Thomas Graves

Dear Robert, As regards my opinions on the actions of Lovelady and Shelley for the five minutes or so after the assassination, all I can say is, "the jury Is still out." I know that must be very frustrating for you to hear, but it it what it is. I will say, though, that if and when "the verdict" (i.e. my conclusion) comes in, I promise that you be the first to know. How can I say that? Because I know that you'll be the only other member "online" up so darn early in the morning. LOL In all seriousness, I'd like to see some enhanced (i.e., stabilized, blown up, adjusted for contrast and brightness) individual "frames" (and, preferably, a further-enhanced GIF) which were derived from the pertinent Couch or Darnell GIF (I get them mixed up) which shows Possible-Lovelady as he bends over and talks with the Lady In Black on the steps. I need to get a better view of Possible-Lovelady's head, face and shirt before I can be absolutely convinced that this person is, indeed, Billy Lovelady. (Right now I'm kinda almost leaning in that direction, if it makes you feel any better. And as regards Shelley? I still believe Shelley can be seen in Couch / Darnell as he walks part-way down Elm Street Extension and then starts crossing over it, walking towards the "island." Which would fit in quite well with his First Day Affidavit, wouldn't it?) I knew that would "make your day." I hope that that doesn't seem like an unreasonable request on my part. To allay any paranoiac suspicions you might have about said request, it doesn't matter to me if Duncan does it, or Chris Davidson, or John Dolva, or whomever. In fact I'll let you choose who does it, you can politely ask them to do it, and we'll "take it from there. " My only condition is that you must refer them to this post so they can read my definition of "enhanced," above (in bold red text), and they must post their results on this thread. Agreed? Warning: If I don't get a positive response from you within the next twelve calendar months, I will take the initiative to ask your buddy Duncan to do it for me. In the meantime, don't "bug" me about my opinion on Lovelady's - Shelley's actions within the first five minutes or so after the assassination, and I won't go out of my way to "bug" you on yours. Bear in mind, however, that I do reserve the right to continue to post my tentative opinions on the matter, and to try to politely and civilly rebut anyone, including you, who disagrees with me on said tentative conclusions. Why, you ask? Well, this is, after all, the JFK Assassination Debate forum, and trying to rebut another person's (or other peoples') arguments is an integral part of the debating process, isn't it. Sincerely, --Tommy

REMINDER: The above originally appeared in post #309 in this thread. Hank Hank, Bingo! Thank you for presenting this to us in such an easy to understand way. --Tommy

I'm also starting to believe that Lovelady and Shelly didn't leave the building. And once again I read in Lovelady's statement what I've read and heard before, that there was a shot, a short pause, followed by two shots in quick succession. The two shots in quick succession couldn't have been fired by the same gun. (But then, this belongs on another thread.) A quick comment or two about Lovelady's handwritten same-day affidavit. http://www.reopenken...velady-location It's interesting to note that he went to the trouble to write in his affidavit that his lunch period was from 12 noon to 12:45. Even though it was probably true (I haven't taken the time to verify it), I don't understand why he felt it necessary to include that information in his affidavit. Did Lovelady expect the investigators to believe that he and Shelley had strictly observed their 45-minute lunch period on that exceptional day, i.e., that the moment "when it was over" just happened to coincide with the official end of their lunch period? What exactly was "all over" when they "returned to work"? Since we all know that the assassination occurred around 12:31, if Lovelady and Shelley really did go back to work at 12:45, what had they been doing during the previous 14 minutes or so? Of Truly's other employees, who else actually went back to work at 12:45 besides Lovelady and Shelley? Anyone at all? What time did Lovelady and Shelley actually go back into the TSBD? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps more importantly, Lovelady originally wrote, "After it was over we went back into the building and went back to work." Edit: Sandy, if you read the sentence above you will realize that your recent interpretation of what Lovelady meant by the phrase "went back into the building" is incorrect. For the simple reason that if he had meant what you think he did by that phrase, then he wouldn't have written as long of a sentence as he actually did write, i.e., he would simply have written "After it was over we went back into the building." In the sentence he did write, he is telling us two things: They went back to work after they had gone back into the building (as opposed, I suppose, to their immediately going back to work on some (admittedly silly) project outside the building.) The only reason the distinction I'm making is important is because Lovelady not only radically changed the meaning of the sentence by crossing out some of its words and adding some different ones in their place, but also by replacing the unwritten-but-implicit pronoun "we" in the middle of the original sentence with the written pronoun "I" in the final version. (see below) Then for some strange reason he put a hard-to-see, elevated but not inserted "I" above the word "and", crossed out "went back to work" and inserted in its place, "took some police officers up to search the building." http://www.reopenken...velady-location It's obvious to me that his final, edited sentence reads, "After it was over we went back into the building and I took some police officers up to search the building." There's a huge difference between the two sentences. It raises some important questions. For example, what exactly was Shelly doing while Lovelady "took some police officers up to search the building"? Working? Guarding one of the rear elevators (as he was allegedly ordered to do by somebody) before he, in turn, alegedly and admittedly assigned that job to the mysterious Jack Dougherty and allegedly went on upstairs, himself? My intuition tells me that Lovelady was telling the truth in his edited, final sentence, the one that reads, "After it was over we went back into the building and I took some police officers upstairs to search the building." Which leads me to believe that it was Lovelady who was "captured" upstairs on the 6th floor (while probably standing on a pallet) in Tom Alyea's film: Note: That's Captain Fritz with his back turned toward the camera, wearing stetson hat and glasses. What time did Fritz get to the TSBD? Anybody know the detective Frits is speaking with? --Tommy bumped because Sandy obviously hadn't read this edited version when he responded to the pre-edited original Bumped for Sandy

[...] [...] When [Lovelady] said [sic; he actually wrote it in his handwritten affidavit] "went back to work," I think he meant went back inside the building. [...] [...] I disagree, Sandy. Please see my edited and bumped post for my reasoning on the meaning of this part of the sentence. Wait! I have a good idea! I'll bump it again! --Tommy

I'm also starting to believe that Lovelady and Shelly didn't leave the building. And once again I read in Lovelady's statement what I've read and heard before, that there was a shot, a short pause, followed by two shots in quick succession. The two shots in quick succession couldn't have been fired by the same gun. (But then, this belongs on another thread.) A quick comment about Lovelady's handwritten same-day affidavit. http://www.reopenken...velady-location It's interesting to note that he went to the trouble to write in his affidavit that his lunch period was from 12 noon to 12:45. Even though it was probably true (I haven't taken the time to verify it), I don't understand why he felt it necessary to include that information in his affidavit. Did Lovelady expect the investigators to believe that he and Shelley had strictly observed their 45-minute lunch period on that exceptional day, i.e., that the moment "when it was over" just happened to coincide with the official end of their lunch period? What exactly was "all over" when they "returned to work"? Since we all know that the assassination occurred around 12:31, if Lovelady and Shelley really did go back to work at 12:45, what had they been doing during the previous 14 minutes or so? Of Truly's other employees, who else actually went back to work at 12:45 besides Lovelady and Shelley? Anyone at all? Lovelady originally wrote, "After it was over we went back into the building and went back to work." Edit: Sandy, if you read the sentence above you will realize that your recent interpretation of what Lovelady meant by the phrase "went back into the building" is incorrect. For the simple reason that if he had meant what you think he did by that phrase, then he wouldn't have written as long of a sentence as he actually did write, i.e., he would simply have written "After it was over we went back into the building." In the sentence he did write, he is telling us two things: 1 ) They went back to work, 2 ) after they went back into the building (as opposed, I suppose, to their immediately going back to work on some (admittedly silly) project outside the building.) Then for some strange reason he put a hard-to-see, elevated but not inserted "I" above the word "and", crossed out "went back to work" and inserted in its place, "took some police officers up to search the building." I firmly believe that his final, edited sentence was meant to read, "After it was over we went back into the building and I took some police officers up to search the building." There's a huge difference between the two sentences. I thought I'd mention it because I honestly don't "get it." And I think it smells a bit fishy. It raises some important questions. For example, what exactly was Shelly doing while Lovelady "took some police officers up to search the building"? Working? Guarding one of the rear elevators (as he was allegedly ordered to do by his boss, Truly) before he, in turn, assigned that job to Jack Dougherty and went upstairs, himself? --Tommy bumped because Sandy obviously hadn't read this edited version when he responded to the pre-edited original

Scott, Just one quick observation. The text of the document consists of an alleged quote of Fidel Castro, but the high level of the English grammar, syntax, and vocabulary in it would appear to be much better than Castro would have been able to speak it. The proper usage of the pronoun "whom," for example. Jus' sayin'... --Tommy

I'm also starting to believe that Lovelady and Shelly didn't leave the building. And once again I read in Lovelady's statement what I've read and heard before, that there was a shot, a short pause, followed by two shots in quick succession. The two shots in quick succession couldn't have been fired by the same gun. (But then, this belongs on another thread.) A quick comment about Lovelady's handwritten same-day affidavit. http://www.reopenken...velady-location It's interesting to note that he went to the trouble to write in his affidavit that his lunch period was from 12 noon to 12:45. Even though it was probably true (I haven't taken the time to verify it), I don't understand why he felt it necessary to include that information in his affidavit. Did Lovelady expect the investigators to believe that he and Shelley had strictly observed their 45-minute lunch period on that exceptional day, i.e., that the moment "when it was over" just happened to coincide with the official end of their lunch period? What exactly was "all over" when they "returned to work"? Since we all know that the assassination occurred around 12:31, if Lovelady and Shelley really did go back to work at 12:45, what had they been doing during the previous 14 minutes or so? Of Truly's other employees, who else actually went back to work at 12:45 besides Lovelady and Shelley? Anyone at all? Lovelady originally wrote, "After it was over we went back into the building and went back to work." Then for some strange reason he put an elevated but not inserted "I" above the word "and", crossed out "went back to work" and inserted in its place, "took some police officers up to search the building." I firmly believe that his final, edited sentence was meant to read, "After it was over we went back into the building and I took some police officers up to search the building." There's a huge difference between the two sentences. I thought I'd mention it because I honestly don't "get it." And I think it smells a bit fishy. It raises some important questions. For example, what exactly was Shelly doing while Lovelady "took some police officers up to search the building"? Working? Guarding one of the rear elevators (as he was allegedly ordered to do by his boss, Truly) before he, in turn, assigned that job to Jack Dougherty and went upstairs, himself? --Tommy

Hi Paul, Neither, actually. I was just thanking Brian for coherently summarizing what Jimbo had kinda alluded to in point " 5) " of his post. I mean, Jimbo has a way with words which, IMHO, tends to cast irrational, exaggerated, hyperbolic aspersions on anyone and everyone he thinks might have been involved in the assassination of JFK, even documented high-level CIA scumbags like Harvey, Dulles, Phillips, and Hunt (all of whom I do believe were involved to some yet-undetermined degree.) So where am I coming from on all this? Just something I learned in law school, of all places. i.e. , In order to ensure that the the average citizen (read "suspect") is accorded his or her Constitutional Rights, the worst (read "documented CIA scumbag") among us must be accorded those very same rights. No, I'm not saying Jimbo is (or was) trying to deny anyone their Constitutional Rights, for cryin' out loud. Jus' sayin' that the fact that four known high-level CIA scumbags were in Dallas at different times during the four or five weeks "leading up to the assassination" doesn't necessarily mean that they were there on assassination business. Hey, even scumbags deserve a break from time to time. Take me, for example. You know, documented "paid professional disinfo agent" that I must be. I need all the freaking breaks I can get around here. Regardless, thanks for asking, Paul, --Tommy PS As for reading the book, maybe I'll get around to it some day. But I already have a good idea on how horrible those big scumbags Allen and John Foster were, and I'm afraid that if I read the book, I'll learn so many bad things about them (is this correct grammar, Jon G. Tidd?) and their friends that it will throw me into a Deep Deep Politics mode, and I'll actually start believing that 9/11 was an inside job, that ISIS was intentionally created by Sandy Berger, that the moon really is made of green cheese, and that Lee, Harvey, and Henry were Sodomite Aliens From Another Solar System who were genetically engineered to resemble each other light years before they came to Earth. And if I do that, I'm afraid that I'll eventually start hating my Dead Mother's Apple Pie, (her potato salad was even better), the San Diego Los Angeles Chargers, The Grateful Dead, and, heaven forbid, TCU Football. And well, ... life simply ... won't be worth living ... anymore. But hey, if you do read anything in it about Guy Bannister, or David Sanchez Morales, or Billings' "Spanish Trace / Shepherd" (you know, the powerfully-built "Spanish"-looking guy who had a one-inch scar on his left eyebrow) or, even better -- since-deceased-at-93-years-of-age ONI Special Agent Robert David Steel (who, when I asked him, could remember how long his small WW II boat-- USS Sea Scout [q.v.] was, and where he was when he heard Pearl Harbor had been attacked, but for the life of him couldn't remember where the heck he was when he heard JFK had been shot), please do let me know about it. Oh, and BTW -- Steel, a native Texan, was a very good friend of Dallas polygraph specialist, Paul Bentley... If anyone wants to see what Steel looked like (I'm guessing around year 2000), all they gotta do is google Robert D. Steel in quotation marks, and you can see his nice obituary picture. FWIW, he lived in that hotbed of Intelligence and "professional paid disinfo agents," my hometown, La Jolla, California. Seriously.

Dear Robert, How short does he look to you? Take a wild guess. You know, give or take a couple of inches. All I can say from the top of my head is that we know that Detective Brown was short, Bonnie Ray Williams was 6' 2", and it's obvious Shelly is not standing straight up in this photo because he's either in the act of starting to get into the police car (he ended up getting in on the other side), or helping the policeman open the door for Arce and Williams.. I would guess that Shelley was at about 5' 10". Say! If Shelley was in the military, why don't you try to find his records? (After all, you're the one who is desperately trying to find out how tall he was. Probably so you can "prove" that that couldn't possibly be Shelley walking down the Elm Street Extension with "Shorty" Lovelady in Couch / Darnell, right? Or do you think you may have spotted him conversing with Gloria Calvery over on the "island"? -- That would be wonderful!) Why don't you contact some of his relatives? Or some of his old co-workers? Or some of the people he used to compete against in dog shows? Maybe you can smother 'em with the world famous "Robert Prudhomme Charm" ! Or do you think it doesn't matter now because you've already somehow "proved" that he was "quite short"? Haven't you. LOL --Tommy Why do you sound like one of the LN's that frequent forums such as the JFK Assassination Forum when you get abusive, Thomas? Dear Bob, Yeah, I suppose you're right. I really should try to sound much more level-headed and rational and open-minded and sincere and friendly and non-defensive and diplomatic and polite and charming and objective and non-confrontational like you always are on this forum. You know, like when you accused me, in an unsolicited 6:54 am Personal Message, of being "disinfo" and threatened, in that same PM, to "expose" me (or words to that effect)? Six fifty-four in the morning, huh? (Question: Was that before or after you milked the cows, fed the chickens, slopped the hogs, and checked your trot lines and traps for fresh "kills"? From the style and color of the shirt and the color-coordinated, groovy, Future Farmers of America or 4-H "cap" you're wearing in your profile picture, I can only assume that that's what you have to do every morning before you can finally take your galoshes, go thaw your hands out by the wood burning stove, have your "breffer," drink a couple of cups of he-man black coffee, and finally go "on line".) BTW, Why didn't you follow through on that threat? Why did you apologize to me (via another PM) a few days later, instead? You know, a couple of days after I'd casually mentioned (on the forum, itself) that I was considering looking for a good lawyer? I mean, it's never too late, Bob. --Tommy

Dear Robert, You talkin' to me? Five-five, huh? Wow! How tall do you think Danny Arce was. about 5' 5" ? What about the policeman with the shotgun, How tall do you think he was without his hat on? About 5' 8" ? --Tommy PS Why do you want to know how tall Shelley was? If you tell me, I'll try to help you find out. If not, ... well I guess it doesn't really matter, does it, because you've already "proved" it, havent you. LOL

Here's my problem, everyone is too quick to dismiss and judge, it's no wonder pertinent information is not scrutinize by professionals, but everything seems to be under attack by woodshop for dummies, no offense to anyone, but hey, let's face it. I took a big ass risk to take this document, and this is what I get when I didn't need to post this, and continue to hang onto for myself? Scott, If it makes you feel any better, I think that it could be genuine. You gotta realize that a lot us "researchers" consider ourselves to be the Second Coming of Sherlock Holmes, and we just love to find things wrong or "suspicious" about things. but in reality most of us get results that are much more like those of Inspector Clouseau. Even if that document turns out to be phony, it asks a lot of interesting new questions. Like why did your friend have it. Where did he get it or who gave it to him, etc. Did he leave it out, hoping you would "borrow" it, just to test your loyalty, or perhaps to feed you some "disinfo," etc? If the latter, why would he want to lead you in that particular direction? --Tommy

Thank for the summary, Brian. Now I understand. All four of those bad guys were in Dallas within four or five weeks of each other. --Tommy

Sandy, Oh, you mean "Not Marina's Husband" aka The Guy Ruby Didn't Shoot" -- Harvey Lee Henry Oswald. --Tommy

I second that emotion, Jon. It's nice to have Greg back. --Tommy

So according to you, Talbot has proved that not only Harvey, but Dulles, Phillips, and Hunt were in Dallas "either on the day of the assassination or the weeks leading up to it." Amazing, Jimbo. I didn't know that. Thanks!, --Tommy Uhh.. Assuming they weren't all in Dallas on 11/22/63, just how many weeks "leading up to the assassination" are we talking about here? Two? Four? Twelve? Half a freaking year?

PS Oh Goodie Goodie! Look what I've found! Shelley (the skinny guy on the right) looks significantly taller in this clip than in the photos you chose, doesn't he Bob? (General observation: It's funny how everyone looks shorter next to 6' 2" Bonnie Ray Williams, and everyone looks taller next to Detective C.W. Brown.) And look at Shelley's thin body, and his facial profile, and the suit he was wearing that day! And dig that distinctive Edd Byrnes (q.v.) hairdo! (Looking at it now with it glowing like that in the sunshine, I think that what I've read about his having red hair must have been true!) And look at how much of his white collar is visible above his jacket on his long, thin neck! Like, two inches! --Tommy PS That's detective C.W. Brown in the flashing red circle. PPS The press guy who saunters up in the background was obviously a giant like me (6'5"). No, I'm not talking about the one with the camera, I'm talking about the one with the white label on his chest.

Dear Robert, How short does he look to you? Take a wild guess. You know, give or take a couple of inches. All I can say from the top of my head is that we know that Detective Brown was short, Bonnie Ray Williams was 6' 2", and it's obvious Shelly is not standing straight up in this photo because he's either in the act of starting to get into the police car (he ended up getting in on the other side), or helping the policeman open the door for Arce and Williams.. I would guess that Shelley was at about 5' 10". Say! If Shelley was in the military, why don't you try to find his records? (After all, you're the one who is desperately trying to find out how tall he was. Probably so you can "prove" that that couldn't possibly be Shelley walking down the Elm Street Extension with "Shorty" Lovelady in Couch / Darnell, right? Or do you think you may have spotted him conversing with Gloria Calvery over on the "island"? -- That would be wonderful!) Why don't you contact some of his relatives? Or some of his old co-workers? Or some of the people he used to compete against in dog shows? Maybe you can smother 'em with the world famous "Robert Prudhomme Charm" ! Or do you think it doesn't matter now because you've already somehow "proved" that he was "quite short"? Haven't you. LOL --Tommy

As Mr. MacRae will tell you, Michael, "The ends justify the means." Sad isn't it? Just checked back in today. Has Duncan volunteered the exif/metadata? No, actual data is in short supply in MacRae's arsenal. Innuendo and insult are his forte. How ironic coming from your mouth, Bob. A case of "The pot calling the kettle black" if I ever saw one. --Tommy

No. Of course it's not "factual". You MUST be kidding. It's merely speculation and guesswork. And based on what we have since learned by looking at Cadigan Exhibit 11, your quote above, concerning what the money order "appears" to be made out of, is not only NOT "factual" at all --- it's 100% dead wrong. FACTUAL: adj. 1. Of the nature of fact; real. 2. Of or containing facts. adj. 1. of or pertaining to facts. 2. based on facts. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/factual David, I think Sandy's talking about his proper use of the word "appears" in that sentence. Which gave him a built-in "out" he could use, if necessary. --Tommy Thanks for explaining that to David. But I resent your insinuation that I used the word "appear" as a way "out" if necessary. I used the word to point out that I never said that the money order was paper and not card stock. Only that it appeared to be. Sandy, Sorry to have "impugned" your character like that, but I actually admire you for having used the word "appears." Why? Because all to many CTers would have said "is clearly" or "is obviously" in that situation, which would have made it much more difficult for them to concede defeat gracefully, as you apparently have, so they never do, you know, ... concede defeat. I realize that it is a fact that the money order appeared to you to be made from paper, not card stock, because the ink seemed to you to have bled through it. But it hadn't. And it wasn't. Are you convinced now that the money order was made from card stock? And are you convinced now that whatever it was that the fingerprint experts did to the money order made it look like the ink had bled through it? (OMG, How do we know the bad guys aren't pulling our legs on that?) Do you still think the card stock money order was forged / manufactured / altered by the bad guys? What about all those numbers and stamps and things on it? Don't they look ... suspicious? And the legal / financial procedures and requirements at the time? And the signature? Was it ... forged? Etc, etc. Where do we go with it now, Sandy? --Tommy

No. Of course it's not "factual". You MUST be kidding. It's merely speculation and guesswork. And based on what we have since learned by looking at Cadigan Exhibit 11, your quote above, concerning what the money order "appears" to be made out of, is not only NOT "factual" at all --- it's 100% dead wrong. FACTUAL: adj. 1. Of the nature of fact; real. 2. Of or containing facts. adj. 1. of or pertaining to facts. 2. based on facts. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/factual David, I think Sandy's talking about his proper use of the word "appears" in that sentence. Which gave him a built-in "out" he could use, if necessary. --Tommy

No, it wasn't. Such a claim was never "factual". Are you joking? Armstrong just never bothered to check out Cadigan No. 11 to do a comparison of the money order photographs. Neither did I. And neither did anybody else (that I know of) until Tim Brennan did such a direct comparison on December 5, 2015. Do you think ALL rumors and sloppy research are "factual" until proven wrong, Sandy? If so, that's a mighty strange philosophy. DVP, As you know I'm a JFK conspiracy theorist. But like you, I loathe sloppy research. So thank you (and Lance, too) for pointing out the fallacies and foibles of some of my more "gung ho, over the top" CT colleagues. I do reserve the right, however, to argue with you from time to time. LOL --Tommy

Wow. Huge discount for seniors, eh? --Tommy

edited and bumped I guess everyone is either 1 ) "Undecided" and ashamed to admit it, 2 ) doesn't want to hurt my delicate feelings by voting "No," or 3 ) terrified of incurring Bob's wrath if they say "Yes". LOL --Tommy

So Billy Lovelady was 5' 8". That's wonderful, Bob. Thanks for sharing. Do you think Shelley was shorter than Lovelady? The same height? Taller? Just how tall would you like Shelley to be? --Tommy

Clive. Note the completely different chins. I don't know who the guy on the left is, but he resembles Robert D. Steel, the old native Texan and ONI Special Agent (and close friend of Paul Bentley (q.v.)) I interviewed in La Jolla a few years ago who, when I asked him, could remember how long his WW II ship (USS Sea Scout) was, where he was when he heard Pearl Harbor had been attacked, but for the life of him couldn't remember where he was when he heard JFK had been shot. Ironically, Linda thinks the guy on the left is a different ONI guy. The guy on the right looks a little like Dallas Secret Service SAIC, Forrest Sorrels. --Tommy