News

36889 readers

3642 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

577

Charlie Kirk bullet analysis finds no conclusive link to rifle found near scene (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 day ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world

151 comments fedilink hide all child comments

An analysis from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive (ATF) could not conclusively connect a bullet fragment recovered during Charlie Kirk’s autopsy to the rifle found near the scene of the rightwing political activist’s killing – and the FBI is running additional tests, lawyers for Kirk’s accused murderer said in recent court filings.

In the court filings, Tyler Robinson’s defense team also asked for a delay to a preliminary hearing scheduled in May, saying they need time to review the bullet analysis as well as an enormous amount of other material that could contribute to the suspect’s defense.

The ATF’s bullet analysis report has been kept private, but attorneys have cited snippets in other public filings that say the results were inconclusive.

The defense said in its motion that it may try to use the analysis to clear Robinson of blame during the preliminary hearing while prosecutors aim to show they have enough evidence against him to proceed with a trial.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I thought the kid more or less confessed. Are they saying he actually didn't? Or that he fired, but he missed? Also, did we ever find out what the real story with the kid was. There was a lot of conflicting accounts about his life before this all went down.

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

I mean it’s entirely possible they intimidated the kid in to confessing to a crime he didn’t commit.

The intent of the whole “We know you did it, we have lots of evidence, confess and we’ll go easy on you” shtick is that someone who didn’t do it would know they couldn’t have evidence and thus wouldn’t be pressured to confess by it. Problem is, most people know that cops plant, tamper and manufacture evidence constantly so it’s actually a pretty good way to intimidate people in to confessing to crimes they didn’t do.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

Well, I thpught he confessed to his dad or something, and his dad called it in because he thought his son was going to kill himself or something. Not like an interrogation confession.