Jump to content


Spartacus

Whereabouts of Mr. Hudson


  • Please log in to reply
176 replies to this topic

#1 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 29 September 2010 - 01:13 AM

After searching the forum and looking at John's Index I did not find a thread dealing with an issue I raised at Lancer but was not satisfied with the answers...

To summerize... Hudson was at the toolshed and then he is standing up with the younger man we see in this image... yet we do not see Hudson at 202 in Willis



From Hudson's WC testimony
Mr. LIEBELER - Would you tell us where you were on November 22, 1963, at around noon, around the time the Presidential motorcade came by?
Mr. HUDSON - Yes; I was over there next to that T. & P. Railroad yard where the little toolshed was.
Mr. LIEBELER - What was the nearest intersection to where you were?
Mr. HUDSON - Elm.
Mr. LIEBELER - Elm and What?
Mr. HUDSON - Houston.
Mr. LIEBELER - Elm and Houston?

Do Ihave the correct tool shed??


Mr. HUDSON - Well, I was standing on those steps that came straight down to Elm there, just above that triple underpass, I was about halfway between the tripple underpass and Houston, where the steps are - somewhere near about halfway.
Mr. LIEBELER - I show you a photograph which is No. 18 of Commission Exhibit No. 875. It depicts the street and the triple underpass. Can you show us on that picture, if that picture shows it the place where you were standing?

Could this be the route he takes to the steps which takes him right past the BDM position?


Mr. HUDSON - Well, I was right along - you see, the steps come down the steps for a way and then there is a broad place, oh, I'll say a little wider than this table here on the steps and then some steps and I was standing on this - that would be somewhere around along about there.
Mr. LIEBELER - Let me just mark on that picture the place where you were standing so that we can have that.
Mr. HUDSON - Right along about there.
Mr. LIEBELER - It was right here where I have placed this "X", is that correct?
Mr. HUDSON - Yes; right along in there.
>>> I could not find a single one of the CE875 photos has an "X" on it<<<<
Mr. LIEBELER - So, you were standing about where I placed the "X" on photograph No. 18 of Commission Exhibit No. 875. Tell me what you saw - tell me what happened to the best of your recollection.
Mr. HUDSON - Well there was a young fellow, oh, I would judge his age about in his late twenties. He said he had been looking for a place to park and he walked up there and he said he finally just taken a place over there in one of them parking lots, and he come on down there and said he worked over there on Industrial and me and him both just sat there first on those steps. When the motorcade turned off of Houston onto Elm, we got up and stood up, me and him both. He was on the left side and I was on the right and so the first shot rung out and, of course, I didn't realize it was a shot, what was taking place right at that present time, and when the second one rung out, the motorcade had done got further on down Elm, and you see, I was trying to get a good look at President Kennedy. I happened to be looking right at him when that bullet hit him - the second shot.
Mr. LIEBELER - That was when the bullet hit him in the head; is that correct?
Mr. HUDSON - Yes; it looked like it ht him somewhere along about a little bit behind the ear and a little bit above the ear.
Mr. LIEBELER - On the right-hand side or the left-hand side?
Mr. HUDSON - Right hand.

Finally, in Don's plaza graphic it shows:


So unless it has changes, and I just linked to the graphic from Don's recent post, he believes Hudson was not yet there at 202...

1 - How early does Hudson actually get to the steps?
2 - is he seen in wills 5 ?
3 - Could he be the blur of BDM in both Betzner and Willis?
Cause we know it was not Gordon Arnold who should be farther back to the right on his "mound" of earth closer to the fence.

Could Hudson have gotten from BDM position to what we see in Muchmore? We do not see the steps or the BDM position until z282 equivilent in Muchmoore. 202 thru 282 is a bit more than 4 seconds... to walk 15 steps?



#2 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 29 September 2010 - 02:10 AM

DAVID THIS MAY BE OF SOME HELP, THE FBI STATEMENT BY EMMET HUDSON, WHERE HE REFERS TO THE TWO OTHER MEN WHO WERE PRESENT WITH HIM, FYI BEFORE YOU GET TANGLED IF, IN THAT MORASS.....HE DOES STATE THERE WERE TWO OTHER MEN WITH HIM, ....EXCUSE CAPS PLEASE THAT TIME OF NIGHT...THANKS...B

Edited by Bernice Moore, 29 September 2010 - 02:10 AM.


#3 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 29 September 2010 - 02:27 AM

DAVID HE IS NOT SEEN IN WILLIS 5 AS FAR AS I KNOW BUT ...I WILL POST A FEW THERE ARE MANY MORE, SEE WHAT YOU THINK...B

#4 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 29 September 2010 - 09:30 PM

Thanks Bernice...

I agree that Hudson does talk about the other 2 men with him.... there are no images of him sitting there with them, or the younger man, prior to willis5. Yet no one asks him how he gets from the tool shed to the stairs or if he passes anyone enroute... He'd have to walk right past BMD's position.

I've also been told that he actually IS in willis5, better versions of the photo make it more apparent yet I have seen no post of any image that indicates Hudson is indeed there. Even a close examination of willis 5 in TKoaAP does not make it appear as if he's there.

If Don is around, I would love to know why he concludes Hudson was not there at z202 beyond the obvious - he's not in the photo.

DJ

#5 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 30 September 2010 - 04:10 AM

HI DAVID, YOUR WELCOME, THERE WAS A STUDY I BELIEVE AT Lancer some time ago, on hudson in relation to willis 5, i did a search thought i may have saved part but nothing came up from the dungeon, but i think it was done by bill miller showing in willis 5 that just shows him, partially,behind the pole, that he was lined up with in that photo, and i no longer could find that research photo either, i guess the gremlin got the munchies, but much came up on hudson from the past but not that of course, mrs murphy's law...here is a slow mo gif showing the steps fwiw, and yes hudson, would have had to have walked past the bdmn wall, thought he may not have paid any attention to anyone there at that time as so many were and had gathered in the park area, yes that looks about right in your map for hm to have gone from the shed to the steps.also a crop from willis bdmn not showing him on the steps, ..take care b..

#6 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 30 September 2010 - 05:45 PM

If one looks in Groden's book 'The killing of a President' and study the Willis enlargement ... parts of Hudson are visible.

For instance: try and determine the length of an arm that would be behind the closest man on the steps as it rest on his hip pocket area. You will probably find it to be a bit long. This is because he and Hudson are both standing in almost the same posture and the two mens coats are overlapping which when seen as one man - the arms are abnormally long.

Also look behind the knee and buttocks area of the same man. This man blocking Hudson from view was thin and wore tighter pants than Hudson. The extra droopy buttocks and pant leg just above and behind the knee appears to be another overlapping of Hudson's clothes in conjunction with the man to his left.

Then if you go to the Muchmore film and start counting when the steps first come into view as the camera pans Charles Brehm ... you will not find anyone moving down the steps and as the camera pans the men on the steps ... they are already in position. This takes away from the time needed for Hudson to have gone from point A to point B.

It also seems to me that Groden has shown that someone is still there at the BDM location right through to the kill shot to JFK. These things considered caused me to dismiss any notion that Hudson was not on the steps in Willis and that Hudson's testimony before the Commission was correct when he said that he and the man next to him rose up off the steps where they had been sitting and talking when the motorcade came onto Houston.

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller, 30 September 2010 - 05:47 PM.


#7 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 30 September 2010 - 05:48 PM

The Miller thread was what I referred to originally... I was not convinced that Hudson was in willis5 and nothing posted has shown he was either behind the other man or the lamppost...

The willis crop does not extend far enough to the left to show the men on the landing imo...
Biggest problem with the willis image is the lack of a white hat (unless deeply in shadows) on BDM

Sure be nice if Emmett had said something about the woman/baby, or guy in an army uniform, or a mysterious guy with a rifle :blink: hanging out back there as he walked to his spot....

once again... nice chatting with ya Bernice...
DJ

#8 Robin Unger

Robin Unger

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,338 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 30 September 2010 - 06:45 PM

The Miller thread was what I referred to originally... I was not convinced that Hudson was in willis5 and nothing posted has shown he was either behind the other man or the lamppost...

The willis crop does not extend far enough to the left to show the men on the landing imo...
Biggest problem with the willis image is the lack of a white hat (unless deeply in shadows) on BDM

Sure be nice if Emmett had said something about the woman/baby, or guy in an army uniform, or a mysterious guy with a rifle :blink: hanging out back there as he walked to his spot....

once again... nice chatting with ya Bernice...
DJ





Quote:

Do Ihave the correct tool shed??


Yes that is the Tool shed.

I have a nice lee Forman image in my files, taken by lee laying on top of the tool shed, looking back through the pergola towards elm st.


Willis 5 Crop

Edited by Robin Unger, 30 September 2010 - 07:32 PM.


#9 Robin Unger

Robin Unger

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,338 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 30 September 2010 - 06:57 PM

Willis 6 Crop


Posted Image


Towner Crop



Posted Image

Edited by Robin Unger, 30 September 2010 - 07:01 PM.


#10 Robin Unger

Robin Unger

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,338 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 30 September 2010 - 07:15 PM

Bond 4 Life


Posted Image

#11 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 30 September 2010 - 07:41 PM

Thank Robin... being focused on the photos/videos myself, I so appreciate your input and opinion.

Do YOU see Hudson in willis5 ??
Did Bowers or anyone see Hudson at the tool shed or walking to the steps?

Interesting how he and so many others line up starting at noon or before to see JFK while the accused assassin sits eating his lunch.
Nerves of steel B)

#12 Cliff Varnell

Cliff Varnell

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,907 posts

Posted 30 September 2010 - 08:09 PM

Sure be nice if Emmett had said something about the woman/baby, or guy in an army uniform, or a mysterious guy with a rifle :blink: hanging out back there as he walked to his spot....



Well, I guess we could consider what Rosemary Willis said about BDM.

http://www.history-m...Vol12_0006a.htm

She described him as a "conspicuous" individual who happened to "disappear the next instant."

We might be able to pin down exactly when that "instant" was by her rapid head turn
Z214-217 as per Don Roberdeau's analysis:

http://educationforu...?showtopic=2394

And then there is the HSCA analysis of Willis #5 (see History Matters page cited above)
in which they identified a "very distinct straight-line feature" "near the region of the hands."

Those who like to promote the woman-holding-a-baby theory pretend that none of the
above exists.

Unless the baby was the very distinct straight line feature? :rolleyes:

#13 Bill Miller

Bill Miller

    Super Member

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

Posted 01 October 2010 - 07:53 AM

The Miller thread was what I referred to originally... I was not convinced that Hudson was in willis5 and nothing posted has shown he was either behind the other man or the lamppost...

DJ


It's always nice to get another analogy concerning photo interpretation. I can think of several reasons why parts of Hudson are not discernible because of color blending and the distance each man is from the camera, but I mentioned several things that don't jive with just one man standing on that top step and you didn't explain why you dismiss them.

For instance, You've seen the images of the man standing next to Hudson in the Nix, Muchmore, and Moorman films and photo and can assess the fitting of his clothes and the length of his arms. Yet in the Willis image the same man if we could draw a straight line inside his arm from his shoulder to where it bends and another from the elbow to the hand ... and then combine the two distances in a straight line and place that line at the shoulder to see how far down the body the arm would hang - you then could apply your findings to whether the distance is too great to be one man, but rather an overlapping of two men in the same posture with one being slightly off-set from the other. I did this when I originally posted on this subject ... did you do the same?

I also mentioned the bulge behind the man's leg just above the knee. The other views from the south pasture appeared to me to show the older Hudson to be wearing baggier pants than the man seen next to him. Hudson's rear seemed a bit lower and his pants roomier as well (forgive me, but I am going from memory here). So I suggested that the bulge was Hudson's saggy pants and that its contradictory to the tighter fitting pants of the younger man. Is there a more logical choice for the bulge that I speak of?? I think the lighter color hat and pants of Hudson blends into the background and the slight blur of the picture added to the illusion that Hudson is not there. However, the darker border I have mentioned didn't escape the image quality.

And lastly, I would like to get your findings on the timing between the Willis photo and the moment that the south dog-leg comes into view in the Muchmore film. BDM seems to be facing the Willis camera and within a flash the Muchmore camera has panned Brehm and onto the staircase. Yet all three me are in position ... not running to get in position, but are already there and watching the President. If you did this and found it to be unlikely that a 58 year old Hudson was another 'Mind Freak' person who can get from point A to point B in less than a blink of an eye, and apply that to Hudson's testimony and the story he continually told until he died, then how justified would one's doubt be that Hudson was not in the Willis photo. That because of the angle from the Willis camera to the steps, plus the further distance Hudson is from the camera, thus slightly shrinking him in the photo, that with the exception of the things I noticed ... that the younger man was blocking out parts of Hudson.

Could someone show more detail in how they drew their conclusion because all these things are important.

Bill Miller

Edited by Bill Miller, 01 October 2010 - 08:00 AM.


#14 Martin Hinrichs

Martin Hinrichs

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 01 October 2010 - 10:48 AM

I also mentioned the bulge behind the man's leg just above the knee. The other views from the south pasture appeared to me to show the older Hudson to be wearing baggier pants than the man seen next to him. Hudson's rear seemed a bit lower and his pants roomier as well (forgive me, but I am going from memory here). So I suggested that the bulge was Hudson's saggy pants and that its contradictory to the tighter fitting pants of the younger man. Is there a more logical choice for the bulge that I speak of?? I think the lighter color hat and pants of Hudson blends into the background and the slight blur of the picture added to the illusion that Hudson is not there. However, the darker border I have mentioned didn't escape the image quality.

And lastly, I would like to get your findings on the timing between the Willis photo and the moment that the south dog-leg comes into view in the Muchmore film. BDM seems to be facing the Willis camera and within a flash the Muchmore camera has panned Brehm and onto the staircase. Yet all three me are in position ... not running to get in position, but are already there and watching the President. If you did this and found it to be unlikely that a 58 year old Hudson was another 'Mind Freak' person who can get from point A to point B in less than a blink of an eye, and apply that to Hudson's testimony and the story he continually told until he died, then how justified would one's doubt be that Hudson was not in the Willis photo. That because of the angle from the Willis camera to the steps, plus the further distance Hudson is from the camera, thus slightly shrinking him in the photo, that with the exception of the things I noticed ... that the younger man was blocking out parts of Hudson.

Could someone show more detail in how they drew their conclusion because all these things are important.

Bill Miller


Hi David.

I second that what Bill have told above.

Emmett Hudson was standing exactly on the same step as the younger man (as we can see in Nix, Muchmore&Moorman)
and this steps are perfectly orthogonal at an 90° angle to Willis camera.
It is more than likely that Hudson is simply hidden by the younger man.

Also, imagine a scenario: Hudson, at the inner edge of the retaining wall (without his hat) decided
to go down to the steps as the SS-100-X re-appeared behind the Stemmons freeway sign on Elm.
There is no need to hurry. He has to take care of the steps and he don't want to miss the president.
Hudson, almost 60 would need more than 10 seconds if you ask me.

best to you

Martin

Edited by Martin Hinrichs, 01 October 2010 - 06:09 PM.


#15 Robin Unger

Robin Unger

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,338 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:23 PM

I tend to agree with Martin and Bill.

Hudson is parcially hidden in Willis 5 because he is standing on the same step as the younger man, and from Willis's camera angle the two men line up one behind the other.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users