Jump to content
The Education Forum
John Butler

Emmett Hudson- It is what he said

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Is Emmett Hudson a reliable or unreliable witness?  This has been a serious topic here several times and discussed by many good people.  Emmett Hudson is one of the men standing on the steps by the Grassy Knoll monument area in various films and photos.  The problem is his testimony doesn’t match what various films and photos show.  I feel kind of like William Munney’s (Clint Eastwood) kids left behind on the farm to sort out the hogs.

I tend to favor the first statements made to the authorities rather than later ones.  It has been my experience that the first statements made on 11-22-63 are the most reliable.  Here is what Emmett Hudson first said on 11-22-63. 

Emmett-Joseph-Hudson-two-rather-3-men-1.

He said there were initially two men, himself and one other, sitting midway down the steps and later laying down when two more shots were fired.  There is some evidence for two men sitting but, not laying down in the grass.  My problem is that there are other photos and films showing 3 men standing on the steps rather than sitting or laying down.  How to sort this out?

  1. The Bell Film shows no one on the steps:

bell-no-one-on-steps-tree-shadows-wrong-

      2.  The Zapruder Film does not show any men standing on the steps at the Grassy Knoll.  I have looked at this several times and have not seen any men standing there.  Now, they could be sitting or laying down and missed that way.  Bill Newman and family are not in the film either and they should be.  Another Zapruder missing person is the Babushka Lady.

     3.  The Martin Film has two men sitting on the steps in the shadows. I speculate this could be what the problem is.  Two men are blocked out by shadows so that 3 men can be placed out and lower down on the steps in the sunlight.   Why would some photo editor do this?  I don’t have a clue.

martin-two-men-in-shadows-sitting-on-ste

This is not really that clear.

 

    4.  The Phil Willis photos 5 and 7 show men on the steps.  Willis 5 shows two men standing on the steps.  There is some argument that the light pole hides another but, I don’t see it in a blow up.

willis-5-two-men-1.jpg

    5.  Willis 7 shows two men on the steps, one sitting and one standing.  They are in the shadows in the upper part of the stairs.

willis-7a-cropped.jpg

     6.  The Nix Film has 3 men on the steps.  Two are standing in the sunlight and another is vanishing into the shadows on the steps.  So, depending on what frame you are looking at you can have two or three men on the steps.  The tree shadows in Nix are wrong.  They move in different directions.  This is to obscure the upper part of the steps.

     7.  The Muchmore Film shows in various frames 3 men standing on the lower part of the steps in the sunlight.  The appearance of these men pretty much match the Moorman Polaroid scene.

     8.  The Moorman Polaroid has 3 men standing on the lower part of the steps in the sunlight.

The above shows the different combinations of men sitting, standing, and laying in the grass or not as related by Emmett Hudson.  From the Warren Commission interrogation various passages have been excerpted:

“Mr. HUDSON - Well there was a young fellow, oh, I would judge his age about in his late twenties. He said he had been looking for a place to park and he walked up there and he said he finally just taken a place over there in one of them parking lots, and he come on down there and said he worked over there on Industrial and me and him both just sat there first on those steps. When the motorcade turned off of Houston onto Elm, we got up and stood up, me and him both. He was on the left side and I was on the right and so the first shot rung out and, of course, I didn't realize it was a shot, what was taking place right at that present time, and when the second one rung out, the motorcade had done got further on down Elm, and you see, I was trying to get a good look at President Kennedy. I happened to be looking right at him when that bullet hit him - the second shot.

Mr. LIEBELER - That was when the bullet hit him in the head; is that correct?”

Some months after his 1st statements Hudson adjusts his statements to match the photos, etc. of him standing with others. 

But, he continues with the notion of laying on the ground for which there is no evidence for that I know.

“Mr. LIEBELER - Did you see that shot hit anything - the third shot?

Mr. HUDSON - No, sir. I'll tell you - this young fellow that was sitting there with me - standing there with me at the present time, he says, "lay down, Mister, somebody is shooting the President." He says, "Lay down, lay down." and he kept repeating, "Lay down." so he was already laying down one way on the sidewalk, so I just laid down over on the ground and resting my arm on the ground and when that third shot rung out and when I was close to the ground - you could tell the shot was coming from above and kind of behind.”

But, all of this concerns only two men.  David Josephs had this to contribute in 2010.

“Mr. LIEBELER - How could you tell that?

Posted September 29, 2010

Thanks Bernice...

I agree that Hudson does talk about the other 2 men with him.... there are no images of him sitting there with them, or the younger man, prior to willis5. Yet no one asks him how he gets from the tool shed to the stairs or if he passes anyone enroute... He'd have to walk right past BMD's position.

I've also been told that he actually IS in willis5, better versions of the photo make it more apparent yet I have seen no post of any image that indicates Hudson is indeed there. Even a close examination of willis 5 in TKoaAP does not make it appear as if he's there.

If Don is around, I would love to know why he concludes Hudson was not there at z202 beyond the obvious - he's not in the photo.

DJ”

Taking Josephs at his word there is evidence that Hudson talked of 3 men being on the steps in contradiction of the two statements he made above talking about two men and there was no mention of a third.

This is something that has bothered me for several years.  Were there two men or three men or now with new evidence none on the steps?

Were there two men on the upper part of the steps blocked out and 3 men inserted into the various films?  And, what was the purpose of that?

 

 

Edited by John Butler
add photo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 men John...Keep It Simple....  

although it is strange that he hardly moves as shots are fired...

MuchmoreFilm---three-men-on-steps---Huds

Hudson%20puffy%20jacketin%20muchmoore_zp

muchmore%20just%20before%20z313_zps6t87d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks David,

I can live with simple if I have to.  I use to argue with folks on just how sharp Occam's Razor really was.  But, I don't even have the simplest of competing theories to look at here. 

Sometimes the simplest answer is not necessarily the answer. 

Sure, Hudson toes the official line until he talks about where the shots came from.  Is that enough to have what shows up in the in the various films and photos?  Nobody on the steps, 2 men sitting, 2 men, one sitting and one standing, 2 men standing and then 3 men standing with one vanishing into the shadows and then 3 men standing.

There should be some sort of answer for the variance.

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, John Butler said:

Thanks David,

I can live with simple if I have to.  I use to argue with folks on just how sharp Occam's Razor really was.  But, I don't even have the simplest of competing theories to look at here. 

Sometimes the simplest answer is not necessarily the answer.

John,

 

After Henry Wade left and the new DA took over in Dallas, he found a bunch of files in Wade's office relating to the Jack Ruby trial. Once upon a time these were available online, but they have since been taken down. Among those documents was a list of people who knew Lee Harvey Oswald, but did not know Jack Ruby. (Group 45, pdf file# 2127).

Included in that list was:  Emmett Joseph Hudson who testified before the WC. In his testimony before the WC, Hudson wasn't asked if he knew LHO.

image.png.9e4d6d8e7a0abd0883798016f4bcb448.png

How did Hudson know Oswald?

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im gunna throw a possibility out here for ya Steve,

What are the chances that during the 6 weeks or so prior to the assassination LHO took his lunch out onto the knoll/pergola area and sat down to enjoy the view, the peace and quiet or just the sunshine.....then along comes the groundsman and they exchange pleasantries one day, then again another day and then again another.....they aren't best of friends but if someone asked the groundsman do you know that man LHO....... my answer would have been yes!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

There is something going on here with Emmett Hudson.  What you point out is something of interest.  Adam Johnson posts a likely scenario, speculative but believable.  No one asked Hudson how he knew Oswald.  That would have been interesting.

Is this a well known fact that Hudson knew Oswald?  Or, is this another hidden fact hid from researchers?  From what you said it must have been hidden for years.

I have noticed some witnesses will go along with the official WC/FBI story but, will retain some thing that is contrary to the story.  In Hudson's case is that the shots came from behind and not from the TSBD.  Mary Moorman, as an example, retained that part of her story that said the first shot was the head shot and 3 more followed. 

Is Emmett Hudson another Dealey Plaza mystery without a solution.  If you examine the frames and photos I posted then you will understand there is a mystery.  I would not have thought a Phil Willis photo could provide much of any value at all.  But, Willis 7 does show two shadowed figures, one sitting and one standing, on the mid section of the steps leading uphill.  The Martin film shows 2 figures sitting.

This agrees more with Hudson's early testimony and not his later.  His later testimony is shown in other frames and photos.  A mystery for sure.  Outside of knowing Oswald and shots from the rear I don't know what would cause the effort to obfuscate Emmett Hudson to the point he is not creditable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Adam Johnson said:

Im gunna throw a possibility out here for ya Steve,

What are the chances that during the 6 weeks or so prior to the assassination LHO took his lunch out onto the knoll/pergola area and sat down to enjoy the view, the peace and quiet or just the sunshine.....then along comes the groundsman and they exchange pleasantries one day, then again another day and then again another.....they aren't best of friends but if someone asked the groundsman do you know that man LHO....... my answer would have been yes!!!!!

Adam,

 

I'd say the chances are pretty good.

It would have been nice to know what they talked about.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


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...