Ashton Gray

"Trauma Room One" excerpt:

12:29 pm on Nov 22, '63, Dallas -- "Geneva Hine, the only employee in the Depository's second-floor offices, observes the electrical power and telephone system go dead. The Dallas Police radio systems Channel One, reserved for officers participating in the security of the President, is suddenly immobilized."

12:30 -- President Kennedy murdered

You know, it's a damned shame there wasn't a CIA/military intelligence abort team in Dallas that day, because there's no question that their absolute first priority would have been protection of critical Command and Communication systems.

"For want of a shoe..."

Ashton Gray

NOTE: I spent hours attempting to respond to this post from Cliff Varnell last night, and the quoting function becomes utterly broken after the first four quotes, which then disables all the quotes in the message. I reported this in the appropriate forum, and my answer was "Use the Reply button," which I always do anyway and have never had anything even resembling such trouble before. So I now have to resort to color codes to be able to respond at all. Sorry, but I proved to my own satisfaction by lengthy tests last night that it's being caused by something in the forum software, and have reported it, and that's all I can do. —Ashton

This begins with Cliff Varnell quoting me from an earlier message:

ASHTON GRAY: I find an endless source of entertainment in the way various threads seem to bring themselves together, because I've just now suffered through Cliff Varnell's most recent torturous twisting of Bowers's testimony about "two men" into something utterly unrecognizable in order to support an unsupportable position, consistently ignoring the most crucial facts in Bowers's actual statements.

CLIFF VARNELL: This is odd.

I cited Bowers' testimony, but I didn't make any reference to the two men, tortured or otherwise.

WelL, Cliff, here's how it went on my monitor, and your mileage may vary: just about the entire content of what you posted from Bowers's testimony was [LEWIS BLACK] Blblblblblblblbl about the TWO MEN! So pardon me, pardon me, for attaching too much importance to it. [/LEWIS BLACK]

CLIFF VARNELL: Here are the observations I posted as to the Bowers' testimony.

1. "Here's the guy with the best view of the scene at the back of the fence during the shooting sequence..."

Thank you. We are as one. I made this exact point many messages ago, viz.:

CLIFF VARNELL: 2. "Catch that bit about the dark dressed man not being distinguishable from the trees?"

Yes, I "caught it." I think I might qualify for sixth grade reading comprehension skills and I don't need a quiz. I just think it's a rather thin and flimsy shadow for you to be grasping onto as though you'd grabbed a bare 220-volt line.

At the point of Bowers's testimony where he makes this single comment that you have such an iron-claw grip on, Bowers is being questioned specifically about an incident "at the time of the shooting," when "there seemed to be some commotion." (Now there's a surprise.) It was then—at the point of the "commotion," when the motorcycle cop came "nearly all of the way to the top of the incline"—that Bowers wasn't certain of the location of one of the two men he had alluded to. I don't give a damn that Bowers decided this was attributible to the "darker dressed man" being "too hard to distinguish from the trees." Did you ever stop to ask yourself how he possibly could know that was the reason he didn't see the man temporarily? I wouldn't advise dwelling on that question for too long.

And Bowers definitively said that the two men were there before and after the shooting.

CLIFF VARNELL: 3. "And the two cops watching east/west on the triple underpass?"

Yes. Agreed. Two cops were at the overpass before and after the shooting. What is your point?

CLIFF VARNELL: 4. "The back of the fence offered natural cover."

No, Cliff. No. The "back of the fence" offered NO "cover" whatsoever from the view of Bowers. For the love of Aunt Marcy, Bowers never even suggested, even in his most uncertain moments, that the fence had any bearing on "dark clothing," which seems to be a point you are determined to make. There are no trees at the "back of the fence." It's just a bare, exposed fence. There are crepe myrtles (thank you, Jack White, for more excellent research) along the outside of the fence—which I've now added to the model, thanks to Jack's input.

To show you what kind of guy I am I've now put a cop into the model at about the position I think "Badge Man" and friend are purported to have been, and I've even turned on shadows for 22 November at 12:29 p.m., and I want you to see something that at least approximates some semblance of reality, instead of all this talk-talk-talk about "how long is a string, how dark is dark." Here's the cop in a medium shot:

And here's the same boy from Bowers's vantage point in the tower:

Yes, it's more difficult to see him in shadows than in full sunlight. But the moment he moves he's going to be silhouetted in motion against the negative space in between the fence and the myrtles, and against any spaces in the fence. Not only that, but he's surrounded by full sunlight. When and how did he get there unseen by Bowers? Where is he going to go unseen by Bowers? How is he even going to move without becoming a focus of attention to Bowers—or to anybody who even might be stationed in that tower?

CLIFF VARNELL: Now that, Ashton, is the sum total of comments I made about Lee Bowers.

And the above, Cliff, is the sum total of my answer.

CLIFF VARNELL: I made one statement of fact -- that Bowers had the best view of the back of the fence.

Then let's go have a drink. I'll buy.

CLIFF VARNELL: I then asked you if you caught the key points in the testimony -- two questions, neither of which had to do with the two men.

Then I formed a conclusion -- the back of the fence offered natural cover.

Then I've changed my mind: you buy.

CLIFF VARNELL: Where in all of that do you get some "tortured twisting of Bowers testimony"? Ashton?

Asked and answered, counselor.

CLIFF VARNELL: Ashton Gray continues:

I think that alone gets the most under the most people's skin.

CLIFF VARNELL: You've been hanging out with Pat Speer too much, Ashton.

Ouch. Hittin' below the belt, Cliff. Now you're definitely buying. (And you know Speer never writes that well.) Do go on, though...

CLIFF VARNELL: All I pointed out was the reasonable speculation that two gunmen dressed as cops shot JFK from the knoll.

Okay. I don't consider it at all reasonable.

Where did they come from? How did they get there? Were they carrying rifles? Where did they go? And what are you going to do about "Hard Hat Man"? He wasn't in police uniform—according the popular Legend of Badge Man and Hard Hat Man. How can you posit that three men can get in and out of these exposed spaces in broad daylight, shoot the President of the United States two or three times, and walk away carrying rifles, when the positions are absolutely surrounded by potential witnesses in every direction, as I've demonstrated repeatedly. Yet you blow this off like it's nothing.

Your answer is that they would say they were "returning fire" if they were seen? Then they would have to answer "returning fire where, and at whom." Never mind bullet and gun forensics to deal with.

You seem to be insisting that I accept without question a scenario that I not only find less than reasonable, but that I find to be downright ludicrous. I simply cannot conceive of any professional, accomplished sniper ever even listening to such a plan, much less agreeing to be part of it. That location near the corner of the fence and the retaining wall of the north pergola has got to be among the worst potential "sniper's lairs" in all of Dealey Plaza as far as I'm concerned.

CLIFF VARNELL: I never claimed that the two cops Bowers saw were the same guys, but that fact isn't going to stop you when you're in full strawman mode, is it?

Au contraire: nothing stops me in my tracks faster. I mistook your meaning, and I apologize.

But you still need to answer the question, then, of what two cops (or men dressed as cops) got in and out of there without Bowers seeing them—just as he saw the two cops and the other men in the vicinity of the overpass. And then there's Hard Hat man you have to answer for. And none of it has the least scrap of supporting testimony or evidence. It's thin air and nothing but.

But you seem to expect me to agree with it.

CLIFF VARNELL: I merely pointed out the police presence in the vicinity of the knoll, and that shooters dressed as cops could easily blend in.

Actually, you've pointed to a police presence in the vicinity of the overpass. "The knoll" has become such a generality in the public mind that it's a meaningless expression for location. "The knoll" stretches from Houston Street to the overpass. Part of why I've created this model is to get to specific locations and look.

CLIFF VARNELL: Sorry if you pet theory doesn't match the facts of the case, Ashton--

Straw theories are no more substantial than straw men. You've been hanging out with Pat Speer too long (see my sig). I have not propounded any theory at all about anything except a possible other location for a shooter of the head shot: the County Courts/County Records complex.

I'm not putting forth The Ashton Gray Unifying Theory of Dallas 1963: all I'm doing is trying to provide people with additional data and tools so they, by their own lights, can better test existing theories that have been floated into the research community and have generated quite a lot of discussion and speculation.

Having subjected the Badge Man and Black Dog Man theories to these same tests that I'm sharing in this forum, I personally reject them out of hand. I don't require you to.

CLIFF VARNELL: you still haven't explained how the throat wound got there if it wasn't caused by a strike from the right front.

So far I'm not convinced that there was a throat wound, so I feel no requirement to "explain" it at all. Feel free to convince me. (Do I see another "Diem Cables" thread beginning to form through the fog in the old crystal ball?)

CLIFF VARNELL: Pour a double...

You buyin'?

Ashton

As of the last few hours I have found it impossible to use conventional quoting codes. There was absolutely no reason for the quoting not to be appearing correctly. I checked and rechecked and triple checked that there were quoting code pairs, and that they were correctly configured.

After a great deal of frustration and incremental tests through an attempt to answer a long message, I found the exact spot where the codes would stop working. When they did, of course, that then destroyed the display of all the quoted passages that were correctly displayed before.

This made utterly no sense. Then I went earlier in the message and deleted one pair of on-quote/off-quote codes, and put a pair further down in the message, at the location where if I had put a pair before, they all had stopped working.

It now worked, indicating that it was not some flaw in the way the quote codes were being put into the reply, but the number of quote codes being put in. And there were only about four.

Was some arbitrary limit set on this? It consumed an incredible amount of time and effort trying to figure out what suddenly had gone wrong, and I still can't post the reply I was trying to post.

Ashton Gray

Always use the "REPLY" button to quote from other people's posts.

I do. I did. I've been replying for months, and if this hadn't been a severe anomaly, I wouldn't have first spent three hours trying to figure out why it wasn't working, then started this topic.

Ashton

As of the last few hours I have found it impossible to use conventional quoting codes. There was absolutely no reason for the quoting not to be appearing correctly. I checked and rechecked and triple checked that there were quoting code pairs, and that they were correctly configured.

After a great deal of frustration and incremental tests through an attempt to answer a long message, I found the exact spot where the codes would stop working. When they did, of course, that then destroyed the display of all the quoted passages that were correctly displayed before.

This made utterly no sense. Then I went earlier in the message and deleted one pair of on-quote/off-quote codes, and put a pair further down in the message, at the location where if I had put a pair before, they all had stopped working.

It now worked, indicating that it was not some flaw in the way the quote codes were being put into the reply, but the number of quote codes being put in. And there were only about four.

Was some arbitrary limit set on this? It consumed an incredible amount of time and effort trying to figure out what suddenly had gone wrong, and I still can't post the reply I was trying to post.

Ashton Gray

Ashton,

Julia Ann Mercer, a 23 yo Dallas resident, was driving a rented Valiant on Elm Street early on November 22. She noticed a truck parked on the right hand side of the road, half up on the curb, protruding into the street and partially blocking traffic. It was a green Ford pickup with the words 'air conditioning' in black on the driver's side. From Mark Lane's Rush To Judgement (pp29-31):

Miss Mercer saw a heavy set middle aged man in a green jacket 'slouched over the wheel' of the truck while the other man 'reached over the tailgate' and took out from the truck what appeared to be a gun case.....The man then 'proceeded to walk away from the truck and as he did, the small end of the case caught in the grass or sidewalk and he reached down to free it. He then proceeded to walk across the grass and up the grassy hill which forms part of the overpass'.

Miss Mercer was able to give a rather detailed description of that man. He was 'a white male, late 20's or early 30's, and he was wearing a grey jacket, brown pants and plaid shirt'

Mercer submitted an affidavit for the Dallas Sheriff's office on November 22 but was not called to testify before the WC. Interestingly, her description fits that given by Lee Bowers of the two men he saw standing near the fence just before the shots were fired. He described one as 'middle aged' and 'fairly heavy-set' and the other as 'about midtwenties in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket'.

It should be noted that Mercer also stated that there were three policemen standing on the bridge overlooking the truck while she was there. All this might indicate that a murder weapon was being delivered, although the gun case may have been empty. IMO, it doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility that the two men were part of a diversion which was implanted, at least partially, under the watchful eye of the DPD.

Hi Mark,

I've been trying to find a space in the posting sequence to thank you for bringing me up to speed on the Mercer incident. What I find most striking about it is how utterly pedestrian (I don't find puns; puns find me) it all is—except, of course, for the dramatic description (after the fact of a shooting, dontcha' know) of "what appeared to be a gun case" by someone who, as far as I know, wouldn't know a gun case from a fingernail file case.

As Lane points out, the testimony by both Mercer and Bowers about "two men" is consistent, and taken together is all very consistent (allowing for them taking their jackets off as the day warmed up) with two men doing some kind of work they needed to do—under the watchful eye of policemen—then moving their truck and hanging around to see the President go by—still under the watchful eye of policemen who probably had been watching them the whole time.

I find an endless source of entertainment in the way various threads seem to bring themselves together, because I've just now suffered through Cliff Varnell's most recent torturous twisting of Bowers's testimony about "two men" into something utterly unrecognizable in order to support an unsupportable position, consistently ignoring the most crucial facts in Bowers's actual statements. Like, f'r'instance (my bold emphasis added):

• MR. BALL: Now, were there any people standing on the high side-- high ground between your tower and where Elm Street goes down under the underpass toward the mouth of the underpass?
  MR. BOWERS: Directly in line, towards the mouth of the underpass, there were two men. One man, middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers. Another younger man, about mid-twenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket. ...On the triple underpass, there were two policemen. One facing each direction, both east and west. There was one railroad employee, a signal man there with the Union Terminal Co., and two welders that worked for the Fort Worth Welding firm, and there was also a laborer's assistant furnished by the railroad to these welders.
  MR. BALL: You saw those before the President came by, you saw those people?
  MR. BOWERS: Yes; they were there before and after.
  

This is at least an approximation of what Bowers described about the two men at issue and at least one of the policemen at that end of the overpass:

Oooo. Sinister. (By the way, my 2D people placed in a 3D model always "face the camera" as a feature of the software, so please don't anybody rush to tell me they are looking in the wrong direction. For these purposes, it's entirely immaterial.)

Varnell would have us believe that one or both of these men, in a flash, transmuted into their alter-egos, "Black Dog Man" and "Badge Man" (don't ask me where Badge Man's trusty sidekick and spotter, Hard-Hat Man materialized from, or how Badge Man got a badge—I simply don't know), dashed 120' down the length of the fence (in mud, you betcha'), got a gun or guns from somewhere unknown, shot the President of the United States (at least twice), crumbled the gun(s) into magic dust (creating a puff of smoke, of course), then ran back the 120' (in mud, you betcha') to be standin' around whistling innocently the next time Bowers thought to glance over there again. (Gotta' watch them spooks every minute!)

You know, I'm just a simple guy from simple roots, and somehow it sounds a lot more to me like these were working stiffs—possibly connected in some way with the welding job that had to get done, President or no president, possibly not—who had delivered some stuff to that area (seen by Ms. Mercer) and had hung around near the cops stationed there to see the Prez go by. And after Ms. Mercer heard the President had been shot, she decided those musta' been gun bags they wuz totin'.

Meanwhile, as the Warren Commission (and others) drone on and on about complete dead-end nonsense, over at the other side of the ranch, almost utterly ignored:

We have a team that has just been briefed by the CIA's worst and dirtiest, accommodatingly flown in by Tosh Plumlee and friends, that packs unnamed Cubans and a celebrity Mafioso into Dealey Plaza and God know what else. Tosh Plumlee—who, as the Fates and Furies would have it, just happens to have spent a so-far-unrevealed amount of time with Lee Harvey Oswald in "intelligence training matters."

And I guess, for some reason (see Varnell above), I'm supposed to get all "Oooooooo! Ahhhhhhh!" about a couple of drudges hanging around, absolutely pinned between cops on the overpass and Bowers in the tower.

And some people wonder why I seem to take on a bit of an edge now and then. Well, they shouldn't wonder: it's either that, or pop a vein.

Ashton

Stephen,

Mark, good find. Do you happen to know who, if anyone took her place that day?

I guess that would depend on which Channel she normally broadcast on.

As Gary Mack correctly pointed out to me, Margie was a Secretary, not a Dispatcher.

Steve Thomas

It was very appropriate for the assiduous Gary Mack to point out the distinction, Steve. But I find what Mark said in his originating post to be utterly absorbing, her job description of far more relevant interest to me than her job title:

Her job was described as of vital importance in coordinating the dispatch of communications for officers in the field.

She received emergency calls and issued information directly to the dispatch officer in the downtown division headquarters, located about a mile from Dealey Plaza.

She was privy to all transmissions, and would have heard all communications regarding the murder of Officer Tippit.

I am captivated to hear that the invitation didn't arrive until the day before the event. Ordinarily such lists are compiled and invitations sent with ample time.

If the invitation in fact came in the mail from a local address, it likely would have been posted the day before—on 20 November. If so, by whom, I wonder? Could there be any involvement here by everyone's favorite Dallas postal employee?

Such an outré event cannot be tossed aside.

Ashton

TO JOHN DOLVA:

John, thanks very much for the graphic suggestion. Within the fairly tight contraints I currently have to work with in this regard, I've attempted at least to approximate what you drew, and will re-do the movie.

TO FRANK AGBAT:

Thanks, too, for your insights, none of which I disagree with.

That said, this is to both of you, and anyone else who takes an interest:

I don't have articulated 3D people models, so simply cannot—and that's cannot—reach the level of meticulously accurate reconstruction that I'd love to see every bit as much as anyone viewing these.

I'm working with stock 3D figures whose physical attitudes and positions are rigid. It's akin to working with plastic army men: you can put 'em on the carpet, but you can't make them drink from their canteen.

Even to get those figures to approximate the actual positions, I've got the "Jacquie" figure with her feet through the floorboards of the limo like Barney Rubble trying to stop the machine.

Modeling custom articulated figures is somewhere on the "To Do" list, and I've got a friend who has a copy of the Dealey model, and thinks he might be able to help by working with some stock articulated men and women 3D models, so I'm hopeful about that and am waiting to see what he comes up with.

That said, he and I and the other handful of people who have contributed in some way to making something of this all have jobs and families and lives that simply have to take precedence, however passionate any of us might be about helping all to get to the truth. I greatly, deeply appreciate the suggestions and interest, though, and please know that they all are taken to heart with a view to constantly improving this tool over time.

Ashton

NOTE-REVISED: Because both "Black Dog Man" and "Badge Man" were brought up by Cliff Varnell, I created the series of images below from the "Black Dog Man" location, but posted them after quoting Cliff's statement only about "Badge Man." Having made this error, I'm going to leave this message just the way it is for all fans of the elusive and wraithlike "Black Dog Man." The equally elusive "Badge Man" is just going to have to sit in the bushes and wait his turn. I regret any additional confusion that might arise from my mistake in one of the world's greatest areas of confusion, and I hope this note and the images below from the alleged "Black Dog Man" location help to bring a little order. I will endeavor to atone by posting, soon, views from the purported "Badge Man" location, and I hope, and believe, that the net result will be greater clarity and, ultimately, considerably lessened confusion in an event super-charged with it.

And while I have that up there, I also don't see anybody there at the corner of the fence drawing such a bead—just an instant before the headshot. Must have been "Queeksdraw McGraw." Whaddaya think?

I buy Badgeman, a few feet west of the corner.

Somehow, Cliff, I just knew you were going to make me do it.

Well, all right, then...

But before we have our shadowy friend Black Dog Man go gettin' an itchy trigger finger, let's give a big shout out to his homies in the 'hood.

First, as he stands there, rifle in hand, ready to murder the President of the United States in broad daylight, he glances to his right and gives a nod to the three (count 'em: 3) Knoll Steps Boys just about 16 feet away (probably less than the distance across your living room):

Hi, boys. Pleasant afternoon for a little murder, don't you think?

Swinging his gaze a little to his left, the homicidal (and, apparently, suicidal) maniac finds a pleasant collection of people loitering around the old lamp post, a few scattered around the infield, and some whack case with an umbrella:

Swinging his gaze further left, our audacious assassin-to-be finds, just 30 feet away, not one, but two more close-up-and-personal eyewitnesses for his infamy: Sitzman and Zapruder. If all that alone didn't make his day, one of them is holding a damned movie camera! And if that weren't enough, just across the wide steps there are two more people who could foil his plans with the merest glance:

But, what the hell. Sometimes you just gotta let 'er rip. Getting down to business, Black Dog Man sets his sights on the throat shot:

I narrowed the field of view so there would be some chance, at least, of picking the target out of the sea of faces. Of course, I guess the Umbrella Man wasn't in full display yet at the time of the throat shot. But at this point, frankly: I don't give a damn.

Now that BDM has done his bid'ness with the throat shot, time to deliver the coup de grace:

There you go. I've even given BDM's target more of the low-rider lean, by request. Looks like he just might miss the motorcycle cops. (Then, of course, merely stroll away. Invisibly. Well, they don't call 'em "spooks" for nothing.)

Now, as to the issue of mass shock and mass hypnosis -- I agree 100%.

The JFK research community has hypnotized itself into thinking that

the case hasn't already been solved.

Heh. Yeah.

Asthon

They could hit JFK from that sweet spot behind the fence

Cliff: do you think you could locate that "sweet spot behind the fence" for me? (Don't get rude, Cliff. This ain't a D.C. lawyer you're talking to here.)

I'd like to aim my virtual camera from this alleged "sweet spot." So far, I'm having a lot of trouble finding any spot behind that fence that doesn't have a motorcycle cop and/or spectator in the line of fire. You seem to know where it is, though. Help me out.

Ashton

The eastern corner of the fence.

As you wish. I've even turned off the foliage to make the shot easier:

I'm wondering how no motorcycle cop got hit. I'm also wondering how anybody could get a scope bead drawn on a moving target from there with the inconvenient corner tree-shrub, shown here in Moorman:

And while I have that up there, I also don't see anybody there at the corner of the fence drawing such a bead—just an instant before the headshot. Must have been "Queeksdraw McGraw." Whaddaya think?

Quoting now from your other message above:

I don't think JFK was hit in the throat with a flechette from an umbrella. I think Mitch WerBell adapted the blood-soluble paralytic technology pioneered by Charles Senseney to a sound suppressed firearm that struck JFK from the Black Dog Man position...

Well, since your designated fence-corner "sweet spot" is just a few feet from the alleged—but always fun—"Black Dog Man" position, while I was there I thought I ought to set up the motorcade where it was at the time of the throat shot, and take a peek. Here ya' go:

I don't know about you, but I was having a bit of trouble picking the target out of the crowd, so I made him a bright sort of [G.W. BUSH] nyewkyuhler[/G.W. BUSH] green for you. Hope it helps.

And now here's what I think in general:

I think it's time we all snap out of over 40 years of mass shock and mass hypnosis, and get a reality check.

Ashton

Ashton Gray

________________________________________

Gosh, I didn't realize that Jackie and John were sitting so far apart at the time of the "head shot."

FWIW, Thomas

________________________________________

Gee, it's a gosher. You can't gosh the geeer, Thomas.

I have no indication that the planted place of their respective bottoms changed from this location to the headshot:

I realize they lean somewhat toward each other, and that she reaches for him, so tell me how cozy you want them to get, and I'll see if I can get 'em there. (And she still won't interfere with a shot from the window depicted in the Quicktime file.)

Ashton

I guess there isnt too much you cant do with your program!

So far it hasn't helped me fry eggs any better. I've had to learn to enjoy my eggs scrambled.

That's zooming movie is from the lower of two windows in the recessed connecting structure between the County Courts and County Records building, which John Dolva had suggested I get added to the model. I should have noted that when I first posted, but at the time I had soon-to-be-scrambled eggs on the stove.

Ashton

They could hit JFK from that sweet spot behind the fence

Cliff: do you think you could locate that "sweet spot behind the fence" for me? (Don't get rude, Cliff. This ain't a D.C. lawyer you're talking to here.)

I'd like to aim my virtual camera from this alleged "sweet spot." So far, I'm having a lot of trouble finding any spot behind that fence that doesn't have a motorcycle cop and/or spectator in the line of fire. You seem to know where it is, though. Help me out.

Ashton

Mr. Plumlee, I have read with absorbed interest your accounts of the unusual, not to say bizarre, sequence of events that you were swept up in on 21 and 22 November 1963, and I want to say at the outset that I can certainly understand how frustrating it must be for you to be questioned about details, when you've only tried to help.

In that spirit of help, I hope you can help me untangle a few knots I find myself dealing with, none of which I have seen asked or answered. Of course, I cannot guarantee with certainy that I've found everything there is to read on this, but I've certainly made the effort, so if something I ask is actually answered elsewhere, perhaps you would be kind enough to give me a very specific cite to a document I can access, and tell where to find it.

If not, here are some questions I have that I feel have relevant importance:

1) As specifically as you can recall, when exactly were you at the Illusionary Warfare Training in Nagshead, North Carolina with Lee Harvey Oswald and for how long?

2) What "intelligence training matters" were you and Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in there?

3) Why was Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in "intelligence training matters"?

4) As specifically as you can recall, when exactly were you at the Honolulu radar installation with Lee Harvey Oswald and for how long?

5) What "intelligence training matters" were you and Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in there, and why was Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in "intelligence training matters"?

6) As specifically as you can recall, when exactly were you at Oahu's Wheeler Air Force Base with Lee Harvey Oswald and for how long?

7) What "intelligence training matters" were you and Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in there, and why was Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in "intelligence training matters"?

8) As specifically as you can recall, when exactly were you "in Dallas at an Oak Cliff safe house on North Beckley Street run by Alpha 66's Hernandez group, who had worked out of Miami prior to the assassination" with Lee Harvey Oswald and for how long?

9) What "intelligence training matters" were you and Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in there, and why was Lee Harvey Oswald engaged in "intelligence training matters"?

10) You have emphasized that "we were military intelligence" going in and out of Dallas, and that the CIA were only your "support people." You later say: "As we say in CIA... ." Were you military intelligence on 21-22 November 1963, or CIA?

11) If you answered "military intelligence," what branch of military intelligence were you in, what was your rank and station, and who was your superior officer?

12) You say you departed from Miami and traveled to Dallas via New Orleans and Houston, and that the flight plan for 6393 Echo out of Salt Lake City, Utah around the same time to Dallas, with Roselli's name on it, was not a flight plan for your flight. You also say that CIA's Robert "Bob" Bennett briefed you on your mission. Do you have any explanation for why the other flight would have departed from Bob Bennett's home town?

13) Would you please supply the names of Secret Service agents and officials who were apprised by CIA and by your "military intelligence" branch of the threat against the President, and of your "abort team" being in the area.

It would be of the greatest help to me—and to many others, I'm sure—if you could fill in these holes in the record. I have been very moved by the lengths you have gone to, and the personal victimizations you have suffered, so you could be of just such help, so, given these few paltry matters, I feel completely confident that you will go the extra two feet.

Ashton Gray

Thanks so much again for the images!

--Smitty

Very glad to help. And for the record, anything and everything I post in this forum is for the public good and is irrevocably placed into the public domain.

Here is the view from the County Courts roof that I wasn't able to post earlier (have not done one from County Records roof):

And just as lagniappe for all the good forum friends and neighbors in the "head shot came from the knoll fence area" camp, here's what the shot would have been from near the corner of the fence (which, as far as I can tell, only gets worse the further toward the overpass you go):

Ashton

Ashton Gray

Here's a round-up of requested views. Determining a "correct" field of view for the virtual camera is pretty iffy, and I may need to lick this calf again, but I had a very little bit of time and wanted to try to accommodate some of the requests as well as I could in the circumstances. One of the circumstances, though, is that I've begun to populate the motorcade, and the 3D people are putting a significant strain on my system processing power now, so everything has gotten very slow to update, making critical positioning/pan/tilt/yaw painful in the extreme.

Here's what I could do, though, with the motorcade set up in a rough approximation of head-shot time:

FOR LEE FOREMAN—NEAR NORTH PERISTYLE STEPS

Lee I think that is very close to where you indicated. The problem that won't be overcome anytime soon, though, is the absence of spectators in this model.

DON'T KNOW FOR WHOM—SOUTH RAILWAY OVERPASS AND NEAR SOUTH PERGOLA

FOR SMITTY—SOME ROOF HOPPING

TSBD Roof:

Dal-Tex Roof:

I have another from the County Courts roof, but the forum software says I've reached my limit of images. Sorry. Will post it next time I can post in this thread.

Ashton

NOTICE: This, regrettably, is a gang reply. I can't keep waiting for a new queue to form before I can post again. Life ain't that long.

Ashton,

As regards the size of the trees you may be absolutely right.

I did scare up a few reference images for the north peristyle trees, all from around the time of the assassination as far as I can determine. None are great, but I believe you can see what I mean:

The last one has the new courthouse building in it helping to date it as around or post assassination, and the others do, too, but I cropped them to focus on the north peristyle. Although it's winter in the bottom photo, the red arrow points to the stubby little young tree, and the one further north is about the same size, as can be made out—not well, but can be made out—in the upper two arials.

Your work and I mean WORK is superb and evidence of long hours of painstaking labour.

That's awfully kind of you, Eugene, but truth is once I got the hang of the program and how to "project" building images onto the shapes "pulled" out of available schematics, it went surprisingly fast. The pergolas and peristyles were another story, and of course the terrain I'm never satisfied with, but the trees, fence, vehicles are all from public domain stock 3D models (tweaked as necessary).

It's definitely the po' man's Dealey Plaza. But I was contemptuous beyond expression of the fact that Myers would take however much silver he took to do his elaborate 3D model, and then allow its accessibility and use for nothing but a RightThink Single Bullet Theory Propagandcast. <SPIT!> So I decided to do whatever I could about it. And I don't regret a single dime or minute invested in it so far.

I knock my images off in a matter of seconds.

All right, that's it: I want all your secrets, and I want 'em now!

TO PETER LEMKIN:

Ashton, I know it is a lot of work, but to do the view from the tower to the fence justice would take at least the last two rows [nearest fence] of vehicles would have to be put in to get an idea of the confusion to the eye there. Also various RR tracks, switing boxes, etc.

Peter, you really know how to hurt a guy.

You got any reference for how many cars were parked where? I'll put some cars in there if I know where to put 'em. (But if you really want to see 1963 Edsels, Corvairs, and Ramblers modeled, don't hold your breath.) And reference for the "switching boxes, etc."? I have a schematic with the tracks, they just haven't been high on my list of priorities.

TO LEE FOREMAN:

Lee, I asked you for a specific location in the bushes by the peristyle, and you gave me a link to a two page forum thread for me to have to wade through even to begin to deduce what you meant. I'll try again: Do you have a specific location you want the view from? If so tell me or post an image with it marked.

TO MICHAEL G. SMITH:

Hey, Smitty. I did one view from the Dal-Tex roof and posted it already. I think it's in the thread called A New Angle on Murder. It didn't have motorcade vehicles in place, though, and I at least have some stand-ins for those now. I'll do some virtual roof-hopping as soon as I can, but it may not be till this weekend.

TO CLIFF VARNELL:

I haven't mentioned the throat wound. I don't expect to any time in the foreseeable future.

TO MARK STAPLETON:

Don't know enough about Ms. Mercer's statements to comment, Mark. Sorry.

TO DREW WILLIAMS

Thanks for starting this topic, Drew. Not only am I having a lot of fun with it, I'm learning a lot as I go, too. How about you?

If I missed something or someone in this very long thread, it was an oversight, so just kick me in the shins and remind me.

Ashton

Alors vous devrez lire mes lèvres.

Il n'y aura aucun nouvel impôt?

Yes. There will be no new taxes on lip reading. (For some reason that I simply cannot fathom, Babelfish can't translate that.)

First I would have to be able to comprehend it. I failed. However! I did what I always do in such an emergency of comprehension: I improvised. In this case the improvosation took the form of dropping into the street a second limo (not a Cadillac, as it was in real life, though—sorry), two motorcycles, and two trailing cars, then swinging the virtual camera around inside the Dal-Tex building right to where the purported "shooter" (with or without the extra-baggage accomplice) is alleged to have been. And here is what I saw:

Would you take the shot?

Only if I was really pissed off at James Tague.

<RIM SHOT, CYMBAL CRASH> Good one, Myra.

By the way, I'm quoting liberally (an adverb expressing quantity, not political leanings) and reproducing the images for continuity of discussion about these issues, which I consider to be of some appreciable significance:

The reason I've stopped quoting you here—and I'll beg your pardon for it—is gently to direct your attention to the rather nondescript edifice in the top portion of this image:

That is what is often referred to, I believe, as the "switching tower." It was manned that day. There is a witness who was there in it throughout the fell events of the noon hour. And after my having taken a virtual look from that location, I'm afraid that all your very well-formed and well-stated arguments fell on somewhat deaf ears (it might be the hat). But, please: you take a look for yourself at what could be viewed in a sweep from that tower, and tell me how likely it is, to you, that an organized group of professional killers would have selected the "behind the fence" area as a sniper's lair:

Uh, the knoll fence? Likely.

With a manned watch tower only 250 feet away—at your back, no less—that not only can see you, but has a 360° view of every possible escape route? And with the Sherriff's department (in the County Courts building) only about 350 feet away, directly in front of you, with at least 40 different windows looking down on your position?

So if I undertand you correctly, that's a place you'd consider "likely" to be picked by professional snipers to shoot from in order to murder the President of the United States in broad daylight—and be able to stroll away, rifle in hand?

Well, Myra, you have an uncanny knack for leaving me almost speechless. (I can only hope other forum members don't start to catch on to how you do it.)

But, even if I'm a glutton for punishment, I sure would like to know where this admirably brazen gun-totin' assassin went. Up in a puff of smoke? And while we're on the subject of puffs of smoke, I think I'll light up (yes, and with my hat on, too) and pose this conundrum to you:

1) Given that it has been rather thoroughly established that this event took place well along into the modern era of smokeless gunpowder (there's a whole thread on this subject), and,

2) if—as it seems you contend—the serendipitously timed infamous puff of smoke from the knoll fence area was not a premeditated, carefully timed diversion, and,

3) if the smoke did not come from the firing of a gun there, then:

just where did this spontaneous puff of smoke come from—right at that pregnant moment—and how, and why?

The question demands an answer from any serious researcher.

As I've made clear, and will say again, I believe the only possible answer is that it was, in fact, a premeditated, carefully timed diversion.

And so the question remains and echoes and reverberates like gunshots on an autumn afternoon: why was the order issued immediately for all personnel in the County Courts building to evacuate that building and go directly into the vast vacant lot you see above, where there clearly was nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

Was there such an order? Can you please site a source?

Yes, ma'am, I can, thanks to the always perspicacious Steve Thomas. Below is what he graciously posted in response to a question I had posed on that count. You can find his original message in context in the thread Order in the Courts! The Riddle of the Court Jesters. Meanwhile, this is what he posted there, and it certainly bears repeating here:

Here is a transcript of what Sheriff Decker broadcast over Channel 2 of the Dallas Police Department at 12:30 from Chief Curry's lead car:

"Have my office move all available men out of my office into the railroad yard to try to determine what happened in there and hold everything secure until Homicide and other investigators should get there."

Here is what was broadcast by the Sheriff's Department dispatcher at 12:30:40:

"Stand by 1. All units and officers in the vicinity of the station report to the railroad track area, just north of Elm. Report to the railroad track area just north of Elm."

Hope that helps.

Steve Thomas

It helped me a great deal, and I found it of great interest that the highly compressed incident contains a beautiful overlay of confusion between the Dallas Police Chief, Jesse E. Curry, and the Dallas County Sheriff, Bill Decker: We have Sheriff Decker broadcasting orders from Police Chief Curry's car. Has your head stopped spinning yet? If not, I'm happy to wait.

Now, without going off into the relationship of these two men to Dallas Mayor Earl Cabell (elsewhere Earle Cabell—brother of CIA's own Charles Cabell, who had been heavily involved in the Bay of Pigs, and subsequently given the boot by JFK), please note that Decker says "have my office [in the County Courts building] move all available men out of my office." And where does he order them to go? He orders them out of the County Courts building—A in the graphic below—and into the "railroad yard"—B in the graphic below—with instructions (and please read the next phrase carefully, several times) for them "to try to determine what happened in there." Here is the graphic:

To "try to determine what happened in there"? At almost the instant of the shooting, who has determined that something "happened in there"?

I'll tell you what "happened in there": a lot of smoke, that's what "happened in there."

Are you suggesting that the assassins were trying to flush out the witness to the assassination to nail them in the parking lot?

(That repititious clunking sound is just my head on the desk. Almost knocked my hat off, too.)

No, Myra. No. No, I'm not remotely suggesting that. I'm sorry that I've been so opaque and impenetrable. It was not my intent. Here's what I'm suggesting, in plain words, as my opinions on all the foregoing:

• • The County Courts building/complex was the location of a primary shooter, probably who delivered the head shot.
  • The County Courts building/complex was emptied specifically to provide a perfect cover for the shooter, likely in uniform, to leave the building without arousing the least suspicion—even if carrying a weapon.
  • Everyone was sent to the "railroad track area just north of Elm" specifically and maliciously because not a damned thing had "happened in there" except a puff of smoke and maybe some loud reports, and because it was away from the escape routes of the shooters.
  • Decker was in cahoots with Cabell & Cabell (and you can climb that ladder right on up the food chain as high as you care to, or not).
  

And just in case you missed my earlier point (I couldn't tell if you were joking or not), I did not bring up the tower as a shooter's location. I brought it up because the presence of a manned observation tower directly behind the knoll fence area makes the entire idea of a professional sniper back there just fall-down funny to me. (So much for badge men, dog men, invisible men, Indian rope trick men, and little green men extracted from golfball-sized grain in fifth-generation photos.)

And not to go all opaque and impenetrable on yer ass again or anything, but I'm going to add here—inscrutably enough and seemingly disconnected enough, perhaps—that I believe that the uniform J.D. Tippit was carrying factors into this exact scenario, as does the uniform worn by the "deputy" seen coming down the stairs in the TSBD by three people as the so-called "first deputy on the scene" was going up those same stairs.

And there's still the problem of what the officer burned his hand on when he vaulted over the fence.

Ain't we got fun.

Ashton

Ashton,

How about a view from where I have indicated. The bushes at the North Peristyle.

- lee

There are bushes all along the front of the North Peristyle, Lee. I don't mind taking a look as soon as I have a few minutes, but can you give me a location that's a little more specific?

Ashton

As I indicated in my post, I don't discount shots from the County Courts Building.

I mistook your meaning (in several places, in several ways), and the onus is entirely on me.

...I just calls 'em like I sees 'em, & I don't care if anyone thinks I'm stepping on their toes.

My next glass of whatever is handy will be raised in toast to you for calling 'em like you sees 'em. And you may have noticed that I don't excel in the toes-avoidance dances, either.

There's been a mis-understanding here, for which I take full responsibility.

I should have stated: "...but it is another thing for the conspirators to BET THEIR LIVES

on such a nebulous occurence."

Thank you for your ready willingness to bear responsibility for the misunderstanding, but it was my own haste on a busy afternoon that caused it.

[AG]: And I think I'll just go on standing right where I am anyway. I'm kind of enjoying the view and counting the passersby who keep telling me I should move along.

[CV]: This passerby wants you to stay put, but I'm only pointing out a flaw in your argument -- who in their right mind is going to risk the gallows on the ASSUMPTION that all those people are going to bite on this "puff of smoke" mis-direction you posit?

Cliff, I have not ever said, nor have I even suggested, nor do I believe, that a smoke pot firing behind the fence was supposed to be the be-all and end-all of misdirection and confusion. The police chief himself ordered a throng of people to rush in that direction, and at almost the same time several police emergencies were being called in (including a YMCA bomb threat if I recall correctly), while another hubbub was being created around the entrance to the TSBD, and lord knows what other psy-ops were being conducted—all into a crowd of eyewitnesses in some stage of shock.

We ALL know they charged the knoll. That's not the issue.

Are you trying to say I can just rest my case now?

You haven't shown your hand down, yet.

Your hole cards: the number of people who testified to seeing the puff of smoke on the knoll.

Bet you didn't know I had The Tower card up my sleeve, did you? (Did Myra fold?)

My hole cards: the number of people who heard gun shots from the knoll.

Better peek at that card again. I think you're holding sounds that could have been gun shots, reported primarily by people who wouldn't be expected to know—and even then uncertain of the point of origin. (Pssst: the cards are marked.)

I'm all in, Ashton. Sure you wanna call?

Tell you what: I'll call as soon as you tell me what the policeman burned his hand on when he vaulted over the fence.

Ashton

But, but, but... But, Myra. It's only because I'm having a bad hair day. Surely that is something a lady can forgive.

Not really; I have bad hair years.

Je ne peux pas vous entendre avec ce chapeau dessus.

Alors vous devrez lire mes lèvres.

In a more serious vein, and with all due respect, it seems clear to me that anyone shooting from that lower DalTex window would have had to shoot through at least two, and perhaps three or even four other cars to hit Kennedy. I'm enclosing another image from the 3D model looking back up toward the DalTex building. Although the other vehicles are not in this view, I feel certain you are imaginative enough to put them there in your mind's eye. Then tell me what you think:

Hm, you may have a point. The two figures are on a low floor. So we'd (we ) need a side-view diagram with everyone in position for the shots from behind to see if the angles are possible. Hey! This is your area right? Can you provide evidence for my premise?

First I would have to be able to comprehend it. I failed. However! I did what I always do in such an emergency of comprehension: I improvised. In this case the improvosation took the form of dropping into the street a second limo (not a Cadillac, as it was in real life, though—sorry), two motorcycles, and two trailing cars, then swinging the virtual camera around inside the Dal-Tex building right to where the purported "shooter" (with or without the extra-baggage accomplice) is alleged to have been. And here is what I saw:

Would you take the shot?

As far as I'm concerned, it's just one more red herring. And, really, not even a very clever one.

Huh? Anyways, do you see the two figures in the window? Let's establish that much.

See image above. Does it really matter? (But to answer your question: no.)

Why, Myra, I'm shocked. Apparently you've abandoned reading my posts altogether, since the whole issue of the stampede up the knoll came about because I posited that the puff of smoke, and the ordering of all the personnel from the County Courts building into the same area behind the fence, was specifically and intentionally diversionary, to focus all attention exactly where the shooters warn't (as they say in my neck of the woods).

...Oops. Busted. Ok ok so I kinda scanned. My bad.

And this might surprise you: no shooters were found all up in there where the crowd and police surged.

What? So the shooters didn't loll around waiting for the welcome wagon to arrive? As you'd say, "shocking." And downright rude. I mean that's just not good manners.

Did you notice that every vehicle including the press bus had already passed? That indicates that some seconds went by before people started charging the knoll. And I suspect that the shooters had escape routes. In addition, early knoll chargers were greeted with the bogus SS men who showed weapons and told people to turn back. Not surprisingly, they did. So the knoll shooter(s) had plenty of time to bolt.

Uh-huh. Certainly did. And I certainly did read everything you wrote that followed where I've stopped quoting you. (I didn't just "scan" what you wrote—unlike some hatless people I know of, who shall remain unnamed. A-hem.)

The reason I've stopped quoting you here—and I'll beg your pardon for it—is gently to direct your attention to the rather nondescript edifice in the top portion of this image:

That is what is often referred to, I believe, as the "switching tower." It was manned that day. There is a witness who was there in it throughout the fell events of the noon hour. And after my having taken a virtual look from that location, I'm afraid that all your very well-formed and well-stated arguments fell on somewhat deaf ears (it might be the hat). But, please: you take a look for yourself at what could be viewed in a sweep from that tower, and tell me how likely it is, to you, that an organized group of professional killers would have selected the "behind the fence" area as a sniper's lair:

And so the question remains and echoes and reverberates like gunshots on an autumn afternoon: why was the order issued immediately for all personnel in the County Courts building to evacuate that building and go directly into the vast vacant lot you see above, where there clearly was nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.

And with a respectful tip o' my hat, I remain, as sometimes,

Ashton

Pat obviously believes that there is an "accepted story" when it comes to Watergate.

Well, sure it an "accepted story," Michael. Untold millions have been spent shoving it down everybody's throat. It's "accepted" the way rape is "accepted."

By the way: this thread is a floor show to effect more such "acceptance." Same old floor show as ever.

Ashton

Ashton, there are also the windows (red) in the setback connecting structure between the records and courts building. Possibly that is a unique formation that can cause sound to bounce and ripple like 'fire crackers'.

John, I put the windows in as accurately as I could determine from available photos that show the windows in that connecting structure (which photos are pretty rare as far as I can find). Here is the view from the lower one, fairly wide field of view (haven't "scoped" it):

And the view from the upper one:

I found and blew up a section of a photo showing the upper window. The photo is fairly contemporary, not around the time of the assassination, but I found it of interest that it appears that the lower part of that window is opened:

Ashton

And since we know there were shooters at Dal Tex and the knoll...

Excuse me? "We" who "knows" that? Did I not get the memo?

Ashton

That's correct Ashton. I distributed a memo to everyone but you because you refuse to remove your hat in the presence of a lady. So there.

But, but, but... But, Myra. It's only because I'm having a bad hair day. Surely that is something a lady can forgive.

Ok, I drew the Dal-Tex conclusion after looking at this page:

http://www.copweb.be/copweb%20jfk%20gazette-Mag01.htm#

Someone with your advanced language skills may notice that it's in French.

Je suis environ aussi français que la statue de la liberté.

(That's a joke, courtesy of Babelfish.)

However, the photos probably speak for themselves. (Then I go on to speak for them.) They show a shooter aiming a rifle (at least that's what I see) in the window of Dal-Tex, right by the fire escape that a man is sitting on. The shooter has a second man (spotter?) with him. (I also attached photos.)

Hm! Imagine that. And here I thought it was a guy lighting a joint, and another guy with his hand down... Well, never mind.

In a more serious vein, and with all due respect, it seems clear to me that anyone shooting from that lower DalTex window would have had to shoot through at least two, and perhaps three or even four other cars to hit Kennedy. I'm enclosing another image from the 3D model looking back up toward the DalTex building. Although the other vehicles are not in this view, I feel certain you are imaginative enough to put them there in your mind's eye. Then tell me what you think:

As far as I'm concerned, it's just one more red herring. And, really, not even a very clever one.

The knoll shooter I doubt you need convincing on. The evidence is overwhelming, e.g., the stampede up the hill afterwards (in your picture).

Why, Myra, I'm shocked. Apparently you've abandoned reading my posts altogether, since the whole issue of the stampede up the knoll came about because I posited that the puff of smoke, and the ordering of all the personnel from the County Courts building into the same area behind the fence, was specifically and intentionally diversionary, to focus all attention exactly where the shooters warn't (as they say in my neck of the woods).

And this might surprise you: no shooters were found all up in there where the crowd and police surged.

Ashton

And since we know there were shooters at Dal Tex and the knoll...

Excuse me? "We" who "knows" that? Did I not get the memo?

Ashton