Where Did The Bullets Go, And What Did They Do?

[Z.W. Wolf]

I'm presenting some material that first appeared in the thread "Trump Shot at Rally" and some new material. The purpose here is to present it all in one focused thread.

Thomas Crooks fired two bursts of shots. One burst of 3 shots. A Pause. And a second burst of perhaps 5 shots.

A matter of controversy: Crooks may have fired one last isolated shot. I don't know enough about it to say. There is one last isolated shot, but I don't know where it came from. I'm not addressing that in this thread. PLEASE DO NOT ADDRESS THAT ISSUE IN THIS THREAD-START A NEW THREAD INSTEAD


I'm presenting this video as auditory evidence for the number of shots. The paths of the bullets as represented in this video are debatable. That's what I'm going to look at.


The first three bullets: There's solid evidence that one of the bullets hit victim David Dutch. Perhaps the first shot of this series, and the first overall.

David Dutch - As he appeared at the rally. Wearing an American flag shirt and this hat.

Victim James Copenhaven may have been hit by a shot fired during the first series or the second series. It's ambiguous so far.

James Copenhaver - Photo not taken on the day of the rally.

Copenhaver was wearing black pants, white shirt, and a camouflage boonie hat.

A boom truck - a type of forklift - was hit. Here we see a spray of hydraulic fluid.

These victims and this truck were in the right grandstand area. (To Trump's left.)


Nothing in this diagram is in proper scale. This is just a schematic to give a rough idea of the area we're talking about.

Yellow Arrow - Boom truck
Orange Arrow - David Dutch
Purple Arrow - James Copenhaver

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

This is the upper right hand corner of the right grandstand. (The grandstand to Trump's left.) I marked a puff of debris in green which shows where a bullet has hit the railing.

This is a still frame from this NYT video:
Source:

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000009576871/trump-shooting-assassination-attempt.html?smid=url-share


From the narration of that NYT

Video analysis shows the first bullet hitting the bleachers to the right of the stage.

Note: The NYT does not identify this as the same bullet that hit David Dutch. I think it was.

This is a still frame from the same NYT video, just a moment later:
Orange Arrow - David Dutch
Purple Arrow - James Copenhaver

David Dutch can be seen reacting to the shot that hit him in the abdomen. An early report said that he was shot twice. Once in the stomach, and once in the liver. I think this was a garbled report.

This is what I think happened: One bullet hit both organs, passed through his body and hit the railing. This is the first shot in the first series of 3 shots, and the first overall.

It may turn out that all 3 in the series of first shots hit in this area. There are a lot of permutations. Maybe Dutch was hit twice and the railing once. Don't know yet.


Still frames from the video in this story:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-shows-trump-supporters-helping-221020602.html

Purple Arrow - James Copenhaver lying prone.
Orange Arrow - Approximate position of Dutch, sitting.

Lifting Copenhaver - White shirt, black pants. The boonie hat is gone.

David Dutch - Orange Arrow
Just starting to get up; top of hat just visible.

Dutch being led down grandstand stairs.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

In these frames from the NYT video, Copenhaver spins to his right. But has he been hit or is he reacting to the sound of the first shot(s)?

This video shows a wide view of the scene. If you look carefully, you can see both Dutch and Copenhaver in the upper right hand area of the right grandstand.

Source: https://x.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1814300342365859983


These are frames from this video:

Orange Arrow: Dutch reacting to being hit at 0:08 in the video
Purple Arrow: Copenhaver still standing

Copenhaver hanging on to the top railing of the grandstand with two hands at 0:15 in the video.

If you watch the video, it's ambiguous when Copenhaver is hit. We see him stagger and he grabs the top railing. But is this a fall? He's over 70 and perhaps when he reacted, he fell.

Or has he been hit in the first series of three shots? I can't tell.

He hangs onto the railing for several seconds and eventually falls.

The first series of shots starts at: 0:07

The third shot is heard at 0:09
Copenhaver is seen falling - or ducking? - at about the same time.
He has both hands on the top railing of the grandstand.

The second series of 5 quick shots starts at: 0:11
Copenhaver jerks his left shoulder down at about the same time.

Copenhaver's left hand lets go of the railing at 0:17
He is hanging by his right hand only.

Copenhaver lets go of the railing completely at 0:21
He falls.

The last, single shot, is heard at: 0:22

My opinion: We are hearing the individual shots in this video as a crack-boom, crack-boom. The crack is the bullet and the boom is the muzzle blast of the rifle.

There is a slight lag between the actions we see in the grandstand area and the time when the mic records the sound of the bullet cracks. But only a slight lag. If anyone wants to calculate that...



In this short video segment we see the right corner of the right grandstand. Hydraulic fluid is already spraying from the boom truck. Copenhaver is hanging from the rail. And we hear the one, last shot. That means the second series of 5 shots has already ended.

Last single shot heard at 4:58 in the video. I don't hear any other shots in this short segment. I can't find the raw footage. Can we find it?


Still frame from the video:
Purple Arrow: Copenhaver hanging on to railing with one hand.

Questions about the boom truck:
Was this a leak due to a hit to a flexible plastic hose or to the tube of the cylinder? Important because the .223 Remington round is not a high power round. It's an intermediate power round. It may or may not be legal to hunt deer with .223 and it's generally not recommended... because it's too low power.

Preliminary info from a YT comment: Independent heavy equipment mechanic here, who has worked on many of those JCB telehandlers. A common safety feature on those machines is a "holding valve" on that telescope cylinder to prevent a catastrophic collapse in the event that a hose breaks. This makes it more likely than not that the bullet actually punched a hole through the heavy steel tube of the cylinder itself. First time I've ever seen one collapse like that. I'm guessing that the wall thickness of that cylinder would be approximately 3/16" inch or 4.7 mm. Can one of those rounds punch through mild steel of that thickness?

My tentative opinion: Possible. Depends on the type of ammo. But very unlikely for any type of .223 bullet to pass through something first and still puncture this thickness of metal. If this is a hit to the cylinder, it would be a clean hit.

 

[Scaramanga]

Yellow Arrow - Boom truck
Orange Arrow - David Dutch
Purple Arrow - James Copenhaver

This 3D model ( scroll up or down to alter the perspective ) shows the various angles very well....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-17/trump-shooting-3d-model-of-showground-rally-site/104104418

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

The third victim was Corey Comperatore

This is a schematic showing his approximate position.

On the day of the rally, he was wearing faded blue jeans, a dark shirt or sweatshirt with some kind of emblem, and a light colored cap. (I could prove that, but I'm not going to show screen captures, even hidden in a spoiler. If you want to prove it to yourself, look at the YT video on page 4 of the "Trump Shot at Rally" thread.)


I'm not sure about this, but I think he's here, holding a poster in front of his face.

At about 0:08 in the video, he starts lowering the poster.
The first series of shots starts at: 0:07

By 0:10 you can see his dark shirt and light cap above the poster.

The second series of 5 quick shots starts at: 0:11

My best guess is that he's hit at 0:11 in the video.

I don't feel great about finding this.

 

[Landru]

There is an entity that is conducting an on the ground investigation. The FBI. Their facilities might be better than yours. Why don't we wait and see what they have to say.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

It's time to critique some other reconstructions out there.

This one for example, has misidentified another spectator as Comperatore.

I gave this spectator a look myself.

What he's got going for him:
-He's conspicuous. Standing silhouetted against the trees, all alone.
-When we hear the first shot at 0:08, this guy really hits the deck fast and hard.

But...
-Comperatore wasn't standing alone. He was, famously, next to his family members.
-Wrong clothes - He's wearing white. Comperatore was wearing a dark shirt or sweatshirt.
-He's in the wrong area. This doesn't jibe at all with the visual evidence in another video.
-You see him alive later. Here he is.

Mike Bell has been very open and honest in acknowledging that he had Copenhaver and Dutch in the wrong area and that he misidentified Copenhaver. It was an early effort.

Source: https://youtu.be/LI9uxEBlhUI?si=uaHo1YMr_ofWiI4i&t=334

I've invited him to join us in this thread, and he has expressed interest. YT deleted the link I sent him though... and his YT email address doesn't work either. Thanks, YouTube.


As I promised in post 1, I'll look at the two Azget Industries videos, soon.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

This 3D model ( scroll up or down to alter the perspective ) shows the various angles very well....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-17/trump-shooting-3d-model-of-showground-rally-site/104104418

Thanks.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

A longer version of the video shows Corey Comperatore standing. I did not put the yellow circle in this screen shot. It's a part of the original video.

 

[Greene]

Questions about the boom truck:
Was this a leak due to a hit to a flexible plastic hose or to the tube of the cylinder? Important because the .223 Remington round is not a high power round. It's an intermediate power round. It may or may not be legal to hunt deer with .223 and it's generally not recommended... because it's too low power.

Preliminary info from a YT comment: Independent heavy equipment mechanic here, who has worked on many of those JCB telehandlers. A common safety feature on those machines is a "holding valve" on that telescope cylinder to prevent a catastrophic collapse in the event that a hose breaks. This makes it more likely than not that the bullet actually punched a hole through the heavy steel tube of the cylinder itself. First time I've ever seen one collapse like that. I'm guessing that the wall thickness of that cylinder would be approximately 3/16" inch or 4.7 mm. Can one of those rounds punch through mild steel of that thickness?

My tentative opinion: Possible. Depends on the type of ammo. But very unlikely for any type of .223 bullet to pass through something first and still puncture this thickness of metal. If this is a hit to the cylinder, it would be a clean hit.

Depending on the exact round used, yes 5.56 is quite capable of that level of penetration.

One of the requirements for the 62gr SS109/M855 round was the penetration of 3mm of steel (ie a helmet) at 600m.

When the M855A1 round was adopted the Army included the following chart in the PowerPoint presentation:

source = https://www.army.mil/article/48657/evolution_of_the_m855a1_enhanced_performance_round

I'm listing M855 because it's readily available due to its long standardization within the US military.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

We have to cautious. There's a difference between .223 Remington and military ammunition. Civilian AR-15 platform rifles typically have different rifling twist rates compared to military rifles. Using full metal jacket (FMJ) military ammunition in a civilian AR-15 can result in suboptimal performance due to these differences in rifling specifications.

 

[Ann K]

News of the day, which might make your trajectory calculations questionable:

FBI Director Christopher Wray revealed during a marathon testimony on Wednesday that investigators still do not know if former President Donald Trump was grazed by a bullet or a piece of shrapnel during his attempted assassination.

Twice during the hours-long session, Wray told lawmakers that the FBI was still working to determine what exactly struck the former president on his right ear during a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. "My understanding is that either it [a bullet] or some shrapnel is what grazed his ear," Wray told Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-CA).

Later during the hearing, Committee Chair Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) asked Wray if investigators knew where all eight bullets fired by Thomas Crooksended up after the shooting.

"There is some question about whether or not it was a bullet or shrapnel that hit his ear, so it is conceivable, as I sit here right now, I don't know whether that bullet, in addition to causing the grazing, could have also landed somewhere else," Wray testified.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-i...rump-was-struck-by-a-bullet?ref=home?ref=home

The "Trump's a hero because a bullet hit him" contingent is furious about the supposition that their narrative may be incorrect.

Donald Trump Jr, along with other MAGA influencers, ripped into Newsweek on Thursday over an article covering FBI Director Christopher Wray'sWednesday testimony on Capitol Hill. Wray testified before the House that he did not know yet conclusively whether or not Donald Trump's ear was grazed by a bullet or shrapnel during the assassination attempt on the former president earlier in the month.

Trump Jr shared a screenshot of Newsweek's initial framing and wrote, "This is really covering some ground, but @Newsweek might be the most embarrassing "news organization" in the entire country. They constantly publish BS, but this is next level Trump derangement. They should be ashamed of themselves!!!"

Controversial MAGA influencer Charlie Kirk also slammed the original headline and article

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/s...ors-comments-on-dads-attempted-assassination/

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

I'm aware of Wray's remarks. If Trump was hit with bullet fragments, it must mean that a bullet hit something to his right first. If and when the FBI locates that hit, we'll include that in this thread.

It would have to be the first or second shot.

 

[M Bornong]

There is an entity that is conducting an on the ground investigation. The FBI. Their facilities might be better than yours. Why don't we wait and see what they have to say.

I'm not really seeing any of these threads as a debunk, or helpful, more they add unverified bunk.

 

[FatPhil]

I'm aware of Wray's remarks. If Trump was hit with bullet fragments, it must mean that a bullet hit something to his right first. If and when the FBI locates that hit, we'll include that in this thread.

It would have to be the first or second shot.

We'd also hear the sound of such a fragmentation in one of the recordings. The crowd near whatever was hit would also have reacted to that hit, and they'd have mentioned it in corroborated statements. The hypothesis also requires remarkably low deviation from the bullet's original path, which would be highly unlikely if the collision was strong enough to rip something solid apart. This hypothesis has too many dependencies, for which there's no evidence, it falls to Hitchens' Razor.

 

[Dan Burt]

Found this on Facebook. No idea if it's accurate as far as which shot...etc. But just using it to see how close Trump came to getting hit with a head shot is crazy.

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/oa7Ljq86jZihy8eP/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v

Can't figure out how to link it and have video play without clicking the link.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

It's time to talk about the first Conspiracy Claim that can be debunked using this database.

The Impossible Trajectory Claim

In general the claim is: Objects were hit which Thomas Crooks could not have hit from his position. This claim is based on not having a clear idea of the layout of the area... yet definite statements are made. This claim is not well formalized, but is very common.

With the available public data, I think we can safely say that all permutations of the impossible trajectory claim are disproven. This is with the caveat that people making the claim right now are making judgements based on false info, so they have no basis on which to make this claim. If reliable publicly available data comes to light that proves that objects were hit that were not in the line of sight of Crooks, then the issue can be re-opened.

All objects that we know were hit: The three spectator victims, Trump, the grandstand railing, the boom truck. When properly placed, they all fit into this line of sight.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

The second issue: Using this data, can anyone prove what motive Crooks had?
I say no.


So far: Ambiguous.

Conclusion: Any claim intended to prove a motive, using this physical evidence, is invalid.
Please see this thread for a discussion:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ca...-prove-the-shooters-motive.13579/#post-320224

 

[Ann K]

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.

There have been multiple reports of explosives in his car, and a transmitter found beside his body. Bullets aside, it's hard not to read that as an intent to cause mass casualties. I don't know how accomplished he was as a marksman, but given the crowd of people in the stands it is not at all surprising that he hit people, whether or not they were intentional targets. He may not even have known that Trump's injury was minor, but just that he saw him drop.

Explosive devices were found inside the car of the gunman who attempted to assassinate former President Donald Trump during his Saturday rally in Pennsylvania, according to a report.

The car, driven by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, was found not far from the Trump rally in Butler, Pa., sources close to the investigation into the shooting told The Wall Street Journal.

https://nypost.com/2024/07/14/us-ne...failed-assassination-attempt-at-rally-report/

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

I just moved all discussion of this issue to a new thread. Sorry for the lag.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ca...-prove-the-shooters-motive.13579/#post-320224

 

[Greene]

We have to cautious. There's a difference between .223 Remington and military ammunition. Civilian AR-15 platform rifles typically have different rifling twist rates compared to military rifles. Using full metal jacket (FMJ) military ammunition in a civilian AR-15 can result in suboptimal performance due to these differences in rifling specifications.

The differences between .223 & 5.56 are minimal.

They are dimensionally the same. The short version is that 5.56 produces higher chamber pressures (which result in higher velocities).

While some (very few) early .223 rifles may be unsafe to use with 5.56, all .223 rounds can be safely fired in a rifle designed for 5.56. Almost all AR platform rifles were designed for 5.56 (it was the original spec after all). ARs with .223 chambers are rare.

Twist rates are tied to the bullet weight rather than construction.

The original M-16a1 had a 1-12 twist. The issue round at the time was the 55gr M193.

With the move to the heavier 62gr M855 the twist rate was changed to 1-7 (that rate was actually chosen because of the slightly heavier M856 tracer round).

The most common twist rates you will find on modern commercial ARs are 1-8 or 1-9.

The two most popular bullet weights are 55gr & 62gr because the M193 & M855 are cheap and easily available.

I specifically used M855 as an example because of it's popularity. M193 is also extremely popular and at shorter ranges penetrates similarly (and sometimes better than) to M855 as velocity is an important factor in penetration.

My example choice was intentional due to the common usage of the round and because it's easier to find verified data of penetration specs.

I'm not ruling out the possibility that Crooks bought 77gr SMKs or something similar but until that info becomes available I'm erring on the side of commonality.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Mendel]

I'm hoping the FBI crime scene team finds all 8 bullets. That can give us more clarification on the fragmentation issue, too.

I think fragmentation in flight is a very outside possibility, with no evidence for it, but because the FBI is awaiting more evidence (i.e. the actual bullet), they're not ruling it out yet.

 

[Gary C]

Q. Isn't it entirely possible that one or more fragments impacted the spectator's clothing and accessories? Wouldn't that be unrecoverable at this point? My wife has several large bags that could absorb a fragment and she might not find it for years.

 

[Ann K]

Q. Isn't it entirely possible that one or more fragments impacted the spectator's clothing and accessories? Wouldn't that be unrecoverable at this point? My wife has several large bags that could absorb a fragment and she might not find it for years.

Another possibility that occurs to me is that a shot might be taken by someone as a memento.

The site was the location of a farm show, which suggests it has been heavily used in the past. I'd expect a thorough metal-detector sweep of the area might turn up a great many things, possibly including spent ammunition or fragments from the past.

 

[Mendel]

Another possibility that occurs to me is that a shot might be taken by someone as a memento.

Crooks took a shot.
Trump took a bullet.
A souvenir hunter might have picked up a bullet.

The site was the location of a farm show, which suggests it has been heavily used in the past. I'd expect a thorough metal-detector sweep of the area might turn up a great many things, possibly including spent ammunition or fragments from the past.

Yes. And then ballistics would match those bullets to Crooks' gun , or not.
Each gun barrel leaves characteristic striations on the bullet. If the ballistics lab has the gun, they fire some test shots, and, using those test bullets for comparison, can then recognize bullets that were fired from that gun.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Wow, I just found out that this video segment was taken by James Copenhaver.


It could be useful in assessing the layout of things.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

I've been holding this back for a few days. A few recent articles have reported that Copenhaver was "shot twice." That was too ambiguous. What if one bullet caused two wounds? And where were these wounds?

This video is more specific and cautious.

He [Copenhaver] told his attorney that the assassination attempt was sad. His wounds were an unnecessary tragedy, and it shows the country's political division. He has wounds on his arm and abdomen.

I think it's very likely that one bullet caused both of these wounds. If that's true, this clarifies the sequence of events. It would mean that Copenhaver was most likely hit with one of the bullets in the first burst of 3 shots.

That would constrain things because we've now accounted for two rounds in that first burst. So what hit the boom truck? And when?


These are two sequential frames. In the first frame we see a puff of debris from a bullet fragmenting. I believe this bullet hit Dutch and passed through. In the second frame we see Dutch reacting.

In the second frame we see Copenhaver spinning to his right. I've asked the question about whether Copenhaver was reacting to the sound of the first shot(s) or whether he was reacting to being hit. In light of this news about his arm wound, I think I can say that he's lifting his left arm because he's been hit in the left arm. This bullet traveled on and hit Copenhaver in the abdomen.

This is the sequence I previously outlined:

The first series of shots starts at: 0:07

The third shot is heard at 0:09
Copenhaver is seen falling - or ducking? - at about the same time.
He has both hands on the top railing of the grandstand.

The second series of 5 quick shots starts at: 0:11
Copenhaver jerks his left shoulder down at about the same time.

Copenhaver's left hand lets go of the railing at 0:17
He is hanging by his right hand only.

Copenhaver lets go of the railing completely at 0:21
He falls.

The last, single shot, is heard at: 0:22


If Copenhaver were wounded in the left arm during the first burst, this could explain why he lets go of the railing with his left arm, while holding on with his right arm.


This is a likely scenario, but it remains that Copenhaver could have been wounded by two different bullets.