Vegas Shooting: shooters spotted on roof next to stage, Evidence and proof

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes

originally posted by: oddnutz
That building has a viewing platform ontop for concert goers by the look of it.
Same with the identical structure on the opposite side.

By the looks of it? So you don't know.

I highly doubt the public are allowed up there. Imagine the lawsuits if someone fell off.

I've seen people climb onto better viewing areas at concerts plenty of times. Or it was crew.

Phones flash. My phone flashes on notifications, besides the camera in use flash


Or it was strobe lights , they might have had some lights up there to use in the light show.

All of this other stuff aside, I feel the theory of shooters nestled in the back of the stage is more interesting and viable when you take into account that video from the high angle in MB.

Notice the lack of dispersal of bodies. They're not exactly all over the place as you'd expect from a madman firing indiscriminately into a crowd of thousands. They're curiously clustered immediately in front of the stage, in a line basically extending from it, with only a handful to the sides. This is inconsistent with random fire and would seem to suggest in my non-expert opinion well-aimed fire from an angle either close to and parallel to the stage, or in a direct line in front of or even inside of it.

Could be a case of "right for the wrong reason." I'm reasonably certain there was one or more suppressed rifles in play, being fired during the chaos of the random spraying--the heavy, loud automatic fire was used as cover to reduce the chance of someone detecting the actual shooting positions. Suppressed weapons aren't especially quiet (tend to be 130-140 dB from a rifle) but amidst the chaos of a screaming crowd, a much louder and more obvious shooter, and the dampening effect from the recesses of the stage, a well-chosen firing position would be essentially undetectable. Soldiers in combat in urban terrain sometimes already have difficulty locating the source of incoming fire from unsuppressed weapons!

a reply to: Greenfire

Notice the lack of dispersal of bodies. They're not exactly all over the place as you'd expect from a madman firing indiscriminately into a crowd of thousands. They're curiously clustered immediately in front of the stage, in a line basically extending from it, with only a handful to the sides.

To me, it makes more sense that the shooter from the windows at MB targeted the canvas covering on the top of the stage.
They have not shown us the condition of the stage canvas, but bet it is full of holes.

I highly doubt someone with an ounce of tactical thinking would silhouette themselves by moving along the rooftop or choose a firing point that was so exposed to higher and more elevated areas (such as where the video was filmed from). Looking at the angle it would bring them almost directly in line with paddock's point of aim. Given the fact he was firing 100 plus round bursts that would stand a good chance to bring them within his beaten zone. Working with him directly or working without him being aware, either way it wouldn't be a safe move. If there were different shooters, they would have been off at an angle and that would leave them located somewhere else.

a reply to: Crumbles

I still want to know what those single shots at the beginning of the video are. They sound like a high powered rifle.

if you remember the cops said that he had points of aim on the note that was on the table. what i think is if he had sighted in the fair grounds before hand, the first few single shots were to check his dope and range (were his shots would hit) then he started his rapid fire.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: Crumbles

I still want to know what those single shots at the beginning of the video are. They sound like a high powered rifle.

if you remember the cops said that he had points of aim on the note that was on the table. what i think is if he has sighted in the fair grounds before hand, the first few single shots few to check his dope and range (were his shots would hit) then he started his rapid fire.

I wonder if he was actually trying to kill members of the group on the stage?

a reply to: sg1642

that could have been what he was trying to do. also it could have been the shots on the fuel tanks. cause a explosion on the east side so everybody had to come out the west gates in front of the Bay.





i still think he was testing his range at first.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Yeah, I find it hard to believe he thought he could burst those tanks with the bullets he had from that distance. Right? Something seems off about that theory. He planned this so meticulously, but didn't take into account what he would need to bust those fuel tanks??

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Yeah, I find it hard to believe he thought he could burst those tanks with the bullets he had from that distance. Right? Something seems off about that theory. He planned this so meticulously, but didn't take into account what he would need to bust those fuel tanks??

Paddock never shoot these shots.

Look at the top and bottom image: Do you honestly think he could have made that shot from the 32 floor? No bloody way.
How did he sneek that bullet up under that small ledge?

Dont you People pay attention to details?

a reply to: djz3ro

Some might wonder why stage crews wear black -
So they can move around in the background and attract as little notice as possible.

originally posted by: KansasGirl
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Yeah, I find it hard to believe he thought he could burst those tanks with the bullets he had from that distance. Right? Something seems off about that theory. He planned this so meticulously, but didn't take into account what he would need to bust those fuel tanks??

Maybe a .50 cal rifle could do it, if that were his objective he could certainly afford one and you can buy them like any other off-the-shelf rifle. In addition you would need incendiary rounds, I don't know if tracers would work. Having only been hit twice I would say they were simply errant rounds, possibly ricochets but not with the intention of blowing up a fuel tank.

Not familiar with the construction of such tanks but aren't they double-walled to insure against such leaks?

a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

The dark black stuff is sott from when the kenetic energy from the projectile penetrated the steal.

For them who dont think a fullmetal jacet cant egnite this tank are mistaken....

Remember it is not the fuel that egnites its the gasses that egnite. This tank might have been empty and dry. There was probably no gasses to egnite in that tank.
The shooter pobably noticed that since it didnt cach fire after Three shots.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

Funny you should say that because those impact areas look suspiciously like incendiary impact marks.

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

Funny you should say that because those impact areas look suspiciously like incendiary impact marks.

He never used tracer rounds.... To easy to spot.

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

Funny you should say that because those impact areas look suspiciously like incendiary impact marks.

He never used tracer rounds.... To easy to spot.

Two different types of ammunition.

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

Funny you should say that because those impact areas look suspiciously like incendiary impact marks.

I gather you know what marks from incendiary rounds look like? This is pretty important and I agree they look like neither HP or FMJ strikes. I've shot up enough old cars to know what they look like.

Have to wonder why just 2 or 3 single shots fired at the tanks ?

Why not rapid/auto fire ?

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: spy66

What's with the dark look around the marks on the tanks? A regular lead or copper clad bullet wouldn't do that would it? Seems to soon for weathering.

edit:

Are they sure those spots happened during the shooting?

Funny you should say that because those impact areas look suspiciously like incendiary impact marks.

I gather you know what marks from incendiary rounds look like? This is pretty important and I agree they look like neither HP or FMJ strikes. I've shot up enough old cars to know what they look like.

Yes. And they look exactly like what can be seen there. I don't know what those tanks are made of and they may have a strange reaction to the kinetic force of a bullet strike but the spread out burn marks look like incendiary to me.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Have to wonder why just 2 or 3 single shots fired at the tanks ?

Why not rapid/auto fire ?

Accuracy.