There was speculation right at the start that the bullet hit a bullet-proof vest first and ricocheted upward into his neck. That makes a lot of sense to me, because it would have lost a lot of its power after the ricochet
My limited understanding is that bullets don't usually ricochet off modern body armour in the way that they might off of, say, steel plate.
Pistol/ submachine gun rounds, shotgun pellets etc. fail to penetrate the densely-woven Kevlar (or equivalent) fibres of "soft" armour and usually remain embedded in the garment.
Rifle rounds will defeat most fabric-based armour so ceramic (less often metal) plates are used in conjunction with a fabric-based armour where there is a need to mitigate against rifle threats.
External Quote:
Ceramic body armor is made up of a hard and rigid ceramic strike face bonded to a ductile fiber composite backing layer. The projectile is shattered, turned, or eroded as it impacts the ceramic strike face, and much of its kinetic energy is consumed as it interacts with the ceramic layer; the fiber composite backing layer absorbs residual kinetic energy and catches bullet and ceramic debris (spalling).
Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_armor
Whether a "turned" bullet constitutes a ricochet might be important here, but the aim of body armour is largely to absorb the energy of the bullet and distribute it over a much larger area before it reaches the wearer's body, not to deflect the bullet:
External Quote:
Behind Armour Blunt Trauma (BABT) is the non-penetrating injury resulting from the rapid deformation of armours covering the body. The deformation of the surface of an armour in contact with the body wall arises from the impact of a bullet or other projectile on its front face. The deformation is part of the retardation and energy absorbing process that captures the projectile.
"Behind Armour Blunt Trauma - an emerging problem" (abstract only), Cannon, L.,
BMJ Military Health 147 (1), 2001,
https://militaryhealth.bmj.com/content/147/1/87 my emphasis.
To reduce injuries that can result from the body armour deforming from a rifle round strike, trauma plates, not to be confused with the ballistically protective ceramic plates, are sometimes worn under/ are part of the body armour,
External Quote:
Trauma plates, also called trauma pads, are inserts or pads which are placed behind ballistic armour plates/panels and serve to reduce the blunt force trauma absorbed by the body; they do not necessarily have any ballistic protective properties. While an armour system (hard or soft) may stop a projectile from penetrating, the projectile may still cause significant indentation and deformation of the armour...
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletproof_vest#Trauma_plates
I haven't watched footage of the moment of Charlie Kirk's murder and have no wish to do so.
But if he were wearing body armour capable of
deflecting a rifle round (even though body armour is not usually designed to do this) it would be substantial, and Kirk would have to be wearing an oversized shirt and jacket to conceal it.
The PASGT armour worn by US troops in the Gulf War (1990-1991) was not protective against rifle rounds (and wasn't intended to be), nor were the "flak jackets" worn by US soldiers and marines in Vietnam; the Springfield 30-06 round that killed Kirk is considerably more powerful than the 7.62 x 39mm rounds that were the standard rifle ammunition of US forces' opponents in those conflicts.
Contemporary American troops are issued with the Improved Outer Tactical Vest, which provides significant protection against rifle rounds. But it is, of necessity, a bulky item.
Were Kirk wearing a lower profile armour to protect against e.g. pistol rounds, it is likely a
fully powered cartridge (such as Springfield 30-06) would defeat it, not ricochet off. For the reasons above, I think it's unlikely he was wearing body armour designed to counter rifle fire.
I guess we can't rule out some unlikely set of circumstances where the assailant's bullet ricocheted off some type of body armour- maybe a chance underpowered round (although this would impair accuracy) and/ or the wearing of a non-LEA/ military spec. protective item of suboptimal design that allowed a ricochet.
External Quote:
Bullets don't bounce off body armor, of course. For one thing, that would be extremely dangerous as the bullet could ricochet off the vest and hit innocent bystanders. The vest itself would also be extremely heavy and cumbersome and therefore impractical for everyday use. Instead, today's armor catches the projectile inside a tight weave of synthetic yarn known as para-aramid thread...
"Body Armor Protection Levels", Propper (US military clothing etc. supplier) website, 20 June 2016
https://www.propper.com/blog/selecting-armor
