Leaked Las Vegas SWAT Audio Indicates Police Gunned Down Stephen Paddock in Hotel

originally posted by: Boadicea

In terms of records and documentation, this security guard is a phantom. The only security guard named Jesus Campos registered with the state of Nevada lives in California and is employed by CSC, an independent security company. There is no official record of Jesus Campos working for either Mandalay Bay or MGM. There is only an anonymous leak to a hitherto unknown citizen investigator... which I find very suspect for several reasons.

There was a discussion yesterday about how Campos's name was manually entered into the system the day before this happened, no details, just a name...

originally posted by: sg1642
At 11:20 they breach the door and enter the suite. At 11:27 they breach the second door inside the room, then Zebra20 advises the dispatcher that the suspect is down, one officer discharged his weapon and there are “no other injuries.”

A weapon was fired and there is a lot of debate about multiple wounds in the picture. Question. Did one of the first men on the scene execute paddock out of anger? Is that what a possible cover up is actually about?

I have wondered for a few days now if the police killed an already wounded paddock while he was on the ground. He looks like he was wounded in the head and chest in the pictures. Police have already said they fired when in the room.

All this talk of shooting through doors...it just doesn't happen. Not by trained individuals.

"Reconnaissance by fire?"

That's the IDF term for it.

originally posted by: ipsedixit
"Reconnaissance by fire?"

That's the IDF term for it.

Recce by fire is a conventional tactic used in the field. It involves firing into likely or suspected enemy positions and waiting on movement or return fire. It isn't something that is used when clearing rooms. It is far better to take whatever is on the other side of that door by surprise than to alert it to your presence.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: TonyS

I've heard nothing about a sniper on the ground or other tall building being a part of the action. I would have gotten a sniper to fire on the guy to keep him ducking as door entry was done. Yes, that could have been dangerous if there was not direct communication between the sniper and the entry unit, but that is the way things are done by pros. Which may explain why, I heard that the team waited 24 minutes before storming the door. But I admit this is armchair analysis on sketchy info.

Sir , atleast you sating something that can be reasonable assume to be a reasonable police procedure.

THe crowd here that is assuming that the scenes were prestaged are just a tad off in my books.

As opposed to assuming the cops are the center of a conspiracy people should be looking at the factors that point TO the conspiracy sirrounding Paddock(?).

Tons of ammo - how did he get it there unseen.

Did he carry his gun through the foyer or in a back door.

The mystery is not "why is the bad guy dead" it's "how did the dead the guy pull off getting set up unseen."

that is where the conspiracy is.

originally posted by: SmilingROB

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: TonyS

I've heard nothing about a sniper on the ground or other tall building being a part of the action. I would have gotten a sniper to fire on the guy to keep him ducking as door entry was done. Yes, that could have been dangerous if there was not direct communication between the sniper and the entry unit, but that is the way things are done by pros. Which may explain why, I heard that the team waited 24 minutes before storming the door. But I admit this is armchair analysis on sketchy info.

The mystery is not "why is the bad guy dead" it's "how did the dead the guy pull off getting set up unseen."

that is where the conspiracy is.

We know where the conspiracy is, those of us who have been following these threads, I assure you.

I would like to know how he pulled it off, why he pulled it off, who is really behind it, why he is dead, are there any more than 59 people dead, and did other people besides him cause the 59 people to be dead? For starters.

The big question...

How far will they go to cover this up? Some think 9/11 was allowed to take place because of the need to cover a financial "error"...

Future news?:

All Of LVMPDs Elite "ZEBRA TEAM" Perish In Explosion During Routine Drill/Training Exercise. An outpouring of support.... Candlelight vigil... Blahblablah... "Lets Roll"-esque slogan in there somewhere, maybe a of, Vegas Strong... Closeups of wifes and kids faces... And its a wrap.

It's time for honest LEOs to start speaking up NOW.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Ive been wondering, can some computer analysis be run on the video to, if not get the trajectories, at least get the path of hits as they land. Just where they land and when, not necessarily where they come from, but in some of the detected hits, at least a decent estimate should be possible. I bet the FBI computers can analyze the F out of a video.

Also, i know some cities have devices that allow them to i think triangulate the position of gunfire. But I don't know much about them... :l From the various video and audio, triangulation should also be possible. I would just seperate by wavelength all 2 or 3 different sounds. And analyse them independantly without worrying if it is an echo or hits, because the data should verify the rapidly moving positions of echoes and hits compared to a relatively stable shooter.

I have little to contribute to this topic at the present time but I keep feeling compelled to point out in every discussion that impact sounds are barely, if at all audible at any time in the footage from the shooting. At least from my honest attempt to listen to the acoustic patterns. What people are hearing generally is the disturbance caused by bullets traveling supersonic through the air (i.e. a miniature sonic boom) which produces a distinctive crackling sound. Given the speed bullets travel at, by the time you hear it, it's probably already hit something anyways but it's bothersome that this keeps being described as an impact sound which skews peoples' understanding of the physics of what's taking place.

It's extremely useful to listen to the thud of the shot succeeding the crack because it permits you to estimate distance to shooter, as the muzzle pop is necessarily slower to reach your ear than the noise produced by the wake of the bullet--speed of sound vs. the speed of a .223 or .308-caliber bullet moving supersonic. There was an audio analysis video out there where someone apparently "proved" you can tell there were a minimum of two shooters at completely different ranges engaging during the course of the shooting, but I haven't watched it to check if it's on point or not. That'd be your best bet, to dissect footage and listen for the delay between crack and thud. I personally noticed the cracks were inconsistent in both number and speed vs. the thuds, which is more than enough proof for me that someone else was in there causing mayhem.

Sorry if this is somewhat off-topic.

a reply to: Greenfire

If these were supersonic rounds a weapons with a suppressor would probably not be capable of hiding the supersonic boom that well. At least not with the 223. These rounds make a lot of noice since they are exstreamly fast.

a reply to: spy66

Suppressors don't reduce the sonic boom at all since the baffles only stunt the violent gas expansion in the barrel, until it exits at lower pressure--thus reducing the muzzle pop by a considerable margin. On the other hand the bullet leaves a constant pressure wave in it's wake as it travels, meaning the suppressor would have zero effect on the bullet's acoustics once it's downrange.

To shoot truly "quietly" a sub-sonic load would have to be employed, and those have among other things the disadvantae of reduced energy and velocity, not to mention they tend to cycle poorly in automatic weapons. The shots themselves didn't need to be hidden, only the point of origin, which is essentially the purpose of a true firearm suppressor.

a reply to: Greenfire

You can buy adaptors that solve the issue you get with subsonic ammo in a semi automatic AR.


But non of the weapons used were semi automatic or fitted with a bump stalk. These were automatic weapons.

a reply to: spy66

You're not wrong about the usage of full auto weapons here, but I disagree somewhat--I heard a number of distinct single shots audible from at least some POVs, cleverly (but not 100%) masked by the blaring auto fire. The number of shots doesn't line up with the number of cracks heard during some sequences. Meaning there's at least one other person shooting who we mysteriously cannot hear...another curiousity to me is that someone would use automatic fire in the first place as it lacks controllability and is difficult to hit with at range. You can hear someone raking randomly back and forth during those long bursts (producing the large number of injuries, but not kills) and yet the dispersal of corpses did not appear random and scattered at all.

But this is kind of veering off topic.

a reply to: Greenfire

There are three shooters back satage. The reason the shots dont sync 100% is because two of the shooters are overlaping eachother. The shooter to the right back stage is being overlaped by the shooter to the left back stage.
This is also the reason why people have reacted to the length some of these rounds lasted for.

The third shooter centerstage initiates the shooting at least two times that can be observed.
First time just after the band runs of stage. You can see the muzlleflash just bellow the bright screen back stage. The second time this shooter can be observed are where i have exlplained in a earlier poste with screenshots and video with actual time this can be observed.
The shooter center stage shot from the same location each time.

a reply to: SmilingROB

The real question is how did nobody notice a few hundred pounds of 1' thick safety glass falling 300 feet down?
Wouldn't it make one helluva crash?
Only 1 person reported hearing glass broken, that was a girl at the bus stop in front of Mandalay.

a reply to: 3n19m470

They use the timing of the sounds and when it reaches the microphones to determine it's distance away. Then they use trigonometry to deduce the intersection. With 2 microphones you can establish a range. With 3 or more you can pinpoint it's origin.

a reply to: KansasGirl

I agree it seems an odd thing to do, as whilst Paddock was contained in that room the risk to other guests at the hotel was minimal. Unless of course, SWAT were told he was already dead

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Which statement was apprently debunked due to distance and noise from the concert where the bus stop was, so I read

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Which statement was apprently debunked due to distance and noise from the concert where the bus stop was, so I read

Not sure about that one,

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
a reply to: SmilingROB

The real question is how did nobody notice a few hundred pounds of 1' thick safety glass falling 300 feet down?
Wouldn't it make one helluva crash?
Only 1 person reported hearing glass broken, that was a girl at the bus stop in front of Mandalay.

And after or during the shooting.

Hmmm