THE CONUNDRUM OF THE KIRK INVESTIGATION

​These are very interesting times we are living in. And technology advances are a major contributing factor.

In 1963 there was one man, by luck or fate, who videoed the JFK assassination. In contrast we have thousands who took videos of the Kirk assassination. 

This presents a problem for any investigator, but especially the FBI, in being able to either coverup the truth of what really happened or achieve the successful prosecution of their current suspect.

For those who’ve canvassed the myriads of YouTube videos from various YouTubers, it’s readily apparent that a defense attorney half their salt will have a field day defending the suspect, whether he is in fact the shooter or not.

The defense attorney will:

• Show videos that purport to show entry and exit wounds that upon seeing the same video “experts” will dispute each other. Where lies the truth?

• Show videos of what an exit wound of a 30.06 rifle wound looks like on an elk, and this be disputed by an “expert”, saying the surgeon found the bullet under Kirk’s skin. (I predict there will be no hunters selected on the jury).

• Show videos of the crime scene being corrupted by both TPUSA and others, suggesting a coverup by someone, maybe the government, to deflect from the real shooter. What was their motive?

​

• Show videos that the shot came from the right rear of Kirk and not from in front, which too will be disputed by experts who will be looking at the same video.

​

• Show comparisons of the shooter’s past online chat style different from the FBI’s presented Discourse chat style, and present experts to claim “there’s no way the defendant wrote that; that it is a fabrication of the FBI.

​

• Show the acoustic analysis that reveals the shooter was much closer to Kirk than the rooftop joker.

​

• Show discrepancy of the time stamps of the shooter running and the “other image” of the purported shooter on a different rooftop (according to the image).

Etc. Etc.

For the FBI to seal a conviction on who they say is the current shooter, they will have to erase, eliminate, or make disappear all of the conflicting videos mentioned here. Otherwise, jurors, of whom it will be hard to find any who’ve not been exposed to these videos, and being shepherded by an adept defense attorney, will be hard pressed to waltz around the reasonable doubt claim. 

It’s my prayer that the true assassin of Charlie Kirk will be found and that justice will be brought to bear. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the current suspect is acquitted at trial by a jury of his peers all of whom have seen or maybe even took videos of what actually happened. This time.... there’s more than one Zapruder film.