Can somebody explain what the James Tague curbstone stuff means?

[Micah Mileto]

Here is my understanding:

1. The James Tague curb fragment is photographed, a thin smear of lead and some millimeter-portion of cement missing.

 

2. James Tague goes to photograph the curb to show his family, only to find the lead smear gone.

 

3. The FBI re-examines the curb and no lead smear is found. Rainfall and street-sweeping vehicles are to blame for the lack of any mark in the same location.

"It should be noted that no nick or break in the concrete was observed, in the area checked, nor was there any mark similar to the one in the photographs taken by Underwood and Dillard observed in the area checked either by the Special Agents, by Mr. Underwood or Mr. Dillard. It should be noted that, since this mark was observed on November 23, 1963, there have been numerous rains, which could have possibly washed away any such mark and also that the area is cleaned by a street cleaning machine about once a week, which would also wash away any such mark"
 

http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pdf/WH21_Shaneyfelt_Ex_26.pdf

4. After James Tagues testimony, the FBI removes the portion of the curb for further examination. They somehow inexplicably find that there is a mark with some amount of lead, with no copper.

http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pdf/WH21_Shaneyfelt_Ex_27.pdf

5. The curbstone is given to the National Archives, and in 1983 the mark is re-examined and is found to have probably been filled in with cement paste.

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/C Disk/Curbstone/Item 22.pdf

James Tague also re-examined the curb for himself and decided that there was a difference. Some basic difference can be seen in the before and after photos.

What happened exactly? Is this physical proof of a FBI coverup or something else?

 

 

[David Josephs]

FBI said 3 shots = 3 hits and maintained this well into March 1964...   But then in March it changes to 2 shots and 1 miss.... well before TAGUE is brought up....  So while the TAGUE curb incident is finally acknowledged, the fact that there was no evidence available which shows a shot down by Altgens as he claims.... and these men where making changes by the end of March seems to me that TAGUE is just another negation of real evidence that more shots were fired....

Then the maps are changed, the limo path is changed and a whole host of other nefarious deeds occur to shoe horn the event into 2 shots that hit... from the probable 5-8 shots fired....

It must have been something to watch these men contort all those shots and injuries and dents and marks... into just 2 shots...

Hope this gets you started...  DJ

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2018 by David Josephs

[Paz Marverde]

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

FBI said 3 shots = 3 hits and maintained this well into March 1964...   But then in March it changes to 2 shots and 1 miss.... well before TAGUE is brought up....  So while the TAGUE curb incident is finally acknowledged, the fact that there was no evidence available which shows a shot down by Altgens as he claims.... and these men where making changes by the end of March seems to me that TAGUE is just another negation of real evidence that more shots were fired....

Then the maps are changed, the limo path is changed and a whole host of other nefarious deeds occur to shoe horn the event into 2 shots that hit... from the probable 5-8 shots fired....

It must have been something to watch these men contort all those shots and injuries and dents and marks... into just 2 shots...

Ditto

[Micah Mileto]

But why did the FBI reportedly find traces of lead on the mark after they said it had mysteriously disappeared?

 

Why does Jose Fernandez's findings mean? If the mark was paved over with cement paste, when was it done? Before or after the lead was reportedly found?

[Robert Harper]

 

Posted 17 hours ago 

 

Micah asks a question, after a considerable amount of homework and David answers it, also with a considerable amount of homework, and it's all done within an hour?

If anyone new to the Forum wonders about the seriousness and dedication of some researchers here, they oughta think about that hour.

 

 

[Paz Marverde]

8 minutes ago, Robert Harper said:

If anyone new to the Forum wonders about the seriousness and dedication of some researchers here, they oughta think about that hour.

Agree

[Pat Speer]

Here's my recollection.

The city filled in the impact location, almost certainly without any knowledge of its significance.

Tague was ignored by the Warren Commission until after its lawyers had written their conclusions. He then contacted a journalist, and got his story in the local press.

This led to an FBI investigation and the realization there was lead on the curb, but not copper.

This didn't actually alter the WC's conclusions.

The timing of the shots in the Z-film had led them to adopt the singe-bullet theory. This left them with a missed shot. They simply said "well this missed shot hit the curb and the curb hit Tague." They said as well that the first shot could have been the one that missed. This ignored, of course, that no copper was found on the curb, and that Tague felt certain the shot that hit the curb was not the first shot.

Their treatment of Tague led him to research the case, and befriend Harold Weisberg, and in time became one of the commission's strongest critics.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Pat Speer

[Rick McTague]

Thought I'd drop in a recent (February 2018) picture of DP with the spot where Tague was standing visible - the rectangular concrete pad at the lower left on the median between Commerce (far south street) and Main (center street) in the triad of roads that make up DP.  I think it provides context and an idea of the distances and angles involved.

Hope this helps!

Rick

[David Josephs]

"The timing of the shots in the Z-film had led them to adopt the singe-bullet theory."

Not exactly as I see it, Pat...

https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsFBIZ313.pdf  

In this FBI model and WCD298 the distances given betrays so very much....

In February when the FBI did yet another recreation and survey plat...  it was 3 shots = 3 hits....

In March we get the Eisenberg drawing - but based on what?     It was, in my view, to remove the 3rd shot for which there was very little evidence yet was a conclusion from the earliest survey (Time/Life Nov 26).... and then reinforced by the next 2 surveys....  I think the Eisenberg drawing coupled with the later REDLICH MEMO (bottom of this post) proves they were aware of these problems much earlier than TAGUE....

With the confirmation of the earlier surveys in Feb... these men, including GAUTHIER who headed the WCD298 model team and reverses all that work in May 1964, are now left in sort of a bind best summed up by REDLICH to RANKIN in April 1964 AFTER the Eisenberg diagram:

I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will present a completely misleading picture.

So we see the beginnings for the need to do yet one more re-enactment...  the misleading picture REDLICH speaks of is the 3 shot scenario from CE585 and the fact that GAUTHIER submits the original plat legend in a sealed container...  in what remains one of the most egregious acts of evidence tampering we get this little exchange:  courtesy of the next senator from PA... Arlen "hypothetical" Specter:

One MUST remember that GAUTHIER is talking about a survey done on Dec 2,3,4 1963....  no one ever explains how a survey done in May 1964 could be the basis for a survey plat used to create a model delivered in January 1964....  GAUTHIER testifies on June 4, 1964...  As shown in a prev post, the article which leads to TAGUE is published JUNE 5.  WALTHERS and TAGUE both testify on July 23.

Mr. WALTHERS. Yes; and I ran right then back up along in here and that would be right at the corner of Elm and Houston, where I ran into one of our deputies, Allan Sweatt, and told him. everybody still at this time was just--I don't know what you would call it--just running around in circles you might say, and I told him, I said, "A bullet struck that curb. It's fresh---you can see a fresh ricochet where it had struck," and I said, "From the looks of it, it's probably going to be in this School Book Building," and immediately then everybody started surrounding the School Book Building and then I got off and come up the street here that runs in front of the School Book Depository Building and started gathering up a bunch of witnesses and started taking them over and put them in our office so we could get some statements before they got all jumbled up together with their stories. 

Mr. GAUTHIER. Our data to build this were compiled on December 2, 3, and 4. It took about 5 weeks to prepare this exhibit in Washington

Mr. GAUTHIER The models were delivered to the Commission's building and installed in the exhibits room on the first floor, on January 20, 1964. 
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Chief Justice, I now move for the admission into evidence of the photographs 878, 879, 880, and 881. 
The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. (The documents heretofore marked for identification as Commission Exhibits Nos. 878, 879, 880, and 881, were received in evidence.) 
Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the onsite tests made in Dallas? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. I did. 
Mr. SPECTER. Was a survey made of the scene used to record some of the results of that onsite testing? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes. 
Mr. SPECTER. And by whom was the survey made? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. The survey was made on May 24, 1964, by Robert H. West, county surveyor, a licensed State land surveyor, located at 160 County Courthouse, Dallas, Tex. 
Mr. SPECTER. Have you brought the tracing of that survey with you today? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. I have; yes. 
Mr. SPECTER. And have you brought a cardboard reproduction of that? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. A copy made from the tracing; yes. 
Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce the cardboard copy made from the tracing for the inspection of the Commission at this time, please? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes. 
Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce the tracing at this time, please? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes; the tracing is wrapped, and sealed in this container. 
Mr. SPECTER. Without breaking the seal, I will ask you if the cardboard which has been set up here--may the record show it is a large cardboard. I will ask you for the dimensions in just a minute. Does the printing on the cardboard represent an exact duplication of the tracing which you have in your hand? 
Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes
Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, we will mark the tracing Commission Exhibit No. 882, and not take it out, since the cardboard represents it, and place Commission Exhibit No. 883 on the cardboard drawing itself, and I would like to move for the admission into evidence of both Exhibits Nos. 882 and 883. 
The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted. 

Tague had yet to come into the picture...  why has EISENBERG simply dropped the shot the FBI & SS place "4 feet from 5+00" or where the third model car sits at the bottom left...   The SBT comes into being simply due to the fact that only 3 shots were allowed... despite there being MANY more.  As I address in my paper, there is simply no visual evidence in the record which supports them placing the "final" shot down by the foot of the stairs...  we only have verbal clues

Mr. LIEBELER - .....Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President's car when he was hit in the head.
Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I was about 15 feet from it.
Mr. LIEBELER - But it was almost directly in front of you as it went down the street; isn't that right?
Mr. ALTGENS - Yes.

Altgens was standing just south and west of the yellow curb beneath "5+00"  Z313 was the general vicinity of shot #2 (actually the vicinity of a number of shots, a flurry) 

If you look closely to his drawing (and speak with Chris D) the drawing is all about the Aiming Lead for the shot and the height of JFK

I know this is a bit hard to follow...  Chris simply ties in all the different mentions of distances and angles...  this goes back to the understanding of the LEVERS used to adjust the data...  the different JFK heights, the location of the muzzle in the window, the different path Shaneyfelt creates... etc...   You'd need to read thru MATH RULES to understand the context...  there is a reason the film "breaks" at z207....

 6.7" = .56'     6.1" = .51'      the note designating JFK's height shows 5' despite the fact CE884 uses 3.24 feet as JFK's head above the street... which gives you some idea how and why Shaneyfelt did what he did to that Exhibit.     Furthermore, Eisenberg uses a very high-velocity rifle assuming 2070 feet per second

At 175 feet that takes .085 seconds to get there...  except the bullet travels down the hypotenuse not along the street measurement...

At the ave of 11.2mph  the car moves at 16.2 feet per second...  times the .085 seconds it would take for the bullet to go the wrong distance, we get 1.37 feet.
(187.75' is the actual distance the bullet would need to travel... 187.75/2070 = .0907 seconds @ 16.2 feet per second = 1.47 feet...    so really not that much different...)

Yet what would a lead of 6.7 vertical inches do to where the shot WOULD hit?

======================




April 27, 1964

 

MEMORANDUM

 

TO:     J. Lee Rankin

 

FROM:   Norman Redlich

 

 

        The purpose of this memorandum is to explain the reasons why

certain members of the staff feel that it is important to take certain

on-site photographs in connection with the location of the approximate

points at which the three bullets struck the occupants of the

Presidential limousine.

 

        Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by

the first bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President

by the third and fatal bullet.  The report will also conclude that the

bullets were fired by one person located in the sixth floor southeast

corner window of the TSBD building.

 

        As our investigation now stands, however, we have not shown

that these events could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested

above.  All we have is a reasonable hypothesis which appears to be

supported by the medical testimony but which has not been checked out

against the physical facts at the scene of the assassination.

 

        Our examination of the Zapruder films shows that the fatal

third shot struck the President at a point which we can locate with

reasonable accuracy on the ground.  We can do this because we know the

exact frame (no. 313) in the film at which the third shot hit the

President and we know the location of the photographer.  By lining up

fixed objects in the movie frame where this shot occurs we feel that

we have determined the approximate location of this shot.  This can be

verified by a photo of the same spot from the point where Zapruder was

standing.

 

        We have the testimony of Governor and Mrs. Connally that the

Governor was hit with the second bullet at a point which we probably

cannot fix with precision.  We feel we have established, however, with

the help of medical testimony, that the shot which hit the Governor

did not come after frame 240 on the Zapruder film.  The governor feels

that it came around 230, which is certainly consistent with our

observations of the film and with the doctor's testimony.  Since the

President was shot at frame 313, this would leave a time of at least 4

seconds between the two shots, certainly ample for even an

inexperienced marksman.

 

        Prior to our last viewing of the films with Governor Connally

we had assumed that the President was hit while he was concealed

behind the sign which occurs between frames 215-225.  We have expert

testimony to the effect that a skilled marksman would require a

minimum 2 seconds between shots with this rifle.  Since the camera

operates at 18 1/3 frames per second, there would have to be a minimum

of 40 frames between shots.  It is apparent, therefore, that if

Governor Connally was even as late as frame 240, the President would

have to have been hit no later than frame 190 and probably even

earlier.

 

        We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine

whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to

frame 190.  We could locate the position on the ground which

corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish

by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the

President prior to this point.  Our intention is not to establish the

point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the

hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole

assassin.

 

        I had always assumed that our final report would be

accompanied by a surveyor's diagram which would indicate the

approximate location of the three shots.  We certainly cannot prepare

such a diagram without establishing that we are describing an

occurrence which is physically possible.  Our failure to do this will,

in my opinion, place this Report in jeopardy since it is a certainty

that others will examine the Zapruder films and raise the same

questions which have been raised by our examination of the films.  If

we do not attempt to answer these observable facts, others may answer

them with facts which challenge our most basic assumptions, or with

fanciful theories based on our unwillingness to test our assumptions

by the investigatory methods available to us.

 

        I should add that the facts which we now have in our

possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and

Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will

present a completely misleading picture.

 

        It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the

FBI and Secret Service with our assistance instead of being done as a

staff project.  The important thing is that the project be undertaken

expeditiously.

 

 

 

[Paz Marverde]

44 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by

the first bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President

by the third and fatal bullet.

Uh-oh

[David Josephs]

I happen to think this memo is much more important to the conspiracy than Katzenbach...

As our investigation now stands, however, we have not shown that these events could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested above.  All we have is a reasonable hypothesis which appears to be supported by the medical testimony but which has not been checked out against the physical facts at the scene of the assassination.

Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin.

[Pat Speer]

I got into all this years ago with Purvis, David. He kept insisting that the evil WC moved the shots because they didn't realize Connally was hit after the head shot, or some such thing. He didn't realize-- because he developed his theory decades before and had never got around to reading the docs on the MFFwebsite--that the FBI and SS (who Purvis desperately wanted to believed were truth-tellers) had concluded the head shot was the third shot, and that Kennedy was struck in the head 10 yards or so further down the road than is easily understood by watching the films. Apparently, it never occurred to him that the locations of the shots were being developed by a different crew than was developing the timing of the Z-film, and that, as a result, those determining the locations of the shots were under intense pressure to lie about the locations, that is, to make sure they didn't align with a segment of film too short to support the single-assassin conclusion. So...voila...the FBI and SS both pretended the head shot was down by the steps.

This all went down in December. The reports were given to the WC in January.

When the WC viewed the films for themselves, however, they realized they'd been fed a bunch of baloney. This, then, led to the May 24 re-enactment.

[David Josephs]

I find it to be a bit more nefarious than that Pat...

Shaneyfelt used the frames prepared by Time/Life of the altered film...  from 171 thru 334 I think...

this is in the final WCR Exhibits as is CE585 showing 3 shots... the last one at 4+96.  As for JC hit after the headshot...  I don't agree.

[Michaleen Kilroy]

Does a municipality really move that fast to repair a chip in a curbstone? Really? I always assumed J Edgar’s crew patched it to maintain the 3 shots 3 hits fiction.

Add this to the list of endless mysteries of what the govt did with the evidence including the Harper fragment, damaged photos, Oswald’s radio, etc.

[Pat Speer]

Hey, Mike. I can't recall if it was ever tracked down as to who cemented over the curb cut, and why.

But what I do know is this.... The FBI didn't hide Tague from the WC. They interviewed him and passed their interview on to the WC. It was the WC staff then who failed to interview him, and tried to pretend he didn't exist. And they would have done just that, if not for an inconvenient article in the paper. 

 

From patspeer.com, chapter 3b:

On 6-29-64, the Warren Commission meets and deliberates over the submitted chapters of its report.  (Intriguingly, few were aware of this meeting until 1997, when General Counsel J. Lee Rankin’s private papers were donated to the National Archives following the JFK Records Act. Rankin’s notes reveal that this meeting consists of his running down a list of questions, and the Commissioners’ deciding whether the proposed chapters adequately answer these questions. Over and over, on the questions of the number of the shots, the order in which the wounds were inflicted, etc, they answer “Treatment in proposed draft satisfactory.” This suggests that by May 29, when Rankin first forwarded Specter's chapter on to the commissioners, the commission's conclusions were written in stone, and that the subsequent testimony of crucial witnesses such as Jacqueline Kennedy, James Altgens, Phil Willis, Abraham Zapruder, Emmett Hudson, and James Tague was taken entirely for political reasons, i.e., to convince the American people that the words of all the prominent witnesses had been considered by the commission before they'd come to a conclusion, when in fact they had not.)

 

P.S. Tague testified on 7-23-64, almost 2 months after Specter first submitted his chapter on the number and timing of the shots.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Pat Speer