Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

quote:

Tape number three described how he stayed put on the steps:

“I continued to stay right on the steps where I was. I didn’t move from there, I didn’t talk with someone who was sitting there that, uh, was – was on the stairs

One possible candidate for Frazier.

This area of the doorway was not captured by Altgens camera

Wiegman frame

Cameraman.jpg

post-2389-0-14746900-1362882351_thumb.jpg

Couch Frames

In couch as Baker runs towards the TSBD entrance, the figure seen in Wiegman still appears to be standing in the same spot ?

PrayerMandarnellmarked.jpg

11094.jpg

Frazier in the DPD

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Mr. FRAZIER. Because Billy, like I say, is two or three steps down in front of me.

Mr. BALL. Do you recognize this fellow?

Mr. FRAZIER. That is Billy, that is Billy Lovelady.

Mr. BALL. Billy?

Mr. FRAZIER. Right

Mr. BALL. Let’s take a marker and make an arrow down that way. That mark is Billy Lovelady?

Mr. FRAZIER. Right.

In my opinion there was only one place that Frazier could have been standing NOT to have been captured by Altgens camera.

and that is standing back in the shadow area, against the WEST wall of the TSBD enttrance

Wiegman taken from almost directly in front of the TSBD entrance

appears to show a figure standing back in the shadow area, against the WEST wall of the TSBD enttrance

Image7.jpg

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest James H. Fetzer

Thanks to Pat Speer, post #38, on the "CE 369 Lovelady's Arrow" thread, for posting some interesting information.

From Billy Lovelady:

Mr. Lovelady said the F.B.I. had taken pictures of him from various angles and that he had been shown a three-by-four foot blowup of the doorway picture and asked if he was in it. 'I immediately pointed to myself in the doorway,' Mr. Lovelady said. He said he was about 15 to 20 pounds heavier than Oswald and about three inches shorter. Asked whether there was any resemblance to Oswald, he replied, 'I’m fatter in the face.'''It was me in the doorway,' he said. 'If anyone doesn’t believe it, they will just have to take my word.'

That being the case, he cannot have been Doorman,

who looks like Lee Oswald but unlike Billy Lovelady.

Billy was 3" shorter and weight 15-20 pounds more.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT DISPROOF OF THE IDEA

THAT BILLY WAS DOORMAN FROM BILLY HIMSELF.

And Billy also confirms that he was in the doorway!

GrodenAnnot-one-half14-320x240.jpg

From Bill Shelley:

At the time President Kennedy was shot, I was standing at this same place. Billy N. Lovelady who works under my supervision at the Texas School Book Depository was seated on the entrance steps just in front of me. I recall that Wesley Frazier, Mrs. Sarah Stanton, and Mrs, Carolyn Arnold, all employees of the Texas School Book Depository, were also standing in this entrance way near me at the time Pres. Kennedy was shot.

But if Billy had been seated, Billy could not have

been Doorman. And Shelley says he was seated.

Shelley, I am quite sure, was involved in setting

up Oswald, but this passage is a problem for the

brain trust here who wants to use him to bolster

their absurd theory of Billy having been Doorman.

More from Bill Shelley:

Sounded like a miniature cannon or baby giant firecracker, wasn’t real loud…Sounded like it came from the west…officers started running down to the lumber yards and Billy and I walked down that way. We walked on down to the first railroad track there on the dead-end street and stood there and watched them searching cars down there in the parking lots for a little while and then we came in through our parking lot at the west end…in the side door into the shipping room…

Since Bill and Billy headed down toward the

tracks and past the grassy knoll, it cannot be

the case that, when Lee told Fritz he was "out

with Bill Shelley in front", he meant AFTER THE

SHOOTING, because Shelly was no longer there.

Lee had been there with Billy Lovelady standing

beside him. Then Billy Lovelady and Bill Shelley

immediately took off toward the railroad tracks.

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest James H. Fetzer

Done!

John,

Thank you. Larry had Pellicano's name as having discovered the contradictions, but I thought it was more appropriate to assign that to O'Toole, since he was the person who had applied the PSE to the tape recording. I will ask Larry again if I should switch it back. I am grateful for your response, a refreshing change from other replies I have been encountering here recently. Nice!

Jim

Dr. Fetzer, well done. Just to be clear, I believe it was Pellicano that interviewed Frazier, not O'Toole. Pellicano recorded the call on O'Toole's behalf. Then, O'Toole ran the stress evaluator. Couple of things here: the pse is still in use by law enforcement agencies. Modern updated versions. I don't think it's allowed in court, but a detective told me that it's VERY useful during investigations. And: Pellicano's in prison in California. I definitely think he would be worth talking to about this subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:

From Bill Shelley:

At the time President Kennedy was shot, I was standing at this same place. Billy N. Lovelady who works under my supervision at the Texas School Book Depository was seated on the entrance steps just in front of me. I recall that Wesley Frazier, Mrs. Sarah Stanton, and Mrs, Carolyn Arnold, all employees of the Texas School Book Depository, were also standing in this entrance way near me at the time Pres. Kennedy was shot.

But if Billy had been seated, Billy could not have

been Doorman. And Shelley says he was seated.

Shelley, I am quite sure, was involved in setting

up Oswald, but this passage is a problem for the

brain trust here who wants to use him to bolster

their absurd theory of Billy having been Doorman.

By posting Shelley's testimony

you have just stated that you believe all of his testimony, and that the two ladies, Mrs. Sarah Stanton, and Mrs, Carolyn Arnold were on the steps.

Now you need to make room for them on the steps.

the " Black Hole " person was not a man

But was in fact a heavy-set lady ( Sarah Stanton ) wearing a short sleeved, summer blouse, with her hands above her head shielding her eyes from the sun.

Mr. BALL - Anybody else you can remember?

Mr. FRAZIER - There was a lady there, a heavy-set lady who worked upstairs there whose name is Sarah something, I don't know her last name.

16832.jpg

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to post
Share on other sites

I must ask:

either Greg was putting us on ("bullxxxxting") about being unable to discern the missing shoulder and so forth

in the past or he is putting us on ("bullxxxxting") about being able to discern these obscure features now. So

which is it, Burnham: Both of those positions cannot be true: were you bullxxxxting us then or are you now?

You have referred to an area of Altgens 6 repeatedly as, Obfuscated Man. I have refuted that claim with a much less complex

explanation for that portion of the photo. Using inference to the best explanationI concluded that it is a man whose elbow is

pointed directly at the camera, and the attendant glare is from over exposure of the white sleeve on his forearm. I have shown

that he is shielding his eyes from the sun with his right hand. It is a simple explanation that is adequate to the evidence unless

one begs the question thus requiring a more complex, but generally less accurate explanation.

Emphasis Added - Lindsay

I find Greg's statements consistent with one another

If my interpretation is correct, Greg has used inference to reach a simple explanation adequate to the evidence. Does he claim his conclusion is indisputable fact or just a reasonable conclusion based what is visable in the photo?, Greg then confirms that a more detailed explanation is likely to be less accurate. That would be because of the poor image quality at the required level of zoom and over exposure due to sunlight.

My translation, "my best explanation given what I can see and other known evidence is a man with ....... This is far more likely than your more detailed explanation, since the image doesn't support the more detailed examination that your more complex explanation requires"

More detailed explanation = greater reliance on guesswork = less accuracy

This is not so different to my own position on this,

I want Altgens6 be a photo that proves Oswald could not have been the shooter but I suspect that no amount of research or explanation will do that, not because it isn’t Oswald in the picture but because the picture quality is so poor to begin with. I’ve found for myself that if you look hard enough and long enough, it's possible to come up with theories that might even have some merit, but I don’t think we will see anything game-changing by looking in the door-way.

Edited by Lindsay Anderson
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest James H. Fetzer

Do you really not understand "admissions contrary to interest"?

These witnesses are contradicting your position. Of course, it

is my conviction that Bill Shelley is lying generally and doing his

best to implicate Oswald or--at the least--to avoid exonerating

him. But if you take him to be telling the truth, then Lovelady

CANNOT HAVE BEEN DOORMAN because he was seated,

not standing. And if Shelley is lying about this, it is entirely

reasonable to infer that he is lying about not having seen

Oswald. I would not have thought this was too tough for

you to have figured out. If you believe Shelley, then you

should believe him when he says that Lovelady was not

standing but was seated, which means that he CANNOT

HAVE BEEN DOORMAN, if Shelley is speaking the truth.

And if he's not, there is no good reason to believe him on

other issues--except when they contradict what we have

been sold by our government. You should be able grasp

this. It should not be too difficult for you to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that Shelley may have meant that he was seated on the steps ( as in pointing out Lovelady's general position ) as apposed to meaning that he was sitting down on the steps.

Would Shelley really take on the FBI and the Warren Commission who identified the Doorman in Altgen's 6 as being Lovelady ?

by saying they were wrong, because Lovelady wasn't standing at the time Altgen's 6 was taken ( but was sitting down on the steps )

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that Shelley may have meant that he was seated on the steps ( as in pointing out Lovelady's general position ) as apposed to meaning that he was sitting down on the steps.

Would Shelley really take on the FBI and the Warren Commission who identified the Doorman in Altgen's 6 as being Lovelady ?

by saying they were wrong, because Lovelady wasn't standing at the time Altgen's 6 was taken ( but was sitting down on the steps )

Robin,

Lovelady told Mr. Ball of the Warren Commission that he ate his lunch while sitting on the steps near Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton.

Ball then asked him if he'd "stayed" on the steps, and Lovelady said "yes." Ball asked him, "Were you there when the President's motorcade went by?" and Lovelady said "right."

Ball didn't ask Lovelady if he was still sitting down when the president's limo passed by and Lovelady didn't volunteer the information, but it's reasonable to assume that he continued sitting down, eating his lunch, only until the motorcade turned the corner at Main and Houston, at which time he stood up out of respect to JFK and Jackie and to see over the heads of the people standing in front of him.

If Lovelady sat on the steps for several minutes near Shelley, that could explain why Shelley recalled him sitting on the steps, before the motorcade passed by.

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...