Jump to content


Spartacus

Additional Claims about the Knoll-Wall


  • Please log in to reply
261 replies to this topic

#16 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 25 August 2004 - 03:17 AM

[QUOTE]
But why is the policeman never mention by any witness? No witness can verify Arnold's story.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[/quote][/QUOTE]

Austin Miller verified a young man tried to get onto the overpass before Kennedy's arrival and was turned away. Is not the camera a witnesses to the event? The Betzner, Willis and Moorman photos show Arnold stahnding over the wall. Moorman's photo shows an apparent shot coming by Gordon's left ear as he had said years before anyone knew his image was captured in Mary's Polaroid. Ralph Yarborough confirmed Arnold hitting the ground. The Towner photo confirms two individuals in dark clothing at the very spot where Arnold would have been on the ground at that point in time. Two Bond photos show someone rising above the wall which is what would have happened when Arnold rose up to hand his film over to the officer. Some knoll footage shows someone in a uniform and an apparent overseas cap standing on the walkway as people are now moving up the knoll. I personally don't think people mentioned Arnold for the same reason they didn't mention the black couple sitting on the bench having lunch. They didn't mention the Hester's falling to ground or Bill Newman pounding his fist on the grass. They didn't mention the pop bottle sitting on the wall after the shooting. There is no doubt some people seen these things - they just were not something that was of great importance to anyone considering them witnessing the horror of the murder itself. One surely cannot fault Gordon Arnold for no one thinking his falling to the ground with a camera in his hands was of great importance or that an officer stopping at his position to mean anything. The same can be said that it is not Gordon's fault that each and every assassination witness was not asked if they seen him on the knoll.

#17 Paul Kerrigan

Paul Kerrigan

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 25 August 2004 - 07:00 AM

There were two Dallas Police Officers who were told to turn away people on the Triple Underpass. These are the people who turned James Altgens away. But Arnold insists that he was turned away by a federal agent when he was behind the picket fence.

And why is no policeman described by Lee Bowers, whom we know was actually in Dealey Plaza?

And by the way, Ralph Yarborough does not confirm Arnold's story. When Yarborough was interviewed in 1993 by historian David Murph, Yarborough denied seeing someone drop down on the Grassy Knoll. He insisted, “Remember where I was in the motorcade — with the Johnsons, too far back to have been able to see anyone [on the knoll] drop to the ground when firing began.”

Edited by Paul Kerrigan, 25 August 2004 - 07:05 AM.


#18 Guest_Wim Dankbaar_*

Guest_Wim Dankbaar_*
  • Guests

Posted 25 August 2004 - 11:26 AM

Paul Kerrigan wrote:

And why is no policeman described by Lee Bowers, whom we know was actually in Dealey Plaza?

----------------

Mr. BALL. Did you see anyone standing on the triple underpass?
Mr. BOWERS. On the triple underpass, there were two policemen. One facing each direction, both east and west. There was one railroad employee, a signal man there with the Union Terminal Co., and two welders that worked for the Fort Worth Welding firm, and there was also a laborer's assistant furnished by the railroad to these welders.



Mr. BALL. You saw those before the President came by, you saw those people?
Mr. BOWERS. Yes; they were there before 'and after.
Mr. BALL. And were they standing on the triple underpass?
Mr. BOWERS. Yes; they were standing on top of it facing towards Houston Street, all except, of course, the one policeman on the west side.
Mr. BALL.. Did you see any other people up on this high ground ?

#19 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 25 August 2004 - 12:24 PM


There were two Dallas Police Officers who were told to turn away people on the Triple Underpass.  These are the people who turned James Altgens away.  But Arnold insists that he was turned away by a federal agent when he was behind the picket fence.


Sam Holland said there was a man in a suit on the overpass who he assumed was affiliated with the police. This could have been the man who confronted Arnold.

And by the way, Ralph Yarborough does not confirm Arnold's story.  When Yarborough was interviewed in 1993 by historian David Murph, Yarborough denied seeing someone drop down on the Grassy Knoll.  He insisted,  “Remember where I was in the motorcade — with the Johnsons, too far back to have been able to see anyone [on the knoll] drop to the ground when firing began.”

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I find that if one bothers to dig into a matter far enough - he or she usually can make sense out of what has occurred. In 1978, it was Yarborough who read about Gordon Arnold's story and Ralph contacted Earl Golz to tell him about seeing this man on the knoll who dove to the ground when the shooting took place. Again in the mid to late 80's Ralph Yarborough again confirmed for Nigel Turner what he had told Earl Golz back in 1978. Then in 1993 someone comes along and interviews the aging ex-Senator and asked him about what he'd seen an/or heard concerning the first shot and the man at the wall. If I'm not mistaken, the 1993 interview asked Yarborough about seeing Arnold when the shooting started. What appears to have happened was that Ralph and the interviewer were not on the same page. If you'll look at a blowup of Altgens number six photograph you will see that no less than two shots into the assassination the then Senator is still smiling and unaware that shots have been fired. So by the time his car has advanced forward to the moment that the head shot to Kennedy had taken place - Ralph Yarborough could then easily see over the corner of the wall. When he thought in 1993 about where his car was when the shooting started - Ralph knew that he could not have seen over the wall at that point. Neither he nor the interviewer separated where the VP car was when Ralph recognized what he took to be the first shot as compared to where the Senator's car was when officially the first shot was fired ... there is a big difference. So one has to consider this - did the younger Yarborough get it right in 78' and again in 86' only to be confused in 93' or did Yarborough make up this story about seeing Arnold and stuck with it for over a quarter of a century and then just forgot about it in 93'? There is only one logical answer to all of this IMO and it concerns the apparent mix-up that the rapidly aging and deteriorating ex-Senator experienced in 93.' I am willing to bet without looking that David Murph didn't try to distinguish between where Yarborough was when the first shot was fired Vs. where he was when he recognized what he thought was the first shot and I'd go even further to say that I bet Murph never considered what Yarborough was still doing two shots into the assassination or even considered turning to the photographical record for the answer.

I hope you have found this information useful.

#20 Antti Hynonen

Antti Hynonen

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 955 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Helsinki, Finland
  • Interests:JFK assassination debate

Posted 25 August 2004 - 01:22 PM

I'm sure you all remember the many witness statements along the lines: at least one shot, including the one that hit the President in the head was fired from the grassy knoll...

Perhaps the first shot Gordon Arnold recognized as a gunshot was the kill shot, fired from behind him. He then hit the ground. At the same time Senator Yarborough's car was in position to see Arnold diving into the ground.

I think Mr. Miller put it pretty much in the way I've understood the events to have taken place.

#21 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 25 August 2004 - 04:03 PM

I'm sure you all remember the many witness statements along the lines: at least one shot, including the one that hit the President in the head was fired from the grassy knoll...

Perhaps the first shot Gordon Arnold recognized as a gunshot was the kill shot, fired from behind him. He then hit the ground. At the same time Senator Yarborough's car was in position to see Arnold diving into the ground.

I think Mr. Miller put it pretty much in the way I've understood the events to have taken place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Thanks, Antti. There is one consideration that I would like to mention. If Moorman's photo is capturing the muzzle flash of Badge Man's gun/the shot that came by Gordon Arnold, then it could not have been the kill shot for JFK's head exploded between Z312 and Z313. Moorman's photo was exposed at Z316 basically ... Z315.6 to be more exact. Of course the kill shot and the Badge Man shot came over the top of one another and that was a description that many witnesses had given. I believe Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman who was sitting in the front passenger seat of the President's limo referred to it as sounding like a sonic boom where one hears two loud bangs one immediately following over the top of the other. While it may sound like I am splitting hairs - I didn't want to give the impression that Badge Man's shot was the bullet that hit JFK in the head. In fact, there was a furrow found in the grass by Mrs. Hartman (assassination witness) that led back to the Badge Man location. The FBI referenced her as saying the furrow led back to the TSBD, but Mrs. Hartman said that is not what she had told them.

#22 Paul Kerrigan

Paul Kerrigan

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 26 August 2004 - 04:03 AM

Paul Kerrigan wrote:

And why is no policeman described by Lee Bowers, whom we know was actually in Dealey Plaza?

----------------

Mr. BALL. Did you see anyone standing on the triple underpass?
    Mr. BOWERS. On the triple underpass, there were two policemen. One facing each direction, both east and west. There was one railroad employee, a signal man there with the Union Terminal Co., and two welders that worked for the Fort Worth Welding firm, and there was also a laborer's assistant furnished by the railroad to these welders.



Mr. BALL. You saw those before the President came by, you saw those people?
    Mr. BOWERS. Yes; they were there before 'and after.
    Mr. BALL. And were they standing on the triple underpass?
    Mr. BOWERS. Yes; they were standing on top of it facing towards Houston Street, all except, of course, the one policeman on the west side.
    Mr. BALL.. Did you see any other people up on this high ground ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yes. I said policemen were on the Triple Underpass. But they were not behind the picket fence turning people away.

#23 Larry Peters

Larry Peters

    Advanced Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 26 August 2004 - 04:18 AM

Yes.  I said policemen were on the Triple Underpass.  But they were not behind the picket fence turning people away.


Now I am lost. Who said that there were policeman behind the fence turning people away? If you are talking about Gordon Arnold - he was met near the underpass at the steam pipe and he was turned away. Considering the timing of the event and the age description given by Austin Miller - there is a chance that we are talking about one in the same event. Gordon said that he then started easing his way along the fence and the same man told to him to get all the way out of the RR yard.

#24 Paul Kerrigan

Paul Kerrigan

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 26 August 2004 - 07:21 AM

Yes.  I said policemen were on the Triple Underpass.  But they were not behind the picket fence turning people away.


Now I am lost. Who said that there were policeman behind the fence turning people away? If you are talking about Gordon Arnold - he was met near the underpass at the steam pipe and he was turned away. Considering the timing of the event and the age description given by Austin Miller - there is a chance that we are talking about one in the same event. Gordon said that he then started easing his way along the fence and the same man told to him to get all the way out of the RR yard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Arnold said he later walked away from the pipe and walked over to the fence. He was then chased away again. Altgens wasn't chased from behind the fence, he was forced from the Underpass.

#25 Larry Peters

Larry Peters

    Advanced Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 26 August 2004 - 09:01 AM

Arnold said he later walked away from the pipe and walked over to the fence.  He was then chased away again.  Altgens wasn't chased from behind the fence, he was forced from the Underpass.


Had Arnold of not stopped to view over the fence - he would not have been told to move on. There is no indication that Altgens had intentions of taking photos through the trees while standing in the RR yard. Once he could not get onto the overpass - he opted to go down to the street.

#26 Paul Kerrigan

Paul Kerrigan

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 28 August 2004 - 12:29 AM

Why does the Moorman photo show Gordon Arnold standing straight up when he himself said that he buried his head in the dirt as soon as shots started being fired?

Arnold said to Earl Golz and in The Men Who Killed Kennedy that he took the film out of the canister and threw it to the policeman. But why did he tell Jim Marrs that he threw the whole camera to the man?

And what happened to the first policeman in his story to The Men Who Killed Kennedy?

Edited by Paul Kerrigan, 28 August 2004 - 12:33 AM.


#27 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 28 August 2004 - 06:00 AM

Why does the Moorman photo show Gordon Arnold standing straight up when he himself said that he buried his head in the dirt as soon as shots started being fired?

Arnold said to Earl Golz and in The Men Who Killed Kennedy that he took the film out of the canister and threw it to the policeman.  But why did he tell Jim Marrs that he threw the whole camera to the man?

And what happened to the first policeman in his story to The Men Who Killed Kennedy?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Paul - you have asked a good question and I can answer it. Gordon Arnold was a bit more specific than just saying 'when the shots first started'. Gordon Arnold said he hit the ground when a shot cae past his left ear. Moorman's photo shows such a shot doing just what Gordon had said.

As far as what Marrs said ... Jim has a tendency to cite what he rcalls witnesses telling him and not actually what the witnesses later calimed to have said to him. I know for instance Mrs. Hartman was called and asked by Marrs to come to the school and talk to Jim's class - she turned him down. The next thing you know he is saying he interviewed her and she has denied that ever happened. Now I'm not saying that Jim purposely has mislead anyone over Gordon Arnold and other witnesses, but he and other interviewers will often times write down what they recall a witness saying after the interview is over and it allows for errors to be made over what a witness actually said. I noticed the other day in a medical report that a doctor I had once seen had said that my sister died of breast cancer. He took no notes during my examination. What I had told him was is that my sister had breast cancer which caused her to have a breast removed. My sister is still alive today. So this is how things happen and it is unfornuate that he comes back on the witness.

I'm not sure what you are talking bout when you ask what happen to the first policeman in the MWKK? If you are talking about Gordon being approached over his film, then he was always talking about the first policeman. The whole purpose of that interview was for him to talk about that officer and that is why you don't hear him discussing the other officer. This is not uncommon either. You may recall what Arnold Rowland said to the Commission when asked why he didn't mention the second man on the 6th floor to the FBI. Rowland said words to the effect that 'they were not interested in hearing about that man they had told me. They only wanted to hear about the man with the rifle'. I suspect that this is what Turner's people had said to Gordon Arnold. I can assure you that not everything Gordon had said made it onto the program. I think Gary Mack said that they interviewed he and Jack quite a bit and only a small fraction of their interview made it onto the show.

I hope this has offered you some more insight into the Gordon Arnold interview.

#28 David G. Healy

David G. Healy

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,152 posts

Posted 28 August 2004 - 06:20 AM

Bill Miller said:

[...]
Now I'm not saying that Jim purposely has mislead anyone over Gordon Arnold and other witnesses, but he and other interviewers will often times write down what they recall a witness saying after the interview is over and it allows for errors to be made over what a witness actually said.

[... the personal stuff]

So this is how things happen and it is unfornuate that he comes back on the witness.

[...]

dgh01: I do believe thats EXACTLY what your saying, Bill. "Now I'm not saying..."
All that don't buy into your ideas of what the "evidence shows" are misleading - not only witnesses, but the public at large!

Fill him in James - this isn't a sheeple forum.


David Healy

Edited by David G. Healy, 28 August 2004 - 06:20 AM.


#29 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 28 August 2004 - 08:08 AM

dgh01: I do believe thats EXACTLY what your saying, Bill. "Now I'm not saying..."
All that don't buy into your ideas of what the "evidence shows" are misleading - not only witnesses, but the public at large!

Fill him in James - this isn't a sheeple forum.



David - you would say that because you come across as about as bright as a road kill that didn't understand what the bright lights meant before he stepped out in front of them. What is there not to understand ... if a witness says they 'handed over their film' to Golz and said they 'handed over their film' to Turner's people in TMWKK - then how do you think Jim Marrs turned it into a camera that was handed over? This sort of thing happens all the time. A witness says one thing and then the interviewer then writes out later what they recalled the witness saying. One change of a word is all it takes. In the case with Marrs - he said 'camera' instead of 'film' and here we are now with someone wondering why Arnold changed his story and not considering that Marrs is the one who made the error. Below is what I said - I would like to know if anyone besides you could not follow the meaning of those few simple senetences.

"Now I'm not saying that Jim purposely has mislead anyone over Gordon Arnold and other witnesses, but he and other interviewers will often times wait and write down what they recalled a witness saying after the interview is over and it allows for errors to be made over what a witness actually said."

Edited by Bill Miller, 28 August 2004 - 05:34 PM.


#30 Paul Kerrigan

Paul Kerrigan

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 28 August 2004 - 07:29 PM

I'm not sure what you are talking bout when you ask what happen to the first policeman in the MWKK? If you are talking about Gordon being approached over his film, then he was always talking about the first policeman. The whole purpose of that interview was for him to talk about that officer and that is why you don't hear him discussing the other officer. This is not uncommon either. You may recall what Arnold Rowland said to the Commission when asked why he didn't mention the second man on the 6th floor to the FBI. Rowland said words to the effect that 'they were not interested in hearing about that man they had told me. They only wanted to hear about the man with the rifle'. I suspect that this is what Turner's people had said to Gordon Arnold. I can assure you that not everything Gordon had said made it onto the program. I think Gary Mack said that they interviewed he and Jack quite a bit and only a small fraction of their interview made it onto the show.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Then Arnold is not being truthful. In earlier accounts, Arnold was kicked by a policeman and then another policeman came by with a large gun and was crying. In The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Arnold coalesced the two policemen into one, now one policeman is kicking him, holding a weapon, and crying instead of two. The other individual was not simply cut out of the program, his actions are all being performed by one man.

Another new edition to Arnold's story is the description of the man (or, according to his earlier accounts, the second of two individuals) who harrased him on the knoll. In this new account, Arnold says the man didn't wear a hat and had dirty hands. This appears in none of Arnold's earlier accounts but it reminds you of the account of Joe Marshall Smith. It is pretty apparent that Arnold read Smith's story and mixed it in with his own.

Arnold also addded a railroad worker to his account in The Men Who Killed Kennedy. When he is show the "Badgeman" enlargement, supposedly for the first time, he says: “Would this fella back here [the figure with the hardhat] be the railroad man I asked you about this morning? Because when I was walking to the site, and I had never told anybody that I had, when we were out there filming, it reminded me that there was a railroad worker just standing out there by the railroad tracks.”

So now, one of the policemen has not only been subtracted but he has been replaced by a railroad worker who really doesn't do much of anything. It is quite remarkable that this new account fits so perfectly with what Mack and White are about to show him. How can we be sure that Arnold never saw the work that Gary Mack and Jack White discovered, published, and publicized within the Kennedy assassination research community?

Edited by Paul Kerrigan, 28 August 2004 - 07:31 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users