JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just for laugh let’s refresh our memories on what conspirators would have needed to have achieved to ensure a successful plot along with things that they would have had to have been confident of.. These of course are the type of things that conspiracy theorist point blank refuse to contemplate or respond to in their never ending nitpick.


‘They’ would have had to have been confident that seconds after the last shot was fired they could have pretty much sealed off Dealey Plaza and its surrounding buildings so that they could apprehend all camera’s and home movie cameras so that they could confiscate them and Doctor any unhelpful or damaging images without the possibility of any ‘rogues’ getting away only for their damaging images to appear in some magazine or newspaper.


‘They’ would have been confident that witness like Howard Brennan weren’t looking up at the 6th floor window when the shots were fired to see no one there. How would they have explained it away if 3 or 4 witnesses had seen an empty 6th floor window at the time of the shots?


‘They’ would have had to have been totally confident that some standing across the road in Dealey Plaza didn’t film or photograph an empty window or that they didn’t capture a Grassy Knoll gunman on camera.


As ‘they’ had gone to such extraordinary lengths to ensure that the autopsy room room at Bethesda was fully set up with corrupt doctors, technicians, CIA agents, nurses, photographers, radiographers and with military men to ensure that all went to plan… they naturally wouldn’t have wanted Parkland to be full of incorruptible doctors, nurses, technicians and staff with no military presence in the room to control the show….to completely waste their efforts at Bethesda. Oh, hang on….that’s exactly what they did.


‘They’ would have had to have been confident that no one in Dealey Plaza might have felt that the President was wounded in any shape, way or form that contradicted their script.


‘They’ would have ensured that the rifle that was supposedly used (a Mauser) was removed entirely unseen from the scene. I mean, they wouldn’t have wanted it paraded in front of the whole world would they….that would just be a joke wouldn’t it?


‘They’ would also have wanted to be confident that no one could have wandered onto to the 6th floor to discover…..no gunman, or someone that was their patsy.




I could have written a much, much longer list but I’ll leave it at 7. Do these 5 point away from a conspiracy. No……they prove that even the concept of such a conspiracy can’t be taken seriously for a second.

[cobalt]

‘So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass? Three witness who must trump all others in terms of location are Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald; both of whom were in open windows. Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them. We don’t really need other witness. Those three seal the deal.’

No they don’t.

Bonnie Ray Williams thought he heard two shots, not three. He changed his mind later. He was not asked by the WC about where he thought the shots came from. He heard neither shots nor movement above him on the 6^th floor. Since Williams was eating alone on the 6^th floor until at least 12.15pm, the time the motorcade was due to arrive, he would have had the opportunity to sense if someone else was in that area. He said he was aware of no one else being there at that time.

Junior Jarman thought the shots came from ‘below him and to the left.’ He thought the 3^rd shot came ‘right behind’ the 2^nd shot. He heard neither shots nor movement from the 6^th floor.

Harold Norman alone heard what he thought were ejected shells and a bolt action rifle being operated ‘directly above us.’ He did not mention this in his first interview where he talked about poking his head out of the window and trying to look up to the 6^th floor, something verified by other witnesses.

‘Please don’t ask me anymore questions until you and the rest of the Conspiracy Clan actually start answering some.’

These three Black American witnesses were all asked by the WC whether they had been in trouble with the law, a courtesy not extended to others giving testimony. They were interviewed at length and on a number of occasions by the Dallas Police and the FBI in an effort to get their stories to line up. They had grounds for suspecting they were facing a different sort of Klan altogether.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

[SIZE=16px][FONT=Times New Roman]‘So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass? Three witness who must trump all others in terms of location are Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald; both of whom were in open windows. Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them. We don’t really need other witness. Those three seal the deal.’

(HERLOCK SHOMES)

No they don’t.

(COBALT)

They certainly don't.


Herlock Shomes writes:

Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald;


That is a good example of supposition being presented as fact.

Where is the eyewitness evidence that Oswald ascended the stairs towards the sixth floor in the minutes preceding the assassination or that he descended the stairs following the assassination?

Where is the evidence that when he was sighted about 90 seconds after the assassination, he had been descending the stairs?

Where is the evidence that Oswald was seen anywhere inside the building carrying a rifle or any package which could have contained a rifle, carrying it up the stairs, or holding it at any time on the sixth floor?

Where is the evidence that Oswald was on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination?

Where is the evidence that his rifle was ever on the sixth floor?

The only rifle found on the sixth floor was a Mauser and that was confirmed by radio and television reports as well as affidavits signed by police officers - all on the day of the assassination.


So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass?

Because when he heard the shots, he looked towards where he thought a shot had come from and he looked at the picket fence; he was convinced that a shot had come from behind the fence; he saw a puff of smoke lingering in front of the picket fence.

Because he saw two police motorcyclists independently head for the same picket fence with their pistols drawn.

Because he said he knew that the third of four shots he heard came from behind the picket fence, remarking 'there's no doubt in my mind'.

Because, according to Holland, half a dozen colleagues of his ran with him to the picket fence, also convinced that a shot had been fired from behind it.


Now, what evidence of Williams, Norman and Jarman could possibly compare to that evidence of Holland's?

[Herlock Sholmes]

‘So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass? Three witness who must trump all others in terms of location are Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald; both of whom were in open windows. Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them. We don’t really need other witness. Those three seal the deal.’

No they don’t.

Bonnie Ray Williams thought he heard two shots, not three. He changed his mind later. He was not asked by the WC about where he thought the shots came from. He heard neither shots nor movement above him on the 6^th floor. Since Williams was eating alone on the 6^th floor until at least 12.15pm, the time the motorcade was due to arrive, he would have had the opportunity to sense if someone else was in that area. He said he was aware of no one else being there at that time.

Bonnie Ray Williams comes across as a pretty straightforward witness who didn’t try and fudge anything that he couldn’t be certain of. He describes hearing 3 shots but admitted that he’d originally said 2 which he put down to the excitement of the moment; the first of the three he suspected at the time of being a firecracker. He described the shots as coming from within the building. Harold Norman saw concrete/dust which fell from the ceiling. Norman said the shots came from directly over their heads and that he’d heard the shell casings hit the floor. Williams though said that he hadn’t heard the casings because he probably wasn’t paying attention. He also said that Norman heard the bolt action on the rifle.

To the FBI (22nd November) - 2 shots from overhead.

To the FBI (March 19th) - 3 shots from from directly above.

Junior Jarman thought the shots came from ‘below him and to the left.’ He thought the 3^rd shot came ‘right behind’ the 2^nd shot. He heard neither shots nor movement from the 6^th floor.

Junior Jarman thought that the first shot was a firecracker. He heard 3 shots. He said that Norman said that they had come from above and that he’d heard the shells fall. He was sure that the bullet came from the left but he thought that they came from below. He wasn’t asked about the third shot.

Harold Norman alone heard what he thought were ejected shells and a bolt action rifle being operated ‘directly above us.’ He did not mention this in his first interview where he talked about poking his head out of the window and trying to look up to the 6^th floor, something verified by other witnesses.

Harold Norman said that he heard 3 shots Tom above and the casings hit the floor. He didn’t recall Williams or Jarman saying where the shots came from but he himself was sure that they came from above. He didn’t see the dust falling but he saw it in Williams hair.

To the FBI (26th November 1963) - heard 1st shot from above then 2 further shots.

Secret Service interview(December 4th, 1963) - shots from above

To the FBI (March 18th) - 3 shots from above

‘Please don’t ask me anymore questions until you and the rest of the Conspiracy Clan actually start answering some.’

These three Black American witnesses were all asked by the WC whether they had been in trouble with the law, a courtesy not extended to others giving testimony. They were interviewed at length and on a number of occasions by the Dallas Police and the FBI in an effort to get their stories to line up. They had grounds for suspecting they were facing a different sort of Klan altogether.

So the Klan were in on this too?

The minor statement differences don’t change in any way that these 3 were strong witnesses. The WC questioning was fair and detailed and in no way coercive.

[Herlock Sholmes]

They certainly don't.


Herlock Shomes writes:

Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald;


That is a good example of supposition being presented as fact.

Where is the eyewitness evidence that Oswald ascended the stairs towards the sixth floor in the minutes preceding the assassination or that he descended the stairs following the assassination?

Where is the evidence that when he was sighted about 90 seconds after the assassination, he had been descending the stairs?

Where is the evidence that Oswald was seen anywhere inside the building carrying a rifle or any package which could have contained a rifle, carrying it up the stairs, or holding it at any time on the sixth floor?

Where is the evidence that Oswald was on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination?

Where is the evidence that his rifle was ever on the sixth floor?

The only rifle found on the sixth floor was a Mauser and that was confirmed by radio and television reports as well as affidavits signed by police officers - all on the day of the assassination.


So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass?

Because when he heard the shots, he looked towards where he thought a shot had come from and he looked at the picket fence; he was convinced that a shot had come from behind the fence; he saw a puff of smoke lingering in front of the picket fence.

Because he saw two police motorcyclists independently head for the same picket fence with their pistols drawn.

Because he said he knew that the third of four shots he heard came from behind the picket fence, remarking 'there's no doubt in my mind'.

Because, according to Holland, half a dozen colleagues of his ran with him to the picket fence, also convinced that a shot had been fired from behind it.


Now, what evidence of Williams, Norman and Jarman could possibly compare to that evidence of Holland's?

This is how to work this out PI.

Holland saw a puff of smoke.

Could have been smoke wafting from anywhere.

We know that there was no one behind the fence.

Either he was mistaken or lying…..take your pick.

We know that the shots came from the 6th floor of the TSBD.

Therefore……into the bin Holland goes with the other liars and loonies like Hofmann and Oliver.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

This is how to work this out PI.


I don't think so.


Holland saw a puff of smoke.

Could have been smoke wafting from anywhere.


Of course.

The President has just been shot and coincidentally a puff of smoke appears from nowhere a moment later and, again purely coincidentally, the attention of Holland and half a dozen colleagues is drawn to the picket fence just behind where the puff of smoke appeared and, again coincidentally, two police motorcyclists head for the same picket fence with guns drawn.

That's a lot of coincidences.



We know that there was no one behind the fence.


Of course.

Just like we know that the puff of smoke appeared from nowhere at just the right time and in just the right place.




Either he was mistaken or lying…..take your pick.


And his half dozen colleagues were also mistaken, and the two motorcyclists were mistaken, and all the witnesses who appear in photographs or moving footage running to the Grassy Knoll were mistaken, and the two-thirds of interviewed witnesses who said that they heard at least one shot come from the direction of the Grassy Knoll were all mistaken.



We know that the shots came from the 6th floor of the TSBD.


We know nothing of the kind, but in any case we know that Oswald was framed.



Therefore……into the bin Holland goes with the other liars and loonies like Hofmann and Oliver.


Holland was neither a liar nor a loony.

If anyone reading your accusation is inclined to believe it, I recommend a viewing of his interview by Mark Lane in the documentary Rush to Judgment.

He is obviously a credible witness.

[cobalt]

'Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them'

As has been admitted by HS himself in his reply, this is not what these three witnesses said to the Warren Commission. Only one of them-Norman- was sure the shots had come from directly above. It's a example of Bugliosism: overstating the evidence available.

'Three strong witnesses'

Who all tell a slightly different tale about the shots.

The WC questioning was fair and detailed and in no way coercive.

Yet only the Black American witnesses then why were asked if they had ever been in trouble with the police?

The FBI had done the groundwork long before the WC questioning. Notice how two of the witnesses come out with anti-Oswald comments on cue which are hardly relevant to what was being discussed.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

'Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them'

As has been admitted by HS himself in his reply, this is not what these three witnesses said to the Warren Commission. Only one of them-Norman- was sure the shots had come from directly above. It's a example of Bugliosism: overstating the evidence available.

'Three strong witnesses'

Who all tell a slightly different tale about the shots.

The WC questioning was fair and detailed and in no way coercive.

Yet only the Black American witnesses then why were asked if they had ever been in trouble with the police?

The FBI had done the groundwork long before the WC questioning. Notice how two of the witnesses come out with anti-Oswald comments on cue which are hardly relevant to what was being discussed.

The Warren Commission lawyers did their best to school their star witnesses, in one case breaking off from proceedings to make sure the witness could remember her lines.

Sometimes things went wrong.

Here is one of their star witnesses, who they hoped would nail Oswald as Tippit's assassin, being asked about her taped telephone conversation with Mark Lane:



Mrs. MARKHAM. That man--I have never talked to that man. I talked to a man that was supposed to have been from the police department of the city hall.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you recognize this as the voice of the man you talked to?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No; it is not.
Mr. LIEBELER. This is not the same voice?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No.
Mr. LIEBELER. How do you explain the fact that the woman's voice on this tape recording is your voice?
Mrs. MARKHAM. I never heard that.
Mr. LIEBELER. You never heard the man's voice before?
Mrs. MARKHAM. And I never heard this lady's voice before--this is the first time.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any doubt in your mind at all that the lady's voice on the tape now is your voice?
Mrs. MARKHAM. It is my voice, but this man told me he was from the city police.




A Warren Commission prosecution witness who could not recognise the voice of the man she had had a telephone conversation with when the recording was played to her and couldn't even recognise her own voice on the same recording.

She is, I believe, one of Herlock Shomes' favoured witnesses, but unlike Holland, who was completely credible, she was not a 'liar or loony'.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Please see my replies below.

This is how to work this out PI.


I don't think so.


Holland saw a puff of smoke.

Could have been smoke wafting from anywhere.


Of course.

The President has just been shot and coincidentally a puff of smoke appears from nowhere a moment later and, again purely coincidentally, the attention of Holland and half a dozen colleagues is drawn to the picket fence just behind where the puff of smoke appeared and, again coincidentally, two police motorcyclists head for the same picket fence with guns drawn.

That's a lot of coincidences.

And we know how conspiracy theorists don’t accept coincidences. And Marion Baker, who was actually in the motorcade, immediately thought that the shots came from the roof of the TSBD and went straight inside. The alleged smoke means nothing.


We know that there was no one behind the fence.


Of course.

Just like we know that the puff of smoke appeared from nowhere at just the right time and in just the right place.

No, because the area behind the fence was checked and there was no sign of anyone ever standing there. Not a single footprint, shell casing…nothing. And how quickly did those people and police officers take to get to that fence? Seconds? Did they see anyone behind the fence? No. Did they see anyone scarpering across the car park? No. Did they see a car pulling away? No.

Either he was mistaken or lying…..take your pick.


And his half dozen colleagues were also mistaken, and the two motorcyclists were mistaken, and all the witnesses who appear in photographs or moving footage running to the Grassy Knoll were mistaken, and the two-thirds of interviewed witnesses who said that they heard at least one shot come from the direction of the Grassy Knoll were all mistaken.

You clearly didn’t read my earlier post so I’ll reprint it for you.

216 Assassination Witnesses

Thought that the shots came from the Grassy Knoll - 52

Thought that the shots came from the TSBD - 48

Thought that the shots came from Knoll & TSBD - 5

Thought that the shots came from Elsewhere - 4

Couldn’t tell where they came from - 37

Not Asked - 70

Explain how you get two-thirds from that. Another Herlock prediction…..no response to this point.

We know that the shots came from the 6th floor of the TSBD.

We know nothing of the kind, but in any case we know that Oswald was framed.

That’s your opinion.

Therefore……into the bin Holland goes with the other liars and loonies like Hofmann and Oliver.

Holland was neither a liar nor a loony.

I didn’t realise that you knew him.

If anyone reading your accusation is inclined to believe it, I recommend a viewing of his interview by Mark Lane in the documentary Rush to Judgment.

And I’d recommend anyone to avoid Mark Lane like the plague. If he told me what my name was I’d dig out my birth certificate before accepting it as true.

He is obviously a credible witness.

He was a distance away, saw no one, only allegedly a puff of smoke from an area that there’s not a single piece of evidence that anyone had been standing there. He’s a ‘nothing’ witness.

No answers from anyone on any of my points and questions I see. Par for the course.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

the area behind the fence was checked and there was no sign of anyone ever standing there. Not a single footprint, shell casing…nothing.

(HERLOCK SHOMES)


There were numerous footprints.

I wonder why.

[Herlock Sholmes]

'Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them'

As has been admitted by HS himself in his reply, this is not what these three witnesses said to the Warren Commission. Only one of them-Norman- was sure the shots had come from directly above. It's a example of Bugliosism: overstating the evidence available.

'Three strong witnesses'

Who all tell a slightly different tale about the shots.

The WC questioning was fair and detailed and in no way coercive.

Yet only the Black American witnesses then why were asked if they had ever been in trouble with the police?

The FBI had done the groundwork long before the WC questioning. Notice how two of the witnesses come out with anti-Oswald comments on cue which are hardly relevant to what was being discussed.

You really are confirming the conspiracy theorist stereotype here. Every minor discrepancy equals deception and plots and yet conspiracy theorists are quite happy to accept someone like McClelland. Who is it but conspiracy theorists who trawl out people like Hofmann and Oliver, Arnold, Charles Crenshaw to name but a few.

These were an extraordinary, stressful and traumatic few seconds. Is it not entirely to be expected that we see some confusion?

[Herlock Sholmes]

the area behind the fence was checked and there was no sign of anyone ever standing there. Not a single footprint, shell casing…nothing.

(HERLOCK SHOMES)


There were numerous footprints.

I wonder why.

[Aethelwulf]

the area behind the fence was checked and there was no sign of anyone ever standing there. Not a single footprint, shell casing…nothing.

(HERLOCK SHOMES)


There were numerous footprints.

I wonder why.

The most up-to-date sophisticated research published in Forensic Science International (2022) shows that postulated shots from the grassy knoll, storm drain or south knoll overpass cannot replicate the x-ray, photo and modeled and known bullet damage. Modeled skull damage and bullet deformation can only be matched to the existing forensic evidence with a shot from the rear, at the the height of the sixth floor. Have a read of the paper above (post 1138). Look at Figures 16a, b, c and d and read the text and you can see the modelled skull and bullet damage with a shot from the grassy knoll. As the authors state, neither match as the area of skull shattering would be more over the forehead area. Figures 17 and 18 show skull and bullet damage from the storm drain and south knoll overpass. Again, neither can be matched. Figures 13 and 15 show the excellent match between the modelled skull damage with the photographic evidence and x-rays. As noted, previously, the authors conclude that the most likely origin of the fatal shot was determined based on the degree of corresponding deformation and fragmentation between simulation and documented evidence. Computational corroboration could be established as physically consistent with high-speed impact from the rear, as established by the official commissions. Simulations of three other speculative shot origins did not correspond with the documented evidence.

The only way this doesn't work is if you go for the fakery and tampering. George and Fishy are childish enough to press this sort of misinformation on readers. I assume you are not that daft.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The most up-to-date sophisticated research published in Forensic Science International (2022) shows that postulated shots from the grassy knoll, storm drain or south knoll overpass cannot replicate the x-ray, photo and modeled and known bullet damage. Modeled skull damage and bullet deformation can only be matched to the existing forensic evidence with a shot from the rear, at the the height of the sixth floor. Have a read of the paper above (post 1138). Look at Figures 16a, b, c and d and read the text and you can see the modelled skull and bullet damage with a shot from the grassy knoll. As the authors state, neither match as the area of skull shattering would be more over the forehead area. Figures 17 and 18 show skull and bullet damage from the storm drain and south knoll overpass. Again, neither can be matched. Figures 13 and 15 show the excellent match between the modelled skull damage with the photographic evidence and x-rays. As noted, previously, the authors conclude that the most likely origin of the fatal shot was determined based on the degree of corresponding deformation and fragmentation between simulation and documented evidence. Computational corroboration could be established as physically consistent with high-speed impact from the rear, as established by the official commissions. Simulations of three other speculative shot origins did not correspond with the documented evidence.

The only way this doesn't work is if you go for the fakery and tampering. George and Fishy are childish enough to press this sort of misinformation on readers. I assume you are not that daft.

Never assume Wulf

[Herlock Sholmes]

Notice how no one has given an answer as to why our genius conspirators would have gone to the huge amount of complex effort and trouble to arrange a fraudulent and corrupt autopsy but they didn’t take single precaution at Parkland.

I think that this point on its own shows how ludicrous the suggestion of a conspiracy is (and it’s clearly the reason why no answer has been forthcoming) CT’s are quite happy to make point blank assertions (fake, forgery) or to nitpick over the most minor of discrepancies, but when a hugely serious a significant point raises its head you can hear the tumbleweed blowing past.

They love piling on the questions but break their necks avoiding answers.