The identity of the alleged attempted assassin, Thomas Matthew Crooks, remains shrouded in uncertainty despite the release of his autopsy results. Reports reveal that these findings do not provide clear evidence linking Crooks to the shooting. The autopsy became accessible only after reporter Kenneth Silva of Headline USA pursued the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records for comprehensive documentation related to the case. Initially, many requests were denied, raising eyebrows about the transparency surrounding such a significant incident.
Silva faced considerable resistance, particularly regarding critical evidence like histology slides that could offer DNA analysis. What stands out is the acknowledgment by the Allegheny County Medical Examiner that there was no documented communication from the Butler County Coroner, William Young, concerning the transport of Crooks’ body. This lack of documentation raises questions about the procedural rigor typically expected in high-profile cases, especially those involving an assassination attempt on a former president.
The absence of records on how Crooks was identified is particularly troubling. Did the Butler County Coroner rely solely on the word of law enforcement present at the scene? Were relatives called in for identification? The investigation appears to lack the meticulousness one would anticipate in such a serious matter. There is speculation surrounding the specific evidence the Medical Examiner received on July 14, 2024, to substantiate the claims of identity, as the only item noted is a bag containing brown hair and a tag on the ankle.
Furthermore, Ariel Goldschmidt, the Allegheny County Medical Examiner, offered vague testimony before a Congressional Task Force, indicating his office had minimal involvement in the broader investigative efforts. His admission that he had “no reports” related to Crooks’ actions or motives raises further concerns. Why was there such a significant breakdown in communication across multiple agencies, including the FBI and local police? Questions surrounding the chain of custody and the collection of evidence at the scene remain unanswered.
This situation exemplifies the difficulties that arise when multiple law enforcement agencies are involved. Despite assurances that standard protocols would be followed, the facts currently available create more confusion than clarity. The complete lack of detailed records leaves the public wondering: how, exactly, was the alleged shooter identified? In the realm of public safety, straightforward answers and due diligence are paramount, and this case has fallen short of those expectations.
"*" indicates required fields
