Gil Jesus

I'm not feeding you anything. I posted a video and asked a question. You hate Trump, I get it. If you don't believe the judge, that's your business. If you resent my asking questions, that's just too bad.

It's amazing how they can deem credible ONE witness who has something to add to Oswald's guilt, but consider multiple, corroborating witnesses who have something that casts doubt on the official story as not credible. They're like jurors in a murder case who only hear one side of the story: the prosecutor's opening remarks, the witnesses he presents to make his case and his closing remarks. No defense case, no cross examination, no opportunity to present the defense's own witnesses and experts and no examination of the evidence. They have "their truth". They don't want to hear it. People argue, "this wasn't a court case". Then why was it conducted as half of one ? IMO, it's just BS.

Judge Andrew Napolitano talks about a conversation he had with then President Trump about releasing the JFK files a month before Trump left office. Makes you wonder if the reason they're all hell-bent on throwing his ass in jail is because they're afraid he's going to say something ?

In this interview with ABC's "Nightline" in 1988, former Texas Gov. John Connally finally reveals a shooting sequence that destroys the Single Bullet Theory. The first shot hit the President The second shot hit Connally The third shot hit the President Hear it from the Governor's own lips: Corroborated by the Zapruder film https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Z230.mp4 Witnessed by a bystander https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNZ2xCrzulI Concluded by the FBI https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png

Dr. Gary Aguillar and Dr. Josiah Thompson discuss the "snowstorm" of fragments in President Kennedy's X-rays and conclude that jacketed ammunition would not leave such a trail.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the dictabelt screwed up during the timeframe which J.D. Tippit was being killed. I'm also sure that it's just a coincidence that the Bowley broadcast is 39.83 seconds long and the anomaly just happens to be long enough to cover it at 48.13 seconds. I timed both on my Movie Maker. But they're just coincidences, I'm sure.

Another interesting thing about this is the transcripts, especially the FBI's version, which was supposed to transcribe ALL of the transmissions, but like the Dallas Police version, it left out the broadcasts between Capt. Talbert's 10-4 at 1:11 and unit 212's ( Off. Spradlin) call a 1:14. ( I determined Spradlin called at 1:14 by counting backwards from Barnhart's call at 1:15 ) The FBI never mentioned those broadcasts, including the "skipping" anomaly, and instead noted that timeframe as the "end of belt Six". I find it strange that both the Dallas Police and the FBI saw fit to not transcribe the radio broadcasts between 1:11 and 1:14 pm. Can any of the Warren Commission's supporters explain why this particular timeframe was omitted from the official transcripts ?

The Dallas Police dictabelt recording and transcript from 11/22/63, covering the stretch of time that Dallas Police officer J.D.Tippit was shot dead. Note that the there is an anomaly in the dictabelt at 1:12 pm Dallas time. ( around the 5:00 minute mark in the video ) Was the dictabelt altered ? Can anyone with radio broadcast experience or experience with dictabelts explain what happened here ? Why it kept repeating over and over something that had been previously said, like an old skipping album record ?

As someone who has had years of experience using two-way communications, including police radios, I suggest it is YOU who has no idea what you're talking about. Here's the dictabelt recording 31 seconds before Bowley called on the radio. There was no one keying the mic for 90 seconds before his call. The transmissions were loud and clear, which they would not have been had someone been keying the mic. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/bowley-call.mp3

Doesn't matter what they were there for. All that matters is what the witnesses said. And once again, your interpretation is wrong. The witnesses were not talking about the Walker photographs. And the key phrase is "any particular photograph recovered from this residence". Allow me to explain it to you. "ANY" is a word depicting something all-inclusive. That means ALL of the photographs. If they had said that the detectives did, "not personally recall any of the photographs they were shown", that would be exclusive to the Walker pics because those were the pictures they were shown. But they didn't say that. They said that they did not recall, "any particular photograph recovered from this residence". I don't understand how you can't grasp the meaning of any photograph from this residence. In fact, they reported the witnesses' answers to viewing the Walker pics separately. When the Walker photos are shown to them, they couldn't recall any of them as well.

I thought the "Russian 35mm and brown case" might have been a weapon. LOL. Still waiting for them to answer the question.

Experts discuss the coverup of the assassination of President Kennedy and its implications for the future of America.

I see J.B. Hicks' name there on the CSSS document. He testified for the Warren Commission. How many questions did Commission counsel ask him about the "backyard" negatives he received ?

I never lose any sleep over your INTERPRETATIONS of what the witnesses MEANT because your interpretations are usually wrong. As they are this time. The document didn't say he couldn't describe them. It said he couldn't recall any of the photographs, even though he testified that, we all looked at it and said, "that looks like the rifle used in the assassination". ( 7 H 209 ) Adamcik's testimony is corroborated by Detective Henry Moore, who testified that, "we all looked and commented on it." ( 7 H 216 ) Like Adamcik, Moore later told the FBI that he, does not recall any particular photograph recovered from that address. ( CD 1066, pg. 255 ) This in spite of looking at the photograph Gus Rose found and commenting on it at the scene. Only a couple of months after their testimony and all of a sudden these two detectives could not "recall any particular photograph" ? Their statements to the FBI had nothing to do with any description. They all looked at the photo. They all commented on the photo. They mentioned the rifle in the photo. They knew what the photo contained. A couple of months later, they told the FBI that they didn't know anything about, "any particular photograph recovered from that address." Sounds to me like they were trying to distance themselves from the discovery of the photographs.

Thanks Dave. Hope all is well. I'm keeping you in my prayers, buddy.

Funny that you mention John Adamcik's initials on the backyard photographs because he told the FBI after his Warren Commission testimony that, "he does not personally recall any photographs that were obtained from this residence."

Thanks Pat. Can you imagine police making copies of photographs that are evidence in a murder case and selling them for a profit ? Talk about police corruption !!!!

Charles, they were so bad that Capt. Fritz was demoted by then Dallas police chief Carl Hansson. Fritz formerly was in charge of the entire detective division but was demoted to head of homicide and robbery. This FBI memo from 1949 shows that, "Captain Fritz does not cooperate with other divisions of the Department or with this Bureau". If you read the bottom paragraph, you'll see that there was a case where a woman allegedly tried to rob a bank and was apprehended by police. As evidence of her guilt, Fritz allegedly had a note she passed the bank teller, but would not release it to the FBI. Shutting out divisions of your own department or the FBI and refusing to release evidence are examples of tactics one uses in the act of framing people for crimes they did not commit. It seems that Fritz had a history of doing these things.

Stovall Exhibits A & B are the lists of items taken by Dallas Police from the Paine residence during their searches on November 22nd and 23rd. What items on these lists implicate Lee Harvey Oswald in the assassination of President Kennedy, the murder of officer J.D. Tippit, or the shooting at the home of General Walker ?

Exactly. And I hope the readers of this thread recognize that the Lone Nutters have responded to this thread with comments and speculation only. And that they have declined to answer any of the questions I've raised. Shaneyfelt never said anything about a "theoretical possibility" of faking the photos. That's Mr. Ulrik saying that. Shaneyfelt said no such thing. This is what he said: "I cannot entirely eliminate an extremely expert composite". ( 4 H 288 ) He went on to explain how it could be done: "...for this to be a composite, they would have had to make a picture of the background with an individual standing there, and then substitute the face, and retouch it and possibly rephotograph it and retouch that negative, and make a print, and them rephotograph it with this camera, which is Commission Exhibit 750, in order to have this negative which we have identified with the camera, and is Commission Exhibit 749." ( ibid. ) Nothing "theoretical" about it. The photographs certainly could be faked, but he doubted that the photos could be faked without his being able to recognize it. I find it interesting that the same Dallas detectives that were involved in the Friday search conducted the Saturday search as well. And I find it interesting that the same detective, Studebaker, who claimed to have "found" the gunsack on the sixth floor, ( you know, the one that wasn't there when he took the picture ) was the one "making copies" of the backyard photographs for his fellow officers. Where are the negatives he made the copies from ? In fact, the Dallas Police were handing out copies on the 23rd like they were candy. And Hoover was pissed because he knew that such a move would not allow Oswald to receive a fair trial in Dallas County. How do you empanel an impartial Grand Jury when pictures of Oswald with the murder weapons are being plastered all over the TV and newspapers ? Police claimed that they found blank Selective Service cards that Oswald had "printed himself". But those are not listed on the evidence list. Neither is the "magazine ad from Klein's Department Store" that they allegedly found in the "same box as the photographs". Not only were these items not listed on the evidence list ( Stovall Exhibit B ), like the "backyard photographs", they do not appear in pictures taken of the evidence recovered from the Paine garage on November 23rd. It's amazing how a police department who made "error" after "error" when it came to handling the evidence in this case, was able to capture the right perpetrator on their very first try. The Dallas criminal justice system in the 40s, 50s and 60s was so corrupt, that they weren't interested in convicting the RIGHT party, they were interested in convicting the ARRESTED party, because in their minds, the party they arrested was the guilty party. The evidence of that surfaced many years later, when an investgation into Henry Wade's convictions showed that multiple "patsies" were convicted of crimes they did not commit and their convictions were overturned on DNA evidence. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791 In fact, Wade convinced a jury to send an innocent man to the electric chair in 1954. https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/ So framing Oswald for the JFK assassination was nothing new for these people. It was S.O.P. and the evidence shows that they had experience doing exactly that.

How did these people come to possess these photos ?

You think ? We're talking evidence here, not opinion. So what ? Where did Studebaker get them from ? Back in those days, you couldn't make copies of photographs without the negatives. How did the Dallas Police make copies without the negatives ? And if the copies were made using the negatives, where are the negatives of CE 133-A and CE 133-C ( Dees and Stovall ) today ? The CE 133-C/Dees and CE 133-C/ Stovall were never reportedly found by the Dallas Police. According to your people ( the authorities ), only CE 133-A and CE 133-B were found in the Paine garage. Where did this different photo with a different pose come from ?

The photos recovered from Geneva Dees in 1976 and by the HSCA from Det. Richard Stovall in 1978 had the same processing errors as the photographs allegedly found in the Paine garage on November 23, 1963. Did Oswald give them these photos ?

https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1685/another-backyard-photographs-iv