Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Who was Thomas Matthew Crooks and his motives in Trump shooting July 13 2024?
Executive summary
Available reporting identifies Thomas Matthew Crooks as the 20‑year‑old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, who on July 13, 2024 fired eight rounds from an AR‑15–style rifle at a Trump rally near Butler, wounding Donald Trump’s ear and killing one attendee; Crooks was killed by a Secret Service counter‑sniper and investigators said he likely acted alone, but officials and news outlets say a clear motive has not been established [1] [2] [3]. Major outlets and later commentators have published conflicting contours of his online footprint and possible ideological shifts, and the FBI’s public statements about what it found — or did not find — have become a focus of dispute [4] [5] [6].
1. Who was Thomas Matthew Crooks — the basic portrait
Reporting assembled a consistent basic profile: Crooks was born Sept. 20, 2003, grew up in Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, worked as a dietary aide at a local nursing home, graduated from community college with an associate degree, practiced at a local shooting club, and was identified by the FBI as the rooftop shooter who fired eight times toward the rally on July 13, 2024 before being shot dead by protective agents [7] [3] [8] [2].
2. What happened at the rally — the established facts
Multiple accounts say Crooks fired eight rounds from a nearby rooftop outside the rally security perimeter, struck Trump in the upper right ear, killed rally attendee Corey Comperatore and critically wounded two others, and was fatally shot by a Secret Service counter‑sniper; bomb‑making materials and a remote detonator were later reported found in his vehicle and home, and the FBI opened an extensive investigation [1] [7] [3].
3. Motive: what investigators said and what they didn’t say
News organizations and official briefings repeatedly emphasize that investigators have not publicly identified a clear motive: the FBI said its forensic work included phone and digital data reviews but, as of early reporting, offered no definitive ideological explanation for why Crooks climbed that roof [3] [2]. Reuters and NPR highlighted that authorities and those who knew him were “frustratingly” unable to explain his motive [8] [9]. Available sources do not mention a single accepted, confirmed manifesto or declaration of intent by Crooks that explains the act [5].
4. The contested digital trail: competing narratives
Longform investigations (CBS, BBC) and contemporaneous reporting traced multiple online searches and visits — including weapons sites, news outlets and political archives — in the months before the shooting, and noted use of VPNs and aliases that leave gaps in the public record [5] [7]. By contrast, the FBI initially told lawmakers it found nothing in Crooks’ online history pointing clearly to motive or political ideology, a statement later seized on by commentators who say material has been under‑shared or suppressed [4] [10]. Commentators such as Tucker Carlson and outlets like ZeroHedge published or promoted recovered online material and alleged a broader digital footprint; conservative and partisan outlets have framed the FBI’s disclosure as a coverup, while mainstream outlets note the bureau’s caution about validating data [6] [4].
5. Interpretations by experts and investigators — multiple angles
Violence researchers and former behavioral analysts offered differing readings: some said Crooks’ preparations and acquisition of explosive‑related material suggest intent for larger violence and planning [7], while others observed operational shortcomings (lack of body armor, single weapon) that might indicate an individual act not intended to sustain a prolonged attack [1]. Analysts quoted in reporting warned against over‑reading online fragments as definitive motive evidence, noting young people’s online activity often shifts and can be ambiguous [11] [5].
6. Where the record is thin and why disputes persist
Significant investigative gaps remain because Crooks died at the scene and some material was initially inaccessible or contested; reporters cite the FBI’s ongoing interviews, thousands of images reviewed and large numbers of interviews but also note that large swaths of his online behavior were obscured by VPNs or aliases and that the bureau’s public disclosures have been limited, fueling alternative narratives [3] [5] [4]. Conservative media and commentators claim withheld or suppressed evidence; mainstream outlets emphasize that law enforcement must validate digital materials before public release [6] [4].
7. Bottom line for readers: what is supported and what remains unsettled
The shooting, identity of the shooter, basic chronology and casualty count are well documented by multiple outlets and FBI statements [1] [2]. The motive is not established in public reporting and remains under investigation; competing reconstructions of Crooks’ online history and intent exist, and readers should note which outlets are reporting primary investigative detail (CBS, BBC, Reuters, CNN) versus opinionated or partisan exposés that assert withheld conspiracies [5] [3] [8] [6]. Available sources do not mention a single, court‑validated account that definitively explains why Crooks acted on July 13, 2024 [2] [5].