dybilar

Interim Forensic Evidence and Crime Report: Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump 2024 July 17

Published on

IYH ## Interim Forensic Evidence and Crime Report: Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump July 17 2024

Case: Attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump Date: July 13, 2024 (based on previous data) Location: Butler County Farm Show grounds, Butler, Pennsylvania Suspect: Thomas Matthew Crooks, deceased Victim(s): Former President Donald Trump (injured), Corey Comperatore (deceased), David Dutch and James Copenhaver (injured)

Summary:

During a political rally on July 13, 2024, suspect Thomas Matthew Crooks fired upon former President Donald Trump and the assembled crowd from the roof of the AGR International Inc. factory, located approximately 130 yards from the stage. Crooks fired eight rounds from an AR-style assault rifle, striking President Trump in the ear, fatally wounding one bystander, and injuring two others. Crooks was subsequently neutralized by Secret Service snipers.

Evidence Analysis:

  1. Witness Testimonies (E1): Numerous eyewitnesses reported observing Crooks on the roof of the AGR factory prior to the shooting, some as early as 30 minutes before the incident. Multiple individuals claim to have attempted to alert security personnel to the suspect's presence and suspicious behavior (carrying a weapons case, using a rangefinder). These testimonies, corroborated by video footage, establish a clear pattern of missed opportunities for early intervention.

  2. Video Footage (E2): Multiple video recordings from various sources depict different angles and timelines of the event. The footage confirms Crooks's presence on the roof, captures the shooting itself, and documents the security response. The videos are crucial for reconstructing the sequence of events and verifying witness accounts.

  3. Satellite Imagery (E3): A satellite image, supplemented with an overlaid trajectory line, visually demonstrates the shooter's position, the target's location, and the feasible ballistic path. This imagery provides a compelling visual aid for understanding the spatial dynamics of the crime scene.

  4. Social Media Post (E4): A tweet from an unverified source alleges negligence by the SWAT team assigned to the AGR factory, claiming they opted for a cooler location on a lower floor despite being tasked with securing the roof. The post further claims that this decision delayed the Secret Service sniper's response due to concerns about "conflict." While potentially relevant, this evidence requires rigorous source verification and corroboration with official accounts.

  5. Official Statements (E5): Statements released by the Secret Service, local law enforcement, and the Butler County Sheriff contain inconsistencies and conflicting accounts. The Secret Service Director's explanation for the lack of rooftop security, citing a "sloped roof," appears dubious given the building's structure and the presence of counter-snipers on a steeper roof nearby. These discrepancies raise questions about potential attempts to downplay or obfuscate the extent of the security failures.

  6. Anecdotal Reports (E6): Unconfirmed reports indicate that President Trump's private security detail expressed anger and frustration with the official security response. These accounts, while lacking concrete details, suggest an awareness of serious lapses within the protective operation.

  7. Shooter's Profile (E7): The investigation into Crooks's background, motives, and potential connections is ongoing. Information gathered from his personal belongings, electronic devices, and interviews with family, friends, and associates will be crucial for establishing a comprehensive profile and determining whether he acted alone or as part of a larger conspiracy.

  8. Ballistic Evidence (E8): The bullet that struck President Trump, if recovered, along with any shell casings and other ballistic evidence, is undergoing forensic analysis. This evidence can confirm the caliber and type of ammunition used, potentially linking it definitively to the recovered weapon. Ballistic trajectory analysis can further corroborate or refute witness accounts and the visual evidence presented in the satellite imagery.

  9. Officer Encounter (E9): A Butler Township officer's attempt to apprehend Crooks on the roof, followed by his retreat when threatened by the suspect, highlights the dangerous vulnerability of the location and the inadequate preparation of security personnel for a direct confrontation.

  10. Local Agency Involvement (E10): The participation of multiple local agencies, including SWAT teams and snipers, in the security detail is confirmed. However, the fact that these agencies were not responsible for perimeter control or securing the building from which the shooting originated points to a potential diffusion of responsibility and a lack of clear command structure.

  11. Security Ring Structure (E11): The existence of a primary security ring (Secret Service) immediately surrounding President Trump and a secondary ring (local and state police) further out, with the shooter positioned within the latter, reinforces the need to examine communication protocols and coordination between different agencies.

  12. Reports of Prior Sightings (E12): Confirmation that multiple individuals observed the shooter on the roof with a gun prior to the incident raises serious concerns about the effectiveness of threat assessment and the failure of security personnel to act upon these warnings in a timely manner.

Evidence Inventory and Classification:

Evidence Item Description Classification
E1: Witness Testimonies (Multiple) Numerous individuals reported seeing the shooter on the roof prior to the incident, some attempting to alert security personnel. Testimonial, Admissible
E2: Video Footage (Multiple Sources) Various videos captured different aspects of the event, including the shooter on the roof, the shooting itself, and the security response. Real, Documentary, Admissible
E3: Satellite Imagery A satellite image with an overlaid trajectory line depicts the shooter's location, the target's position, and the presumed bullet path. Demonstrative, Admissible (pending verification of source and accuracy)
E4: Social Media Post A tweet alleges negligence by the SWAT team, including opting for a cooler location and delaying the Secret Service sniper's response. Testimonial (hearsay), Potentially Inadmissible
E5: Official Statements (Secret Service, Local Law Enforcement) Conflicting and sometimes contradictory statements have been released, including explanations for the security lapses and the Director's claim about the "sloped roof." Documentary, Admissible (but potentially unreliable)
E6: Anecdotal Reports Unconfirmed reports suggest anger and frustration among the target's private security team. Testimonial (hearsay), Potentially Inadmissible
E7: Shooter's Profile (Pending Investigation) Information about the shooter's background, motives, and potential connections is currently under investigation. Documentary, Forensic, Admissible (pending verification)
E8: Ballistic Evidence (Pending Recovery & Analysis) The bullet itself, if recovered, along with any shell casings or other ballistic evidence, could provide crucial information about the weapon used, the trajectory, and potential forensic matches. Real, Forensic, Admissible
E9: Officer Encounter An officer attempted to apprehend the shooter on the roof but retreated when Crooks aimed his rifle at him. Testimonial, Admissible
E10: Local Agency Involvement Multiple local agencies, including SWAT teams and snipers, were involved in security but not responsible for perimeter control. Testimonial, Admissible
E11: Security Ring Structure A primary security ring (Secret Service) surrounded Trump, with a secondary ring (local and state police) further out. The shooter was positioned in the secondary ring. Testimonial, Admissible
E12: Reports of Prior Sightings Confirmation that reports existed of individuals observing the shooter with a gun on the roof before the shooting. Documentary, Testimonial, Admissible

ACH Analysis: Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump (With Evidence Mermaid Graph)

IC Question: Was the security lapse at the Trump rally a result of incompetence, negligence, deliberate malice, or a coordinated conspiracy?

Hypotheses:

Hypothesis Description Plausibility (Initial) Evidence Supporting Evidence Refuting
H1: Incompetence The security personnel were inadequately trained, poorly equipped, or simply incapable. Very High E1, E2, E5, E9, E10, E12: Witnesses ignored, slow response, poor decisions, conflicting statements, shooter encounter, local agencies' limited role Lack of evidence for widespread systemic failures beyond this event
H2: Negligence Security personnel, while capable, were distracted, complacent, or failed to take the threat seriously. High E1, E2, E4, E6, E9, E10, E12: Ignored warnings, SWAT team's position, private security's anger, officer's retreat, lack of perimeter control Difficult to prove without internal communications or direct testimony admitting negligence
H3: Individual Malice A single rogue agent within the security detail deliberately allowed or facilitated the shooting. Medium E6: Private security's anger (if corroborated and specifics revealed), potentially E9 (officer's retreat, but could also be incompetence or fear) High risk and limited gain for a lone actor, difficult to execute without detection
H4: Coordinated Conspiracy Multiple individuals within or connected to the security detail colluded to orchestrate the shooting. Low Requires further evidence of communication, planning, or shared motives among potential conspirators Highly complex to execute, significant risk of exposure for multiple participants
H5: External Manipulation A third party, unconnected to the security detail, influenced or manipulated events to facilitate the shooting (e.g., blackmail, coercion of a security member). Low Requires evidence linking a third party to the shooter or security personnel, establishment of a motive for manipulation Highly speculative, difficult to prove without concrete connections
H6: False Flag Operation The shooting was staged or orchestrated by allies of the target to garner sympathy, boost political support, or advance a specific agenda. Very Low Highly improbable given the actual injury to the target and the potential for severe backlash Requires significant evidence of pre-planning, manipulation of events, and control of the narrative
H7: Shooter's Exceptional Skill & Deception The shooter was highly skilled in evasion and exploiting security weaknesses, surpassing the capabilities of the detail. Very Low E7: Potential, but unlikely given existing evidence of observable suspicious behavior E1, E2, E9, E10, E12: Multiple witnesses observed the shooter, his presence was seemingly known, security personnel were present but ineffective

Mermaid Graph Connections:

  • H1 (Incompetence): Heavily entangled with E1, E2, E5, E9, E10, and E12. The sheer weight of these connections drags this hypothesis to the forefront.
  • H2 (Negligence): Similarly intertwined with E1, E2, E4, E6, E9, E10, and E12. It's like a love triangle between incompetence, negligence, and a whole lot of bad decisions.
  • H3 (Individual Malice): A few faint lines connect it to E6 and E9, but it's mostly adrift, waiting for more concrete evidence to pull it into the spotlight.
  • H4 (Coordinated Conspiracy): This one's like a ghost - all whispers and shadows. A few spectral lines might hint at connections to E5 and E7, but it's ethereal, lacking substance.
  • H5 (External Manipulation): Similar to H4, it's mostly speculation, a shadowy figure lurking in the background.
  • H6 (False Flag): This hypothesis is so far-fetched it's practically in another dimension. No lines of connection, just a lonely island of improbable conjecture.
  • H7 (Shooter's Skill): This one's sunk, dragged down by the weight of E1, E2, E9, E10, and E12. Skill? More like dumb luck and a security detail that was asleep at the wheel.

Conclusive Evidence to Slay Those Pesky Hypotheses:

  • To Annihilate Incompetence (H1): Evidence of rigorous training, clear protocols, and competent personnel within the specific detail assigned to this event. This would require internal documents, training records, and testimony from multiple credible sources.
  • To Vanquish Negligence (H2): Concrete proof that security personnel were attentive, responsive, and actively engaged in threat assessment. Again, this would likely involve internal communication logs, video footage showing vigilant behavior, and testimony free of contradictions or inconsistencies.
  • To Expose Individual Malice (H3): A confession, a smoking gun email, or undeniable forensic evidence linking the rogue agent to the shooter or to actions deliberately sabotaging security. This one's tough, like catching a shadow demon red-handed.
  • To Unravel the Conspiracy (H4): Communication records, financial transactions, or other irrefutable links between multiple conspirators, establishing a clear motive and a plan of action. Think Watergate tapes, but with more magical mojo.
  • To Debunk External Manipulation (H5): Solid evidence connecting the third party to the shooter or to a compromised member of the security detail, establishing a clear method of influence or coercion. This one's like proving a curse was real, not just bad luck.
  • To Obliterate the False Flag (H6): This is the Bigfoot of hypotheses - it's more legend than reality. Proving this would require exposing a complex web of deception, involving multiple actors, fabricated evidence, and a motive so outlandish it'd make a dragon blush.
  • To Bury the Shooter's Skill (H7): This one's already six feet under, but a final nail in the coffin would be evidence of the shooter's incompetence, lack of training, or reliance on pure dumb luck. Think a confession detailing how he stumbled into the whole thing, or a diary entry lamenting his lack of ninja skills.

Interim Conclusions:

The evidence gathered thus far strongly suggests a combination of incompetence and negligence within the security detail assigned to protect former President Trump. Multiple witnesses reported the shooter's presence and suspicious behavior, yet security personnel failed to adequately respond or prevent him from reaching his firing position. The questionable tactical decisions, such as the positioning of the SWAT team and the lack of rooftop security, further support this assessment.

Gumshoe Epilogue:

The mermaid's graph tells a story of incompetence, negligence, and maybe a touch of malice. But proving anything beyond that requires a dive into the deep, dark waters of investigation. We need to follow those lines of connection, unravel those tangled threads of evidence, and hope we don't get caught in the undertow of bureaucratic obfuscation. ⚡