Member of Charlie Kirk’s Team Removed Camera, Saved Copy of Video – No Exit Wound at Back of Neck
September 20th, 2025Update: Charlie Kirk Was Not Wearing Body Armor
Via: New York Post:
During dinner, Erika begged her husband to start wearing a bulletproof vest and, when he refused, the friend suggested he speak from behind bulletproof glass.
“Not yet,” Erika recalled Kirk replying, before he added that he felt confident in his security team and that there would be additional security at the Utah Valley University event.
—
For my commentary on this, I’ll include an excerpt from an email that I sent to a Cryptogon supporter yesterday:
With regard to the shot: I doubt that Charlie Kirk was shot directly in the neck with a 30-06 bullet.
I think that what we saw might be explainable if the bullet first made contact with body armor and then some or all of the projectile deflected upward into the neck.
After watching it dozens of times from different angles, there is no exit wound going back toward the white backdrop of the tent. 30-06 to the front of the neck would have passed through the back of the neck for sure. It should be exiting for sure.
If he was shot directly through the neck, there would have been a very obvious exit wound with blood splatter against the tent behind Kirk.
Look at 30-06 in ballistics gelatin:
And with other objects:
Of course, we have no idea what type of 30-06 ammo is alleged to have been used, but that wouldn’t matter because any 30-06 shot to the front of the neck would definitely exit the back of the neck.
That didn’t happen.
If the bullet didn’t hit armor first and deflect up… I have no idea what happened.
—
I have seen countless videos about alleged projectiles coming from different angles and distances. Alleged hand signals, reflections, vapor trails, muzzle flashes…
What do I think of all of that?
Again, summing it up in two sentences: I doubt that Charlie Kirk was shot directly in the neck with a 30-06 bullet… If the bullet didn’t hit armor first and deflect up… I have no idea what happened.
I had previously posted about the removal of the camera that was positioned behind Charlie Kirk within minutes of the assassination, and concern about what happened to that footage.
It turns out that the person was associated with Charlie Kirk and he turned the video over to law enforcement.
BUT…
He kept a copy.
It confirms what we already knew: No exit wound from the back of the neck.
Via: Candace Owens:
FWIW, I’ve seen a couple of photos of Charlie on that day where his nipples are discernible behind the white of his t-shirt. Also, some photos from the side show normal and uninterrupted body contours under the t-shirt. It doesn’t seem he was wearing armour.
Just a mention: I read or heard somewhere the theory that there was an explosive device in the top of his body armor on his left side, and shrapnel from it hit his neck. But wouldn’t that leave burn marks on him and shrapnel scattered around, not just in his neck?
They did remove the tent, stage and all the grass, burying the dirt under brick. They’ll never tell how they disposed of the tent and stage materials or his body armor.
I’ve heard that body armor can be very thin. If like silk, it could be undetectable. I’ve seen modestly-endowed women wearing a two-layer cotton, somewhat stretchy bra and a cotton t-shirt whose nipples still showed when that was not their intention.
I’m leaning toward a RHS entry now, and here’s a new angle:
https://x.com/jonaaronbray/status/1969412722577043694
More here:
https://x.com/jonaaronbray