Robert Prudhomme

I've searched everywhere I can think of, and cannot come up with a height for Bill Shelley. Does anyone know?

He does not appear to be a very big man, and it seems most others tower over him in the photos of him and others.

Robert Prudhomme,

I'm struck by your disbelief that anything shoddy was done.

I can't speak to the x-ray equipment or the haste-makes-waste nature of the x-ray examination.

I do believe it's clear the autopsy procedure was shoddy, as was the writing of the autopsy report. I believe further the shoddy overall quality of the autopsy was deliberate and is the reason why blog sites such as this exist.

Okay, Jon, then you answer the question.

How would an x-ray tech go about making poor quality x-rays, that are still able to portray hundreds of dust like bullet fragments in JFK's skull?

Do you seriously think the techs would not be doing their absolute best, considering the importance of the deceased, and the high ranking generals and admirals present?

Anyone on this forum know how tall Bill Shelley was?

Of course I'm paranoid, Thomas. The LN's tell me that all the time.

Here is a little gem for those who believe they are seeing Shelley and Lovelady walking down the Elm St. extension in Couch.

From the March 18, 1964 FBI statement of Bill Shelley:

"Immediately following the shooting, Billy N. Lovelady and I accompanied some uniformed police officers to the railroad yards just west of the building and returned through the west side door of the building about ten minutes later."

The comical thing about this statement, and Shelley's WC testimony, is they contain elements that are obviously not true. And yet, without the FBI statement and WC testimony of Bill Shelley, would we even know Shelley and Lovelady had gone to the rail yard? Are you starting to get the suspicion we are the victims of a gigantic hoax, and Baker is one of the main players, and there are people still working very hard to perpetuate this hoax?

Please don't get all paranoid again, Bob.

It's reasonable to assume that you're referring to certain members of this forum, yes?

If so, why do you feel the need to impugn the character of Forum members who disagree with you?

It's very divisive and tends to put a dampener on the free exchange of ideas and theories.

Is that your intention?

Do you feel like you're on some kind of Mission and that you have a "corner" on the Truth Market?

Sincerely,

--Tommy

Why do you immediately assume I am referring to you?

"FWIW, I'm inclined to believe Baker more than the others, including the inconveniently-deceased (1978?) Gloria Jean Calvery.

At this point, I mistrust Shelley and Truly the most. But Gloria Jean is rapidly catching up with them in my book."

I'm always impressed with researchers that go on their gut feelings, and trust some witnesses, and not others. We should call this the Selective Witness Program.

Really, Thomas, what logical reason do you have to trust Baker, and not trust Shelley, Truly and Calvery?

Really, Bobby. It's like I said. I think both Lovelady and Baker were too dull intellect-wise to be chosen to be bad guys.

Clever, devious Shelly probably told Lovelady to l-i-e to the Warren Commision about seeing Vicki Adams on the first floor, near the back of the building, when Shelley and Lovelady (supposedly) returned from the railway yard / parking lot and entered the TSBD through a rear or side door. I'm guessing that they really hadn't seen Vicki Adams there, and that they may not have even entered the TSBD that way and / or at that time. I'm guessing that dull Lovelady realized that he would be committing perjury if he l-i-e-d to the Warren Commission like that, but he kinda went through with it, anyway, and totally "spilled the beans" when he blurted out, "But I couldn't swear that it was Viki Adams," or words to that effect. See what I mean by "dull intellectually-speaking"?

Regarding Baker, I've read that some of his colleagues in the police department considered him to be one of the duller knives in the drawer. If he was rather dull intellectually-speaking, then I think it's unlikely that the ground-level Dallas "powers that be" (Truly and Shelley) would have chosen Baker to be one of their bad guys.

But maybe I'm all wrong, Bobby.

So what?

Live goes on, regardless.

I'm not "all hung up" on the idea that Baker was as pure as the driven snow.

By the way, are you ever going to ask anyone to please blow up and "enhance" the part of Darnell that you think shows Lovelady rising up from his sack lunch on the steps or perhaps climbing the steps backwards? Or was be bending over just before that and talking with somebody on the sidewalk, below?

I would do it myself, but I don't know how.

Have you done so already, or has someone already done it voluntarily? (I haven't looked at the other threads yet, today.)

--Tommy

Yup, I'm going to make you the head of the Selective Witness Program, Thomas. Using nothing more than gut instinct and some poorly grounded innuendo, you are able to sort out lying witnesses from truthful witnesses.

What amazes me most is it has taken you this long to solve the Crime of the Century.

Tell you what, Pat. You make a list of all the settings they made on the portable x-ray machine, why you think they would produce poor quality x-rays and I'll check it out with my friend the x-ray tech.

"This is JFK medical evidence 101 kind of stuff." Oh my, now I'm really impressed LOL.

My favourite cartoon, clearly demonstrating the Magic Bullet had to have entered the back of the neck, if it originated from the Sniper's Nest, for it to have exited the throat and then struck Connally in the right armpit. How many vertebrae did it destroy on its way through the neck?

Thank God for the dumbing down of America! Without it, garbage like this would never pass for serious research.

Here is a little gem for those who believe they are seeing Shelley and Lovelady walking down the Elm St. extension in Couch.

From the March 18, 1964 FBI statement of Bill Shelley:

"Immediately following the shooting, Billy N. Lovelady and I accompanied some uniformed police officers to the railroad yards just west of the building and returned through the west side door of the building about ten minutes later."

The comical thing about this statement, and Shelley's WC testimony, is they contain elements that are obviously not true. And yet, without the FBI statement and WC testimony of Bill Shelley, would we even know Shelley and Lovelady had gone to the rail yard? Are you starting to get the suspicion we are the victims of a gigantic hoax, and Baker is one of the main players, and there are people still working very hard to perpetuate this hoax?

"FWIW, I'm inclined to believe Baker more than the others, including the inconveniently-deceased (1978?) Gloria Jean Calvery.

At this point, I mistrust Shelley and Truly the most. But Gloria Jean is rapidly catching up with them in my book."

I'm always impressed with researchers that go on their gut feelings, and trust some witnesses, and not others. We should call this the Selective Witness Program.

Really, Thomas, what logical reason do you have to trust Baker, and not trust Shelley, Truly and Calvery?

I finally found it. Here is "Shelley" and "Lovelady" on their way to the rail yard. If you look closely, Baker can be seen stepping off the curb of the concrete island and crossing the path they made five seconds or so before.

Here is the problem. If Baker was inside the TSBD front door within 15-22 seconds of the last shot, how much time do you think has elapsed, since the last shot, as he steps off the curb of the concrete island as seen here?

If Shelley and Lovelady had stopped at the concrete island to speak to Gloria Calvery, and are now seen out in the middle of the Elm St. extension, how long after the last shot were they speaking to her? Four seconds? Five seconds?

Oh boy, you're really sticking your neck out this time. They put the machine on a setting whereby metal would be apparent? Are you serious?

I have a good friend who is the x-ray tech at our hospital. I'll get back to you after I discuss this one with him.

Falling asleep here. G'night.

That's what I would like to know, Thomas. I sincerely believe Shelley had a meeting with her on the concrete island, simply because I cannot see a logical reason for him to lie about this.

How could they possibly have had this meeting prior to Baker's arrival, if he was inside the TSBD in 15-22 seconds, and at the island at 10-15 seconds? It simply makes no sense at all. If this was all true, Calvery should either still be on the concrete island in Darnell, or between the island and the steps. I simply refuse to believe Calvery made it inside the building before Baker did.

Thomas, we may never know exactly what happened that day but, my God, man, don't you smell a rat here, and doesn't it seem like there is something wrong with everybody's story, including Calvery, Shelley, Lovelady, Baker and Truly?

Well, you are the one who carried on so loudly about these FBI "statements" being beyond reproach, so I thought I'd just throw the evidence back at you and see how you dealt with it.

Even if Calvery was further up the street, where you believe you found her, Baker has not even crossed the Elm St. extension yet and Shelley and Lovelady are already well on their way to the rail yard.

When did the exchange with Calvery take place, giving Calvery only a few seconds to make it to the concrete island?

Even if Shelley was part of some vast coverup, and was privy to the assassination before it occurred, what purpose would it serve to insert a made up meeting with Gloria Calvery in his statement of 22/11/63?

Sorry, Pat, I don't believe a word of what you are saying. Despite the fact a portable x-ray machine was used, it is inconceivable that shoddy work would be done on the POTUS.

If it was so inaccurate, how was it able to record hundreds of dust like metal fragments in JFK's skull?

It doesn't really matter exactly where Calvery was down Elm St. She simply did not have the time to run that far back up the street.

However, three women gave statements to the FBI corroborating her FBI statement, in that she was standing just east of the Stemmons Freeway sign when the assassination took place, and her own FBI statement stated JFK was directly in front of her at the time of the first shot, for whatever that is worth.

She came up the sidewalk and stopped to talk to Lovelady and Shelley on the concrete island. RAN UPHILL I might add. Aren't those two an awful long ways across the street, considering this conversation just took place? Hell, Baker hasn't even crossed the Elm St. extension yet, and they've already had their chat with Calvery and are halfway to the rail yard.

Shouldn't we be able to see Calvery between the concrete island and the TSBD steps??

P.S.

Considering Calvery would have come up the Elm St. sidewalk, the running woman in Darnell is on the wrong side of the Elm St. extension to be Calvery.

Look at this still that shows the "concrete island" and "Shelley" and "Lovelady".

Despite what Shelley and Lovelady may have told the WC in 1964, I still go back to Shelley's first day statement. I believe it to be the most factual of anything said by Shelley as, even if a conspiracy was afoot, the details had not been fully worked out on 22/11/63, and Shelley had no reason to fabricate yet.

According to his statement, Shelley ran across the Elm St. extension, where he met Gloria Calvery, who informed him of JFK being shot. If he and Lovelady proceeded down the Elm St. extension, it had to be after this meeting. Yet there they are, already out in the middle of the extension, heading west.

The real clincher comes when you watch the Darnell film in slow motion, and see Baker run past "Shelley" and "Lovelady" at a point where these two are already west of the concrete island.

Chris Davidson supplied an excellent gif of this very event, seen here:

What was that about?

I think they did exactly what they said they did, in their first day statements.

Shelley walked across the extension to the concrete island, spoke briefly to Gloria Calvery, then went back inside the TSBD and phoned his wife.

Lovelady stayed on the steps, as seen in Darnell, and went back inside the TSBD eventually. He later returned outside and was seen on the steps in later films.

Robert Prudhomme, on 13 Dec 2015 - 10:50 AM, said:

Robert Prudhomme, on 12 Dec 2015 - 10:12 PM, said:

David Von Pein, on 12 Dec 2015 - 9:41 PM, said:

Robert “Bob” Prudhomme said

Isn't it funny that none of the Parkland doctors saw something so obvious, and right out in the open?

Yes, I agree. It is.

But there's also no doubt whatsoever that a great big hole WAS there in the RIGHT-FRONT-TOP area of JFK's head.

And here's the inescapable proof....

Dave (and Bugsy, wherever you are)

Did anyone ever figure out what that strange bag-like thing is that can be seen hanging on the right side of JFK's head? It's not brain matter, that's for sure. Whatever it was, Jackie must have had a devil of a time getting it all stuffed back inside JFK's skull, and getting all the bone pieces and scalp sections matched up, so the Parkland doctors would never be able to see this wound. Clint Hill was right there. Funny that he never described her doing re-constructive skull surgery, isn't it.

Hey, if this wound was closed up, and the Parkland doctors could not see a wound in the back of JFK's head, how did they know there was a large head wound?

And another question.

If Jackie glued everything on the right front of JFK's head back together, to the point the Parkland doctors could not even see this wound, why wasn't it still glued back together when JFK got to Bethesda? From what I recall, the coffin had a pretty smooth trip across country, and I don't remember any reports of them dropping the coffin.

Why do the autopsy photos show the right front of the head as a large gaping wound, if it left Parkland as an undetectable wound?

Bumped for David (and Bugsy, wherever you are)

I see what you mean now, Sandy. Yes it should have affected the density measurements, unless the "wing" was folded back while the x-ray was taken maybe?

Well, I just assumed that those taking the x-rays would have held fragments roughly in place, or at least out of the way. I have a radiologist friend who owns a clinic, and he pays me to repair his machines, including x-ray machines. I've seen the technicians taking x-rays, and I just can't imagine them just letting things hang down and obstruct their x-rays. They would know, I am sure, that that would negatively impact the usefulness of the x-ray. They would know that the radiologist would set them straight.

But then, maybe things weren't done so professionally at the JFK autopsy.

It was not a diagnostic x-ray, where the techs were trying to measure the comparative density of various parts of the brain, or looking for a tumor, or a hairline fracture, etc. The x-rays were rush jobs in pursuit of metal. The doctors were trying to find bullet fragments. That's all.

And it worked. They found a fragment behind the eye with a smaller fragment next to it.

I'm not quite sure what you are talking about here, Pat, and I seriously wonder if you are, either.

How would an x-ray tech differ in his procedure if he was rushed, as opposed to not being rushed?

Are you able to look at an x-ray and tell the difference?

I believe they were on the front steps of the TSBD at the time of the assassination.

I do not believe they remained on the steps of the TSBD for 3-4 minutes, spoke to Gloria Calvery after she returned from down near the Stmmons sign and only then walked down the Elm St. extension to the rail yard, seeing Baker and Truly go up the steps when they were 25 steps down the Elm St. extension. The ONLY way their story can be true is if Baker was delayed in ascending the steps, and his claim to being in the building within 22 seconds is a lie.

Only Baker's story or Shelley and Lovelady's story can be true. Of course, the odds are that all three of them, plus Truly, are telling a lie, or the FBI and WC lied for them, as was the case with Victoria Adams seeing Shelley and Lovelady on the 1st floor.

Richard

Would you mind elaborating on this "lack-of-Biffle-corroboration" thing you keep going on about?

Kent Biffle was a reporter riding far back in the motorcade, and he left the car he was riding in to find out if there was a story in Dealey Plaza. However, prior to his entering the TSBD with what he called the "first wave of officers", he went down to the Grassy Knoll to investigate why all the onlookers were pointing to it.

What does Biffle have to do with Baker?

You're fond of calling people "hoaxers" and looking down your long nose at all of the other members here, yet you seem to agree to a certain hoax involving the testimony of Shelley and Lovelady.

Does that not make you a hoaxer, as well?

Robert Prudhomme: In other words, WC lawyers falsified [this portion of] the testimony of Victoria Adams, and either falsified [the associated portions of] the testimonies of Lovelady and Shelley, or coerced [i.e. prepped] these two into giving false testimony.

If you can readily accept these serious offenses to have occurred [in a Government that has just murdered its sitting President], I am puzzled as to why you accept as Gospel the testimony [that in particular relates to the lunchroom incident] of Marrion Baker and Roy Truly.

Do you think the WC's lying could extend to these gentlemen, as well?

***********

Belin could not have achieved this, the perpetration of a lunchroom hoax, because there were 2 testimonies in near lock-step correspondence to doctor up. The will-call counter bump is the telltale clue that the correspondences were true accounts.

Imagine Belin attempting to insert the bump into scripts, in his office at his leisure, for dramatic realism. Not only does this run into the problem I mentioned earlier- of the stenographer, etc.- now wrapped up in the mini-conspiracy.

But the bump will be exposed as a falsehood once the hoax hypothesis fails, when it is held up against the aggregate of: the filmed interview, the Sept. 23rd affidavit, the lack of Biffle corroboration (this list is not exhaustive- we may include the Oswald-wedding-ring similarity with Baker's-sameday affidavit-omission-arrested-Oswald and the Martha Jo Stroud document)

Belin knew full well that he would have to answer to the historians of his day, when the 26 volumes were published. And if the bump had been a falsehood, and the historians had recognized and publicized that, the whole edifice could have come tumbling down. He couldn't have pulled off this sleight-of-hand, even if he had to. It is impossible in a philosophical sense- there is too much of the aggregate that could potentially pop up and expose Belin's sleight-of-hand.

So the hoaxers thus have to paint Baker as a monster- a devious player in the coverup, stretching over a 23-year-coupling of film record.

But the coverup maestro was Truly, and it was Truly who used the lunchroom incident to help keep focus away from the west elevator.

[...]

[T]he "will-call counter bump" you refer to proves nothing, as it could have occurred later as well. -- Prudhomme

Dear Robert,

If the "counter bump" occurred later, then why did both Truly and Baker say it happened right after they entered the front entrance (about 30 seconds after the assassination), when they were making their way to the elevator / stairs to go up to the roof?

Why did they both include such an insignificant event in their statements? To add an element of "realism" to their l-i-e-s?

You have both of them as bad guys, huh?

--Tommy

More distraction, Thomas.

Of course the will-call counter bump happened right after they entered the TSBD. That is not in question here. When they entered the TSBD is something that is yet to be established.

Merely repeating over and over when you believe T & B entered the TSBD is not evidence, and does not make your belief true.

We have Shelley and Lovelady telling obvious lies in their testimonies, can you not imagine Baker and Truly doing the same?

More false argument and rhetorical questions, Robert.

Of course you missed, or more likely chose to ignore, the "(about 30 seconds after the assassination)" in my post, above.

Merely repeating over and over that, when asked, both Frazier and Molina said they didn't see Baker run up the steps doesn't mean he didn't do so.

Pauline Sander's statement to the FBI says that he did.

By the way, what were the names of the policemen you think Baker conferred with down at the intersection of Elm and Houston?

Whoever they were, did they ever say anything about Baker's running up to them to ask them some questions about where the shots had come from?

Baker became pretty famous for running into the "correct" building and looking for the assassin(s), didn't he?

If Baker had run up to the policemen at the intersection and the policemen had confirmed Baker's suspicions (based on the sounds of gunshots and the sight of flying pigeons) that the sniper had fired from an upper floor or the roof of the TSBD, don't you think those policemen would have wanted to get on the record as having suggested to Baker that he should look for the sniper in that building? ("We were right! We were right, but that dummy Baker let him get away!")

Wouldn't Baker's running up to them like that have stuck in their minds, especially since by the time they made their statements (if any), the "official" story was that someone (Oswald?) had shot the President from a 6th floor "sniper's perch" in the TSBD?

Don't you think it strange that, given these circumstances, the policeman or policemen whom you seem to think Baker ran up to, either: 1 ) thought it was too insignificant to relay to the authorities (in statements or reports), or 2 ) somehow forgot all about Baker's having run up to them?

--Tommy

Thomas

Twist this any way you care to. The fact remains that two people standing directly in front of the TSBD front door, Frazier and Molina, did not see Baker enter, despite the likelihood that Baker probably had to shove these two out of the way.

Even stranger, Frazier and Molina were facing the direction Baker was coming from, yet Roy Truly, who claims to clearly have seen Baker, was facing the opposite direction from which Baker was coming.

P.S.

Pauline Sanders' "statement"? I'll believe it when I see a signed copy of it.