Law&Crime Sidebar - 7 Bizarre Details of Donald Trump’s Assassination Attempt

Episode Date: July 19, 2024

It’s been six days since a 20-year-old gunman attempted to assassinate Donald Trump during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. The nation was shocked when shots rang out and the former President was swarmed by Secret Service agents while grasping his ear. The shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, was taken out within seconds of the failed attempt. Critics have set their sights on Trump’s security, wondering why the rally wasn’t secure and how the shooter was able to fire off shots. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber takes a look at seven bizarre details surrounding the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:If you’ve ever been injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: www.forthepeople.com/YouTubeTakeoverHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger and Christina FalconeScript Writing & Producing - Savannah WilliamsonGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will

keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. There are many strange details regarding the shooting of former President Donald Trump, and a lot has come out days afterwards. We're going to break down some of the more bizarre details and unknowns from this past week. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber.

It has been quite a week so far in the aftermath of the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump out in Butler, Pennsylvania, when a shooter identified as 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks opened fire, ultimately wounding Donald Trump, critically injuring two others, David Dutch and James Copenhaver, although they're reportedly in stable condition, but also tragically killing 50-year-old Corey Comparator, and he was apparently shielding his wife and children from gunfire that day. By the way, I have to tell you, There were GoFundMe pages that were set up for both Corey and for the Butler victims in general. I want you to listen to this. Corrie's at the time of this recording is almost at $1.3 million raised, where there was a goal of just $7,000.

And over $5.4 million has been raised for the families in general in total. That is incredible, incredible support. But there are a lot of weird aspects to this shooting as the FBI is investing. this. And to be clear, this is a rapidly developing story and evolving story. So what we're discussing with you right now is based on the information we currently have. Things could always change. But let's talk about this. We have been breaking down this story, this shooting, the details all week. And we kind of want to summarize what we know at this point, the outstanding questions, what we can expect. So first, let's lay out how on earth this happened. I mean,

authorities say that Crooks was able to scale a building that was on the outside security perimeter of this pro-Trump rally. It's the American Glass Research Building, sets up an AR-15-style rifle about 150 yards away from Trump's podium where he was giving a speech and opens fire within minutes of Trump's speech at about 610, 6.11 p.m. And you know, that's a little bit old that chart. That chart's a couple of months old. And if you want to really see something that said, Take a look at what happened. He's on top of the roof. Don't go over there.

He's on the roof, buddy. He's dead. I just seen his hair blow up by shit on the head. He's dead. USA! Now, this shooter was instantly neutralized by a secret service counter-sniper team. And I got a hands off to the Secret Service who immediately, as soon as the shots rang out, swarmed onto Donald Trump to protect him, shield him from any continuing gunfire. You want to talk about heroes. You want to talk about selfless actions. That's a prime example.

Now, authorities, they reportedly discovered a remote detonator or transmitter on Crook's body, as well as remote controlled explosives, a bulletproof vest, fully loaded magazines, and a drone in his car, which was parked nearby. And investigators also found another vest, explosive materials, and a 3D printer at his home in Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. So that's about 50 miles away. He had apparently been living there with his parents. And according to CNN, a joint FBI and Department of Homeland Security Bulletin has revealed that Crooks had been receiving multiple packages in the months leading up to the shooting, including those marked as possibly containing hazardous materials. So first, let's start off with a major strange aspect. Big question, how is this suspected shooter even able to get into position when reporting indicates that both spectators and law enforcement at the event were aware of him?

Let me expand upon that. There were reports that people saw this shooter beforehand. There's even video that is circulated online of him seemingly checking out the roofs, scoping out the area. There are those who say they saw him with a duffel bag and rank. range finder. Then there are reportedly people who saw him climbing the roof. For example, Ben Macer told KDKA that he saw the guy move from roof to roof and told an officer that this shooter was on the roof. When I turned around to go back to where I was, it was when the gunshot

started and then it was just chaos and we all came running away and that was that. Now, apparently investigators believe that crooks had also used a bike to check out the Butler site. And according to the New York Post, a witness saw that bike around 40 minutes before the shooting. It's being reported that senators held a briefing with top Secret Service officials, including the director of the Secret Service, Kim Cheeto, who will talk a lot about. And one Senator, John Barrasso of Wyoming, reported that more than an hour before the shooting occurred, the Secret Service had identified crooks as a character of suspicion, because they saw him with that rangefinder in that bag. And then, according to Fox News, source

to say 10 minutes before Trump walked on that stage, the Secret Service supposedly changed their assessment. Instead of considering Crooks suspicious, they'd apparently upgraded his status to a threat. And yet, despite all of that, the ex-president was still allowed to step onto that stage. Why? That's a big question, right? According to another Fox report, the Secret Service agent in charge was actually on the phone with local and state police about this threat, about this guy, while the shooting was taking place. There were also reports that a sniper from a local tactical team had snapped a photograph of the gunman,

saw him looking through a rangefinder. Again, this is before the shooting, and then radioed that information in to a command post. ABC News reported that the shooter was spotted by Secret Service counter-sniper teams 20 minutes before the gunshots rang out. And then there's reporting that a Butler Township Police Officer actually confronted the shooter.

apparently was hoisted up to that roof. Crooks apparently spots him, points the weapon at the officer, who then lets go of his grip and drops eight feet to the ground. Now, Butler County Sheriff Michael Sloop defended this officer's action, saying he probably saved Donald Trump's life by delaying what could have been a fatal shot. Quote, can you imagine 10 seconds before that that the president was looking straight ahead and where that bullet could have potentially landed? So in total, the reporting indicates that crooks first came on law enforcement's radar about, and this is the approximation, but seems to be about three hours before the shooting. He was apparently walking by the magnetometers carrying a range finder at one point. The bottom line, how come authorities didn't stop crooks?

And more importantly, didn't stop Donald Trump from getting on that stage. And what complicates this, of course, is that the Secret Service Director, Kim, Kimberly Cheeto, who I mentioned, seemed to at first say it was the responsibility of local law enforcement to sweep and secure the building that the shooter was perched on top of, although she has since backtracked from those comments. There's also reporting that police were inside the building, but not on the roof. And she also told ABC News that there may have been a danger to post a sniper team on the roof where the gunman was located. Quote, that building in particular has a sloped roof at its highest point. And so, you know, there's a safety factor that would be considered there that would

We wouldn't want to put somebody up on a sloped roof. But that decision and these comments are facing a lot of scrutiny. In fact, one law enforcement official said that the sloped roof could have created a visual block to the counter snipers and that a tree may have prevented one of the sniper teams from seeing the gunmen as he climbed onto the roof. Now, I had the chance to speak with former Secret Service agent Charles Marino about this. And by the way, he also acted at one point in time as senior law enforcement advisor to the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Let's hear what he had to say. The Secret Service has this statutory responsibility to protect the former president.

They also have the responsibility of not only creating, but also effectively implementing the overall security plan for the venue. Let me state this includes the inner perimeter, the middle perimeter, and the outer perimeter, because they also have the responsibility of requesting state and local law enforcement assets. as they do throughout the entire country to help implement that security plan. So the Secret Service owns this. They've got to take the hit on this. It was their job to make sure

that this building was taken out of play. Talk to me how to make sense of the idea that he was in their sights for an hour before. They saw him as a person of interest or a suspicious character. And yet Donald Trump was allowed to take that stage. Well, as we know, whenever you have a catastrophic failure like the Secret Service had on Saturday, it's going to expose other failures in the system. And the one area that we're going to find additional failures in is going to be communication.

So let's go through the timeline that you just set up very well. If we're talking about an hour out and thinking that there was a threat that's walking around with a range finder, that's being armed, that person's got to be located either by state and local law enforcement and then interviewed by the protective intelligence teams that are on the site. If that person can't be found, that information needs to be communicated to the protective detail because you may not want to bring the former president that far out in advance to the site at all. You may want to take him somewhere else, like a local police department, for him to hang out. or maybe he stays on his aircraft.

There's a number of options. Now, if we're talking about the 10-minute-out scenario where you're saying the Secret Service is now confirmed that this is not suspicious person, but an actual threat, then the natural question is, why does the detail bring him to stage? Why do they allow him to go up to the podium? And that's where there's going to be a lot of questions

regarding the communication flow. Was it sent at all? Was the information sent at all to the Secret Service detail? Was it sent but not broadly enough and transmitted to them? Or was it ignored? And was there a decision to say, you know, we're going to take them to the stage anyway? Now, that being said, Cheidel said that no assets from the rally were diverted on the day that Trump was shot, even though apparently there were other events in the state that required Secret Service protection.

And she also said that there was no truth to the rumor. and she also said that there was no truth to the rumors that the former president's detail had asked for more resources and was denied, and as for accusations that the Secret Service role in this event was somehow partisan, she'll push back on that, saying the Secret Service is not political, people's safety is not political. And she also added that the Secret Service is tasked with the tremendous responsibility of protecting the current and former leaders of our democracy, and it is a responsibility that I take incredibly seriously and I am committed to fulfilling that mission.

By the way, there have been calls for her to resign, and she has indicated she will not resign from her role. We're going to talk about that a lot more and some more of the potential fallout for the Secret Service. We'll get to that in a little bit. Hey, let me just take a quick pause from Sidebar to thank Morgan and Morgan for sponsoring today's Law and Crime YouTube Takeover, America's largest personal injury law from, look, if you're in that position where you're hurt and you need legal representation, this may be the firm you want in your corner, specialists in this area, a firm that has secured, verdicts and settlements and the multi-millions across this country, a firm that doesn't settle for lowball offers, a firm where there is no upfront fee, you only pay them if you win, and a firm that makes

the whole process so easy for their clients, because from starting your claim to uploading documents, to talk to your legal team, it can all be done from your smartphone. So if you're ever been injured, you can easily start a claim by going to forthepeople.com slash YouTube Takeover. Before we even get into the next area, the apparent motive in this case, or what could be the motive, there is one more detail I have to get into. Why didn't the sniper team immediately take the shooter out? I mentioned all the different aspects of how they might have seen him beforehand. Was there an opportunity to take him out?

So I want to play you some of my conversation this past week with former sheriff's deputy and SWAT member, Chad Ayers, and also former FBI agent, Bobby Chacon. stuff circling around the internet that they asked for permission to take the shot. That is absolutely false. In this type of situation, they do not have to ask for any type of, you know, authority to take a shot or utilize deadly force in this type of situation. When you are assigned and you've got a former president on there and someone is laying on the roof with a long gun, the first opportunity they have, they're going to take that. So again, I don't want to Monday morning quarterback or second this counter-sniper unit.

there's the possibility that maybe the angle and the slant of the roof, they couldn't get a visual on him until he got to a certain position. Now, I think that when you look at the video of the counter sniper who took the shot, they're looking in the direction of that building. And I'm pretty sure that's because they're hearing radio traffic saying somebody's on the roof because there was some chaotic situation over there. You saw the video of people saying, woman saying he's on the roof. He's got a gun. I'm sure that was put over comm. when you look at that roof it sloped away and I don't think the counter sniper guys could actually see the shooter yet he was calling up he was on his belly and he and and then what happened was an officer confronted him and they

retreated he shut he turned around with his rifle towards the officer what that did was make the guy move quicker then he popped up really fast over that peak and started shooting that's when the I own the sniper's person because you see them looking there and they're probably saying I see the roof I don't see anybody I see the roof I don't see anybody that That's because he's behind that slight and then he pops up and then he starts firing and then they fire back. A couple of things to note about that. So it seems that the counter-sniper team that we had seen pictures of that were circulated in the media,

this was the team that we had thought had neutralized the suspected shooter. It turns out they weren't the ones who took the actual shot that killed the gunman. This was apparently a different counter-sniper team. But again, Bobby could be 100% right that there was a visual obstruction. in their way, and that's why they didn't act quicker. And by the way, we are not putting blame on them whatsoever. They were able to neutralize this target immediately. There is one more thing I have to mention as well.

According to Brian Enten from News Nation, and this is on Twitter or X, quote, sources within the Secret Service say the working theory right now is the Secret Service sniper did not initially shoot Crooks because the sniper thought Crooks was a police officer on the roof. Okay, so another possible explanation for what happened here. Now, I want to talk about one of the strangest aspects of all of this. Motive, right? Why would Crook supposedly do this? And that is where we get into this whole other territory, because it's so weird. It's so weird. The FBI is pouring over his cell phone history, his online search history, digital footprint, and there appears to be, at the time of this recording, no clear motive, no apparent political

or religious ideology or motivation. And as far as we know from reporting, there's no manifesto, there's no note, there's no writings, there's no social media posts that outline a motive or plan here. And that includes interviews, by the way, because apparently the FBI conducted over 200 interviews with family, neighbors, co-workers. They can't find anything. Now, there is reporting that Crooks did conduct searches online about major depression disorder. According to ABC News, Crooks had been registered as a Republican voter, but a $15 donation to this progressive group was also labeled and recorded under Thomas Crooks.

This was back in January of 2021. Reporting also indicates he was a loner. He enjoyed gaming and computers. He had been maybe severely bullied in the past. Interestingly, one of his apparent instructors at a community college where he graduated in May said his homework responses were thoughtful. His email responses were polite. This is according to Reuters.

So it seems the main theme is no one saw this coming. It was all unexpected. At least that's what's coming out right now. Now, I should tell you, at one point, there was reporting that Crooks had allegedly posted a message on the gaming platform steam before the shooting where he saw. supposedly wrote, July 13th will be my premier, watch as it unfolds, but now it appears, according to the FBI, that that was fake. So we're still working on confirming whether or not that was a legitimate post from Thomas Matthew Crooks. However, there is also reporting

that Crooks had searched online, not only about the Trump rally in Butler, but also about the Democratic National Convention. And then on the day of the shooting, he searched Butler, farm photos and a nearby gun shop in Bethel Park. There's also reporting he was searching for images of Trump, President Biden, other famous figures. So what were his targets? What would he have done if he survived that day? Something to think about.

And investigators say that crooks had visited that Butler site at least two times, including on the day of the shooting earlier in the day and then left and came back. So possibly showing this preparation. In fact, ABC News also reported that someone using. the suspect's name, so presumably the suspect himself, had signed up for that butler rally a week before the shooting, preparation, premeditation. And actually, with that in mind, CNN is also reporting that Crooks had visited the shooting range the day before the rally.

They also say he went to Home Depot where he purchased a ladder, then a local gun store in Bethel Park to buy 50 rounds of ammunition. In fact, when they turned over his body after he was killed, they found a receipt. for Home Depot. Now, here is again, former FBI agent Bobby Chaconne talking about this idea of a motive and how strange it is we can't find one yet. You know, there's an implied motivation. He wanted Donald Trump dead because he didn't want Donald Trump to become the next president. I think that that's kind of an implied thing. I mean, he might have hated Donald Trump for other reasons, but it's hard to see that he took this action for any other

reason other than he wanted to stop Donald Trump from becoming the next president. I mean, he might have been, he might have had an agreement with Trump for other past actions that Trump Trump may have taken while he was president the first time. But this is a political assassination. And normally those things have that implied motive of you want to stop this person's political ambitions. You do normally find a lot of political ideology in the person's lifestyle and his background and his conversations with people and as associations with people and organizations and so normally this they are ideologues and they are hell bent on carrying out an act of violence in political act of violence it's normally very apparent from looking at their background and here

they're not finding that so you know there's that and like i said there's an implied motivation but it could be you know he was just out for fame but oftentimes we also see indications of that in his background you know he wanted to become famous because you know he because killing trouble obviously would make him famous um or you know because we had like you know different motivations when hinkley shot reagan it was because his fascination with jody foster it would and thought he would maybe famous the person that killed john lennon actually was a big john london fan so there's sometimes these people have these ideas in their head that this act i'm going to carry out this act and then i would be viewed

as this other person or in this way so you know that's more of a mental health expert question like could and what is in his background might indicate that um but yeah you're right i mean a political motivated attack normally had some kind of he would be more active politically either online or in person and which is not finding that right now apparently drives to the rally in but butler pennsylvania parks the car uses the ladder to get to the roof of the adjacent american glass research building sets up and opens fire so bobby when we talk about what his motivation was and we see law enforcement trying to set up a timeline here what do you take away from that well the young man was very determined. Clearly, he's determined to carry out this attack with all of these steps he's

taking, what we call pre-event planning and pre-event activity, which begs the question on why we're not seeing more rhetoric, more associations in his background that would have led somebody to believe that he was going to do this. If he was able to keep all of this rage and carrying a gun to a rooftop and shooting into a crowd and taking practice, practicing the day before. I mean, you are determined. There's a lot of rage there. And to have that rage not manifest itself in prior behavior or prior acts or prior discussions is really unusual. Now, although we reported that it doesn't seem based on his cell phone data, his computer data, these searches, his online activity, that there are any outward political ideologies or

religious motivations. But what also makes this weird about no apparent motive, no red flags, Nobody's seeing anything in his behavior, nothing from his online activity. Crooks was apparently also a nursing home worker. He had no criminal history. His employer, Bethel Park skilled nursing and rehabilitation center, said his background check was clean. They were shocked. Crooks was, as I mentioned, living with his parents in this suburban neighborhood in Bethel Park about 50 miles away from the shooting.

And I'll tell you what, let's talk about the shooter's parents for a minute because there's a lot of questions there too. So we're talking about Mary Elizabeth Crooks, Matthew Brian Crooks, again, of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. They are licensed professional counselors. A neighbor described them as nice people. Another neighbor came out and told the crooks, please don't blame yourself. It was not your fault. Reporting indicates that these parents have been cooperating with law enforcement. In fact, Matthew Crooks apparently told CNN that he was trying to figure out what the hell is going on

and that he would wait until he talks to law enforcement before speaking publicly. about his son. But it does become a question of how much they knew about what was going on with him. And it becomes interesting because it was reported this week that the crooks, the shooter's parents, called local police hours before the shooting. They said they were concerned that he was missing. We don't know more about what was said exactly and whether or not it had anything to do with the shooting or that he had access to the weapon. And we also don't know. what steps police took afterwards from that call. But this is where it's important, because it wasn't just that Crooks had been living with

his family. Authorities have indicated that Crooks used this AR-15-style rifle to commit the shooting using 5.56 ammunition, and that this gun was purchased legally by Crook's father Matthew. Now, I've seen some reporting that the purchase was possibly six months ago. I've seen other reporting indicating it was further back years ago, but the gun was apparently registered to the father. And in fact, it reportedly was one of 20 guns that were registered with Mr. Crooks, the father here, all kept in the home. And my understanding, no permit or registration is required under Pennsylvania law. That's my understanding. And my understanding also

is that Pennsylvania doesn't require gun owners to store their weapons safely. So it's also being reported that Thomas Crooks, the perceived shooter here, and his father, were members of a local shooting club called the Claritin Sportsman's Club. But here's the question in all of this. Are the parents legally responsible, especially when you consider what was found at the home? Remember I mentioned all those materials that were found in the home, the packages. Why do I ask that? You remember Jennifer and James Crumbly out in Michigan, the parents of the Oxford High School shooter? They were convicted of involuntary manslaughter. They purchased the weapon in that case that was used in the mass shooting. And they were also convicted for their failure to properly

store the weapon, keep it out of their son's hands. The jury said in that case it was foreseeable that that could happen. Now, of course, there were some egregious facts in that case, right? The idea that on the day of the shooting, they were called into the school because of alarming drawings of their son, but they didn't take him out of school. They didn't use a cable lock on the gun. They didn't tell the school about the gun that the shooter told his family. He heard voices that the shooter had asked his father, James, for help to take him to the doctor, but James apparently told him to just suck it up. So we have some really bad facts in that case to establish that was foreseeable, but what about this case? Are we talking the same thing? Is it different? Well,

talking Michigan, I spoke to Charlie Langton this week, and this is a Michigan attorney, legal analyst, anchor for Fox 2 Detroit, WWJ News Radio, and I asked him about whether the parents could face criminal charges in any way. I'll give you the short answer is no. And I looked at the very same thing because it struck me, the first thing that struck me was that the father in the Crumley case bought the gun for Ethan Crumley, the shooter. And then the father, in this case, bought the gun for his son, the Trump shooter. But there's a big difference here. Ethan Crumley, the shooter at the Oxford High School, was 15 years old.

But that's not the case here. He was 20 years old. An adult who under, as I understand Pennsylvania law, I don't practice there, but it's similar to Michigan, is that there's no duty on the part of a parent to take care of an otherwise healthy 20-year-old. You don't believe, even though he was living with them, right, that the parents have any kind of responsibility for storing the gun or for what happens with that gun, right? No, because there's a superseding cause here is that the kid, the 20 year old, the 20 year old took the gun and and shot at Trump and killed other people.

And let's assume for the moment that the father was grossly negligent, although I don't know how having 20 legal. guns purchased legally, presumably stored legally, although I don't know that, but assuming all that was, I don't even know how you're going to get over the first prong of recklessness or certainly gross negligence. And there's no legal duty imposed, unlike Crumbly. See, Crumley, you've got to go the extra way. When you've got a minor, the parents have a duty. And if you breach that duty, then, yes, you cause the injury. It is foreseeable, as you just said, that a minor might, get a hold of an illegally stored gun, especially a minor with some mental illness, and then go out and kill someone. This is not the case here. And I don't read that into the jury instruction

that you've got in Pennsylvania. You know, in the Crumbly case, you was very clear, at least to me, and clear to the jury, that it was foreseeable that not only he could gain access to the gun, but he would commit a school shooting in that neighborhood. Isn't there something for the legal analysis to say this happened 50 miles away? So when you talk about, about the location of the crime. Does that ever come into a factor that this wasn't somebody who took out a weapon and used it at a school? But the allegation was that he took the weapon and then traveled 50 miles to a political

rally and open fire on the former President of the United States. Would you say that matters in the foreseeability analysis? Yeah, but it helps the parents. It's going to be my defense. Sure. Yeah, no, absolutely. If they did have knowledge that he was building explosives, if they did have knowledge that he could gain access to the gun, if they even knew what he was planning to do but didn't do anything,

could then this be a different kind of case? Yes, I think it could be a different case. And the facts that were changing, because we're speculating now, if the dad or mother knew that this guy was building up bombs or acquiring weapons and acquiring ammunition and maybe, I need a little more facts here, but maybe he suggested he didn't like Trump. He didn't like politicians or something like that. I could see a better case being made for the prosecution.

Now, I'm going to move on to another point. Did Crooks act alone? Did he have help? Was there a second shooter? The reason this has come up, or one of the reasons, is because Catalin Gregorris, director of the National Center for Media Forensics at the University of Colorado in Denver and Cole White Cotton, Senior Professional Research Associate at the same institution, they analyzed audio of the shooting, and they concluded that the first three shots were

consistent with alleged weapon A, the next five were consistent with alleged weapon B, and the final acoustic impulse was emitted by a possible weapon C. And the audio also confirms that the shooter was on a rooftop about 393 to 492 feet away. Now, some have said, is that weapon from another shooter was another Secret Service sniper. And according to the Washington Post, two audio experts, Rob Mayer of Montana State University and Stephen Beck of Beck Audio Forensics, counted a total of 10 gunshots.

So the first eight shots had similar acoustic characteristics. They were fired within six seconds. Then there was a ninth shot from an apparent different area, and 16 seconds later, there is a 10th shot. Now, the last two, they say had different audio characteristics. from the first eight, but they also say that audio in and of itself can't tell you exactly where the shots come from. There is something to note about this, though. And as Fox News reported, there is that photo of the pair of U.S. Secret Service counter snipers. They aren't the ones who

apparently killed the gunmen. There were four counter sniper teams that day, and this other team had neutralized the shooter. And apparently a member of local law enforcement had also engaged the shooter, seeming to mean that this local marksman had fired a shot. So with that, Here once again is former SWAT team member, Chad Ayers, talking about this concept of was Crooks acting alone? Yeah, I can understand where people are coming from on this, but obviously the audio acoustics, it can do strange things. We've all been in baseball stadiums when fireworks go off or, you know, obviously I've been

involved in deadly force encounters and shootings multiple times in my career. The echo, the ricochet, now keep in mind a lot of what we are hearing. As outsiders, there's microphones involved all over that stage. So we're hearing different delays and things like that. As I have watched this video, I mean, Jesse, it seems like a thousand times by now. Yes, I feel like it's consistent with the initial fire from the shooter, taking his rounds, followed by the counter-sniper team's rifles. And then likely that last one they are hearing is the locals counter-sniper,

taking that shot. The DA's reported that gentleman's been placed on leave. Also, the sound aspect, you might have a mixture of these counter sniper guys who have suppressors on their rifles, which I would assume many of them do. Your local counter sniper may not have had a suppressor on his rifle, so you're going to get different audios through that feed. But again, at the end of the day, I am confident we are still working with one shooter and multiple law enforcement shooters. But it's not just that because there was reporting from a former classmate of Crooks that he had failed to make the school's rifle team back in the day because he was such a bad shot. So does it make sense that Crooks was able to take that shot? Wouldn't that be really

difficult? Also, I mentioned all of the explosives and the bomb making materials, a 20-year-old guy, no criminal history. How does he know how to do this? No help? Well, I asked Chad Ayers about this and I asked also once again Bobby Chaconne, former FBI agent. Let's hear what they had to say. He's proned out. He's laying out. He's stabilized that rifle. I could take my five-year-old nephew, and in about 20 minutes, I could lay him behind that rifle, steady it, tell him to put it on this target, pull the trigger, and it's going to go there. It is not a tough shot whatsoever, especially with a 5-5-6 caliber assault rifle. Very easy. I know we mentioned it Monday. I am looking forward to knowing what type of scope he had. Was it a magnified type of scope? was it a red dot? What was that? Not that it changes a lot, but it does change a little bit. But at the end of the day, you know, whether it's a good shot or not, the only reason former President Trump is alive today is because he turned his head, period. Think about a lot of these mass shootings or school shootings, right? You've got 15, 16, 17, 18 year olds that carry out

the most heinous crimes ever. These crimes 100 percent can be committed by a solo person without any help at all. I mean, our guys are digging into it, our forensic examiners, our computer forensic examiners are good at that. So, you know, if he was able to use, you know, this was a young man, he knows computers. He's of the age that he grew up with them. And so, you know, if he was using some kind of, you know, dark web to hide his search histories and stuff, our guys usually find that stuff. And so hopefully something like that happens, because I don't know where, I mean, unless you somehow got a whole of a bomb-making manual, and I don't know how you do that either. Obviously, stuff's readily available on the Internet, which leads a trail.

If you're not finding that trail, I don't know how a 20-year-old young man without prior military training or any kind of training would know to get those things and how to even crudely assemble them. Now, I do have to mention this as well, that it is being reported that at the time of Crook's death, he was wearing a T-shirt from Demolition Ranch, which is a YouTube. channel has 11 million subscribers. It apparently features videos of guns and explosive devices. So was there something from there that he was able to learn how to do all this? But I will tell you, and this is important to note, that the founder of Demolition Ranch,

Matt Carricker, released the statement saying they were shocked and confused to find this out. No matter what side you're on politically, none of us want violence. This channel was never meant to incite violence or hate. And what is also interesting as we think about whether or not crooks had communicated with anyone is that apparently crooks had two cell phones yeah there was one that was found near his body and there was a second phone located at his home back in bethel park that had reportedly just 27 contacts on it so if this reporting is true i imagine investigators are going to track down those people so let's go back to how this happened how was a 20 year old able to expose these vulnerabilities that day. Why were their vulnerabilities? Great question, right? Well, there are

apparently multiple investigations happening right now. We know we have the FBI regarding the shooting, looking into the shooting, looking into the shooter, but we also have multiple investigations that have been opened up by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General looking into the security of the event, the planning, the counter-sniper team's preparedness. And Congress is also jumping in as well. In fact, Director of the Secret Service, Ms. Cheeto, she will be testifying next week in front of the House Oversight Committee. And here once again is Charles Marino, former Secret Service agent, on what we can expect from these investigations, especially what we can expect might happen with the Secret Service Director. It's no surprise that at the DHS level, we're now seeing the Inspector General get involved.

they will conduct their own independent investigation. And then you also have the hearings of Congress that we spoke of, but you also have calls by Congress for now an independent commission. So you could have essentially three, four simultaneous investigations going on. The big thing is how quickly do these investigations move? Because the longer this stays out there, the more the conspiracy theories gain traction. So it's important for all of these investigations to move very quickly, but the Secret Service will not be allowed as much as they may want to, and they've already been told to stand down from looking at themselves and assessing themselves. They are now at the mercy of three, four external mechanisms to investigate the agency.

But in terms of putting a spotlight on the Secret Service from these multiple different investigations, what could happened? Well, first they're going to look at what went wrong. They're going to look at the operational security plans, the number of agents that were there, the number of Secret Service uniform division officers, how many special operations teams were there, counter-sniper's, counter-assault team? Were they purely secret service teams or were they a hybrid, where Secret Service was married up with state and local resources? Like we're hearing, how many police officers from what jurisdictions were requested to come in and support that outer perimeter area. So that visit itself is going to be under a microscope to look at what went wrong

there. That's one area they're going to look at. Then they're going to start looking at more systemic things. What are the hiring practices of the Secret Service? This director happens to be very big in DEI. She implemented a program called the 35. for 30 campaign when she became director. That is, she wants the Secret Service workforce to have 30% females by the year 2030. The big question is gonna be in order for her to meet that quota that she put in place,

had she lowered standards throughout the agency. So naturally, they're gonna then go on to training. Is training still the world-class training that it was when I went through? And they're gonna look at operations. They're going to look at resources. And this is where the Department of Homeland Security comes into the conversation. Is the Department of Homeland Security giving the Secret Service the resources that it needs to carry out their zero-fail mission?

Director Cheetah, there are calls for her to resign. A, do you think she will resign? Do you think that's the right call for her to resign? What's your take on it? And if she doesn't resign, could she be fired and how could she be fired? What's the protocol there? So I don't think she'll resign. She has said she has no intention on resigning.

Yes, she can be fired. She is a presidential appointee non-confirmed by the Senate. So it would likely be a joint decision between her immediate boss, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the president of the United States. What I think is the focus now needs to be the U.S. Secret Service. The agency has to come out of this stronger than before this situation took place. They need to make sure that they have everything that they need to do their job, as I already said. And I think at this point in time, it can't be about the individual, the director, who has already come out and made too many statements that just fly in the face of common sense.

sense. So I think it's undercut the credibility of the agency enough. I think the attention has too much and too much on her. And I think it really needs to be on the agency right now to make sure that they're able to do their important job, not just for the people they protect, but ultimately for democracy. All right. So that is what we have right now. This story is evolving. This story is changing. We are getting new information. This is what we have right now, but of course, we will continue to follow the latest in this shooting that should never have happened. That is all we have for you right now here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so much for joining us.

As always, please subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.