Robert Prudhomme

Funny way to describe a man running full tilt into a building, Thomas.

"...in front of the building at this time...."?

Five

It appears to me the knot has slipped. I wear suits and ties all the time. It's not unusual for my tie knot to slip. When a mirror is available, I always check my tie knot.

FWIW, I wear custom-made Brooks Brothers suits and also Brooks Brothers ties and tie my tie the same way as shown in the photo.

Yeah, sure it does, Jon. And I'll bet the knot underneath just happens to be a perfect match, pattern wise, for the front of the tie, right?

Is this the question, Tom?

"The alternative is what? Someone who can't count to 6 replaced the tie at NARA with a fake?"

If it is, all I can say is, do we immediately stop analyzing evidence, just because we cannot think of a good reason why it might have been altered? Isn't that a rather odd approach to investigative research?

I have no idea what occurred here. I do know that we have been presented with the impossible, and that certain elements of the evidence do not match up. Who did it and why? That's the next thing to deduce.

What question was that, Tom?

How, then, do you explain the two icons above the tie knot that just happen to align perfectly with the vertical rows of icons beneath each of them?

I cannot believe I am even having this discussion with you, Tom. Can you not see the attempt at hustling us that has been made here?

How many here believe JFK would leave part of the inner knot of the tie hanging out of the top of the knot?

Also, if the neck band of the tie comes out of the top corner of the tie knot, why can we not see the neck band coming out the top right corner of the tie in the photo with the arrow?

No matter when it was done, it still requires the inability to count to 6, and a tie exists that is a perfect match except for that for the wrong number of icons.

Seriously, I don't understand what you are saying about an inability to count to six, Tom. Can you not see two vertical rows of six icons each in the tie knot?

Sometimes hunches pan out.

I was being sarcastic, Jim, for the benefit of certain members here who have attempted to minimize the value of my work at another forum. And who, right up until the Hawkins' statement was brought into the light, believed I was mistaken in saying Baker did not enter the TSBD immediately.

Who can't count to 6? What are you saying?

I would assume the miscount took place long before this material made its way to the National Archives.

You'll have to get some other opinions then, because that's the way it looks to me.

The alternative is what? Someone who can't count to 6 replaced the tie at NARA with a fake?

I simply cannot believe you cannot see something so obvious, Tom. I have no trouble seeing two vertical rows of icons on the tie knot, and each vertical row has six icons, all neatly lined up in a row.

P.S.

And what a coincidence that there is a square icon above the top circle icon on the left, and a circle icon above the top square icon on the right.

IMO the red arrow is pointing to the top edge of the horizontal part of the knot. The vertical part of the tie should have been pulled down until the horizontal part of the knot rises up and covers the part that appears above the horizontal edge.

Tom

And the icons just above where your red arrow is pointing just happen to match the 5 icons below each of them? Not to mention the tie is 6 icons wide all the way up to the knot, and then suddenly becomes 5 icons wide going across the front of the tie knot.

Please, Tom, look at this photo one more time, and click on it to enlarge it so you can see the tie knot better.

If JFK's tie was tied the way you describe it, that would be the sloppiest tie knot I have ever seen. A well tied knot should go right up to the collar top, and hide everything tied beneath it, instead of leaving part of the inner section of the knot sticking out.

No, JFK is wearing a perfectly tied tie that does not need the vertical part pulled down in order to cover up the part "appearing above the horizontal edge". This is the President, after all. Do you really think he would be out in public with a tie tied like a used car salesman's?

Hard to believe it was not that long ago everyone said I was nuts for not believing Baker went into the TSBD immediately.

Of course, my saying so doesn't really count, as I was only working on a "hunch".

Not like some of the serious "researchers" here.

There are only 3 possible orientations that will maintain alignment with the pattern on the tie. The one Ashton has selected for animation and either 120 degrees clockwise or 120 degrees counter-clockwise. Remember, the pattern on JFK's tie is fixed relative to his body. If you rotate the overlay less than 120 degrees the pattern will be misaligned."[/font][/cvolor]

I don't understand what you are saying, Tom. If the section of tie we see above, with the nick, becomes the horizontal part of the tie knot, why couldn't the nick be anywhere on the 360° circumference of the tie knot?[/font][/color]

Bob,

If we view the tie at the level of the "nick" there are six 'icons' around the horizontal circumference of the tie in the underlying photo. Two icons are visible in the front, two in the back that are unseen, and one on each side that are partially visible. 360/6=60 degrees - every icon is located 60 degrees from the other around the circumference of the knot.

IF only one type of icon was used, the horizontal tie in the overlay could be moved ONLY at 60 degree increments or the icons will not overlap. However, two different icons are present and they alternate. A 60 degree movement would overlap two non-matching icons. This requires another 60 degrees of travel around the circumference of the tie in order to match the overlapping icons. Two incremental moves of 60 degrees each, equals a single movement of 120 degrees. 360/120=3 Therefore only 3 possible location of the nick in the tie exist - AS THE TIE IN THE PHOTO IS TIED.

If you presume the photo represents the knot AS WORN BY JFK then there are only 3 possible positions of the nick per the explanation above. However, we know by the photos of the untied full length tie, that the tie was obviously unknotted. When it was re-tied, the 'tighter' the knot was pulled, the shorter the circumference of the knot in the tie. It follows then that the 'looser' the knot the longer the circumference. Utilizing this procedure, the location of the nick could be moved laterally in VERY small increments. The knot in the tie would then appear larger or smaller than the knot in JFK's tie as seen in photographs. Any change in the size of the knot could be hidden by photographing the tie from a distance, and in any close-up, a photo from the side prevents any size-of-the-knot comparison. I do NOT have any closeup photos of the nick as viewed from the front. Are there any?

Did they photograph the tie ONLY after re-knotting it? Given their SOP, IF it was to their advantage to do so, then they almost certainly did!

Tom

Tom

Did you not notice that I pointed out that this tie:

has 5 icons in its width, while THIS tie, now in a horizontal position in JFK's tie knot, has 6 icons in its width???

I recommend clicking on this photo of JFK and counting how many icons wide the material at the front of his tie knot is, and then having another look at this gif:

Okay, that is enough.

I'll try to explain my view point one more time. See the knotted tie above? With the nick just to the left of centre of the tie knot?

If I removed the tie, undid the knot, and re-tied it, starting an inch away from where the first knot was tied, where would that place the nick?

I know everyone is hung up about the pattern of circles and squares on the tie, but there is something very important you are missing here. In the gif above, the tie knot only shows a combination of five "circles and squares", now shown vertically on the tie knot. When did the pattern change from six "circles and squares" to five "circles and squares"?

Look again at this photo of JFK below, and enlarge it if you have to.

Now, count the number of "circles and squares" in each vertical column of the tie knot, and then compare it to the evidence photo below:

I count six "circles and squares" on each vertical row in the tie knot in the photo of JFK, and only five "circles and squares" in the same rows (now horizontal) seen in the tie in the evidence photo.

How can the section of the tie with the nick seen in the evidence photo have made the front of the knot, with only five "circles and squares" in its pattern?

Ashton has shown the nick in the front of the tie because it suits his purpose to do so.

True. BUT...

*PLONK*

A fine rebuttal, if ever I saw one.

Okay, unless I am missing something here, I don't understand what the problem is with the tie knot.

In this photo, we can see a vertical "nick" in the tie. If you rotated this photo 90° to the right, you would have a long horizontal nick in the tie that does not, as far as we know, go completely through the tie. The only way this tie could get this kind of nick, IF it was made by a projectile exiting JFK's throat, would be if the nicked area was part of the tie knot (making the section we see above lie horizontally) and the nick was made in the left extreme edge of the tie knot, and the tie material was folded over, from front to back, where the projectile nicked the tie. This is why the nick appears so long, as the projectile has pierced both the back and the front of the tie knot as it clipped the edge of the knot.

"BTW, There are only 3 possible orientations that will maintain alignment with the pattern on the tie. The one Ashton has selected for animation and either 120 degrees clockwise or 120 degrees counter-clockwise. Remember, the pattern on JFK's tie is fixed relative to his body. If you rotate the overlay less than 120 degrees the pattern will be misaligned."

I don't understand what you are saying, Tom. If the section of tie we see above, with the nick, becomes the horizontal part of the tie knot, why couldn't the nick be anywhere on the 360° circumference of the tie knot?

It appears the the top of this tie segment extended to the WIDE end of the tie, and the bottom extended to the NARROW end.

Assuming that is true, Ashton oriented it on his gif the way it should be if JFK tied it the way I tie mine. Which is as follows: The tie is draped over the neck, the the wide end hanging on the anatomical right and the narrow end on the left. Then cross the wide over the narrow, and finish up.

EDIT:

Conclusion:

Assuming the top of the tie segment in the photo above leads to the wide part of the tie, and assuming JFK tied his knots the way I do (as indicated in Ashton's gif), then moving the nick to the anatomical right would place the nick on the back side, exposed, and a bit lower than where it is in the front. About 1/16th inch lower.

I'm not sure if this is what is being pointed out but, when we look at the front of the tie knot, we are looking at the length of the tie on its side.

Although it appears we can only see 5 of the 6 pattern emblems on the knot, this is not actually the case. Look closely, and you will see the knot extends above the border of the super imposed knot face. Simply adjusting the slack in the knot will place the nick on the left side of the knot (or on the right side or middle, if you so desire).

In other words, there is absolutely nothing to prove the nick in the tie was away from the left side, and near the middle of the tie. This, of course, still leaves open the possibly this nick was made by an exiting bullet, bullet fragment, bone fragment or 1/4" x 10" drill bit inserted through the rear of the skull.

I asked before if the above photo was of JFK, and I found out it is. Here is the problem. If I am correct, and the nick was on the anatomical left side of the tie, the SBT is completely sunk.

Look again at this gif:

On the button hole side of the collar, note the horizontally striped pattern of the material the button hole passes through. Note also that, when the shirt collar is done up, the point where vertical stripes meets horizontal stripes, on the buttonhole side, is about halfway down the right collar tab, and the horizontal stripes, on the buttonhole side, actually run down on an angle to JFK's right side.

Now, look at the close up of the shirt and tie on JFK above, and you can see that, once the shirt and tie is actually on JFK, the boundary made by the horizontal stripes on the button hole side of the collar and the vertically striped material of the shirt is much higher in relationship to the right collar tab.

What is happening is that, once the shirt and collar is actually on JFK, he fills out the collar and shirt and straightens the collar band out; making the collar band stripes truly horizontal again.

Now, think about what this does to the hole seen in the button hole side of the shirt. By raising the collar band, out past the button hole, and pivoting on the button hole as you do so, you are moving the hole on the button hole side to JFK's anatomical right.While it appears the projectile hole would be lined up with the nick in the tie, it would actually be to JFK's right of the nick in the tie.

If the hole is moved to JFK's anatomical right, and if the nick was on the anatomical left of JFK's tie, the projectile was definitely travelling a right to left path through JFK's neck, and could NOT have been on its way to Connally's right armpit, unless he was sitting in Nellie's lap.

I had some trouble following some of what you said about the shirt, Robert. Tell me if I am saying the same here:

The lines on the front of the shirt should be vertical. As they are on the photo of Kennedy. But on Ashton's gif they are not vertical. If you leave the button where it is, acting as a pivot, and pull the left and right halves of the shirt apart below the button, so that the lines are vertical as they should be, the two holes will no longer be perfectly aligned. There will be a gap between them. If a bullet from behind made both those holes, it had to have been traveling toward Nellie Connally, not her husband. The Magic Bullet is therefore more magic than we had all imagined, as it had to have made a much sharper turn in mid air in order to hit the Governor. And of course we know it did, because the WC needs to know Oswald is guilty.

Check! And thumbs up!

As for the tie, I don't understand your criticism/comment. Assuming Ashton oriented it correctly (that is, rotationally), then it seems to me that it has been position properly by Ashton since its emblems are in the proper location. Though Ashton may not have picked the correct set of emblems to place the nicked section upon.

Am I right about this?? I don't think I'm missing anything.

Actually, I am more interested in the horizontal stripes in the collar band behind the button and the button hole In Ashton's gif, when the collar is done up (in an empty shirt), the horizontal stripes on the button hole side are pointing down at an angle to the anatomical right. In other words, with the button done up, the shirt material and collar have been rotated on the collar button; making it appear the bullet hole on the anatomical left is further to the left than it really is.

Further, look at the vertical stripes on the shirt with JFK in it. They run up and meet the collar band at what appears to be roughly 90°; almost perpendicular. Now look at Ashton's gif, in particular the vertical stripes of the shirt on the buttonhole side. Do they meet the collar band at a 90° angle? Nope, not even close.

Someone has played with something in the material Ashton is working with, with what I believe is an intent to place the bullet hole on the shirt further to the left and more compatible with the SBT.

I see exactly what you mean.

However, I'm sure that after Ashton rotated the pieces, he moved them together so that the button and hole locations are the same. But that is the only thing that appears correct. If you rotate the pieces to make the horizontal lines truly horizontal, that makes the vertical lines LESS vertical. And vice versa. You can't make both the vertical lines and horizontal lines correct at the same time. Therefore the fabric has been altered, just as you said. It may just be folded under temporarily for the photo. Or it may be permanent... we don't know.

I can't figure out exactly what has been done in that gif, either. I just know that, in the photo of JFK, the vertical stripes are perpendicular to the horizontal stripes of the collar, while in the post-assassination gif, they are not perpendicular.

Someone at some point in history has screwed with this, and whoever he was, he was very good.

Sorry, folks, but I simply do not see how Ashton's deduction that the only place the nick could have been is the front of the tie is possible. Loosen the tie knot up, feed a bit of the tie one way and voila! the nick is now on the left side of the tie.

Here is another clue.

See what looks like blood on one side of the nick only? If the nick was on the left edge of the tie knot, the part of the tie with the "blood" on it would be on the back of the tie knot; lined up with the bullet hole in the shirt that just happened to be oozing blood.

What a coincidence!

It appears the the top of this tie segment extended to the WIDE end of the tie, and the bottom extended to the NARROW end.

Assuming that is true, Ashton oriented it on his gif the way it should be if JFK tied it the way I tie mine. Which is as follows: The tie is draped over the neck, the the wide end hanging on the anatomical right and the narrow end on the left. Then cross the wide over the narrow, and finish up.

EDIT:

Conclusion:

Assuming the top of the tie segment in the photo above leads to the wide part of the tie, and assuming JFK tied his knots the way I do (as indicated in Ashton's gif), then moving the nick to the anatomical right would place the nick on the back side, exposed, and a bit lower than where it is in the front. About 1/16th inch lower.

You could put the nick in the tie anywhere you wished; back, front or on either side, simply by altering the place you started tying the tie. Ashton has shown the nick in the front of the tie because it suits his purpose to do so.

It appears the the top of this tie segment extended to the WIDE end of the tie, and the bottom extended to the NARROW end.

Assuming that is true, Ashton oriented it on his gif the way it should be if JFK tied it the way I tie mine. Which is as follows: The tie is draped over the neck, the the wide end hanging on the anatomical right and the narrow end on the left. Then cross the wide over the narrow, and finish up.

EDIT:

Conclusion:

Assuming the top of the tie segment in the photo above leads to the wide part of the tie, and assuming JFK tied his knots the way I do (as indicated in Ashton's gif), then moving the nick to the anatomical right would place the nick on the back side, exposed, and a bit lower than where it is in the front. About 1/16th inch lower.

I'm not sure if this is what is being pointed out but, when we look at the front of the tie knot, we are looking at the length of the tie on its side.

Although it appears we can only see 5 of the 6 pattern emblems on the knot, this is not actually the case. Look closely, and you will see the knot extends above the border of the super imposed knot face. Simply adjusting the slack in the knot will place the nick on the left side of the knot (or on the right side or middle, if you so desire).

In other words, there is absolutely nothing to prove the nick in the tie was away from the left side, and near the middle of the tie. This, of course, still leaves open the possibly this nick was made by an exiting bullet, bullet fragment, bone fragment or 1/4" x 10" drill bit inserted through the rear of the skull.

I asked before if the above photo was of JFK, and I found out it is. Here is the problem. If I am correct, and the nick was on the anatomical left side of the tie, the SBT is completely sunk.

Look again at this gif:

On the button hole side of the collar, note the horizontally striped pattern of the material the button hole passes through. Note also that, when the shirt collar is done up, the point where vertical stripes meets horizontal stripes, on the buttonhole side, is about halfway down the right collar tab, and the horizontal stripes, on the buttonhole side, actually run down on an angle to JFK's right side.

Now, look at the close up of the shirt and tie on JFK above, and you can see that, once the shirt and tie is actually on JFK, the boundary made by the horizontal stripes on the button hole side of the collar and the vertically striped material of the shirt is much higher in relationship to the right collar tab.

What is happening is that, once the shirt and collar is actually on JFK, he fills out the collar and shirt and straightens the collar band out; making the collar band stripes truly horizontal again.

Now, think about what this does to the hole seen in the button hole side of the shirt. By raising the collar band, out past the button hole, and pivoting on the button hole as you do so, you are moving the hole on the button hole side to JFK's anatomical right.While it appears the projectile hole would be lined up with the nick in the tie, it would actually be to JFK's right of the nick in the tie.

If the hole is moved to JFK's anatomical right, and if the nick was on the anatomical left of JFK's tie, the projectile was definitely travelling a right to left path through JFK's neck, and could NOT have been on its way to Connally's right armpit, unless he was sitting in Nellie's lap.

I had some trouble following some of what you said about the shirt, Robert. Tell me if I am saying the same here:

The lines on the front of the shirt should be vertical. As they are on the photo of Kennedy. But on Ashton's gif they are not vertical. If you leave the button where it is, acting as a pivot, and pull the left and right halves of the shirt apart below the button, so that the lines are vertical as they should be, the two holes will no longer be perfectly aligned. There will be a gap between them. If a bullet from behind made both those holes, it had to have been traveling toward Nellie Connally, not her husband. The Magic Bullet is therefore more magic than we had all imagined, as it had to have made a much sharper turn in mid air in order to hit the Governor. And of course we know it did, because the WC needs to know Oswald is guilty.

Check! And thumbs up!

As for the tie, I don't understand your criticism/comment. Assuming Ashton oriented it correctly (that is, rotationally), then it seems to me that it has been position properly by Ashton since its emblems are in the proper location. Though Ashton may not have picked the correct set of emblems to place the nicked section upon.

Am I right about this?? I don't think I'm missing anything.

Actually, I am more interested in the horizontal stripes in the collar band behind the button and the button hole In Ashton's gif, when the collar is done up (in an empty shirt), the horizontal stripes on the button hole side are pointing down at an angle to the anatomical right. In other words, with the button done up, the shirt material and collar have been rotated on the collar button; making it appear the bullet hole on the anatomical left is further to the left than it really is.

Further, look at the vertical stripes on the shirt with JFK in it. They run up and meet the collar band at what appears to be roughly 90°; almost perpendicular. Now look at Ashton's gif, in particular the vertical stripes of the shirt on the buttonhole side. Do they meet the collar band at a 90° angle? Nope, not even close.

Someone has played with something in the material Ashton is working with, with what I believe is an intent to place the bullet hole on the shirt further to the left and more compatible with the SBT.

How bout losing the attitude?