Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Thank you for that insightful, well thought out comment. Your brilliantly reasoned analysis is an example to us all.
    More than happy to help
    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

    Comment


    • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post




      Here are fifteen:




      and it was like a double bang — bang, bang... This was instantaneous.

      (KELLERMAN TESTIMONY)


      The last two seemed to be just simultaneously, one behind the other

      (GREER TESTIMONY)


      I heard two reports which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them.

      (HICKEY TESTIMONY)



      ... there was a bang [and then a few seconds later] and then there was bang! bang! - very close together.

      (ROBERT MACNEIL, CANADIAN JOURNALIST)



      I heard three shots. One, then a slight pause, then two very close together.

      (LEE BOWERS TESTIMONY)



      ... one shot, then a pause, and then two shots in very close order ... almost on top of each other.


      (LEE BOWERS INTERVIEW)



      ... the second two [shots] seemed to be simultaneously.


      (SEYMOUR WEITZMAN)



      The second two shots were immediate. It was almost as if one were an echo of the other. They came so quickly, the sound of one did not cease until the second shot.

      (MARY WOODWARD, DALLAS MORNING NEWS)



      I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time and then there were two real fast bullets together.

      (LINDA WILLIS, ONE OF THE EYEWITNESSES CLOSEST TO THE ASSASSINATION)



      They were in rather rapid succession.

      (DALLAS MAYOR EARLE CABELL)



      Then a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession.

      (LADY BIRD JOHNSON)



      the first shot was fired, followed in quick succession by two more

      (WILLIAM MCINTYRE TESTIMONY)



      In other words, it was the first, and then a pause, and then the other two were real close.

      (CLYDE HAYGOOD TESTIMONY)



      and then the third shot was fired right behind the second one


      (JAMES JARMAN TESTIMONY)



      there was a slight pause after the first shot and then the next two was right close together

      (BILLY LOVELADY AFFIDAVIT)



      I heard one shot and then a pause and then this repetition-two shots right behind the other

      (EDWARD SHIELDS TESTIMONY)
      Thanks PI. You are a wealth of information.

      Cheers, George
      They are not long, the days of wine and roses:
      Out of a misty dream
      Our path emerges for a while, then closes
      Within a dream.
      Ernest Dowson - Vitae Summa Brevis​

      ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

      Comment


      • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Helen Markham could not recognise her own voice on a recording of a conversation she had with Mark Lane.

        On the recording, she said that the killer was short with slightly bushy hair.

        Oswald was not short and had straight, thinning hair.
        I already answered this in the post you quoted. Helen Markham's testimony under was that everything that Mark Lane claimed that she said was a lie by Mark Lane.


        Mr. BALL. Mrs. Markham, do you know a man named Mark Lane?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No; I do not.
        Mr. BALL. Did you ever hear of the name?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. Did not.
        Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a New York lawyer who says he was from New York?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a lawyer who was investigating the case in behalf of the deceased man, Lee Oswald?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a man who said he was representing the mother of Lee Oswald?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Mr. BALL. You don't remember ever talking to a man named Mark Lane?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Mr. BALL. In an appearance before this Commission, a man named Mark Lane has testified this way. Let me read it to you. That was on Wednesday, March 4, 1964, Vol. II of a public hearing before this Commission, page 51. This is what he said:
        "I spoke with the deponent"-he is talking about an affidavit that you made to the Dallas Police Department-"l spoke with the deponent, the eyewitness, Helen Louise Markham, and Mrs. Markham told me Miss or Mrs., I didn't ask her if she was married--told me she was 100 feet away from the police car, not the 50 feet which appears in the affidavit."
        Do you recall ever stating that to Mr. Lane or anyone else?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; no, sir.
        Mr. BALL. He testified: "She gave me a more detailed description of the man who she said shot Officer Tippit. She said he was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy." Did you say that to Mark Lane?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; I don't even know the man.
        Mr. BALL. Or anybody else?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Mr. BALL. Did you ever tell anyone that the man who shot Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Mr. BALL. Was the man, is it your memory now that the man who shot Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir. He wasn't too heavy.
        Mr. BALL. Is it your memory that his hair was bushy?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. It wasn't so bushy. It was, say, windblown or something.
        What I mean, he didn't have a lot of hair.
        Mr. BALL. He didn't have a lot of hair?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; that I could see. I don't even know that man; I never talked to nobody.
        Representative FORD. You didn't talk to him by telephone or any other means?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
        Representative FORD. Did you ever get an anonymous phone call from a person who asked you these questions?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
        Mr. BALL. Now, he also says, and he testified as follows:
        "Helen Markham said to me she was taken to the police station on that same day, that she was very upset. She, of course, had never seen anyone killed in front of her eyes before, and in the police station she identified Oswald as the person who had shot Officer Tippit in the lineup, including three other persons. She said no one pointed Oswald out to her, and she said she was just shown four people, and she picked Oswald. She said when he asked her how she could identify him, she said she was able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket and dark trousers."
        Did you ever make that statement to him?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. I did not, sir.
        Mr. BALL. Or to anyone else?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. Not to anybody.
        Mr. BALL. When you identified Oswald--it was the number 2 man--were you told the number 2 man whom you identified in the lineup?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, I was not.
        Mr. BALL. Were you ever told his name?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
        Mr. BALL. Ever told his name later?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. Nobody, nobody told me nothing.
        Mr. BALL. Well, the man that you identified as the number 2 man in the lineup in the police station, you identified him as the man you had seen shoot Officer Tippit?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, I did.
        Mr. BALL. Did you identify him because of his clothing that he had on at that time in the lineup.
        Mrs. MARKHAM. Just like I told you. I mostly looked at his face, his eyes, and his clothing, too.
        Mr. BALL. He said here you were able to identify him, Mark Lane testified that you told him you were able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket. First, did the man in the lineup have a gray jacket on?
        Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.​​


        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Domingo Benavides said the assassin had curly hair, which needed cutting, and a ruddy complexion. Oswald had neither curly hair nor a ruddy complexion and anyone looking at photos of him taken at that time can see that he did not need a haircut.
        That is an inaccurate description of what Benavides said.

        "His hair was a little bit curlier." than attorney David W Belin. Benavides also testified that Tippett's killer was a bit ruddier than Belin - "a little bit darker than average".


        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Johnny Brewer did not see Oswald take his seat in the theater.

        He could not therefore know how long Oswald had been in the theater.
        Brewer saw Oswald enter the theater, so he knew how long Oswald had been in the theater.

        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Calloway made a prejudiced statement about the way Oswald was dressed when he identified him: 'He had the same trousers and shirt, but he didn't have his jacket on. He had ditched his jacket.'
        How is Calloway's statement in any way prejudiced?


        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        She said the killer wore a dark coat, not a light grey zipper jacket.
        So what? She clearly saw Tippet's killer and IDed hm as Oswald.


        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Virginia Davis said that the murderer 'didn't look like he was over 20.'

        So what? She clearly saw Tippet's killer and IDed hm as Oswald.​

        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Guinyard testified that the killer wore a brown shirt.

        Oswald's shirt was grey.
        Oswald's shirt was brown. Anyone who isn't colorblind can clearly see that.

        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        According to Dallas Police Patrolman Roy W. Walker, Warren Reynolds described the suspect as having wavy hair and wearing a white jacket.
        Author Dale K Myers claims that Patrolman Walker told Walker that Reynolds said the suspect had wavy hair and a white jacket.

        Against this hearsay we have Reynold's testimony under oath.

        Mr. LIEBELER. OK; let me put it this way: When is the first time that anybody from any law-enforcement agency, and I mean by that, the FBI, Secret Service, Dallas Police Department, Dallas County sheriff's office; you pick it. When is the first time that they ever talked to you?
        Mr. REYNOLDS. January 21.
        Mr. LIEBELER. That is the first time they ever talked to you about what you saw on that day?
        Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right.
        Mr. LIEBELER. So you never in any way identified this man in the police department or any other authority, either in November or in December of 1963; is that correct?
        Mr. REYNOLDS. No; I sure didn't.
        Mr. LIEBELER. So it can be in no way said that you "fingered" the man who was running down the street, and identified him as the man who was going around and putting the gun in his pocket?​

        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        William Scoggins testified that the assassin was wearing a darkish-brown jacket, not a light grey zipper jacket.
        You are incorrect. Again.

        Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this now. When you first saw this man, had the police car stopped or not?
        Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he stopped. When I saw he stopped, then I looked to see why he was stopping, you see, and I saw this man with a light-colored jacket on.​

        Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
        Smith testified that the killer wore a sport coat.

        Sports jackets do not have zips.
        Smith IDed the jacket found behind the gas station as the jacket worn by Tippet's killer.

        Mr. BALL. This is Commission's Exhibit 162, a grey, zippered jacket. Have you ever seen this before?
        Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; that looks like what he had on. A jacket.
        Mr. BALL. That is the jacket he had on?
        Mr. SMITH. Yes.​

        Helen Markham picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
        Domingo Benavides told police wasn't sure if he could ID Tippet's killer.
        Johnny C. Brewer​ identified Oswald at the theater.
        Ted Callaway picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
        Barbara J. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
        Virginia R. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
        Sam Guinyard picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
        Warren Reynolds identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph. (Oswald was dead by the time police contacted him.)
        William W. Scoggins picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
        William Arthur Smith​ identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph.

        Oswald also tried to murder Officer McDonald with the gun that was used to kill Officer Tippett. In the gun and his pockets, Oswald had a mix of Winchester-Western and Remington-Peters bullets. Tippet was shot with a mix of Winchester-Western and Remington-Peters bullets. The shell casings discarded by Tippett's killer were a mix of Winchester-Western and Remington-Peters bullets
        "The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren

        "Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer

        Comment


        • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
          Secret Service Agent Clint Hill testified that Kennedy's back wound was about six inches below the neckline and that the right side of the back of his head was blown away and lying on the back seat of the vehicle.

          I cannot remember what adjectives were used to discredit Hill, but posters made it plain that he was not, in their views, a credible witness.
          I have posted showing that Clint Hill testified that JFK was killed by a bullet to the back of the head. He believed Oswald was the only shooter.

          Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
          For the purpose of getting the two wounds to line up and thereby sustain the Single Bullet Theory, Kennedy was turned into a momentary hunchback, whose back wound miraculously rose by five to six inches (actually more than that if the angle of entry was as stated by Humes and not the 17 or 18 degrees being claimed).
          That is not an accurate description of the single bullet theory.

          Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
          A witness by the name of Burroughs, who said he sold popcorn to Oswald at about the time that Tippit is known to have been shot, was not - pointed out one of my adversaries - assistant manager in the movie theater but in a much lower position and obviously not qualified to remember whom he was selling popcorn to or when.
          Perhaps you should read Butch Burroughs actual testimony under oath.

          "I just failed to see him when he slipped in."

          "Did you see that man come into the theater?"
          "No, sir; I didn't.

          "I didn't see him when he came in."
          "The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren

          "Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

            I already answered this in the post you quoted. Helen Markham's testimony under was that everything that Mark Lane claimed that she said was a lie by Mark Lane.


            Mr. BALL. Mrs. Markham, do you know a man named Mark Lane?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No; I do not.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever hear of the name?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Did not.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a New York lawyer who says he was from New York?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a lawyer who was investigating the case in behalf of the deceased man, Lee Oswald?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever talk to a man who said he was representing the mother of Lee Oswald?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. You don't remember ever talking to a man named Mark Lane?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. In an appearance before this Commission, a man named Mark Lane has testified this way. Let me read it to you. That was on Wednesday, March 4, 1964, Vol. II of a public hearing before this Commission, page 51. This is what he said:
            "I spoke with the deponent"-he is talking about an affidavit that you made to the Dallas Police Department-"l spoke with the deponent, the eyewitness, Helen Louise Markham, and Mrs. Markham told me Miss or Mrs., I didn't ask her if she was married--told me she was 100 feet away from the police car, not the 50 feet which appears in the affidavit."
            Do you recall ever stating that to Mr. Lane or anyone else?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; no, sir.
            Mr. BALL. He testified: "She gave me a more detailed description of the man who she said shot Officer Tippit. She said he was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy." Did you say that to Mark Lane?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; I don't even know the man.
            Mr. BALL. Or anybody else?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Did you ever tell anyone that the man who shot Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Was the man, is it your memory now that the man who shot Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir. He wasn't too heavy.
            Mr. BALL. Is it your memory that his hair was bushy?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. It wasn't so bushy. It was, say, windblown or something.
            What I mean, he didn't have a lot of hair.
            Mr. BALL. He didn't have a lot of hair?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; that I could see. I don't even know that man; I never talked to nobody.
            Representative FORD. You didn't talk to him by telephone or any other means?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
            Representative FORD. Did you ever get an anonymous phone call from a person who asked you these questions?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
            Mr. BALL. Now, he also says, and he testified as follows:
            "Helen Markham said to me she was taken to the police station on that same day, that she was very upset. She, of course, had never seen anyone killed in front of her eyes before, and in the police station she identified Oswald as the person who had shot Officer Tippit in the lineup, including three other persons. She said no one pointed Oswald out to her, and she said she was just shown four people, and she picked Oswald. She said when he asked her how she could identify him, she said she was able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket and dark trousers."
            Did you ever make that statement to him?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. I did not, sir.
            Mr. BALL. Or to anyone else?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Not to anybody.
            Mr. BALL. When you identified Oswald--it was the number 2 man--were you told the number 2 man whom you identified in the lineup?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, I was not.
            Mr. BALL. Were you ever told his name?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
            Mr. BALL. Ever told his name later?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Nobody, nobody told me nothing.
            Mr. BALL. Well, the man that you identified as the number 2 man in the lineup in the police station, you identified him as the man you had seen shoot Officer Tippit?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, I did.
            Mr. BALL. Did you identify him because of his clothing that he had on at that time in the lineup.
            Mrs. MARKHAM. Just like I told you. I mostly looked at his face, his eyes, and his clothing, too.
            Mr. BALL. He said here you were able to identify him, Mark Lane testified that you told him you were able to identify him because of his clothing, a gray jacket. First, did the man in the lineup have a gray jacket on?
            Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.​​




            That is an inaccurate description of what Benavides said.

            "His hair was a little bit curlier." than attorney David W Belin. Benavides also testified that Tippett's killer was a bit ruddier than Belin - "a little bit darker than average".




            Brewer saw Oswald enter the theater, so he knew how long Oswald had been in the theater.



            How is Calloway's statement in any way prejudiced?




            So what? She clearly saw Tippet's killer and IDed hm as Oswald.





            So what? She clearly saw Tippet's killer and IDed hm as Oswald.​



            Oswald's shirt was brown. Anyone who isn't colorblind can clearly see that.



            Author Dale K Myers claims that Patrolman Walker told Walker that Reynolds said the suspect had wavy hair and a white jacket.

            Against this hearsay we have Reynold's testimony under oath.

            Mr. LIEBELER. OK; let me put it this way: When is the first time that anybody from any law-enforcement agency, and I mean by that, the FBI, Secret Service, Dallas Police Department, Dallas County sheriff's office; you pick it. When is the first time that they ever talked to you?
            Mr. REYNOLDS. January 21.
            Mr. LIEBELER. That is the first time they ever talked to you about what you saw on that day?
            Mr. REYNOLDS. That's right.
            Mr. LIEBELER. So you never in any way identified this man in the police department or any other authority, either in November or in December of 1963; is that correct?
            Mr. REYNOLDS. No; I sure didn't.
            Mr. LIEBELER. So it can be in no way said that you "fingered" the man who was running down the street, and identified him as the man who was going around and putting the gun in his pocket?​



            You are incorrect. Again.

            Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this now. When you first saw this man, had the police car stopped or not?
            Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he stopped. When I saw he stopped, then I looked to see why he was stopping, you see, and I saw this man with a light-colored jacket on.​



            Smith IDed the jacket found behind the gas station as the jacket worn by Tippet's killer.

            Mr. BALL. This is Commission's Exhibit 162, a grey, zippered jacket. Have you ever seen this before?
            Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; that looks like what he had on. A jacket.
            Mr. BALL. That is the jacket he had on?
            Mr. SMITH. Yes.​

            Helen Markham picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Domingo Benavides told police wasn't sure if he could ID Tippet's killer.
            Johnny C. Brewer​ identified Oswald at the theater.
            Ted Callaway picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Barbara J. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Virginia R. Davis picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Sam Guinyard picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            Warren Reynolds identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph. (Oswald was dead by the time police contacted him.)
            William W. Scoggins picked Lee Harvey Oswald out of a lineup.
            William Arthur Smith​ identified Lee Harvey Oswald from a photograph.

            Oswald also tried to murder Officer McDonald with the gun that was used to kill Officer Tippett. In the gun and his pockets, Oswald had a mix of Winchester-Western and Remington-Peters bullets. Tippet was shot with a mix of Winchester-Western and Remington-Peters bullets. The shell casings discarded by Tippett's killer were a mix of Winchester-Western and Remington-Peters bullets
            A lesson to PI, Fishy and George on how to properly evaluate witnesses with out the conspiracy goggles on Fiver. A book could be written on witnesses who suddenly started remembering additional details after talking to people like Mark Lane. You bit on Helen Markham is a perfect example but I guarantee that she’ll continue to be quoted by conspiracy theorists. It’s called cherry-picking.

            Excellent, balanced post with a proper use of evidence.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

              I have posted showing that Clint Hill testified that JFK was killed by a bullet to the back of the head. He believed Oswald was the only shooter.



              That is not an accurate description of the single bullet theory.



              Perhaps you should read Butch Burroughs actual testimony under oath.

              "I just failed to see him when he slipped in."

              "Did you see that man come into the theater?"
              "No, sir; I didn't.

              "I didn't see him when he came in."
              PI still prefers to read something that Burroughs said years after the evident to a conspiracy author. The evidence around Oswald at the Texas Theatre really couldn’t be clearer. Brewer and Postal categorically tell us when Oswald arrived there. It was after Tippit’s death had been reported on the radio (which both Brewer and Postal were listening to) and whilst police cars were still passing the Theater and Brewer’s store with sirens on. It’s also important to mention the she saw Oswald enter the theatre just after her boss, Mr. Callahan, had gone outside to get into his car to follow the police cars. That close to Oswald entering that she thought that Callahan might have actually seen him but he hadn’t…..he just missed him.

              Comment


              • Another one to add to the list of witnesses who changed their stories is Phil Willis (who George used as one of his headshot wound witnesses) He was a retired U.S Army Air Corps man who was present at Pearl Harbour during the attack. He was also a pilot in the Battle of Medway.

                He was at the corner of Houston and Elm with his wife and two daughters when the assassination happened. He’s often used in various conspiracy videos and in one 1993 video he said:

                The final shot had to come from the Grassy Knoll…..somewhere in that area to hit him in the side…..over the ear. There was at least one shot came from that direction, and it took the top of his head off and blew his brains out and backwards. And…..um….I would swear that over my mother’s grave to this day.”

                The problem is of course that this wasn’t what he’d said in 1964 at the Warren Commission. When asked if he’d seen when the president was hit in the head he said:

                ”No, sir; I did not. I couldn’t see that well, and I was more concerned about the shots coming from that building.”

                When he was asked which building he answered:

                The Texas School Depository Building.”

                When WC Counsel Liebeler said: “You were pretty sure.”

                He replied: “I felt certain. I even looked for smoke, I knew it came from high up.”

                Liebeler pressed on just to ensure that there were no doubts:

                “So you did not actually observe the President at the time he was hit on the head?”

                Willis replied: “No, sir.

                So even a man of good character like Willis can be subject to persuasion (especially after talking to people with an agenda). Experts tell us that memory is a reconstruction which can be subject to outside influences.

                But CT’s like George still go on using Willis’ later quote as proof of conspiracy. It’s simply a poor way of evaluating witnesses…as Fiver has been showing.

                Comment


                • Clint Hill gets deliberately misinterpreted too. He told the WC that he saw a:

                  large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the (President’s) head.”

                  This is taken by conspiracy theorists like Gary Aguilar as supporting the CT position. But Hill told National Geographic in a documentary called ‘Inside The Secret Service,’ that there was a:

                  gaping hole above his right ear about the size of my palm.”

                  Which of course is entirely consistent with the autopsy photos and x-rays.

                  Comment


                  • William Greer said at the WC that the wound was on the upper right side. Arlen Specter repeated: “upper right side, going toward the rear.

                    This ‘going toward the rear,’ allowed Gary Aguilar, to claim Hill as a ‘back of the head’ witness.

                    Comment


                    • Aguilar quoted Parkland Doctor Charles Carrico saying that the wound :

                      was a large gaping wound, located in the right occipitoparietal area,” and that it was a: “defect in the posterior of the skull, the occipital region.”

                      What he doesn’t quote is Carrico to the HSCA saying that the wound was: “above and posterior to the ear, almost to the crown of the head.”

                      Carrico drew the wound in 1981 for the Boston Globe. It was above the ear and entirely in the parietal bone.

                      Comment


                      • A minor industry has arisen out of a claim that Kennedy’s head had been subjected to surgery. David Lifton wrote the ironically titled Best Evidence because of what was said by FBI agents O’Neill and Sibert about “surgery to the head area.” They said that Dr. Humes used this phrase which was just an initial impression which he very quickly saw wasn’t the case. It might also of course been the case that they confused a comment by Humes about the tracheostomy which certainly had been performed at Parkland.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                          A lesson to PI, Fishy and George on how to properly evaluate witnesses with out the conspiracy goggles on Fiver. A book could be written on witnesses who suddenly started remembering additional details after talking to people like Mark Lane. You bit on Helen Markham is a perfect example but I guarantee that she’ll continue to be quoted by conspiracy theorists. It’s called cherry-picking.

                          Excellent, balanced post with a proper use of evidence.
                          A note to also to herlock , you'll find overall since the start of this topic there has shown to be on more than many occasions where witnesses have been found to be correct when what they saw and heard and testified too was in direct contradiction to the WC report.

                          George, cobalt, PI for your use of the evidence .
                          'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                            A note to also to herlock , you'll find overall since the start of this topic there has shown to be on more than many occasions where witnesses have been found to be correct when what they saw and heard and testified too was in direct contradiction to the WC report.

                            George, cobalt, PI for your use of the evidence .
                            I can’t recall any. But ok.

                            Comment



                            • Ok let’s take a look at another witness and this one is conspiracy theorist royalty. Jean Hill.


                              Look at many videos and photographs and Jean Hill can be seen in her re raincoat standing next to her friend Mary Moorman near to the kerb. For years she carried a Business Card around with her saying ‘Closest witness to JFK when he was shot,’ which isn’t exactly true but she was certainly one of closest. She co-authored a book with Bill Sloan called JFK: The Last Dissenting Witness and she was also on the video ‘Beyond JFK: The Question of Conspiracy’ which was brought out to promote the Oliver Stone movie.

                              Hill claimed to have been so close the the presidential limousine that she could almost have touched the front fender as well as claiming to have seen and Grassy Knoll gunman and a man, who she claimed was Jack Ruby, running from the TSBD to the yard behind the fence. She said that she immediately ran across Elm Street in an attempt to apprehend the shooter. In her WC she said that she didn’t see Jackie Kennedy climb onto the trunk precisely because she’d run across Elm Street where she’d narrowly missed being hit by a police motorcyclist called JB Marshall (who she was having an affair with at the time) despite being told to ‘get down’ by her friend Mary Moorman. Then once she got onto the Knoll she was stopped by a couple of Government agents who took her to the Criminal Court Building where they tried to intimidate her.

                              Hill described her boyfriend Marshall’s position near to the limo but, unfortunately for her, the officer described was actually BJ Martin and definitely not Marshall. She claimed that Marshall told her all manner of sinister things like - the parade route being changed at the last minute by LBJ’s staff and that LBJ ducked down in his car before any shots were fired. Naturally conspiracy theorists lapped this up. Unfortunately for her, Secret Service Agent Rufus Youngblood testified that he to,d LBJ to duck down after the first shot and this was confirmed by driver Herchel Jacks. That the route had been changed has been proven to be an error caused by a newspaper The Dallas Morning News which showed a map, but spanned 2 columns of an i column page and the scale was too,small to show the Elm Street turn.

                              Hill claimed to have been harassed by the FBI, surviving several assassination attempts - clearly these conspirators had no problem killing the president but they repeatedly botched killing a Dallas housewife. It was all worth it though because Oliver Stone came to her house for dinner and she baked cookies for the cast and crew.

                              When interviewed by WBAP-TV less than an hour after the assassination Hill said that she’d heard 4-6 shots from the Knoll and that she: “saw a man running.” She also claimed to have seen a small dog between JFK and Jackie (giving her the benefit of the doubt, there was actually a bouquet of flower which she might have mistaken for a dog - which shows how witnesses can be mistaken) In her statement to the Sheriff’s office she said 5-6 shots and that she thought that she’d seen plainclothes men firing back. Her testimony is fairly consistent which is strange because she claimed that she had only signed a blank sheet at the Sheriff’s office (as you do of course) She also claimed that the Warren Commission mangled her testimony. Did they ‘mangle’ her TV appearances as well?

                              Hill, early on, claimed that she was on the edge of the kerb, but later claimed that she was almost touching the fender. Photographs show that she was actually a few feet from the kerb. She then claimed that she’d immediately run across Elm Street. Is this true? No, it’s not. Wilma Boyd took a photograph a few seconds after the the shooting and guess what? Jean Hill is seen sitting on the grass, next to Mary Moorman, exactly where she’d been standing. Then Bond took another photograph around a minute later. Had Hill run across Elm Street by then? (remember, she said immediately) Nope….she was standing again by now and in a position close to where she’d originally been standing.

                              She did actually run across the road, over a minute after the shots and nothing like ‘immediately.’ She is then seen in film going up the Knoll. In her original affidavit though she mentioned nothing about those sinister government agents though. Was she taken away? In her affidavit she said: “as I came back down the hill Mr. Featherstone of the Times Herald had gotten to Mary to ask her for her picture she had taken of the President, and he brought us the the press room down at the Sheriff’s office and ask us to stay.”

                              Hill of course claimed that her affidavit was fabricated to what did Moorman and Featherstone have to say. Mary Moorman has never gone public on the issue but it’s known to Dallas researchers that she doesn’t agree with Hill’s version of events. Hill admits in her book that Moorman disagreed with her that she was waylaid by agents and that they were re-united in the Sheriff’s department.

                              Featherstone insisted that he did go with Hill and Moorman to the Sheriff’s office press room but admits to having argued with Hill about some parts of her testimony: “Mrs. Hill has told her story over and over again for television and radio. Each time, she would embellish it a bit until her version began to sound like Dodge City at high noon…In the meantime, I had talked to other witnesses and at one point I told Mrs. Hill she shouldn’t be saying some of the things she wa telling television and radio reporters. I was merely trying to save her embarrassment but she apparently attached intrigue to my warning.”

                              So Hill was ‘hassled’ but not by agents.


                              I’ll end with this. It was recorded in the press room of the Dallas Sheriff’s office. It was a filmed interview with Jean Hill and Mary Moorman by WBAP-TV reporter Jimmy Darnell:


                              Darnell: Did you see the person who fired the……

                              Hill: No….I didn’t see any person fire the weapon….

                              Darnell: You only heard it?

                              Hill: I only heard it.



                              Yet another conspiracy theorist witness (still used today by some conspiracy theorists) who crumbles when properly examined.


                              This is how conspiracies are born.









                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GBinOz View Post
                                A downward trajectory of 45 to 60 degrees from where? Imagine Humes with a probe in the wound. It shows a downward trajectory in relation to the back. He is going to estimate the angle from the back. If the president were sitting absolutely vertically with regard to the zenith, this would translate to 30 to 45 degrees from the horizontal plane.
                                Hi George,

                                Please rephrase what you wrote above, because I see it like this:
                                The blue line shows 90 degrees downward, the green line 0 degrees, the yellow appr. 45 degrees and the orange line appr. 60 degrees. This doesn’t fit with your 30 to 45 degrees from the horizontal plane.

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	image.png
Views:	308
Size:	25.4 KB
ID:	806511​​​
                                By the way, this photo (Croft) was taken at about Zapruder frame 160, when Connally was briefly looking to his left.


                                The following shows the president's posture at the approximate time of the shot(compared to Myers hunched proposal).

                                Click image for larger version  Name:	Posture-1.jpg Views:	0 Size:	57.1 KB ID:	806396
                                First of all, the question of whether or not the “45 to 60 degrees downward trajectory” fits with how Myers proposed it doesn’t matter. Secondly, the photo above is not the best to use for a few reasons: 1) without any points of reference we/I have no way of knowing where (at what point along the route) it was taken, 2) it’s not all that sharp and without a clear view of the president and 3) judging by the chrome rim of the car window, it actually seems to have been rotated somewhat clockwise.

                                Cheers,
                                Frank
                                "You can rob me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."
                                Clint Eastwood as Gunny in "Heartbreak Ridge"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X