In this post, it was reported that Mike Adams found a 366 millisecond (ms) “snap .. pop” delay in bullet sounds (audio forensics) in one of the shots taken at the Butler Rally for Trump. In this post, the process of audio forensics for ballistics got explained (by experts).
The following uses the correct process to determine if a water-tower shooter is plausible:
If a bullet was shot from top of water tower down to podium, and if it had muzzle velocity of 3,100 feet per second (fps), then it takes 0.266 seconds (266 ms) for it to travel the first 771 feet (yellow bracket). At that point, the bullet has slowed to 2,688 fps, resulting in a Mach Angle represented by the 68’ line headed west.
It takes another 59 milliseconds for sound to travel west to the microphone, offset from podium by 61 feet. The total time for that bullet snap to get picked up by the microphone is 266+59 = 325 ms. The total time for the muzzle blast (green) is 694 ms — leaving a 369 ms gap, which is similar to the 366 ms gap that Mike Adams found.
A microphone offset from the podium by 61 feet, and a rifle with a muzzle velocity of 3,100 fps would successfully explain a water-tower shooter, shooting at the podium that Trump was standing on. While many factors are in play, the ballistic analysis shows that it is not implausible for there to have been a second shooter on the tower.
In other words, the ballistics evidence indicates that a shooter on the tower cannot be ruled out by the audio record, and so remains a possibility. Ideally, all GPS locations of all cell phones at the rally — if a subpoena by a court demanded them— would let experts place all active shooters (friend and foe) at the rally, giving a complete picture.
There is a company, ShotSpotter, that claims to be able to tell you where gunshots come from, as long as you let them install 25 microphones per square mile. Here is a quote from an ACLU piece on them:
Shotspotter installs 20 to 25 microphones per square mile in the cities where it is installed, and uses those microphones to try to identify and locate the sound of gunshots. In the past, we have scrutinized this company and its technology from a privacy perspective. Placing live microphones in public places raises significant privacy concerns.
But we have way more than just 25 cellphone microphones from people at the rally, so it’d be much easier for us to place all of the gunshots that occurred at the rally, than it is for ShotSpotter to do what it claims that it can do. And, because of the density of microphones, we could do it more accurately than ShotSpotter would be capable of.
And a report on the performance of ShotSpotter found that the system could get you to within 25-feet of where the shooter was standing at the time they took the shot:
“The researchers determined that the ShotSpotter accurately detected 80 percent of the shots fired in the field test; 72 percent of the shots were also triangulated, with a 25-foot margin of error in pinpointing the exact location of the gunshot.”
Notes
… and …
Reference
[ACLU report on ShotSpotter] — https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/four-problems-with-the-shotspotter-gunshot-detection-system
[government report on the performance of ShotSpotter] — https://www.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh241/files/archives/ncjrs/fs000201.pdf
“The researchers determined that the ShotSpotter accurately detected 80 percent of the shots fired in the field test; 72 percent of the shots were also triangulated, with a 25-foot margin of error in pinpointing the exact location of the gunshot.”
Please say it straight up. The “gap” you refer to means the shooter was NOT on the water tower, right? The “figures” “seen” there were NOT to scale, but 2 to 10 times the size of a normal man when using the garage door below for perspective. Also, the water tower seems slightly behind line of sight to Trump, or so it appears to me.
Also, there’s the small matter (Sarc) of the gun-smoke puffs off to Trump’s left of platform. (Crooks Building and SS “upstairs window” above Crooks position are on Trump’s right of platform)
As we see the smoke puffs from off-platform left…coinciding with the hydraulic hose being slit …are
2 people near Trump instantly shot and felled to the floor.
So…why the question IF there was a second shooter?
1). Shooter One: EITHER Crooks or SS Sniper from “upstairs” window, BOTH having the same trajectory…
2). AND Shooter Two: the shooter off platform left-side of Trump that clipped the hydraulic line before wounding two people and murdering another.
THIS Murder is what we need to focus on because THIS is the SURE THING MURDER CHARGE for a sniper OTHER THAN Crooks or the “SS Snipers in the “upstairs window.” on Trump’s right side of the platform and across the field, along with the SS Snipers in the upstairs, who they “say”’ left the building to wander around the field looking for Crooks…who is shown in MANY videos to be walking OPENLY around the building, then climbing onto the roof in a “bear crawl,” all on video…
3). AND Shooter 3…the Sniper who killed Crooks, assumed to be the shot following TWO Separate Volleys…volley 1 said to be 3 shots and Volley 2 said to be 5 quicker, distinctly different shots ,
AND THEN Shooter 3, with Crooks’ “taken out” by a single final Sniper shot, assumed to be a Secret Service Sniper, BUT “they” are saying this shooter was NOT on the barn roof position directly behind Trump’s platform. Please confirm.
But “they” don’t say where, and so we don’t know WHERE this Crooks Kill-shot Sniper was …who is said to NOT be on the barn roof position.
The acoustic analysis distinguishes this last shot by a longer pause, and distinctive sound, indicating closeness to Trump’s microphone position, used for Laboratory analysis because of its central position.
See Peak Prosperity, Chris Martinson, YouTube.
Chart of audio graphics is matched with multiple video angles and distances to identify location and trajectory.
So my confusion is, WHY the confusion? …as to whether there was more than one would-be assassin?
Sen. Ron Johnson has mentioned Dr. Martinson’s research…and I think he would have introduced this element for a reason. He introduced the Second Shooter as having recorded audio validity.
Like every other piece of “evidence,” …here today, changed tomorrow.
But there has to be a CITIZEN’S INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE…as a collection point to sort and connect dots, throwing OUT the bazillion (ON PURPOSE) blind alleys that make this a maze rather than the STRAIGHT LINE that is appropriate CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.
Thank you for reading this. I know ALL of us realize what’s at stake.