reSee.it - Related Video Feed

From Miss Frazier's camera, it seems that Officer Chauvin's knee is on Mr. Floyd's neck. Officer King's body camera shows that Chauvin's knee was more on Floyd's shoulder blade. No more questions.

Speaker 0 states that they circled the agent and slowed down the video, and claims that the agent is run over when he fires the shot, adding that you can clearly see her hit him.

That's classic! The back of his head doesn't catch up, and then he blends with another guy. It's obviously AI. Look at the guy's left hand; it cuts off. There's a glitch through the guy's head, and the motorcycle wheels aren’t rotating. AI learns from what it sees but lacks physical references, leading to errors. The whole park seems to slide in an optical illusion. Check her arm; it's anatomically incorrect. AI just guesses and lacks limitations like CGI does. In one frame, her arm bends the wrong way, and there's a strange hand above her leg. Clearly, she's not real.

I can't see myself raising my rifle in the video. It seems like my shoulder is up, but the rifle is pointed down.

I think I found the shooter. This guy with the white hat starts it by creating signals—“touches the bill of his hat, and then he touches his ear.” The guy that shot Charlie is over on this side, and he’s seen by others who move to block him, with one man “rubbing his right arm” as he steps in front. “Watch this”—the background figure shifts, and the white-shirt man is “holding the gun right there.” If I go frame by frame, the moment the black-clad man moves his arm out, the white-shirt man “lifts his right elbow” and “shoots it.” His hand goes back, and then Charlie gets hit. “Watch the gun shoot right now”—the gun fires, Charlie is hit. “It’s clear as day.” The black-shirt man shows the white-shirt arm; “pop, bang.” Oh my god.

Charlie Kirk was hit by a high velocity round that created a significant high pressure shock wave traveling at 1,500 meters per second, which ripped his gold necklace in half and contributed to killing him. There was no exploding mic, and some observed effects in the videos are artifacts of the rapid sequence of events, likely occurring in five to fifteen milliseconds. The initial shock wave travels at 1,500 meters per second and violently yanks the necklace backwards and slightly upward, as Kirk’s neck juts out to the back. The necklace, still under the shirt, will be launched forward a split second later as the shock wave reaches the front. The pendant junction shears the necklace in half due to differential forces acting on the chain and pendant, similar to tearing toilet paper off a roll when yanked too quickly. The right half of the necklace is torn from the pendant junction and whips around Kirk’s head above his ear due to the backward and slightly upward force. The pendant remains attached to the left half of the necklace and is thrown slightly forward into the shirt and upward over his left shoulder by the front shockwave expansion not captured in that camera exposure, creating a swooshing projection seen in the next angle. The shock wave undulates down his back, indicating it is not uniform and propagates around the body in varying timing, duration, and magnitude. This differential forcing along the necklace’s contact with the body contributes to the tearing. Another angle shows the left half of the necklace with the pendant still attached swooshing upward over the left shoulder; the right side of the chain is whipped around Kirk’s head, as seen previously. The middle panel shows Kirk’s body ballooning outward, with the neck expanded as if wearing a donut-shaped life preserver around the upper chest. This cavitation shockwave travels through the body cavity, but the effect is not uniform. The back shock wave goes out first, then the front, imparting opposing forces that help tear the chain and move the pendant. A white smear in the middle panel, pointed to by a green arrow, was claimed by some to be smoke or vapor; it is not smoke. It is a double exposure: the shock wave moves the shirt so fast that the camera exposure creates a double image, and motion blur is present around Kirk due to the rapid movement. The double exposure explains a white streak and the apparent dual gold lines; that is the right side of the chain whipped around the head while the left side remains caught in the shirt, with the pendant acting like a grappling hook inside the shirt. There is no palm gun or exploding mic. The little black dot is the lapel mic, which remains attached and does not enter the neck. A white projectile observed is spit or sweat ejected from the body due to the shock wave. The overall claim is that Kirk was hit with a high-velocity round in the neck down into the body cavity, creating a fast-moving shock wave that tore the necklace, swung it around, and produced the observed video artifacts and motions. The speaker invites feedback, asking what others think and what might be wrong or missing.

Charlie Kirk was hit by a high velocity round that created a high pressure shock wave propagating at 1,500 meters per second through his body. This shock wave ripped his gold necklace in half and contributed to killing him. The analysis argues there was no exploding microphone and that some video artifacts can be explained by the rapid sequence of events occurring in milliseconds. The initial shock wave travels at 1,500 m/s and violently yanks the necklace backwards and slightly upward, as Kirk’s neck juts out to the back. The necklace, still under the shirt, is later launched forward a split second later as the shock wave reaches the front. The pendant junction shears the chain due to differential forces acting on the chain and pendant. The right half of the necklace is torn away from the pendant junction and whips around Kirk’s head above his ear due to the backward and slightly upward force. The pendant remains attached to the left half of the necklace and is thrown slightly forward into the shirt and upward over his left shoulder by the frontward expansion of the shock wave, which is not captured in that camera exposure, creating a swooshing projection seen in the next angle. The shock wave undulates down his back, indicating it is not uniform in timing, duration, or magnitude. It propagates around in an undulating manner: out the back, down the back, then forward into the chest and upward. This differential force along the length of the necklace, in contact with the body, leads to the tearing. The left half of the necklace with the pendant attached swooshes upward over the left shoulder; the right side of the chain is whipped around Kirk’s head, as seen in the prior frame. The middle panel shows Kirk’s body ballooned, with the neck expanded, resembling a donut-like inflation around the upper chest, interpreted as cavitation shockwave traveling through the body cavity. This is not uniform: the shock wave went out the back first, then a split second later out the front, imparting force on the pendant to the front and upward, opposing the force on the necklace going backward, contributing to the tearing and the swooping motions. A white smear in the middle panel, pointed to by a green arrow, is not smoke or vapor from a mic explosion. It is a double exposure: the shock wave’s speed causes the shirt to move so quickly that the camera exposure cannot keep up, producing a double exposure and motion blur. The middle panel’s double gold line is two chains forming a V due to the double exposure; in reality, there is one chain, with the right side whipped around the head and the left side still caught in the shirt, the pendant acting like a grappling hook inside the shirt. The video shows a possible exploding lapel mic claim, but the analysis notes that the mic is still attached after the shirt jerks and rebounds, not entering the neck. A small black dot is identified as the lapel mic and remains in place. The white projectile at the end is identified as spit or sweat ejected from the body due to the shock wave, not gang violence. In summary, the account asserts Charlie Kirk was hit by a high velocity round into the neck and body cavity, creating a 1,500 m/s shock wave that tore the necklace and caused the observed motions; there was no exploding mic or palm gun, and artifacts in the video are explained by rapid movement and double exposure. The presenter invites feedback and corrections.

"This is so much so." "Before we had a flag and we had" "it so it's positioned above the tent so it'd be in" "the camera made us move. What was that?" "Just a so much so." "It's too crowded." "It's just there's just so much." "As you can see, this new trajectory places a shooter on the roof of the Sorenson Center, and the shot would come at a much steeper down angle and a much larger angle off of the perpendicular, such that a bullet entering Charlie's neck would hit his spine and glance downward into his chest cavity, killing him instantly."

First one I saw. So my thought is there's not much going on here. So maybe they're practicing. Come on.

The speaker notes that what appears to be a mullet, slowed down because it is very fast. They acknowledge uncertainty but say the trajectory aligns with Charlie in the final dot or mark just before he gets hit. They also observe that the trunk of the car went down immediately.

It's really incredible. We see the SUV. Hang on with us. Let's move on to your left. You're gonna see him. Let's watch.

As you can see, this new trajectory places a shooter on the roof of the Sorenson Center, and the shot would come at a much steeper down angle and a much larger angle off of the perpendicular, such that a bullet entering Charlie's neck would hit his spine and glance downward into his chest cavity, killing him instantly. "Before we had a flag and we had" "it so it's positioned above the tent so it'd be in" "the camera" "and made us move. What was that?" "It's too crowded." "It's just there's just so much." "This is so much so."

The speaker recounts their position and reaction, notes when a shot rang out, describes looking both left and right, observes the subject slumping forward in a chair, confirms the subject slumped again, describes blood on the left side of the neck leading down the shirt, notes that the subject was carried off. "I was standing from probably the third row in the bottom. I saw hit I heard the shot ring out." "I looked to my left, and then I looked over to my right." "I saw him slump over in his chair forward." "He slumped over." "He had blood coming from the left side of his neck down his shirt, and he slumped over, and he was carried off." "Running high right now."

I can't see in the video. It doesn't look like I raised my rifle, just my shoulder. My rifle is pointed downward.

The speakers recount the moments surrounding Charlie Kirk being shot and highlight the behavior of Mikey McCoy, Charlie Kelley’s chief of staff. The account begins with a father describing his son’s roles: Justin is the chief financial officer, and Mikey is the chief of staff. He recalls the instant Charlie was shot: “Charlie’s been shot in the neck. Please call every pastor and pray.” He notes that Charlie was directing at the time, with blood all over him. Speaker 1 focuses on Mikey’s actions during the incident. He notes that Mikey is still there, phone in hand, texting, talking, then putting the phone away. He points to the person Charlie is arguing with, Hunter Kozak, and emphasizes what the video shows about Mikey: he seems to see Charlie get hit and “simply walks away.” Mikey later reappears on the other side of the tent, not running but walking. The account questions whether Mikey might be on the phone, though it isn’t certain. Security guards are described as doing their part, while Mikey is shown “walking, like getting far away from everything.” The narrative suggests Mikey turned his back on the incident after it happened. Speaker 2 names Mikey McCoy, Charlie Kirk’s chief of staff and friend, describing what he did or did not do during the morning. The speaker asserts that Mikey “spent the whole morning dutifully and loyally by Charlie’s side filming everything,” but then “abandoned Charlie in the very instant Charlie was killed.” The key questions posed are whether Charlie was actually dead, whether he needed help, and whether Mikey rushed to aid him or instead got his camera out. The speaker concludes that, according to the account, “Mikey McCoy didn't care about Charlie Kirk at all and just left him behind.” In summary, the described sequence presents Mikey McCoy as being present with Charlie prior to the shooting, then engaging in texting and moving away, appearing on the far side of the tent, and ultimately turning his back on Charlie after the incident, with the claim that he abandoned him as Charlie passed. The recounting is reinforced by a second speaker who reiterates that Mikey did not assist Charlie and appeared to prioritize other actions over Charlie’s welfare.

The speaker references a person who was removing memory cards from cameras about four minutes after what is described as the Charlie Kirk assassination, noting that something about the situation didn’t sit right. They mention Candace released a video showing how this person reacted, and that diligent investigation followed, including a campus visit to UVU to examine the events with a play-by-play analysis. The speaker says they will leave a link to that video but first shows a clip. In the clip, Speaker 1 describes the sequence: “He doesn't try to grab Charlie. He doesn't duck. His first reaction standing right here is to turn this way and start booking.” The person “starts booking back here,” and Speaker 1 notes that he sees the shot and that Charlie hasn’t even hit the ground yet. Charlie is described as being in a position where “Charlie’s like this,” and the person pivots to lean back. Security personnel respond by coming over, grabbing him, and pulling him to the ground. Meanwhile, Terrell Farnsworth “has already turned and begun running back here to climb up on that wall.” The speaker asks the audience to imagine there had just been a shooting, with chaos and people running. Charlie Kirk “was just shot,” and the wall is described as “almost as tall as I am.” The speaker asks the audience if they can see, confirming visibility. The analysis then focuses on the person’s actions: measuring “how much of a pain in the ass he climbed up right here and then threw that loose rock and just so he could get to his vantage point.” The speaker calls it out as an attempt to explain the sequence from the vantage point up the wall. The clip continues with the person producing a selfie video: “Oh, they shot Charlie. They just shot Charlie. They just shot Charlie.” They refer to him as “Agent” and note his statements like “They shot Charlie. God help him.” The speaker says this behavior is a major red flag and cites it as the most troubling aspect. The running scene is described further: as the person runs out, he looks to his left and, in the footage, is seen climbing up, then reacting to the news that Charlie was shot. The voiceover emphasizes the emotional state (or lack thereof) as the footage shows the stampede of people and chaos. The speaker underscores that, to them, the absence of emotion on the person’s face during these events is “the biggest red flag of all.”

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss critical evidence surrounding Charlie Kirk’s shooting, focusing on the right ear as the entry point and a sequence of video frames showing increasing blood in that area. - Speaker 0 highlights that Charlie was shot in the right ear. In successive clips, the red area at the ear becomes darker, indicating blood. Color analysis of the area is said to match the color of blood from the neck wound, supporting a right-ear shot. A live color analysis is performed using Grok, with screenshots and annotations to compare regions around the ear and neck. - The two low-resolution images depict a brief temporal sequence showing the right lateral head and neck with regions of interest: a yellow arid region labeled neck wound containing a small dark red to crimson spot consistent with fresh arterial or venous blood egress from a puncture wound approximately 1–2 cm inferior to the mandible. The hue is described as vivid scarlet (150–200 red, 0–50 green/blue) with minimal surrounding tissue distortion. A green arrow region (superior aspect near the mastoid/posterior auricle) shifts from neutral skin tone to a subtle darkening (brownish red) in the second frame. A blue arrow region shows a neutral flesh tone in the left image and a faint reddish overlay in the right image, possibly indicating localized hyperemia, blood splatter, or motion blur. Overall, minimal global color shifts are observed; the ear area does not display a prominent red hue in either frame, though minor shifts are noted. - The color analysis suggests the posterior region near the ear could plausibly indicate early blood spillover from the ear canal, consistent with vascular disruption in middle/inner ear structures after a penetrating injury. However, low image resolution, motion blur, and compression artifacts introduce uncertainty; higher-resolution images and forensic enhancement would be required for confirmation. - Speaker 1 and Grok concur that definitive confirmation requires higher-resolution angles; the analysis supports that bleeding could be present but is not conclusive on its own. - The pair discuss the sequence where blood wells up from the ear canal and then disappears as the hairline recedes from view in subsequent images, reinforcing the notion of blood involvement near the ear and supporting a right-ear entry. - They emphasize that the shooter could not have been from the Losey Building based on a combination of the ear-to-neck vector analysis and a 3D model. Speaker 0 presents a vector analysis: a direct vector from the right ear canal to the neck exit wound yields a 42.6-degree angle; momentum would reduce this angle, giving a smaller angle (about 9.17 degrees, then 8.4 degrees off from the 03:00 position). The model places the shooter in the corner of the BA Building, not the Losey Building. The conclusion is that Paolo Robinson was not the shooter and did not fire from the Losey Building. - Speaker 0 argues that the crime narrative is being pushed by the FBI and others, asserting that Tyler Robinson was wrongfully pursued and that he could not have killed Charlie Kirk. They discuss the potential need to drop charges and pursue due process, noting that a high-profile defense attorney (Sam Parker) is ready to take the case pro bono, but a judge is reportedly not allowing it. - They acknowledge that while the sound analysis could provide corroborating evidence of additional shots, the main point is proving there is no viable shot from the Losey Building. They reiterate that even if Tyler were on the Losey Building or had a gun, he did not kill Charlie Kirk. - The conversation closes with plans to continue analyses, obtain higher-resolution imagery, and pressure authorities to pursue proper due process, with an emphasis on disproving the Losey Building shooter hypothesis.

The transcript depicts a police or federal agent moving to the left of a vehicle, approaching as the motorist is present. The agent grabs his gun, opens fire on the motorist, and continues firing as she drives past. The moment the agent fires, he is described as standing to the left of the SUV, with the wheels pointing to the right, away from the agent. The sequence is punctuated with the word “Shake.” The narration notes that this depiction appears to conflict with allegations that the SUV was ramming or about to ram the officer. The speaker references statements attributed to President Trump and others, who said that the federal agent was hit by the SUV, pointing to another video filmed from a different angle. It is asserted that, in this moment of grainy, low-resolution footage, it does look like the agent is being struck by the SUV. However, when this clip is synchronized with the first clip, the conclusion drawn is that the agent is not being run over. The claim made is that the agent’s feet are positioned away from the s...

Speaker lauds Charlie Kirk but shifts to showing how video metadata can reveal manipulation. 'the inspector card shows your your resolution and your frame rate.' He notes a 4K frame size of '3,840 times 2,160' and contrasts it with 'A 150 by 58', showing the clip’s actual size. He says 'everything we film is pretty much in 30 frames per second,' and that 'when you talk about a clip being at 15 frames per second, command I again, you can see we're at 15 frames per second'—implying alteration. They claim: 'This video has already been altered' and 'This has been rendered one time,' then 'reuploaded, downloaded again, reuploaded again.' Uploading to X and re-downloading could 'erase facial details' such as wrinkles. He adds: most iPhones film at 29.97 fps; 'the only device that films at flat 30 frames per second is an actual GoPro'; '60 frames per second' equals '59.94 frames per second,' and compressions degrade quality.

The speaker highlights an event at 3:11 in the video, focusing on the driver's actions. The speaker expresses disbelief and confusion regarding the driver's behavior. The speaker emphasizes the driver turning around abruptly.

This is the first time we're seeing the victim, and their condition doesn't look good, in fact, it looks terrible. We're trying to determine if they are being moved out of the area or if they are being put into an ambulance. The activity we were observing was quite anxious and there was a lot of quick movement happening on the other side of the vehicle. To our surprise, the victim is completely alive. It's shocking.

Speaker 0 says what appears to be the mullet. He slowed it down because it is so fast. He adds that the trajectory aligns with Charlie in the final dot or mark that we see.

Ambulance, that's some sort of sign, but yes. So, basically, the activity that we were looking for that, that anxious or that quick moving that was going on on the other side of the vehicle. Oh my gosh. He's completely alive. What the hell?

The guy is right there. They might have hit him. What's that? He seems a bit injured.

The footage describes a sequence where a man in a white shirt raises his right elbow while holding a gun. He fires, and his hand snaps back into place as Charlie is hit. The man in the black shirt identifies the white-shirt shooter and his arm in the background. The shooter then re-raises the gun and elbow, producing a pop and bang as Charlie is hit again. The scene is punctuated with exclamations such as “Watch this” and “Oh my god” as the events unfold. The speaker repeatedly emphasizes the clear sequence of actions: elbow movement, gun discharge, impact on Charlie, and the visual focus on the arm in the background.