David Josephs

Bill, 

I don’t know why you are choosing this path of discussion.  If the photo on the apps they show her in 1978 are not the man who was there, makes sense the Lopez report took so long to get released and why Sprague was removed...

Why can’t you answer the question Bill?

If Duran knows it’s not Oswald, and Azcue knows, and Litamil/9 says he was never there... and the FBI FUBARs the investigation...

....how is that her NOT LYING about it 15 years later when she most certainly knew it was not Oswald when asked about it...

CORNWELL - Okay. What specifically about the report was it that makes you angry?
TIRADO - That I was a--let me see how to say it--, I don't remember exactly, but uh, I did more to Oswald when he was here than was my job, that it was extra.

LOPEZ - Did you ever have a conversation with Azcue when Oswald was not in the office about the possibility that he was an intelligence agent for some country?
TIRADO - No, no. I don't think so. We only thought that he was a crazy man, an adventurer, or something like that.
LEAP - Did it ever enter your mind that that he was a penetration agent?
TIRADO - Perhaps. Perhaps, because it happened, it happened sometimes that somebody came and say this is a policeman or something like that.

TIRADO - .....So, Azcue went to the door, he opened the door and told Oswald to go away
 

I think we both know Azcue’s job re an American Communist... recruit, question, delay.... but not this time?

The items I listed all pan out as well Bill...  for you to dismiss them out of hand seems out of character...

Besides, instead of Having me repeatedly proving the negative... prove he was there... when they show none of the evidence can be tied to Oswald....  just this OTHER” Second person....   so Hooveresque

DJ

 

21 minutes ago, Bill Simpich said:

Your Duran argument hinges on your belief that she is deliberately lying about Oswald

Does she confirm Azcue’s statement that it was not the man Ruby killed?

iow, she knew it was not Oswald yet continued on as if it was...  how is that not lying?

As for 5 things...

1. Odio
2. Evidence of the journey in total, you’d have to read the articles... 1500 docs to hide that he didn’t go...
3. The call transcripts and timings
4. Litamil 9 & 7
5. Summary Reports of all intel activity never mention Oswald
6. 9/28 Sports Drome
7. Marina’s lies about Mex
8. The ticket found by Marina in Aug 64
9. Ochoa and the hotel registry, FM11 which puts HOLee under “O”
10. Gaudet and 9/17
11. The Paine typewriter letter reiterating those 15 days back from Oct 2... to 9/17 when the clock doesn’t start until the traveler gets there...
12. la PAZ bs rave story
13. Alvarado as CIA asset trying to place Ozzie there on the 18th....
14. the taxi story from morning of 10/2
15. did I mention Odio?

Thanks John... 

COINTELPRO has been around a while... and the info is easily found....   before the internet, organizations still communicated via newsletter and meetings.... the techniques work regardless of delivery method....

COINTELPRO (syllabic abbreviation derived from COunter INTELligence PROgram) (1956–1979, and beyond) is a series of covert and illegal projects conducted by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting American political organizations....

3 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Whoever wrote that nailed it as far as some activity on this forum both past and present

That would be the FBI John....

2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Its sort of a random observation but the difficulties you have with the FBI work on Oswald's trip to MC remind me a bit of their investigation of the Odio visit.  Initially they blew it off by making Odio look unreliable, then when the WC pressed them later in 1963 they came up with the simplistic explanation of mistaken identify involving three characters from Miami who had ended up in Dallas as part of their effort to collect donations (going to Dallas hunting for donations seems to have been the thing to do - of course there was actually much bigger money to be had in  NYC where many of the truly wealthy Cuban exiles lived, or even in Miami itself). I guess rich ultra right Texans were thought to be easier marks?

Anyway, after dragging in Howard, Hall et al and offering the WC a simple solution to their query,  we find that internal documents within the FBI clearly show it was not those three guys at Odio's door (including the fact she didn't identify them from their photos). 

Internally the FBI did quite good case of documenting why it could not have been - that was just compartmentalized from the feedback given the WC.  So we are left with  an easy answer wiping away all the Odio issues which was given to the WC and all sorts of loose ends internally within the FBI investigative reports which counter what they told the Warren Commission.

Just feels a bit like Oswald and Mexico City.

 

 

I’m thinking Pervasive more so than random...

FBI did that in virtually every area of the case.

Deleted

34 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Because the film and photo record in this case is self-authenticating.

Nothing is “self-authenticating” Jon....  especially in the FBI’s grab bag of bs evidence...

How does the zfilm accomplish this Jon?   When we know for a fact it was heavily altered....?

In fact, use whatever image or film u like and please explain SELF AUTHENTICATING....
And then look up what evidence authentication means...

I can’t speak for JB... he and I have had our disagreements over what he sees in photos, films.....

But I have truly never seen or heard something so oxymoronic.... as self/authentication.... in evidence.

Authenticating a photo usually doesn’t require a chain of custody because usually the FBI isn’t trying to frame an innocent man...
In this case Jon, nothing is real or authentic until proven so....  hope that’s not news to you....

In this case.. Zapruder claiming the film’s authenticity in no way authenticates his film...  we must look at chain of possession and the testimony of those who saw it before and after....   And on and on with all the evidence...

then there’s the number of times FBI reports find a certain conclusion from the evidence they offer does not work...

 so that evidence is simply dropped for evidence that works....  case in point... 

Please read this... It shows the FBI confronting a conclusion which doesn’t work... La Frontera....  and showing how improbable it was....   no matter, just replace, rinse and repeat...

Take care
DJ

=====

A photograph of a crime scene would be considered “documentary evidence.”

The ultimate purpose of a “chain of custody” with evidence is to provide “authentication” of that evidence so that it is admissible in court.  The Federal Rules of Evidence state, “the requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.” (USCS Fed. Rules Evid.  R 901).  This means that the person introducing the evidence must provide sufficient proof that the evidence is what that person claims.  Thus, the chain of custody is typically used to ensure that evidence is not tampered with or altered and that the “identity and integrity” of the evidence remains intact.  This “authenticates” the evidence in court so that it is admissible.

Photographs are typically authenticated by a person who is familiar with the scene that was photographed providing testimony that the image in the photograph “fairly and accurately depicts the scene as it was at the time in question.”  Anyone familiar with the scene can authenticate a photograph and it does not necessarily have to be the photographer.  That being said, the “chain of custody” is not usually part of “authenticating” a photograph, rather, authentication of a photograph leans more towards a person being able to testify that the photograph “fairly and accurately depicts the scene as it was at the time in question.”

1 hour ago, James Norwood said:

Your argument will not persuade anyone, and you are in violation of the forum guidelines by stringing out the discussion until the thread devolves into chaos

Standard COINTELPRO techniques for disrupting forums...   google them... it makes an interesting read....

1954, concentrate.... why don’t the records match boys?

Bill is in another league altogether....   I am still working on a easier to digest version of the info... all in good time.

I really spent my time on the journey and the dates before and after...

Like 1954,  ...the FBI went the extra mile piling on the BS....

Like the discovery of the 12:20pm bus to Houston... not part of a ticket to Laredo or Mexico City... just Houston

...and the details tell us he was headed for the Greyhound Terminal in New Orleans  (Del Norte in Mexico)... not Continental which becomes Flecha Rojas

from there it only gets worse...

btw... currently digesting a 20 page Weisberg analysis of the trip I came across in his files...  he always seems to spark a new line of thinking... amazing really.
DJ

The first interview with Green on the 10th, no bus for Ozzie
On "Dec 16" we now have a bus...  but for some reason we have a virtually identical report but in September 1964... at the moment of the WCR publishing...

Ballsy.

But what about that 24fps speed?

Was he watching a 48fps original or a 16fps?

One last tidbit for the fearsome foursome....  y'all act as if this kind of thing didn't happen with virtually all of Oswald's "records"
when we see duplicity everywhere we look.

Below are pages from the Tarrant county permanent school records of all the children who attended school in Tarrant...  they're online where with a little patience and some skill you can find most anything you look for...

Where is Lee (who hated to be called Harvey) and who is 7 year old Nancy Lee Oswald with Lee's Bday plus a day and why do we not see a LEE OSWALD thru 6th grade?

Furthermore, Marge was divorced in MAY 1947 and requested her name revert to Oswald.  Wonder where they got EKDAHL for 48-49...???

It sure would be great if people could do just a little research before challenging what they obviously know so little about...

Thanks James

49-50

50-51

 

51-52

 

 

 

Sorry Bill...  this is the way I answer questions...  I found what you were referencing and would like to address it.

23 hours ago, David Josephs said:

I'm not sure we can say much with certainty about the origination of the 2 applications.  How much of DURAN do we believe?

I believe her and Azcue that it was not the man Ruby killed... in this reference I am specifically talking about the applications...  I will copy the Q I ask at the end of this post:

At what point does DURAN repeating it was our Oswald to every HSCA question cross the line into lying about it Bill?

The AMMUG/1 described application process / applicant scrutiny was still completely ignored....
Why wouldn't AZCUE be interested in this American wanting to go to Cuba/Russia as a potential double agent?  Wasn't that a big part of his job?

The way LITAMIL/9 describes Duran after she returns from interrogation also seems to me she was playing a part..."Happy with her performance" is how L/9 put it, 
and may have been bullied to agree it was Oswald...
Furthermore, Lit/9 and LIT/7 are repeatedly asked about Oswald at the Embassy and all answers are negative...  L/9 was a close friend to AZCUE yet he is unaware of the American causing all the commotion?  

The LITAMIL/9 references have been redacted for over 50 years... and we come to find he does not support the story... and he was CIA!?!

While Sylvia was in Mexican police custody.... L/9 story doesn't change...  not a single one of his October '63 and forward summary reports contain info on this Oswald visit....

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10262-10355.pdf

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32389430.pdf is another L/9 report saying that as DURAN spoke of her arrest.

 

1 hour ago, Bill Simpich said:

David,

Could you try again, I don't follow you.  Of course Bill.... sometimes I can't even follow myself....

1.  Your opening argument that "Oswald wasn't there"  is irrelevant to the question of why you think Duran is not telling the truth on any subject.   This commentary is very confusing and unhelpful.   If it wasn't Oswald then she would realize the whole thing was a scam....  and I didn't say "any subject"... we are talking about the 2 applications.. yet as I realize... if she describes someone who is not Oswald and continues on agreeing that is was Oswald... how is that not lying?

2.  It remains confusing when you write "she doesn't know how many copies there were or if she gave a copy to the man before her...."  What are you referring to?  Can you cite your source?  Bill - these are Q & A's of Duran...  She can't remember how many copies of a visa application are created - which she did primarily after answering phones - in her job?  Same with #3 below...  If anyone can walk in and get a blank Visa Application and walk out how can we possibly know whether those WCR/HSCA applications are the original ones... especially since it takes until Aug 64 to get the carbon and 15 years to get the original?

"It could have happened..."

TIRADO - I don't remember very well if uh, there were only two copies. I mean, one original and one copy, but uh, it could have happened, but I don't remember.

3.   You write:  "Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?"  Same problem.  She can't remember the most simple aspects of her job?  One copy to file, one copy to Cuba... the person themselves would not get a copy?  But she can't remember that...  the person filing has no record of the application at all?  Maybe, but like Marina and the photos... she conveniently can't remember how many there were... 

It goes from there.  I assume you are saying that because she forgot certain procedures that is evidence of lying.   That is a big burden you haven't met at this point.  Not "lying" in every case but omitting...  her allowing it to be Oswald despite knowing it wasn't is not fibbing just a little?

 

Below, a note to Win Scott to use CIA assets, who in turn informs WS of what happened...   sure looks like the CIA/DFS making sure everyone's story is properly "motivated."

Again, if it wasn't Oswald - as I think most are starting to fully understand - then DURAN is indeed complicit when finally questioned 15 years later...  She tells Lopez he was barely 5'4" and very slight...  Azcue confirms...   The WCR et al has him 5'11" 165....  Even our guy was 5'9" 135....  Marina was 5'4"

At what point does DURAN repeating it was our Oswald to every HSCA question cross the line into lying about it Bill?

DJ

3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Erwin Schwartz watches it on a 24fps projector.

So you think this was half speed or 50% too fast?

When did this occur?

21 hours ago, Bill Simpich said:

David,

What evidence do you have that Silvia Duran is not telling the truth on any subject?

Oswald wasn't there.

Not trying to be flip here Bill...   both Azcue and Duran say it wasn't him...  plus, how do you address what AMMUG/1 tells us about how those not "with us"
are interrogated when submitting a Visa app?  Azcue supposedly just yells at this person for a bit and throws him out...

Isn't that the opposite of his job?

I believe her when she says he didn't come back...  I believe her that she typed up an application...   
With the assets we had in that Embassy/Consulate... why does it take until Aug 28th to get it to the WC? 

How could so much detail have been written about the Mexico trip when the book was being printed at the time they get the info?
Is there evidence the WC sees this application prior to August 64?

CIA says the WC decides not to show DURAN the application and by default the photo so it is not until HSCA...  the photos of the application are in many cases just crap without the ability to tell who is in the photo... so I doubt there'd be a reason for her to comment...

I realize this is 15 years later.... but her job was to process these applications and she doesn't know how many copies there were or if she gave a copy to the man before her....
You feel this is truthful - all the instances of forgetfulness on key items?     

CORNWELL - Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?
TIRADO - I don't remember very well if uh, there were only two copies. I mean, one original and one copy, but uh, it could have happened, but I don't remember.
CORNWELL - Okay. To the best of your memory then, the person who made the application was not permitted to have a copy.
TIRADO - I don't know. I don't remember.

and the fact anyone can take with them a blank version of this application.. she talks as if she'd done many of these applications yet still does not rmember the most basic things about them, the processes or the photos....

CORNWELL - Would you have ever allowed a person to take all of the applications outside and attach the photos or sign them themselves?
TIRADO - Yes, because you may come, ask for the application and you may keep it.

So, assuming an impostor is there on Friday the 27th (Since Ozzie was on a different journey in TX) we have no idea whether what we see today was the application taken at the time...

Why do you think it took until Aug 64 to get the carbon if the trip down there was discussed immediately after the assassination?

Cheer Bill... hope you and yours are well
DJ

17 minutes ago, Mark Stevens said:

I just wanted to comment on this.

Did they have an assignable motive for Oswald? For Ray? For Sirhan? Did any of these 3 people confess to the killing(s) for which they were suspected? Did they need an in-depth study of Oswald to determine what motivated him to kill Kennedy because he denied it? Was he murdered before he stood trial? Did he take the stand and state why he did it, or deny involvement in it? Did they need an in-depth study of Ray to determine what motivated him to kill King because he denied it? Was he murdered before he stood trial? Did he take the stand and state why he did it, or deny involvement in it? Did they need an in-depth study of Sirhan to determine what motivated him to kill Kennedy because he denied it? Was he murdered before he stood trial? Did he take the stand and state why he did it, or deny involvement in it? 

Are these all fruits, but not all apples? I'm pretty sure I see 2 oranges and 1 apple, but for you it might just be bananas.

I mean see bananas....

Nice tactic Mark....

But nothing to do with why the FBI included in evidence just about every possible worthless item they could get their hands on and then offer no index while
spreading the information around so haphazardly as to make it virtually impossible to follow....

I'm sorry you do not see the glaring conflicts with the year 1954 and Oswald's life...  As I don't remember seeing an answer, or if I even asked you,

Also not sure how a MOLE HUNT thread gets to Stripling... which is why I may have used info used previously....

I'll take some time now and read back to find your questions...  

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything here... simply to point out the evidence from which conclusions are rendered...

What's most sad is someone, anyone, taking the time to question but not the time to research....  this conversation can be picked up on a new thread...
We should leave this thread for its intended purpose....
DJ

5 hours ago, Anthony Mugan said:

Q1. Could the various copying and photographing and printing processes done on the seperate images we see account for the distortions in the typed part of the document?
I truly do not see how Anthony.   The HSCA version surely seems to be the "top" copy... while the other screams carbon copy....  the thinness of the type on one versus the other..
We NEVER see original items of evidence... copies or photos.  Below is a 1 page analysis concluding the typewriter at the embassy was used for the application... but they use the word "APPEARS" a whole bunch...  

Also have a pdf rif: 104-10005-10059 which has a CIA routing slip and poor photos of the WCR version of the application.. 5 images of the signature alone while the application itself is completely unreadable.  I am searching my files now for info on how the WCR came to acquire that version of the application.  ok... found it CE2564

 

Q2. If you look at CE 2564, the visa application form from the WC report you can see a faint line of black dots in the photo of LHO running slightly diagonally in the upper part of the image, above his head. Could this be a trace of the staple on that photograph (a separate image to the one used in the top copy the HSCA got)? This image is much lighter than the HSCA one which presumably relates to the copying processes done on the different documents. Could this have led to the much fainter image of the staple in CE 2564?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=844&tab=page

Possible... yet doesn't it look like the darkness of the staple would be as dark as the other dark things in the image on the left?

Also notice the faint crease/line across Oswald's mouth, especially seen on the right, even seems the photo is darker below that line.. strange shading
 

Q3. As the applicant would have had to sign both copies of the application is it possible that the applicant signed the top copy neatly but quickly scribbled his signature on the second copy? Has a specialist in handwriting looked at this at any time?
"Is it possible" and the JFK Assn.... of course it's possible...  when the FBI rewrote Oswald's TSBD application it was signed "By Brian" with a signature eerily the same as others attributed to our man.  The 2 signatures are above and below the "employment app" designation.

It should be no surprise that the FBI/CIA had some of the best forgers available to them in the world.....

 

Q4. Is it likely that the top copy got the official stamp but the carbon going into the local file didn't?
Yes... that's exactly what the story is....  But I came to find that the carbon application was not provided until Aug 28, 1964 (CE2564 above)... 2 or so weeks before publishing.

Q5. As the version which looks most unusual is the WC version, obtained from the Consulate in Mexico, that would require the Cuban government to have co-operated in 'tidying up' the HSCA version at a later date or for the US to have modified the document to create a less than ideal forgery for the WC version in 1964 in a way that runs counter to their basic hypothesis. At first sight that seems the wrong way around for there to be forgery involved or am I missing something?
As mentioned to Q4... Aug 28, 1964.... from Nov 23, 1963.  To get the Carbon Copy from Mexico City....  the original is mentioned in the reply to Mexico from Cuba in early October 1963 as being received, stamped, and basically refused until he has a Russian Visa. CE2564 still.

As I say, I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here to test out the possibilities...would actually be quite pleased if I could get to a point were I could 'sign off' on LHO not being physically present in Mexico as it would open the door to tying up the Odio incident, but I'm just not there yet.

That's fair... also remember there is testimony that puts Oswald in Dallas at the Sports Drome the weekend of Sept 28.... Odio is near Dallas.
Why else would Hoover's FBI cover up where he was in favor of a bus journey and a 5 day stay that never happened?

Sept 30th was a Monday... Every embassy/consulate he needs to do his business is open... and he was portrayed as being in such a rush since he had to leave
based on the 15-day visa which was 1- a 180-day visa, and 2 -the days don't start until you enter the country... 15 days back from Oct 2 is..... Sept 17th.

Any reason not to do any business in line with why he was there, on Monday? (I seem to remember it may have been a holiday in Mexico... but not sure)

Love this SOP... "even though he couldn't have, he did in any case"....

 

When Hoover talks to LBJ and says the man down there did not sound like Oswald... so instead of Oswald NOT being there, Hoover's solution  is magical:

"It appears there is a 2nd person"...  cause for Hoover, he can't be in Dallas assisting the FBI...

FWIW
DJ
 

.    

 

 

Regards

Anthony

HSCA conclusion from:  HSCA VISITS CUBA RELATED TO OSWALD VISA APPLICATION   docid-32272523
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32272523.pdf

 

3 hours ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

DJ has distinguished the difference between the composition of the brick, and the wall.   Thanks for that.

If the wall is not part of Stripling school, it is irrelevant.

Why can you guys never stay on topic?

Why is it "you guys" can't follow a logical argument?

Stripling's attendance occurs when the WC is supposed to know where he was... 8th grade at BJHS New Orleans.
The physical evidence of his attending BJHS in 54-55 conflicts with itself...
The pattern is followed 3 years in a row
We already have in evidence the conflict with his leaving the marines in March 59 and Sept 59....  

There is evidence of 2 different people in a multitude of places... and we've already proven via the dental records that the man buried did not have LEE Oswald's teeth.
Is it truly that much of a mental stretch for you to see this duplicity running rampant thru his life starting as early as 1947.
If so, again... no skin off me buddy, we're all entitled to conclude what we want...  be nice though if you took some time to address the many anomalies I pointed out already like why the 1954/55 BJHS grade cards don't match the permanent record?  or the housing location order from Lillian to Myrtle to Exchange Place?  The photo from 1954 and 1956 not being the same Marge?  The reason why Kudlaty would lie or embellish such a vivid memory (you saying you cannot think of any other occasions where the FBI takes something without record or the altering the record? - Minox Camera remind you of anything?

I'm glad you got the brick and wall reference... but you are still microscopically looking at the brick...  you can't see a wall... understand?
Take a step back and compare what the WCR offers for those years and what independent research does...  if you feel BJHS evidence precludes a boy named Harvey Oswald
from attending Stripling for 6 weeks in the fall of 1954... so be it... move on already Robert... this inability to see the big picture and then argue the brick's molecular composition as a way of disproving there is a wall... can be seen as a tactic to derail the discussion... what answer would satisfy?  The FBI destroyed evidence...

Is that a surprise to you?

 

WHY do you think his 7th, 8th and 9th grades are so important?  Did they do this deep dive on James Earl Ray? Sirhan?
I've looked, no, they didn't.  They couldn't have cared less.....

But not with the man accused here... the FBI created a thud weight report that said everything BUT Oswald could have done it...

As with so much of the "contrary to the gov't report" evidence found by researchers, are you just bothered by molecules or do you actually care about the H&L journey?

Peace,
DJ

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

This visa application was made in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy by someone posing as Oswald on 27 Sept.?  Or, is it just paperwork prepared by various government folk later to say that Oswald was in Mexico City at the time that they claim?

Could this application have been made at an earlier time by someone else and then adjusted to fit Harvey Oswald?  Photo, time, date, and signature adjusted?

Well John, that would fit in with a pet theory that no one was actually there impersonating Oswald... and it was all an Intelligence Operation... with the key players told what they needed to say... kinda like McFarlands and the Aussie girls, Bledsoe and Whaley in their time and place, etc....

I'm not sure we can say much with certainty about the origination of the 2 applications.  How much of DURAN do we believe?

Seems she has little clue what the processes are....  AZCUE would interview anyone trying to do what "Oswald" was trying to do.... he was a Cuban Intel agent
This info from AMMUG/1 suggests that none of the SOPs were followed with this person...  it suggests to me that a real american trying to get to Cuba was not there... As LITAMIL/9 confirmed....
....or Duran and Azcue are part of the lie/project going on at that embassy.   Not a single thing is "right" with Mexico... not one.

DJ

 

CORNWELL - Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?
TIRADO - I don't remember very well if uh, there were only two copies. I mean, one original and one copy, but uh, it could have happened, but I don't remember.
CORNWELL - Okay. To the best of your memory then, the person who made the application was not permitted to have a copy.
TIRADO - I don't know. I don't remember.

On 9/18/2019 at 1:04 PM, Chris Davidson said:

I only suggest the bottom floor location for a "over the limo" miss at approx extant z152

The miss at 152 - of which I am in total agreement as to timing - seems to have created a spark or ricochet to the left of the limo...

I thought for sure I had read about a woman who saw those "sparks" fly up off the street....

Anyway, the low trajectory from the bottom floor or even van top seems too shallow to have missed and hit so close to Dal-Tex.... 

The 2nd, 3rd and roof locations seems to make more sense for this shot....

 

2 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

604frames/18.3fps = 33 seconds.

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313.
This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds.
This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 miles per hour.

===

At the actual speed of 16fps there are 528 frames in 33 seconds... less 486 = 42 frames...  or just enough time for a limo stop removal...??

===
Much more importantly... they kept referring to frame 161 as the start of the 8.3 second shooting span to frame 313...   
33 seconds - 8.3 seconds = 24.7 = seconds from frame 0 to 161 plus frame 314 to 486.  
161 + 172 = 333 frames / 24.7 seconds = 13.48 frames per second film speed for the non-shooting sequences 

Isn't that a problem that directly suggests frame removal? 

As long as they held to those 8.3 seconds for 161-313, 152 frames (18.3fps) they should have had only 18.2 more seconds of film, not 24.7
6.5 more seconds of film... 119 frames at 18.3fps and 104 frames at 16fps   

Removal of the turn? 

3 hours ago, Anthony Mugan said:

The one of the left (which looks older???) is the one the WC had and that has the faded photo with no obvious staple, the odd signature and no Cuban stamp??

The notes at the top of the 2 images from the HSCA claim so... as does the WCR exhibit of the app.

Might be hard to read but it’s there... the wonderful world of JFK Assn evidence...

DJ

Sadly the interpretation is colored with the fraud perpetrated by the investigation.  Most are unaware of RAFAEL OCHOA..   who handled every item of Mexico side evidence...

On 7/8/2020 at 12:08 PM, Mark Stevens said:

lollerskates!!!!!!!!

Aren't you the one who stated you weren't familiar with all of the H&L evidence?

Mr. Stevens.....   how familiar are you with the data?

Curious mostly...  you've read the book, seen the notebooks at Baylor and been thru the CD?

If not, no worries....  again, I'm curious as to where you get your opinions and the data from which you derive them...

Sorry for not rereading the entire thread...  I may know more about H&L across the entire spectrum than anyone other than John Armstrong himself.  All due respect to Jim Hargrove who admins the H&L website....  You may have read some of my posts here on the subject.  I've taken topics JA introduced in the book much further down the road, which was his hope all along.

I spent 2 years talking thru the entire book with John a number of years back and we've helped each other on numerous projects....

The purpose of John's book was 2-fold....  1 - it was a place to start from where a researcher could continue down a chosen path or all the paths as I have...
and 2 - to take on the totality of the evidence.

Topics like Oswald at Stripling deserves this kind of discussion... what I don't see you asking is why it's important at all that in the fall of 1954 Oswald is in Fort Worth
when the WCR tells us he was living with Myrtle Evans at 1454 St. Mary's in New Orleans attending Beauregard in the 9th grade.

I am now going to attempt to piece together for you the anomalies surrounding the fall of 1954. 

 In May 1953 NYC Oswald was finishing 7th grade.
September 1953 he enters 8th grade at PS44 (Manhattan, Bronx or Staten Island?) and gets the progress report mentioned by Carro from the call with Marge.

 

Harvey is placed in YOUTH HOUSE during April/May 1953... this school record has been doctored... from March 1953 to June 1953 there are not 109+15 days of school to attend or miss..   Another story for another time - what we see above is a combined record of both Lee and Harvey

This is dated just after he returns back to school after Youth House....  he entered April 21... but please notice he is returning to "PS 117 Jr H"
just under the name CLAVERIE

We also see the same 2 addresses as the NYC perm record...  but no mention of PS 44....

 

Which ultimately leads to conflicts:

J. CARRO was involved with Oswald in NYC as his parole officer... kinda. 
Lee cannot be entering 8th and 9th grade at the same time...
PS 44 is in the Bronx and there's one on the west side of Manhattan... Robert Oswald wrote he started 8th grade in  Sept 1953 at PS 44 on Columbus & 76th.
on the west side of Manhattan...10 days before the 9/24 court date and call from Marge below...  

 

In January 1954 Marge and Ozzie move back to New Orleans and in with Marge's sister Lillian Murret.  And this is where I have a difference of interpretation from John/Jim...

I do not see the Beauregard cumulative record as evidence he attended BJHS in the fall of 1953... He very well may have... as The Beauregard records have many, many other conflicts and problems which stand on their own (grade cards do not match the info on the perm record - do a search and I'm sure you'll find my posts on the subject).  Other evidence is available for the Fall of 1953 for a Harvey Oswald and nurse mother living on Exchange and his attending 8th grade at BJHS.  For now though let's start with Jan 1954...

March 1954:  Myra DaRouse takes HARVEY TO MONTE LEPRE CLINIC AND THEN home to 126 Exchange after piano falls on him

Here we have a letter, below, from Mother to J Edward Pic... June 14 1954 New Orleans 
Return address 1454 St. Mary's is Myrtle Evan's place...  they had returned from NYC in January and lived with Lillian thru February 1954 when they moved to Myrtles
and remained there until August 1954 when they supposedly moved to Exchange Place

Mr. JENNER - Do you know how it was that she went to live at 126 Exchange Place in New Orleans?
Mrs. MURRET - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - Was that 1954 or 1955?
Mrs. MURRET - I don't know--whatever you have down there probably is the right year, but they lived at Myrtle's house first.

 

So here we are in June 1954... they should be at Myrtle's

 

Mr. JENNER - How long did they stay at your house?
Mrs. MURRET - At my house?
Mr. JENNER - Yes.
Mrs. MURRET - Well, like I said, 2 weeks or 3 weeks at the most, somewhere in there.
Mr. JENNER - And you are pretty sure that they moved directly from your house into this place on Exchange Alley?
Mrs. MURRET - Well, either there or to Myrtle's apartment. I don't know which, to be truthful with you.

Well... they didn't move from Lillian to Exchange but to Myrtle's

Mr. JENNER - You did see Lee after they returned from New York?
Mrs. EVANS - Oh, yes; they lived at my house for, oh, I guess about 6 months.
Mr. JENNER - Including Lee?
Mrs. EVANS - Oh, yes.

We have a photo from 1954 of Marge Oswald at Exchange Place... we also have a 1956 photo of Marge from Exchange Place yet they hardly appear like the same person.  Her own sister was amazed and Mr. Murret had the exact same comments about her....  in the spring of 1954 Harvey attended BJHS and was even taken back to Exchange by Myra DaRouse... HARVEY.

But in terms of the Fall 1953/54 school year semester Lee is in NYC while Harvey/Marge are in New Orleans at Exchange Place

 

 

Stripling attendance is assumed to be Sept-Oct 1954 while Lee Oswald attends BJHS in New Orleans...  please read the WCR note inset below

 

 

"BJHS in 1954" then jumps to Sept 1955.  Evidence shows him at BJHS in Louisiana from Jan 54 thru June 55...  quite a lot of evidence in fact.

"1954"... well a school year is either 9/53-6/54, or 9/54-6/55...we know Lee starts at BJHS in January 1954
With the WCR question seemingly skipping his 9th grade year (remember 9th grade from above?) and going straight to 10th at Warren Easton thru Oct 1955.

In the summer of 1955 Lee starts work at Tujagues import/export and works all thru 10th grade - he drops out of 10th in Oct 1955
Summer of 1956 they move to 3830 W 6th #3 in Ft Worth - this is LEE and mother

The note asks for school data for Louisiana, not Fort Worth.  The 1954-55 school year was entirely in Louisiana yet
it appears the question does not know this...

H&L via Kudlaty say September - October 1954 at Stripling  ...and it appears we also have him attending only Sept-Oct 1955 at Easton...

yet another item of evidence which shows Oswald in school in Louisiana and dropping out Oct 1955.

He appears to have also been at Arlington only from 9/5 - 9/28 1956.

3 schools 3 years in a row during the same months our man Oswald barely makes it 6 weeks... or 2 schools and our discussion about 1954.

The WCR question projects ignorance of the BJHS 54/55 school year despite all the evidence...  Grade cards all marked "session 1954 - 1955"

 

 

Why is it - do you suppose Mark, that the WCR steered clear of the 54-55 school year?

Why is it we see the same pattern for 1955 and 1956 where the boy starts school yet leaves before the end of October?
Why would Kudlaty lie?  This certainly doesn't "make" the book... it is simply another brick in the wall....

Well, maybe this is why he is telling us the truth...   the grade cards from 54-55 at BJHS do not match the perm record on which these grade cards are recorded
12 absences does not match any of them... even the grades are off...  

Just seems there is much more to the 54-55 school year than Kudlaty telling us what he did....

 

 

While I do appreciate these deep dives into the molecular composition of the brick...  you gotta step back a bit - and every once in a while - to see the wall before you.

I look forward to your reply
DJ

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, David Boylan said:

It is good to have David back!

Sometimes you just need a break...

46 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Are you saying the passport application is as phony as the photo?  Or, am I misreading?

Not really a "passport" application" but I get you...

I'm simply not sure if the application sent to Cuba, is the same as the one we see first in the WCR without a STAMP
or the second one at the HSCA - fully stamped - yet with a different signature and completely askew to the "original"....

But like all things from that time period, the evidence was created to fit the situation... standard FBI MO.
And that everything goes thru OCHOA, #2 at Gobernacion behind the CIA asset Echeverria.

There is no authenticated evidence available that puts Oswald in Mexico....  and those who were there and were our assets were not able to place him there.

We find it was Phillips and his assets who created much of the Oswald fallacy in Mexico... every BS story and bit of evidence traces back to him or OCHOA
who was basically helping cover Hoover's butt by offering (creating) evidence for Mexico when Hoover knew Oswald was doing his job traveling from New Orleans thru Austin to Dallas.

Hoover had no choice but to back the CIA's play, even if he had no idea what happened down there

If our man Ozzie wasn't there... how "real" can those applications be?

Here are the 2 items and superimposed using the #779 as the anchor.

Is it possible the captions are backward in the HSCA?  the one on the right looks like the original based on the thinness of the lettering yet that is the one they claim was photographed when HSCA staff met with Fidel.

If the fixed writing on these 2 sheets of this form line up for the carbon... the text would also line up.  

 

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

DJ, Mr. Joseph's.  You really should put all this together in a book for the sake of history.  It might not make you rich in your old age given the NYT likely wouldn't review it but it would be important.  Even just putting all the articles at K & K together in book form as say a set of essays with maybe a little more tying them together for context would be a nugget for future researchers and historians to mine.  jmho, Regards, Ron.

Well...  i sure appreciate the vote of confidence...   and I retire in a couple years.  If there are still beaches in Atlantic City I'll be editing my essays for such a book.

Is there a way to get a download of ALL my posts and content here?  I wonder....

And if one was to do something like that... a book?  a website?   Slide show?  maybe all three....

That a some Day Trading and I'll be busy...  got a nice pension as well as a few other income flows... 

It's just a matter of focus and effort... and that passion which hits us and drives us to do those kind of projects..

Your kind words are most motivational I must say...  

5 hours ago, Anthony Mugan said:

Do you (or anyone) have a view on that photo?

First off - thanks for the open mind.... and second, thx for reading the work.  

I've written about those photos quite a bit....    this is the WCR official photo of the application as supposedly received from CUBA.

The version with staples is from the HSCA.  This version has no CUBAN Stamp by the signature and an obviously different signature.
Kinda like the signatures in Helsinki ...  below those is the signature of the man Ruby killed...  Long post.... take your time...
DJ

First, Duran was never shown the application of photos AFTER 11/22
2nd, the supposed CARBON COPY has no staple in  it

Third - AZCUE's statement has him there by 9/26 and as early as 9/25... Azcue also said it was not the man Ruby killed.

4th...  the signatures are not the same on the 2 copies

 

5th... the CIA dispatch confirming the WC was not going to show DURAN that application or photo

6th - there were multiple copies and different sizes of the famed photo..
The WC didn't know from where the photo originated?

 

6

 

7th there is DURAN herself testifying at the HSCA....her job was to assist applicants... she recommended a few places for these photos... probably within walking distance for convenience?

CORNWELL - So, from all the circumstances, did it appear to your that he just went somewhere locally and had the pictures made?
TIRADO - Yeah. I think that I already explained (to) him where he could take the photographs.
CORNWELL - You told him some locations in town where ge could go? Were there some right in the neighborhood of the Consulate there?
TIRADO - That I don't remember.

CORNWELL - Did you have it twice or did you type one and make two copies?
TIRADO - Only one.
CORNWELL - And made two?
TIRADO - Yes.

And finally, the applications themselves reveal an interesting anomaly, DURAN says above that one typing made 2 copies... a carbon copy
yet when you superimpose them and line up the form's lettering and lines, the applications are horribly askew

 

And when you line up the Application # at the top:  the further down you go, the more offset it gets.... and those signatures....