Emergency Doctors Determine that Trump was Struck by a Rifle Bullet

[Joe Elliott]

Going back to one of the original themes of this posts, emergency room doctors do not act like Sherlock Holmes. They get reports of victims of gunshots wounds coming in, they don't go sit in a corner and smoke a couple of pipes and figure out the details, dydywhile the patients bleed out. They get busy and treat the wounds.

In the Trump case, they don't make a careful study of whether a wound was caused by a rifle bullet or a fragment. They just treat it and report it as a bullet wound.

If the JFK case, they don't make a careful study. Wounds typically occur in pairs. And entrance wound and an exit wound. If they find one wound, they don't carefully look for the other wound and then consider which is the entrance wound and which is the exit wound. If they find a round wound on a dying patient, they will just consider it to be an entrance wound, and not consider the possibility that it was an exit wound that was shored up by a collar.

The statements by emergency room doctos are not Holy Writ.

[Richard Smith]

You or the AP have cropped the Friday statement from the FBI. Here is the complete quote:

https://apnews.com/article/trump-bullet-shrapnel-ronny-jackson-christopher-wray-cb780b9d1a078f0be4191682e75101cf

“What struck former President Trump in the ear was a bullet, whether whole or fragmented into smaller pieces, fired from the deceased subject’s rifle,” the agency said in a statement.

In other words, the President was struck by, either:
* a rifle bullet
or:
* a fragment of a rifle bullet

in which case I wonder, if it was a fragment, how they could tell if was a fragment of the bullet and not a fragment of the object the bullet struck.

Since the FBI believes it could have been a fragment, bullets don't just fragment themselves. They must know, i assume, of some object that was roughly between the shooter and Trump that was struck. But we do not know what the object was or what damage happened to it.


And I have read in the news, and checked out the wikipedia page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Donald_Trump

So no one hear wants to take a stab at explaining how five men standing near each other received their minor wounds. My explanation? From a spray of several fragments caused when the bullet struck on object. Let's here someone else's idea.

LOL. The FBI investigated and said it was a bullet.  That's a B-U-L-L-E-T.  You think that you know better than the FBI?  You sound like a JFK CTer desperately spinning to reach a desired outcome.   Here is the bottom line.  You hate Trump.  You don't want him to have miraculously survived an assassination attempt in an heroic manner.  Rather, you want to alter the facts to make it seem as though he was in less danger.  We shouldn't believe our eyes or common sense.  We shouldn't believe the FBI who has investigated the actual facts.  Rather, we should entertain some baseless alternative theory because it suits your political narrative.

[Jerry Organ]

Here is a link that shows, if you scroll down a bit, the streak was about the length of his hat, about one foot. Object traveling at 8,000  feet per second if the shutter speed was 1/8,000 of a second. Impossible.

https://haje.medium.com/theres-a-problem-with-that-bullet-in-flight-photo-of-trump-333dc1eeda1a

Mills' camera had a "rolling shutter".

    "Rolling shutter is a method of image capture in which a still picture
     (in a still camera) or each frame of a video (in a video camera) is
     captured not by taking a snapshot of the entire scene at a single
     instant in time but rather by scanning across the scene rapidly,
     vertically, horizontally or rotationally. In other words, not all parts
     of the image of the scene are recorded at exactly the same instant.
     (Though, during playback, the entire image of the scene is displayed
     at once, as if it represents a single instant in time.) This produces
     predictable distortions of fast-moving objects or rapid flashes of light."

Undistorted

Rolling-Shutter Distortion

The left half of the streak was recorded earlier than the other half. In the meanwhile, the bullet had moved a small amount.

[Charles Collins]

Mills' camera had a "rolling shutter".

    "Rolling shutter is a method of image capture in which a still picture
     (in a still camera) or each frame of a video (in a video camera) is
     captured not by taking a snapshot of the entire scene at a single
     instant in time but rather by scanning across the scene rapidly,
     vertically, horizontally or rotationally. In other words, not all parts
     of the image of the scene are recorded at exactly the same instant.
     (Though, during playback, the entire image of the scene is displayed
     at once, as if it represents a single instant in time.) This produces
     predictable distortions of fast-moving objects or rapid flashes of light."

Undistorted

Rolling-Shutter Distortion

The left half of the streak was recorded earlier than the other half. In the meanwhile, the bullet had moved a small amount.

That explains it. Technically any single point or pixel in the photo is exposed for the specified shutter speed time. However, the time that it takes to expose the overall photo (or even just the length of the bullet streak) is greater than the specified shutter speed time. Since the shutter “roll” apparently moves horizontally when the camera is in landscape orientation, I imagine that if Mills had had the camera turned 90-degrees (portrait orientation) that the shutter roll would have been vertical and a horizontal bullet streak would have been closer to the correct length for that 1/8000 of a second shutter speed setting. Thanks Jerry!

[Jerry Organ]

Maybe some of the streak could be air disturbance in the wake of the bullet. Looks like the FBI has something else on their plate. They'll have to hire consultants and have them stage a recreation. Trump hates the FBI and government-payroll consultants, so it'll just be for sensible folks.

Trump's uncle went to MIT, so maybe Trump can doodle it out on a napkin in his spare time. That'll go in the Kelly Report.

[Royell Storing]

  Trump's Uncle did far more than, "...went to MIT". He also did clandestine work for the U.S. Govt. Immediately after the death of Nikola Tesla, Uncle Trump was tabbed to independently sift through the numerous "locked down"  labs that Tesla had established across the USA.   

[Richard Smith]

Going back to one of the original themes of this posts, emergency room doctors do not act like Sherlock Holmes. They get reports of victims of gunshots wounds coming in, they don't go sit in a corner and smoke a couple of pipes and figure out the details, dydywhile the patients bleed out. They get busy and treat the wounds.

In the Trump case, they don't make a careful study of whether a wound was caused by a rifle bullet or a fragment. They just treat it and report it as a bullet wound.

If the JFK case, they don't make a careful study. Wounds typically occur in pairs. And entrance wound and an exit wound. If they find one wound, they don't carefully look for the other wound and then consider which is the entrance wound and which is the exit wound. If they find a round wound on a dying patient, they will just consider it to be an entrance wound, and not consider the possibility that it was an exit wound that was shored up by a collar.

The statements by emergency room doctos are not Holy Writ.

You began this thread by claiming that Trump was not struck by a bullet or bullet fragment.  Instead you claimed he was struck by some other mystery object three feet long.  Tin foil hat stuff.  Now you appear to accept that Trump was struck by a bullet or at least a fragment of a bullet.   Either way that means he was shot.  Why go through this tortured exercise?  Here is your reason:  "Trump is claiming he was struck by a bullet to make himself seem more heroic, a man spared by a miracle of God."  You want to denigrate this conclusion (a fact) because you hate Trump.  It is very revealing of the psychology of those who pathologically hate Trump.  Ideology is more important than fact.  It is more important to believe something that supports the narrative than your own eyes.

[Andrew Mason]

That explains it. Technically any single point or pixel in the photo is exposed for the specified shutter speed time. However, the time that it takes to expose the overall photo (or even just the length of the bullet streak) is greater than the specified shutter speed time. Since the shutter “roll” apparently moves horizontally when the camera is in landscape orientation, I imagine that if Mills had had the camera turned 90-degrees (portrait orientation) that the shutter roll would have been vertical and a horizontal bullet streak would have been closer to the correct length for that 1/8000 of a second shutter speed setting. Thanks Jerry!

The camera used was a Sony ILCE-1 camera which used a vertical travel mechanical shutter:

But that is not a problem since the camera was turned so that the vertical travel of the shutter curtain was in the same direction as the bullet travel.

While the exposure time is effectively 1/8000th of a second, the time it takes for the shutter opening to travel from top to bottom of the image sensor (shutter speed), appears to be 1/400th or 1/500th of a second (depending on whether it was 35 mm full frame or APS-C).  This means that the space between shutter curtains as it passes over the sensor is 1/20th or 1/16th of the vertical image captured.  So each photo is essentially a series of exposures from top to bottom of 1/8000th second snippets.  The time between the beginning of exposure of the top snippet and the end of exposure of the bottom one would be 1/400th of a second or 1/500th of a second.

If the camera used a shutter speed of 1/400th of a second (2.5 ms) and an exposure time of 1/8000th of a second, the time between one end of the streak and the other would be the width of the streak divided by the frame width x 2.5 ms.  So in this case, I measure the streak to be 21.4% of the total width of the image.  So the total exposure time is:

Exposure time for streak = .214 x 2.5 = .535 milliseconds.

If the camera used a shutter speed of 1/500th of a second (2 ms), the exposure time for the streak would be .214 x 2 = .428 ms.

Bullet speed

If the muzzle speed of the bullet was 3300 feet per second, by the time it travelled 450 feet it would be down to around 2700 fps.  So in 1 ms it would travel 2.7 feet. In .428 ms it would travel 1.16 feet or about 14 inches.  In .535 seconds it would travel about 17 inches.

So it looks to me like that is the real bullet streak is consistent with being captured by a shutter speed of 1/400th or 1/500th of a second with an exposure time of 1/8000th of a second (shutter curtain window of 1/16th or1/20th of the sensor width travelling across the image sensor in the direction of the bullet travel (ie direction of bullet travel in the image).