Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
I'm using evidence collected together in this thread:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/where-did-the-bullets-go-and-what-did-they-do.13573/#post-320035
It's best not to repost all of it here, so please refer to the evidence posted there.
Using the physical evidence presented in the thread - Where Did The Bullets Go, And What Did They Do? - can anyone prove what motive Crooks had?
I say no.
But, we can't make that assertion without looking at the legitimate questions. And, based on this physical data, and the things we know for sure about Crooks, there are legitimate questions.
These are the things that we know about Crooks: He was intelligent. He was meticulous in his thinking. He acted in a manner which shows a callous attitude to human life.
Was this an assassination attempt, a mass shooting, or a mixture?
Was this an assassination attempt, and all spectator victims were "collateral damage"?
-Was it a political act?
Was this a mass shooting?
-Trump was never targeted. All spectator hits were aimed hits. Trump was the collateral damage.
Mixture The intent was to cause as much horror and loss as possible. Taking into account that Crooks was intelligent and methodical and callous, he would "do the math" to achieve the maximum horror and loss. In this scenario, Trump was the highest scoring target. As in a video game, he'd want to get the highest scoring target, but not when the probability of hitting the target is too low. The final score is the thing. A similar thing could apply to the tactics of a real life military mission.
Three permutations:
-Trump was the high value target, but Crooks meticulously planned out a line of sight in which all misses aimed at Trump would hit spectators... and roll up the score. He carefully placed himself to get this line of sight. When he missed Trump he just continued to fire wildly without changing aim. The crowd was a "carpet target."
-Crooks was convinced that he had missed Trump. He began aiming at the crowd, perhaps aiming at individuals. He, methodically, gave up on the single high value target after assessing that the probability of a hit on the high value target was too low. He went for lower value, but more numerous, targets of opportunity. The math was better, in other words.
-Trump was the high value target, but Crooks was mistakenly convinced that Trump went down due to being shot. Crooks then shifted his aim to the crowd, perhaps aiming at individuals.
The second burst happened while Trump was lying prone.
There's a pause of about 2 seconds between the end of the first burst and the start of the second burst.
This is a reasonable question: After Trump was down, why didn't Crooks lower his aim and continue to fire at him? Hoping for at least a lucky shot. If he was convinced that Trump couldn't be hit because he was shielded... Why did he keep shooting at all?
It seems that victim Comperatore was hit in the second burst. I'm leaning toward thinking Copenhaver was hit in the second burst, but that is ambiguous. These unfortunate men were not in the line of sight of Trump prone on the stage platform. The rifle was not aimed lower.
This may point to Crooks shifting his aim to the crowd. The pause could be explained by Crooks lifting up his head to take a peek after the first burst, thereby losing his sight picture, assessing the situation, going back into shooting position, and taking aimed shots again. It's the kind of thing an untrained guy would do.
Or was the crowd always the intended target? The pause becomes hard to explain in this scenario.
Or was the second burst a series of un-aimed wild shots as Crooks panicked? At the very least that would show a callous disregard for human life.
So far: Ambiguous.
Conclusion: Any claim intended to prove a motive, using this physical evidence, is invalid.
When we add in things that we know for sure about Crooks, we are still left with nothing but legitimate questions.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/where-did-the-bullets-go-and-what-did-they-do.13573/#post-320035
It's best not to repost all of it here, so please refer to the evidence posted there.
Using the physical evidence presented in the thread - Where Did The Bullets Go, And What Did They Do? - can anyone prove what motive Crooks had?
I say no.
But, we can't make that assertion without looking at the legitimate questions. And, based on this physical data, and the things we know for sure about Crooks, there are legitimate questions.
These are the things that we know about Crooks: He was intelligent. He was meticulous in his thinking. He acted in a manner which shows a callous attitude to human life.
Was this an assassination attempt, a mass shooting, or a mixture?
Was this an assassination attempt, and all spectator victims were "collateral damage"?
-Was it a political act?
Was this a mass shooting?
-Trump was never targeted. All spectator hits were aimed hits. Trump was the collateral damage.
Mixture The intent was to cause as much horror and loss as possible. Taking into account that Crooks was intelligent and methodical and callous, he would "do the math" to achieve the maximum horror and loss. In this scenario, Trump was the highest scoring target. As in a video game, he'd want to get the highest scoring target, but not when the probability of hitting the target is too low. The final score is the thing. A similar thing could apply to the tactics of a real life military mission.
Three permutations:
-Trump was the high value target, but Crooks meticulously planned out a line of sight in which all misses aimed at Trump would hit spectators... and roll up the score. He carefully placed himself to get this line of sight. When he missed Trump he just continued to fire wildly without changing aim. The crowd was a "carpet target."
-Crooks was convinced that he had missed Trump. He began aiming at the crowd, perhaps aiming at individuals. He, methodically, gave up on the single high value target after assessing that the probability of a hit on the high value target was too low. He went for lower value, but more numerous, targets of opportunity. The math was better, in other words.
-Trump was the high value target, but Crooks was mistakenly convinced that Trump went down due to being shot. Crooks then shifted his aim to the crowd, perhaps aiming at individuals.
The second burst happened while Trump was lying prone.
There's a pause of about 2 seconds between the end of the first burst and the start of the second burst.
This is a reasonable question: After Trump was down, why didn't Crooks lower his aim and continue to fire at him? Hoping for at least a lucky shot. If he was convinced that Trump couldn't be hit because he was shielded... Why did he keep shooting at all?
It seems that victim Comperatore was hit in the second burst. I'm leaning toward thinking Copenhaver was hit in the second burst, but that is ambiguous. These unfortunate men were not in the line of sight of Trump prone on the stage platform. The rifle was not aimed lower.
This may point to Crooks shifting his aim to the crowd. The pause could be explained by Crooks lifting up his head to take a peek after the first burst, thereby losing his sight picture, assessing the situation, going back into shooting position, and taking aimed shots again. It's the kind of thing an untrained guy would do.
Or was the crowd always the intended target? The pause becomes hard to explain in this scenario.
Or was the second burst a series of un-aimed wild shots as Crooks panicked? At the very least that would show a callous disregard for human life.
So far: Ambiguous.
Conclusion: Any claim intended to prove a motive, using this physical evidence, is invalid.
When we add in things that we know for sure about Crooks, we are still left with nothing but legitimate questions.
Last edited:
