Mods, if this is too offtopic, or potentially too incendiary a topic, I understand, I just do not know where else to post this.
Further, I fully agree with the sidebar rule here, let us please keep this civil and keep politics out of this to the greatest extent possible.
DISCLAIMER: Please, everyone and anyone, do not consider any of this discussion to be 100% confirmed fact, this is meant for reasoned consideration, not wild speculation nor justifying motivated reasoning of any kind or flavor.
Further: I do not endorse any political views of this guy, but I think his ballistic analysis is worth consideration.
Please at least watch this linked ~20 minute video.
The guy claims to be either a current or former USMC Scout Sniper, and while I cannot confirm this beyond a reasonable doubt... I also do not really have any reason to doubt that he is.
There is also a longer 2 1/2 hour livestream where this guy presumably goes into more detail, which he has linked on his YT vid page.
Essentially, the guy goes through 4 different camera angles.
He explains that the movement of Kirk's shirt is almost certainly not a result of any kind of body armor as is widely being speculated; instead, it is from how Kirk's lapel mic and earpiece and the wire for such were affixed to him.
He shows that the earpiece actually was captured flying off of Kirk's right ear, and that this is what caused the movement of Kirk's shirt.
But also... he believes that the shot did not come from from straight on.
He believes that the shot came from Kirk's right, and he believes that the wound which....featured the 'geyser' of blood coming out of Kirk's neck... he believes this was an exit wound, not an entry wound.
He believes that the entry would was somewhere on the right side of roughly Kirk's jaw, to behind or around his right ear, that the round traversed through Kirk from his right, to his left, and that it likely functionally killed him instantly either by obliteration of the lower brain, or severing of the spinal cord.
He also believes he may have captured a reflection of a muzzle flash, as well as potentially the muzzle flash itself... indicating a shooting position from Kirk's right... and that the currently most popular and widely accepted (?) idea that the shot came from 150 - 200 yards/meters away, basically from nearly directly in front of Kirk... cannot be the case.
Finally, be believes that the caliber used was not 30.06, that the visible wound is simply too small to indicate a 30.06, that it is more likely a lower caliber round.
At least this is inline with ... what I have been able to gather / opinionate based on the published image of what is supposed to be the weapon used in the incident.
Long story short, I think it is more likely that the rifle is not 'an older Mauser in 30.06' as officially described, but instead, more likely to be either a Remington 700 or Ruger American, a model from roughly the 80s - 90s - 00s, and that it is likely to be in caliber .270 or .243.
Hopefully I have linked this correctly, here is the start of a comment chain from myself, in another thread, a few days back, when I attempted to analyze the presented image of the weapon being claimed to be the weapon.
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/21325405
If you would, please discuss in the most objective manner you are capable of.
It doesn't matter if he's right or wrong. Making the assertion means he's an idiot.
You are way too invested in this bullshit. Go touch some grass.
well, see, i think the actual forensics of this case matter.i guess if you're not invested in the truth that's not really something you're worried about. does make you look fuckin pig ignorant to say both "im not watching the video" and also "all the claims in the video are false" though.
as far as your assertion that he is an idiot; that which is asserted without evidence or argument may be safely dismissed without evidence or argument. seeing as how you argue from mere denial while tacitly admitting not to have reviewed the evidence or their argument, you reveal yourself to be that which you accuse others of. you reveal yourself to be a hypocrite who didn't read the op and is projecting the inadequacies of their own position onto those with whom you disagree.
now fuck off mortuary assistant, and don't come back until you've gone to work and looked up entry and exit gunshot wounds in a professional reference and compared them to the video that you actually watched.
... though I find your username ridiculous, lol, I very much appreciate that you as well are trying to approach this rationally, as you say, as a forensic analysis of a crime scene.
the reason i feel compelled to at least attempt my own analysis is that... well, a conspiracy theorist podcaster is currently in charge of the FBI, has purged many of its most experienced investigators and leadership... and certainly seems to be stonewalling everything to do with Epstein, if not outright destroying or manipulating evidence.