Jump to content


Spartacus

Ed Hoffman's Activities and Observations


  • Please log in to reply
365 replies to this topic

#91 Michael Hogan

Michael Hogan

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,468 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 July 2007 - 07:32 PM

Ed Hoffman, through an interpreter:

"The train man was still standing there. I could see him very plainly. I watched him take the gun apart. I don't know how he did it because I don't know anything about guns, but he dismantled it and put it inside the brown suitcase. Then he started running, too. He ran off to the north, into the railroad yards. I managed to keep him in sight until he ran behind a train. He ran right around the caboose and disappeared, and after that I couldn't see him anymore."


From Breaking the Silence by Bill Sloan, page 19.

Edited by Michael Hogan, 12 July 2007 - 07:32 PM.


#92 Jack White

Jack White

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 8,640 posts

Posted 12 July 2007 - 08:00 PM

I have heard Ed's story five or six times, including the first time he told it
in public at Jim Marrs' class.

I remember him mentioning the signal box. Why would he mention the
signal box unless it had some significance to his story? I have always used
the signal box to visualize the area he was talking about as being near the
tracks.

Jack

#93 Michael Hogan

Michael Hogan

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,468 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 July 2007 - 08:25 PM

I have heard Ed's story five or six times, including the first time he told it
in public at Jim Marrs' class.

I remember him mentioning the signal box. Why would he mention the
signal box unless it had some significance to his story? I have always used
the signal box to visualize the area he was talking about as being near the
tracks.

The only mention of it in Sloan's book is:

Using the sign language of the deaf, Hoffman describes through a professional interpreter the chilling sequence of events that followed.

"The train man was standing there behind the fence and beside an electrical box of some kind," he explains. "He was holding a brown bag, and I thought it had something to do with his work at first. But then I noticed that he and the businessman kept walking around, and they weren't staring down the street in the direction the motorcade was coming like everyone else was. They seemed to be more interested in the fence than anything else."



#94 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington
  • Interests:Photograph and film interpreting

Posted 12 July 2007 - 11:29 PM

I have heard Ed's story five or six times, including the first time he told it
in public at Jim Marrs' class.

I remember him mentioning the signal box. Why would he mention the
signal box unless it had some significance to his story? I have always used
the signal box to visualize the area he was talking about as being near the
tracks.

Jack


I think Ed tried to say that the worker disappeared behind the signal box from where he was positioned on the freeway. Anyway, Ed's family has told me that Ed doesn't have a good understanding of the English language and that he doesn't always give the right signs to make his point clear. This was one of the reasons that I wanted his daughter to interpret for him. As I said once before - even Ed's daughter had trouble communicating with him at times because Ed was not saying things clearly and I could sense the frustration with Ed that it was causing.

Bill


#95 Duncan MacRae

Duncan MacRae

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,651 posts
  • Interests:My main interest is in the photographic record of the assassination.

Posted 14 July 2007 - 09:58 AM

Ed's family has told me that Ed doesn't have a good understanding of the English language and that he doesn't always give the right signs to make his point clear. This was one of the reasons that I wanted his daughter to interpret for him. As I said once before - even Ed's daughter had trouble communicating with him at times because Ed was not saying things clearly and I could sense the frustration with Ed that it was causing.

Bill

Just one question

Can Ed write as a normal person would with pen and paper?

Duncan


#96 Ken Rheberg

Ken Rheberg

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 12:22 AM

Miles,

I'm going to have to ask you once again. This is the fourth time now.

You said that the spectators watching the motorcade in the area adjacent to the switch box did not report seeing anyone that fit Ed Hoffman's description nor did they see the alleged rifle toss.

Please give me the names of these spectators.

I'd appreciate it if you would not refer me to Gary Mack or anyone else. I want the names from you and you alone.

You're the one who brought up these witnesses and what they did not report or see.

Who are they?

If you don't know who they are, then simply say you don't know who they are. That's all I'm asking at this time.

Thanks.

Ken


Ken,

Apparently you were instrumental in affording me & Duke a chance to see Ed's very interesting booklet "Eyewitness."

I have thanked you 3 or 4 times for your assistance.

I, therefore, would like to assist you with your research, but I do not have the time to do the research for you, as I think I pointed out to you before. You will have to do that for yourself from now on.

Hope that's clear.

Now, I think I remember providing you with an affidavit of Oscar McVey. There is dispute as to his location, but he very likely was at the balustrade as seen in the Bell frames.

Don Roberdeau suggests this.

Dodd encountered a Katy RR official at the north end of the Underpass. There is dispute as to his name (Pat Simples has been cited, but without verifiable records), but he was there at Z-313. A lead here, Ken: the records of the Katy will have his name.

As to the published names of the score or so of nearby witnesses who did not see Ed's toss (but who would have seen it, had it occurred), etc., see "Six Seconds in Dallas" & also the plat John got from me to give to Robin Unger to put up on his excellent site & research treasure trove.

Again, Ken, you can look this up for yourself, without further help.

_____________________

On one point that keeps coming up about someone reported to Seymour Weitzman that he had seen something thrown though a "bush."

This testimony, IF accurate (which is debatable), has no bearing on Ed's story because the contemporaneous photographic evidence shows zero vegetation obstructing the witnesses' view of Ed's alleged rifle toss & disassembly.
If something was seen thrown through a bush (?), it could not have been Ed's rifle, unless the rifle was thrown twice. :(

_____________________


OK, Ken, hope this helps out. It's a snap from the plat you can look up for details. Good hunting!

Posted Image



For all Forum members:

Duke said on 7/10/07:

“Ed's book hasn't provided those as yet to my satisfaction. I'll explain later after he's had a reasonable time to respond to my queries.”

My response: Ed is 71 years old at this time and in poor physical health. He had a massive heart attack in 1998, was involved in a head-on auto collision in 1999, and now suffers from diabetes and congestive heart failure. The bad news results of blood work done a little more than three months ago were “off the charts.” 89% of patients with results of that magnitude die within three months. Ed is still hanging in there, but due to his fragile condition, his family will not bring up the subject of assassination threads like this one anymore.

Now for Duke (and Miles, I suppose, by extension).

Duke, you said on 7/11/07:

“As I'd said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. At the very least, some corroboration would be useful.”

and

“Another good question is, with so many persons nearby the steam pipe, how is it that Ed, 265 yards away, didn't see any of them but the two that nobody else saw?”

and:

“ . . .it has nothing to do with whether Ed's story squares with "the official version" or not, but whether it squares with anyone else's version. . .”

My response: There is corroboration for some of what Ed Hoffman saw. But, to my knowledge, you and Miles haven’t mentioned it. So here it is. Dallas Police Officer J. W. Foster, who stood on the triple underpass near Sam Holland and others, said that after the shooting he moved to “the end of the viaduct” (where the triple underpass meets the picket fence) at which point somebody told him that some man had run up the railroad tracks from that location.

That’s just what Ed had said. After the shots, his “railroad man” had run up the railroad tracks from the area of the switchbox which is at the very same location where Foster’s man had run from, i.e. where the triple underpass meets the picket fence.

Foster doesn’t mention who the person was who told him about the man running up the railroad tracks. If Foster is still alive, and he may very well be, I wonder if he might remember. And where that might lead.

And now for Miles.

Please note my most recent request of you:

“If you don't know who they are, then simply say you don't know who they are. That's all I'm asking at this time.”

This all arose from your conclusion that spectators watching the motorcade in the area adjacent to the switch box did not report seeing anyone that fit Ed's description nor did they see the alleged "rifle toss." I wanted to know who they were, these spectators who didn’t report and didn’t see. I wanted you to name names.

But in your response, you somehow came up with this (emphasis yours):

“I, therefore, would like to assist you with your research, but I do not have the time to do the research for you, as I think I pointed out to you before. You will have to do that for yourself from now on.”

Please, Miles. Try to understand. I don’t want you to do my research for me. You never have. And I’ve never asked you to.

All I’ve ever wanted you to do is admit to this Forum that you really don’t know who these spectators are.

This would be an important admission.

But you won’t say it. So I’ll say it for you.

You don’t know who these spectators are! No one knows. You brought up the suggestions of Don Roberdeau as to who the men might be. I know Don, and he will tell you this: no one knows who these men are. Period.

So if you don’t know who they are, then how can you say what they reported or didn’t report? What they saw or didn’t see?

Just the same, Miles, you chose to "refute" Ed’s story anyway, at least in part based on what these unknown men didn’t report and didn’t see.

The value of this kind of research escapes me.

Ken

#97 Miles Scull

Miles Scull

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,407 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 12:54 AM

So if you don’t know who they are, then how can you say what they reported or didn’t report? What they saw or didn’t see?

Just the same, Miles, you chose to "refute" Ed’s story anyway, at least in part based on what these unknown men didn’t report and didn’t see.

The value of this kind of research escapes me.

Ken


Ken,

Sorry to hear Ed's not well. That's bad news.

So, not to belabor the point, if there were many people nearby the scene (and there were) & if we don't know the identities of a few of these (and we do know the identities of many of these bystanders), then it's reasonable to ask why no one saw what Ed saw from 265 yards away, even if we don't know the identities of a few witnesses.

Unknown witness to another unknown witness: "Hey, Joe, did you see that? That guy threw a rifle to that other guy! I'm going to tell the cops!"

Also, Bowers' testimony indicates that Bowers recognized individuals whom he did know as uniformed lot attendants (McVey) in the vicinity of the steam pipe.

Anyway, seeing that Ed's so ill, let's drop this unfortunate & worn out subject out of respect for an honest man who only reported what he thought he saw.

Edited by Miles Scull, 15 July 2007 - 12:58 AM.


#98 Miles Scull

Miles Scull

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,407 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 12:54 AM

dupe

Edited by Miles Scull, 15 July 2007 - 12:55 AM.


#99 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington
  • Interests:Photograph and film interpreting

Posted 15 July 2007 - 02:54 AM

So, not to belabor the point, if there were many people nearby the scene (and there were) & if we don't know the identities of a few of these (and we do know the identities of many of these bystanders), then it's reasonable to ask why no one saw what Ed saw from 265 yards away, even if we don't know the identities of a few witnesses.

Unknown witness to another unknown witness: "Hey, Joe, did you see that? That guy threw a rifle to that other guy! I'm going to tell the cops!"

Also, Bowers' testimony indicates that Bowers recognized individuals whom he did know as uniformed lot attendants (McVey) in the vicinity of the steam pipe.

Anyway, seeing that Ed's so ill, let's drop this unfortunate & worn out subject out of respect for an honest man who only reported what he thought he saw.



I looked at that silly list - Tague - Franzen's - what kind of nonsense was that supposed to be? From where the Farnzen's stood, Tague, and others - looking uphill at a wooden fence would not allow them to see what occurred in the RR yard no matter how hard they looked. Most people watched the limo race away and most likely watched the parade continue by. To see a deed - one has to be looking at the persons doing the deed. Any distraction would possibly prevent the deed from being witnessed.

As far as what poor old Ed saw - I'd be more concerned about what the poor old researchers thought before having all the facts straight.

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller, 15 July 2007 - 02:16 PM.


#100 Miles Scull

Miles Scull

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,407 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 06:14 PM

So, not to belabour the point, if there were many people nearby the scene (and there were) & if we don't know the identities of a few of these (and we do know the identities of many of these bystanders), then it's reasonable to ask why no one saw what Ed saw from 265 yards away, even if we don't know the identities of a few witnesses.

Unknown witness to another unknown witness: "Hey, Joe, did you see that? That guy threw a rifle to that other guy! I'm going to tell the cops!"

Also, Bowers' testimony indicates that Bowers recognised individuals whom he did know as uniformed lot attendants (McVey) in the vicinity of the steam pipe.


Addendum:

Couple of overlooked final points:

Here is a graphic of published identified witnesses as from the map referred to as found at Robin Unger's site.

Posted Image

These witnesses saw smoke & heard a shot to their left. Their attention & their glances
could have & would have been directed to the steam pipe area where they had an
unobstructed view of any & all activities taking place there, especially if there was something
as attention attracting at the steam pipe as two men tossing & catching a rifle. Remember the
alleged rifle toss occurred after the limo had passed through the underpass; thus, the witnesses would have
been free of the distraction of the passing limo.

There has been speculation that the witnesses rushed to the west side of the underpass to view the limo as it
sped away to Parkland. The photographic evidence shows otherwise. Of course, by now Holland & Dodd & crew
were running around to the steam pipe & would be viewing the steam pipe within seconds, if they didn't already have it in view.

Here's a photo which shows only two witnesses at the west balustrade at the time in question:

Posted Image

A crop here shows:


Posted Image

Posted Image


only two witnesses, yellow & green arrows. The other witnesses were dashing to the steam pipe.

The yellow arrowed witness is already in a position to see the receding limo & the steam pipe,
if he chooses to do so, if the action of someone walking to the switch box carrying a rifle for
disassembly & secretion into a tool box distracted him, as it did not.

Posted Image

And, of course, Sam Holland & Dodd & all the others would have been in locus of the steam pipe
& the switch box to see the alleged rifle toss & the alleged subsequent action of disassembling &
hiding the rifle in the tool box.

The agent of the Katy RR had been in this locus at Z-313.

Edited by Miles Scull, 15 July 2007 - 06:41 PM.


#101 Duke Lane

Duke Lane

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Interests:Universally loved and admired for his keen wit, sharp intellect, loathsome egoism, and awe-inspiring self-delusion, Lane studies the JFK assassination from afar, offers few opinions, and generally keeps to himself.

Posted 15 July 2007 - 08:58 PM

Here's a photo which shows only two witnesses at the west balustrade at the time in question:

Posted Image

Thank you for that image: it is the same one that I'd used to prove Tom Tilson's "Black Car Chase" (see Marrs, Crossfire) a bunch of balderdash in my Cowtown Connection article back in '92 or '93. Tilson, you might recall, claimed that he was coming east from Industrial Blvd on Commerce as he noticed the limo speeding toward the entrance ramp when he saw someone running down the railroad embankment (in the background of this photo) and jump into a black sedan that was parked alongside the roadway (NOT in the background of this photo!).

The only way he could've seen anything like that is if the "black sedan" was in the motorcade (uh-oh and shades of an LBJ conspiracy ... and let's not even go there!!).

This is also one that shows the lack of vegetation (trees) between the highway (behind McIntyre as he shot this photo, and ahead of the motorcycles in the foreground) and the railroad yards beside the TSBD. This at least proves that Ed Hoffman would've been able to see what he claimed to see if he was where he claims he was.

#102 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington
  • Interests:Photograph and film interpreting

Posted 15 July 2007 - 09:25 PM

These witnesses saw smoke & heard a shot to their left. Their attention & their glances
could have & would have been directed to the steam pipe area where they had an
unobstructed view of any & all activities taking place there, especially if there was something
as attention attracting at the steam pipe as two men tossing & catching a rifle. Remember the
alleged rifle toss occurred after the limo had passed through the underpass; thus, the witnesses would have
been free of the distraction of the passing limo.


The location of the shot and the smoke was out in front of them and slightly to their left. The steam pipe area was almost 90 degrees to their left.

There has been speculation that the witnesses rushed to the west side of the underpass to view the limo as it
sped away to Parkland. The photographic evidence shows otherwise. Of course, by now Holland & Dodd & crew
were running around to the steam pipe & would be viewing the steam pipe within seconds, if they didn't already have it in view.


Not only has there been speculation with what they could have and would have seen, but there is also an ongoing attempt by some to distort the record for what ever reason. In the beginning it was YOU (Miles) who hadn't even read Hoffman's book before trying to make him out to be in error or had falsified some of the things he had said he seen. Now after supposedly reading Hoffman's book you are going a step further and distorting the facts. In the quote above you have taken the part where Holland admitted that it was a couple of minutes before they left the underpass and went into the RR yard to it now being within seconds. In fact, is it not the Bell film that shows the men still on the underpass around 60 seconds or so after the limo has passed underneath of it. So let's put the assassination aside for a moment so you can please tell this forum why you are misstating the facts even after they have been posted several times over?



only two witnesses, yellow & green arrows. The other witnesses were dashing to the steam pipe.

The yellow arrowed witness is already in a position to see the receding limo & the steam pipe,
if he chooses to do so, if the action of someone walking to the switch box carrying a rifle for
disassembly & secretion into a tool box distracted him, as it did not.


Two problems here. As I said before - the Bell film shows the men still on the underpass as long as a minute following the limo leaving the plaza. You may want to argue otherwise, but first note that Bell had stopped his camera and started filming again. The second problem that I see is that you have no way of knowing what distracted who and for how long. You keep telling this forum that no one saw anything tossed near the steam pipe, but yet Weitzman wrote in his report that a worker had told him that he saw something through the bushes being tossed after the shooting and the location was over near the steam pipe. Claim someone in cahoots with Hoffman had helped establish what you believe was a lie as far as anyone tossing anything in the RR yard if you like, but just stop misstating the facts - if you can.



And, of course, Sam Holland & Dodd & all the others would have been in locus of the steam pipe
& the switch box to see the alleged rifle toss & the alleged subsequent action of disassembling &
hiding the rifle in the tool box.


It takes less than 15 seconds to break down a rifle if one knows what they are doing. I cannot say from where you are from how they measure time, but a walk to the steam pipe plus 15 seconds for a breakdown of a weapon is still far under the time allowance Holland gave for getting off of the underpass. If you have other time frames that are not general descriptions, but rather in minutes or seconds from Dodd, Simmons, etc., then please post them.

Thanks,

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller, 15 July 2007 - 09:29 PM.


#103 Miles Scull

Miles Scull

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,407 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 10:57 PM

Here's a photo which shows only two witnesses at the west balustrade at the time in question:

Posted Image

Thank you for that image: it is the same one that I'd used to prove Tom Tilson's "Black Car Chase" (see Marrs, Crossfire) a bunch of balderdash in my Cowtown Connection article back in '92 or '93. Tilson, you might recall, claimed that he was coming east from Industrial Blvd on Commerce as he noticed the limo speeding toward the entrance ramp when he saw someone running down the railroad embankment (in the background of this photo) and jump into a black sedan that was parked alongside the roadway (NOT in the background of this photo!).

The only way he could've seen anything like that is if the "black sedan" was in the motorcade (uh-oh and shades of an LBJ conspiracy ... and let's not even go there!!).

This is also one that shows the lack of vegetation (trees) between the highway (behind McIntyre as he shot this photo, and ahead of the motorcycles in the foreground) and the railroad yards beside the TSBD. This at least proves that Ed Hoffman would've been able to see what he claimed to see if he was where he claims he was.


Duke,

No problem. This McIntyre proves the point. Sam Holland said that it took 2 minutes for him & clambering crew to reach the trampled muddy area by the fence. Sam said that immediately after the limo went under him & through the underpass, that he then began to run toward the steam pipe. So Sam & those other spectators who were running with & in front of Sam would have arrived at the locus of the fence at about 45 to 60 seconds after Z-313. It would have taken Ed's alleged sniper at least 45 to 60 seconds from Z-313 to reach the steam pipe for the alleged rifle toss. Barring a lighting strike Sam Holland could have intercepted the tossed rifle in mid air & run for a touchdown with a handoff to Oswald at the TSBD front steps!

Then of course there's the clincher:

Posted Image

The limo is under Sam Holland going through the underpass. There are two spectators standing at the balustrade at the end of the left red arrow. They have just heard a loud report of a rifle shot from nearby to their left at the picket fence. They turn in the direction of the loud shot to their left. They then see a man with a rifle at port arms weaving & bobbing in & between densely parked cars as he approaches the steam pipe in plain view. They then see Ed's alleged sniper toss the rifle over the steam pipe to an awaiting assistant. They then watch, as Bowers is also watching (!) all this time BTW, the assistant walk to the switch box with the rifle, stoop down, brake down the rifle, put it in a tool box, close the tool box, lift it up & walk away.

The spectator at the balustrade, however, sees all this in progress. So, brave Texan that he is, he walks the 15 feet to the switch box & says to the stooped man: "Howdy, Pard, hey you hear that shot that hit the President? Just wondering if that rifle you're hiding there has anything to do with that there shot? Mind if I take a gander at it?"

Of course, after years of using Ed's story as a crutch for one's demonstrably false & ridiculous ideas (Midget Man), it's very galling to have to admit, in front of the whole forum membership (!), that one all along has been a poster boy for poor, forced, sloppy, self-aggrandizing research at the expense of other respected researchers like Jack White, etc.

That's one thing.

But, to knowingly persist in being dead wrong & to repeatedly engage, for years (!), in a massive fudging of fact, -- that is something else. THAT's an obvious joke on this forum & good laugh to its members! :lol:

Edited by Miles Scull, 15 July 2007 - 11:01 PM.


#104 Miles Scull

Miles Scull

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,407 posts

Posted 15 July 2007 - 10:57 PM

dupe

Edited by Miles Scull, 15 July 2007 - 10:58 PM.


#105 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington
  • Interests:Photograph and film interpreting

Posted 16 July 2007 - 01:41 AM

[quote]No problem. This McIntyre proves the point. Sam Holland said that it took 2 minutes for him & clambering crew to reach the trampled muddy area by the fence.[/quote]

I believe Holland said that he went across the RR yard to the back of the colonnade by way of the front of the cars and then came back to the point where he thought he heard the shots. The time allowance he gave was 3 to 4 minutes.



[quote]Sam said that immediately after the limo went under him & through the underpass, that he then began to run toward the steam pipe. So Sam & those other spectators who were running with & in front of Sam would have arrived at the locus of the fence at about 45 to 60 seconds after Z-313.[/quote]

Didn't someone post the other day where Holland said he didn't leave the underpass for a couple of minutes or words to that effect? I still refer to the Mark Bell film.




[quote]It would have taken Ed's alleged sniper at least 45 to 60 seconds from Z-313 to reach the steam pipe for the alleged rifle toss. Barring a lighting strike Sam Holland could have intercepted the tossed rifle in mid air & run for a touchdown with a handoff to Oswald at the TSBD front steps![/quote]

I think if one looked at Lane's interview of Holland - they will see that it takes Holland and Lane 27 seconds to slowly walk from the steam pipe to the point where they turned at a right angle to go up to the wooden fence. So is there any reason to say that an assassin would take 2 to 2.5 times longer to walk the fence than it did Holland to casually walk it???




[quote]The limo is under Sam Holland going through the underpass. There are two spectators standing at the balustrade at the end of the left red arrow. They have just heard a loud report of a rifle shot from nearby to their left at the picket fence. They turn in the direction of the loud shot to their left. They then see a man with a rifle at port arms weaving & bobbing in & between densely parked cars as he approaches the steam pipe in plain view. They then see Ed's alleged sniper toss the rifle over the steam pipe to an awaiting assistant. They then watch, as Bowers is also watching (!) all this time BTW, the assistant walk to the switch box with the rifle, stoop down, brake down the rifle, put it in a tool box, close the tool box, lift it up & walk away.

The spectator at the balustrade, however, sees all this in progress. So, brave Texan that he is, he walks the 15 feet to the switch box & says to the stooped man: "Howdy, Pard, hey you hear that shot that hit the President? Just wondering if that rifle you're hiding there has anything to do with that there shot? Mind if I take a gander at it?"[/quote]

These are not facts, but just your imagination playing out a fantasy.




[quote]Of course, after years of using Ed's story as a crutch for one's demonstrably false & ridiculous ideas (Midget Man), it's very galling to have to admit, in front of the whole forum membership (!), that one all along has been a poster boy for poor, forced, sloppy, self-aggrandizing research at the expense of other respected researchers like Jack White, etc.[/quote]

I again will say that the Hat Man is visible in the Groden enlargement in "The Killing of a President". That Thompson went to the plaza and could not see anything from Moorman's location that matched the fedora shape at the fence. That this spot was wear the smoke came through the trees and from where Bowers reported a man standing. The accoustics test also support this location as having a gunshot fired from it. Midget or giant - one man - one shot - one puff of smoke - shae seen in Moorman's photo is missing when Thompson goes to the plaza to see if it is still there.

It might also be worth pointing out once again that when looking up hill and depending how far back from the fence one is - a 6' man can only have the top of his head seen over the fence from where Mary stood. In fact, I doubt that the top of a midgets head would even been seen over the fence and looking uphill, which makes me wonder why some joker would even see this person as a 'midget'.



[quote]But, to knowingly persist in being dead wrong & to repeatedly engage, for years (!), in a massive fudging of fact, -- that is something else. THAT's an obvious joke on this forum & good laugh to its members![/quote]

Miles - are you confessing?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users