Kirk Assassination: The Mystery Investigator Answers Your Biggest Questions

[00:00] Hello and welcome back to Trigger Smart.

[00:02] Now, many of you have seen the last few

[00:04] videos that I've done, the one from two

[00:05] days ago where I covered this person,

[00:08] Calakulu, if I'm saying that correctly.

[00:11] This person has sent out emails to

[00:13] dozens or even more than that, as far as

[00:15] I know, other creators. And some people

[00:18] are starting to report on some of the

[00:19] information that's coming from this

[00:21] individual or this entity. Um, I don't

[00:23] know the person. I don't know if any of

[00:25] them know the person either. We don't

[00:27] know their identity. don't know their

[00:29] background, but there's a theory that is

[00:32] well a piece of a theory I should say.

[00:35] Jason Goodman's theory and you know some

[00:37] other people as well that it came from

[00:39] the back. This person believes that as

[00:42] well. This individual or this entity has

[00:45] now sent out answers to your questions

[00:47] from the comments. So, we're going to

[00:49] explore that here today. And just a

[00:51] quick recap of kind of all these

[00:53] different theories, pieces from

[00:54] different ones being pulled in, is that

[00:57] a vehicle or a camera or a person

[01:02] somewhere behind the tent area

[01:05] hit him in the back of the head. Hit him

[01:07] at the top of his oipital lobe and it

[01:11] bounced into the vertebrae.

[01:14] And some say that it came out and that's

[01:15] the exit wound. Others say it went down

[01:18] and destroyed the C7 and stuck in there

[01:20] according to the corner. So, the

[01:22] bullet's still there, at least a

[01:23] fragment of the bullet, which means

[01:24] another fragment could still come out.

[01:26] It could be a piece of bone from the

[01:28] vertebrae that came out if he was shot

[01:29] from the back. Many say that it caused

[01:31] cavitation of the neck and possibly some

[01:33] of the chest area, which kicked out the

[01:35] shirt in the front and the back.

[01:38] This person here is saying that that

[01:41] amount of pressure or that amount of

[01:42] force and especially the speed that it

[01:44] happens could have thrown it up the

[01:47] pendant into the neck. Even if this is

[01:50] not what happened, even if it's not even

[01:51] close, just this idea and the way this

[01:54] person is defending their thesis is very

[01:56] interesting and can seem to be very

[01:58] convincing to certain people. So, let's

[02:00] see what they have to say. So, here

[02:02] again, we have Calakul, the mystery

[02:04] investigator.

[02:06] I've read some comments and I would like

[02:08] to address some of the most common and

[02:09] natural ones. Okay,

[02:12] before I even do that, I have found

[02:14] articles that say in different words

[02:16] that Charlie's pendant was was taken off

[02:19] Kirk's body when the paramedics tried to

[02:22] stop the bleeding. That's a quote, not

[02:24] from this person, but from an article

[02:27] that supports the video I sent you

[02:28] earlier, which rather clearly showed the

[02:29] necklace hanging in a single line from

[02:31] his neck after it broke and swung around

[02:33] his body. and it confirms the hypothesis

[02:35] that it could have been removed actively

[02:37] in the aftermath while on the ground by

[02:39] people crouching over his body. So, a

[02:41] quote, he never took it off until he was

[02:44] assassinated and the people caring for

[02:46] him ripped it off as they tried to save

[02:48] his life and Erica has it on her at all

[02:50] times. Now, that's from Fox News. And

[02:53] here's that article. Charlie Kirk's

[02:55] wife, Erica, addresses nation's first

[02:57] comments

[02:59] and we search for that. He never took it

[03:01] off until he was assassinated. And the

[03:03] people caring for him ripped it off as

[03:05] they tried to save his life. And Erica

[03:07] has it on her at all times now. Okay.

[03:11] They ripped it off him. Okay. Well, we

[03:14] saw clearly it was already broken.

[03:17] At least from the videos that I've seen

[03:18] and the images that I've seen, assuming

[03:20] they're not doctorred, it was already

[03:22] broken and hanging off his neck. So, if

[03:23] they had to rip it off of him, what does

[03:26] that mean? Does that mean rip it out of

[03:29] him?

[03:30] I don't know. And then next they show

[03:33] the small icon with blood traces in the

[03:35] crevice of the cross was ripped from

[03:36] Kirk's body. Okay.

[03:39] The small icon with blood traces in the

[03:41] crevice of the cross. So they're saying

[03:43] it was a cross. A lot of people are

[03:45] saying it was a Star of David or some

[03:47] other kind of pendant, St. Michael's

[03:49] pendant or something. Um, according to

[03:52] New York Times and Erica, it says the

[03:55] small icon with blood traces in the

[03:56] crevice of the cross was ripped from

[03:59] Kirk's body again. Ripped from Kirk's

[04:03] body by medics as they attempted to stop

[04:05] the bleeding after he was shot at

[04:07] Turning Point USA in Utah less than two

[04:09] weeks ago. Erica told the New York

[04:11] Times. So, let's check that. Here we

[04:13] have the article. Erica Kirk reveals she

[04:15] wears husband Charlie's bloodstained

[04:17] pendant that was ripped from his neck as

[04:18] he died. Okay.

[04:21] All right. And let's find that specific

[04:22] spot where they talk about a cross. And

[04:26] here it shows a small icon with blood

[04:28] traces in the crevice of the cross was

[04:29] ripped from Kirk's body by medics as

[04:31] they attempted to stop the bleeding

[04:33] after he was shot. And that and Erica

[04:35] told New York Times. So this is

[04:37] according to Erica. They're reporting on

[04:39] what she's saying. All right. Right now,

[04:40] up to this point, basically this person,

[04:42] this entity, whoever this is, is saying

[04:44] that there is some evidence that the

[04:47] necklace or the pendant in this case

[04:48] they say it's a cross. Erica says it's a

[04:50] cross, was ripped from his body. And

[04:53] this is after it's already broken. It

[04:55] was already hanging according to

[04:56] previous videos and previous things that

[04:58] this person has sent. So in that case,

[05:02] so far this thesis has been defended

[05:05] with the fact that news articles from

[05:08] Erica's words herself are saying that it

[05:11] was a cross and that it had to be ripped

[05:14] from his body. All right, now let's get

[05:16] into the first comment. The necklace is

[05:19] way too long. Now, this was probably the

[05:21] most common one that was in the

[05:23] comments. The necklace appears very long

[05:25] because we're used to seeing the front

[05:27] part after the necklace is folded in

[05:28] half, losing more of its length by being

[05:30] wrapped around the neck. When we

[05:32] straighten such a necklace into one

[05:33] line, it is right around the length seen

[05:35] in the video. I tried to simulate the

[05:37] necklace of the exact same length and he

[05:39] goes into some he or she goes into some

[05:41] details about how they tried to match

[05:42] that at home and it says be aware about

[05:45] the space by the neck and the thickness

[05:47] of the chains and things. So, please see

[05:49] the following additional visual

[05:51] validation. The pendant had four peaks

[05:54] as shown by the arrows. Let's consider

[05:55] the position of the bottom of the

[05:56] necklace. The top arrow if the top

[05:58] corner it is right under the D of the

[06:00] word freedom. So looking here we can see

[06:04] 1 2 3 4 and you'll see a zoomed in

[06:08] version as well here in a second. Here's

[06:10] the necklace split into three parts and

[06:12] then straightened out. There's also the

[06:14] elbow height for future reference. So

[06:17] this yellow line is behind the neck and

[06:20] in theory that would be curved so it

[06:21] could be even longer. Green is going to

[06:24] about that spot right just below the D,

[06:26] right? Because up here we can see the

[06:29] four parts of the cross below the D. And

[06:33] then the blue part is just the other

[06:35] piece going straight down. So this

[06:37] person took those colors. So you have

[06:39] the blue which is the left side of the

[06:41] chain, green which is the right side of

[06:43] the chain and yellow which is what would

[06:45] be behind him. Here's his elbow height.

[06:48] So the chain is fairly long if you go by

[06:51] this logic.

[06:53] Next let's consider that the vertical

[06:54] portions of the necklace appear a little

[06:56] shorter on the image there than they are

[06:58] because of cover on the neck. So

[07:00] accounting for the curve around the

[07:01] neck, this one here, the second one with

[07:04] this piece added would be the length of

[07:06] the chain

[07:08] from the neck position.

[07:11] So the length of the chain, as you can

[07:14] see, is a yellow, green, and blue. Blue,

[07:17] green, and yellow. Are these exactly the

[07:19] same length? They sure look like it. So

[07:22] if this theory is correct, then the

[07:24] length of the chain definitely hangs

[07:26] down pretty far. Let's keep going.

[07:29] Here's the exact same length positions

[07:30] of the neck and the wound location

[07:33] across his shoulder around his elbow and

[07:34] further down which is what we see in an

[07:36] image here coming up. So, blue around

[07:40] the neck piece, green and yellow. So,

[07:44] the same length. So, it hangs down

[07:47] pretty much all the way down to his

[07:49] genital area or definitely past his

[07:51] waist, right? Based on these lengths.

[07:53] So, hanging over his shoulder, it goes

[07:56] just past the elbow.

[07:58] The length of the necklace on the

[07:59] previous images matches very closely, if

[08:01] not perfectly, to the necklace that has

[08:02] been captured breaking, swinging, and

[08:03] hanging from his neck. So, if it's here,

[08:07] again, we're not going to show any gore,

[08:09] but we have this pendant or cross this

[08:13] person alleges in the neck. The chain is

[08:16] wrapping around,

[08:18] and you can kind of see the end of it

[08:20] there a little bit brighter, but it's

[08:21] wrapping around this whole area. And he

[08:23] goes just past his elbow.

[08:26] Just like this. Just past the elbow.

[08:30] Comment two. How could the perpetrators

[08:32] have predicted the pendant would cause

[08:33] the wound? They're saying they didn't

[08:35] predict this. Not always does everything

[08:37] go according to plan. Perhaps they had

[08:39] some other offiscation in mind. Maybe

[08:41] this was even better for them and helped

[08:42] them in the end by all the confusion. Or

[08:44] perhaps they had no special cover up

[08:45] planned and they figured they would all

[08:47] be gone before anyone finds out what

[08:49] happened. Tyler Robinson could have been

[08:50] a backup shooter and it can take just a

[08:53] single random person wandering where the

[08:54] shooter is, a random look in the right

[08:56] way, something blocking the view, bad

[08:57] battle light, etc. and many other events

[08:59] to make plan A impossible. So, it makes

[09:01] sense for them to have plan B ready. So,

[09:03] this person alleges there were multiple

[09:04] plans in place or Robinson could have

[09:07] just provided situational awareness. To

[09:10] this day, there's no conclusive footage

[09:11] capturing him clearly with a firearm

[09:14] with a gun. So, as far as I know, that's

[09:17] true. Tyler Robinson has not been seen

[09:18] with a firearm. There's no images of him

[09:21] on the roof, which Paramount Tactical

[09:24] clearly showed in his recent visit there

[09:28] that there were cameras on the roof, so

[09:30] they should have seen him. And when he

[09:33] jumps off the roof, there's no gun. When

[09:35] he's walking through the hallways,

[09:37] there's no gun visible, but then they

[09:39] say that it was his firearm and they

[09:41] found it in this forest or this park.

[09:43] So, that's the only information we have

[09:45] to go off of from that. Let's get back

[09:46] into it. All right. Comment three. Why

[09:49] didn't the medical examiner report the

[09:50] injury wound at the back of Charlie's

[09:52] head? This is assuming he was shot in

[09:55] the back of the head. I assume the

[09:57] medical examiner who has been the source

[09:58] of the information about the damaged

[10:00] cervical spine and bullet under the skin

[10:02] near T1 was the hospital Dr. Charlie has

[10:04] or was brought to after the incident.

[10:07] When someone is presented a body of a

[10:08] person reported to be shot, sees a large

[10:10] wound in the front of the neck and feels

[10:11] a bolt under the skin on the back of the

[10:12] T1. This case seems so conclusive to him

[10:17] that he doesn't even give it a second

[10:18] thought. As far as he's concerned, an

[10:20] autopsy is going to be be performed

[10:22] later on anyway. Why would he keep

[10:23] searching for anything else at that

[10:24] point? The wound at the back of the head

[10:26] hidden with hair could have been quite

[10:28] inconspicuous. Moreover, some gun

[10:30] enthusiast channels have reported right

[10:32] after the shooting with their

[10:33] commentaries that entry wounds are often

[10:35] so small that one has to be pulling the

[10:37] skin apart to look where the entry

[10:39] wounds actually are. I assume especially

[10:42] when searching in hair or fur of a shot

[10:44] animal or person, which might be similar

[10:46] to a wound with human hair. Now, we're

[10:48] not going to look at images of entry

[10:50] wounds for obvious reasons, but

[10:52] there can be variations. There can be

[10:55] times where the entry wound is difficult

[10:57] to find. There can be times where little

[10:59] or no blood goes through. A lot of times

[11:02] they can selfseal because the speed of

[11:04] the bullet and it cauterizes as it goes

[11:06] through. Um, there are a lot of things

[11:08] that can happen. So theoretically, could

[11:10] there be an injury wound that hasn't

[11:12] been seen yet? It's possible. Comment

[11:15] four, under some other videos that other

[11:17] people have done. How could the examiner

[11:19] tell that the cervical spine has been

[11:20] damaged and where the bullet was when he

[11:23] definitely didn't open up Charlie,

[11:24] knowing he was long dead?

[11:27] A medical doctor who touched hundreds of

[11:29] thousands of necks within the career can

[11:30] be able to sense damages like these just

[11:32] by palpitation of the neck and the head.

[11:34] He might not be able to tell a 3D image

[11:36] of every vertebrae, but he can sense

[11:38] damage when it's done. Especially if the

[11:40] bullet traveled along the back side of

[11:41] the spine, so the damage has been done

[11:43] from that side, which is easy to feel

[11:44] with the hands. And if the bullet

[11:45] stopped near the skin of T1 is reported,

[11:47] it is plausible that he would have been

[11:49] able to feel the bullet with his hands

[11:51] as well. Comment five, the illustrations

[11:54] show a person standing upright. Charlie

[11:57] was sitting hunched forward.

[11:59] The more hunched he sat, the more the

[12:01] trajectory works and the more

[12:03] perpendicular the pendant flew into the

[12:05] neck. By the way, the neck was expanding

[12:07] towards the pendant at the same time.

[12:09] This assumes the cavitation theory. So,

[12:11] the two speeds and forces combined. So,

[12:14] he's showing he or she is showing the

[12:16] direction of the pendant going up into

[12:18] the neck. Comment six under some other

[12:21] videos. How could the examiner tell the

[12:23] heart was damaged? Now, I believe this

[12:25] is the piece that I added where I said

[12:27] that if you got hit in the back of the

[12:29] spine, it could basically stop the heart

[12:31] instantly. And based on my research,

[12:33] that's not necessarily true in every

[12:35] case. And in a lot of cases, the heart

[12:37] keeps beating on its own, as many of you

[12:38] pointed out in the comments. So, Calakul

[12:40] says, in my view, he couldn't,

[12:43] meaning he couldn't tell that the heart

[12:44] was damaged. I think the notion that the

[12:46] heart was damaged or even stopped

[12:47] somehow came up collectively, partially

[12:49] me, was to explain the blood flowing and

[12:51] not squirting. It's not easy to stop a

[12:53] heart at an instant. It has its own

[12:54] pacemaker called the sinoatrial node.

[12:59] What we're seeing on this video is very

[13:00] dark blood, which is more likely venus

[13:02] blood, not arterial blood. I don't want

[13:05] to include images of blood here,

[13:06] obviously, but he says to he or she says

[13:10] to Google arterial versus venus blood to

[13:13] see the difference in color. So, this

[13:15] dark blood this person alleges was from

[13:18] a vein, not from an artery. It might

[13:21] seem like a huge amount of blood is

[13:22] flowing out of the wound very quickly.

[13:23] But when viewed in slow motion, I can

[13:24] imagine it making that impression with

[13:26] say 100 milliliters over those couple of

[13:28] seconds. And I haven't seen any video

[13:30] shown the wound for more than 2 seconds.

[13:32] So it's quite possible the flow slowed

[13:33] down considerably after the initial

[13:35] spurt. Many people noticed how the blood

[13:37] there was under the tent and on the

[13:38] pathway to the car. So it's quite likely

[13:40] that the flow more or less stopped after

[13:42] the first two seconds of release. Here's

[13:44] an image of the arteries and veins. It

[13:46] is quite possible to cut the vein or

[13:48] just the artery. I would even say that

[13:50] being more to the side, the vein might

[13:52] actually correspond more to the location

[13:54] of the wounds. So, this person is saying

[13:57] it's more likely theoretically in this

[13:59] case due to the dark blood and the

[14:01] location of the injury that one of these

[14:04] blue veins might have gotten pierced

[14:08] versus the actual arteries. Comment

[14:10] seven, Charlie was wearing a St. Michael

[14:13] pendant. Now, I saw hundreds of comments

[14:16] saying this. This is a relatively less

[14:19] important, but good to have clarity.

[14:21] There seems to be no concrete

[14:22] photography, but the pendant Charlie was

[14:24] wearing actually looked like when he was

[14:26] alive. From after the shooting, there

[14:27] are many thumbnails that don't actually

[14:29] correspond to the four corners apparent

[14:30] under his shirt. As someone noted in the

[14:32] comments, the pendant wouldn't even have

[14:34] to be pointy to be able to get whipped

[14:35] through the skin. However, based on the

[14:38] four points, so here's a close-up now

[14:40] under that D on the shirt. We have one

[14:43] there, one there, one there, and one

[14:47] there. Okay. Erica, his wife, has been

[14:51] supposedly showing and wearing the very

[14:52] necklace the security took out of his

[14:54] neck. He supposedly has blood on it,

[14:56] which she refuses to wash off. On her

[14:58] speaking photos, it seems to be confused

[15:00] for other pendant and necklace that she

[15:02] is wearing.

[15:05] This is showing the texture and

[15:06] thickness of the chain. What some

[15:09] articles use as a thumbnail doesn't

[15:11] match. So, we clearly had four corners.

[15:15] This has jagged edges in several

[15:17] corners, several vertices, which

[15:20] compared to this doesn't look like it

[15:21] matches. Okay.

[15:24] Example with a St. Michael pendant can

[15:27] have the shape of the cross, too.

[15:28] Although, this particular one probably

[15:29] isn't the right one either. But this one

[15:30] is, you know, four corners. Erica wore

[15:33] two necklaces during her speech.

[15:35] Articles tend to insinuate the visible

[15:38] pendant is the one. It isn't because it

[15:40] doesn't have any bumps pointing up from

[15:42] each of the four ends. So, he's talking

[15:44] about this one here.

[15:46] There's no bumps popping up that would

[15:48] stick out through the shirt.

[15:50] Okay. The other necklace is similar to

[15:52] Charlie's though, that longer one here.

[15:57] We don't get to see the pendant on it

[15:59] for that one. Finally, here's her

[16:00] holding the probable correct cross from

[16:02] the car. This is the best quality there

[16:04] seems to be. Texture of the necklace

[16:06] seems to match. Left arm of the cross

[16:08] appears different from the right,

[16:09] thinner and doesn't match the other

[16:10] arms. Potentially the left arm could be

[16:12] a substitute to complete the shape after

[16:14] the original arm was broken off during

[16:15] the whipping into Charlie's neck and

[16:17] entering. Okay, so here you see the

[16:21] cross that she appears to be carrying

[16:23] with her since she's passed. She refuses

[16:27] to wash the blood off it, she says. And

[16:29] if you look at the texture and thickness

[16:33] and the length of it, she's wrapped it

[16:34] around her hand multiple times. This

[16:37] looks like this could be the one. So,

[16:39] what do you think? Is that specific

[16:41] cross and chain? Is that the one that

[16:42] Charlie was wearing in the previous

[16:43] images? Could be. Let's get back into

[16:47] it. And one last note about cavitations.

[16:50] Notice on all the demonstrations for

[16:51] ballistic slow motion videos that the

[16:53] cavitation spreads perpendicular to the

[16:55] direction of the projectile. There are

[16:56] two directions in which it does very

[16:58] little. And that is the direction of the

[17:00] projectile and the direction from where

[17:01] it came. So, so what they're trying to

[17:03] show here is as a bullet goes through

[17:06] the ballistic gel, which a lot of people

[17:08] say is similar to human consistency of

[17:10] flesh and fluids, the cavitation goes

[17:13] perpendicular to the direction of the

[17:15] bullet, meaning up and down in this

[17:17] case, and not forward and back. So if

[17:19] the bullet was traveling down the spine

[17:21] after it bounced off the occipital bone

[17:23] as this person has proposed it was the

[17:25] most efficient direction to expand the

[17:26] neck on all its sides increase its

[17:28] circumference which then whipped the

[17:30] necklace. In that case only little of

[17:33] the energy goes to expand towards the

[17:35] chest and the head. So from the top view

[17:37] down they're alleging that it went

[17:39] straight down. When the bullet goes down

[17:41] the neck away from the observer

[17:42] cavitation spreads to its sides

[17:44] expanding the neck circumference. So

[17:45] we're looking at like a top down view

[17:47] basically here. top of his Charlie's

[17:49] head. So, it expands all these

[17:51] directions based on the travel of the

[17:54] bullet after it allegedly bounces off

[17:56] the oipital bone. Then, Calako goes on

[17:58] to say, "Had the bullet come from the

[17:59] front, for instance, a lot of cavitation

[18:01] energy would be directed up to the head

[18:03] and down the chest." Lastly, the bullet

[18:05] needs time distance to gradually

[18:07] transfer energy. Had it entered the side

[18:09] front of the neck and gone straight

[18:11] through the neck, which is the I believe

[18:13] the uh official story, it would have

[18:16] gone through soft tissue, cavitated the

[18:17] soft tissue of the neck only for a very

[18:19] short distance and then very soon

[18:21] reached the vertebrae and exerted all

[18:22] its energy into piercing through. But

[18:24] basically what they're saying here is

[18:26] based on any bullet, especially from a

[18:29] high power rifle coming through from the

[18:30] front, it would have just continued

[18:32] straight through the neck, which is what

[18:34] many gun experts have been saying.

[18:37] cavitation while piercing the vertebrae

[18:39] would also be greatly diminished and

[18:40] shielded by the pierced vertebrae and

[18:42] the neighboring vertebrae. So there you

[18:44] go. Calakul, whoever this person or

[18:46] entity or AI or whatever this is has

[18:49] answered your questions from the

[18:51] comments. Let me know. Do any of these

[18:53] make sense? Are you convinced? Are you

[18:55] not convinced? Do you think that this

[18:57] theory is why he actually passed or do

[18:59] you think that this is just a

[19:00] consequence of him being shot? Let me

[19:03] know your thoughts down in the comments.

[19:04] And as always, like, subscribe, and

[19:06] share this around. And I'll see you on

[19:08] the next one.