David Josephs

How many different bags were needed Dave? Dave... look at something OUT OF THE CORNER OF YOUR EYE.... Now tell us you haven't a clue what you saw... he was asked half dozen times if he was sure he did see Oswald and did not see anything in his hands... this is the best you can do "authenticating" the evidence? David... you did not authenticate anything at all. Instead you focus on something that does not change a thing... So let's try to focus Dave... Get the bag: Made, brought to Irving, put the disassembled rifle in it, retrieve said bag and rifle and clip and ammo Friday morning, bring it all over to Frazier, put it in the backseat of the car and only take up 2 feet (Frazier testimony), take it again and walk unnoticed with it into the TSBD, hide it somewhere, retrieve it, reassemble the rifle, load the rifle, align the scope, and be ready to fire when JFK arrives... Talking to me about Dougherty and his inability to SEE is kind of lame Dave.... but I can see that's the best you got... 2nd page, the FBI needed to change DAY's statement about the paper being the same... replica K2, despite using the same paper dispenser, did NOT have the same characteristics as the "original"... nor was it like ANY of the paper at the TSBD, and the TAPE was the wrong size and it too didn't match... So once again David... AUTHENTICATE THE BAG as real evidence - that it was actually in the corner, ever in MONTGOMERY's hands and why there are so many different bags around Only a LNer could take this, combine it with the length and Frazier's lies about what he sees as Ozzie walks away and conclude the man put a 40" bag in the backseat of Frazier's car... Mr. BALL. When you went down there what did you find? Mr. HICKS. Lieutenant Day--well, first I saw Chief Lumpkin, who told me Lieutenant Day was there in the building and to report to him on the sixth floor, I believe it was and he and Detective Studebaker, I believe it was were the two that were still on that particular floor. Mr. BALL. Day and Studebaker? Mr. HICKS. Yes. Mr. BALL. Did you do some work with them? Mr. HICKS. Yes; there was--well, no. Lieutenant Day was dusting several items around there for fingerprints at the time and Mr. Studebaker had taken some pictures and was still taking a few others. I assisted him in moving the equipment back and forth and I don't know, I don't believe I actually took any of the pictures upstairs; however, I was there when some of them were taken.

DVP - please offer the authentication for that bag... Chain of Custody or whatever you like... but get it from workbench to Irving to the garage, to the Frazier's to the TSBD and beyond... and then explain to us why this man is lying about what he saw. I'll start with finding and taking the bag.... Montgomery is the man holding the bag and photographed in front of the TSBD - yet he did not pick up the rifle bag.... Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick the sack up?Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?Mr. BALL. The paper sack?Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.Mr. BALL. You picked it up?Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints. How about the men on the 6th floor ? Mr. BELIN. Did you take it down to the station with you?Mr. DAY. I didn't take it with me. I left it with the men when I left. I left Detectives Hicks and Studebaker to bring this in with them when they brought other equipment in. Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was doubled - it was a piece of paper about this long and it was doubled over. Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately? Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know. Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of it before you picked it up? Mr. STUDEBAKER. No. Mr. BALL. Does that sack show in any of the pictures you took? Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; it doesn't show in any of the pictures. Mr. BALL. Did you ever see a paper sack in the items that were taken from the Texas School Book Depository building? Mr. HICKS. Paper bag? Mr. BALL. Paper bag. Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I did not. It seems like there was some chicken bones or maybe a lunch; no, I believe that someone had gathered it up. Mr. BALL. Well, this was another type of bag made out of brown paper; did you ever see it? Mr. HICKS. No, sir; I don't believe I did. I don't recall it. Fingerprints Dave? Seems quite a lot turns up after all the items are returned from DC and the FBI lab.... Mr. BELIN. Did you find anything, any print of any kind, in connection with the processing of this?Mr. DAY. No legible prints were found with the powder, no.Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether any legible prints were found by any other means or any other place?Mr. DAY. There is a legible print on it now. They were on there when it was returned to me from the FBI on November 24. (really the 26th) Maybe someone saw Oswald enter that morning? Mr. BALL - Did you see him come in the door?Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; I saw him when he first come in the door--yes. Mr. BALL - Did he have anything in his hands or arms? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, not that I could see of. Mr. BALL - Did he come in with anybody?Mr. DOUGHERTY - No.Mr. BALL - He was alone?Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; he was alone.Mr. BALL - Do you recall him having anything in his hand? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't see anything, if he did.Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't?Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time.Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir.Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands?Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing?Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so.Mr. BALL - You saw him come in the door?Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.Mr. BALL - The back door on the first floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - It was in the back door.

I can't help but notice how the limo appears to move sideways thru these frames... Chris - do me a favor... for T146, above, can you please show us where TOWNER IS in the Zfilm, as this is being filmed? Below I've highlighted where the curb was in relation to the limo's position... We also never see the slowing and hard left back to the center, in Towner... (or Hughes or Bell for that matter)

Thanks Paz... I try to proceed under the assumption that not everyone knows every little detail... and try to put the info in context... DJ (shout out to Bart for his wonderful posts and excellent essays... )

Mrs. RANDLE. He was carrying a package in a sort of a heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me. It was about, if I might measure, about this long, I suppose, and he carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it. Unless he was 6'8" - that's not possible given the 34" minimum length.... Mrs. RANDLE. I measured 27" last time. Mr. BALL. You measured 27" once before? Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.

I’ll take a try.... see it as reverse engineering. Math follows rules, so to make adjustments and come to the correct speed numbers so that frame numbers match locations. The change from z168-171 to z161-166 is a giant clue, and hidden from the public for decades. Position A makes little sense to have even been brought up unless the limo passed thru that spot. Except getting the limo from there to z133 in the middle of the street required a splice.... The limo appears to move at a constant rate. X number of frames for movement between X number of frame locations. 1 foot per frame, or very close to that, and the limo appears smooth... Erase what you think of the film from your mind. Frame numbers have no relationship to the extent film. Start fresh with the surveys from Nov and Dec. what the revised CE884 does is make it impossible to recreate the movements of the limo except for specific snapshots in time, frames... but the relationship of those frames do not match what we see... where things are supposed to be, aren’t... as Tom Wilson famously mentioned so long ago. The current math being done is to uncover how the relationship to Station C was established and why Position A lays between this turn at C and z133/161. If the limo turned wide and slowed, it took time which moves the frame counter well past 133 coming out of that turn... Pos A is 5’3” off the path from C to z166 which creates the 100 foot distance... we sssume the FBI uses geometry, right angle triangles and their special properties. The Math proves how the end result of the FBI changes are not physically possible and in turn the zfilm is not physically possible. Frames and distances cannot be as presented. Frame numbers are arbitrary with 312 chosen purposefully... 156+156+156... 156+156= 312 + 156 = 468 + 1 second of film, 18 frames = 486 No surprise we have a splice and pivotal event at these two locations. Everything is made to occur in that second 156 frames.... which could have been 409 48fps frames.... The math removes the second shot from 313 and a final shot at 345 down by the stairs.... Not a perfect explanation, but a start....

Why 100/166? Station C is not frame 00...

images removed

(jaw drops)..... So Truly was right... Mr. TRULY. That is right.And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn. Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb? Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here. Mr. BELIN. All right.

Sweet... Wonder where the limo was in relation to the green box intersection before and after the Towner splice... Or z133.... Edit... Or that may be too late already

Thank you for the honesty Lance. To be that informed and come to such an illogical conclusion which the evidence in fact contradicts, let alone not apply the context of the times is something with which I cannot come to grips. The presentation of said pov not better represented than by DVP.... And truly a wonderful source of the historical record.... Freely offered I may add.... This conflict is not resolvable..... So when a CTer presents something, is it not incumbent on you as WCR LN supporter to use WCR evidence to refute it? Further, if said evidence is not AUTHENTIC it is of no evidentiary value other than to suggest the tampering of same. Authenticate the evidence Lance...as if a court of law.... And make a case.... Don't just say we're wrong... Show me why with logic that works Cool? Or too much to ask?

Hey Josh......

3 little questions Lance.... I completely respect you've formed an opinion, a conclusion about the evidence.... I hope you think these are fair as they tend to help us understand an opinion based on a 5% exposure and a closed mind and one based on 90% and some level of acknowledgment that the cold war produced many things thought to be improbable... Your or anyone's acceptance of the supported theory is not the goal Lance... John and I spoke at length about this.... When finished in the late 90's H&L was to be an entry point for others to carry forward... To prove, disprove, advance or revoke evidence. It was never a thought that the community would not accept the far out plans of the CIA with regards to the Russians. "No matter how paranoid one is, what the government is really doing, is much worse ".... Have you read the entire book? Have you investigated the sources beyond the opinions written here? If you were shown convincing evidence of their simultaneous existence... Would you reconsider your position?

Hey Michael.... Thanks for having my back buddy..... When I can remember not to take the bait... All is good. I applaud those with cooler heads... I'm Passionate, Mediterranean, hot blooded..... And make no excuses.... What else would we call those who can command the attention of the forum for nothing more than to debate manners, spelling, grammar and syntax....

Just wanted to say thank you to all the kind words of support I've received over the past week... I don't think you need to leave to make a statement Paul.... There are other places to play... Without losing contact here.... I've been on this forum since 04 if not earlier.... The trolls come and go.... Sadly the moderation rules have not adapted to technique, a deceitful style wins over vulgar substance. I simply wanted to say that the 2 Oswalds expanded, is Armstrong. All John..... I spent almost 2 years in discussion with John and am happy to say his and my thoughts continue to produce interesting break-thrus. Anyone who wants my side by side sheet on where H&L were over the years please feel free to ask.... The conflicts jump out at you.... Luckily I have the time and resources to work on the JFK case daily. Documents appear to support my idea that Ozzie was never there and the FBI was CYA for their $200 a month asset.... Chris' work is really amazing btw. When it can be translated into digestible pieces, even better... I hope to help with that.... If we didn't have to deal with A little yapping bouncy dog nipping at our heels, it would make things more enjoyable

Language is not as critical as patterned intent Kathy.... "With all due respect" is as offensive as "trust me" and carries as much meaning. None. "Due" respect is completely subjective... A backhanded insult in reality... You see that, right? When capital "t" is more important than the content of his post Or the subject at hand... Who is showing the disrespect ? Without the expectation and enforcement of intellectual honesty, what is the basis for moderation? A bad word or ongoing trolling of a topic? Opinions stated as fact or spelling/grammar? Free speech in a membership setting Still requires the expectation of respect with intelligent disagreement... Setting up a soapbox in every thread to scream "the Russians did it" and then provide nothing but the color of the soapbox brings everyone down... One wonders if there is any perception of awareness.... Or does this bull in a China shop get to thrash around until everything is broken?

Btw, a year ago... May 1 2017... I get this from MW: Had forgotten all about it.... Still trying to quit... Has nothing more to say.... And agrees with everyone else... A year ago, that needs to learn some manners. We were still at odds over his MATH attacks... So what happens in a year to make him so disrespectful? Asking him not to whine about subjects he doesn't understand???? "David, I wish you the best on this - I really do. Like I said you're smart - your gun work and MC is great. Honestly, I'm trying to quit this damn forum. I really am. Not because of you but because of people like Graves and Mike Clark. I think I've said just about all I can on the forum but the rest with Graves it feels like he's taking over the whole damn thing. For me, the true remaining possible breakthroughs for the case will be these - if they ever happen: A pristine copy from the PM footage is released and reveals if PM is LHO. The document release this October.

It takes an amazingly thick skin to work, personally satisfying as it is, and post thoughts, theories, evidence and full on 6 part essays in the face of ongoing attack. There are the DVP type, incredulous to even think - attacks which question the stupidity of even considering a different possibility than the WCR result.... Which as we see relies more on faith than fact. Then there is the Dub'ya type attacks... "Why oh why oh why" is this tactic.... Since the answer is so easy and obvious, why do what you're doing? A compete lack of intellectual curiosity coupled with the NEED to tear down that which is not understood... Yes, TEAR DOWN but luckily Chris too perseveres. Or the PT rebuttals which treat facts like the current adminstration, both misquoting and misconstruing the words of others while regurgitating debunked lies as accepted fact. I don't need to agree with Armstrong or Lifton or Jim or anyone for that matter... To show the respect due and debate facts and their authenticity over opinions and insults.... Again, why should a man like Lifton bother sharing his work when he is met by a whiny attack dog with an attitude? Why should any of us for that matter? So while I keep my membership to check in on any updates, the gems found within the 33000 rows of doc links from last year's release Will be posted and discussed elsewhere... Will the leadership of this forum recognizes trolling for the subtle yet devastating tactic it is... Versus the flare-like "insults" I hurl to bring your attention to the matter? I do not attack unless provoked... I have no desire to debate those coming here completely unarmed, yet the unarmed receives the greatest leeway of all.... I'll take my effort and work elsewhere for now

I emailed you James a number of times with no response... Asking just that... On moderation you cannot send or receive PM... Or at least that what it seems. 2 Or 3 of us represent the only real defense and ongoing push back to the trolls... I invoked the COINTELPRO doc as the postings of both tommy and Dub'ya surely fit the tactics designed to derail a thread they want derailed... If you cant recognize an attack on the forum and its members, why moderate at all? I stood up for Armstrong and for Lifton for a pure sense of respect for the effort involved... These 2 playing like deaf children and running rampant over the history, present and future of JFK research is a shame... Even worse you all stand by and watch from the sidelines and remove the only defense offered. Why should the membership need to suffer through the fools just to read something in which they're interested ? Where is YOUR stand for the rights of those who are not these 2, when repeatedly attacked with nothing more than generic links and shallow observation... Math Rules especially. I have degrees in Finance and Math yet Chris thinks at a level way beyond most... And luckily, with effort, I get it. Why should Dub'ya be allowed to infect intelligence with his inability to understand even WHY we have the discussion in the first place? Grow a backbone moderators and nip this in the bud. Free speech is fine, censorship not.... Respect has been earned by many who post here... If you can't rebutt with something more than a generic opinion, doesn't that person owe it to this forum and its members to stop acting the disruptive fool and chill?

So connect the dots Chris... the earliest we have on film is z133, not 161. And 161 was really 168 as determined by WEST Why wouldn't they have found where 133 was since that is the first frame WE SEE with the limo... (other than hiding the shot at 157)? If the limo did actually make that wide turn... what does that do to the analysis? DJ This - to me - sounds as if POSITION A was deemed to be along the route of the limo... Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first position we established that morning was frame 161. Mr. SPECTER. Was there not a position established prior in sequence to frame 161, specifically that designated as position A? Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was actually established later. But the first one to be actually located was 161. And we went back later and positioned point A. Mr. SPECTER. Well, let's start with the position which is the most easterly point on Elm Street, which I believe would be position A, would it not? Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. Mr. SPECTER. Have you a photographic exhibit depicting that position? Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; in each of the positions that we established, we used, insofar as possible, the Zapruder pictures to establish the position, or we established it from the window, and made photographs from the position Mr. Zapruder was standing in. Mr. SPECTER. This chart has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 886. Mr. SHANEYFELT. This shows the photograph that was made from the point where Zapruder was standing looking toward the car, and is a point that we have designated as position A because it is in a position that did not appear on the Zapruder film The Zapruder film does not start until the car gets farther down Elm Street. And this shows how there never was a change incorporating the 10" change AT STREET LEVEL... only at rifle muzzle level and only when needed... which does not move the limo forward 15.25'. Mr. SPECTER. Was there any prior position, that is a position before position A, where the marksman from the sixth floor could have fired the weapon and have struck the President at the known point of entry at the base of the back of his neck? Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; because as the car moves back, you lose sight of the chalk mark on the back of his coat. Mr. SPECTER. And what is the distance between that point on the President and station C? Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 44 feet from station C--91.6 feet to the rifle in the window from the actual chalk mark on the coat. All measurements were made to the chalk mark on the coat. Mr. SPECTER. On the coat of the President? Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. Mr. SPECTER. The President's stand-in? Mr. SHANEYFELT. Right. The angle to the rifle in the window was 40b010'. Mr. SPECTER. And what is the other data? Mr. SHANEYFELT. The distance to the overpass was 447 feet, and the angle to the overpass was minus 0b027'; that is, 27' below the horizontal.

Jeremy - here's a clue - Read Lifton's book. From your post you appear as confused about the topic as our boy dub'ya here is about the entire case.... He epitomizes what's wrong today... having a thought or opinion does not relieve you of the expectation of respect for those who unearthed FACTS... In fact, the more dub'ya posts - the lower the this place sinks.... as people like JB here jump on the little choo-choo that could..... Mr. Norwood et al, approve this or not... I'll be posting the newly released documents that are applicable to our research elsewhere until the moderators recognize COINTELPRO tactics and those who employ them for what it is... an ongoing and direct attack to the serious people of this forum... Everyone has a right to an opinion... yet, when all one offers is opinion based on poor judgment based on even poorer research... we find dub'ya at the forefront.... Dub'ya.... All the autopsy reports state the starting time of 8pm... Here is the casket delivery report.... followed by the quoted testimony of the Autopsy Dr.... 6:30? 6:45? 7:00? 7:17? A team of 6 or pore people wheeled in a coffin from an ambulance at 7:17pm.... When the motorcade fron the airport arrived at the Naval Hospital, Bobby Kennedy and ICZS. Kennedy were let off at the Administration Building. O'Neill and I helped carry the damaged casket into the autopsy room with some Secret Service agents. Yet there is a team of military men assigned to do that job.... The JOINT CASKET BEARER TEAM... this is the military, there's a form in triplicate and specific purpose for everything... So you see DUB'YA.... if you'd take that cone of shame and silence off maybe you'd LEARN something.... then again AINT GONNA LEARN WHAT YOU DONT WANNA KNOW What the following Sibert testimony shows is he and O'Neill were not in the morgue see the actual body until after 8pm.... (James Sibert)A: Yes. I might mention - on this Exhibit 157 - that when we were in that autopsy room One of us was present all the time, with the exception of when photographs and radiology work and X-rays were done. Question: What was the time of the preparation for the autopsy at the hospital? “Answer: Approximately 7: 17 p.m.” Do you See those words? A: Yes. Q: Can you tell me what your understanding is pi of the meaning of those? And if my question is unclear I can try it a different way. A: As I say, I know there was probably some discussion there about photographs and X-rays. This would have occurred before the Autopsy began. And this 8:15 is when the first incision, was made. Q: Well, I guess my question, in part, is: Does the time that is provided here, 7:17 p.m., help you identify the approximate time that the casket as unloaded from the Navy ambulance? A: Well, that could have been about the time that it was unloaded, the 7:17 - or just a short time thereafter when they got it in there. And, of course, they had to take the body out of the casket, put it on the autopsy table and this would all be preparation, too Q: Did you see the body lifted out of the casket and put onto the autopsy table? A: I believe I do. I remember that. That was just before. They cleared the room, that I mentioned. The photographs and the X-rays that were taken right after that. Q: Did you see, at any point at Bethesda Hospital, a military team unloading any casket on the night of November 22nd? A: Not that I recollect MD163: The Joint Casket Bearer Team which is a six-page POI document with The Joint Casket Bearer Team appearing to be a cover sheet. And it is followed by a document entitled Company E Honor Guard, First Battalion, Third Fort Myer Virginia dated December 10th 1963 THE WITNESS: This first line here in paragraph two, is that 1810 hours? That would be 610 p.m. wouldn’t it? “A tight security was immediately placed around the autopsy room by the naval facility and the U.S. Secret Service Bureau agents made contact with Mr. Roy Kellerman.” (DJ: He can only know this if he was outside the autopsy room at this point, not inside) Q: First incision. How much time was there between the time that the body was unwrapped from the sheets and the first incision was made? A: Well. this is the time that you would have had the X-rays and the photographs Now repeatedly he tells us that the FBI agents were NOT present during the pre-autopsy photos and xrays… we also know that the xray techs involved saw Jackie and Bobby arrive and go up to their room as did Dennis David… It is also in the ARRB that humes finally admits that the body was on the table as early as 6:45… over a half hour BEFORE Sibert helps the SS carry in a casket at 7:17. During the time towards the beginning of the autopsy when you left the room for the photographs and X-rays, where were you waiting during that time? A: As I recall, WC were out in the hall. But they cleared the room for the X-rays And they said they were going to take photographs. So, everybody except the personnel involved in those two functions - Medical personnel, were the only ones who were, theoretically, in there. Again, not knowing who was inside prior to 8:15pm and knowing and seeing and describing the “tight security” the SS put in place at this time… the only thing these men saw was the activity AFTER 8pm when: “The President’s body was removed from the casket in which it had been transported and was placed on the autopsy table, at which time the complete body was wrapped in a sheet and the head area contained an additional wrapping which was saturated with blood. Following the removal of the wrapping, it was ascertained that the President’s clothing had been removed and it was also apparent that a tracheotomy had been performed, as well as surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull. All personnel with the exception of medical officers needed in the taking of photographs and X-Rays were requested to leave the autopsy room and remain in an adjacent room.” – Sibert/O’Neil report You see, from the order these FBI men place this it sounds as if the photos and xrays happen AFTER 8pm… we come to find that not being the case.

please do not paraphrase my posts what I asked was: "what beyond this terribly thin excuse for a connection do you have to put the KGB in the middle of the JFK assassination? " yet this is your answer... As I've said a couple of times recently, it seems more likely that Castro patsied both the CIA and the KGB, and that after the assassination, the Ruskies tried to do some damage control by having Nosenko, Yatsov, Nechiporenko, Kostikov, and yes, even widdle blond-haired, very thin-faced Nikolai Leonov say that Oswald was one wild and crazy guy, boy, you know, more than capable of killing a president all by him not-quite-so-widdle 5' 9.5", brown-haired self. "it seems more like" is part of a theory, not solution. I can give you many other reasons for the people you name to have done what they did having nothing to do whatsoever with Oswald and JFK.... nor have you connected LEONOV to anything.... your attempts at wit... or "wid" given your new spelling preferences Mr. Fudd doesn't hide that you never answer the qwestion