David Josephs

2 hours ago, Ian Lloyd said:

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=6368&fullsize=1

Ian, That image of Montgomery with the bag has nothing to do with Mexico....  ???

As to the title of this thread:

How do you incorporate Position A into this Chris?

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. 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. 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. What is that exhibit number? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Exhibit No. 886. 
Mr. SPECTER. And why was that location selected for the position of the car? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. This location was selected as the first point at which a person in the sixth floor window of the Book Building at our control point could have gotten a shot at the President after the car had rounded the corner from Houston to Elm. 

Shaneyfelt is basically stating the limo passed thru this spot... and is the reason, as I see it, for the Towner/Zapruder sync

4 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

Your response would lead me to believe that you don't believe in zfilm alteration.

The Z film was ALTERED?????

Hey Joe - say it ain't so....  ya mean cause it's in 9 pieces at the archives and doesn't even have "0183" stamped on it....

Mind blowing

I should add that it does appear that frames are gone...  while I could be seeing this incorrectly... it appears that JFK swings his head from his left to right in the span of a single frame... which is not possible....  As Chris D. above knows... this is also near the spot which CE884 is changed to frame 161 from 168...

I do think a shot hits the street near this point and is why there is a break here - much like 207-212 where there definitely was a shot....

1 minute ago, John Butler said:

David,

I guess Z frames 158 and 159 were torn also.  Can you back up your claim that the film was torn.  What reference can you site on this?  If I am recalling the Fetzner Symposium of 2003 there was no mention of torn film.  I sure those experts would have been all over that in the film.  You can check Jack White's presentation for the post I made concerning his view of Zapruder and Altgens.  That is where that came from.  John Costella surely would have said something about that.  He said the film was almost technically perfect except for a few minor changes.  He didn't say anything as I recall about torn film frames.

John, that you post this with the innocence of a lamb is comical at best... downright nefarious at worst.

The is nothing you've said or  done on this forum that we haven't already been thru....  try a search of this forum John... LEARN something already...

That you don't comprehend the HOW's or WHAT's of this case is obvious... and John Costella would surely back me on this.... you want me to ask him myself or are you going to do it?

That you are unaware of the provenance of the film described as "The Zapruder film" is also no real surprise.
That you need wikipedia to learn about COINTELPRO is just sad

No John, you'll be back on Ignore for me... your lack of any substance and lack of any ability to learn how poor your "analysis" remains is monumental.

Any time you see a frame within Costella that has no SPROCKET IMAGE - a frame from a 1st gen copy was supposedly inserted... 
the "Original" Zfilm has numerous splices and over 45 feet of film when there is only 30 feet to a side....

Again, maybe go read volume 4 of Horne's great work and LEARN something before it's too late....

11 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

I think David has put it very precisely.However, I don't believe, he is COINTELPRO. Even they wouldn't have him. 

One needn't be... to use the tactics....

Ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know.....

31 minutes ago, John Butler said:

 

   

 

{Sigh}

Mr. Butler... you are requested to actually LISTEN and LEARN...  your analysis of this frame is the most misdirected and misinformed ever posted... almost as bad and your Hill/Moorman junk.

We are not picking on you John... you place yourself into these situations by allowing yourself to spew analysis which is not only wrong but absurdly so.

Do you understand that when a frame is torn the images within the frame MAY BE AFFECTED ????

You can see the tear splice as it moves thru the frames...  it is truly time that you spend quite a bit of time listening and learning as I said at the beginning...  I'm not sure if it is some sort of condition that requires you to comment when you should know better and LEARN something first....

The frame from which you are claiming JFK's head is on the car sill, etc... is a SPLICE, a TEAR IN THE FILM - purposely or not is unknown yet from the reaction of Hickey and Willis it APPEARS that there was a shot at this point..

You take the cake JB....  some of the most effective COINTELPRO tactics I've seen here- to name just a few that I see you using with the results being members dealing and/or leaving your threads/posts so that those without the benefit of 25 years of knowledge are not fooled into believing you present anything with authority or accuracy.

The list below is but a small part of the ongoing efforts to derail these discussions.. in your case for no better reason than for you to stand up on a pedestal and declare "the Emperor has new clothes"....  the level of stupidity that you assume the rest of us have so as to be able to post garbage and think you're contributing is quite unique in your case....

Are you just bad at this or do you really buy the swampland you try to sell here?

"Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt(trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

===

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.

Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.

With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

The image I posted above is from 1969...

MOLINA furnished the following descriptive data concerning himself in 1964

Sex Male
Race White
age 40 years
Born June 18, 1924, at Dallas, Texas Height  71,' weight 164 pounds
Eyes Brown
Hair Build Complexion Marks and Scars Wife Children Education Military Service Residence - 18 - Brown, graying, balding in front Stocky Fair Large mole in left eyebrow SOLEDAD MOLINA JOE MOLINA, JR ., aged 171. JOHN MOLINA, aged 101 LINDA MOLINA, aged 141 and, adopted daughter SYLVIA, aged 14 Crozier Technical High School, Dallas U . S . Navy, 1943-46, NSN 1891656 4306 Brown, Dallas, Texas

CE2036

Any chance Prayerman is MOLINA?

He can't be over to the East since Gloria passes right by him....

Initially I thought Molina may be suit/tie man....  he definitely is not walking down to the RR tracks with those 2 men....

FWIW...

Quote

Three of these men were management personnel: Steve Wilson, Otis Williams, and Roy Truly. Steve Wilson, the manager of a publishing company, remained in his office on the third floor

So is this just a huge coincidence?     Can’t be the same guy....

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwilsonS.htm

There is a claim this Wilson had a hand in with the BYP.....

Yeah - completely missed that thread about donating....  Thanks James...

Donation complete....says we're almost to $1000 

To Rob's point... I think it's the massive reposting in replies that's the problem...  If a poster only has a few things to say against a LOOOONG post like one of mine,

they needn't "quote" the entire post... but just that part the reply poster is addressing...

I'd have to believe that is the worst culprit of unnecessary bandwidth use

What would it take to get an accessible back-up Archive of the posts from this forum so that even if worse case does happen there is a searchable resource that should be much less per month...  how much space does the forum take up...?  Maybe someplace like MFF could host it...just a thought

DJ

James...  could you please pin a HOW TO DONATE AND SAVE THE ED FORUM thread to the top of the key forum topics with the most visits?

I'm fairly sure the response will be sufficient to keep things going for a while...

Thanks

DJ

Sorry to hear James....   

We have 102 pages of members in the lookup.

I would gladly pay a buck or two a month along with the rest...

Surely we could get to the $130 figure with the core group of posters and lurkers?  Or even open it up to online funding support....

IDK... but I know I don’t want this forum to go away... and for a buck or so a month spread out over many, we should be able to do this....

how can I assist with such an endeavor?

DJ....

14 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

First of all, do you associate the "notice of attempt to deliver mail card", as described in Stovall B, as directly connected to the "Nassaus" package?

As opposed to what ?

How else do you suppose we are even aware of this package?

14 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

No, I don't believe that to be the case.

Take away elaborations, post-assassination, that Ralph Yates told Dempsey Jones regarding the hitch-hiker, and you are left with Yates dropping off a man with a package at the corner of Houston/Elm, and that the man talked about the possibility of shooting the President from a building as he passed by.

It was after the assassination that Yates described the "long package" as possibly containing "window shades".

So we have confirmation and corroboration of a package pre-assassination, but the content of the package was post-assassination.

This event was determined to have occurred on Thursday 21st and Yates informed Dempsey the same day.

This event essentially mirrors what allegedly occurred the next morning in that Frazier drops off a man with a package at the corner of Houston/Elm as per Mr. Shields

 

Tony,

If we are gong to have Yates deliver a man with a rifle in a paper sack to Elm and Houston... Frazier made up the curtain rod story...  if that was actually his lunch, only Wesley can dispel that but he doesn’t but saying it was a small dime store type flimsy paper sack... not enough to hold 7lbs of broken down rifle 34” long, clip, ammo, and nothing with which to assemble them....

The postage due package to Lee in Irving was supposed to be there before the 20th so he comes home, as the evidence would say, retreived the constructed bag from this package and used it to bring you in the rifle....

since this did not happen you need to ask yourself.... who made the bag that was claimed to be but never shown in the SE corner, and when.  Monty comes out with the bag later in the afternoon... yet if you read Studebaker and Day and Monty and Johnson’s testimonies about who picked up that bag and where it went is very revealing.  I did a full post on it so I’m sure it can be found

here is the one where Gary Mack sent me the transcript of Montgomery’s oral history statement. 

Here it is... love Day’s comment... “There’s a legible print on it now”

how does one create a paper sack from flat paper without leaving any prints... and if what Johnson says is true, the DPD personnel handled that bag before it went to DC... they should have found legible identifiable prints from the men who handled it... but after Ozzie is dead, only his prints are found... when the FBI sends the bag back to Dallas...  

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.

Mr. BELIN. All right, is there anything else you can remember about that sack?

Mr. JOHNSON. No; other than like I said, my partner picked it up and we unfolded it and it appeared to be about the same shape as a rifle case would be. In other words, we made the remark that that is what he probably brought it in.

That is why, the reason we saved it.

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.

58 minutes ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

I agree with you that "Oswald" did not bring any bag approaching 36" or 27" or any other major size to work. (He may have brought a much smaller lunch bag, but nothing remarkable - he did eat a simple lunch that day, after all.)

Frazier testifies to Oswald buying his lunch that day..... where would that have been?

58 minutes ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

Did Fritz on Friday night suddenly get word through FBI channels (official or otherwise) that the FBI could or would make the (phony) case against "Oswald" on its own, and therefore Frazier's (phony) "confession" was no longer necessary?

I’ll be doing a presentation updating what we know at CAPA in Nov about the rifle and who knew what, when.  It is directly provable that the FBI used evidence of one transaction to represent the 10 cartons to Klein’s order that did not happen based on the available evidence

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-evidence-is-the-conspiracy-index I have a few articles on the rifle....

After offering back to back reports stating the FBI took this film signed only by Dolan, and another, signed by all 3 agents saying Walkman kept the film...  Worse yet what happens to the rest of the non existent FC rifles since the only rifle ever seen from those 100 serial numbers is C2766.  How many were left in stock.?  How many were used to fill C20-T750 orders? Between Feb 63 and Nov 63 when he claims they stopped?

27 minutes ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

Do we agree that if Frazier had buckled to Fritz's pressure to "confess", then a carrot would likely have been offered to Frazier: implicate "Oswald" as the prime-mover behind the assassination, and Frazier would have faced little (or maybe no) jail time? 

Hey there Paul....

"confess" to what... do you think? 

- Accessory after the fact?
- Direct Accessory - in that the confession would state he knew a rifle was in the bag and he helped Oswald go get it and get it into the TSBD?
- The murder itself?  There is no image of Wesley before we see him on the steps AFTER the shooting.

as to speculating about jail time and such, IDK....   do you get the impression that Fritz would just say nothing and leave after Wesley threatens him with retaliatory violence should they want to try and "make" him sign....  "I'll get in a few good licks before you take me..." he says to Fritz, or something to that effect.

Seems strange to me that DPD cops and whoever else was in there just let that slide....

As I was searching for Wesley's interrogation notes I came across this statement concluding an argument on DVP's site:

Numbers 1 through 8 above strongly suggest that Lee Harvey Oswald's "curtain rod" story was a complete fabrication from the beginning, used as a device with which to avoid suspicion when he carried his dismantled Mannlicher-Carcano rifle into the Depository Building on the same morning of President Kennedy's visit to Dallas, Texas.

Now, doesn't it make a bit more sense that FRAZIER fabricated the story since Oswald is claimed to have said he 1 - did not bring a bag to work, and 2 - never said anything about curtain rods....  Since Fritz did these notes well afterward, does it not make more sense to claim Oswald did say he brought a bag with curtain rods in it?

Now why in the world would Wesley lie? - to save himself?  Maybe has something to do with William "Bill" Randle and his relationship with Oswald?

Mr. BALL - And who lives in that house with you? 
Mr. FRAZIER - My sister and brother-in-law and their three children. 
Mr. BALL - Will you state their names, your sister's name? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Linnie Mae Randle and my brother-in-law. I believe his real name is William Edward Randle. We call him Bill. They have three little girls, Diana, Patricia and Caroline Sue. 

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. 

Even the Find a Grave site bio perpetuates the lie

Linnie Randle testified to the Warren Commission that she had seen Lee Harvey Oswald with a long package under his arm when he got into her brother, Buell Wesley Frazier's car as they left for work at the Texas School Book Depository on Friday, 22 Nov. 1963.
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/102461058/linnie-mae-randle

  William Edward "Bill" Randle https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/131275226/william-edward-randle 

A funeral Service for William "Bill" Randle age 80, of Dike will be held at 10:00 a.m. Friday, June 13, 2014 at First Baptist Church of Sulphur Springs with Bro. Mike Skelton and Bro. Fred Lewis officiating. Interment will follow in Restlawn Memorial Park with Grandsons and Great-Grandsons serving as Pallbearers. With Ray Skelton, Randy Gyer, B.W. Frazier, Robert Frazier, Erwin Boyle, Clifford Randle, Marvin Randle, Don Randle and Chuck Creed serving as honorary Pallbearers. Visitation will be from 6 until 8 pm Thursday, June 12, 2014 at Murray-Orwosky Funeral Home. Bill Randle died Wednesday, June 11, 2014 at his residence. He was born January 20, 1934, in Dallas to Alfred Ernest Randle and Adina Gebert. He married Linnie Frazier who preceded him in death in 2012. Bill was a retired cabinet maker and wood worker. He was a member of the First Baptist Church and served as a Deacon since 1955. He is survived by daughters, Diana Gyer (Randy) of Dike, Patricia Skelton (Ray) of Sulphur Springs; brothers Clifford Randle, Marvin Randle and Don Randle all of Irving; sister Dorothy Creed of Coppell; Grandchildren, Jason Ashford, Josh Ashford, Steven Cooper, Patricia Cooper, Mike Skelton, Brandon Skelton, Jessica Heaton and Amber Jester , and nine Great grandchildren He was preceded in death by his parents, one brother Charlie Randle and a daughter Carolyn Ashford and one great granddaughter Chloe Ashford.

From WCD 21 we find yet another piece of the puzzle about which Wesley was not questioned... 

His brother-in-law knows Lee Harvey in one FBI report yet denies this to the SS 5 days later...

I haven't been able to find the SAIC Benavides O/M, San Antonio 11/25/63 that they reference here....  I've found a few 11/25 reports by Benavides but they had to do with New Orleans and a woman claiming to see Charles Steele Jr in both New Orleans leafleting film and in front of the TSBD

Ya see, if Oswald's paper sack did not or could not contain a rifle... there was no other way for it to get to the TSBD...  Frazier was their only choice 'cause the other paper sack never made it to Oswald.

"Denied Curtain Rods"

13 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Read Buell Wesley Frazier's account of his face off with the "master" interrogator where he tells Fritz if he hits him ( Frazier) with his raised fist, he's goin to be in one hell of a cat fight.

Fritz walked out.

Wesley says "hours of interrogation" - is there any record of anything Wesley said beyond his watching him walk to the TSBD with that package under his arm.....

and that the brown bad was not made of heavy packing paper but was a thin dime-store paper sack about 2' long....

I happen to think that Wesley tried as hard as possible not to incriminate Oswald yet I believe he ultimately had not choice...

It is becoming my POV that there never was a paper sack related to Oswald... with mom and sis backing Wesley's story to keep him out of trouble.

Shields does not say anything about the following statement he makes to the HSCA - to the WC.
I think he is talking about Charles GIVENS as he was with Givens at the Elm/Record Parking lot during the motorcade.

Where did Oswald get his lunch?

First off - sorry to hear about the sad news...  that site has always been a gold mine...
I need to go see some of those debates though....

===

To Tony's post....

When the rifle is right side up, the sketch is there... upside down...
no sketch...

then again, I don't think it was supposed to be Oswald... he's never had a widow's peak 

Don't know why they would leave that there and even go out of the way to mention it...

FWIW

Evidence: Rifle and Police Artist Sketch [Negative #2]

Evidence: Rifle and Police Artist Sketch [Print]

https://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collections/JFKDP/browse/?q=rifle&t=fulltext&sort=#result-5

1 hour ago, Tony Krome said:

If that's the way Fritz operated, why persistently request a tape recorder??

16 hours ago, Evan Marshall said:

 

interrogates a couple of hitmen but no presidential assassins while at Detroit Homicide. I find both nature of the inquiry, the number of people present for the interrogations, and the record kept all  totally unacceptable

My interrogations ran a much as 14 pages and there only two of us in the room. I'm convinced in Dallas that some of the folks present were there to ensure LHO didn't open doors best left closed.

Mr. BALL. Did you have any tape recorder? 
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I don't have a tape recorder. We need one, if we had one at this time we could have handled these conversations far better. 
Mr. BALL. The Dallas Police Department doesn't have one? 
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I have requested one several times but so far they haven't gotten me one. 

p.91 Bart Kamp “Anatomy of Lee Harvey Oswald’s Interrogations”

In Larry Sneed’s No More Silence Holmes says the following about the usage of his so-called abilities using his memory: “There was no tape recording of the interrogation or stenographer or anyone taking notes. That was the way that Fritz operated. The interrogation itself was rather informal with Captain Fritz being in charge. He would ask Oswald various questions and pull out different things such as the map with the X’s on it and the card that had been taken out of Oswald’s billfold that had A.J. Hidell on it and things like that. Then he would say, “Well, Sorrels, do you have anything you want to ask him?” But Kelley and Sorrels had very little to ask; they didn’t have the documentation that I had. We were free to ask or interject anything we wanted. Of course, we were all experienced interrogators, and when you went to trial in those days, especially in federal court, you had to show any notes you took to the defense. So they got to look at every note that you had against their client. But we old-time investigators would just do it by memory. I could still quote nearly every word that boy said to this day and that’s been over twenty years ago. That’s the way I was trained to interrogate anybody, and so was Fritz. If they’re telling the truth, you’d talk to them by the hour, and if they couldn’t tell it the same way twice or a third time, or a tenth time, you’d catch them because you’d know exactly what he had said the first time. You didn’t need notes; you didn’t need a secretary or a stenographer. Of course, you do now, but back then you really had to use your own wits to convict people.

What complete junk...  At least our man Harry Holmes is consistent...  "That was the way Fritz operated"   ????   
Can you image trying to tell a judge the accused "confessed" - verbally - or said anything for that matter which was not written down contemporaneously...  I guess if 6 people in the room all say the accused said a certain something, it would have to be seriously considered... but one of the largest police Depts in the country and no interrogation notes??

wonder why they had so many stenographers working for the DPD  

That's A LOT of Secret Service men in there...  and of course the "Unknown FBI agent" at Ruby's interrogation...  speaking of which... what about the notes from THOSE interviews?

I believe TL Baker was responsible for the typed version of these notes....

Mr. BALL. Did somebody assist you in the preparation of that notebook? 
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. 
Mr. BALL. Who was that? 
Mr. FRITZ. I had several officers assist me with this, and some secretaries, of course, that helped us with it. I had my lieutenant, T. L. Baker, help me to put this book together, this larger book, I think you have a copy of it there, and to make some additional books like this.
Of course, we worked the whole office ever since it happened so it is hard to say just who helped. 

On 4/26/2019 at 8:14 PM, Ron Bulman said:

Another aspect that is Beyond Theory to me is Oswald ever ordering, picking up, having "his" money order processed, concealing or using the Mannlicher Carcano rifle.  Nor the pistol from Seaport Traders.  Didn't happen.  I defer to David Josephs at KennedysandKing, at least 2-3 articles I think. 

thanks Ron...  and yeah... between the FBI taking and not taking the microfilm, as well as having a copy of it made and returned to Waldman... man I'd love to see that film.

by Saturday mid morning, the FBI had laid out they didn't have the records for the right rifle....  so Sunday rolls around..

and upon further review....  what we couldn't find Friday or Saturday...  we found it.... kind of...

We also have Harry Holmes' ridiculous story....  and then there's this guy... 

8 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

 

Three Depository employees shown in the picture taken by Dillard
were on the fifth floor of the building when the shots were fired:
James Jarman, Jr., age 34, a wrapper in the shipping department;
Bonnie Ray Williams, age 20, a warehouseman temporarily assigned
to laying a plywood floor on the sixth floor and Harold Norman, age
26, an "order filler."

--Warren Commission Report, p. 68 (emphasis added)

Roy Truly would have been in charge of the flooring work.  Astounding coincidence, eh?

Photographer:Eugene George

Date:01/06/1983