Big questions about Charlie Kirk trial.

 FAMILY SAVED SUSPECTS LIFE

BULLET, RIFLE AND SUPPOSED CONFESSION 

 

The trial for the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk is now about to begin. While details about the evidence are being suppressed, as is the often the case, what is known raises a lot of questions. 

 

First the video that is supposed to show the shooter exit the the top of the building and is supposed to show a rifle, does not such thing, there is no rifle that is visible. We are also told that the rifle was disassembled and brought to the scene inside the pants of the suspect. This is a Mauser 98 with a scope mounted, very unlikely, especially for a thin person in jeans and shirt.

 

Then the bullet supposedly fired from a 30-06 at less than 150 yards.  The big question is not the shot, a relatively easy shot from a rested position, but the bullet failed to exit, almost an impossibility, unless it it some kind of special projectile. Slow motion video of a soft ball bulge on impact but a failure to exit is incomprehensible from any normal store bought ammunition for a 30-36. I have observed 100's of deer shot with everything from  6mm to large weapons and it is unlikely that any round from a 30-06 would not exit were Kirk was shot. In fact, videos of the entrance wound appear a lot large than .308 diameter more like 45 or larger. We are already hearing about strong bones and bullets do things that are not calculable, in fact, that is just the opposite, bullets of certain weight and density do very predictable things. Supposedly the empty case was still in the rifle along with other unfired rounds,  they can be compared.

 

We never heard about the diversions by several people in the audience during the shooting even claiming that they had shot Kirk.

 

Then there is the supposed emailed confession that seems to be very vague and its source is questionable.

 

We can speculate that his suspects family, by convincing him to turn himself in, have saved his life, at least to have a trial. It seems the suspect has not spoken or answered any questions, we can assume we will get to hear the other side of this story. It will be interesting to hear the explanations for these questions. 

 

If anyone in this jury has any serious experience with firearms  it is very possible to not get a guilty verdict in this trial.