Eyewitness said he had seen Crooks’ hair flying after the 9th shot.
6:49 saw you know his his face right he was probably pushing himself up from that prone shooting position and um as as his
6:58 silhouette if you will drop below the roof line then came the one round from the counter sniper um and
7:07 I didn’t see again his figure was below the roof line at that moment in time that second in time but I saw what what
7:14 I was describing and described in my FBI interview as as a as kind of a burst a
7:19 puff of feathers which you know in hindsight know now that it was it was his hair flying uh and so again uh from
that is true, but both Gary Melton and the man from that video I pointed at yesterday mention the same entry/exit wounds.
we do not have images of the circled part, but the injury under his right ear is extensive, and either it is an injury caused by the stock after it was shot, by the bullet that hit the stock first, or by the bullet while on its way to the stock, and for the 2 last cases: where did that bullet come from or go to? either incoming through is mouth or, e.g., from his left chin…
photos of the autopsy would be helpful, but as @cmartenson pointed out, we only have a very brief statement that crooks died following a gunshot wound…
whether an entry/exit wound would count as 1 gunshot wound or would count as 2 wounds is not clear to me, but that is something we will find out later…
also note that this damage was only mentioned when the fast buriers of information released that image (search for the press release titled “butler investigation evidence photos”) and nobody ever mentioned between July 13th and August 28th that the stock of that rifle was damaged…
if you look at the photo of the rifle that was photographed on the roof, you can see the damaged stock…
I do not have a better picture than this one, but the whitish reflection shows what can be the damaged part:
A little bit later, as you can see in a bodycam video, the hair is blown slightly towards the roofline by the wind. Therefore the puff of hair can’t be seen anymore beside the rifle after that.
given the drone footage of @rough_country_gypsy, the rifle picture released from the evidence photos and the image of crooks that was taken when he was sitting outside the building next to building 6, we can compile this (I know it is not to scale…):
and if a sniper or SWAT officer took a shot to his head, it is clear that the reported entry and exit wounds would match his left and right chin/jaw/cheek, and this would blow away the missing part of the rifle’s stock…
depending on the caliber, the hard polymer of the stock will tear away whatever it encounters, and the skin of his head and a puff of hair is easily cut away in that process…
as @sorey pointed out, the puff of hair was flying around, so, that is some evidence that has not been kept in proper custody too
it is extremely obvious to me that bullet 9 did not take him out at all…
This is even 100% for sure! Otherwise he wouldn’t have turned around (maybe even transfered into the next roof lane with this maneuver) and repositioned again between shot 9 and 10 (as seen in the Semper Fi video by Jon Malis)
Love your mock-up. Would be fantastic if you could elaborate one simulating when he’s in a lying position and holding the rifle.
From your picture, it seems like SWAT ground guy could have fired a shot that strikes/grazes the top or west side of the stock without hitting Crooks at all, other than shrapnel.
Seems likely since Crooks did stop firing, SWAT ground guy said he confirmed the hit, and the rifle is damaged.
We know shot 10 caused the hair to puff out because that’s what every other eye witness said so far. We know it happened after he sat up because of the potato video.
It is weird that Crooks isn’t more damaged from a counter sniper shot and the distance and one in a million shot makes no sense.
Is it true that Crooks autopsy won’t be released? That was a random thread comment. If so, that’s weird.
the rapid fire of 5 shots had ended just under a second before the 9th shot was registered…
i.e., the 9th shot did NOT stop the firing, as there were no shots fired or interrupted by bullet 9…
it is highly unlikely that bullet 9 hit the rifle without causing any damage/injury to crooks…
I do not know anything about the release of crooks’ autopsy report… as you may remember, I do not believe any witness testimony, report or similar allegations that are not backed by hard evidence…
that is exactly right.
as far as I see the things now, it went as follows:
3 rounds were fired in a very controlled manner: 3 shots in 2 seconds, evenly spread in time
a pause of just under 1 second
5 rapid fire shots
a pause of just under 1 second
bullet 9, allegedly from the SWAT officer on the green between the rally area and the first fence in the direction of the AGR site. it is unclear whether this officer hit crooks or the rifle
a pause of just under 10 seconds
bullet 10, possibly from the SWAT officer related to bullet 9, one of the southern barn snipers behind Trump, the Washington Co sniper near the tractor mud pool across the green, or another person with a gun
I think it is likely that crooks did not get shot by any of the snipers on the barns behind Trump, as I think their rounds would have created much more damage, hence, the Washington Co sniper (who used a different rifle) or a SWAT officer are much more likely to have fired the 10th shot…
Per the Congressman’s report, ground swat guy confirmed the hit and the Congressman’s report stated that shrapnel from the rifle damage hit Crooks’ cheek and neck.
I don’t know what else you want.
100% a bullet coming in at the right angles from ground SWAT guy can hit the rifle butt and not hit Crooks. It just has to be the right spots and a splintering or shattering effect occurs.
I don’t know why anyone is arguing against it at this time with no other evidence released or claims made to the contrary. It’s silly.
Show me any other official statement or testimony made that contradicts the claims about shot 9 from ground SWAT guy hitting the rifle butt.
people’s mind fills in the blanks and repeating the eye witness “report” embeds the full/extended story in their memory and that is what they eventually believe happened…
only hard evidence with videos and/or audio is to be trusted, and the higher resolution and the older, the better…
