Ukraine sniping problem...

[IDB87]

Yes, and our point being that a doctor had better know the type of wound they're dealing with if their treatment is going to be affective.

Knowing that it's a gunshot wound would be enough.

They'll have to note the depth of the wound during the course of slug extraction.

And if the slug didn't stay in the body?

 

[TheRealnz]

Do you think a doctor has to determine if the wound was caused by a 5.56mm projectile or a 7.62mm one in order to be able to treat the wound?

Jesus, *********** christ. Yes, the doctor would want an idea of the caliber, because knowing that will give them a general idea of what they're going to find. Or are you asserting that a 5.56mm projectile is going to leave a similar wound channel to a 7.62mm projectile?

Why would the doctor want to know? Why would the wound channel and the characteristics of the round be important to the doctor? I'll give you a hint. It's not just slug removal.

No, the doctor hasn't conducted forensic testing by treating a bullet wound, good for you to admit that. Therefore, the doctors opinion doesn't really matter.

So the slug didn't stay in the body. The wound channel generated by the projectile isn't going to magically adopt characteristics that are similar to other rounds. The doctors going to look at the wound channel, see what if anything needs to be removed, sutured, etc.


I would prefer Catsmate actually responded to this since I asked him originally but it looks as though he's ran away from the thread.

 

[uke2se]

Jesus, *********** christ. Yes, the doctor would want an idea of the caliber, because knowing that will give them a general idea of what they're going to find. Or are you asserting that a 5.56mm projectile is going to leave a similar wound channel to a 7.62mm projectile?

Could you provide evidence for this, like an article by a doctor discussing this matter?

For the record, you are talking BS, and we all know it. It's going to be funny watching you flail for evidence.

Why would the doctor want to know? Why would the wound channel and the characteristics of the round be important to the doctor? I'll give you a hint. It's not just slug removal.

Don't be coy. Tell me what you saw on CSI.

So the slug didn't stay in the body. The wound channel generated by the projectile isn't going to magically adopt characteristics that are similar to other rounds. The doctors going to look at the wound channel, see what if anything needs to be removed, sutured, etc.

Hehe, you really know your stuff, don't you? A doctor engaged in life saving operations would make sure to measure a wound before trying to stop the bleeding. Or do you think a doctor has the ability to see the difference between a 5.56mm entry wound and a 7.62mm entry wound without measuring?

I would prefer Catsmate actually responded to this since I asked him originally but it looks as though he's ran away from the thread.

He's likely ignoring you, so you're stuck with me.

 

[Caustic Logic]

He's likely ignoring you, so you're stuck with me.

FWIW, you're not allowed to say you're ignoring someone, at least not that you've put them on ignore mode so they can't even see your posts. Or, I found, to even use the word "ignore" in a made-up policy of ignoring most of what someone says. It's considered more civil here to leave people guessing. I guess I'm being ignored (fully) by C1 too. Lot of "ignoring anything" going on.

News for the Kiev Cabal, and Bad news. Ac CE alerts me, a big time TV news show in Germany has put together some serious questions about their "proper investigation."

Todesschüsse in Kiew – Wer ist für das Blutbad vom Maidan verantwortlich (Who is responsible for the carnage from Maidan?)

Transcript is now up on the page and the segment alone is on youtube as well. Aired yesterday. This was very good, and MONITOR is THE top investigative TV journal in the country and widely watched and respected. Some interesting stuff in there even for us - they have the radio communication of Janukovic's guys wondering who's shooting unarmed people, for example. And they make it crystal clear that the putschists are not seriously investigating, with many voices including pro-Maidan people and lawyers of the victims who are complaining that they don't get to see a single piece of paper with anything remotely forensic. Confirmation that Hotel Ukraine was firmly in the hands of Maidan forces on the day. A doctor, Oleksandr Lisowoi, confirms that he has treated both protesters and police with wounds from identical bullets. Is that Olga's friend or somebody else? A "high-ranking member of the investigative commission" who doesn't want to be named says that what he found out doesn't fit with what the public is told. And on and on. Will watch again. Hopefully someone translates/subtitles it.

The doctor, never heard of. The Olga ally who agreed was the new Health Minister Musiy. That would be three people now, allegedly/reportedly saying that, and all quite informed. Huh.

Also, news from an informed guy in Georgia that four of the snipers (to be named, but not yet) are from there, trained for just this (false-flag sniping) by Sakkashvili's U.S.-installed government, to push Ukraine in the same EU-NATO direction they took 12 years ago. A few links collected here, languages involved ATM...

On my end, video work continues, nothing ready to show yet.

 

[Caustic Logic]

I Google translated that German program's transcript and can share the key points here.

But early on , there was evidence that they were hit in the back by their own central station , the Hotel Ukraina

...

Reporter ( MONITOR translation ) : " They also know that there was sniper from the Hotel Ukraina ? "

Oleg Machnitzki , Attorney General , Ukraine ( MONITOR translation ) : "We are investigating this."

But what evidence is there ?

This is the main theme of the show, with a sub-theme of other, non-hotel clues, all aside from the Paet-Ashton call and it "rumors" and "hearsay."

And , the hotel on the morning of February 20 was firmly in the hands of the opposition. We talk to eyewitnesses from the Hotel Ukraina , journalists, opposition figures . They all confirm to us on February 20 the hotel from the opposition was heavily guarded. It would therefore be difficult to sneak a sniper of the government.

Otherwise, they cite one video clue, and several specific, if not named, people. The video clue, as we've covered here, appears to be read wrong by the producers. But that they too saw it the way I did suggests I wasn't so crazy to see that.

this video that proves evidently that the opposition is hit with the metal plate from the back.

Seen at 3:09 in the video, that's the "ironic kid," apparently shot right through his shield after all, from the forward direction, evidenced by the inward dents as IDB87 noted and I now agree. Still we must note that perches other than the hotel are not necessarily government forces - there's no set rule that the rebels couldn't take over a few spots among the mainly vacated buildings in the area security forces were just chased from.

The people, then:
- The show says "The man in yellow on this recording ... is named Mikola. We meet up with him at the scene." (he's seen at 0:32, crouching near the ironic kid, masked, impossible to verify even facial similarity)

Mikola ( MONITOR translation ) : "Yes, on the twentieth , we were shot at from behind , from the Hotel Ukraina, from the 8th or 9th floor also ... almost from the very top . "
... there were people up and shot , and from the other direction here we were also fired upon . "

Reporter ( MONITOR translation ): "And who shot from above? "

Mikola ( MONITOR translation ) : " I do not know . ... They were mercenaries , definitely professionals. "

Could be an imposter, a real witness who read the evidence wrong, or a real witness who read it right. The other direction he points is roughly the 10-11:00 off Instytutska line, about the direction that the ironic kid was hit from.

- Sergei , a weapons expert , working with the prosecution:

Before our eyes, he assured nor cartridge cases. He then alerted the government investigators who have the place in his own words already examined thoroughly . Amazingly , while they are still working , their superior authority has already determined in a press conference , who are the culprits.

He's picking up hunting rifle shells, and assorted bullets, at the Metro station area, weeks later. I note the area's been cleaned up, the station un-boarded and re-opened, etc. I'm not sure these are really all left behind. But likely so. Whichever.

We are the road at night with investigators Sergei . He shows us with a laser , that there is not just picking channels from the direction of the government buildings . Some channels in the trees pointing in the opposite direction when lit exit hole and bullet hole , above the Hotel Ukraina,

(see 4:35 - he has a laser shine thriough a splintered tree to a window on the - 10th floor? - west side, inner face of the extruded portion. Also at 7:03, a tree mark with the hotel behind in daylight)


- a radio amateur who recorded government "sniper" chatter - they're baffled at who these other snipers are that are killing unarmed people. Could be a ploy, I suppose, a cover story they were hoping someone would record.

- Oleksandr Lisowoi , Hospital No. 6 , Kiev

( MONITOR translation ) : " The wounded , we have dealt with , had the same type of bullet wounds , I am now speaking of the type of balls that we have surgically removed from the bodies , which were identical . More I can not say. "

Reporter ( MONITOR translation ) : "But you ... "

Oleksandr Lisowoi , Hospital No. 6 , Kiev ( MONITOR translation ) : " The militia found and in the opposition. " (found in both military/police and protesters)

Note here: whatever one says about police or Berkut treated at the Maidan field clinic, a guy at the hospital would be in a different spot in that regard.

- "a senior member of the Commission of Investigation" (unnamed).

Quote: "That which I have received on my test results , does not match with what the prosecutor says . "

Vague but intriguing.

- Roman Titikalo , counsel for the co-plaintiff

( MONITOR translation ) : "We are not told what type of weapons, we do not get access to expert opinions, we do not get the deployment plans. The other discovery documents we have not , the prosecution simply shows us no papers. " ... "I was able to peek into the autopsy report , but not copy , ballistic reports I did not get ."

- Oleksandr Baschuk , lawyer of the victims

( MONITOR translation ): "We are all ran to no discovery protocols and if you ask me, there's a simple reason for this , it is not detected correctly . I as a lawyer of the injured tell you, the public prosecutor's office does not properly cover their people who are biased , like before. They want to keep as in the Soviet Union or under Yanukovich everything under the ceiling so as that "

 

[carlitos]

That Mikola is pretty smart. He can identify professional mercenaries, from behind, at 8 or 9 stories. Impressive.

 

[uke2se]

That Mikola is pretty smart. He can identify professional mercenaries, from behind, at 8 or 9 stories. Impressive.

Meanwhile, in the real world, Russian separatists are escalating the situation in Eastern Ukraine. It's most likely deliberate provocation from the Russian government. My prediction? The separatists won't back down and agree to talk - despite offers from Kiev of increase self-determination - and one of two things will happen:

1. Kiev backs down, which will likely lead to another fake referendum and a Russian annexation.

2. Kiev acts against the separatists, which will prompt a Russian military response, which leads to war.

 

[Caustic Logic]

That Mikola is pretty smart. He can identify professional mercenaries, from behind, at 8 or 9 stories. Impressive.

Wow that was easy, and uke-pleasing.


What's hard is acknowledging how uncritical you'd be if the tables were reversed. This guy Mikola identified the snipers on government buildings 200 meters away as Berkut snipers, trained to kill on orders from Yanukovych and thank God now they can join Europe etc. Carlitos brand complaints, droll drive-by denunciations would ensue - against any Putin-fan who would question this Mikola.

But he said something different, so he's lying, as are these other people and the physical evidence.

Meanwhile, in the real world...

Where did the Monitor crew travel to and investigate? Narnia was it? You may have deemed it a land full of liars, but it exists.

...(off-topic)

So, nothing to say except to show your disdain for all evidence from real people in real places that disagrees with your preconceived notions. Slightly sub-par even by your standards.

 

[Caustic Logic]

So, this Monitor program is perhaps the biggest batch of new info delivered at once, and it's probably the most mainstream and influential yet, in Germany, which matters here. The attempted de-bunks here so far are extremely lackluster, considering.

There are many other credible claims and evidence presented besides Mikola, but clearly he's important. I'm not 100% convinced by the guy, but he deserves more than a hand-wave.

Carlitos wonders how he could know about shooters who were behind him, and stories above. That might sound pretty crazy, but Mikola claims he spent some time pinned down there and seems to have normal mobility, functioning eyes, etc. I'm guessing by turning around, looking, listening, etc. A real witness could piece that together. Carlitos, do you really disagree with that? Is his figuring out where the shooters were really suspicious to you?

To judge the the killers as "professionals" is a subjective call he might form from seeing people shot dead around him, who, when and how, what rounds turned up, or other unknown clues he read that way. Anyone can dismiss his reasons for forming that impression, but they do so without knowing the reasons.

As for mercenaries, he never says he saw that, just believes it. Maybe this is added info from things he heard and found credible, considering what he saw which - if he's genuine - is way more than any of us could know.

 

[uke2se]

What's hard is acknowledging how uncritical you'd be if the tables were reversed. This guy Mikola identified the snipers on government buildings 200 meters away as Berkut snipers, trained to kill on orders from Yanukovych and thank God now they can join Europe etc. Carlitos brand complaints, droll drive-by denunciations would ensue - against any Putin-fan who would question this Mikola.

I'd seriously question that as well. What do you say we simply disregard what this Mikola says? He sounds a bit like an idiot.

 

[carlitos]

On one hand, our Mikola has eyes in the back of his head, and he's able to discern country of origin and professional training from hundreds of yards away. On the other hand, he's a potential "perp" because he wasn't shot.

he never says he saw that, just believes it.

Precious.

 

[Caustic Logic]

I'd seriously question that as well. What do you say we simply disregard what this Mikola says? He sounds a bit like an idiot.

What do I say to that proposition? I say you go ahead, sounds like an absolute gas to just ignore the evidence you don't like. I mean, look at what he's saying? How could you conclude otherwise? Another idiot like Drs. Bogomolec, Musiy, Lisowoi, FM Paet, etc, Sergei the weapons expert lining up trajectories, the two lawyers, the commission member.

He only says so much, it's been considered, the ignorers have made their case to ignore, and I'm still not convinced myself or willing to hang everything on what he says. The possibilities.
1) He's who he claims and lived through what he claims, and is telling us what he saw/heard and thinks in general
2) A total imposter there to smear the new government for whatever reason
3) A disinfo agent of some kind - an actor hired to come out looking like #2 and to smear real witnesses and skeptics the cabal is worried about.

ETA: in order of likelihood IMO 1, 3, 2 (3 over 2 for safety reasons at least). A corporate media pseudo skeptics list will usually exclude option 3 as that's a whole realm they tend to deny the existence of, and would order them 2, 1, with 1 acknowledged as possible for good form, but downplayed as much as possible with anatomy games now in addition to words games.

On one hand, our Mikola has eyes in the back of his head, and he's able to discern country of origin and professional training from hundreds of yards away. On the other hand, he's a potential "perp" because he wasn't shot.


Precious.

1. Wow, again you note eyes in front (can't see behind - and don't forget inability to pivot and look up! He saw stuff above him, WTF?) and you think he must be claiming to have seen some specific pro training and some specific nation of origin when he never said that. You do think this is suspicious, based on nothing suspicious. Wow are you ever bad at just considering something you don't like in an even-handed manner. That's fine, we're all different.

2. He wasn't the only (approved?) cameraman filming this crime without any interference from the criminals. That's what's suspicious about our cameraman, allegedly the nephew of the new Interior Minister. Mikola here, or the guy in yellow if that's not really him, was just one of the anonymous expendable protesters with memories people could dismiss with the descriptor "idiot," so no threat like a camera (in the wrong hands).

 

[Caustic Logic]

Finally I completed and posted my video on the "Arcade" bank window.


(still processing ATM)

At 1:55 is sort of a video version of that graphic Carlitos re-posted here for amusement:

You can see the three panes outlined, the middle one earlier shining, then opened. After that segment is several scenes where I superimpose the action below with an enhanced view of the window. This adds little but evidence endurance, and a snappy effect. Before 1:55 sets up the line of fire possibility (not at all certain in itself, but it wound up pointing to this window, so...)

From the description:

This video focuses on a certain high window of the "Arcade" Bank (aka "Metro station") behind Hotel Ukraine. This pane of interest was seen closed as security forces were chased out of the area, and then seen opened minutes later as people were murdered by snipers just beneath it, pinned down by the "metro station." There's a possibility worth further examination that at least one victim, likely three and perhaps more, were shot by a sniper in there.

Yanukovych regime Berkut? Russian-provided "third force" provocateurs bent on a pro-West fascist coup? Georgians and Yugoslavs trained by NATO for the same reason? Fanciful guesses abound, but hard facts are few and far between. So, here's one more to help fill in the gaps. That window at the "Arcade" Bank merits further scrutiny. As does the Hotel Ukraine, of course, and the whole new government currently commanding "the investigation" as some call it.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Also FWIW I found some longer and better footage of the BBC green helmet sniper incident and from that, with enhancements, you can see the helmet and even a face peering out, as he drops from standing to crouching at the sill.

To me it seems in all the BBC footage shared so far, there's no recording of this shot from the hotel. It all seems to be afterwards. What I could use is a second opinion - there are sounds he seems to treat as gunshots, but to me they don't sound like it, especially the last one that startles them into not filming the hotel in the open.

see 6:15 and after - NSFW, Gatehouse uses F-word twice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg3R_BSz0Cc

I also find it interesting how only the BBC guys at first are worried. Does Gatehouse laugh softly as the protesters notice how worried and filming the crew is, and decide to suddenly announce "sniper!" and get a few people walking a bit that way?

I think you can glimpse these guys hiding between the pillars in the 7.5-hour RT-Ruptly video. As it zooms in at 6:39:42 - the orange helmet, green poncho guy is identifiable (comp image). I still can't see the part where they run over to those stairs, with the noises and "sniper!" reaction. They were behind the pillars both before and after that episode, it seems camping for some time.

The rest of this gets complicated, so clowns, please don't even pretend try to follow.

The time offset between RT video time stamps and Kiev local PM time, is video ahead by about one hour and 37 minutes (+/-, I dunno, 4 min?) This is from seven inexact azimuth readings over the afternoon up to last visible direct sunlight. Each can be off by several minutes, but they came out: 1:37, 1:37, 1:44, 1:10, 1:23, 1:40, 1:24 - a steady range centered on an average of 1:37 - +/- 4). So ... it would seem the BBC crew was there at about 5:22 and however long on either side of that.

Whichever exact time it was, the spot you can see them is 15 minutes after the only audible gunfire heard on this video shot from a few windows away from the one that helmet's visible in. That's out of about 2.5 hours of footage. And maybe I missed one at an odd time, but I've been over the relevant span, 10 minutes out each way super-thorough, and this is all they got. A big volley of 12 loud rifle shots, starting at 6:23:59 in the video, with another burst of two at 6:26:30. That would equate to local time 4:47 +/- 4 min, and the last two shots at 4:49:30, +/- 4 min.

Anything I've said earlier that conflicts with this stands self-debunked. The black patch I ID'd earlier was compelling but not even timed. It would seem to be at about 3:26 PM. This could still hide some shooting or other clue, but not the one I was looking for. That is present, useable, and being used.

Gatehouse says there was "a shot" that rang out. I think he might be softening it, or for some reason, singling out one shot among them (the one that killed VM?) as the one to mention.

But that's a subjective thought, and what matters is the time reading and technical stuff, compound questions but each with only one right answer. I invite discussion of the science of this in a friendly and relevant way, and of course I expect to get lazy mockery as usual instead. But the time frame matters when Volodomyr Melnychuk was shot dead by a sniper high in the hotel, by a more precise solar reading of that video, at about 4:51:30, +/- 2 min. That video contains a single gunshot with at least 40 seconds of silence before and about 2:20 after, and I don't think that's a match with RT's audio (you'd want to try matching it to the later burst). I think one of the two videos has to have an altered gunfire soundtrack.

Have a listen at the one I suspect - it does have some pecularities in the sound department, doesn't it?:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjUzaw5pIBY

 

[000063]

No, it's the proper course for a skeptic. Whatever adjectives you wish to add to the word "skeptic" aren't really relevant.

...

They do, however, seem to be edging closer and closer to a Rule 10 violation.

 

[Caustic Logic]

(too late to edit previous post, corrected version below. I encourage mods to delete my post that was in or near violation of the swearing rule)

Also FWIW I found some longer and better footage of the BBC green helmet sniper incident and from that, with enhancements, you can see the helmet and even a face peering out, as he drops from standing to crouching at the sill.

To me it seems in all the BBC footage shared so far, there's no recording of this shot from the hotel. It all seems to be afterwards. What I could use is a second opinion - there are sounds he seems to treat as gunshots, but to me they don't sound like it, especially the last one that startles them into not filming the hotel in the open.

see 6:15 and after - NSFW, Gatehouse uses an unspecified swearing word, one of the more generall offensive ones too) and he does it twice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg3R_BSz0Cc

I also find it interesting how only the BBC guys at first are worried. Does Gatehouse laugh softly as the protesters notice how worried and filming the crew is, and decide to suddenly announce "sniper!" and get a few people walking a bit that way?

I think you can glimpse these guys hiding between the pillars in the 7.5-hour RT-Ruptly video. As it zooms in at 6:39:42 - the orange helmet, green poncho guy is identifiable (comp image). I still can't see the part where they run over to those stairs, with the noises and "sniper!" reaction. They were behind the pillars both before and after that episode, it seems camping for some time.

The rest of this gets complicated, so clowns, please don't even pretend try to follow.

The time offset between RT video time stamps and Kiev local PM time, is video ahead by about one hour and 37 minutes (+/-, I dunno, 4 min?) This is from seven inexact azimuth readings over the afternoon up to last visible direct sunlight. Each can be off by several minutes, but they came out: 1:37, 1:37, 1:44, 1:10, 1:23, 1:40, 1:24 - a steady range centered on an average of 1:37 - +/- 4). So ... it would seem the BBC crew was there at about 5:22 and however long on either side of that.

Whichever exact time it was, the spot you can see them is 15 minutes after the only audible gunfire heard on this video shot from a few windows away from the one that helmet's visible in. That's out of about 2.5 hours of footage. And maybe I missed one at an odd time, but I've been over the relevant span, 10 minutes out each way super-thorough, and this is all they got. A big volley of 12 loud rifle shots, starting at 6:23:59 in the video, with another burst of two at 6:26:30. That would equate to local time 4:47 +/- 4 min, and the last two shots at 4:49:30, +/- 4 min.

Anything I've said earlier that conflicts with this stands self-debunked. The black patch I ID'd earlier was compelling but not even timed. It would seem to be at about 3:26 PM. This could still hide some shooting or other clue, but not the one I was looking for. That is present, useable, and being used.

Gatehouse says there was "a shot" that rang out. I think he might be softening it, or for some reason, singling out one shot among them (the one that killed VM?) as the one to mention.

But that's a subjective thought, and what matters is the time reading and technical stuff, compound questions but each with only one right answer. I invite discussion of the science of this in a friendly and relevant way, and of course I expect to get lazy mockery as usual instead. But the time frame matters when Volodomyr Melnychuk was shot dead by a sniper high in the hotel, by a more precise solar reading of that video, at about 4:51:30, +/- 2 min. That video contains a single gunshot with at least 40 seconds of silence before and about 2:20 after, and I don't think that's a match with RT's audio (you'd want to try matching it to the later burst). I think one of the two videos has to have an altered gunfire soundtrack.

Have a listen at the one I suspect - it does have some pecularities in the sound department, doesn't it?:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjUzaw5pIBY[/QUOTE]

 

[Caustic Logic]

And in case that's not edging back enough, I acknowledge that above, I should have characterized Carlitos' anatomy game as including "He saw stuff above him, what nonsense!" Abbreviating a swear word is dangerously close to saying it, and I'm held to certain standards here, having had posts zapped for it in the past. But to clarify, here F stood for fudge. I know it's a stand-in, so I'll try to avoid that from here on and keep it clean to avoid further distractions.

Further, I wouldn't want to contribute to any impression some might be sowing that I'm "edging" around and unstable, and thus probably wrong in a way that requires no demonstration. Just call it wrong with no demonstration folks. You don't need to construct fancy reasons.

I get the purpose of the games though and don't expect those to stop any time soon. "Just wait," the implication seems to be. "Don't budge an inch or open anything. Annoy and provoke the serious and "edgy" guy, and sooner or later he's sure to be zapped away for a rule violation or something similar to one, and we can call it a win."

Anything on topic and showing the slightest human reason I'm sure to respond to. More games, be they over word meaning, "qualifications," anatomy, simple provocation, or whatever, don't hold your breath.

 

[uke2se]

Caustic Logic, when are you going to realize that people criticizing your posts aren't "playing games". We are evaluating your "hypothesis" and "evidence" from a skeptical viewpoint. That your posts fall well short isn't cause for you to accuse us of playing games.

 

[Border Reiver]

He's picking up hunting rifle shells, and assorted bullets, at the Metro station area, weeks later. I note the area's been cleaned up, the station un-boarded and re-opened, etc. I'm not sure these are really all left behind. But likely so. Whichever.

The evidentiary value of picking up any of the items above after the area's been cleaned is less than nothing. The casings cannot be accurately printed to determine who loaded them, and would be imposible to match up with any recovered bullets other than a very vague "this is the sort of bullet that is fired from this type of cartridge".

I recognize that you're not making anything out of this at the moment, but just to ensure that no one thinks it might be a critical piece.

(see 4:35 - he has a laser shine thriough a splintered tree to a window on the - 10th floor? - west side, inner face of the extruded portion. Also at 7:03, a tree mark with the hotel behind in daylight)

I call BS.

A laser pointer's beam rapidly widens and looses coherence after a few meters. Having a beam still able to be detected after travelling over 30m and be able to be seen is not technically possible.

A laser range finder would have the coherence to travel the distance, but would be able to be detected with the naked eye at the terminal end.

- a radio amateur who recorded government "sniper" chatter - they're baffled at who these other snipers are that are killing unarmed people. Could be a ploy, I suppose, a cover story they were hoping someone would record.

I'd wonder at the authenticity of the recording - frequency, provenance, any analysis done to see if it had been altered, etc.

Police frequencies are always in a specific band (one of the few international treaties that I am aware of that don't get broken), so it is comparatively easy to get a radio onto the "police band" to listen in. However, groups like Berkut, or SWAT teams encrypt their transmissions so that other people don't get to listen in in real time to get intelligence.

I see two options for the recordings:

a. Faked police transmissions;
b. Non-police use of police frequency band.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Caustic Logic, when are you going to realize that people criticizing your posts aren't "playing games". We are evaluating your "hypothesis" and "evidence" from a skeptical viewpoint. That your posts fall well short isn't cause for you to accuse us of playing games.

When? Sometime after it's true.

The evidentiary value of picking up any of the items above after the area's been cleaned is less than nothing. The casings cannot be accurately printed to determine who loaded them, and would be imposible to match up with any recovered bullets other than a very vague "this is the sort of bullet that is fired from this type of cartridge".

I recognize that you're not making anything out of this at the moment, but just to ensure that no one thinks it might be a critical piece.

ETA: Excellent! Informed and reasonable thoughts on the evidence. Thank you.

I've always found shell casins, artillery shells, found somewhere days or weeks later, to be a pretty poor indicator of what happened at a specific time. It could be the day before, someone dropping it there to make a point.

I call BS.

A laser pointer's beam rapidly widens and looses coherence after a few meters. Having a beam still able to be detected after travelling over 30m and be able to be seen is not technically possible.

A laser range finder would have the coherence to travel the distance, but would be able to be detected with the naked eye at the terminal end.

This I have a hard time seeing. Last seen, he was standing on the ground, pointing at buildings some distance away. When it shines on the hotel (should be - about 30 meters could be right, or likely more, up to maybe 70-80 m) So was that scene staged, shone from a different tree he maybe climbed up?

Is it possible this is a newer type of laser you don't know about? At 4:28 you can see the bright spot on a building tens of meters away, and the beam running back almost to the camera.

So, I question your call of ... nonsense here.

I'd wonder at the authenticity of the recording - frequency, provenance, any analysis done to see if it had been altered, etc.

Police frequencies are always in a specific band (one of the few international treaties that I am aware of that don't get broken), so it is comparatively easy to get a radio onto the "police band" to listen in. However, groups like Berkut, or SWAT teams encrypt their transmissions so that other people don't get to listen in in real time to get intelligence.

I see two options for the recordings:

a. Faked police transmissions;
b. Non-police use of police frequency band.

This could be. Non-police helpers pretending to be baffled by the snipers, getting their message in same day - or later - or an a different frequency even. I don't think it's proven. I imagine your insight on encryption is normally true, but that you're just guessing - maybe a real good guess but not a fact - that that's how they do it in Ukraine.

Even if it's so, and it makes sense, in an unusual situation might they just forget, or consider it low priority considering, or even speak openly in the hopes someone will hear their bafflement, and realize they didn't do it? (or the reverse psychology version of that (saying unencrypted "we didn't do that!" as they did it) etc.? I don't think this is a point so sure it should cut the straightforward option from what should be your list of three options.