It sure looks more like a jacket than a rifle.
Also, that GPT-5 analysis seems really bad. Not very informative that it didn't find anything. It also might not be "objective" if you interacted with it after not seeing the rifle yourself, which I feel like I get from your messages.
I have not told it anything about me not seeing the rifle. I did give the link to my chatlog and the questions I asked, and my follow-up questions. In a previous chat I just asked it fairly objective questions about what the official timeline is. Given the way GPT is set up, if anything that should bias it toward validating the official version.
I don't think GPT-5 Pro's capability is absolute proof, but it's another set of eyes and GPT-5 likely know a bunch about how artifacts from low resolution in videos are supposed to look like that I don't know.
When the figure is about to jump off of the roof, they briefly put down their bag. It has a long thin part of the right side. It’s not definitively a rifle, but its shape is consistent with one. There isn’t enough detail to really show for sure one way or another.
Given the quality of the camera, that item's shape is "consistent with" a lot of different items, including a rifle. It could've been anything from a jacket to a small suitcase, and any features smaller than a couple inches (such as a rifle barrel) would disappear between the pixels.
I wouldn't expect to see an identifiable rifle in that low-quality footage, so not seeing it isn't surprising. Album, where I tried to keep the pixelization consistent (18 pixels tall = 4"/pixel in the video, guessing 28" barrel = 7 output pixels per 430 input pixels). My unidentifiable blob is consistent with a rifle because it was made from a rifle. It's also consistent with a stick.
Which blob are you talking about?
While the moment right before he jumps might have a blob that's consistent with a lot of different items, it seems to me like the time he walks, there's no such blob as far as I (and GPT-5 Pro) seem tobe able to tell.
It's worth noting that the government document says that him carrying an object consistent with being a rifle is visible while he runs across the roof. The moment where he prepares his jump is not a moment he runs over the roof.
To answer your question succinctly: I don't see or not see a rifle. The video is not clear enough to tell. And I think we should draw zero consequences from that.
I think trying to deeply analyze a grainy video to confirm or deny the existence of a rifle is a fool's errand when there's so much other evidence available. It's silly for the FBI to claim it's definitively a rifle, and it's silly to claim that not being able to see a rifle in that quality of video cuts against guilt.
There's a ton of other evidence, finding the rifle near the scene of the shooting in the woods, the other surveillance where a rifle is much more visible, the texts, the confession, etc.
Tyler Robinson is Rudy Guede. The evidence points towards him. Is it vaguely possible that the FBI has manufactured a ton of evidence and has convinced many civilians, including Robinson's own father and his boyfriend to lie, but that is a mere possibility and definitely not reasonable.
The scenarios are either that Tyler Robinson is the perpetrator or that someone tried to set him up as a patsy.
In an age of no-click remote exploits for phones, it's easy for someone with nation state capability to fake the text messages and there is plenty of the discussion online that they are looking fake. I think it's debatable whether the text messages are stronger evidence for Tyler as perpetrator or patsy.
The rifle being found in the woods near the shooting is consistent with both versions.
confession
It's a hand-written document that could also have ...
That looks consistent with a rifle to me, though there are are really only a few moments as he's transitioning from the roof to the ground that it's easy to see he has something long in there.
The more interesting mismatch to me is with the terminal performance of that bullet. The lack of an exit is definitely not consistent with a 30-06 at 140yd striking his neck from that angle. I think I know how to explain it, but I'm curious if anyone else has tried to figure out how that could happen.
The FBI uploaded a video of their suspected shooter running over the roof after the shoot on Charlie Kirk was made. The Utah County Attorney writes in their charging document:
Immediately after the shot was fired, a camera captures the suspect running across the roof carrying an item whose shape is consistent with a rifle.
When I look at the video myself I don't see "an item whose shape is consistent with a rifle". When I asked GPT-5 Pro (to have an objective perspective) whether it can find such an item on the video and it can't find anything that matches the description either.
In the past we discussed how Amanda Knox likely wasn't guilty as charged because the evidence from the prosecution didn't really line up. What do you think in this case? Do you see the rifle? Otherwise, what consequences should we draw from it not being there?