this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026

568 points (97.7% liked)

News

36867 readers

3781 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

568

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

149 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.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] MyMindIsLikeAnOcean@piefed.world 4 points 1 hour ago

If you’re going to report on bullet analysis, you need to also report on the evolution of the science. Which is to say, the way we understand bullet analysis from a show like CSI or something is incorrect. Bullets simply can’t be linked to firearms like fingerprints can be linked to people.

The way I understand the science is that bullet analysis tells us if a bullet is from a family of guns, not a specific gun like it was used in the past. Bullet analysis and be used to rule out a weapon, not to directly tie one to a crime. This article doesn’t tell us the gun was eliminated like it suggests.

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Almost makes you think Charlie tried to pull a Trump but rolled a critical fail.

[–] krisevol@lemmus.org 2 points 39 minutes ago

Na, it was Israel. He had a meeting with then 2 weeks earlier that didn't go well.

[–] greenbit@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 hours ago

And the assembling the rifle story and the weird video of the kid and the fake text messages...

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

Turns out face enlargement surgery has serious side effects.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago

Can't wait for the 2nd shooter theories. Didn't Kirk's head jerk back, and to the left?

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 45 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Charlie Kirk’s killing was an inside job. Where was Erika? Where was Trump? Where are the Epstein files?

[–] El_Scapacabra@lemmy.zip 20 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Erika and J.D. sitting in a tree S.N.I.P.I.N.G.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

that made me laugh out loud

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 12 points 7 hours ago

It was spontaneously created by the Almighty. You didn't need proof of the bullet's firing. You just need strong enough belief. If God came down and snatched the bullet from Trump's ear, he also placed this one.

[–] BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 10 points 7 hours ago

This is NOT Proof of anything at All!

-Pizzagate believers who call Michelle Obama a legitimate Man!

[–] harcesz@szmer.info 22 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

DJ Trump did Kirk 11.

[–] GameOverFlow@lemmy.zip 12 points 9 hours ago

Can Kirk fuel meld Trumps beam?

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 hours ago

(•_•) Looks like…

( •_•)>⌐■-■ this bullet is…

(⌐■_■) the smoking gun.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 14 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

erika grifting kirk already forgiven tyler.

[–] DERRALEXANO@sh.itjust.works 11 points 12 hours ago

Nah she forgave the killer (not TR)

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 40 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

This is a nothing statement. It just means that they can't definitively prove what rifle fired the bullet. It's something that happens all the time, and there's plenty of other evidence for them to convinct. Plus that motherfucker is still worm food, so it doesn't really matter anyway.

[–] frog_brawler@lemmy.world 10 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

It’s not a “this proves Tyler Robinson is innocent” but it casts substantial doubt on the prosecution’s claims. Once they start talking about shot angle and where Robinson supposedly was at the time of the shooting, having this part about the bullet already out of the way will likely clear him… and then we’re going to have proof that someone other than Robinson killed Kirk.

It doesn’t help the state too much that the sheriff responsible for this situation investigation just resigned.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 1 points 1 hour ago

While I'm not deluded enough to dismiss the efficacy of political violence, I'm not keen on having this guy running around out in the wild either. Much like any action, consequences are inevitable, and you l one has to be ready to be on the receiving end of them. That said if he gets off because the cops/prosecution shit the bed, I'm not gonna lose any sleep. ACAB and Charlie Kirk sucked.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 5 hours ago

They have DNA.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

There was also the guy the said he did it immediately after it happened. At best they can prove at this point that Tyler Robinson thought he killed Kirk and nobody else nearby had the tools to do it.

I'm sure the autopsy will contain the truly damning evidence because of the shot angle.

[–] Bluewing@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago

Not surprising. Since high velocity rifle bullets very often get very deformed on impact and some are even specifically designed to fragment on impact. Unlike low velocity pistol rounds which don't move fast enough to deform a lot.

People need to stop watching CSI reruns.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 9 points 13 hours ago

there's plenty of other evidence for them to convinct

Like confessing to the trans roommate? That was surely planted evidence.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 44 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

A disturbing number of people seem to be reading this as:

"The bullet does not match the gun." i.e. that there is 'proof' that the bullet didn't come from his gun

Instead of

"They can't say if it is or is not from the gun due to being a small fragment and not an entire bullet"

It probably doesn't help that there are a bunch of communities/subreddits who've editorialized the headlines to say 'bullet does not match gun' and the tendency of people to only read the headline.

[–] MyMindIsLikeAnOcean@piefed.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Yes, and…

The way I understand the evolution of bullet science is that the days are gone when bullets can be used like finger prints because too many cases have been overturned.

The way we should be thinking about this type of forensics is that it can link a bullet to a family of guns ie “this could have been the weapon or this couldn’t have been the weapon” - it’s almost never definitive, in the affirmative.

The headline here could also be “bullet investigation does not rule out Robinson as the shooter”.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

It's a non-story.

The thing that happened is that the defense asked for more time before the trial. This is incredibly common and will likely happen in every criminal case multiple times.

From a legal point of view, nothing important is happening here. Reporting on this is about as relevant as writing an article stating the the judge called the court in session.

The only reason that it is getting traction is because the headlines can be crafted to attract the conspiratorial-minded people by focusing on one tiny part of that motion that is useless without the context of the full report.

It's entirely clickbait/conspiracy nonsense.

[–] FatVegan@leminal.space 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

OJ's glove didn't fit, therefore he's innocent

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Using this metaphor, OJ's glove is shredded to pieces so determining if it fits or not is not possible.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] pleaseletmein@lemmy.zip 47 points 20 hours ago (4 children)

His neck just did that.

[–] IndieGoblin@lemmy.4d2.org 2 points 9 hours ago

God must've smited him

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] BigTuffAl@lemmy.zip 13 points 16 hours ago

Bullet analysis is circumstantial and pseudosciencey anyway so the fact they couldn't get that in their favor is kind of weird.

load more comments