Is This Black Dog Man

[Jack White]

There were three buses in the motorcade.

Jack

[Kathleen Collins]

Hi Duncan.

What is the timeline between Willis 6 and Towner 3.

Looking at that photo, it's the first time I've seen this man at the retaining wall near Black Dog Man's position. I wonder who he is. Notice how bright the grassy knoll is compared to what the ones who overturned the govt did to the Moorman photo.

Kathy

[Bernice Moore]

In all the years of studying the Towner photo, I had never noticed

two important discoveries I just made. Bernice...please post image

here.

Jack

***********

Better late than never Jack......

Best B.........

[Alan Healy]

What is the timeline between Willis 6 and Towner 3.

Ignoring a slight mistake in my last post,

I think the sequence goes;

Bond4 (+20 z313)

Towner2

Willis6

Bond5(+30)

Towner3

Bond6(+40)

Willis7

Scaggs & Bond7(+50)

Okay, you can make of that what you will Robin it's not scientific, it's just based on Bond's own words that she took a photo approx' 20secs after the shooting & was consistant in taking photos there after until the end of the motorcade went by her(10-15secs between each one is a good estimate I feel).

Maybe we can make a new thread about this & try & get the timing down better for all these aftermath scenes?

With respect we can't use those press buses to judge the flow of time, the second one, seen in Willis7, Bond7 & that Scaggs photo, has stalled or stopped(the first one most definetly did too, because of the man seen exiting the car in front of it).

Go look at the guy nearest the camera in Willis7 & see how he catches up to the same bus by the time of Bond7/Scaggs(he's right by the bike cop in the latter).

We know there where photos taken from inside one of the buses, so it is very possible that at least one of these pressmen saw the "rush to the knoll" & told the driver to stop.

********

Btw.

In my last post I said Bond6 came 5secs before Towner3, that was wrong.

T3 then B6 sorry.

I think I was subconciously overly influenced by this,

http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/5395.jpg

It appears to show no one behind the wall at all & in the full photo you can see men running up the knoll but those guys are not connected. The men in Towner3 by the fence are most likely in the above linked blow-up too, it's just that the we can not make them out from the small print of B6 from which I got that blow-up.

Anyway here's hoping we all get better copies of the Bond slides to study with one day.

Alan

[Bill Miller]

Im not trying to be evasive Bill. I recall seeing buses in different films, Hughes for example..Now if you want to list all the films you know of with buses, feel free to do so and i'll have a look at them all tomorrow, although I still don't see the point.

Duncan

Not evasive??? We have been talking about the timing of the photo YOU used and there is a press bus in it whereas you remarked that you do not know whether it was standing still or moving. You implied that you had viewed the buses in the assassination films and now you seem to only be recalling some distant memory of seeing some buses. I am pretty sure that the bus in the post assassination Willis photo that you used is seen in motion, as well as the cars in front of it in one of the assassination films. I also believe that the same film can time stamp when that Willis photo was taken. I feel that these are things that should have been considered before claiming that you were satisfied that the possible figure you claim to see beyond the pyracantha bush was the BDM.

The point is the same as previously mentioned and that is if we find that the photo you used was taken around the time of Towner #3, then the figure you were talking about could not be the BDM. What I am doing here is trying to get you into the habit of checking these assassination films and photos against one another before claiming confirmation about two blurry figures being one in the same person.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

In all the years of studying the Towner photo, I had never noticed

two important discoveries I just made. Bernice...please post image

here.

Jack

***********

Better late than never Jack......

Best B.........

Jack,

Go look in Groden's book at a normal enlargement of the Towner photo. (From memory - see pages 54 through 56) If you'll do that, then you might see that there are no missing parts of the fence, but rather a man in a light colored jacket walking up the walkway towards the shelter. The two individuals near the tree should be policemen if you still believe Gordon Arnold's version as to what happened with him immediately following the shooting.

Bill

[Alan Healy]

In all the years of studying the Towner photo, I had never noticed

two important discoveries I just made. Bernice...please post image

here.

Jack

***********

Better late than never Jack......

Best B.........

Hi Bernice & Jack,

If you study the blow-up of Towner3 from Groden's "TKOAP" you should surely notice the "missing slats" are in fact a man in light clothing walking North(along the path most prob').

The two dark figures have their backs to the camera & one of which appears to be in the process of climbing over the fence.

Anyway, that's my interpretation but you cannot use that poor copy above for close study period.

Not while we have a better one that is so much clearer it can show a bottle on the wall.

http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/5446.jpg

(I don't have the full version to hand sorry, I wish I did)

Regards,

Alan

[Jack White]

In all the years of studying the Towner photo, I had never noticed

two important discoveries I just made. Bernice...please post image

here.

Jack

***********

Better late than never Jack......

Best B.........

Hi Bernice & Jack,

If you study the blow-up of Towner3 from Groden's "TKOAP" you should surely notice the "missing slats" are in fact a man in light clothing walking North(along the path most prob').

The two dark figures have their backs to the camera & one of which appears to be in the process of climbing over the fence.

Anyway, that's my interpretation but you cannot use that poor copy above for close study period.

Not while we have a better one that is so much clearer it can show a bottle on the wall.

http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/5446.jpg

(I don't have the full version to hand sorry, I wish I did)

Regards,

Alan

Of course you are correct about the man in the white shirt, Alan! In the scan that

was posted here, he is not as clear as in copies in my computer! The white shirt

was the same tone as the sky.

However, the elevated men are definitely behind the fence. In my copies I had never

noticed them, because they are much darker than the posted scan. You can clearly see

the top of the fence about waist high on the men. They are NOT climbing the

fence. Climbing a five foot picket fence with sharp tops is not recommended,

and why climb...the end of the fence is only about 15 feet north!

Thanks for your response.

Jack

[Kathleen Collins]

Hi Bernice & Jack,

If you study the blow-up of Towner3 from Groden's "TKOAP" you should surely notice the "missing slats" are in fact a man in light clothing walking North(along the path most prob').

The two dark figures have their backs to the camera & one of which appears to be in the process of climbing over the fence.

Anyway, that's my interpretation but you cannot use that poor copy above for close study period.

Not while we have a better one that is so much clearer it can show a bottle on the wall.

http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/5446.jpg

(I don't have the full version to hand sorry, I wish I did)

Regards,

Alan

He looks like Richard Nixon to me. (Kidding)

Kathy

[Bill Miller]

However, the elevated men are definitely behind the fence.

Jack

Jack,

If one lightens the photo - they will find that the two mens dark outlines block out the lighter tones of the fence, thus they are standing between the wall and the fence. (see below)

Bill

Edited July 25, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Not evasive??? We have been talking about the timing of the photo YOU used and there is a press bus in it whereas you remarked that you do not know whether it was standing still or moving.

No....WE...Are not talking about the bus...YOU are. I have repeatedly stated that I don't see the relevance of the buses to the subject of the opening topic. Now you've said a lot in this thread, but contributed nothing but questions. How about putting forward something with some substance to back your wild claim that the 2 figures don't match.

You implied that you had viewed the buses in the assassination films

So what?

I am pretty sure that the bus in the post assassination Willis photo that you used is seen in motion, as well as the cars in front of it in one of the assassination films. I also believe that the same film can time stamp when that Willis photo was taken.

Once again..SO WHAT? ...make your point and tell us all the relevance of your point in relation to the topic subject

I feel that these are things that should have been considered before claiming that you were satisfied that the possible figure you claim to see beyond the pyracantha bush was the BDM.

What you feel is of no importance to me. So far you have ranted on about buses and said little else about how these buses affect the 2 figures. Come on..give us your analysis.

The point is the same as previously mentioned and that is if we find that the photo you used was taken around the time of Towner #3, then the figure you were talking about could not be the BDM.

And explain exactly why that is? Do you know something about BDM'S movements after z313 that no one else knows. This is indeed Earth shattering news. Now it's your turn to announce this revelation to the world's press.

What I am doing here is trying to get you into the habit of checking these assassination films and photos against one another before claiming confirmation about two blurry figures being one in the same person.

If I need your help i'll ask for it, but don't hold your breath. Now..Put up some information to prove your point. This is the worst analysis and conclusion i've ever seen from you.

Duncan

Duncan,

The above response appears IMO to be little more than grandstanding. I know you have not liked my questioning how you were able to confirm that the possible figure in the post shooting Willis photo is the same man called the BDM. I then pointed out that there may be a clearer image of this area in yet another photo taken around the same moment. You realized the implication of Towner #3, so you then took the position that another photo would not be relevant. When I look at Towner #3 - I do not see the BDM, but rather the two cops Gordon Arnold spoke of.

And so you know ... I was asking the questions so to better understand how you reached your conclusion - you were the one who was supposed to be answering them for you were already convinced - I was not!

Bill

[Robin Unger]

Bond 7 & Skaggs appear to show similar time frames.

[Bill Miller]

When I look at Towner #3 - I do not see the BDM, but rather the two cops Gordon Arnold spoke of.

Bill

Unbelievable, simply unbelievable. You have been accusing me of using unsuitable images for analysis purposes, yet here we have you POSITIVELY identifying the 2 figures in a blurry image which you have arrowed as policemen, and then concluding that they are also the two policeman Gordon Arnold spoke of. You are practicing double standards in my opinion. Do you think potential assassins would still be hanging around at Towner3. Maybe they were giving the first people to reach the fence a guided tour of the area.

Duncan

Duncan,

You really need to go back and learn the case. Gordon Arnold never said that either of the cops that came up to him immediately after the shooting and as he laid on the ground, were assassins. All Gordon uttered after he saw the Badge Man image - he asked if this could be the man that approached him? The point of the Towner #3 picture is that the timing and location of two figures in dark clothing like cops would wear gives a lot of support to what Arnold had said many years before attention was ever drawn to this image. The relevancy in all of this is that the photo YOU chose to use which shows the pyracantha bush between the camera and the location you speak of is also seen in Towner #3. And yes, it is a far better image than the one you opted to use to make a BDM match. The shapes of these individuals is seen quite well against the background whereas the Willis post assassination photo you have used shows a fuzzy dark area with part of the pyracantha bush blocking it from view. This is exactly why I asked if you had done anything more than just making one of your usual erred visuals before proclaiming a confirmation on anything. Instead of trying to defend yet another claim where a thorough study was not conducted ... just try and learn something from this that may help you in the future.

Bill

Edited July 25, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

the relevancy in all of this is that the photo YOU chose to use which shows the pyracantha bush between the camera and the location you speak of is also seen in Towner #3.

Bill

That simply is not true. There is NO bush or branch in front of the BDM2 area in Towner 3. It's a figment of your imagination. I have made a small gif which shows the Pyrancantha in the clearest picture of the Pyracantha taken that day by Harry Cabluck within a minute of Z313 from a similar angle which proves my point. You are wrong in your analysis.

Duncan

Was your using a view of the bush from a different angle an accident or did you do that on purpose?

The light areas show sunlight shining off the tree bark. The foliage line starts at the branch. The foliage runs at about a 45 degree angle, which causes part of the dark area to be hidden in my view.

Bill

Edited July 25, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

You're no sunspot expert..... You forget to mention that there is no sunspot at your top arrow in the Cabluck photo. There is no sunspot there because there is no branch there

Duncan

I will address that last part of your response - first! I think the term here to use is 'reflective angle'. And I must say that if you cannot see the vast rotation of the pyracantha bush between those two images in your Gif., then God help you with everything else. I guess the Stemmons sign coming in and out of your Gif didn't catch you eye .... and if it did you must not have recognized the significance of it. Even the foliage shaping of the bush changes drastically because they are views from totally different angles.

That simply is not true. There is NO bush or branch in front of the BDM2 area in Towner 3. It's a figment of your imagination.

I think if you reread my statement that you will find that I referencing the pyracantha bush and its branches as not blocking this area Vs. the photo you chose where it does block out a good percentage of the area in question.

I'll give that question the answer it deserves, ie, no answer

Your response is nothing short of provoking one's 5th amendment right.

Bill

Edited July 25, 2007 by Bill Miller