October 14, 2025 • 48 mins
The fake photos, false claims and wild conspiracy theories swirling around the murder of Charlie Kirk are nothing more than click bait for people trying to build a following on the death of a man who wanted to engage in a truthful discussion of our differences in an attempt to find common ground. Joseph Scott Morgan and Dave Mack take a close look at what is really happening in the discussion about the murder of Charlie Kirk. Why does Joe call it a murder investigation? Who is really in charge of the investigation? Why are some people so ready to embrace unfounded, made up stories, while ignoring the facts of what actually took place when Charlie Kirk was murdered in front of the world?
Transcribe Highlights
00:00.03 Introduction
01:32.62 The Death of Charlie Kirk
05:06.05 Murder of Assassination
09:57.63 Prosecutor press conference
14:25.00 Solving a murder, not a political event
19:02.29 Claims about autopsy
24:28.32 APs and Laterals
29:35.10 Autopsy would take place at a specific time
34:17.85 Discussion of ammunition size and speed
39:11.01 ATF might be consulting the case
43:03.48 Candace Owens "claims" of "inside info"
48:08.91 Murder Investigation
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Body bus with the Joseph's gotten More. After years of
spending time with the dead and their families, I learned
something really quick early on in my career, as a
matter of fact, when I was in my early twenties.
(00:27):
It's a term that we use now on acronym actually kiss,
keep it simple, stupid, because most people that experience a
death many For many it's the first time, and even
more so those that experience death from a traumatic event
(00:51):
like gunshot wounds or stab wounds, or bludgeonings or poisonings.
It's just a lot to absorb. A hold that in
America we are almost one body of people, almost like
our own organism, and there's just so much that we
(01:13):
can absorb at one point in time. Over the past
month or so, we have been going through the throes
of dealing with the death of a young man, certainly
a young man by my standards, who stood high on stage,
(01:36):
and his death was not from coronary art disease. It
was not a CBA or a stroke, It wasn't pancreatic cancer,
it wasn't lightning falling from the heavens. It was a
single round fired from within a range of two hundred
yards that struck him in his neck. Today, I want
(02:03):
to have a further discussion about the murder of Charlie
Kirk and what evidence might exist and what the future holes.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks. Dave. You
(02:26):
know me pretty well. Not as well as Kimmy knows me,
but you know me pretty well, and you can pick
up many times, I'm sure on the tonality of my voice.
And no, I did not get up on the wrong
side of the bed today. I got up on the
wrong side of theet Internet. I guess which happens more frequently.
(02:50):
I guess I'm in that and get off my lawn
phase in life, but I am Sometimes you you want
to try to stem the tide of misinformation, but many
times it seems as though you're spinning in the ocean
to raise the water level. And I've been involved in,
(03:16):
you know, over the past couple of weeks, several high
profile media appearances, and I'm struck. I think by the
lack of education, the lack of understanding, and the presence
I think of malicious mercenaries is what I'll call them,
(03:41):
that are in dwelling out there in the blogosphere. And
everywhere else because I have to I have to imagine
that those that last named group are there solely for
the purpose of reading anarchy and discord.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
You go on a talk show to talk about what
actually transpired in the murder of Charlie Kirk, and people
want you to call it an assassination. If you don't
call it an assassination, Joe, they can't take you seriously.
Speaker 3 (04:18):
You're dealing with the murder. How was Charlie Kirk murdered?
What took place?
Speaker 2 (04:24):
And when I saw a question at a minute eight
thirty seconds into an interview you did where somebody said
he won't call it an assassination, I cannot take him seriously.
And I thought, what are your credentials? Who are you
writing this? Are you doing this from your mom's basement?
Are you doing it at the convenience store where you
keep calling out sick because you don't have any bills
to pay because your mom pays for them. You know,
(04:45):
I'm trying to figure out who is now equal in
terms of their ability to contradict and chastise you for
whatever you say or do because you won't call it
an assassination. That's a political term.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Yeah, it is. And yeah, and listen, I've tried to.
I have tried to stay away from the term. It
floats around and it does not easily roll off off
of my tongue because I'm a verse to it, simply
(05:16):
because I have seen over the years, and there are
multiple examples of this day. When we begin to treat
transgressions against society, which are enumerated in our canon of law,
we begin to treat one individual event differently than how
(05:40):
it has been treated in the past relative to other events,
and designated something other than what it actually was. The
slope becomes very slippy slippery three two, the slope becomes
very slippy free. At that point in time, you lose
(06:02):
control of the entire in this case, I think the
control of the entire investigation. And I got to tell
you I take exception, first off, from how the investigation
started off with even cash Pattel. You know, with the
(06:26):
FBI demanding that we have information to release immediately.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Okay, why that is?
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Explain why when an investigation begins to go, Yeah, find that.
Tell me why what he was asking for is not
something that you, as a professional investigator, would expect to
have to turn over to the public.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
Well, because it is a prosecutable case, and anything that
I give to somebody that is that is a bureaucrat
and their purpose there is to is something other than
a thorough investigation that follows the traditional standard with Okay,
(07:13):
let's just say this. Were there any other cases in
the news that particular day where the highest ranking law
enforcement officer in the country went out and said, I
want as much information as I can get right now,
and I don't know. Suddenly you begin to hear information
is being disseminated to the public and nothing has been
(07:36):
confirmed yet, and that's a major problem. The first thing
that you have done is, by virtue of opening your mouth,
you have put the investigators, whether they be FBI agents
or a local deputy sheriff in East Egypt, Utah, somewhere
(07:59):
in a position where everybody they're going to be gleaning
information from. They've got this data pouring in. You know,
the case is not Charlie's body is not even cold yet,
you know, and they're talking about they're talking about these
things openly, and brother, it hasn't ceased. As a matter
of fact. You can go out there to one of
(08:19):
those beautiful mountains out there in Utah, snowcapped. It started
off on the peak with a tiny snowball, and now
this damn thing weighs about a ton and it is
plummeting towards the valley right now, and we'll be into
anybody that gets in its path if in fact, you
(08:43):
were to take the time to give the police time.
And I'm not talking about the FBI here, all right,
because this is not an FBI case. They have been
brought in to consult on this case to take advantage
of like and since they're ERT, their Evidence Response Team,
which is a fine group of people. I've got students
(09:06):
that work for ERT or have been on EERT in
the past. You've got the ATF that's going to be
out there because firearms are involved, and that's all fine
and good. Praise the Lord and pass ammnition. The people
that this that are really going to be tasked with
this are going to be the state police officers from
the Utah State Police, the locals, oh and by the way,
(09:32):
the medical Examiner for the State of Utah. Those are
your primary actors here. And then you have the prosecutor.
And you know when the prosecutor came up pretty quickly
and gave a grave a presser. I don't know if
you remember that, and he said, we've got somebody, and
(09:52):
you know, we're going to prosecute this case as a
capital case. And they knew what they had at that
particular time. I don't know if I've seen another detailed,
detailed explanation from the prosecutor. Do we know why? It's
(10:13):
not because he's been bought and sold? One, two, three,
what's the answer to this. It's a prosecutable case. And
he's not going to say anything else. So you know,
you can sit back and you can, you know, pull
your hair out, and you can beat your head against
the wall and you can scream at the universe. But nothing,
(10:37):
and I mean nothing is going to change the fact
they're going to move forward with the prosecution. Now, you're
entitled to have your opinion about it. I'm entitled to
have my opinion about it. But the way my opinion
differs is fact that I've spent time in the Mork.
I spent time in the morg and I've spent time
around homicide victims, specifically people that have been shot, people
(11:00):
that have been shot with the high caliber weapons. And
the one thing I do know is that no homicide
and no gunshot wound are exactly the same. Well, David,
(11:25):
I didn't know if you knew this, but you know,
I'm been working for jack State now for over a
decade as a professor, and you know, and I look
forward to the day when I can finally hang it
up and you know, sit on the beach somewhere, maybe
maybe for a couple of weeks at a time during
(11:46):
the year more so than I do. Now we're just
hanging out on my boat. But did you I'm going
to make a big reveal to you here, Dave. Are
you ready?
Speaker 3 (11:55):
I'm ready?
Speaker 1 (11:56):
Okay, get ready, because I found that a potentially I
have another revenue stream. And this is amazing. It's a
revenue stream that I was not even aware of, apparently
by virtue of me making comments about the murder. We'll
(12:17):
say it again, murder. There you go, murder of Charlie Kirk.
I'm now employed by the Massady. Isn't that cool? So
I don't know what the retirement system is like. Do
I get a villa in Tel Aviv right on the Mediterranean?
Is that all part of the package?
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Is that audio is now going to be edited Joe
that it says I am with a Masad and I
have a retirement villa, just saying. But here's the reality check.
Though this is not a game. There was a man
that was murdered in Utah on a college campus. He's
a man who has a wife and two children, and
(12:59):
he's gone now. He went to speak in public and
engage in conversation and somebody decided to silence that and
he was killed. To solve this crime, to make the
person who did it be held accountable, you have to
solve the crime devoid of politics. Whether you agree with
(13:21):
him or not, that doesn't have anything to do with it.
The one thing in the United States of America that
I have been brought up to believe in Joseph Scott
Morgan is that And for somebody who has lived in
where I've made my life by speaking words, is that
I have the right to say whatever.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
I want as long as I don't incite anything.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
But more than that, you have the right to say
what you want to say, and I should be willing
to defend that right to the death of your rights,
even though I don't even though I don't agree with it.
Speaker 3 (13:57):
But we're not at that point anymore.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Now it's we have become a society where half the
country believes that and the other half believes if you
don't say what I want and agree with me, you
are to be silenced.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
And your murder doesn't matter. You died, you should have
been gone.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
And so in trying to solve this case, I'm tired
of the inflammatory rhetoric that has invaded this to the
point where I've seen you called out because you called
it a murder, and it was a murder. It is
a murder, and to solve the crime, you're solving a murder,
not a political event.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
So who should be in charge?
Speaker 1 (14:31):
Yeah, And again it comes down to the homicide in
its purest sense is not in fact a federal charge.
And there's certain circumstances where the FEDS will get involved
in homicide investigations. But this is the Bailey Wick of
(14:54):
the state authorities because it's a prosecutable case. All you
have to do is look at the prosecutor there that
those couple of days following following the murder of Charlie Kirk,
and he was right out front of this thing saying
and as well he should have been, you know, because
(15:15):
he's the true authority here, the prosecutor is at this
point in time. So we are in a position where
we understand that he's moving forward with the case, a
homicide case, that they are going to prosecute this guy.
And you know they have said that they're going for
the death penalty, all right, So when you begin to
(15:40):
consider other possibilities as to who should be involved, who
should be in charge, it falls apart really really quickly. Again,
you know, the biggest case that I can cite, and
I will cite it over and over again until I
take my last breath. As JEFK at that point in time,
(16:01):
Earl Rose had been allowed Doctor Rose had been allowed
to take charge of JFK's body there in the hallway
at Parkland, we wouldn't be in a situation we're in today.
So let's kind of start, you know, from the beginning,
(16:22):
just so that we can understand. I think a lot
of people, first off, are ignorant of the law. In
every almost every state, there is a state statute that exists,
and it has to do with autopsies, okay, in every
state that prescribes what the medical legal authorities have the
(16:46):
ability to do. If you're interested in it. If you're
interested in it, I urge you to actually look up
Utah Code Section twenty six B Dash eight Dash two
oh seven. So one of the things that has been
propagated out there was fact that Charlie's body was not
(17:06):
in fact autopsied. Okay, So how many times have you
and I worked a case, our covered case, Dave, where
as soon as an autopsy was complete, we had the
medical examiner or corner running out to a bank of
(17:28):
microphones to make a statement about that particular case. I'll
answer that for you, it doesn't happen. If it does,
it is certainly the exception as opposed to the norm.
All right, Medical examiners are not in the business of
giving pressors in regards to homsides, and people believe that,
(17:58):
I guess silence is that you're engaging in some kind
of nefarious behavior, where I take the opposite look, I
think that you're trying to keep You're trying to keep
things pristine, because the taint of public involvement, the taint
(18:20):
of the knowledge that is disseminated to the public, can
take this case and fly it into the side of
the mountain. All right, If you look at this from
the perspective of the state medical examiner if they denied
(18:43):
denied an autopsy on the body of Charlie Kirk saying
you know what, I don't think we need to go
any further here. We're just going to go ahead and
release the body directly from the hospital, send the body
to the mortuary, have the body embalmed, and fly Charlie's
remains OneD down to Arizona. Well, what prosecutor in the
(19:09):
world would go along with that? And I'm going to
ask you a question, And Dave, do you think do
you think that there was a conversation between the medical
examiner and the prosecutor in this case? I would hope so, yeah,
there would be, just like there was a conversation between
(19:33):
the medical examiner and the detectives or the investigators that
are working the case. As a matter of fact, I
submit to you that there were investigators from the police
present for the autopsy. There were forensic technicians that were
there present for the autopsy. It would not even surprise
me if there was a representative from the DA's office
(19:55):
there or the State Prosecutor's office that was there witness
to this and they're going to speak directly to the
pathologists because they know you kind of particularly in the
environment where we're in right now, they know intrinsically that
this case is potentially problematic. So if you if you
(20:17):
flip that and you say, well, the medical examiner by
virtue of the fact that some mysterious intelligence agency out there,
I don't know, let's even go darker. Let's say the Illuminati,
because that's a word that's floating around out there, the Illuminati.
The Illuminati pressed the state medical examiner not to do
(20:41):
an autopsy. So this person is going to put their
entire career on the line because they're receiving a threat
about not moving forward with an autopsy, that it's a
good idea to just release his body, by the way,
with probably a fragmented perle still resting in the body.
(21:03):
Have we ever covered case Dave where we had somebody
that was shot, it was a homicide and the body
was buried with a projectile in it. I don't recall now,
there have been cases where projectiles have been buried with bodies.
Things that essentially thought this was thought it was a
(21:24):
suicide initially, and they decided not to do an autopsy,
and it turned out really bad. Actually, I've been a
part a couple of those and some offices I've worked with,
and it's a nightmare, trust me. An autopsy was performed.
One more little point about this, the idea that there
(21:45):
was a single forensic pathologist in that room. I don't
buy that either. I think that more than likely, given
the high profile nature of this case, they probably had
more eyes on this than just a single hair of
eyes from the medical examiner that was there. So they
(22:09):
would have to go in do this examination on Charlie,
and they're going to have to. There's a couple of
ways that we do what are called pulling trajectories. You
pull a trajectory at a scene, like you if you
look at the top of the flat top of that
building where they allege the shooter fired from. They would
(22:32):
have gone out to the scene and they would have
pulled multiple points of trajectory from that one location down
to where X marcusist spot where Charlie was seated. We
talked about I know that when we did Idaho, how
many times we do Idaho. The term Pharaoh system came
(22:53):
up fa r O and this is a device that
can go out and shoot multiple images from multiple perspectives
all at one time, and they would have utilized that
technology at the system at this scene in order to
map digitally map the entire area. So you pull it
(23:14):
that way. But also you do a probative trajectory, which
when you see that defect appear in Charlie's neck suddenly
out of nowhere and blood begins to issue forth when
his body would have been examined. And by the way,
(23:36):
there's also another player in the surgeon. The surgeon actually
made a statement. We'll get back to him in just
a second, but you would do a probative trajectory at autopsy.
So after they have X rayed the remains in a
case like this, which would have been extensive, they would
have done aps and laterals. They would have put in
(24:01):
trajectory rods literally into the site which is the entrance. Okay,
I'll get to that in a moment. Please remind me
of that, and just aps and yeah, aps and laterals. Aps.
They are like, yeah, so lateral view with the X
ray is you're shooting from the side. AP can either
(24:23):
be full on antiially or you can flip a body
over and do full on post serially, so you're looking
almost like a bird's eye view of the body staring
straight down at the body as it's face up, or
you can turn the body face down into a prone
position and shoot like that, so you get multiple, multiple layers.
(24:45):
I don't know if that office has access to CT technology,
which very well could come into play, which is very dramatic,
particularly if you can freeze that projectile in that space
for a moment where you can catch an image of it. Yeah, yeah,
it is, and it's amazing technology. Now, whether or not
(25:05):
they have access to that's another thing. I think that
they probably would. This is a state of the art
Medical Examiner's office, and they would have done images as well.
And I'm talking about photographic images literally with a trajectory
rod placed into the wound. That will when you insert
(25:29):
these rods that we use in the morgue, it'll give you, well,
it'll give you an indication of the track of the wound.
You have to be very gentle when you're doing it
because you don't want to cavitate the area and damage
the tissue that may have not been specifically damaged as
a result of the projectile. So you just kind of
gently place it, place it insight to and then just
(25:52):
kind of remove your hand from it and where it
comes to rest. That gives you an initial indication of
was this from above to below? Was it from below
to above? That sort of thing with that wound track.
And then after that you go in and you do
an extensive and I mean extensive neck dissection layer by layer, buddy,
(26:15):
I mean, and you're taking samples all along the way.
The thing that helps you navigate this are going to
be in the immediate are going to be the radiographs,
the actual X ray images, because when you take a
look at an X ray of a gunshot wound, if
around has fragmented, which I have all the suspicions in
(26:39):
the world that this round fragmented because we don't hear
any talk about an exit wound. Okay, so it's hit
a bony process more than likely, all right, it may
have shattered, or it may have formed to the point
where it lodged in a bone. You will see what's
called a lead storm that's behind it. It's almost if
(27:02):
you imagine like a comet traveling through the air and
all of the debris that the comet kind of kicks off.
And you know, some of these astronomers can do these
beautiful photographs where you see all of that that schmutz
coming off of the tail of the comet. That's the
track that it's taken, Okay, And what you do is
you navigate with the X ray. I've literally stood at
(27:25):
a table with a lightboard above us, and we're looking
at an injury or at a neck or a chest
where we're carefully dissecting the area and then looking up
at the radiographic image and trying to say, okay, we've
got a bit of debris here, here, and here, and
(27:45):
it appears that the core of the projectile is going
to be loaded located, you know, like in a neck.
You can say, well, it might be between C one
and C two. Is it lodged in the spinal process
or not. Has it gone through a disk space, or
has it exited out of the spine and is literally
(28:08):
just lying beneath the layer of the skin. That actually
does happen many times. It looks like the person's got
a big pimple on the back of their neck, but
it's palpable. You can actually press on it feels very
hard beneath the surface. All of this would have been
done and going to another point, here that I think
is very important to understand is people seem to be
(28:30):
under the impression that people at the Medical Examiner's Office
don't work twenty four hours a day. And the reason
I say that is people will say, well, it's sure
didn't take them very long to do that autopsy if
they did in fact do the autopsy. Well, dude, I've
(28:51):
done autopsies at one, two, three o'clock in the morning
because the case requiredired it. It's not like you. And
plus you've got other cases coming in at Utah State
Medical Examiner or other busy shop. Okay, so they're not
just handling Charlie Kirk's death that day. You've got other
(29:15):
bodies that are literally in line behind him. They have
to keep this flowing. And they know that this autopsy
is going to take a protracted period of time, so
they would have set a very specific time as to
when this autopsy would have been done. And yes, yes,
our tools at the Medical Examiner's Office do in fact
work after five pm in the afternoon. Okay, Just so
(29:38):
that we have that understanding, it's not like you just
shut the door and say, okay, we're not receiving anybody.
And yeah, our staff is incapable of working at that
particular time. No, no, no, it's going to happen, and
they would have had an assemblage of all these people
that showed up there. And guess what, when the truth
finally does come out and it will appear in court records,
(29:59):
we will see at that particular time who all was there,
and maybe they will have their own views about the
death of Charlie Kirk. I was on a panel. I
(30:25):
guess it's been just over a week ago now, I think.
And I was on with four people, Okay. I was
on with Mike Baker, who is retired from the CIA.
(30:45):
I was on with Rob O'Neill, the man that has
been named as the individual that killed Osama bin Laden
with the Seal teams. Morgan was leading the conversation and
I asserted at that moment Tom brother Dave that this
(31:07):
was a homicide, This was a homicide that to use
the term assassination was problematic, and there were and the
theme that Pierce Morgan was going after at that particular time,
and he recognized it, you know, over a week ago
where he's saying, oh, well, there are so many conspiracy
(31:28):
theories that are floating around out there. Should we assign
any validity to any of the stuff that's floating out
on the Internet and the chat rooms and everything else
that's going on. And uh, I think it was, Yeah,
I know it was. It was. It was Rob O'Neil
who said, who made the statement that he had shot
(31:52):
many people as a sniper in the seal teams, and
he said that the defect on Charlie's neck left of
the mid line didn't look like any entrance wound he
had ever seen. And I got to tell you, Dave,
(32:14):
that that defect in his neck looked like a lot
of entrance wounds I've seen over the years. The people
are under the impression that I guess that it should
have this round should have literally decapitated him, and that
(32:34):
that's that's just inaccurate. The fact that it entered at
this location to the left of the mid line. There
is what appears to be at least venus blood that
is issuing forth from this wound. What is venus blood,
It's a darker the blood is darker. So if you
(32:54):
think about the veins or the venus system in the neck,
the juggler vein, those sorts of structures that are in there,
the blood is going to have a darker appearance to it.
I'm not saying that that's precisely what would happen, because
you can't really get a good view of this from
(33:15):
that particular perspective, like the clarity of it, even though
people have tried to enhance it. I don't know how
much validity to assign to that. But it did begin
to pour profusely. And he also made another comment. This
is Rob O'Neill. He said that he had never seen
(33:37):
anyone he had shot with their shirt move And I'm thinking, yeah,
that's that's from a ballistic standpoint, that's kinetic energy because
you were using you're using a round high power ground.
By the way, that if in fact it is a
(33:58):
thirty six, which again people are saying now they don't
think it's a thirty out six. That and I'll give
you I'll give you the reason why they're saying this.
They don't think it's a thirty out six, that it
was something else. Well, either way, if it is, if
it is a thirty out six, that bullet weight, the
projectile weight is one hundred and eighty grains, Okay, so
(34:22):
it's rather hefty. All right, one hundred and eighty grains.
It's traveling at three roughly twenty eight hundred to three
thousand feet per second. If you can imagine that that
number is astronomical, and this is a thirty point three
zero inch This is imperial measurement. It's a caliber that
(34:47):
is based on the old imperial system if it were
and this is very rough, but if it were converted
to metric, it would be like the diameter would be
like seven millimeters as opposed to point three zero inches. Okay,
traveling at that rate, yeah, it's when it hits soft tissue.
It's not going to be a gigantic hole all right now,
(35:10):
seeing entrance wounds that have kind of blown out, there
are other things you have to consider relative to this.
But the area just to the left of the midline
in the neck is rather soft. It's malleable. You've got
you know, the skin overlying a kind of a robust
area of muscle, which, yes, it's dense, but it's not
(35:31):
bone dense, right, and then you've got all of the
venus structures and arterial structures that are underlying that. It
doesn't get to anything firm really until you get back
to the spinal spinal column. Okay, so yeah, the fact
that this is happening. Now back to this idea of
the shirt moving. When you see that, that's a transfer
of kinetic energy. So a real simple experiment that you
(35:54):
can go go to, like the most peaceful pond you
can find, pick up I don't know, the tiniest pebble
that you want to pick up, all right, and toss
it into this peaceful, you know, beautiful pond and watch
what happens. Well, you're gonna have ripples that go out.
It's an energy transfer from this object striking that surface
(36:18):
and it literally just kind of bleeds out. Well, that's
why you saw a shirt move like this.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
I remember asking you that day about it because I
saw that, you know, before the videos got blurred, we
happened to see one that was very clear. Yeah, that's
what had happened. And I was shocked. But I did
notice that, and I remember asking you, you know, because
I didn't know what it meant. And once you said
that and you were telling me about it, I'm like, Okay,
that makes perfectly good sense. But Joe, perfectly good sense
(36:44):
is not what a lot of people are looking for
right now. And I saw a lot of comments critical
of the type of weapon or the type of ammunition.
Speaker 3 (36:52):
And one of the things that you said.
Speaker 2 (36:55):
I can remember which show you were talking about the
age of the ammunition and how that actually impact what
what could also be done? Because what if the ammunition
was older, would that have an impact?
Speaker 3 (37:07):
Does that really mean something?
Speaker 1 (37:08):
Yeah, I suppose it. Could you know if the if
the ammo itself is degraded in any way, we don't
know what kind of care has been taken. We also
don't know about the care of the weapon either internally,
the mechanism of the weapon, how did it operate, did
it affect the projectile is traveling down the barrel? Because
(37:29):
I mean, one of the first things they teach you
in the military, even if the low level that I
was in many many years ago, is your life depends
on your on your rifle. If you it will only
perform as well as you as you clean it. All right,
So performance, you know, diminishes significantly after a period of
(37:49):
time if you if you're not taking care of the weapon,
the ammo that you choose to cycle through it as well.
You also don't know about the quality of the ammunition,
like who manif factored this. Is it some kind of
like Russian ammo that was brought into the country or
is this something that was that was created by Winchester
(38:09):
Remington here in the United States. Don't know. They haven't
necessarily released that information yet, So that's going to play
a part as well. You know, both external, internal and
external ballistics come into play here. What's going to affect
the flight of the round? The physical stability of the
(38:30):
projectile itself dependent upon age perhaps, and it's still going
to have a level of lethality to it. But every
everything that is either done or not done to a
weapon or ammunition plays into this, and that's something that
they're going to be examining with this. I can tell
you this with the weapon that they have collected, you know,
(38:53):
the one that was found there in the quasi wooded area,
you know that's right off campus. They're pumping rounds for
the same Dave. They've taken the thing back to a
ballistics lab. If the my suspicion would be my suspicion
would be probably ATF Okay. Now it may go to
(39:15):
the state, to the State crime lab as well. But
if the ATF is doing this on a consulting basis.
They have a wide range. You wouldn't believe the catalog
of ammunition they have just in the firearms lab there
that if they're looking to match this these projectiles or
the ammo that was used, they can go back specifically
(39:35):
and approximate that ammo in order to because what would
have been collected at autopsy would have been would have
been if it's fragmented, you expect the bulk of the
round to be the base, which is the most robust
part at the bottom. So what you're trying to replicate
in these testing are the rifling marks that are created
(40:00):
as a bullet twist down the barrel. They're going to
fire live rounds through this same weapon, either into a
water tank or into a cotton box, which is going
to preserve the ballistic characteristics. You know, you can fire
it into a big bend that contains water and there's
(40:21):
a there's a basket, a metal basket at the bottom
of the thing, and so as the projectile loses energy
when it strikes the water, that projectile free floats through
the water and it lands in the barrel and the
rifling is not impacted, so you have a pristine bullet.
And then you have this gnarled up bullet that you
(40:42):
were covered at autops, you put it on comparison scope
and the ballistics expert begins to match this up. And
this is going to be key because people will say, well,
it's not a thirty out six, or it was a
different weapon. That's going to be sussed out pretty quickly.
So that little house of cards is going to fall
apart just by what is standard operating procedure in every
(41:05):
other firearms related homicide that we work across this country.
All Right, it's not going to instantaneously change because it's
Charlie Kirk. They're going to stick with this. This is
why it's important that we remember this is a homicide
investigation that took place in the state of Utah. Now,
I guess if you want to, you can say that
(41:26):
there has been some specter that has presented itself inside
of the agency that's taking control of the weapon, and
they're going to conduct their own test, and that they're
going to come up with bullets that are not actually
part of the investigation, and they're going to try to
put us off scent here, and that we're not going
(41:47):
to get the real data that ain't the way it works.
Because if that is the way it works, you're going
to have to get all of the law enforcement people,
even at state level, in on the game as well.
So now we've got the medical examiner who would have
to be part of the process, the forensic scientists that
are going to be doing the ballistic examinations, they would
(42:10):
have to be part of this conspiratorial process. Probably the
prosecutor would have to be upon it as well, because
the prosecutor doesn't want an autopsy, right, They're just going
to send the body off, so he'd have to be
keen to it. So you're going to have to get
all of these actors on board, and also the physician.
The surgeon presents an interesting character in all of this
(42:32):
because that individual was eyes on. They were eyes on
on the case as soon as Charlie rolled through the doors.
Do you think the surgeon that's on call is even
aware that Charlie Kirk is in town? Probably not. Maybe
they were, but probably not. You know why, because they're
(42:53):
doing surgeon stuff. They don't have time, they don't I've
been around these people. All they're all they're going to
know is that we've got a thirty something year old
white male rolling in. He's unresponsive and he's got an
apparent gunshot, one to the neck. All hands on deck,
here we go, all right, just like it happened when
(43:14):
Kennedy was rolling into Parkland in the back of that
damn limousine. Lowed those many years ago that you know,
they had an awareness the president was in town. Obviously
they knew. It was called ahead that JFK the President
was mortally wounded. He was being brought to Parkland. They're
not going to be up on the game here, you
(43:36):
know what I'm saying. They're going to take every patient
through the door that comes in. There's also been another
rumor that has been floated about, and I'm not going
to mention their name, but their initials are Candae Owens.
She apparently has stated that in one of these things
(44:00):
she does on her podcast or whatever, where she's saying
that she has inside information regarding the death certificate, and
the fact that the caliber of the weapon is not
named in the death certificate and that it was not
(44:21):
mentioned anywhere invalidates the process. That these are always the
caliber is always mentioned on the death certificate. They bear
with me indulge me, just for a moment, indulge my
mate insanity. Here, just for a second. Death certificate, John
(44:41):
Fitzgerald Kennedy. Cause of death, multiple gunshot wounds of head
and neck. That's what was on President's death certificate. Yeah. Next,
uh oh, here's a good one. Lee Harvey Oswalt hemorrhage
(45:01):
secondary to gunshot wound of the chest. Now I know
that Jack Ruby fired a thirty eight caliber revolver. It's
not mentioned in the death certificate. Hang on one second,
but wait, there's more. Let's see who do I have here?
Hang on, Oh, Kurt Cobain, Yeah, Kirk Cobain, I have
him right here. Oh, Kirk, Well, he's got a contact
(45:24):
perforating shotgun wound to the head. You notice that it's
not mentioned that it's twenty gauge, a sixteen gauge, a
twelve gauge hella, a ten gauge elephant gun. It's not
mentioned they say shotgun wound. Okay, hang on, who else
do I have here? Let's see one more. I know
(45:52):
I've got him. Oh, Tupac, Tupac, he was shot. Guess
what multiple gunshot woes. There's not There is not a
caliber mentioned in the death certificate. This is bordering into
(46:12):
the realm of the absurd. You have people that are
making comments about things that they have no understanding of.
Period they feel as though they're minding out knowledge that
all the rest of us need to know. But what
is it that they always do? They always say that
we have unnamed sources. But we'll get back to that.
(46:37):
But it never comes to fruition because I think it
was heard that was actually putting out for a time
that there could be a possibility he was shot from
the back. Well, now she's saying that, Okay, Charlie Kirk
has in fact died from a gunshot went to the neck.
(46:58):
He was shot from the front, Okay, And she gives
this great anatomical descriptor of his vertebral bodies back there
he shot here and right here. Thank you, Candice, Thank
you so much for giving us that information. After you've
(47:18):
stirred the waters. At this point in time, guys, listen,
the only thing I can say is that patience is
in fact the watch work. As a matter of fact,
it's going to be the watch word for the next
few months. If you're easily distracted, if you need some
(47:41):
kind of conspiratorial case that you want to go follow,
go out there and knock yourself out, but understand that
the authorities in Utah are not conducting an assassination investigation.
They are conducting a murder investigation. A murder investigation where
(48:08):
in the balance hangs a young man's life who the
state prosecutor has already said they're going after the death
penalty in keep your ears open, let's see what happens.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks.
Body bus with the Joseph's gotten More. After years of
spending time with the dead and their families, I learned
something really quick early on in my career, as a
matter of fact, when I was in my early twenties.
(00:27):
It's a term that we use now on acronym actually kiss,
keep it simple, stupid, because most people that experience a
death many For many it's the first time, and even
more so those that experience death from a traumatic event
(00:51):
like gunshot wounds or stab wounds, or bludgeonings or poisonings.
It's just a lot to absorb. A hold that in
America we are almost one body of people, almost like
our own organism, and there's just so much that we
(01:13):
can absorb at one point in time. Over the past
month or so, we have been going through the throes
of dealing with the death of a young man, certainly
a young man by my standards, who stood high on stage,
(01:36):
and his death was not from coronary art disease. It
was not a CBA or a stroke, It wasn't pancreatic cancer,
it wasn't lightning falling from the heavens. It was a
single round fired from within a range of two hundred
yards that struck him in his neck. Today, I want
(02:03):
to have a further discussion about the murder of Charlie
Kirk and what evidence might exist and what the future holes.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks. Dave. You
(02:26):
know me pretty well. Not as well as Kimmy knows me,
but you know me pretty well, and you can pick
up many times, I'm sure on the tonality of my voice.
And no, I did not get up on the wrong
side of the bed today. I got up on the
wrong side of theet Internet. I guess which happens more frequently.
(02:50):
I guess I'm in that and get off my lawn
phase in life, but I am Sometimes you you want
to try to stem the tide of misinformation, but many
times it seems as though you're spinning in the ocean
to raise the water level. And I've been involved in,
(03:16):
you know, over the past couple of weeks, several high
profile media appearances, and I'm struck. I think by the
lack of education, the lack of understanding, and the presence
I think of malicious mercenaries is what I'll call them,
(03:41):
that are in dwelling out there in the blogosphere. And
everywhere else because I have to I have to imagine
that those that last named group are there solely for
the purpose of reading anarchy and discord.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
You go on a talk show to talk about what
actually transpired in the murder of Charlie Kirk, and people
want you to call it an assassination. If you don't
call it an assassination, Joe, they can't take you seriously.
Speaker 3 (04:18):
You're dealing with the murder. How was Charlie Kirk murdered?
What took place?
Speaker 2 (04:24):
And when I saw a question at a minute eight
thirty seconds into an interview you did where somebody said
he won't call it an assassination, I cannot take him seriously.
And I thought, what are your credentials? Who are you
writing this? Are you doing this from your mom's basement?
Are you doing it at the convenience store where you
keep calling out sick because you don't have any bills
to pay because your mom pays for them. You know,
(04:45):
I'm trying to figure out who is now equal in
terms of their ability to contradict and chastise you for
whatever you say or do because you won't call it
an assassination. That's a political term.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Yeah, it is. And yeah, and listen, I've tried to.
I have tried to stay away from the term. It
floats around and it does not easily roll off off
of my tongue because I'm a verse to it, simply
(05:16):
because I have seen over the years, and there are
multiple examples of this day. When we begin to treat
transgressions against society, which are enumerated in our canon of law,
we begin to treat one individual event differently than how
(05:40):
it has been treated in the past relative to other events,
and designated something other than what it actually was. The
slope becomes very slippy slippery three two, the slope becomes
very slippy free. At that point in time, you lose
(06:02):
control of the entire in this case, I think the
control of the entire investigation. And I got to tell
you I take exception, first off, from how the investigation
started off with even cash Pattel. You know, with the
(06:26):
FBI demanding that we have information to release immediately.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Okay, why that is?
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Explain why when an investigation begins to go, Yeah, find that.
Tell me why what he was asking for is not
something that you, as a professional investigator, would expect to
have to turn over to the public.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
Well, because it is a prosecutable case, and anything that
I give to somebody that is that is a bureaucrat
and their purpose there is to is something other than
a thorough investigation that follows the traditional standard with Okay,
(07:13):
let's just say this. Were there any other cases in
the news that particular day where the highest ranking law
enforcement officer in the country went out and said, I
want as much information as I can get right now,
and I don't know. Suddenly you begin to hear information
is being disseminated to the public and nothing has been
(07:36):
confirmed yet, and that's a major problem. The first thing
that you have done is, by virtue of opening your mouth,
you have put the investigators, whether they be FBI agents
or a local deputy sheriff in East Egypt, Utah, somewhere
(07:59):
in a position where everybody they're going to be gleaning
information from. They've got this data pouring in. You know,
the case is not Charlie's body is not even cold yet,
you know, and they're talking about they're talking about these
things openly, and brother, it hasn't ceased. As a matter
of fact. You can go out there to one of
(08:19):
those beautiful mountains out there in Utah, snowcapped. It started
off on the peak with a tiny snowball, and now
this damn thing weighs about a ton and it is
plummeting towards the valley right now, and we'll be into
anybody that gets in its path if in fact, you
(08:43):
were to take the time to give the police time.
And I'm not talking about the FBI here, all right,
because this is not an FBI case. They have been
brought in to consult on this case to take advantage
of like and since they're ERT, their Evidence Response Team,
which is a fine group of people. I've got students
(09:06):
that work for ERT or have been on EERT in
the past. You've got the ATF that's going to be
out there because firearms are involved, and that's all fine
and good. Praise the Lord and pass ammnition. The people
that this that are really going to be tasked with
this are going to be the state police officers from
the Utah State Police, the locals, oh and by the way,
(09:32):
the medical Examiner for the State of Utah. Those are
your primary actors here. And then you have the prosecutor.
And you know when the prosecutor came up pretty quickly
and gave a grave a presser. I don't know if
you remember that, and he said, we've got somebody, and
(09:52):
you know, we're going to prosecute this case as a
capital case. And they knew what they had at that
particular time. I don't know if I've seen another detailed,
detailed explanation from the prosecutor. Do we know why? It's
(10:13):
not because he's been bought and sold? One, two, three,
what's the answer to this. It's a prosecutable case. And
he's not going to say anything else. So you know,
you can sit back and you can, you know, pull
your hair out, and you can beat your head against
the wall and you can scream at the universe. But nothing,
(10:37):
and I mean nothing is going to change the fact
they're going to move forward with the prosecution. Now, you're
entitled to have your opinion about it. I'm entitled to
have my opinion about it. But the way my opinion
differs is fact that I've spent time in the Mork.
I spent time in the morg and I've spent time
around homicide victims, specifically people that have been shot, people
(11:00):
that have been shot with the high caliber weapons. And
the one thing I do know is that no homicide
and no gunshot wound are exactly the same. Well, David,
(11:25):
I didn't know if you knew this, but you know,
I'm been working for jack State now for over a
decade as a professor, and you know, and I look
forward to the day when I can finally hang it
up and you know, sit on the beach somewhere, maybe
maybe for a couple of weeks at a time during
(11:46):
the year more so than I do. Now we're just
hanging out on my boat. But did you I'm going
to make a big reveal to you here, Dave. Are
you ready?
Speaker 3 (11:55):
I'm ready?
Speaker 1 (11:56):
Okay, get ready, because I found that a potentially I
have another revenue stream. And this is amazing. It's a
revenue stream that I was not even aware of, apparently
by virtue of me making comments about the murder. We'll
(12:17):
say it again, murder. There you go, murder of Charlie Kirk.
I'm now employed by the Massady. Isn't that cool? So
I don't know what the retirement system is like. Do
I get a villa in Tel Aviv right on the Mediterranean?
Is that all part of the package?
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Is that audio is now going to be edited Joe
that it says I am with a Masad and I
have a retirement villa, just saying. But here's the reality check.
Though this is not a game. There was a man
that was murdered in Utah on a college campus. He's
a man who has a wife and two children, and
(12:59):
he's gone now. He went to speak in public and
engage in conversation and somebody decided to silence that and
he was killed. To solve this crime, to make the
person who did it be held accountable, you have to
solve the crime devoid of politics. Whether you agree with
(13:21):
him or not, that doesn't have anything to do with it.
The one thing in the United States of America that
I have been brought up to believe in Joseph Scott
Morgan is that And for somebody who has lived in
where I've made my life by speaking words, is that
I have the right to say whatever.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
I want as long as I don't incite anything.
Speaker 2 (13:43):
But more than that, you have the right to say
what you want to say, and I should be willing
to defend that right to the death of your rights,
even though I don't even though I don't agree with it.
Speaker 3 (13:57):
But we're not at that point anymore.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Now it's we have become a society where half the
country believes that and the other half believes if you
don't say what I want and agree with me, you
are to be silenced.
Speaker 3 (14:06):
And your murder doesn't matter. You died, you should have
been gone.
Speaker 2 (14:10):
And so in trying to solve this case, I'm tired
of the inflammatory rhetoric that has invaded this to the
point where I've seen you called out because you called
it a murder, and it was a murder. It is
a murder, and to solve the crime, you're solving a murder,
not a political event.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
So who should be in charge?
Speaker 1 (14:31):
Yeah, And again it comes down to the homicide in
its purest sense is not in fact a federal charge.
And there's certain circumstances where the FEDS will get involved
in homicide investigations. But this is the Bailey Wick of
(14:54):
the state authorities because it's a prosecutable case. All you
have to do is look at the prosecutor there that
those couple of days following following the murder of Charlie Kirk,
and he was right out front of this thing saying
and as well he should have been, you know, because
(15:15):
he's the true authority here, the prosecutor is at this
point in time. So we are in a position where
we understand that he's moving forward with the case, a
homicide case, that they are going to prosecute this guy.
And you know they have said that they're going for
the death penalty, all right, So when you begin to
(15:40):
consider other possibilities as to who should be involved, who
should be in charge, it falls apart really really quickly. Again,
you know, the biggest case that I can cite, and
I will cite it over and over again until I
take my last breath. As JEFK at that point in time,
(16:01):
Earl Rose had been allowed Doctor Rose had been allowed
to take charge of JFK's body there in the hallway
at Parkland, we wouldn't be in a situation we're in today.
So let's kind of start, you know, from the beginning,
(16:22):
just so that we can understand. I think a lot
of people, first off, are ignorant of the law. In
every almost every state, there is a state statute that exists,
and it has to do with autopsies, okay, in every
state that prescribes what the medical legal authorities have the
(16:46):
ability to do. If you're interested in it. If you're
interested in it, I urge you to actually look up
Utah Code Section twenty six B Dash eight Dash two
oh seven. So one of the things that has been
propagated out there was fact that Charlie's body was not
(17:06):
in fact autopsied. Okay, So how many times have you
and I worked a case, our covered case, Dave, where
as soon as an autopsy was complete, we had the
medical examiner or corner running out to a bank of
(17:28):
microphones to make a statement about that particular case. I'll
answer that for you, it doesn't happen. If it does,
it is certainly the exception as opposed to the norm.
All right, Medical examiners are not in the business of
giving pressors in regards to homsides, and people believe that,
(17:58):
I guess silence is that you're engaging in some kind
of nefarious behavior, where I take the opposite look, I
think that you're trying to keep You're trying to keep
things pristine, because the taint of public involvement, the taint
(18:20):
of the knowledge that is disseminated to the public, can
take this case and fly it into the side of
the mountain. All right, If you look at this from
the perspective of the state medical examiner if they denied
(18:43):
denied an autopsy on the body of Charlie Kirk saying
you know what, I don't think we need to go
any further here. We're just going to go ahead and
release the body directly from the hospital, send the body
to the mortuary, have the body embalmed, and fly Charlie's
remains OneD down to Arizona. Well, what prosecutor in the
(19:09):
world would go along with that? And I'm going to
ask you a question, And Dave, do you think do
you think that there was a conversation between the medical
examiner and the prosecutor in this case? I would hope so, yeah,
there would be, just like there was a conversation between
(19:33):
the medical examiner and the detectives or the investigators that
are working the case. As a matter of fact, I
submit to you that there were investigators from the police
present for the autopsy. There were forensic technicians that were
there present for the autopsy. It would not even surprise
me if there was a representative from the DA's office
(19:55):
there or the State Prosecutor's office that was there witness
to this and they're going to speak directly to the
pathologists because they know you kind of particularly in the
environment where we're in right now, they know intrinsically that
this case is potentially problematic. So if you if you
(20:17):
flip that and you say, well, the medical examiner by
virtue of the fact that some mysterious intelligence agency out there,
I don't know, let's even go darker. Let's say the Illuminati,
because that's a word that's floating around out there, the Illuminati.
The Illuminati pressed the state medical examiner not to do
(20:41):
an autopsy. So this person is going to put their
entire career on the line because they're receiving a threat
about not moving forward with an autopsy, that it's a
good idea to just release his body, by the way,
with probably a fragmented perle still resting in the body.
(21:03):
Have we ever covered case Dave where we had somebody
that was shot, it was a homicide and the body
was buried with a projectile in it. I don't recall now,
there have been cases where projectiles have been buried with bodies.
Things that essentially thought this was thought it was a
(21:24):
suicide initially, and they decided not to do an autopsy,
and it turned out really bad. Actually, I've been a
part a couple of those and some offices I've worked with,
and it's a nightmare, trust me. An autopsy was performed.
One more little point about this, the idea that there
(21:45):
was a single forensic pathologist in that room. I don't
buy that either. I think that more than likely, given
the high profile nature of this case, they probably had
more eyes on this than just a single hair of
eyes from the medical examiner that was there. So they
(22:09):
would have to go in do this examination on Charlie,
and they're going to have to. There's a couple of
ways that we do what are called pulling trajectories. You
pull a trajectory at a scene, like you if you
look at the top of the flat top of that
building where they allege the shooter fired from. They would
(22:32):
have gone out to the scene and they would have
pulled multiple points of trajectory from that one location down
to where X marcusist spot where Charlie was seated. We
talked about I know that when we did Idaho, how
many times we do Idaho. The term Pharaoh system came
(22:53):
up fa r O and this is a device that
can go out and shoot multiple images from multiple perspectives
all at one time, and they would have utilized that
technology at the system at this scene in order to
map digitally map the entire area. So you pull it
(23:14):
that way. But also you do a probative trajectory, which
when you see that defect appear in Charlie's neck suddenly
out of nowhere and blood begins to issue forth when
his body would have been examined. And by the way,
(23:36):
there's also another player in the surgeon. The surgeon actually
made a statement. We'll get back to him in just
a second, but you would do a probative trajectory at autopsy.
So after they have X rayed the remains in a
case like this, which would have been extensive, they would
have done aps and laterals. They would have put in
(24:01):
trajectory rods literally into the site which is the entrance. Okay,
I'll get to that in a moment. Please remind me
of that, and just aps and yeah, aps and laterals. Aps.
They are like, yeah, so lateral view with the X
ray is you're shooting from the side. AP can either
(24:23):
be full on antiially or you can flip a body
over and do full on post serially, so you're looking
almost like a bird's eye view of the body staring
straight down at the body as it's face up, or
you can turn the body face down into a prone
position and shoot like that, so you get multiple, multiple layers.
(24:45):
I don't know if that office has access to CT technology,
which very well could come into play, which is very dramatic,
particularly if you can freeze that projectile in that space
for a moment where you can catch an image of it. Yeah, yeah,
it is, and it's amazing technology. Now, whether or not
(25:05):
they have access to that's another thing. I think that
they probably would. This is a state of the art
Medical Examiner's office, and they would have done images as well.
And I'm talking about photographic images literally with a trajectory
rod placed into the wound. That will when you insert
(25:29):
these rods that we use in the morgue, it'll give you, well,
it'll give you an indication of the track of the wound.
You have to be very gentle when you're doing it
because you don't want to cavitate the area and damage
the tissue that may have not been specifically damaged as
a result of the projectile. So you just kind of
gently place it, place it insight to and then just
(25:52):
kind of remove your hand from it and where it
comes to rest. That gives you an initial indication of
was this from above to below? Was it from below
to above? That sort of thing with that wound track.
And then after that you go in and you do
an extensive and I mean extensive neck dissection layer by layer, buddy,
(26:15):
I mean, and you're taking samples all along the way.
The thing that helps you navigate this are going to
be in the immediate are going to be the radiographs,
the actual X ray images, because when you take a
look at an X ray of a gunshot wound, if
around has fragmented, which I have all the suspicions in
(26:39):
the world that this round fragmented because we don't hear
any talk about an exit wound. Okay, so it's hit
a bony process more than likely, all right, it may
have shattered, or it may have formed to the point
where it lodged in a bone. You will see what's
called a lead storm that's behind it. It's almost if
(27:02):
you imagine like a comet traveling through the air and
all of the debris that the comet kind of kicks off.
And you know, some of these astronomers can do these
beautiful photographs where you see all of that that schmutz
coming off of the tail of the comet. That's the
track that it's taken, Okay, And what you do is
you navigate with the X ray. I've literally stood at
(27:25):
a table with a lightboard above us, and we're looking
at an injury or at a neck or a chest
where we're carefully dissecting the area and then looking up
at the radiographic image and trying to say, okay, we've
got a bit of debris here, here, and here, and
(27:45):
it appears that the core of the projectile is going
to be loaded located, you know, like in a neck.
You can say, well, it might be between C one
and C two. Is it lodged in the spinal process
or not. Has it gone through a disk space, or
has it exited out of the spine and is literally
(28:08):
just lying beneath the layer of the skin. That actually
does happen many times. It looks like the person's got
a big pimple on the back of their neck, but
it's palpable. You can actually press on it feels very
hard beneath the surface. All of this would have been
done and going to another point, here that I think
is very important to understand is people seem to be
(28:30):
under the impression that people at the Medical Examiner's Office
don't work twenty four hours a day. And the reason
I say that is people will say, well, it's sure
didn't take them very long to do that autopsy if
they did in fact do the autopsy. Well, dude, I've
(28:51):
done autopsies at one, two, three o'clock in the morning
because the case requiredired it. It's not like you. And
plus you've got other cases coming in at Utah State
Medical Examiner or other busy shop. Okay, so they're not
just handling Charlie Kirk's death that day. You've got other
(29:15):
bodies that are literally in line behind him. They have
to keep this flowing. And they know that this autopsy
is going to take a protracted period of time, so
they would have set a very specific time as to
when this autopsy would have been done. And yes, yes,
our tools at the Medical Examiner's Office do in fact
work after five pm in the afternoon. Okay, Just so
(29:38):
that we have that understanding, it's not like you just
shut the door and say, okay, we're not receiving anybody.
And yeah, our staff is incapable of working at that
particular time. No, no, no, it's going to happen, and
they would have had an assemblage of all these people
that showed up there. And guess what, when the truth
finally does come out and it will appear in court records,
(29:59):
we will see at that particular time who all was there,
and maybe they will have their own views about the
death of Charlie Kirk. I was on a panel. I
(30:25):
guess it's been just over a week ago now, I think.
And I was on with four people, Okay. I was
on with Mike Baker, who is retired from the CIA.
(30:45):
I was on with Rob O'Neill, the man that has
been named as the individual that killed Osama bin Laden
with the Seal teams. Morgan was leading the conversation and
I asserted at that moment Tom brother Dave that this
(31:07):
was a homicide, This was a homicide that to use
the term assassination was problematic, and there were and the
theme that Pierce Morgan was going after at that particular time,
and he recognized it, you know, over a week ago
where he's saying, oh, well, there are so many conspiracy
(31:28):
theories that are floating around out there. Should we assign
any validity to any of the stuff that's floating out
on the Internet and the chat rooms and everything else
that's going on. And uh, I think it was, Yeah,
I know it was. It was. It was Rob O'Neil
who said, who made the statement that he had shot
(31:52):
many people as a sniper in the seal teams, and
he said that the defect on Charlie's neck left of
the mid line didn't look like any entrance wound he
had ever seen. And I got to tell you, Dave,
(32:14):
that that defect in his neck looked like a lot
of entrance wounds I've seen over the years. The people
are under the impression that I guess that it should
have this round should have literally decapitated him, and that
(32:34):
that's that's just inaccurate. The fact that it entered at
this location to the left of the mid line. There
is what appears to be at least venus blood that
is issuing forth from this wound. What is venus blood,
It's a darker the blood is darker. So if you
(32:54):
think about the veins or the venus system in the neck,
the juggler vein, those sorts of structures that are in there,
the blood is going to have a darker appearance to it.
I'm not saying that that's precisely what would happen, because
you can't really get a good view of this from
(33:15):
that particular perspective, like the clarity of it, even though
people have tried to enhance it. I don't know how
much validity to assign to that. But it did begin
to pour profusely. And he also made another comment. This
is Rob O'Neill. He said that he had never seen
(33:37):
anyone he had shot with their shirt move And I'm thinking, yeah,
that's that's from a ballistic standpoint, that's kinetic energy because
you were using you're using a round high power ground.
By the way, that if in fact it is a
(33:58):
thirty six, which again people are saying now they don't
think it's a thirty out six. That and I'll give
you I'll give you the reason why they're saying this.
They don't think it's a thirty out six, that it
was something else. Well, either way, if it is, if
it is a thirty out six, that bullet weight, the
projectile weight is one hundred and eighty grains, Okay, so
(34:22):
it's rather hefty. All right, one hundred and eighty grains.
It's traveling at three roughly twenty eight hundred to three
thousand feet per second. If you can imagine that that
number is astronomical, and this is a thirty point three
zero inch This is imperial measurement. It's a caliber that
(34:47):
is based on the old imperial system if it were
and this is very rough, but if it were converted
to metric, it would be like the diameter would be
like seven millimeters as opposed to point three zero inches. Okay,
traveling at that rate, yeah, it's when it hits soft tissue.
It's not going to be a gigantic hole all right now,
(35:10):
seeing entrance wounds that have kind of blown out, there
are other things you have to consider relative to this.
But the area just to the left of the midline
in the neck is rather soft. It's malleable. You've got
you know, the skin overlying a kind of a robust
area of muscle, which, yes, it's dense, but it's not
(35:31):
bone dense, right, and then you've got all of the
venus structures and arterial structures that are underlying that. It
doesn't get to anything firm really until you get back
to the spinal spinal column. Okay, so yeah, the fact
that this is happening. Now back to this idea of
the shirt moving. When you see that, that's a transfer
of kinetic energy. So a real simple experiment that you
(35:54):
can go go to, like the most peaceful pond you
can find, pick up I don't know, the tiniest pebble
that you want to pick up, all right, and toss
it into this peaceful, you know, beautiful pond and watch
what happens. Well, you're gonna have ripples that go out.
It's an energy transfer from this object striking that surface
(36:18):
and it literally just kind of bleeds out. Well, that's
why you saw a shirt move like this.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
I remember asking you that day about it because I
saw that, you know, before the videos got blurred, we
happened to see one that was very clear. Yeah, that's
what had happened. And I was shocked. But I did
notice that, and I remember asking you, you know, because
I didn't know what it meant. And once you said
that and you were telling me about it, I'm like, Okay,
that makes perfectly good sense. But Joe, perfectly good sense
(36:44):
is not what a lot of people are looking for
right now. And I saw a lot of comments critical
of the type of weapon or the type of ammunition.
Speaker 3 (36:52):
And one of the things that you said.
Speaker 2 (36:55):
I can remember which show you were talking about the
age of the ammunition and how that actually impact what
what could also be done? Because what if the ammunition
was older, would that have an impact?
Speaker 3 (37:07):
Does that really mean something?
Speaker 1 (37:08):
Yeah, I suppose it. Could you know if the if
the ammo itself is degraded in any way, we don't
know what kind of care has been taken. We also
don't know about the care of the weapon either internally,
the mechanism of the weapon, how did it operate, did
it affect the projectile is traveling down the barrel? Because
(37:29):
I mean, one of the first things they teach you
in the military, even if the low level that I
was in many many years ago, is your life depends
on your on your rifle. If you it will only
perform as well as you as you clean it. All right,
So performance, you know, diminishes significantly after a period of
(37:49):
time if you if you're not taking care of the weapon,
the ammo that you choose to cycle through it as well.
You also don't know about the quality of the ammunition,
like who manif factored this. Is it some kind of
like Russian ammo that was brought into the country or
is this something that was that was created by Winchester
(38:09):
Remington here in the United States. Don't know. They haven't
necessarily released that information yet, So that's going to play
a part as well. You know, both external, internal and
external ballistics come into play here. What's going to affect
the flight of the round? The physical stability of the
(38:30):
projectile itself dependent upon age perhaps, and it's still going
to have a level of lethality to it. But every
everything that is either done or not done to a
weapon or ammunition plays into this, and that's something that
they're going to be examining with this. I can tell
you this with the weapon that they have collected, you know,
(38:53):
the one that was found there in the quasi wooded area,
you know that's right off campus. They're pumping rounds for
the same Dave. They've taken the thing back to a
ballistics lab. If the my suspicion would be my suspicion
would be probably ATF Okay. Now it may go to
(39:15):
the state, to the State crime lab as well. But
if the ATF is doing this on a consulting basis.
They have a wide range. You wouldn't believe the catalog
of ammunition they have just in the firearms lab there
that if they're looking to match this these projectiles or
the ammo that was used, they can go back specifically
(39:35):
and approximate that ammo in order to because what would
have been collected at autopsy would have been would have
been if it's fragmented, you expect the bulk of the
round to be the base, which is the most robust
part at the bottom. So what you're trying to replicate
in these testing are the rifling marks that are created
(40:00):
as a bullet twist down the barrel. They're going to
fire live rounds through this same weapon, either into a
water tank or into a cotton box, which is going
to preserve the ballistic characteristics. You know, you can fire
it into a big bend that contains water and there's
(40:21):
a there's a basket, a metal basket at the bottom
of the thing, and so as the projectile loses energy
when it strikes the water, that projectile free floats through
the water and it lands in the barrel and the
rifling is not impacted, so you have a pristine bullet.
And then you have this gnarled up bullet that you
(40:42):
were covered at autops, you put it on comparison scope
and the ballistics expert begins to match this up. And
this is going to be key because people will say, well,
it's not a thirty out six, or it was a
different weapon. That's going to be sussed out pretty quickly.
So that little house of cards is going to fall
apart just by what is standard operating procedure in every
(41:05):
other firearms related homicide that we work across this country.
All Right, it's not going to instantaneously change because it's
Charlie Kirk. They're going to stick with this. This is
why it's important that we remember this is a homicide
investigation that took place in the state of Utah. Now,
I guess if you want to, you can say that
(41:26):
there has been some specter that has presented itself inside
of the agency that's taking control of the weapon, and
they're going to conduct their own test, and that they're
going to come up with bullets that are not actually
part of the investigation, and they're going to try to
put us off scent here, and that we're not going
(41:47):
to get the real data that ain't the way it works.
Because if that is the way it works, you're going
to have to get all of the law enforcement people,
even at state level, in on the game as well.
So now we've got the medical examiner who would have
to be part of the process, the forensic scientists that
are going to be doing the ballistic examinations, they would
(42:10):
have to be part of this conspiratorial process. Probably the
prosecutor would have to be upon it as well, because
the prosecutor doesn't want an autopsy, right, They're just going
to send the body off, so he'd have to be
keen to it. So you're going to have to get
all of these actors on board, and also the physician.
The surgeon presents an interesting character in all of this
(42:32):
because that individual was eyes on. They were eyes on
on the case as soon as Charlie rolled through the doors.
Do you think the surgeon that's on call is even
aware that Charlie Kirk is in town? Probably not. Maybe
they were, but probably not. You know why, because they're
(42:53):
doing surgeon stuff. They don't have time, they don't I've
been around these people. All they're all they're going to
know is that we've got a thirty something year old
white male rolling in. He's unresponsive and he's got an
apparent gunshot, one to the neck. All hands on deck,
here we go, all right, just like it happened when
(43:14):
Kennedy was rolling into Parkland in the back of that
damn limousine. Lowed those many years ago that you know,
they had an awareness the president was in town. Obviously
they knew. It was called ahead that JFK the President
was mortally wounded. He was being brought to Parkland. They're
not going to be up on the game here, you
(43:36):
know what I'm saying. They're going to take every patient
through the door that comes in. There's also been another
rumor that has been floated about, and I'm not going
to mention their name, but their initials are Candae Owens.
She apparently has stated that in one of these things
(44:00):
she does on her podcast or whatever, where she's saying
that she has inside information regarding the death certificate, and
the fact that the caliber of the weapon is not
named in the death certificate and that it was not
(44:21):
mentioned anywhere invalidates the process. That these are always the
caliber is always mentioned on the death certificate. They bear
with me indulge me, just for a moment, indulge my
mate insanity. Here, just for a second. Death certificate, John
(44:41):
Fitzgerald Kennedy. Cause of death, multiple gunshot wounds of head
and neck. That's what was on President's death certificate. Yeah. Next,
uh oh, here's a good one. Lee Harvey Oswalt hemorrhage
(45:01):
secondary to gunshot wound of the chest. Now I know
that Jack Ruby fired a thirty eight caliber revolver. It's
not mentioned in the death certificate. Hang on one second,
but wait, there's more. Let's see who do I have here?
Hang on, Oh, Kurt Cobain, Yeah, Kirk Cobain, I have
him right here. Oh, Kirk, Well, he's got a contact
(45:24):
perforating shotgun wound to the head. You notice that it's
not mentioned that it's twenty gauge, a sixteen gauge, a
twelve gauge hella, a ten gauge elephant gun. It's not
mentioned they say shotgun wound. Okay, hang on, who else
do I have here? Let's see one more. I know
(45:52):
I've got him. Oh, Tupac, Tupac, he was shot. Guess
what multiple gunshot woes. There's not There is not a
caliber mentioned in the death certificate. This is bordering into
(46:12):
the realm of the absurd. You have people that are
making comments about things that they have no understanding of.
Period they feel as though they're minding out knowledge that
all the rest of us need to know. But what
is it that they always do? They always say that
we have unnamed sources. But we'll get back to that.
(46:37):
But it never comes to fruition because I think it
was heard that was actually putting out for a time
that there could be a possibility he was shot from
the back. Well, now she's saying that, Okay, Charlie Kirk
has in fact died from a gunshot went to the neck.
(46:58):
He was shot from the front, Okay, And she gives
this great anatomical descriptor of his vertebral bodies back there
he shot here and right here. Thank you, Candice, Thank
you so much for giving us that information. After you've
(47:18):
stirred the waters. At this point in time, guys, listen,
the only thing I can say is that patience is
in fact the watch work. As a matter of fact,
it's going to be the watch word for the next
few months. If you're easily distracted, if you need some
(47:41):
kind of conspiratorial case that you want to go follow,
go out there and knock yourself out, but understand that
the authorities in Utah are not conducting an assassination investigation.
They are conducting a murder investigation. A murder investigation where
(48:08):
in the balance hangs a young man's life who the
state prosecutor has already said they're going after the death
penalty in keep your ears open, let's see what happens.
I'm Joseph Scott Morgan and this is Bodybacks.
Host
Joseph Scott Morgan
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.