Jump to content

Charlie Kirk Assassinated [Shooter in custody]


Recommended Posts

Posted
4 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Dude you know what I mean? Sorry I had an excellent Delta 9 gummy so maybe it makes more sense to me. Fox and the WH are chummy so they probably would get a heads up over other networks bc of the chumminess. Does that not make sense? Ah fuck it. 

Sure, it ought to make sense. Except, the words “trust Fox” written in this timeline.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

Can someone explain how he got the gun (mauser rifle?) up on the roof and how he got it down with him, where it was later wrapped in a towel and found by authorities? did he carry it in a bag and assemble it up on the roof? how did he disassemble it so fast when he made the escape?

Mossad imo

  • Haha 2
Posted
18 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Sure, it ought to make sense. Except, the words “trust Fox” written in this timeline.

Sure. Most of y’all aren’t in my true crime community. A separate deal. So we are agnostic about sources and what not provided the source can be corroborated. We listen to and watch everything. Podcasts, TikTok local YT people in a particular case. All local news and so on. We just want whatever we have to be confirmed in our private and not public chats. 
 

so when I use sources I’m not looking at it thru a left or right political lens. I’m gathering information. Not rhetoric if that makes sense where as in the DT and cloakroom sources are often disregarded (bc mostly opinion based) bc of the source. 
 

in my group one lady believes the Candace Owen types on the far right are being paid by drug cartels to push the theory that Kirk was killed by Israel. And further that he accepted 1 million to change his views. Wild shit. We can discuss all this because while we are all different political beliefs in my large group we don’t go there. It’s about cases and trying to figure them out. Who what when where why how shit. Nothing else. So we don’t come to blows or are trying to make the motive be something it’s not. We only seek the truth wherever it goes. We share theories. Sure we want to be right. Who doesn’t? But it’s about the crime not our politics if that makes any fucking sense lol. 😂 

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Nicole44 said:

Thank you! 😊 

I also read that if the state intends to seek the death penalty (I do remember the governor saying that Kirk’s family will have some input) that they do not have to announce that tomorrow. That they have 60 days I think? To do so?

 

The governor also indicated that they’d have a presser right after the assassin’s court appearance. So maybe they intend to explain that a bit? Bc I can see a scenario where if the DP isn’t automatically sought tomorrow in court that there will be an upheaval in conservative circles and media. So let’s say that Kirk’s widow hasn’t decided or if the State would want to give her some space to decide that. I’d imagine that they will want to have a presser to explain that before they get devoured by the conservatives. this is just a scenario playing out in my mind and the desire to get ahead of what has been a deeply deeply unsettling week for a lot of us, 
 

She may have already made a choice. I’m against DP now…my thoughts over the years have evolved this way…but I’m not going to judge her if she wants that punishment. I also know if she does not want the DP that the state said it will try to honor her wishes.
 

So I hope if that’s the case that the Feds don’t step in to alter that wish. With all the unrest happening I just don’t want to see half of people losing their damned minds when the state appears to have 60 days to make a determination.
 

so my question is that they don’t have to automatically put that down tomorrow? Right? They can also develop more charges if the investigation warrants correct? Or do have time to develop more? 

They have to charge a capital offense first.  And doing so will be a stretch.

This is the Utah homicide statute and it makes capital a number of forms of murder that probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster.  https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter5/76-5-S202.html?v=C76-5-S202_2025050720250507

The only one factually even potentially applicable is 

the actor knowingly created a great risk of death to another individual other than the deceased individual and the actor;

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Sure. Most of y’all aren’t in my true crime community. A separate deal. So we are agnostic about sources and what not provided the source can be corroborated. We listen to and watch everything. Podcasts, TikTok local YT people in a particular case. All local news and so on. We just want whatever we have to be confirmed in our private and not public chats. 
 

so when I use sources I’m not looking at it thru a left or right political lens. I’m gathering information. Not rhetoric if that makes sense where as in the DT and cloakroom sources are often disregarded (bc mostly opinion based) bc of the source. 
 

in my group one lady believes the Candace Owen types on the far right are being paid by drug cartels to push the theory that Kirk was killed by Israel. And further that he accepted 1 million to change his views. Wild shit. We can discuss all this because while we are all different political beliefs in my large group we don’t go there. It’s about cases and trying to figure them out. Who what when where why how shit. Nothing else. So we don’t come to blows or are trying to make the motive be something it’s not. We only seek the truth wherever it goes. We share theories. Sure we want to be right. Who doesn’t? But it’s about the crime not our politics if that makes any fucking sense lol. 😂 

giphy.gif

As a general proposition, most of us are looking at evidence and theories from an evidentiary standpoint:  is it accurate, can it be proven, is it "corroborated."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Nicole44 said:

so when I use sources I’m not looking at it thru a left or right political lens.

 

10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

As a general proposition, most of us are looking at evidence and theories from an evidentiary standpoint:  is it accurate, can it be proven, is it "corroborated."

I don’t watch network news, but I do pay attention to a particular source’s credibility. Given the amount Fox paid to settle the suit against them, it is not an outfit I hold in esteem. But, sure, if it benefits the WH to have FOX report actual fact, then FOX will do so. Just keep this in mind, if the WH decides at any second after that report that some other narrative suits them more, then FOX will turn on a dime, and report the new talking points.

Edited by Willfully Horn
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

 

I don’t watch network news, but I do pay attention to a particular source’s credibility. Given the amount Fox paid to settle the suit against them, it is not an outfit I hold in esteem. But, sure, if it benefits the WH to have FOX report actual fact, then FOX will do so. Just keep this in mind, if the WH decides at any second after that report that some other narrative suits them more, then FOX will turn on a dime, and report the new talking points.

Agreed. I do see that. I also see propaganda in a lot of coverage on other platforms. I try my best to weed through it. Basically our sort of motto is if someone has an exclusive interview then we watch it regardless of the platform. Bc it’s a piece of the puzzle. Or helps to shine light on one. 
 

Twitter going batshit over Candace Owen’s making that claim. This shit is just already weird and getting weirder, then you also have bots doing their bot shit. People making up shit. It’s getting to the point where I need like two back up sources for every one source. Even if a source or platform means well they could be spreading wrong shit. Common in all investigations but this is way worse bc of the politics and everyone wanting their to be a motive that works for their group, thankfully my private group doesn’t care about that, we just want the real answers realizing we may not get them at all. But in spite of that we aren’t going to fill the void if there are no answers just to satisfy a particular side or a belief. If we don’t get the answers so be it but we aren’t trying to create ones either. 

Posted
1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

Can someone explain how he got the gun (mauser rifle?) up on the roof and how he got it down with him, where it was later wrapped in a towel and found by authorities? did he carry it in a bag and assemble it up on the roof? how did he disassemble it so fast when he made the escape?

He stuck it in his pant leg and up into a backpack. He acted like he had a limp and limped all the way through a neighborhood, into the campus, into the building and up on the roof. There was a stairway that led directly onto the roof. The whole thing is caught on cameras. He climbs over this small wall next to the public roof area and hides for about 20 minutes where he assembles something with the gun, and then goes to his perch and makes the shot. Then he runs across the giant roof area to the corner farthest away from where Kirk was, throws the gun down to the grass, jumps down, and then walked over to a wooded area across the street where he dumped the gun.

Since it was caught on cameras they immediately searched the wooded areas because they saw him walk in there. This video does a good walkthrough. 

The guy is a bit of a dildo but the walkthrough makes sense if you watch all the camera videos. For me, its very strange how easy it is to get up on the roof and get down from it. Its tailor made for a snipers position. Not a difficult maneuver and certainly wouldnt require a bunch of extensive training or anything. The main question for me is how he got the idea to use the roof. Could be as simple as he had been up there before and then heard where Kirk would be setting up and realized he could likely pull it off without having to do anything too complicated. 

Posted
2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

Can someone explain how he got the gun (mauser rifle?) up on the roof and how he got it down with him, where it was later wrapped in a towel and found by authorities? did he carry it in a bag and assemble it up on the roof? how did he disassemble it so fast when he made the escape?

If you look at the building where he took the shot, it is connected via a roof-top bridge to the UVU Computer Science building.  Using Google Maps, you can see a stairway that gets you up on the roof-top bridge.

The bridge appears to be at the same height as the roof where he took the shot.  It's possible that he assembled the gun somewhere near the bridge, walked up the stairs and jumped on the roof, then moved to where he took the shot.  It looks easy to get from the roof-top bridge area to the roof of the building where he took the shot.

The NY Times has some pics and maps up that show a likely path:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/12/us/tyler-robinson-manhunt-timeline-kirk-suspect-caught.html

  • Like 1
Posted
51 minutes ago, BlackCat said:

He stuck it in his pant leg and up into a backpack. He acted like he had a limp and limped all the way through a neighborhood, into the campus, into the building and up on the roof. There was a stairway that led directly onto the roof. The whole thing is caught on cameras. He climbs over this small wall next to the public roof area and hides for about 20 minutes where he assembles something with the gun, and then goes to his perch and makes the shot. Then he runs across the giant roof area to the corner farthest away from where Kirk was, throws the gun down to the grass, jumps down, and then walked over to a wooded area across the street where he dumped the gun.

Since it was caught on cameras they immediately searched the wooded areas because they saw him walk in there. This video does a good walkthrough. 

The guy is a bit of a dildo but the walkthrough makes sense if you watch all the camera videos. For me, its very strange how easy it is to get up on the roof and get down from it. Its tailor made for a snipers position. Not a difficult maneuver and certainly wouldnt require a bunch of extensive training or anything. The main question for me is how he got the idea to use the roof. Could be as simple as he had been up there before and then heard where Kirk would be setting up and realized he could likely pull it off without having to do anything too complicated. 

What's weird to me is the shot itself.  If Kirk is actually wearing hard body armor then it makes sense.  Bullet clips the armor plate and then ricochets up into his neck.  But it just really doesn't look like he's wearing any body armor at all.  You can see the outline of his pecs and his nips.  So if there's no body armor for the bullet to deflect from what happened?  He didn't just get shot directly in the neck from the front.  I doubt the entry wound would have been that big and there definitely would have been a gaping exit wound.  So did the bullet hit this cross he was wearing?  Seems odd a .30 cal bullet you'd normally use to kill deer would be stopped by something like that.  Especially considering we don't see any wound/blood on his chest.

When I first saw the video of the shooting, I immediately thought he'd been shot from behind.  So there would be some small entry wound on the back of his neck and it forces his body to tense up like we see in the video, then the shirt billows out and the gaping exit wound appears on the front of his neck. This guy's video seems to suggest a bullet could have come from behind him.  A bit morbid but he tries not to show the blood and whatnot.  I'm also not claiming any crazy conspiracy theory like Israel killed him or the shooter was a patsy or anything like that.  Just find the shot itself a bit odd.  

 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

As a general proposition, most of us are looking at evidence and theories from an evidentiary standpoint:  is it accurate, can it be proven, is it "corroborated."

To elaborate on this, I kind of assume you true crimers are skeptical of a single source of information that cites unnamed sources and is generally pretty vague.  Even if that single source gets repeated on dozens or hundreds of sites that maybe initially looks like corroboration, but on closer scrutiny just cites that single source and changes the wording around to make it look like a different, "corroborating" report.

Then you combine that with the single source being a) pretty much proven liars b) lying in service of an agenda and administration.

Then you have something to be very skeptical of.

And, as for the FBI, normally they and DOJ lawyers wouldn't comment much on evidence gathered prior to court proceedings that mandate disclosure.  And, it's a valid point that they may not have "unlocked" the forensic/computer evidence yet.  Of course, this FBI is anything but normal and wouldn't seem likely to observe prior norms.  And, the very thing that makes it abnormal is politicization and the performative clown that is the Director.

So, it's not unreasonable to read into this FBI's silence on matters.  And to assume that if they had motive evidence that fit their narrative or could be twisted to do so, they'd be yelling it from the rooftops.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

They have to charge a capital offense first.  And doing so will be a stretch.

This is the Utah homicide statute and it makes capital a number of forms of murder that probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster.  https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter5/76-5-S202.html?v=C76-5-S202_2025050720250507

The only one factually even potentially applicable is 

the actor knowingly created a great risk of death to another individual other than the deceased individual and the actor;

Lol. Dude’s going to be tried, convicted and executed in record time. This may be a new high-water mark of “well ackshuly”-ism. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Lol. Dude’s going to be tried, convicted and executed in record time. This may be a new high-water mark of “well ackshuly”-ism. 

I'd actually guess he pleads.  Probably also assume they withdraw death penalty in return for the plea.

And if they don't withdraw the death penalty, he still gets a penalty-phase "trial," where upbringing, motive. mental health, indoctrination and such will get a lot more play than at a guilt-phase trial.  And that may not be something the government really wants to get into.

Posted
3 hours ago, SpiralOut said:

What's weird to me is the shot itself.  If Kirk is actually wearing hard body armor then it makes sense.  Bullet clips the armor plate and then ricochets up into his neck.  But it just really doesn't look like he's wearing any body armor at all.  You can see the outline of his pecs and his nips.  So if there's no body armor for the bullet to deflect from what happened?  He didn't just get shot directly in the neck from the front.  I doubt the entry wound would have been that big and there definitely would have been a gaping exit wound.  So did the bullet hit this cross he was wearing?  Seems odd a .30 cal bullet you'd normally use to kill deer would be stopped by something like that.  Especially considering we don't see any wound/blood on his chest.

When I first saw the video of the shooting, I immediately thought he'd been shot from behind.  So there would be some small entry wound on the back of his neck and it forces his body to tense up like we see in the video, then the shirt billows out and the gaping exit wound appears on the front of his neck. This guy's video seems to suggest a bullet could have come from behind him.  A bit morbid but he tries not to show the blood and whatnot.  I'm also not claiming any crazy conspiracy theory like Israel killed him or the shooter was a patsy or anything like that.  Just find the shot itself a bit odd.  

 

Dude got shot in the neck. It's pretty fucking easy to see. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
54 minutes ago, immamac said:

Dude got shot in the neck. It's pretty fucking easy to see. 

Yes, because .30 cal bullets fired from high powered long rifles hit a human's neck and leave no exit wound.  Here I was thinking Kirk was a pencil necked dweeb when in reality he's got a bull neck with a muscular density surpassing that of the world's strongest men.  Silly me.

bGq5MH1OLzjQEd4rRBDYOivDUfUTfHfUE7hPcT2xLto.webp.23f4cc416f5cb610917d4ba8310bba1b.webp

Posted
6 hours ago, Texas Jeff said:

If you look at the building where he took the shot, it is connected via a roof-top bridge to the UVU Computer Science building.  Using Google Maps, you can see a stairway that gets you up on the roof-top bridge.

The bridge appears to be at the same height as the roof where he took the shot.  It's possible that he assembled the gun somewhere near the bridge, walked up the stairs and jumped on the roof, then moved to where he took the shot.  It looks easy to get from the roof-top bridge area to the roof of the building where he took the shot.

The NY Times has some pics and maps up that show a likely path:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/09/12/us/tyler-robinson-manhunt-timeline-kirk-suspect-caught.html

what about the escape?

Posted

Wasn't he shot on his right and blood shoots out on his left from his neck? I don't ever want to rewatch what I saw of that but I thought he was shot and then slumps to his left as blood is pouring out of him. 

Posted
11 minutes ago, SpiralOut said:

Yes, because .30 cal bullets fired from high powered long rifles hit a human's neck and leave no exit wound.  Here I was thinking Kirk was a pencil necked dweeb when in reality he's got a bull neck with a muscular density surpassing that of the world's strongest men.  Silly me.

bGq5MH1OLzjQEd4rRBDYOivDUfUTfHfUE7hPcT2xLto.webp.23f4cc416f5cb610917d4ba8310bba1b.webp

Burnie Burns Conspiracy GIF by Rooster Teeth

Posted
9 minutes ago, SpiralOut said:

Yes, because .30 cal bullets fired from high powered long rifles hit a human's neck and leave no exit wound.  Here I was thinking Kirk was a pencil necked dweeb when in reality he's got a bull neck with a muscular density surpassing that of the world's strongest men.  Silly me.

bGq5MH1OLzjQEd4rRBDYOivDUfUTfHfUE7hPcT2xLto.webp.23f4cc416f5cb610917d4ba8310bba1b.webp

Pistols have way different ballistics than rifles, a .223 can make a pretty gnarly exit wound channel, and 30-06 even moreso. Theres a ton more velocity and so exponentially greater kinetic energy is delivered 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Next he's gonna tell me that he didn't get shot. It was just an invisible man who slit his throat at the exact time the gun noise went off. It was fucking aliens 

Posted
12 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Where did the idea that there’s no exit wound come from?

So the official story (which I'm not claiming is bullshit, I'm just confused on the physics of the whole thing) is that the shooter shot Kirk from his front from the roof of that building.  Except when you see the video of Kirk getting shot he moves before the wound shows up on his neck.  Most people seem to think he was hit in the chest on some body armor he was wearing and that the bullet ricochets up into his neck.  Hardly anyone thinks the bullet went straight into his neck because that would have ripped his entire neck apart and left a giant exit wound.  There are several videos from multiple angles of the shooting, including ones where you can see the back of Kirk's neck and there is no exit wound back there.  

I'm not a gun guy, so maybe I'm completely off base here, but it seems to me that getting shot by a large caliber bullet from a high powered rifle in the front of your neck would leave an exit wound on the back of your neck/head somewhere.  There isn't one from everything I've seen.  Thus, the wound we see on Kirk's neck is actually the exit wound and he was shot from behind.  OR he actually was wearing body armor that took the initial hit and the ricochet went up into his neck and thus was tumbling to create a larger wound and wouldn't have the kinetic energy at that point to create an exit wound.

Posted
9 hours ago, immamac said:

He's already bigger than he was then. He's fine and it's all come out that it was mostly horseshit. 

I don't mean in terms of views, like he had an HBO special and shit. I'd love to see him back in that kind of mainstream because this is real journalism.

Posted
4 minutes ago, immamac said:

Next he's gonna tell me that he didn't get shot. It was just an invisible man who slit his throat at the exact time the gun noise went off. It was fucking aliens 

Quit being purposefully fucking dense.  It's annoying.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Hover over the username and there's a box for ignore that will take you to the ignore settings. 

I see that now that I'm on a laptop.

I went to go find the user in mind and... he's not around anymore.  I guess problem solved.

 

the usual suspects GIF

  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, texasdago said:

I see that now that I'm on a laptop.

I went to go find the user in mind and... he's not around anymore.  I guess problem solved.

 

the usual suspects GIF

On mobile go to the three lines at the top then account>ignored users>add new user to ignore list, and you have to type it out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

To elaborate on this, I kind of assume you true crimers are skeptical of a single source of information that cites unnamed sources and is generally pretty vague.  Even if that single source gets repeated on dozens or hundreds of sites that maybe initially looks like corroboration, but on closer scrutiny just cites that single source and changes the wording around to make it look like a different, "corroborating" report.

Then you combine that with the single source being a) pretty much proven liars b) lying in service of an agenda and administration.

Then you have something to be very skeptical of.

And, as for the FBI, normally they and DOJ lawyers wouldn't comment much on evidence gathered prior to court proceedings that mandate disclosure.  And, it's a valid point that they may not have "unlocked" the forensic/computer evidence yet.  Of course, this FBI is anything but normal and wouldn't seem likely to observe prior norms.  And, the very thing that makes it abnormal is politicization and the performative clown that is the Director.

So, it's not unreasonable to read into this FBI's silence on matters.  And to assume that if they had motive evidence that fit their narrative or could be twisted to do so, they'd be yelling it from the rooftops.

Skepticism is how we roll. I just mean we watch videos and go to podcasts that most people aren’t aware of. There are some podcasters in the true crime community I absolutely LOATHE. But I will still take a look at their information if they have scoop. Like TMZ is a similar thing. Sometimes they have a good source. Like when they obtained that camera footage of the shooter walking/ limping to campus. So all I mean is we don’t disregard a piece of evidence simply because of the source but we try extremely hard to get corroborating sources. So if we can’t, we still consider what the source says, but we don’t give it as much weight, it’s kinda like a Venn diagram basically. 
 

most of us are mappers in how we build our cases. If any of this shit makes sense. 
 

hopefully the court appearance is earlier in the day. It doesn’t sound like the assassin is cooperating at all right now. 

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, SpiralOut said:

So the official story (which I'm not claiming is bullshit, I'm just confused on the physics of the whole thing) is that the shooter shot Kirk from his front from the roof of that building.  Except when you see the video of Kirk getting shot he moves before the wound shows up on his neck.  Most people seem to think he was hit in the chest on some body armor he was wearing and that the bullet ricochets up into his neck.  Hardly anyone thinks the bullet went straight into his neck because that would have ripped his entire neck apart and left a giant exit wound.  There are several videos from multiple angles of the shooting, including ones where you can see the back of Kirk's neck and there is no exit wound back there.  

I'm not a gun guy, so maybe I'm completely off base here, but it seems to me that getting shot by a large caliber bullet from a high powered rifle in the front of your neck would leave an exit wound on the back of your neck/head somewhere.  There isn't one from everything I've seen.  Thus, the wound we see on Kirk's neck is actually the exit wound and he was shot from behind.  OR he actually was wearing body armor that took the initial hit and the ricochet went up into his neck and thus was tumbling to create a larger wound and wouldn't have the kinetic energy at that point to create an exit wound.

The behavior of a projectile in a body or "piece of meat" can be highly unpredictable.  They are capable of producing gnarly exit wounds and also no exit wound at all and also just drilling pretty much straight through.  A lot of it depends on the type of bullet (soft point vs. full metal jacket and there's a wide variety of behavior from various soft point designs) and what it actually hits on the way through.

As pointed out above, that chart is pistol rounds, which have a lot lower velocity and thus kinetic energy than rifle rounds.  1/2mv^2.  But a lot of pistol rounds also have a lot more mass than rifle rounds.  A rifle round is more apt to produce a lot of hydrodynamic shock, which can help make a big exit wound.  But sometimes that relatively small diameter projectile will go right through.  Whereas the pistol may be less apt to produce that shock, but possibly more apt to tumble in the body and "fly off course," which can produce a pretty gnarly wound in its own right. So that chart is fairly simplified.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

He got shot in the fucking neck. None of that matters. It wasn't a ricochet and it wasn't body armor failure. He got shot in the mother fucking neck and it exploded. Nothing really more to analyze. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

The behavior of a projectile in a body or "piece of meat" can be highly unpredictable.  They are capable of producing gnarly exit wounds and also no exit wound at all and also just drilling pretty much straight through.  A lot of it depends on the type of bullet (soft point vs. full metal jacket and there's a wide variety of behavior from various soft point designs) and what it actually hits on the way through.

Maybe we get more information today that will clear some things up.  Like they haven't said a peep about the actual bullet, which should be in their possession.  Also nothing about whether they tested the gun to see if it had been fired or if they tested Robinson himself for GSR since they picked him up in the same clothes he did the shooting in.  Seems like that would have been a quick and easy thing to do to say, yeah, this is our guy and he absolutely did it.

Posted
51 minutes ago, SpiralOut said:

So the official story (which I'm not claiming is bullshit, I'm just confused on the physics of the whole thing) is that the shooter shot Kirk from his front from the roof of that building.  Except when you see the video of Kirk getting shot he moves before the wound shows up on his neck.  Most people seem to think he was hit in the chest on some body armor he was wearing and that the bullet ricochets up into his neck.  Hardly anyone thinks the bullet went straight into his neck because that would have ripped his entire neck apart and left a giant exit wound.  There are several videos from multiple angles of the shooting, including ones where you can see the back of Kirk's neck and there is no exit wound back there.  

I'm not a gun guy, so maybe I'm completely off base here, but it seems to me that getting shot by a large caliber bullet from a high powered rifle in the front of your neck would leave an exit wound on the back of your neck/head somewhere.  There isn't one from everything I've seen.  Thus, the wound we see on Kirk's neck is actually the exit wound and he was shot from behind.  OR he actually was wearing body armor that took the initial hit and the ricochet went up into his neck and thus was tumbling to create a larger wound and wouldn't have the kinetic energy at that point to create an exit wound.

You are

Posted
22 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The behavior of a projectile in a body or "piece of meat" can be highly unpredictable.  They are capable of producing gnarly exit wounds and also no exit wound at all and also just drilling pretty much straight through.  A lot of it depends on the type of bullet (soft point vs. full metal jacket and there's a wide variety of behavior from various soft point designs) and what it actually hits on the way through.

As pointed out above, that chart is pistol rounds, which have a lot lower velocity and thus kinetic energy than rifle rounds.  1/2mv^2.  But a lot of pistol rounds also have a lot more mass than rifle rounds.  A rifle round is more apt to produce a lot of hydrodynamic shock, which can help make a big exit wound.  But sometimes that relatively small diameter projectile will go right through.  Whereas the pistol may be less apt to produce that shock, but possibly more apt to tumble in the body and "fly off course," which can produce a pretty gnarly wound in its own right. So that chart is fairly simplified.

Jesus people.  This isn't hard.  Bullets do yaw and pitch, but there has to be enough mass in the target to impact the amount of loaded kinetic energy in the projectile.  All round produce kinetic energy based upon both their mass and velocity.  Pistol rounds will often have more mass, but significantly less velocity.  A 30-06 has both.  It's a big, fast round.  Even here a shot in the neck, even with modern hollow-points, etc won't expand unless it hits something dense enough to offset it's velocity.  In this case, it clearly passes straight through, but because the neck is a bundle of nerves and veins, it's catastrophic and the dump of kinetic energy and cavitation which you can clearly see is what cause the damage.  

This is what happens.  This is why he flinched.  This is why his shirt flew up.  This is why his neck was shredded despite the high probability that the round passed straight through without expanding

bullet-gelatin-slow-moiton.gif?resize=49

Posted
19 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Maybe we need a rampant speculation and conspiracy theories thread?

That would be cool. People won’t use it properly bc surly is surly. But at least having a thread like that you go into it knowing what to expect. Rampant speculation and conspiracy theories. Just call it “follow the white rabbit.” 

giphy-downsized.gif

Posted
3 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

That would be cool. People won’t use it properly bc surly is surly. But at least having a thread like that you go into it knowing what to expect. Rampant speculation and conspiracy theories. Just call it “follow the white rabbit.” 

giphy-downsized.gif

In fairness, this thread has been home to quite a bit of rampant speculation and conspiracy. It's just that it's coming from the FBI and journalistic entities that are really shitting the bed. This story has been a complete boondoggle from the jump, and I'm not holding my breath for the facts to get any more clear after today's presser

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
38 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Maybe we need a rampant speculation and conspiracy theories thread?

That's actually all of Surly. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, alincoln said:

Did you watch the video above. His escape is entirely captured on video. 

No haven't been able to watch videos this morning. Was he carrying the whole assembled rifle when he jumped down from the building?

Posted
1 hour ago, Deej said:

Burnie Burns Conspiracy GIF by Rooster Teeth

Stupid fucking social media and true crime podcasts have turned everyone into a "well, actually...." person

There is not always a grand conspiracy or fake out.  Jesus Christ. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Captainant said:

In fairness, this thread has been home to quite a bit of rampant speculation and conspiracy. It's just that it's coming from the FBI and journalistic entities that are really shitting the bed. This story has been a complete boondoggle from the jump, and I'm not holding my breath for the facts to get any more clear after today's presser

I feel ya. In the true crime community the DA and the indictment aren’t the be all end all. In one of our cases Suzanne Morphew, we absolutely think it was her hubby Barry. We think they have the right person, but the DA fucked up the first trial, and now we feel they have the time of death (TOD) for her wrong. And that may fuck up the case. But we tend to give respect and weight to the prosecution but we don’t blindly go “yeah we believe this shit 💯.” 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...