Jump to content
The Education Forum

Sandy Larsen's Draft Editor


Recommended Posts

I'm going to do a writeup based on your recent post. Maybe you can help me by finding photos... you seem to remember better than I where they are. It won't be that much work and I'll give you credit as coauthor.

Suggestions are welcome. Just reply to this thread any time.

The draft of my writeup will be in the post following this one.

 

Proof that Bart Kamp's Gloria Calvery is NOT Gloria Calvery


This proof is short very easy to follow.

Forget about Gloria Calvery for now. Let's talk about the three girls in the photos below.

According to their FBI affidavits, these three women stood together along Elm Street to watch the motorcade go by.

These are known/accepted photos of them when they were in high school. Except for the darker skinned one, Stella Mae Jacob,, for which we have only the Dealey Plaza photos. Note that she is a native American.

 

Stella-Mae-Jacob.jpg     Jean-Holt-1962.jpg     Sharon-Simmons-1960-HS-Pic_zpsa0kxtsoh.jpg

Left:      Stella Mae Jacob
Middle:  Gloria Jean Holt
Right:     Sharron Simmons


FBI Affidavits

We know these three woman were standing together because they said so in their FBI affidavits:

Stella Mae Jacob:  "I am an Indian female.... I was accompanied by Sharon Simmons, now Mrs. Nelson, and [Gloria] Jeanne Holt, both employees of the Texas School Book Depository."

Gloria Jean Holt:  "I was accompanied by Sharon Simmons, now Mrs. Nelson, and Stella Jacob, both-employees of the Texas School Book Depository."

Sharon Simmons:  "I was with [Gloria] Jeannie Holt, 2521 Pleasant Drive, Dallas, and Stella Jacob, 508 South Marsalis, Dallas, at the time the President was shot."

(Source, pages 43 , 48, 69)

Note that Stella Mae Jacob described herself as being an Indian. This explains her darker skin. Note also that all three worked at the TSBD.


And Here They Are!

Anybody can look through Dealey Plaza photos and find these women. Since they were standing together, all we need to do is find one and the other two should be there with her.

And here they are! The top frame was taken when they were waiting for the motorcade to arrive, and the bottom frame shortly after the shooting. (They had moved back onto the grass.) Clearly, the three women on the right comprise our group of three  women.
 

Image9-vert.jpg


The woman labeled as "Unidentified dark skinned woman" has since been identified as the the native American of the group, Stella Mae Jacob. Everybody agrees that is her in the two frames. And from that we know, that the other two must be Gloria Jean Holt and Sharron Simmons.

But for fun let's compare them to their high school photos:

Stella-Mae-Jacob.jpg                                   Jean-Holt-1962.jpg          Sharon-Simmons-1960-HS-Pic_zpsa0kxtsoh.jpg
(Dealey Plaza Photo)

 

Not surprisingly the high school photos match. Everything jibes.


But Bart Kamp Claims Differently

Normally I don't care much what individual researchers believe. But in this case I do. Why? Because Bart is the undisputed champ and expert when it comes to the dismantling of the Second Floor Encounter. He has a lot of influence over others and can steer them in either the right or wrong direction.

I'm afraid that in this case he is wrong. And I'm afraid that, because of that, some of his his work is flawed.

That is why I am stepping up and trying to nip this in the bud.

Here is how Bart is wrong. We know from the FBI affidavits and the photos that the light-haired woman above is Gloria Jean Holt. From the color frame above it looks like she's a strawberry blonde. Well Bart claims that this strawberry blonde isn't Gloria Jean Holt at all. He says she is Gloria Calvery... this woman:
 

149407954_1437170856.jpg

 

But how can Bart be right? We already know who the three women are. The answer is that he NOT right. He is basing his opinion of the 55- year old memories of Karen Westbrook. She was shown the Zapruder frame that shows only the backs of the heads and somehow decided she was one of the women

 

 

 

 

normal_DARNELL80c.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to post
Share on other sites

[reserved]

 

14 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Paul,

 

If you go up a line or two, Ambulance 603 tells Dispatch that he is Code 5 out to Baylor.

That would be the Baylor University Medical Center.

According to the Dallas Police Radio Codes, Code 5 is "Enroute" and Code 6 is "Arrived".

http://www.bearcat1.com/radiotx.htm

Two pages later, on page 410 of that pdf, Ambulance 603 informs Dispatch that he has arrived at Baylor, and Dispatch acknowledges this at 1:23 PM.

 

If you go through those lines on page 408 that you pointed out, Ambulance 602 announces that he is Code 5, "Enroute", then he announces he is Code 6, has "Arrived", then he announces again that he is Code 5, "Enroute".

I'm not sure what that is all about, but you can see on the next page (page 409), that Ambulance 602 twice more calls in and tries to raise Dispatch.

On the next page (page 411), you can see Dispatch trying to respond to 602.

On the next page, (page 412), Dispatch asks Gerald Hill (#550/2) if he know what ambulance took Tippit, that "we had three going". (I'm not sure which three ambulances Dispatch is talking about here).

Hill responds that he was at 12th and Beckley, and saw an ambulance from Dudley Hughes pass in front of him and thought he might have Tippit. This is at 1:25. 

Dispatch again tries to raise 602 on page 412.

I'm pretty sure 602 was from the Dudley Hughes Funeral Home. If my memory serves me right, at that time, the ambulance services in Dallas were stationed out of the funeral homes.

 

I'm pretty sure that the 1:10 time stamp in the transcripts is simply a typo on the part of the person doing the typing, because it comes after a 1:11 time stamp, a 1:15 time stamp, and a 1:16 time stamp on page 407.

 

Steve Thomas

 

Steve,

I'm using this radio transcript:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/tapes2.htm

To me it appears that the following happened with the ambulances, in chronological order:

  1. Ambulance 603 arrived at the Tippit site. They reportedly had radio trouble... presumably that is the reason they didn't advise the dispatcher of their arrival there.  Anyway, because of that we don't know the precise arrival time.
  2. At 1:18 ambulance 603 transmitted "Code 5, Baylor. " Meaning they were en route to Baylor. I think with Tippit's body.
  3. At 1:19 ambulance 602 transmitted "What was that address on Jefferson?" 602 was clearly not headed to or from the Tippit site.
  4. At 1:23 ambulance 603 transmitted "Out, Baylor." I believe this means that they were at out of their vehicle at Baylor. (There are a lot of "out" codes, like "Out of Service," signifying they are not available for calls.) The transcript notes their siren sound, so they must have just arrived. (I don't know why they didn't give the Code 6 Arrival signal.)

So according to the radio log, Tippit's body arrived at the hospital at 1:23. And yet time of death was recorded as 1:15 on the death certificate. How does one explain that? The doctors couldn't know he died 8 minutes before they saw him.

As with the other discrepancies, this one disappears if you subtract 8 minutes from the police radio timestamps. Tippit's ambulance actually arrived at 1:23 - 0:08 = 1:15. The doctors pronounced him DOA at that time.

 

(Yes, I earlier did say the WC/FBI added 7 minutes to each timestamp, not the 8 I just used here. 7 minutes was my best estimate at the time I studied the Tippit timeline versus the police radio timestamps. But keep in mind there can be only a one-second difference between 7 and 8 minutes depending upon which part of the minutes you're looking at.  Also, keep in mind that clocks are not all synchronized with perfect timing.)

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

[reserved]

The Nature of

There is a great deal of evidence regarding Lee Harvey Oswald that is self-contradictory. For example, one piece of evidence shows that Oswald attended two different schools simultaneously. In each of these pieces of evidence the contradiction disappears if one assumes there were two Oswalds. Let's call this evidence The Evidence.

We have two theories that attempt to resolve the contradictions in The Evidence, the One Oswald Theory, and the Two Oswald Theory. We know the latter as the H&L Theory. The two boys in the H&L theory have been assigned the names HARVEY and LEE.

As mentioned above, the H&L Theory resolves all the contradictions in the Evidence. (In contrast, the One Oswald Theory must resolve each and every one of the contradictions in the Evidence. But that is outside the scope of this post.)

Critics of the H&L Theory say that this theory cannot be correct because a medical record shows that LEE had mastoidectomy surgery as a child, whereas the Oswald exhumation report shows that the other boy, HARVEY, has a mastoidectomy bone scar. But the critics are wrong. What this evidence show is that BOTH boys had the surgery.

Now, one of the critics has complained and said that we are engaging in pure speculation because we don't have the medical report for HARVEY indicating the he, like LEE, had this surgery. But this critic is wrong. We are not speculating at all... our evidence for HARVEY's mastoidectomy is the exhumation report which notes the existence of the bone scar. The problem this critic is having is caused by his constantly viewing the evidence from the viewpoint of the One Oswald Theory.That would be fine if we were discussing the One Oswald theory, but we are not. We are discussing the Two Oswald Theory and we need to view all evidence from within that framework.

 

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
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...