Bill Miller

It may well be that the steam in the pipe - whatever it was used for was not always charged with hot steam and/or not uniformly insulated. It likely was not associated with the railroad, as I can think of nothing they could use it for and steampipes were not usual around railyards to my knowledge. From the photo with Marguerite it looked like one could easily go over or under, depending on height and energy level. Right, Peter. I suspect that the insulation may have been missing in places. The fact still remains that some men did go over the steam pipe and they never said a word about being burned ... Holland mentions two such men in his Lane interview. Bill

What seems clear is that you continue to cite something as fact even though you have been repeatedly asked if the photographic record supports what you are citing as fact. The question still stands and I await your answer. Miles, do you have any evidence that there was a car(s) parked up against the fence or are you just citing assumptions as fact once again? I also see that you have finally stopped saying that Holland ran behind the fence immediately following the assassination to now pushing that time back to one minute. Maybe you'd like to acknowledge that Hoffman said he saw someone walking the fence line - Gordon Arnold said that he walked the fence looking for a spot to film the parade - and that Holland said he walked the fence looking for shell casings and tracks. It seems only right that seeing this is an education forum (rather than a propaganda forum) that you let your readers know why you are ignoring three independent witnesses. Miles, the distance between the fence and the cars according to Holland's drawing is every bit as wide, if not wider, than a checkout lane at a grocery store and for MOST people those lanes are plenty wide enough to move through them with ease. Bill Miller

Duke, let us say I find the report and it says what I have claimed - how would that change your opinion? Bill Miller

Alan, if you cannot cite correctly what has been written, then how can you learn by reading about the JFK assassination case??? Herb took no ones word for anything ... didn't you read his response. Dennis David and his group didn't take my word either, Groden, Law, Mellen, Beirma, Cummings, Hancock, and etc., got it, but not by taking my word for anything. It's OK if you don't get it. I won't say anything, but expect Miles to post a response crying for the moderators to tone down the foul language, unless he only whines when I use the word. Bill

Maybe Arnold's friends and family didn't have your view and didn't wish to sign Gordon's death warrant as long as that was a concern of his. As far as my adoption ... the point is that the family and friends managed to not give off a hint that I was adopted because that was what my parents wanted, thus no one betrayed them. Look how many other witnesses were never known about - they either didn't talk about being in Dealey Plaza when JFK was shot or the people who knew where these witnesses were had never ratted them out. Bill

Instead of you guys looking at this as how you think you'd react - keep in mind that Arnold knew there was more than one shooter .... that a conspiracy had occurred, thus not all the assassins had been captured. Gordon didn't want his story to get out into the public mainstream and this is why Golz and Turner each had to do a lot of coaxing to get Arnold to even tell his story. In fact, a lot of people who were in Dealey Plaza didn't come forward because they knew something wasn't right in the official story that had been on the news on the afternoon of the shooting. So while it is nice to play the 'this is what I would have done' game - its really what Gordon Arnold thought and feared that is important. Just think about it ... Gordon had been prevented from coming onto the underpass by a federal agent. Then Gordon was approached again and told to get out of the RR yard altogether. Then the President is soon shot from someone behind Gordon or at least this is what Gordon must have thought. How soon afterwards does anyone think that it would have taken for Gordon to realize that the assassination was certainly bigger than he was. Even after all those years leading up to the Turner interview ... Gordon was emotional about it being discovered that the man who may have taken his film may have been one of the assassins. Gordon lived with that fear whereas I don't see how anyone seeing the crash of Dianna would have felt as if their life was in danger for talking about what they had seen. Bill

Duncan, I am adopted and everyone around me knew it, but me .... I was 20 years old when I first heard of this, so no - not everything spreads as wildfire when kept between family and friends. Bill

Of course he talked about it to LOTS of people after he got out of the service and back in Dallas. Here is how he came to the attention of researchers... Dallas researcher Howard Upchurch was on jury duty. While waiting in the venire room, prospective jurors started talking about the assassination, when one of the jury pool said, "I was there that day". Howard and others questioned him and he told the story you are familiar with. Howard phoned Earl Golz of the DMN, who wrote a feature on Gordon's story. Most researchers initially tended to doubt the story BECAUSE NO PHOTOS CONFIRMED HIS PRESENCE. However, as other information was developed, particularly the Moorman images, many of us were persuaded of his veracity. Gary Mack, initially a doubter, interviewed Arnold several times, and was convinced by things told to him that only someone who was there would have known. Jack It was through Gary Mack that I learned that Gordon had told his family and friends of what he witnessed on the knoll. Gordon, wife, then girlfriend, was one of those people. Gary also has pointed out (and I agree) that Gordon told details of his experience on the knoll that had not been photographically confirmed until years later. Bill

Jack, Taking a photo of myself and showing how it cam out on film while standing in the shade of the walkway in Dealey Plaza - the following example was created. Occam's razor is a logical principle attributed to the mediaeval philosopher William of Occam (or Ockham). The principle states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed. This principle is often called the principle of parsimony. It underlies all scientific modelling and theory building. It admonishes us to choose from a set of otherwise equivalent models of a given phenomenon the simplest one. In any given model, Occam's razor helps us to "shave off" those concepts, variables or constructs that are not really needed to explain the phenomenon. By doing that, developing the model will become much easier, and there is less chance of introducing inconsistencies, ambiguities and redundancies. Bill

Jack, I do not think you see my reasoning for I am saying that Arnold and BDM are the same person. Bill

Those overseas hats do not fit over the entire width of the head. Jack is right that the image is not clean enough to make a precise determination of Arnold's head width. And I will say it once again for it is a fact - one can use the same person and take their photo from a straight -on frontal view and then have them turn their head as Badge Man's head is seen and their head will appear wider that the first photo because the human head is not round, but oblong in shape. Bill

Well, you started out saying that the cars were parked right up to the fence - that Holland had to jump bumpers and so on. Now that some of your misconceptions have been cleared up - you are saying that there was only two feet between the cars and the fence. Go back and look at Holland's drawing of the footprints that he said was 3' x 2'. Is there not even more spece between where Holland said the footprints stopped and the fence? So it appears that someone could walk the fence line. And so we are clear - I interviewed Hoffman with his family present and Ed walked me down that fence line as he said the man with the gun had done. I do not recall seeing you there. Can you be more precise??? The Daniel film shows the SS car coming through the underpass and can be timed quite easily. As far as when it came under Stemmons for Ed to see it - that would depend how much time was lost when Curry's car pulled along side the limo so to give directions to the hospital. Curry called it a rolling stop meaning that the two cars were barely moving at that point in time. I look forward to your thoughts after digesting this information. Sam Holland said, "I came up in front of the cars and got over to the fence and then walked back down looking around, just like the rest of them." this tells me that Holland is saying that others also walked the fence line looking for shell casings and/or tracks. I believe that Jack has addressed the steam pipe before by saying that it was insulated. You may recall Holland saying that a couple of guys went over the steam pipe and one fell on top of the other. I am not sure where Weitzman touched the pipe so to get burned ... maybe you can enlighten us on this ? I have asked this question several times for a reason and it appears that it needs to keep being asked until you address it - Does the photographic record support your position that Foster was off the underpass within 20 - 30 seconds following the shooting? I would like to know where you got the information that the cars were pressed into the fence at the time of the assassination? I hope that you are not citing your impressions as fact. Bill Miller

Same unanswered questions as before ... "At least one car or truck was parked no more than a foot away from the fence .... " Can you point us to where you derived at that piece of information? Holland mentions the footprints covering an area of about 3' x 2'. Also, if one wishes to use Holland's drawing as some sort of scale as to how much room was between the fence and the cars - his spacing is about equal to the length of a car hood when compared to the length of his cars. I must be missing something and look forward to you (Miles) clearing it up for me. Miles, are you not aware that these photos were not taken on the day of the assassination. Hoffman said a man walked the fence line - Holland said he walked the fence line - and Gordon Arnold said he walked the fence line. How many witnesses are needed to validate that the fence line could be walked on 11/22/63 during the assassination? Bill Miller

It's Ok, Jack .... I leave you in your own little world. I had a feeling that looking at this matter in a logical way may be a little too much to ask for. By the way, Jack ... you are forgetting about Arnold saying that he saw the President coming down the street and started filming him up to the point the bullet came past his ear. The Betzner and Willis photos occurred during this period and those photos show only one man. So either pick Arnold or the BDM, but you cannot have one standing in front of the other. Had BDM been standing to one side of Arnold so not to block Gordon's view of JFK through his camera's eye, then the two individuals would be seen off-set from one another in the Willis and Betzner's photos. I might also add that each time you cannot seem to understand how something looks in a photo - the rush to judgment to say its been altered doesn't make it so. Bill

Sorry, Jack - I misread the post. One reason that Badge Man would have stayed behind the fence is that he remain near the guy with the fake secret service badge. It might have also been less noticeable to stand in the RR yard with a rifle - compared to standing out on the walkway not 15 to 20 feet from Zapruder in one direction and with Hudson in the other. Bill

Gordon Arnold said that as he was looking for a spot to film from the RR yard side of the fence that the same man came up to him again and said that he wanted him out of there altogether. Gordon said that was when he went around to the other side of the fence. So to answer your question - Arnold was told not to be back in the RR yard at all, thus he couldn't take Badge Man's position ... or so he believed. Bill

It gets rather frustrating when someone seemingly is trying to confuse rather than to learn. The grass in which Arnold stood that runs from the shelter down to the street IS west of the steps. The walkway and steps are west of the wall. I read how Gary Mack explained this to you, so why do you continue to pretend not to get such an obvious point? Below are the two sun patches seen in both the Moorman and Betzner photos. Note the dark spot seen within both patches - does it tell us anything? Sure it does. It tells us that we are looking at the same individual whereas as the limo came towards the knoll - this person turned his body slightly to his right as if to be tracking the President with a movie camera, which is exactly what Arnold said he had done. Bill Miller

"At least one car or truck was parked no more than a foot away from the fence .... " Can you point us to where you derived at that piece of information? Holland mentions the footprints covering an area of about 3' x 2'. Also, if one wishes to use Holland's drawing as some sort of scale as to how much room was between the fence and the cars - his spacing is about equal to the length of a car hood when compared to the length of his cars. I must be missing something and look forward to you (Miles) clearing it up for me. Miles, are you not aware that these photos were not taken on the day of the assassination. Hoffman said a man walked the fence line - Holland said he walked the fence line - and Gordon Arnold said he walked the fence line. How many witnesses are needed to validate that the fence line could be walked on 11/22/63 during the assassination? Bill Miller

Jack, I ask that you rethink your position and offer it again, but this time where you aren't contradicting yourself. First of all - you have said that you believe Arnold's story and I pointed out that in both the Willis and Betzner photos there is but only one individual to be seen anywhere over the wall. I would also like to point out that Betzner's photo was taken at a different angle to the wall than Willis took his photo from. This means simply that if Arnold had someone in front of him, then in one photo or the other - the extra person should be staggered/offset from the person behind him. However, this does not happen, nor did Arnold say that anyone ever blocked his field of view so he could see the President as he was coming towards him. So to say "but its not Arnold" is saying that Arnold must have lied about being on the knoll because Gordon DID NOT utter a word about anyone standing in front of him. (If you want to know how much the background would shift between the Betzner and Willis LOS's to the wall, then look where the corner of the fence starts in each photo. Two photos from two different angles, taken less than a second apart, and yet only one man is seen) I also believe that you have said in the past that someone retouched the image so to hide it being a man in uniform. Bill

Duncan, the BDM isn't just solved in my head. At that conference was also John Simkin as well as others who I didn't mention in the short list of those who saw my presentation and walked away telling me that it made sense in their minds or that it put that old theory of it being an assassin to rest. So when you start out saying "It's been solved in Bill Miller's head, and thats about it" ... you start off with an error in the information that you're bringing to the forum. Now about your observation concerning Arnold and Badge Man ... please tell us all that you did to arrive at your conclusion. For instance; can you tell us what the 21 year old Arnold weighed when he got out of boot camp and had taken a leave which got him to Dallas in the first place? Can you tell us what the aging Arnold weighted in "TMWKK" series? Can you tell us how many feet of space is between the Badge Man and Arnold? Can you tell us anything that you did other than to just make another observation with that keen eye of yours??? Bill

I have no idea what you were trying to say in the above statement. I believe we were talking about Arnold's head when I made that statement. The human head is not round, but rather oblong in shape. As far as the rest of Badge Man's body ... its not defined even in Jack's work, so where does his outline start and where does it stop? I'll do a forum search later to see if I can find that group photo I spoke of ... people standing in a row and one man is much larger than the others, but not in height. Duncan - you started out this discussion telling us how small Arnold looked compared to Badge Man ... now you are making Arnold out to be large. Should we stop posting on this until you get it straight on whether Arnold looked small in Moorman or whether he looks large? I will do a search and see if I can find the row of people standing next to one another where one guy is 30+ percent wider all around than the other people next to him. I am sure you have seen it for I have posted it on several occasions here and at Lancer. Bill

There may be a couple of things that would explain what you think you see. One obvious find is that the camera is looking at Arnold face-on and is seeing the Badge Man with his head slightly turned to his right. The human head is narrower from ear to ear - than from back to front. If we could turn Badge Man's head so to be looking right at the camera as Arnold is positioned, then Badge Man's head may even be narrower than Arnold's. The next thing is that Arnold was not a large man in his younger days. We have no idea how large Badge Man was? I once posted a line of people seen at some outing and one man's head was in real life much larger than the other men's heads in the picture. Without knowing the facts ... there really can be no precise comparison. Bill

Herb, I can only think of a few people who have not understood the connection between Arnold and the Black Dog Man (BMD). Researchers from Robert Groden, Joan Mellen, William Law, Larry Hancock, Debra Conway, and etc., have seen these images and have said that after they saw my presentation that they had finally seen the connection and that I had convinced them that the two individuals were one in the same. Had it not been for the work Jack and Gary had done with the Badge Man, then I may never have made the connection. It was when I created an overlay transparency of Arnold and the BDM that convinced me they were one in the same person. I have not seen another face in the Badge Man images other than what Jack and Gary have shown. Bill

The photo has text on it that says that 'Foster runs here in 20 to 30 seconds' .... Are you saying that he was a slow runner and that once he started to move off the underpass that it took him that long to cover such a short distance or are you saying that Foster ran there within the first 20 to 30 seconds after the shooting? If it is the latter ... can you tell us how this relates to the photographic record? Bill Miller