David Von Pein

Good question. I have no idea. But Sandra (as of 2008 anyway) certainly did contradict Miss Adams, for sure.

Yes, I agree. Plus, there's the fact that that front elevator is much closer to the place where Adams and Styles were watching the motorcade from (as we can see when looking at the floor plan for the fourth floor). So it makes perfect sense that they would have first tried to go down in the more-convenient front elevator rather than clomp down the rickety stairs while wearing high heels.

Sandra Styles was, of course, with Victoria Adams when they went down the back stairs of the Book Depository shortly after the assassination on 11/22/63. Styles was not called to testify in front of the Warren Commission, but she did talk at some length with assassination researcher Sean Murphy in 2008. Here's what she told Murphy at that time: [Quoting Sandra Styles:] “I watched the motorcade from a south-facing window on the fourth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. With me was one of my Scott Foresman colleagues, Victoria Adams (who sadly passed away last year). When the shooting took place, we were not even aware at first that it was a shooting. It sounded like fireworks. President Kennedy was obscured from our view at the critical moments by tree foliage. All I could make out in those moments was the pink of Mrs. Kennedy's suit. Contrary to what Vickie [Adams] told the Warren Commission, she and I did NOT go to the rear stairs within a minute or so of the shooting. First, we lingered by the window for quite some time, trying to determine what was going on outside. Things were very confused. Next, we made an attempt to take the front-of-building elevator downstairs. For some reason, however, this elevator—which, unlike the rear elevator, went only as high as the fourth floor—did not come when we called it. It was only after trying to call the elevator that we thought of going towards the rear stairs. And even then we did not proceed very quickly — we were wearing high-heel shoes! While we were still in the office area, our view of the rear stairs was blocked by partitions. Anyone could have come down those stairs without us knowing about it. All this time we had absolutely no idea that shots might have come from the Depository building. As a result, I was paying very little attention to what was going on inside the building in those first few minutes after the assassination. If the Warren Report estimated that Vickie and I reached the first floor via the rear stairs some 4 or 5 minutes after the shooting, then I'd have to say that sounds a little conservative. If anything, it was probably longer. I have no clear recollection of seeing Bill Shelley or Billy Lovelady (both of whom I had a passing acquaintance with) near the rear of the building when we reached the first floor. I have a vague recollection of seeing them at some point around the front entrance. But it's perfectly possible we did see them where Vickie said we did—near the freight elevator. I really wasn't paying much attention to people IN the building. I thought all the action was outside. It always puzzled me how Vickie seemed to exaggerate the speed with which we went to the rear stairway. Although I was fond of her, I guess she was what you might call a 'person of drama'. I found the version of events she told people somewhat sensationalistic and at odds with my own memory of those minutes. I simply stated what I recalled, but I didn't contradict her because I felt I couldn't say what she saw or didn't see; just because I didn't recall it the same way did not mean she was in error necessarily. I am not that noble a person that I would not have contradicted her to the interviewers had it been necessary. Why was Vickie the only one called to testify before the Warren Commission? I don't know. My recollection has always been that I WAS interrogated by a representative from the Warren Commission very briefly in our office, but there was no follow-up, whereas she was questioned more than once. I have wondered whether it might have been that her testimony required more investigation and mine was more plausible or I was less positive in my recollections than she. Vickie was a very friendly and gregarious person, while I am more reserved and less outgoing. She may have exaggerated some points, while I was cautious about what I said, not wanting to mislead. In some instances, her version might be more accurate.” -- Sandra Styles; July 2008 Source Link --->

McClelland himself, in the 2002 interview with Vince Bugliosi that I quoted at length above, said that he himself (McClelland) "drew" the sketch "for Josiah Thompson's book". [Edit: which is something that you, Pat Speer, did indeed note in your last post; i.e., that McClelland in later years started to say that he himself had actually drawn the sketch we see below.] "I have to say that the sketch I first drew for Josiah Thompson's book a few years after the assassination was misleading. Since last night, I've been thinking that I placed the large hole in the president's head farther back than it really was, maybe. It may have been a bit more forward." -- R.N. McClelland; Oct. 2002

In addition to his appearance in 1988's "The Men Who Killed Kennedy", Dr. Robert McClelland also performed a "hand-on-his-head" demonstration for the PBS-TV camera in another 1988 television program, "Who Shot President Kennedy?", hosted by Walter Cronkite. In that PBS program, Dr. McClelland twice put his right hand over the upper-right portion of the back of his head to indicate where he said the large wound was located in President Kennedy's head (see the screen captures below). The late Doctor Robert McClelland, in my opinion, had some very strange beliefs concerning JFK's head wounds and what he was seeing when he viewed the autopsy photographs at the National Archives for that PBS/NOVA program in 1988, which I discuss HERE and HERE. Here's an excerpt from Vince Bugliosi's book concerning Dr. McClelland: [Book Quote On:] “When I spoke over the telephone to Dr. McClelland in late September and early October of 2002, McClelland, a respected Dallas surgeon whom no one accuses of trying to deliberately mislead anyone, only of being completely wrong in what he thought he saw (the most honest people in the world can think they saw the darndest things), said he was positive the president had a "massive hole to the back of his head." He said at the time of his observation he was holding a metal retractor that was pulling the skin away from the president's trachea so Drs. Perry and Carrico could perform their tracheotomy. "I had nothing else to do or to distract me so I fixated on this large, gaping hole to the back of the president's head for ten to twelve minutes." When I wondered how he could see the large hole when the president was always lying on his back, he said the wound was so large that he nevertheless could see "most of it." If what he said was true, I asked, how is it possible that on the Zapruder film itself, the explosion is clearly to the right frontal portion of the president's head with a large amount of brain matter spraying out, and the back of his head appears to be completely intact? Dr. McClelland gave an answer that deserves some type of an award for inventiveness: "What the explanation for this is, I just don't know, but what I believe happened is that the spray of brain matter and blood was kind of like a bloodscreen, similar to a smokescreen, that precluded a clear view of the occipital area." If, I pursued the matter, the exit wound was to the back of the president's head, where was the entrance wound for this bullet? McClelland, who believes the shot to the head came from the grassy knoll, said he believed the president was struck "around the hairline near the middle of his forehead." If that was so, I asked, how was it that seventeen pathologists, including Dr. Wecht, all agreed that the president was only struck twice, both times from the rear, and none of them—from photographs, X-rays, and personal observation (by the three autopsy surgeons)—saw any entrance wound to the president's forehead? Again, McClelland, who acknowledged, "I'm not a pathologist and I've never conducted an autopsy," said, "I don't know the answer to your question." But he remained sincerely inventive in his imagination. "What I believe happened is that none of the pathologists saw the entrance wound because it became a part of the destruction to the whole right side and top of the president's head. In other words, it was no longer a separate hole that could be identified." (Of course, none of the autopsy photographs show any such massive injury to the president's forehead extending to the right side of his head, and none is referred to in the autopsy report, nor in the reports of the Clark Panel and Rockefeller Commission. As the HSCA said, "There is no evidence that the president was struck by a bullet entering the front of his head.") "So you do acknowledge," I said, "the explosion to the right front part of the president's head?" "Oh, yes," the doctor said, "but that's not where the bullet exited. It exited in the occipital region of his head, leaving a hole so big I could put my fist in it." When I pointed out to the doctor again that not only didn't the Zapruder film show any large hole to the back of the president's head but autopsy photographs never showed any large hole there either, he said that although it was pure "supposition" on his part, at the time the photographs were taken, someone "could have pulled a flap of the president's skin, attached to the base of his neck, forward," thereby covering the large defect. When I asked him if he saw any such loose flap of skin at Parkland, he acknowledged, "I did not." It was getting late in the evening, Dallas time, but before I ended the interview I reminded Dr. McClelland of the fact that in his Parkland Hospital admission note at 4:45 p.m. on the day of the assassination, he had written that the president died "from a gunshot wound of the left temple." "Yes," he said, "that was a mistake. I never saw any wound to the president's left temple. Dr. Jenkins had told me there was a wound there, though he later denied telling me this." Since there was no bullet wound to the left side of the president's body, and since the conspiracy theorists allege that Kennedy was shot from the grassy knoll to his right front, conspiracy author Robert Groden solves the problem and avoids having his star witness, Dr. McClelland, look very confused and non-credible simply by changing McClelland's words "left temple" to "right temple" in his book, The Killing of a President. When I called Dr. McClelland the following evening to discuss further one of the points he had made, he quickly told me he was glad I had called because "since we hung up last night, I've had some second thoughts about the exact location of the exit wound." Unlike the many conspiracy theorists who have exploited Dr. McClelland's obvious errors to their benefit, he told me, "I don't question the integrity of all the pathologists who disagree with me" (he wasn't so kind to his colleague, Dr. Charles Crenshaw: "Chuck had a lot of problems and fabricated a lot of things"), saying, for instance, that he and the three autopsy surgeons were "obviously looking at the same head and the same wound," but that the area on the head where they placed the wound differed because of "the different positions from which we viewed it and also because of the different interpretations of what we saw, which is normal." But he made a major concession in an effort to reconcile his position with theirs. "I have to say that the sketch I first drew for Josiah Thompson's book a few years after the assassination was misleading. Since last night, I've been thinking that I placed the large hole in the president's head farther back than it really was, maybe. It may have been a bit more forward." When I asked him where he now put it, he said, "Partially in the occipital region and partly in the right back part of the parietal bone" (which I told him was actually consistent with the original position he took in his Warren Commission testimony), but he still insisted that this large exit wound was not to the right frontal area of the president's skull as concluded by all the pathologists. Dr. McClelland told me he believes there were two gunmen, Oswald and someone else, and further believes that "the CIA and FBI, mostly the CIA, were behind the conspiracy to kill Kennedy, and they brought in the Mafia, who carried out the killing." He said he didn't know but suspects that "the Warren Commission covered up the conspiracy." On that note, I thanked the good doctor for his time and bid him a good night.” -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 405-407 of "Reclaiming History"

We can argue forever about the exact time that Officer Tippit was shot. There will always be disagreement amongst LNers and CTers concerning that point. But it doesn't really make a whole lot of difference precisely when Tippit was shot, because regardless of what the exact time was, we KNOW (or at least I do) that Tippit's murderer was positively (and beyond all possible doubt) Lee Harvey Oswald. And we can know this for a fact not only due to the many witnesses who positively identified Oswald as either Tippit's one and only killer or as the one and only gunman who fled the scene of the crime....but also due to the even-more-definitive ballistics evidence that Oswald was kind enough to leave behind at the scene of the murder---which consisted of those four bullet shell casings that positively came from the same gun that was used to kill Officer Tippit, which was also the same gun that Oswald still had in his very own hands just 35 minutes after Tippit was slain. Yes, virtually all CTers will argue that those bullet shells were faked or planted or switched to incriminate the resident "patsy", but when asked what proof the conspiracy theorists possess to support such an extraordinary and vile allegation, the silence becomes overwhelming. In short, no such evidence exists and every reasonable person knows it. And therefore....

Marcus, Why wasn't the "real assassin" seen by anybody coming down those same back stairs? I guess you think the real killer(s) must have just stayed up on the Floor Of Death for several extra minutes, running the great risk of being caught right there on the sixth floor. Is that it?

I see that Sandy still hasn't given up on his very silly notion about both Lovelady & Shelley telling a pack of lies to the WC. Mr. Larsen can't seem to accept the simple notion that Lovelady and Shelley merely provided more details in their later (1964) statements than they did in their earlier statements. (As discussed years ago at the link below.) http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/Shelley-And-Lovelady

..........

You're not really suggesting that these photos below are implying that all three of these Dealey Plaza witnesses (Abe Zapruder, Bill Newman, and Gayle Newman) saw the "back of JFK's head" blown out, are you? Because these hands-on demonstrations are showing no such thing, of course:

Exactly!! The big question I have now regarding Victoria E. Adams is: Why on Earth would she have told author Barry Ernest (in the early 2000s, was it?) that she had definitely not seen Shelley & Lovelady just after she got to the first floor of the TSBD on 11/22/63? Prior to her interviews with Ernest, had her memory of events been so diminished that she had actually thought the Warren Commission had added things to her sworn testimony? I suppose the "fading memory" explanation is always a possibility to consider. (Victoria passed away in November 2007. She was 66.) Also, I'm wondering what Barry Ernest's opinion was/is of Victoria's "mental state" when he interviewed her? Did her memory of the events seem clear and vivid? Or was it somewhat shaky and murky? (I'm just wondering.)

But the jacket can't possibly have the bus transfer in it that he got from McWatters. So what the heck are you talking about (re: Oswald wanting to save money on his bus fare before he ever exits the TSBD)?

Why have you decided to just make up this "10 seconds" figure? You know full well that Adams testified she stayed at the 4th-floor window for "15 to 30 seconds". So why are you now pretending it was as little as ten? Plus, there's this 2011 info from conspiracy theorist Sean Murphy: "Sandra Styles claimed she told Ernest what she was now telling me: that she and Victoria Adams did *not* go to the rear stairs anything close to as quickly as Victoria had claimed." -- Sean Murphy; January 27, 2011

But that was only AFTER he left the TSBD. You've got him desperately trying to get his jacket BEFORE he ever switched from the bus to the taxi. You've got your chronology all messed up here.

Any other nitpicky points you want to bring up? I've got to give you credit though, Marjan. You've posted more hunks of pure speculation (aka: fantasy) in these last 24 hours on this forum than anyone else I can ever think of. Congrats.

Huh?? What's that got to do with his blue jacket? Are you suggesting he had a "Get On The Bus Free" ticket in his blue jacket?

JEAN DAVISON SAID: I have a question for anyone who accepts Vickie Adams' time line and believes that she came downstairs before Truly & Baker had reached the freight elevator on the 1st floor. If she's right, how does her story prove that Oswald didn't come down those stairs? In the WC version, Baker spotted Oswald just after each man had reached the second floor landing. That means that while Truly & Baker were rushing up from the 1st floor to the second, Oswald would've presumably been hurrying from about the 3rd floor to the 2nd. So where were Adams and Styles during that time, according to Adams? Already outside the building! Can someone explain how her time line prevents Oswald from using those stairs? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: It doesn't prevent Oswald from using those same stairs. And that is something I have also pointed out in my posts in the past: "I'll say this regarding Vickie Adams' timeline....The more I think about this subject, the more I realize that even if Adams DID descend those stairs as quickly as she said she did, that particular scenario really does no harm whatsoever to the "Oswald Did It" conclusion. Why? Because...then Adams and Styles very likely BEAT Lee Harvey Oswald to the stairs. Hence, it's likely that Adams & Styles were always AHEAD of Oswald on their descent down the stairs. And if Adams & Styles were really THAT fast at getting to the first floor, then they could have possibly beaten Baker & Truly too, with B&T only getting on the stairs after A&S had vacated the stairwell." -- DVP; February 17, 2011

I don't recall her saying any such thing in her 1966 interview. (But maybe she did and I just missed it.) But here's what Adams told the WC: Mr. BELIN - How long do you think it was between the time the shots were fired and the time you left the window to start toward the stairway? Miss ADAMS - Between 15 and 30 seconds, estimated, approximately. Mr. BELIN - How long do you think it was, or do you think it took you to get from the window to the top of the fourth floor stairs? Miss ADAMS - I don't think I can answer that question accurately, because the time approximation, without a stopwatch, would be difficult. Mr. BELIN - How long do you think it took you to get from the window to the bottom of the stairs on the first floor? Miss ADAMS - I would say no longer than a minute at the most.

Why not? We know Baker & Truly DID briefly emerge on the 4th floor during their journey thru the building. We merely need to accept these possible alternative scenarios: 1. Baker & Truly were both inside the lunchroom with Oswald on the 2nd floor at the precise moment when Adams & Styles were also on the 2nd floor making their mad dash toward the ground floor.....and, therefore, A&S didn't see B&T (or Oz). or.... 2. Dorothy Garner got the chronology mixed up SEVEN MONTHS LATER (on June 2, 1964) when she tried to reconstruct the timeline for Assistant United States Attorney Martha Joe Stroud.

Boy, Oswald was sure desperate to get that jacket, wasn't he? But.....why?

From a 2011 discussion (which includes participation by Barry Ernest; see link below)..... DAVID V.P. SAID: With respect to Vickie Adams, the ONLY thing a person needs to accept in order to have Oswald on the back stairs within one to two minutes after the President's assassination is to accept the almost certain fact that Victoria Adams was simply inaccurate in her time estimate about when she and Sandra Styles were on the back staircase. And if she's off by a mere ONE MINUTE, or even less, then her whole story unravels and it then becomes quite easy to accept the fact that Oswald used the back stairs just after shooting President Kennedy from the sixth floor. The key to pretty much knowing without a doubt that Adams and Styles were on the stairs only AFTER Lee Oswald used the same stairs is not really Oswald himself--but Roy Truly and Marrion Baker. Because if Adams was really on the stairs as early as she said she was, she would have had virtually no choice but to have seen (or heard) the two men who we know for a fact WERE on those stairs within about 60 to 75 seconds of the assassination -- Truly and Baker. Since Adams saw nobody and heard nobody, the very likely solution is that she was mistaken about her timing (which couldn't be a more common error with human beings), and she was on the stairs AFTER all three men (Oswald, Baker, and Truly) had already utilized the same stairs. David Von Pein February 14, 2011

It's actually a very good movie (accuracy-wise), with very few mistakes. Some 1978 cars are shown on the street in a couple of scenes, and the Hertz sign atop the TSBD says "Fords" instead of "Chevrolets". But those aren't really things I would regard as mistakes, because they couldn't really be corrected within the type of TV Movie budget they had to work with. Also please note that the real Jim Leavelle is handcuffed to Oswald (Frederic Forrest) in the film.

See one of those stairway doors in action in the cued-up video clip below (which is from a TV movie that was filmed inside the TSBD itself in 1978):