Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ed Hoffman is incorrect


Recommended Posts

I Just read your article Duke...great stuff.

I noticed that you have Chaney as one of the three lead motorcycle cops. I have uploaded the picture from your article for reference. In view of the recent dispute over Costella's supposed new discovery regarding the actions of Chaney, which I am following but not contributing to, I'm wondering if this position for Chaney is an error in your article, or is this where you actually believe Chaney is positioned in the photograph?

image001.gif

Duncan

I'm going solely by what was described to me by Bill "Lumpy" Lumpkin. Otherwise, I wouldn't know one from the other.

It strikes me offhand that Steve Ellis told a different story for later "reminisces" than he did in other circumstances. "Lumpy" told me that he had to "remind" other officers what they really did as opposed to what they later "remembered." According to official reports, Ellis remained at the top of the entrance ramp, even while he later reminisced that he was part of the lead group going to Parkland.

Unfortunately, both Ellis and Chaney are deceased as I recall, and cannot clear up this question. All I can say is to "go ahead with what I'd said," as it came from the sole surviving member of this cordon of officers.

If there are particular questions, let me know via email, and I'll attempt to clear them up with Lumpkin. Also let me know via email what the "new discovery regarding Chaney" entails, and I'll see if I can't get some insight into that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I Just read your article Duke...great stuff.

I noticed that you have Chaney as one of the three lead motorcycle cops. I have uploaded the picture from your article for reference. In view of the recent dispute over Costella's supposed new discovery regarding the actions of Chaney, which I am following but not contributing to, I'm wondering if this position for Chaney is an error in your article, or is this where you actually believe Chaney is positioned in the photograph?

image001.gif

Duncan

I'm going solely by what was described to me by Bill "Lumpy" Lumpkin. Otherwise, I wouldn't know one from the other.

It strikes me offhand that Steve Ellis told a different story for later "reminisces" than he did in other circumstances. "Lumpy" told me that he had to "remind" other officers what they really did as opposed to what they later "remembered." According to official reports, Ellis remained at the top of the entrance ramp, even while he later reminisced that he was part of the lead group going to Parkland.

Unfortunately, both Ellis and Chaney are deceased as I recall, and cannot clear up this question. All I can say is to "go ahead with what I'd said," as it came from the sole surviving member of this cordon of officers.

If there are particular questions, let me know via email, and I'll attempt to clear them up with Lumpkin. Also let me know via email what the "new discovery regarding Chaney" entails, and I'll see if I can't get some insight into that.

Duke clearly is not aware that Chaney was wearing SUNGLASSES, unlike the 3 McIntire cops. So unless

he ditched his shades, none of the three in McIntire is Chaney. (See Altgens)

He also has not noticed that the rightmost McIntire cop has sgt stripes, so may be either Bellah or Ellis.

He also does not say whether Lumpkin was in the group of two or the group of three motorcycles.

Jack

Edited by Jack White
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read the forthcoming new book about Ed's experiences, which clears up most of the disinformation about Ed over the years. The main problem has been with ASL interpreters who unintentionally misrepresent what Ed tries to explain. There are few nuances possible in ASL. Finally his story will be accurately told in a forthcoming book by two dedicated researchers.

Excerpting very briefly from the soon-to-be-published book:

"........Interpreters unfamiliar with the details of Ed's story often mistranslate plurals for singular. Most nouns in American Sign Language do not have a distinct plural form. "Man" and "men" are signed identically. At one meeting where Ed was telling his story, he referred to the police officer standing by the railroad bridge, the interpreter voiced "policemen" for Ed's singular "policeman." Sometimes translation errors occur when there is a similarity between a standard sign and an unusual body gesture. For example, Ed described how he wanted to get the attention of the officer on the railroad bridge, but was frightened by the Secret Service agent pointing the rifle. Ed demonstrated how he quickly lowered his arms and the interpreter misunderstood and voiced, "They turned off the light."........"

Virtually all problems with perceptions of Ed's story relate to unintentional misinterpretations by well-meaning translators. Publication of the book will be announced soon.

Although I'm fairly confident that this will be "explained" in the book (since I know that the authors have seen "Freeway Man"), what one must most wonder are two things:

1) why Ed wanted to get the attention of a "lone" officer on the railroad bridge (there were two) when there were a dozen cops on motorcycles on the highway forming a barricade to hold back traffic for the motorcade's progress - and kept it stopped for no less than 15 minutes and, as I recall, quite a bit longer - yet Ed did not attempt to get any of their attention, but ran by them all and took off in his car; and

2) why all of these officers, involved in the security of the presidential motorcade, would allow a man to run down the highway waving his arms, run directly by them (and not halt, as he was probably ordered to do ... if he was there, which he wasn't), and continue to his car to speed off in apparent pursuit of the motorcade, yet not one of them saw fit to concern themselves with him in the least.

Should we assume that DPD, knowing that the President had just been shot, saw a twenty- or thirty-something year old guy running along the highway and realized that there was no way that he could've had anything to do with the shooting and, when Ed didn't respond to their orders to stop, knew that Ed was just a harmless deaf-mute?

Did Ed perhaps think that the cops on motorcycles were too busy holding traffic to chase after his gunmen, and instead that the cop on top of the railroad bridge had perhaps a little more time on his hands?

The motorcycle cops didn't react to Ed simply because he wasn't there, and Ed didn't try to get their attention because he didn't know - until I researched and wrote "Freeway Man" - that they were even there. Otherwise, they would've been in his story - because they'd had to have been - and Ed would probably have an "investigatory witness" arrest report at DPD just like Ken Wilson did in Fort Worth ... despite his report having "mysteriously disappeared."

Burying his head in the sand doesn't save the ostrich from the lion's assault, and yours won't ever put Ed on the highway.

Virtually all the problems with the story lie with people who are intent on believing it no matter what the facts are, and perpetuating it at any cost, including that of The Truth (our "only client?" Well, I suppose if the WC could ignore it, so can we, eh?). In the end, it's all about "the book," and continuing the conspiracy of commercialism.

After all, some people still would like to believe that Ken Wilson was really David Atlee Phillips (tho' it doesn't seem as if First Hand Knowledge is still in circulation).

Duke wrongly assumes that Ed was trying to signal policemen on the triple underpass.

If I remember correctly, he was trying to signal the much closer policeMAN on the

RAILROAD BRIDGE just north of him.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Duke Lane. Great article.

To me the most convincing argument remains that it is inconceivable that all those people on the railroad bridge have not seen the guy breaking down the rifle behind that switchbox. From your overview you can see how impossible that would be.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/hoffmanview1.gif

This story also shows again that one of the main obstacles to the truth is the JFK research community itself. Take for example how James Files is discredited, based on the Hoffman story. The reasoning is: Files is bull, because Hofmann saw two men behind the fence, where Files says he was alone. Most reseachers did not take into account that Hoffman's story is bull.

By the way. Bowers story is much more interesting. For those who don't know it yet, Files was indeed alone when he took his shot. But a few minutes before he had a visitor, checking if he was in place. That visitor was Edward Lansdale.

I must do my appeal first. Once I'm free, I'll give you some documents to see. I'll bring them to you in Texas. We'll cut off any corner of the paper you choose, you can have the paper tested, to prove its age. I'll let you make Xerox copys [sic] so you can have the hand-writing analized. [sic] Dates and signatures are on the papers. They will blow your mind and prove that I levelled [sic] with you on all things except for one; "Government involvement". When the time is right, I'll tell you why I had to do all in my power to protect certain people. I'm truly sorry about not being able to give the interview, but Organized Crime is kid stuff compared to the Government. But hell, you already know that! You've been around the block a few times yourself.

In the beginning Files did not want to implicate the CIA. He was simply afraid to do that. It is interesting to know that his VSA test shows the most stress when he talks about David Atlee Phillips.

I wanna tell that when it comes to the government and underhanded work , the mob, they are kindergarten. They are kindergarten! I might upset a lot of people in the family saying that, but they are kindergarten when it comes to working with the government. They are the goldfish in the shark's pond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Is Ed Hoffman still alive?

Sadly, no. He passed away last year.

Thank you. I thought I read it on the forum but could not find it. The search facility is not very good on this site. Even using Google did not bring the information up.

John, using Google I was able to find it in about twenty seconds. First I Googled: Ed Hoffman JFK Education Forum

This thread was the number one listing. At the bottom of the same listing was the message: More results from educationforum.ipbhost.com

Clicking on that brought up a full page of listings. The thread you were looking for was the fourth one from the top, started by Duncan MacRae on March 25, 2010

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15676

Edited by Michael Hogan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Ed Hoffman still alive?

Sadly, no. He passed away last year.

Thank you. I thought I read it on the forum but could not find it. The search facility is not very good on this site. Even using Google did not bring the information up.

John, using Google I was able to find it in about twenty seconds. First I Googled: Ed Hoffman JFK Education Forum

This thread was the number one listing. At the bottom of the same listing was the message: More results from educationforum.ipbhost.com

Clicking on that brought up a full page of listings. The thread you were looking for was the fourth one from the top, started by Duncan MacRae on March 25, 2010

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15676

I missed out the "JFK" from the Education Forum. I will remember to do that in future. Gary Mack emailed me to say he died on 24th March, 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 years later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...