http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnQCGEIUUk0
The more recent news stories claim that the younger Tsarnaev brother had no gun in the boat when the shooting started.
Yet he had a self inflicted wound from a projectile going into his mouth and out the back of his neck.
One transit authority cop at the scene says the wound looked like a knife wound.Of course exit wounds can be slit shaped and mistaken for knife wounds.
Here's the conundrum. The end of the FLIR video shows Tsarnaev place what looks to be a rifle muzzle to his mouth, then his head falls back as a splotch of body temperature IR signature appears on a surface several inches behind his head. The muzzle, if that's what it is, the back of the neck and the sudden appearance of the splotch that could be blood spatter all line up.
Since the New York Times story claimed among other things that Tsarnaev had a BB gun is it possible that he shot himself with one of the more powerful pellet guns?
A pellet gun would not be listed in the Federal Indictment, since an air gun is not a firearm under federal law.
In looking up the wounding capabilities of air rifles I've found that several murders have been committed with pellet guns. Many over the counter air rifles could easily punch a hole through the tissues between the inside of the mouth and the back of the neck.
What are your thoughts on this?
PS
The New York Times story also mentioned an M4 Carbine. Crosman makes a pump up pneumatic air rifle called the M4 177 that's is a pretty detailed replica of the M4 carbine. Velocity of that rifle is 675 fps. There are other assault rifle styled airguns with much higher velocity ratings.
While an air rifle of such small caliber is not a good choice for a firefight, one of the more powerful air guns could be used to execute a hostage with little noise. A replica M4 could be used in a bluff to make it appear the brothers were better armed than they actually were.
|