CITIZEN FORENSICS on the RISE: Here, There and Everywhere---Where Are the Shooting Victims? Forensic Placement Plus Audio Analysis is Essential

This is what happens when government fails to protect---or perhaps worse, conspire to perpetrate.

The question of the placement of victims and, thus, shooters is critical.

The combined use of physical evidence (counting bullets, shells, blood, etc.) and audio analysis, as stressed in the previous article, will determine the conclusion.

Analysis of the audio cannot be ignored

George Webb is placing the shooting victim named Dutch at a different location than did Ryan Dawson, ArnGrimR and the producers of a video depicting bullet trajectories.

Here are some various hypotheses differing regarding the placement of Mr. Dutch at the moment of wounding:

Hypothesis by George Webb Multiple shooters.

Hypothesis by Ryan Dawson One shooter.

Hypothesis by ArnGrimR One shooter.

Hypothesis (video reconstruction) by use of AzGet software One shooter assumed in video.

Other speculations—e.g., the dripping of blood on the President’s face—involve too much uncertainty and are (in my opinion) at this point a distraction. I am familiar with real blood and its spatters (ER work, research on blood at a medical school, a few years ago investigating "magnetic vaccinations" wherein I also used cow’s blood for a subset of experiments). Joe's hypothesis of the implausibility of the particular pattern of the trail of blood across the face is completely unfounded and without probative merit. This will be a distraction. Again and again, physical forensics (shell, casings, position of the victims--especially Mr. Dutch)--along with the very critical, ballistic-audio analysis will fix whether there were one or more shooters, the latter case ipso facto indicating conspiracy.

The question of Mr. Crook's line of sight also must be resolved also.

John Leo Keenan: Mr. Crook as Patsy

Indeed, this is looking like a conspiracy. The conspirators do not need to control all events. I suspect that the "fun" they have is engaging in dynamic, adaptive, "on-the-fly" script writing of world events according to their self-serving, evolving narratives of micro events to accomplish their schemes of a grander sort.

The larger importance of the ongoing event that is likely to be called “J13” here on out, is that citizen forensics is coming to the fore. This really began in full force with the probings from non-governmental investigators into the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963. Each following event, the killings of Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, the attempted skinking of the USS Liberty by Israel, the Ruby Ridge incident, the Waco, Texas-Branch Davidian massacre, the Okalhoma City Bombing, 9/11 and the Building 7 “tell,” Sandy Hook, the Boston Marathon, the Las Vegas Massacre and many intervening events that garnered public attention and significantly impacted public sentiment and policy, have fostered the rise of the semi- and fully-independent media and—very importantly—citizen forensics and historical and journalistic analysis. These latter consequences have been overall very good developments.

For citizen forensics to continue to develop, investigators are going to need better on-the-ground investigations. Of course, policing agencies must have primary control of the acquisition of physical evidence and law enforcement. But citizen forensics can develop in parallel, and all should desire this, if the collection of physical evidence that is not immediately or easily available to the public can be better made transparent. Citizen forensic investigators, along with historians and both independent and trade journalists, can and must provide the overarching and long-view analysis that police bureaus cannot—and in many cases should not—be engaged in.

A few helpul tips for citizen forensic investigators is to remember to (1) employ the method of maintaining multiple-working hypotheses; (2) combating one’s own ego attachment to hypotheses; (3) learning to admit one’s errors publicly and quickly when the facts insist; (4) working comfortably with both reductionist and anti-reductionist thinking; (5) pursuing ever-refining techniques of pattern detection; (6) quickly identifying erroneous, hidden assumptions among the necessary assumptions; (7) networking and collaborating; and (8) keep your day-time job for as long as possible.