Were TSBD employees Jacob, Holt, and Simmons misidentified as Calvery, Hicks, and Reed?

[Robin Unger]

quote:

Robin,

I believe Sandy Larsen agrees with me, but maybe I'm wrong.

Congratulations Thomas, you have ONE PERSON WHO AGREES WITH YOU.

[Thomas Graves]

On 3/19/2017 at 1:43 AM, Robin Unger said:

quote:

Robin,

I believe Sandy Larsen agrees with me, but maybe I'm wrong.

Congratulations Thomas, you have ONE PERSON WHO AGREES WITH YOU.

 

Thank you, Robin.

Darn, I guess that means everyone else strongly disagrees with me on this, huh, and they must still think that your (and Roberdeau's and Speth's) dark-complected Calvary (sic) is somehow the same person as the light-complected Gloria Jean Little (Calvery's maiden name) in those Grand Prarie High School year book photos, huh?  Even though the difference in skin color and facial features have been giving students and researchers "fits" for quite a while, now.

And what about those high school photos of blond Gloria Jeanne Holt who said she was with (presumably dark-skinned) Native American Stella Jacob during the motorcade, and the pretty darn amazing resemblance between her (Holt) and your (and Roberdeau's and Speth's) blond "Karan Hicks" right  next to your so-called (but incongruously dark-skinned) Gloria Calvary (sic)?

Oh well, I guess I might as well concede.  Seein' as how everyone but Sandy Larsen and I think that you, and Roberdeau, and Thiery "Fake News" Speth must be right.  Because, after all, you guys are experts on this stuff, aren't you, and you exercised your expertise on Gloria CalvAry (sic) a long, long time ago, and it's too late to change it now, because you've "set it in concrete" with your nice big photos and graphics and labels and all.

Congratulations to you, sir.

--  Tommy

Edited March 24, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

On 3/4/2017 at 1:11 AM, Robin Unger said:

Todd Vaughn sent me the Darnell frames, at the time he questioned the identification of the dark skinned woman as being Calvery.

Yet you went ahead and labeled that dark-skinned woman as Gloria Jean Calvery on those Darnell frames.

Way to go, Robin.

I wish you had put a question mark ("?") after her name.  As well as (due to your apparent uncertainty about Calvery), after the names of her two stated sidekicks that day, "Karan Hicks" and "Carol Reed".

But you went ahead and unintentionally set their mis-identifications "in concrete," instead.

--  Tommy

Edited March 20, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

Sandy Larsen's Proof that Thomas Graves is Right

We all know that Karen Hicks and Carol Reed were standing with Gloria Calvery. We all know that Gloria Calvery was not standing among the group of three women nearest the Stemmons sign. We therefore know that that group of three women does not include Karen Hicks or Carol Reed either.

There is virtually no question that what I just wrote is correct.

I believe that Thomas will ultimately be proven correct (perhaps by the end of this post) that those three women nearest the sign are Stella Jacob (because she is native American, and so matches the dark-complected woman labeled as Gloria Calvery); Gloria Jeane Holt (because she was said to be standing with Stella Jacob and because Holt's pictures look remarkably like the lady labeled as Karan Hicks); and Sharon Simmons (because she was said to be standing with the other two women) who, by elimination, must be the woman labeled as Carol Reed..

(Did I get all those names right, Thomas?)

Another convincing reason to believe Thomas is right is that all six women we are talking about were said to be 1/3 to 1/2 the way between the TSBD and the underpass. And that Kennedy's limo was right in front of Calvery's group during the shooting. This means, IMO, that all six of these women had to have been among the women we see in Zapruder between the Stemmons sign and the group of scarf-wearing women. Since Gloria Calvery's group is known not to be those women nearest the Stemmons sign, they must be among the scarf wearing women. and this leaves no choice but to conclude that the other group of three women -- Stella Jacob's group -- must be the three women nearest the Stemmons sign.

Kudos go to Thomas Graves for solving this hard-to-explain mystery.

[Thomas Graves]

On 3/19/2017 at 9:11 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Sandy Larsen's Proof that Thomas Graves is Right

We all know that Karen Hicks and Carol Reed were standing with Gloria Calvery. We all know that Gloria Calvery was not standing among the group of three women nearest the Stemmons sign. We therefore know that that group of three women does not include Karen Hicks or Carol Reed either.

There is virtually no question that what I just wrote is correct.

I believe that Thomas will ultimately be proven correct (perhaps by the end of this post) that those three women nearest the sign are Stella Jacob (because she is native American, and so matches the dark-complected woman labeled as Gloria Calvery); Gloria Jeane Holt (because she was said to be standing with Stella Jacob and because Holt's pictures look remarkably like the lady labeled as Karan Hicks); and Sharon Simmons (because she was said to be standing with the other two women) who, by elimination, must be the woman labeled as Carol Reed..

(Did I get all those names right, Thomas?)

Another convincing reason to believe Thomas is right is that all six women we are talking about were said to be 1/3 to 1/2 the way between the TSBD and the underpass. And that Kennedy's limo was right in front of Calvery's group during the shooting. This means, IMO, that all six of these women had to have been among the women we see in Zapruder between the Stemmons sign and the group of scarf-wearing women. Since Gloria Calvery's group is known not to be those women nearest the Stemmons sign, they must be among the scarf wearing women. and this leaves no choice but to conclude that the other group of three women -- Stella Jacob's group -- must be the three women nearest the Stemmons sign.

Kudos go to Thomas Graves for solving this hard-to-explain mystery.

Sandy, 

Works for me.  LOL

That and he fact that the three-person group comprised of Jacob, Holt, and Simmons  (married name Newton) is not visible near the curb on the south side of Elm Street, which suggests to me that a simple mistake was made by the person who took down or typed up their statements when they made them to the FBI, and that the group comprised of Jacob, Holt, and Simmons was standing on the north side of Elm Street, instead..

Thanks for your help and moral support, Sandy.

--  Tommy

Edited March 23, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:

That and he fact that the three-person group comprised of Jacob, Holt, and Simmons  (married name Newton) is not visible near the curb on the south side of Elm Street, which suggests to me that a simple mistake was made by the person who took down or typed up their statements when they made them to the FBI, and that the group was probably standing on the north side of Elm Street, instead..

Tommy,

Someone (Pat Speer?) commented on one of the threads (probably this one) that the north/south confusion could have arisen due to there being two Elm Streets. The south side of the extension is the north side of the main road. Or so the explanation goes.

Regardless, the "south" that was recorded in the affidavits is clearly wrong.

EDIT: Having given some thought to the Elm Street/Extension explanation, it doesn't make good sense to me (FWIW). Because of the park between the two roads. I think the "souths" in the affidavits were simple errors.

 

Edited March 20, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Thomas Graves]

On 3/19/2017 at 10:53 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Tommy,

Someone (Pat Speer?) commented on one of the threads (probably this one) that the north/south confusion could have arisen due to there being two Elm Streets. The south side of the extension is the north side of the main road. Or so the explanation goes.

Regardless, the "south" that was recorded in the affidavits is clearly wrong.

EDIT: Having given some thought to the Elm Street/Extension explanation, it doesn't make good sense to me (FWIW). Because of the park between the two roads. I think the "souths" in the affidavits were simple errors.

 

 

Sandy,

I hope you're not second-guessing yourself, again.

 

This is what TSBD employee Stella Jacob said in her FBI statement:

"At approximately 12:00 pm on November 22, 1963. I left the Depository building  and walked down toward the Stemmons expressway underpass [i.e. the Triple Underpass] west [south-west, actually] of the [TSBD] building approximately fifty yards and took up a position on the curb on the south aide of Elm Street to await the presidential procession."

 

From Stella Jacob's detailed description, I think it's clear that she wasn't standing on Elm Street Extension (which parallels the front wall of the TSBD, and which, therefore, does not go "down" towards the Triple Underpass), but was standing about 150 feet downhill on Elm Street proper, instead.

--  Tommy

 

PS  If you keep second-guessing yourself (and posting your doubts), I'm gonna have to start calling you Sandy "Hamlet" Larsen.  

Edited March 16, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

5 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

From Jacob's detailed description, I think it's pretty clear, Sandy, that she wasn't standing on Elm Street Extension...

Tommy,

I never thought that Jacob or the others were standing on Elm Street extension. I don't believe that the originator of the explanation thought that either.

The explanation was that somebody standing on the north side of Elm Street might have described it as standing south of the Elm Street extension. (Which, technically speaking, would be true.)

When I first heard this explanation I thought it might explain the errors in the affidavits. But now that I've given it some thought, and especially having just read that part of Jacob's affidavit, I no longer believe this explanation is valid.

[Thomas Graves]

5 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Tommy,

I never thought that Jacob or the others were standing on Elm Street extension. I don't believe that the originator of the explanation thought that either.

The explanation was that somebody standing on the north side of Elm Street might have described it as standing south of the Elm Street extension. (Which, technically speaking, would be true.)

When I first heard this explanation I thought it might explain the errors in the affidavits. But now that I've given it some thought, and especially having just read that part of Jacob's affidavit, I no longer believe this explanation is valid.

WHEW!

I CAN START BREATHING AGAIN.

--  Tommy

PS  Do you really think it's necessary to explain why those errors (south side instead of north side) occurred?

Edited March 20, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

3 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

WHEW!

I CAN START BREATHING AGAIN.

--  Tommy

PS  Do you really think it's necessary to explain why those errors (south side instead of north side) occurred?

edited and bumped

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:

WHEW!

I CAN START BREATHING AGAIN.

--  Tommy

PS  Do you really think it's necessary to explain why those errors (south side instead of north side) occurred?

No, because its obvious that they are indeed errors. Though it wouldn't hurt to understand how the errors occurred. Especially considering the same error exists in... what is it?... three different affidavits.

I wouldn't put much effort into figuring it out.

 

 

 

[Thomas Graves]

31 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

No, because its obvious that they are indeed errors. Though it wouldn't hurt to understand how the errors occurred. Especially considering the same error exists in... what is it?... three different affidavits.

I wouldn't put much effort into figuring it out.

 

Well, Sandy, we can speculate the heck out of it if we want to, so why don't I just kinda "get the ball rolling"?

I'm guessing the three gals, not being suspects themselves in the "crime of the century," were in the same room together when they made their statements to the FBI, and the first one to give her statement made a boo-boo and said "south side" instead of "north side." and the two other gals heard her say that, and it influenced them (because. well. maybe they were a little confused about the "points of the compass" around the (southwest-facing?) TSBD (which is surrounded by some kinda weirdly-oriented streets, anyway), and so they just kinda "followed suit" and said "south side," too, when they were giving their statements.

How's that sound?

Okay, now it's YOUR turn!

--  Tommy

PS  This is kinda fun, huh?

 

Edited March 20, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

50 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Well, Sandy, we can speculate the heck out of it if we want to, so why don't I just kinda "get the ball rolling"?

I'm guessing the three gals, not being suspects themselves in the "crime of the century," were in the same room together when they made their statements to the FBI, and the first one to give her statement made a boo-boo and said "south side" instead of "north side." and the two other gals heard her say that, and it influenced them (because. well. maybe they were a little confused about the "points of the compass" around the (southwest-facing?) TSBD (which is surrounded by some kinda weirdly-oriented streets, anyway), and so they just kinda "followed suit" and said "south side," too, when they were giving their statements.

How's that sound?

Okay, now it's YOUR turn!

--  Tommy

PS  This is kinda fun, huh?

 

What I had in mind is that the first one misspoke and said south. After giving her statement, the officer typing the affidavits used the first affidavit as a boilerplate for the rest. And so he copied much of the material from the first, including errors. He asked the subsequent witnesses only for unknown information.

That is what I've thought since way back when we were looking at the affidavits of Calvery and her group. We noticed that much of the information was identical on all three affidavits.

 

[Ray Mitcham]

As there are two Elm Streets, the original and the new underpass road, I agree with the idea that the girls were right when they said they were on the South side of the original Elm Street. Didn't one of the Chism couple say that they were standing on the South side of Elm Street, when they were obviously on the North side of the new underpass?

Edited March 20, 2017 by Ray Mitcham

[Thomas Graves]

8 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

As there are two Elm Streets, the original and the new underpass road, I agree with the idea that the girls were right when they said they were on the South side of the original Elm Street. Didn't one of the Chism couple say that they were standing on the South side of Elm Street, when they were obviously on the North side of the new underpass?

Dear Ray,

The obvious problem with that interpretation is that in none of the films or photos which show the "infield grass" between Elm Street and Main Street during the motorcade is there visible a group of three women (self-described "Indian female" Stella Jacob, blond-in-her-highschool-yearbook-photos Gloria Jeanne Holt, and a "mysterious" co-worker by the name of Sharon Simmons) standing at the (south) curb of Elm Street, about 150 feet downhill from the TSBD, in the direction of the Triple Underpass.

So, since those three gals weren't on the south side of Elm Street, it's logical to assume they were probably on the other side of Elm Street (i.e. the north side, next to the Grassy Knoll, where most of the spectators on Elm Street were, anyway), don't you agree?  And lo-and-behold, when we look with an open mind we see that there IS a group of the three gals standing close to each other over there on the north side - Robin Unger's (strangely dark-skinned) Gloria CalvAry (sic), blond Karan Hicks (who looks amazingly like Gloria Jeanne Holt does in a high school yearbook photo which was taken of Holt one year earlier), and, of course, the "mysterious" Sharron Simmons

--  Tommy

Edited March 20, 2017 by Thomas Graves
Reason for edit: The Agency made me do it. At first I thought it was just the Devil, again.