See the change log at the end of this document for the complete history of revisions.
First and foremost, my heart goes out to everyone affected by this event.
If you were one of the many eyewitnesses that were present at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas on 1-Oct-2017, then know that this work is dedicated primarily to you and i humbly request that you read though it, understand it and, whether you agree with it or not, please share it since others may find it useful. Unlike others who are capitalizing on this event, i am gaining nothing from my work, but it pains me rather deeply that so many of you are being given answers that, in my opinion, are deeply flawed and so i’d like to make an attempt to provide some answers that are hopefully more accurate than some of the garbage floating around on the web.
Anyone who has researched the events of this mass-shooting has very likely come across many claims from eyewitnesses and others regarding multiple gunmen acting either in concert with, or in place of the alleged gunman (at the time of this writing there is no concrete proof to my knowledge), Stephen Craig Paddock and it is this facet of the event which i choose to investigate.
First, let me be clear about how the term “multiple gunmen” is used here. Like many others, i have come across a plethora of reports of multiple shooting incidents at various locations including the Bellagio, Caesars Palace, Planet Hollywood, Tropicana, Hooters and others. Police apparently sent strike teams to investigate each of these reports and found that all of them were without merit according to the police scanner audio. Regarding the alleged shooting at Hooters and reports of bodies being carried out, it appears that this location was used as a staging area for emergency vehicles. I am not necessarily discounting reports of events occurring at locations other than at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino and the Route 91 Harvest Festival at this point, however the scope of this analysis was purposely limited as to whether or not more than one gunman targeted the festival specifically, as well as to determine the approximate location of the shooter or shooters. Many witnesses have stated, to varying degrees of certainty, the possibility of multiple gunmen targeting the festival audience and i hope to shed some light in this regard which i’m sure many victims, their families and people in general are seeking.
Perhaps many are aware of the acoustic analysis preformed by Mike Adams of Natural News in which he claims to have proven that there was indeed a second gunman targeting the venue. Mike stated in his video that he performed a forensic spectral analysis of audio samples recorded by one or more witnesses in order to reach his conclusion. He further states that the entire process consumed only about three hours of his time during an afternoon and i honestly have to wonder what kind of scientific forensic analysis can be preformed in just three hours? Furthermore, to my knowledge, Mike has not followed up on his initial findings in order to locate the second shooter he claims existed, even though he stated that doing so would be rather trivial. Why not?
Personally i think Adams is acting very irresponsibly by promoting what he himself admits is an unfinished analysis, across multiple high-traffic websites including YouTube, Veterans Today, Shooting News and Natural News (his own website), with seemingly little regard for how such information may negatively impact the victims, their families and the public in general if it is incorrect, as i do believe it is and as i think my own data demonstrates. His YouTube video, Forensic acoustic proof of SECOND shooter in the Las Vegas massacre, has received over a million views as of this writing and he continues to capitalize upon this massacre with several follow-up videos, including another clickbait title, The public astonished to discover this PROOF of a second Las Vegas shooter. Lastly, Mike did not publish the math he used to calculate ballistics and bullet impact to delay times so far as i am aware and therefore his conclusion cannot be considered to be a result of a “forensic acoustic analysis” as far as i’m concerned.
There are real human victims of this slaughter and i’m sure that many of those left alive to grieve are desperate for answers. When these already damaged people come across a half-baked “forensic acoustic analysis” which “proves” there was a second gunman, i think they are being sent down a sensationalist rabbit hole that can only add to the pain they already carry.
That said, i have to credit Mike for inspiring me to pick up where he left off. After watching and listening to several of the videos recorded by eyewitnesses, i was also quite certain that there was more than one shooter initially because i thought i clearly heard overlapping gunfire and very different tones of gunfire which would strongly indicate a second gunman. The possibility of a second shooter did not surprise me in the least, but that’s another story, suffice to say that i’m aware of the bigger picture and how events like this are often manufactured and used for political purposes. Also it must be considered that there is evidence of foreknowledge of this event, one piece of which are the several posts on the public message board 4chan on 10-Sep-2017, roughly three weeks prior to the attack, by someone identifying them self as “john”:
Another potential piece of evidence results from statements made to the media by an alleged eyewitness, Brianna Hendricks, who stated that a woman, accompanied by a male subject, pushed her way to the front row of the concert and told people that they were all going to die approximately 45 minutes prior to the time the shooting began. Brianna further stated that…
It seemed she was telling us to either warn us, or she was part of it and she was telling us because she knew we were going to die. It was so scary.
It felt like she had knowledge of what was about to happen.
She said they’re all around us and we were going to die.
According to Snopes (a highly dubious resource if ever there was one) who claims to have interviewed Brianna, the witness later altered her story. If this is true, could such alterations be the result of pressure upon her to conform to an official narrative, or did Brianna really feel that her original statements were inaccurate and wanted to amend them? We don’t know, but given the details she provided in her statement to the press, i suspect something closer to the former. Perhaps the bigger question is why the LVMPD has failed to comment regarding the statements made by Brianna Hendricks.
It is also quite interesting that, similar to the alleged insider trading prior to the September 11, 2001 attack in the U.S., James Murren, the CEO of MGM Resorts International which owns the Mandalay Bay, dumped 259,760 shares of stock on the 7th of September, 2017, and another 34,390 shares on the 8th for a total value of $10,024,632 and he did so during a time when the value of the stock was apparently rising. The day after the shooting MGM Resorts International stock fell 5.7%. From Disobedient Media:
It’s currently unclear why Murren chose to sell when he did. To date, MGM’s stock has not experienced a significant decline in value due to the repurchasing program. It could be interpreted to run against the company’s interests for the CEO to convey a sense of urgency in the selling of his shares by disposing of them immediately after the commencement of his company’s share repurchase program. It’s also strange that the CEO of a company would sell more than half of their stake (let alone 80%) in the company that they represented.
Further details regarding these stock transactions can be found at The Ledger Gazette.
James Murren was not the only one who profited big as a result of the decrease in the MGM stock value. On August 14, 2017, George Soros placed a put call for 1,350,000 shares on MGM Resorts International for a profit of $42,242,000. And there were many more. See the article Insider Trading and Financial Anomalies Surrounding the Las Vegas Attack.
Returning to the primary topic, Mike Adams and others massaged my curiosity enough that i decided to dive in and see what i could find regarding multiple shooters targeting the venue. I wanted to see if i could determine the locations of where several witness captured their videos so i could plot them on a map and use that in conjunction with the audio they recorded in order to calculate bullet impact to muzzle report delay times which could then be used to determine whether there were multiple gunmen, as well as their potential locations.
The sounds of bullet impacts and muzzle reports needs to be thoroughly addressed because it is precisely here at the earliest point in this event that i believe there is a huge misunderstanding that is held not only by many of the people that were present at the concert that night, but also by others who are researching this event. The misunderstanding that has led to the multiple shooter theory at the venue is, i believe, largely a result of the fact that there were mostly two, very distinct gun related sounds that night, one being generated by bullets impacting the asphalt and other objects at the venue, and the other being produced by the muzzle report of the weapon. The bullet impacts most often have a higher frequency, a shorter duration, and are of a higher amplitude. In other words, they are louder and sharper, sounding much more like a “crack” than a “bang”, while the muzzle report — the sound emanating from the barrel of the gun — sounded more like a “bang” and was not generally as loud at the concert area, at least according to the audio samples i have analyzed. I suspect that more than one witness who can be heard stating that the gunfire did not sound authentic, said so because they queued in more on the bullet impacts than the muzzle reports which followed shortly thereafter. This is a completely innocent mistake, one which i initially made myself even though i am familiar with guns. It is also a harmful mistake however in that this misunderstanding alone seems to be sending people off on wild goose chases which only further muddy the waters and, worse, may add to the trauma felt by those who witnessed this event firsthand. Another interesting aspect that was likely in play during this event is something called normalcy bias which is basically where the mind tries to put a shocking event like being fired upon into a normal context so that it doesn’t have to deal with reality.
Regarding the “taxi” video of which my copy is titled Vegas Shooting Taxi Driver’s Video ! Must Watch B4 Well You Know , The Take Down !, it seems this video in particular has attracted a lot of attention from prospective investigators.
The video was recorded by a woman operating a taxi in very close proximity to the Mandalay Bay hotel main entrance near the same wing and just 32 floors below where the sniper nest is alleged to have been. In it there are several rapid fire sequences that are very loud and very clear and which are obviously indicative of gunfire, however in the very same video can be heard gunfire which sounds quite muffled and much farther away. The driver even remarks about this, stating that the gunfire sounds “like it’s coming from farther away”. It seems many have concluded that this is proof of a second shooter, but this conclusion does not seem to be backed by any serious thought or analysis. Having said that, i must admit that i too had assumed that multiple shooters were firing from very different locations when i initially listened to this video, but i eventually realized that there may be a couple of less dramatic explanations, such as; what if the the shooter in the Mandalay Bay hotel room turned away from the window in order to fire at threat inside the hotel? Could this have been when the security guard, Jesus Campos, was shot at? Could this have been when the police first approached the room? Could this have been when Paddock (allegedly) sprayed bullets down the hall? We are told that the gunman fired approximately 200 rounds through the front door of the suite at Campos and possibly others. If that is true, then Paddock, assuming he was the shooter, would have moved away from the window and this certainly would have resulted in a dramatic difference in the way the gunfire sounded to anyone outside the hotel.
Some have speculated that the shooter could have been firing from the broken window nearest the taxi (the bedroom window where the red circle on the left is in the image above) when the louder shots were recorded and then moved to the farther window closer to the venue when the duller shots were recorded, or perhaps even visa-versa, but if we assume the police reports are accurate, the gunman apparently never fired from the bedroom, the door of which was apparently barricaded and the contents of which allegedly contained no bullet casings or weapons. That the window was smashed out of the second bedroom, and that one or both of its doors were apparently barricaded, does raise other questions, however i suspect one possible reason for this may be that the gunman could have detected someone just outside of, or trying to enter the hotel room and therefore the second sniper position was barricaded and abandoned before it was ever used. Or perhaps it was done just to create a diversion so police wouldn’t know for certain from which window the fire was originating, but then why barricade the door?
Regarding the completely baseless speculation that there was a sniper in a helicopter firing on the crowd, good luck proving that a), it happened and b), that a legally required anti-collision beacon or strobe light, which happens to be flashing terribly out of sync with the gunfire, is actually muzzle flashes. As per the FAA Night Operations Handbook for aircraft, chapter 13, pg. 13-7, 13-8:
All recently manufactured aircraft certificated for night flight must have an anticollision light that makes the aircraft more visible to other pilots. This light is either a red or white flashing light and may be in the form of a rotating beacon or a strobe. While anticollision lights are required for night visual flight rules (VFR) flights, they may be turned off any time they create a distraction for the pilot.
Understand that i am absolutely not stating as fact that only one shooter targeted the concert, but i will state that the data which i have accumulated over the better part of a week, including what my eyes and ears see and hear, does not indicate the presence of a second shooter, not at the venue nor anywhere in the immediate vicinity. Again, for the purpose of this work, i have not considered shooting events which may have occurred at other hotels. That’s another issue altogether and one possibly worth exploring, but it isn’t my focus here.
I would also say that Paddock certainly does not seem to fit the profile of a mass-murder at this time, however if he was in fact prescribed diazepam (Valium) as alleged, then it must be taken into account that such mind altering drugs are present in many mass shootings dating at least as far back Columbine (20-Apr-1999) where Kevin Harris was apparently taking fluvoxamine (Luvox) and Dylan Klebold is alleged to have been taking Paxil and Zoloft.
I have little doubt at this time that the Vegas/Mandalay Bay shooting was planned by people far above Paddock for potentially multiple purposes, including a continued assault on the second amendment; the opportunity for certain investors (George Soros and Michael Chertoff according the “john” posts on 4chan) to profit from the sales of security equipment designed to prevent such slaughters; to instill yet more fear in the public mind which is often leveraged to control populations, etc.. I am extremely suspicious of the FBI given their remarkably track record of utterly criminal behavior in many previous instances, including manufacturing domestic terrorists in order to later arrest them, thus “preventing” a terrorist attack.
Lastly, i wonder why the concert stage lights were turned on soon after the shooting started, thus illuminating the crowd and making them easier to target.
This has been a difficult undertaking for me. Because i choose to do a video and audio analysis of the gunshots, and because i needed to hear every detail in the witness videos, i had to wear high quality headphones and this made it seem as though these people were right next to me. The screams and pleas for help and all of the noise and confusion during this horror lived inside my head as i listened over and over again to the evidence. It’s difficult to imagine what it was like for those that actually lived through it.
My research into the Vegas shooting went something like this:
- Procure multiple witness videos for analysis where the witnesses were in close proximity to the music concert at the Route 91 Harvest Festival
- Extract the audio tracks from the videos to be used for further waveform analysis
- Plot the witness locations and paths of travel on a map
- Log the times of the gunfire bursts in each audio file
- Analyze each burst of gunfire in each audio file in order to find samples that would provide good data with regard to bullet impact to muzzle report delay times
- Determine the lag time between the bullet impact and the following muzzle report at least once for each burst sample where the quality of the sample permitted
- Using the impact to report delay, plot a circle around each witness that indicates the approximate distance of the shooter from the witness
- Gather enough data from enough witnesses to indicate the position or positions of the shooter or shooters which can be determined from where multiple circles for multiple witnesses converge
According to the data i have derived from multiple witness videos and audio, the hypothesis that i believe to be correct at this time is that there was only one shooter that targeted the venue at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas on the night of October 1st, 2017 and i will explain in detail why i think this may be an accurate assessment.
Watching and listening to the witness videos, especially without having a background in gunfire, can mislead one to conclude that there were indeed multiple shooters and i’m quite certain that many of those present at the concert drew this erroneous conclusion in real-time, some even stating that they felt as though they were being chased such as Stephanie does at about the 50 second mark in this interview with Fox 5:
When you extract the audio portions of the witness videos and look at the waveforms however — and i want to stress look, rather than just listen — it is readily apparent that, while there are indeed two very different and very distinct sounds, it becomes quite obvious that they both originate from the same source.
I’m sure Stephanie isn’t being untruthful when she stated that it felt as though she was being chased, nor when she said that she could not understand how all of the gunfire could have come from one shooter. However, she is interpreting the horrific events which she lived through just prior to this interview according to what she saw through her eyes and heard with her ears, as well as through her own understanding of what she thinks a mass-shooting should sound and look like to her. Stephanie isn’t lying, but i strongly believe that her understanding of certain aspects of this event regarding automatic gunfire, bullet impact and muzzle report sounds is incorrect as i believe the data will demonstrate.
The audio waveform above represents a typical rapid fire sequence found in nearly all of the audio files which i examined from witnesses located at, or very close to the venue. This particular sample is from the 00:06:04-00:06:07 time frame of the audio track extracted from a video titled, RAW VIDEO: Escape from Las Vegas shooting. In this graphic we can clearly see two distinct sounds, one of which is of a higher amplitude which represents bullet impacts, and the other a lower amplitude which follows the impacts and represents muzzle reports. You will notice that the last three bullet impact sounds that i have marked are closely followed by the last three muzzle reports from the gun. There is a delay between the two because of the location of the witness relative to the bullet impact locations, the location of the shooter, the velocity of the projectiles, the speed of sound and the downward angle from which the bullets were fired. Once you see the difference in appearance of the sounds, you should be able to easily identify nearly all of the lower and higher amplitude spikes besides those which i have marked.
This pattern is found in nearly every one of the rapid fire bursts within and across multiple audio/video files. The only exception that comes to mind are samples which were recorded far enough away from the target area (the concert) that either the bullet impacts were not recorded, or the muzzle reports were not recorded. It is important to understand this: For every video that i have analyzed which recorded rapid fire at or very near the venue, they all record both sounds nearly simultaneously for each burst of gunfire and these sounds are bullets striking asphalt and other objects (metal and glass in some instances) followed approximately 30 to 40 milliseconds later by the sound of the gun firing (the muzzle reports). The reason the bullet impacts are heard before the muzzle report of the gun is because the bullet (assuming a .223 cal. Remington 55 gr. cartridge) is traveling roughly three times the speed of sound (approximately 3239 feet per second muzzle velocity) while the sound of the muzzle report (the gunshot) is traveling much slower at approximately 1138.52 feet per second (80 F air temperature assumed) and therefore the impact of the projectile is recorded before the muzzle report when it is recorded by someone closer to the target zone and further from the weapon. If this were overlapping gunfire, as in multiple shooters, then i think all of the following would have to be true:
- Both gunman would have had to be firing approximately the same caliber of weapon because nearly all of the firing sequences recorded in the video/audio files i analyzed that were captured by people close to the venue, all sound similar in duration, tone and the rate of fire
- Both gunman would have had to be using a bump-stock or similar device because the telltale variations in the rapid fire sequences produced by such a device can be clearly heard in all of these samples i analyzed
- According to the data provided by witness locations and bullet impact to muzzle report delay times, both gunmen would have to be located in generally the same place
- Both of the gunmen would have to had fired at nearly the same time with one (the same one) leading the other by approximately 30 to 40 milliseconds and they would have had to stop their firing in the same order with roughly the same 30 to 40 millisecond offset
Meeting all of these conditions does not seem logical in the least to me and, from listening to audio samples and looking at the audio waveforms, there is no doubt in my mind that the generally louder and sharper sounds are bullet impacts and not muzzle reports. For example, in a video originally titled A personal story on Vegas Concert, at the 00:02:43.27, 00:02:45.9 and 00:02:46.3 time marks, bullets can be heard hitting what sounds like metal and glass and these sounds are accompanied by the corresponding bullet impact sounds which one would expect since bullets don’t impact dense objects silently, such as asphalt, metal and glass.
The locations of several witnesses who were positioned close to the festival are plotted on the map below. Surrounding and centered around each witness is a colored circle specific to that witness which, based on the data below, indicates the approximate distance of the shooter from that particular witness. The diameter of each circle around each witness is determined by calculating the bullet impact to muzzle report delay time as per the ‘bullet time to distance’ chart below. For example, if a sample bullet impact to muzzle report delay was 300 milliseconds, then this would put the gunman at a distance of 800 feet from the witness (assuming a .223 caliber cartridge and correcting for atmospheric conditions, the speed of sound, etc.).
If we only look at the data for a single witness, then the shooter could be positioned anywhere along the circumference of the circle surrounding that witness, however when the data for multiple witnesses is plotted we should then be able to determine not only an approximate distance, but also the approximate position of the shooter or multiple positions of multiple shooters if there was more than one. Looking at the image below, all of the circles converge closest to the Mandalay Bay which is consistent with a single shooter at or near the hotel. The smaller red circle nearest the Mandalay Bay indicates where the circles tend to converge tighter and thus it indicates the approximate position of the gunman according to the data from all the witness recordings.
The gaps between the circles surrounding the witnesses and the Mandalay Bay where the sniper nest is assumed to be could be because the reference cartridge i used (.223 Remington, metal case, 55 gr.) is different than the actual cartridge used. Another possibility is that there is a problem with the math i used, however if the math is correct then, while the data still indicates a single shooter, the location of that shooter may not have been at the Mandalay Bay, though i lend next to zero credence to that possibility at the moment. There are also variables to consider, such as the distance of witnesses from the point of bullet impact, their distance from the gunman and probably others which i have not considered, though in my opinion i believe that the impact such variables would have upon the data is minimal.
You will have to enlarge the image below to see the detail. If simply clicking it does not enlarge it enough, try right-clicking it and choosing to view it in a new window or tab, or copy the image location and paste the URL in a new window/tab.
Again, it is not only the raw data that seems to indicate a single gunman, but also the audio of the muzzle reports which, except for the amplitude, sound very much the same across all of the witness videos in terms of firing rate, variations in the firing rate which is indicative of a bump-stock device, burst times, tone, etc..
Please feel free to share your comments. You need not register to leave a comment and if you wish to comment anonymously, just use a fake email address. If you were a witness to this event or have sensitive information to share, you have my assurance that your right to privacy will be maintained.
If you’re curious about how the data in the image above was derived, read on…
I may work further on this, so do not consider it complete. There may be errors, so do not consider it perfect. If you have any feedback, questions, or find any errors, again, feel free to comment or contact me privately.
general observations -------------------- * several shot sequences are approximately 10 seconds * no shot sequences seem to be any longer than 10-11 seconds * some 10 second shot sequences are very close to other firing sequences, such as the 00:03:25-00:03:27 and 00:03:30-00:03:40 sequences in the  video - if the shooter had to reload after a 10 second burst, i doubt there was enough time to eject, reload, reacquire the target area and begin firing, nor do i think there was time to pick up another weapon which, for the example given, there is only approximately 3 seconds between bursts * i cannot detect any muzzle flashes from the Paddock hotel room (or anywhere else) from the videos i examined, particularly from witness  which includes some fairly steady footage of the Mandalay Bay during a rapid fire sequence - i adjusted the brightness, contrast and color saturation of the video to a large degree and could not observe flashes - although many of the videos are not of the highest quality, i still find this odd - the shooter certainly was not using a silencer and i tend to doubt that a flash suppressor alone would mask the muzzle flashes * although Paddock apparently had 20+ guns in his room, it is unusual for any of the gunshot sequences to differ in amplitude and tone within the same witness recordings and often they differ little between different witness recordings - the bump-stock type repetitive fire variations are present in every video - this begs the question as to whether Paddock, the alleged shooter, ever used more than one type/caliber of weapon and, if he did not, then why bring 20+ guns which is an utterly absurd number
Atmospheric conditions in Las Vegas, October 1st, 2017:
A 20 degree angle was used for ballistics calculations. This was roughly estimated using Google Maps:
.223 Remington, metal case, 55 gr. cartridge ballistics table:
Bullet time to distance, corrected for atmospheric conditions and angle.
How calculations were preformed
calculations ------------ * ballistic calculations were preformed using the Ballistic Calculator tool from GunData.org  * distances from projectile impacts to muzzle reports are calculated from witness recordings close to the concert where projectile impacts are recorded before the audible muzzle report - from this data the estimated distance to the shooter is derived and, given enough data from multiple witnesses, shooter position can be derived * cartridge (assumed): .223 Remington, Remington Metal Case, 55gr (used for ballistic calculations) - ballistic coefficient: 0.202 - initial velocity: 3240 ft/s - bullet weight: 55 gr. - zero range: 100 yds. - shooting angle: 20 deg. - sight height: 1.5" - wind velocity: 0 - wind angle: 0 - drag function: G1 | Ingalls - air temp: 80 F - altitude: 2030 ft. - atmospheric pressure: 29.53 - relative humidity: 24% * Las Vegas temperature, 1-Oct-2017, 10p: 80 deg. F (used for ballistic calculations and speed of sound)  * Las Vegas relative humidity, Oct: 24% (used for ballistic calculations)  * speed of sound @ 80 deg. F: 1138.52 ft/s  * map radius's surrounding each witness location as plotted on the map are calculated using the projectile impact to muzzle report delay figures - added to the distance is the difference between the witness location and the target area (rough center of open area in front of stage) to create the corrected distances which are then used to calculate the radius around the witness - the corrected distance was measured on Google Maps using the built-in measuring tool sound time to distance feet ms ------------ 1800 1581 1650 1449 1500 1317 1350 1186 1200 1054 1050 922 900 790 750 659 600 527 450 395 300 263 150 132 projectile time to distance feet ms ----------- 1800 928 1650 809 1500 700 1350 600 1200 509 1050 426 900 350 750 280 600 215 450 155 300 100 150 48  https://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KVGT/2017/10/1/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Las+Vegas&req_state=NV&req_statename=Nevada&reqdb.zip=89101&reqdb.magic=1&reqdb.wmo=99999  https://www.weather.gov/epz/wxcalc_speedofsound  http://www.las-vegas.climatemps.com/humidity.php  http://gundata.org/ballistic-calculator
SOFTWARE USED ------------- os: GNU/Linux Mint packages: Waterfox (web browser) Scrapbook X (extension to save and organize web content) Audacity (audio editor) GIMP (image editor) Kate (text/code editor) youtube-dl (download video, extract audio) KSnapshot (screen capture) VLC (media player
Witness  analysis
witness  scope: measure muzzle report to echo delay in order to determine shooter distances and, along with data from other witnesses, locations reference video: RARE ANGLE LAS VEGAS SHOOTING FOOTAGE FROM FRONT ROW video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miznwQu3WyE data ---- * approx. distance to Mandalay shooter window: * approx. distance to center of concert area: notes ----- * the following distances were averaged to plot witness circles: 1000 + 1075 + 925 + 1000 + 840 + 930 / 6 = 961.67' audio sample (h:m:s) impact (h:m:s) report (h:m:s) delay (s) distance (ft) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00:00:00-00:00:10  00:00:46-00:00:57 00:00:46.14 00:00:46.54 0.4 1000 00:00:46-00:00:57 00:00:55.86 00:00:56.3 0.44 1075 00:01:13-00:01:15 00:01:14.69 00:01:15.05 0.36 925 00:01:15-00:01:24 00:01:15.45 00:01:15.85 0.4 1000 00:01:42-00:01:53 00:01:43.12 00:01:43.44 0.32 840 00:01:42-00:01:53 00:01:51.55 00:01:51.91 0.36 930  unable to obtain a good impact/report sample
Witness  analysis
witness  scope: measure muzzle report to echo delay in order to determine shooter distances and, along with data from other witnesses, locations reference video: A personal story on Vegas Concert video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBZMh19_Dws (deleted) witness name: Lisa Fine data ---- * approx. distance to Mandalay shooter window: 1,186' * approx. distance to center of concert area: 85' notes ----- * the following distances were averaged to plot witness circles: 1040 + 1025 / 2 = 1032.5' * it is assumed that some of the firing sequences in this sound track consist of bullet impacts followed by muzzle reports for the following reasons: 1) the shear sharpness of the higher frequency sounds preceding the lower amplitude and lower frequency sounds, 2) the 00:00:14-00:00:16, 00:02:37-00:02:44 and 00:02:44-00:02:47 samples where apparently bullets can be heard striking objects in the vicinity of the witness, possibly glass in the 00:00:14-00:00:16 sample and metal in the 00:02:37-00:02:44 and 00:02:44-00:02:47 samples, and 3), because of the witness location which is much closer to the concert than to Mandalay Bay which would account for bullet impacts being recorded before muzzle reports * at 00:02:43.27, 00:02:45.9 and 00:02:46.3 there are bullet impacts that sound like they are extremely close to the witness - one of the latter two impacts, and i don't know which, may possibly be seen in image file "003-bullet-impact.png" - this could just be an anomaly in the video since this small bright area on the pole in front of the witness appears for only a single frame, however it does correspond with the spike in the audio that sounds like a bullet striking a metallic object audio sample (h:m:s) impact (h:m:s) report (h:m:s) delay (s) distance (ft) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00:00:15-00:00:16 [1,2] 00:00:16-00:00:18  00:00:22-00:00:24 00:00:22.36 00:00:22.78 0.42 1040 00:01:26-00:01:29 00:01:27.72 00:01:28.13 0.41 1025 00:01:31-00:01:41  00:02:01-00:02:11  00:02:35-end   unable to obtain a good impact/report sample  breaking glass at 00:15:35-00:15:42
Witness  analysis
witness  scope: measure muzzle report to echo delay in order to determine shooter distances and, along with data from other witnesses, locations reference video: Las Vegas Shooting (FIRST SHOTS) _RARE video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT5sUUgsO_Y data ---- * approx. distance to center of concert area: 156', 1,578' * approx. distance to Paddock hotel room: 1,355', 2,033' notes ----- * the following distances were averaged to plot witness circles: 1125 + 1110 / 2 = 1117.5' * corrected distance is derived from the difference in feet from the witness location to the approximate center of the concert area in front of the stage where bullets impacted - this corrected difference is then added to the distance figures below * from ~00:02:00 on, the witness is moving almost constantly and further away from the Mandalay Bay hotel, then moves slightly closer to it in the last few minutes audio sample (h:m:s) impact (h:m:s) report (h:m:s) delay (s) distance (ft) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00:03:12-00:03:14  00:03:17-00:03:18 00:03:17.13 00:03:17.6 0.47 1125 00:03:19-00:03:21 00:03:19.65 00:03:20.11 0.46 1110 00:03:51-00:04:01 [2,6] 00:04:39-00:04:49  00:05:06-00:05:16  00:05:35-00:05:44 [2,3] 00:07:00-00:07:01 [2,4] 00:07:08-00:07:09  00:07:33-00:07:34 [1,2] 00:07:35-00:07:36 [1,2] 00:08:45-00:08:47 [1,2] 00:08:49-00:08:57 [1,2] 00:09:55-00:10:02 [1,2] 00:10:21-00:10:22 [1,2] 00:10:22-00:10:24 [5,2] 00:11:17-00:11:26 [1,2] 00:12:35-00:12:38 [1,2] 00:12:40-00:12:44  00:13:02-00:13:07   possible rapid fire, very low amplitude  unable to obtain a good impact/report sample  no impacts detected  possible impact or report, possible small-arms fire  although the 00:10:22-00:10:24 sample closely follows the 00:10:21-00:10:22 sample, the tone is noticeably different  at approx. 00:03:53 in the video, there is a man in a white shirt on the left side of the frame that seems to drop to the ground as though he was shot in the head
Witness  analysis
witness  scope: measure muzzle report to echo delay in order to determine shooter distances and, along with data from other witnesses, locations reference video: 2 SHOOTERS HEARD 0:48 LAS VEGAS SHOOTING FOOTAGE video source: (deleted from YouTube) alternate video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zDGbLqOH7Y data ---- * approx. distance to Mandalay shooter window: 1,081' * approx. distance to center of concert area: 112' notes ----- * the following distances were averaged to plot witness circles: 1110 + 1025 + 975 + 820 + 875 / 5 = 961 audio sample (h:m:s) impact (h:m:s) report (h:m:s) delay (s) distance (ft) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00:00:13-00:00:16 00:00:15.18 00:00:15.64 0.46 1110 00:00:18-00:00:28 00:00:18.28 00:00:18.69 0.41 1025 00:00:49-00:00:59  00:01:23-00:01:31 00:01:27.16 00:01:27.55 0.39 975 00:01:31-00:01:35  00:01:49-00:01:58  00:01:57.55 00:01:57.87 0.32 820 00:01:58-00:02:01  00:01:58.3 00:01:58.64 0.34 875  unable to obtain a good impact/report sample  sequence begins with a high amplitude, low frequency burst of about 8 shots which sound like muzzle reports, however the amplitude and frequency of the sounds is significantly different than the other muzzle reports in this video  distance estimate appears to be wildly incorrect, especially given that the amplitude and frequency of the muzzle reports is similar to other samples in this video
Witness  analysis
witness  scope: measure muzzle report to echo delay in order to determine shooter distances and, along with data from other witnesses, locations reference video: Video Las Vegas shooting during concert WARNING Disturbing content video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV1zMdabikc data ---- * approx. distance to Mandalay shooter window: 1,220' * approx. distance to center of concert area: 125' notes ----- * the following distances were averaged to plot witness circles: 1060 audio sample (h:m:s) impact (h:m:s) report (h:m:s) delay (s) distance (ft) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 00:00:00-00:00:03  00:00:38-00:00:50  00:01:06-00:01:17 00:01:06.37 00:01:06.8 0.43 1060 00:01:36-00:01:45  00:02:36-00:02:37  00:03:41-00:03:43   unable to obtain a good impact/report sample
Change logClick to expand...
- initial publication
- added information about possible foreknowledge of the shooting
- added information regarding the ‘Stephanie’ interview
- misc. minor edits and typo corrections
- minor corrections to witness  data
- minor correction to witness  circle on map
- removed the ‘personal observations that are beyond the scope of this work’ section in the ‘general observations’ file and incorporated it in the main body of this document
- added info about the MGM stock sale
- updated and edited other content
- edited and clarified information regarding the gap between the converging circles around the witnesses and the Mandalay Bay hotel
- major corrections to all of the witness data, however the results remain essentially the same
- removed witness data that either was not relevant to my analysis, or where the witnesses were too far away from the festival to provide accurate data
- uploaded new image files for most of this document and added a couple more
- corrected some text in all of the witness analysis files (this has no effect upon the data)
- added data for a new witness,
, to replace the old data for the old
witness whose data was not usable
- minor edits
- fixed a broken link
- added more info regarding FAA requirements for flying aircraft at night
- edited video link for ‘Stephanie’ interview since YouTube deleted the original as part of their censorship campaign
- typo correction
- minor edits, polishing
- added more info about the James Murren stock dump
- added info about George Soros betting against MGM stock
- added more info regarding the stock trades prior to the shooting
- minor edits