to me that he has somewhat baggy pants, and might be experiencing some static cling, or at least his pant leg is being gathered closer together near the bottom of his left leg due to his stance. That’s my take on it, anyways.

[sherlock-holmes]

We have been looking in all the wrong places LOL
Today Show 14-July

[sherlock-holmes]

Great interview with fellow who was next to Corey Comperatore
starts at 6:25 & injured lady is carried off at 9:56

Watch: Trump assassination attempt detailed by eyewitnesses | NBC News NOW

[sonjax6]

Donald Trump is standing a little further back from Barron. It’s hard to tell how to compensate for that without knowing what the camera focal length is. Also, for all we know Barron might still be growing - last I heard he was 6’8", and if he was past that he might not want to advertise that he’s freakishly tall! Really tall guys often keep growing past their 18th birthday.

I would guess Trump is probably in the 6’1" to 6’2" range. If he had shrunk all the way down to 5’11" it would be pretty noticeable.

Edit to add: I was looking on X for a larger size photo of that pic with Donald and Barron Trump and found a document that showed Fulton county, GA showed him at 6’3" when they booked him a year ago. Did they measure him, or just go off his driver’s license? Does he have a driver’s license?

[kincses-zsolt]

@bob781

Now it was a bullied schoolboy with a grudge against the world, namely, Crooks.

Remark: We live in our minds and the perception is more a-priori than physical facts. In the school I almost never felt be bullied. However, there were some agressive people, who cannot fit inside their skin. Just punch them in the nose, this is how it works. (Additionally my acronym is RIsP = rest in small pieces.)

[roger-knight]

Hello KHunter,

Thank you for your feedback and spending time to verify all of our numbers. The more people check, the more accurate we get.

As stated, we are using high accuracy KML data files provided from Land ID. The results of which have been confirmed by a high accuracy drone in Garys video. But maybe we both have a very accurate way of measuring and we simply are not placing the elements at the right place?

One question: How about the other two sea levels (Trumps stage and AGR building) do you get the same as ours?

Looking at the exact positon of the bleechers wheels I double checked again and found it to be at 1336. Let’s analyse this together and maybe we can find a comon agreement on this topic:

[roger-knight]

Hi KHunter,

Yes, but you are using a government official document as a reference, something that is not so convincing in this forum.

I am sorry that I would have to disagree with this height you propose, therefore I suggest we continue to find more comparative information. The more information the closer we get to reality.

[roger-knight]

Yeah, according to the newspaper article I provided in my prior post on this topic, during the Fulton County trial his weight seemed to be incorrect and then a whole shit storm started on X and they found out that 6’ 3” is also not possible.

I will research some more photos, because they tell the truth…

[prayingpatriot]

Thank you that helps clear it up for me. I actually though his leg might be back but in the photo I had, there was no way of telling.

[prayingpatriot]

Not being one to ever watch NBC except maybe the Olympic events, I had not seen this. One person had said the guy on the watertower got shot? That was thrown out but does eyewitness count? And whatever came of the woman shot in the arm???

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@bigtim

Also, please stop spelling it “riffle,” it’s spelled “rifle.” Thank you!

you are so right…

he also misspells hights instead of heights, gravaty instead of gravity, etc, etc…

but anyhow, given the following images, I have a question…

@bigtim

we know that

• the SWAT officer fired the 9th shot towards crooks
• angle between the line of fire of that SWAT officer to crooks was about 12 degrees different to the line of fire of crooks towards Trump, so it was not very different from the angle he was shooting from (provided the assumption he fired some shots towards the rally area)
• the blood trail in the 20th rib on the roof of AGR building 6 is extensive and consistent with a serious blood loss

the question I have is the following: if crooks got shot by the SWAT officer, and the stock of his DPMS A-15 got damaged as shown in the photo, wouldn’t we expect more damage to crooks’ cheek and chin area?

under the assumption that crooks fired the 5 rapid fire shots, there was about 1 second between the last shot fired from the AGR site to the rally site and the 9th shot, so crooks may have relaxed a bit and distanced his cheek/chin from the stock, but still:

• if he relaxed and increased the distance between the shoulder part of the stock and his chin, and the SWAT officer blew away that part of the rifle’s stock, crooks may have been left relatively undamaged after that 9th shot, which means he did not engage in any other activity for the subsequent 9-10 seconds until the 10th shot finished him off
• if he did not relax, and that part of the stock got shot off, I would think the bottom half of crooks’ mouth/chin would have been taken away with the 9th bullet…

I would have thought that

• if the SWAT officer injured crooks without killing him, he would have a head/chest injury through which he would have bled enough to explain the blood trail
• the 10th bullet would have finished him off, which would have stopped feeding the blood trail, as the heart would have stopped pumping out blood when dead
• the damage to the stock could be explained away if crooks got shot through the chin/mouth/cheek, but we do not see these wounds in the photos of crooks’ dead body
• if the SWAT officer had injured crooks in the head, or chest, the stock would not have been damaged like it was
• as shown in the next picture, crooks looked at the witnesses under the trees at some point after the first shots were fired and before he got killed. this position looks like a very realistic position to have been taken out by a bullet coming from the rally area, leading to blood trails on the right side of his face…

crooks took this position somewhere after the 8th shot was fired and before the 10th shot finished him off, so maybe this is what happened:

• the SWAT officer shot the rifle out of his hands with bullet 9, but did not really injure crooks. this explains the damage to the stock of the rifle, and the lack of related face injuries
• crooks rose up above the ridge of the roof, exposing his head and enabling a head shot with bullet 10 from the person who took him out (remember that I do not believe that he got shot by any of the snipers on the barns behind Trump). this head shot would be consistent with the pictures we have seen, but if this shot killed him, the blood trail should be much smaller than what we have seen…

so, given the extended blood trail, it may as well be that bullet 10 did not kill him right away, but that

• he got confused but not seriously wounded by bullet 9,
• bled out following the injuries sustained from bullet 10, and
• by the time the “first responders” were on the roof, he had died “spontaneously” or with some help while he got handcuffed…

screenshots taken from the video “Trump Video Original Unedited” at 29s:

[kincses-zsolt]

(As I remember “riffle” was a jeans brand.)

Jeans

[kincses-zsolt]

@howdoiknowthisinfo

• the SWAT officer shot the rifle out of his hands with bullet 9, but did not really injure crooks. this explains the damage to the stock of the rifle, and the lack of related face injuries

Looks like it is only a scratch.

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

indeed, and this can as easily be a burn wound caused by the hot ridges on the roof

[daniloraf]

@howdoiknowthisinfo

the line of fire of that SWAT officer to crooks was about 12 degrees

12 degrees? I don’t have the numbers here, but the ESU angle to Crooks can’t be that high. I’ll be surprised if it reaches 1 degree. Edit: sorry, you meant it horizontally

@howdoiknowthisinfo

• he got confused but not seriously wounded by bullet 9,
• bled out following the injuries sustained from bullet 10, and
• by the time the “first responders” were on the roof, he had died “spontaneously” or with some help while he got handcuffed…

He died on shot 10. The reactions alone from the eye witnesses point to that. “Ohhh!!!” “He’s dead…” “They got him” “Big poof of hair”. etc… They saw it, they saw the gore. From their reactions it was unequivocal to them that Crooks had immediately died and could not have survived the event. About the Stock being broken, I know we’re curious (I am too), but does it really matter to the story? If it was the bullet from shot 9 or 10, if he fell on it hard between shots and broke it… if he himself cut it beforehand (doub it), if his head forcefully broke the stock from being pushed to the back when he got shot, or if it was the bullet from shot 10 that exited the back of his head and hit the stock (likely…), or if it broke between shots 3 and 4 or after the last shot… does it matter to the story that much? Keep in mind the FBI said they have no evidence of the bullet from the local ESU hitting the stock… that word game doesn’t exclude they have evidence of it being hit by shot 10… they also admit that the rifle was and is fully operational (and that’s a big deal, after all not even the Death Star was always fully operational).

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@daniloraf

12 degrees? I don’t have the numbers here, but the ESU angle to Crooks can’t be that high. I’ll be surprised if it reaches 1 degree.

12 degrees horizontally… not height…
the heading of the lines of fire is about 197.12 vs 184.96

[howdoiknowthisinfo (howdoiknowthisinfo.com)]

@daniloraf

if his head forcefully broke the stock from being pushed to the back when he got shot

these stocks are made of very solid polymers that do not get damaged easily…