Did Gloria Calvery almost catch up to Marion Baker?

[Clive Largey]

Truly's description of how he became to be near the steps of the TSBD after the shooting claimed he was bore back by people running away in terror and so that is how some people read the footage, naturally. His claim is echoed in other testimony, "bedlam", "people running this way and that" etc. So that is where it comes from Tommy.

[Thomas Graves]

No, I would like to know exactly how much time elapsed between the two stills. From what I can see in the first still, Lovelady is standing on the upper steps, quite relaxed, and, like most people around him, does not appear to realize anything has gone seriously wrong with the motorcade.

I want to know how many seconds he and Shelley have to go from this relaxed state to being 25 steps down the Elm St. extension after, of course, running out to the concrete island and conversing with Gloria Calvery, who will need a few seconds to run up the street first.

P.S.

Why guess? Why not work out the exact time?

Shelley and Lovelady could have fibbed a little in their affidavits and also gotten the sequence of events mixed up. The Couch / Darnell gif that Clive posted a few days ago shows "Shelley" and "Lovelady" apparently crossing over to "the park" (the extension of the 'island') after Running Woman has passed them.

If so, then maybe that's when they had their conference with Gloria Calvery. Over there on the "island."

Regarding the timing, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out given the fact that Couch panned down towards the triple overpass and "caught" several cars, motorcycles, and known people in the general area of Elm Street and the Grassy Knoll.

Let us know what you come up with, Robert.

--Tommy

PS What makes you think that Shelley spoke with Calvery on the concrete island and then walked partway down Elm Street Extension?

Maybe it was the other way around.

Or maybe they never spoke at all. Except at her wedding, of course.

edited and bumped for Prudhomme

Edited December 6, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

Posting vague images that might or might not be Shelley and Lovelady and discrediting inconvenient witness statements is a poor and questionable research method.

[Thomas Graves]

Posting vague images that might or might not be Shelley and Lovelady and discrediting inconvenient witness statements is a poor and questionable research method.

Ba Ba,

Well, it is true that one must be able to see.

--Tommy

PS "Poor and questionable"? How can something be both "poor" and "questionable"?

Almost everything in this case is "questionable."

LOL

Edited December 7, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

What is poor and questionable is how some members, when confronted with a difficult situation that doesn't mesh with their pet theory, simply dismiss witnesses as lying, confused, mis-remembering or a combination thereof.

[Thomas Graves]

What is poor and questionable is how some members, when confronted with a difficult situation that doesn't mesh with their pet theory, simply dismiss witnesses as lying, confused, mis-remembering or a combination thereof.

Ba Ba,

What you don't realize is that "poor" and "questionable" don't mean the same thing.

I'd much rather be "questionable" than "poor."

Wouldn't you?

In this case, however, I am neither.

FWIW, It seems that both your vocabulary and your eyes are ... rather weak.

--Tommy

Edited December 7, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

Well, I put you in the same category as the Badge Man group. If you look hard enough, you can probably see Lovelady and Shelley in a dozen different places in Dealey Plaza.

[Thomas Graves]

Well, I put you in the same category as the Badge Man group. If you look hard enough, you can probably see Lovelady and Shelley in a dozen different places in Dealey Plaza.

Dear Robert,

Let me know the next time you need my help in spotting Gloria Calvery or Roy Truly.

--Tommy

[Robert Prudhomme]

Have you positively identified Gloria Calvery, then?

[Thomas Graves]

Have you positively identified Gloria Calvery, then?

You seemed to agree with me at the time, Bob.

Have you changed your mind?

Shall I bump that particular post from the other thread to freshen your memory?

The point is, I pointed out someone to you who was standing "behind" another woman in Altgens 6, and who was therefore practically invisible. You had a very, very hard time "seeing" her until I very patiently explained how to detect part of her face and part of her hair in the photograph. Remember?

Have you gone back to thinking that Calvery might be the dark-complected woman standing way down Elm Street by the Stemmons (not Thornton) Freeway sign?

Or do you have another candidate for Calvery now?

I couldn't care less to tell you the truth.

--Tommy

Edited December 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Prudhomme]

I saw the woman, after you pointed her out, but that by no means identifies her as Gloria Calvery.

[Thomas Graves]

I saw the woman, after you pointed her out, but that by no means identifies her as Gloria Calvery.

Nice diversion, Bob.

But the only reason we're talking about Calvery now is because I mentioned (yesterday?, the day before?) that I seem to be able to find things in photos and films that you have a hard time seeing even after you're told where to look. I mentioned this possible "Gloria Calvery" (by the Thornton Freeway sign), whom I had very patiently pointed out to you, and I also mentioned the Roy Truly I found in the Weigman clip, as examples...

So, have you found the real Gloria Calvery yet? You know, the TSBD employee (deceased a long time ago) at whose wedding Bill Shelley was best man?

--Tommy

Edited December 8, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

I'm wondering how much time elapsed between this still

and this still

[sorry Bob; I had to delete them because I got an error message saying I was trying to post "too many images. -- Tommy ]

[deleted in the interest of "cleaning up" and consolidating this now-longish post]

Robert,

You said in an earlier post (#106 this thread), that Lovelady looks "relaxed" in the "first" (i.e., your "top") still, leading you to believe that, in so many words, "nothing has happened yet."

But I'd like to point out to you that there are three women on the sidewalk who suddenly have their hand to their mouth, that one of the two "khaki guys" has turned around and is looking at the TSBD (did he hear a shot or a gasp / scream / startled utterance come from that direction?), that Lovelady is now leaning way forward (just like he is in Altgens 6), to get a better look at what's "going down," down on Elm Street, and that Prayer Man has lowered both hands and raised his head a little.

I'm copying and pasting one of my recent posts on the "Prayer Person" thread to this post because it incorporates Chris Davidson's great two-frame gif, from the Weigman film, in which you can see all of the "startle reactions" I mentioned above, and also because I think I did a pretty darn good job of analyzing the opposite-but-simultaneous movements of Lovelady and Prayer Man at the time that the first shot was audible to them.

Sandy Larsen, on 09 Jun 2016 - 01:18 AM, said:

Duncan MacRae, on 08 Jun 2016 - 08:43 AM, said:

Sandy Larsen, on 08 Jun 2016 - 07:55 AM, said:

Duncan MacRae, on 07 Jun 2016 - 02:40 AM, said:

[...]

[...]

[...]

Looking at these two perfectly-aligned frames and with the help of the green lines and the photographic "enhancement" of Prayer Man, we can see that Lovelady is standing straight up and that Prayer Man is taking a picture with both hands (or drinking two-handedly from a shiny cup full of very hot coffee) in the first frame (the one without the cars), and that in the second frame a few seconds later (with the cars), Lovelady is leaning forward quite a bit, probably in response to having heard the shots and / or screams and wondering what the heck's going on with the President.of the United States down the street. Taking this into consideration helps to explain why Prayer Man lowered both of his hands (still clutching the camera or coffee cup) and raised his head at about the same time that Lovelady leaned forward -- because Prayer Man, too, had heard the shot or screams and wanted to get a better view of what was "going down," down on Elm Street.

PS Who "enhanced" these frames so that PM's / PW's camera lens / coffee cup glows / shines so much more here than in the original film? I assume it was Chris Davidson, who is to complimented for doing so,and for creating this excellent GIF.

--Tommy

PPS Lovelady's leaning forward in the second frame (and supporting himself by holding onto the center hand railing?) helps to explain why Lovelady (aka "Doorman") looks so strangely angled in Altgens 6. And also helps to establish the "first-shot" timing of the Weigman frame, in Chris' giff, above, in which Lovelady is leaning forward.

Edited by Thomas Graves, 29 August 2016 - 08:57 AM.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Guest]

A few corrections

1/ These images are NOT perfectly aligned, take another look

2/ Frame 1 is the one with the cars, it was taken from a further distance.

3/ Lovelady is not leaning forward, he is stepping down.

[Thomas Graves]

A few corrections

1/ These images are NOT perfectly aligned, take another look

2/ Frame 1 is the one with the cars, it was taken from a further distance.

3/ Lovelady is not leaning forward, he is stepping down.

Barto,

Who said they were perfectly aligned? (I did.)

Is it possible to align the two frames any better than Chris has done?

Are the people on the steps sufficiently well-aligned in the two frames for us to determine their movements, if any?

Why was Lovelady stepping down right then?

If Lovelady was stepping down, where did he go within the next few seconds? Over to his right to the side of the steps to get his lunch, or to lean over to talk with someone?

Do you agree that the "Doorman" in Altgens 6 was Lovelady? And that Altgens 6 was taken a second or two after JFK was hit in the throat?

Thanks,

-- Tommy

Edited September 10, 2016 by Thomas Graves