David Josephs

52 minutes ago, Robert Montenegro said:

Once again, I certainly do not want to step on anybody's feet here, as I am a "F.N.G." to the forum

Not sure what FNG is... but it is sure nice having a weapons expert with hands-on experience...  feet and all.

I get PNG, Persona non Gratis... FNG? 

Anyway, didn't you mention that one of the worst spots to pick as a Sniper (for shooting down Elm instead of Houston) was that SE window... or anywhere in that building for that matter.

Have you given much consideration to Tosh's SE knoll shot(s)?

So here is the work in progress in both formats...

Both searchable...  

Corrections and additions are most welcome...  

15 hours ago, Robert Montenegro said:

Check out that small sniper rifle next to him.

While diversion rifles are making Loud noises... this thing would have never been heard...

FWIW

4 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

It was 3126 Harlandale.

I believe that says ALBERTO DALMAN/DALMASS  and OSCAR D... at 2927 "  which I take to mean Harlandale

Maybe the name of his Harlandale informants?

I'll go ahead and post it here in Excel form... if people want a pdf version just, ask.  Not everyone has/uses Excel...
we all have acrobat reader...

18 minutes ago, John Kowalski said:

What sources of information would be available for Harvey for the period 1948-1952?

I followed on John's lead by going to the respective school districts online and finding the records they kept...

I found the TARRANT county pupil population listed by school district....  that would be very telling and boy was it:
Other telling info comes from John Pic...

AND Robert....  These are all 1946 dates...  

There is no listing of a LEE OSWALD attending school in the MASTER TARRANT County books for 1945 thru 1955

'47-'48 shows NANCY LEE and HARVEY OSWALD ... in Sept 1947 Marge was still married to Ekdahl

Mr. JENNER - He entered in September 19, 1946, and continued to January 23, 1947, old Covington Grammar School

In '48-'49 NANCY LEE with a birth date 1 day after Lee, with Harvey using the 7-9-39 bdate supposedly to get into 1st grade, yet in 1947 he would artificially be 9 years old and in 3rd grade
not 1st.  Doesn't this suggest it was HARVEY at San Saba enrolled in BENBROOK?

And no... no one has the first clue as to who NANCY LEE was/is.  btw - in '48-'49 ROBERT entered 9th grade at Stripling Jr High  YET, there is no ROBERT listed until 1949-50.

FWIW - the only year the TARRANT BOOKS do not offer is 1946-1947... there is a 1944-46 book and then a 1947-48...  Could that be the long arm of the FBI protecting itself ala Stripling??

'49-'50  HARVEY has his birth day back... almost

'50-'51

'51-'52...

This shows that in Jan 1947 when Lee was 7 in October was supposedly let into school with the July bdate...  
He's SUPPOSED to be at the BENBROOK School, in Tarrant county...  9-9-47 would be the start of 2nd Grade, never attending a full year of 1st. yet promoted to 2nd grade none the less

Address on enrollment card is "Worth Hotel" AND 7408 Ewing which is not bought until 1948.  MO lists LEE's Bday as July 9, 1939 to get into school (Harvey's Bdate above)

This info is from an FBI report as footnote to p674 of the WCR.  CE1874 mentions O.H. STOWE superintendent TARRANT county schools claiming they had an enrollment card for October 31, 1945 with July 9 1938 as Lee's Bday.  The address was listed as ROUTE 5 BOX 567 
(WCD897 p461)

This shows that 2nd grade starting 9-9-47 was removed/changed to 3-19-48.... date of withdrawal is 3-18-47... Sept-March and no grades?
It's as if nothing happened ...  present 120 of the 180 school days but at LILY B CLAYTON, not GEORGE CLARK

Bigger Question is why this card is different from the completed Cumulative record...

Can anyone explain why a PERM RECORD would have an "early" version" and a "final" version ?  The one above already lists 2 different schools so it's not
specifically a "LILY B CLAYTON card:  Also notice that 3300 WILLING is not listed... which was why he changed from CLAYTON to CLARK elementary...

Sure wish I knew who wrote the handwritten things on this card

And an FBI report re: Marge's addresses:  like us - the FBI is stumped from 1942 - 1954.  After 1954 there are addresses for Marge that directly contradict where she was and where she was working...

2 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

It was 3126 Harlandale.

not being cheeky here....  why do we see 3114 Harlendale in Walthers' notes? 

Where did 3126 come from?

DJ

15 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

What was the name of the organization that Henry Wade gave out at Oswald's midnight press conference, and which Jack Ruby corrected him?

This is what I've found... I didn't know off the top of my head....

Doesn't seem to be the same mistake...  btw - what was the correct Harlendale address?
DJ

Wiki - District Attorney Henry Wade briefed reporters at the press conference telling them that Lee Oswald was a member of the anti-Castro Free Cuba Committee. Ruby was one of several people there who spoke up to correct Wade, saying, "Henry, that's the Fair Play for Cuba Committee," a pro-Castro organization.

Article by Mike Sylwester, "Mob Connections: Jack Ruby, Smuggling With and Spying on Communists, 1938 - 1958"   http://www.jfklancer.com/jackruby.html 

 During the Friday night "press conference" with Lee Oswald at the Dallas Police Station, then District Attorney Henry Wade said that Lee Oswald was a member of the "Free Cuba Movement," Ruby corrected him, stating: Fair Play for Cuba." As Ruby testified to Chief Justice Warren:

And they questioned Henry Wade, "what organization did he belong to," or something. And if I recall, I think Henry Wade answered, "Free Cuba." And I corrected Henry Wade, because listening to the radio or KLIF, it stood out in my mind that it was "Fair Play Cuba." There was a difference. So he said, "Oh yes, Fair Play Cuba," and he corrected that.

We left out in the hallway, and I saw Henry Wade standing there, and I went over to him and said, "Henry, I want you to know I was the one that corrected you." I think it is a childish thing, but I met Henry Wade sometime back, and I knew he would recognize me. By the way, it was "Fair Play Cuba," or something to that effect.
Actual newsreel footage. 

Hey there Doug...  do I have this right?  it seems they got the wrong house in that article... Walthers' note says 3114 Harlendale...??

Plus, I guess this is a duplex? as the address on the post out front is 3126....  was this just more ASCI planted evidence against Ozzie?  I do think I found an image of Oswald at one of these meetings... but can't be sure...

That sure looks like CRUZ in the front row...  I think that's Oswald by the way he is standing and holding his body

FWIW  DJ

A point of interest has resurfaced again of late; that being a Nov. 23, 1963, report made by Dallas County Sheriff’s Department Deputy E.R. “Buddy” Walthers. In his report to Dallas County Sheriff Bill Decker, Walthers said that “at a house at 3128 Harlandale, some Cubans had been having meetings on the weekends and were possibly connected with the ‘Freedom for Cuba Party,’ of which Oswald was a member.” Walthers got the name wrong. Oswald was a self-proclaimed member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC), which he set up while in New Orleans in the summer of 1963.

Here's a composite re: the Granbury house....

Based on the 2 sets of poles - telephone and electrical? - and that they lived off Granbury Route 45 (or 5??)

Pic and Robert O talk of the brick/stone house on Granbury in the middle of nowhere...  it's claimed the house was in an area flooded by the opening of Benbrook dam...
but I fail to see how given the few details we have.

(edit: you can see the top of a house to the right of the car)

18 hours ago, John Butler said:

In David's timeline is a reference for 2220 Thomas Place on March 19, 1948.  And, then nothing until 1952.  Generally, if there is nothing to report on then the time period entries would be left blank.  Or, if nothing could be found for those years then maybe a note saying such would be appropriate.

Maybe David will make a comment on that.  His input would be appreciated. 

LOL.. Thanks for the kind words John/Jim...  I have been adding to the timeline so I will need to get you an update...  Be nice if POAGE would let me keep a copy there...(hint)

We have the fact there was ALSO A NOTE for a Harvey Oswald going to the HARRIS while Lee, I think, was the one with the punctured heel....
4029 BYERS is also very close by... It's very possible they just stayed at Thomas...  here's what John wrote:

In 1940 the duplex at 2220 Thomas Place was purchased by Edna Pendleton.
There were two apartments-one in the front (apt. "A"), and one in the rear (apt. "B").
In 1946 and 1947 Mrs. Rufie Cox occupied apartment "A," while Erwin and Velda
Schutz occupied apartment "B." From 1948 thru 1954 Mrs. Rufie Cox occupied apartment
"A," but there was no listing for anyone in apartment "B."

1948    7    19    HARVEY taken to Harris Hospital by Mr. Prestin "Allen"        Summer    Ft. Worth     2220 THOMAS PL / 4029 BYERS
1948    8    ??    FBI report claims Bell says Summer '48 for 3 months - MO and son        Summer    Benbrook    101 San Saba
 

52 minutes ago, John Butler said:

David Josephs has the most complete info on this.  I'm waiting for him to respond.  I think he eventually will give us a clue, a direction.

Let's look at this time frame...  early 1948 Marge moves to 3300 Willing after finding Edwin with another woman at the 8th street apt. 
Summer 1948 the FBI has Marge and son moving to San Saba BEFORE Ewing... claiming Bell said they only lived there a few months.

But we all know they were a year off...  John Pic's photos of Lee and Blackie are of 101 San Saba... despite his trying to lie about it in testimony.

That there is no listing for the "B" side from 1948-1952 is pretty telling - no?  

4029 BYERS is a 10 min walk from 2220 Thomas... and BIRCHMAN is 1.5 miles down the road.

Harvey could have attended Arlington Elementary (now South Hi Mount) after Lee leaves in summer '49...  but that's just a guess...

No records of Marge working and the infamous NANCY LEE and HARVEY are from Sept '47 thru June '48... then she gets crossed off and Marge Oswald becomes Marge Ekdahl
despite claiming she wanted her name back after the divorce... (why would school records CHANGE to a name she was not using?)

We must also remember that EDWIN would not have lived at San Saba... he was a NYC intellectual... BELL says Marge and son leave around Thanksgiving 1947... 
It MAY be possible that HARVEY is a few years younger and not yet going to school.. and when he finally does it's in a different grade than Lee... until after NYC and 1953...

My $.02
DJ

Wanted to add this visual... Actual measurements within Gauthier's model based on the info provided in WCD298.

There is a lot of contradictory info in this one image....  Part of the measurements was the distance from Zapruder to JFK...

Here's a bit more detail into what was done to hide as much as possible.  As Chris says... creating one shot from 2...
(and it stands to reason if the shooters where radio connected... a "fire" command would be carried out by all shooters simultaneously... making many shots sound like fewer.)

3 hours ago, John Butler said:

Chris,

Shot 2?  Frames 56 thru 73?  Shot 3?  (frame 89).  Are they using a different reference for Zapruder frames?  What's with these numbers?  Are they referring to frames past the Stemmons sign?

What are they talking about?  The p. limo was on Houston Street when Zapruder 56-73 were taken.  This has to refer to something else? 

Surely these guys were using something else as a reference for frames.  Were they working with a different Zapruder film?

Since this January 28, 1964 is going to several Asst. Directors of the FBI it must be a serious document.  It mentions various WC legal staff as agreeing.  It is obviously not the official story.  They didn't like the idea of one shot hitting Kennedy and then Connally? 

Frame 225 plus 56 or 73.  Frame 281 to 298?  That makes more sense according to Zapruder.

Could you post the docs without the gif so that the second page can be read at the bottom.  Or, post a reference to find these docs.

Hey John... following Davidson's lead and the WEST surveys the question is whether or not a 3rd shot near 5+00 existed or was added to there were 3 shots... it was later removed and became the TAGUE shot...

56 frames from 171 is 227.  56 from 161 is 217...  Halfway between is 222...  313 minus 89 = 224....

The numbers we know as the Zfilm frames was designed on purpose.  Instead of Z133 being the frame the limo reappears, it was actually close to 33 frames later...
the real mystery is 133 since we all know the camera was not turned off and on again.

It takes the cycle 81 frames to make that wide turn onto Elm so we may infer from TRULY's wide turn story that there were at least 50-80 frames spliced out of that turn from Zapruder.

Creating the relationship between Z100 and Z161/166/168 & 171 is the reason CE884 was hidden and changed.  Traveling .9' in 3 frames at 15mph or even 11mph doesn't work...
those 2 speeds are 2.24mph for the stuff marked on the street... 168-171  and a bit over 3 mph for 161-166.

Either way the limo was barely moving as it comes out of that turn onto Elm (that's why Towner's movie is so strange... the background gets bigger while the limo gets smaller; that's not possible as whether zooming or moving toward to objects, they both would get larger within the image... This is also exactly where 133 runs to 171 in Z... )

Then there's the entire thing about Shaneyfelt moving the path of the limo south so line of sight for 161 becomes 168...

By shifting the spot to indicate the frame numbers from where JFK sat to front and rear bumpers, the FBI and SS were able to create complete confusion... the data offered does not represent what is seen on the zfilm...  WEST used the location markers "3+00" for example to plot the limo course every 25 feet...  except for 5+00

Shaneyfelt moves the path by inserting dots with frame numbers as the limo's from bumper reaches them... while the SS reconstruction used the rear bumper.

It's 15.5 feet from front to JFK and another 6 feet to the rear bumper.  the image below is true to scale. 

Is it a coincidence that the movement places JFK at 168... and the old 168-171 on what becomes CE884... becomes 161-166...

Nothing about the zframe numbers or the info provided by the FBI works.  Whereas the WEST surveys were consistent throughout.

Finally... the limo was said to pass thru POSITION A - but not filmed - by SHANEYFELT... which is why they put the limo at this position in the reenactments

The Queen Mary was very close to the limo when z133 appears...  yet how can the limo be at POS A and then Z133 with the follow-up car right on it's tail?

4 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

I may be missing it but was there an actual written NPIC evaluation/conclusion related to the number of shots, trajectories, firing points or do we just have the numerical notes and tables?   Its also my impression that the actual NPIC study was done a good bit after the preparation of the two sets story boards and the viewings that McMahon describes.

My impression was that the true estimate of the shooting was presented in great secrecy based on the first set of story boards and that was done over the weekend....the second set were prepared at a later date for the archives and supported the lone nut story - not what was briefed at the highest level within 48 hours.

 

 

Larry - I think simply because NPIC was so CIA affiliated and staffed they call these docs CIA....

I have not seen anything from NPIC in terms of a study/evaluation or conclusion unless we speak of the 4 briefing boards Homer and gang did,

Yes, I agree Larry... Dino's boards were completely different and MAY be the CIA analysis of which we speak since no one after that weekend ever sees them.(until Hicks).. and it most likely pointed out problems that couldn't be let into the record...

If I remember correctly Arthur Lundahl brought these to McCone on Sunday with briefing notes.  1 of the 2 board sets was returned to Dino then given to Hicks who freaked and withheld it from Rockefeller Comm. 

(Horne V4 p1236) 

14 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

David, do  they say in their notes that they thought it came from the front and not behind?

This was amazing... yet not very description of the shots themselvesWashington Navy Yard NPIC and Dinos interview.doc

and Not in those notes (CIA450)...  only from Homer McMahon's AARB interview...    

while you were discussing the, the hits, the shots that hit the
people in the limousine---ah, the Governor and the President. Did
Mr. Smith tell you the directions the shots came from, or did you
people try to determine that on your own during your study of the
film?
McMahon (10:38): OK, let, let me not answer that question, and take a little detour.
I’m an Army brat; my Dad was in the First and Second World War....

Horne: Your opinion.
McMahon: About eight (8) shots.
Gunn: And where did they come from?
McMahon: Three different directions, at least.

1 minute ago, James DiEugenio said:

David:

 

But where does. it say they place the shot at 190?  Are you saying that in your first column to the right of the boards where its says 190 in black, that means they think a shot was taken there?  

 

What then indicates multiple gunmen?  The fact that the other places in black are spaced too close together?

On a subsequent page Jim.

NPIC staff notes the 18 vs 16fps camera speed - which they know is wrong...

LIFE published saying which frames the shots were (I believe)... more importantly was when this was written.  How does NPIC know what LIFE has done if this is the weekend of the assassination unless someone tells them?

The multiple gunman comes from realizing that a East side 6th floor TSBD gunman has the trees in the way at 190...(see the SS photos at z186 below)By default, if 6th floor Eastwindow shooter can't hit JFK at 190 due to the tree... there MUST be a 2nd shooter with a clear line of sight... from the front.

Been reading thru the Weisberg Archives...  by letter...

"Oswald as Agent" has 3 volumes and a wealth of interesting stuff...

The infamous CIA # 110669 which Tom Hume as well as Weisberg and peers saw used within encrypted messages...

the numbers in 110669 were used alot by Oswald...

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

I'm basically guessing what these building could be.  They might be somewhere out of Dealey Plaza?  Films were taken from Love Field to the end of Dealey Plaza.  If I drew the incident ray/reflected ray right then the area shown should have no buildings in it.  It probably would be better to use a map of Dealey Plaza with Altgens shown and the p. limo shown.  I won't argue if Z 255 position is used for Altgens 6.  I really think that the p limo was at the SW corner when Altgens was taken.  Few people agree with that. 

Yeah, I'd have a tough time agreeing with that...

Here are some images that might help ID the reflections...

DJ

Which building in DP is your #1 & #2?

Those notes describe exactly what we see in the HOMER created boards, not DINO's.

They call out frames with shots possibly seen - there are 6 different frames offered and the question... How did LIFE determine the 1st and 2nd shots?

The page with all the frame numbers in a table :

10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

So how did Jerry get from this that the CIA said that the first shot did not come from the sixth floor, and there were at least two gunmen firing.

Do you see anything that indicates that?

Placing the first shot at 190 puts the tree between JFK and the 6th floor window Jim...  they used POS A to confuse the issue in the WCR by claiming that this was the position where the mark on the stand-in JFK hits the right spot... complete BS.  Look up the MATH RULES thread for details.

Speaking of reflections...

13 hours ago, John Butler said:

In this case it should show the eastern side of the sidewalk on Houston plus the people there.  It doesn't and that is the problem

While trying to figure out what the Towner reflection shows... can you ID the building above the reflecting pool columns in Altgens 6?

(Btw - there is a great reflection image in Altgens 5 showing Houston and people on the west side)

2 hours ago, John Butler said:

Altered film has to be the right conclusion.  But, where is the p. limo for this reflection to be true?

Virtually Stopped at the corner just before turning back hard left to get thru Position A to what the FBI’s Shaneyfelt called z133

The “Truly” corner, as his description from testimony was crystal clear. 
{Edit... I jest John... idk yet what I’m really seeing}

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  (that’ll be enough from u buddy...;)

I think that's Houston in the reflection... if your red line is correct, you would not see anything to the LEFT of the limo, only to the right...  turn a mirror that way and see...

If Towner is the dot and the limo is the mirror we'd see the WEST side of Houston to the left/front of the limo, and to the south as you move to the right on the limo towards to the back of it.   

while the red line coming from the TSBD is correct, Towner wouldn't be able to see it since the mirrored surface - FROM HER VANTAGE POINT - only points to the WEST down Houston...

and back toward her but slightly to her right... she is not seen in the limo mirror - or just barely.. ELM is at the far LEFT of the image - the left front fender...

Yet if that really is the East side of Houston... where'd all the people go?

On 4/5/2020 at 7:43 AM, John Butler said:

Jim,

Here's something interesting and amusing that came up while working on pics in another thread.

This bit of camera legerdemain may take a bit of explaining:

First off, I have a frame from the Tina Towner film at the left (screen right).  This frame shows reflections on the side of the p. limo that represents the crowds on the southwest corner of Houston and Elm Street since the vehicle is making the turn from Houston onto Elm.  If possible magnify this.  (This is where Toni Glover said she saw Kennedy's head explode.  I include this also as an example of the weirdness of Dealey Plaza that afternoon.) 

The reflections on the side of the p. Limo has been mirrored and this is at the right (screen left) side.  This shows a better view of Houston and Elm Streets.  The reflections on the side of the p. limo shows a considerably reduced crowd on the southwest corner of Elm and Houston than the ones shown in the Zapruder frame and the Elsie Dorman Frame.

This matches something else I have done with Zapruder and Dorman films.  The number of people shown in the two films on Houston and Elm Street's southwest corner do not match.

 

Hey John,

Take another close look at the actual towner image.  Now look at an overhead of Dealey Plaza...

Dal-Tex is in the background of the Towner image so the reflection would be back down Houston..  Elm would not be in that reflection
(Use the blue arrow thru the "=" sign and the white image of the limo under the "x".. that reflect to Towner's right... Elm should not be visible if the reflection is to the South...

Can we ID the things reflected with greater accuracy using images of Dealey?

19 hours ago, John Kowalski said:

Does anyone recall reading that one or some of Harvey's payroll checks were signed by someone other than the people he worked for? Apparently the check(s) were signed by a president of another company while he was working at: Leslie Welding, Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall or Reilly's.

Are you referring to the $33 TEC check that was deposited Sept 25th in New Orleans after he left?  Along with the New Orleans return of 4 library books after he left.

DJ