Robert Mady

In the WC Exhibit the arrow is pointing directly at the man to the right side of "OSWALD", if this is NOT LOVELADY, can anyone provide conclusive proof of the identity of who this person was? It would seem that my case of OSWALD on the steps is based on this man at the end of the yellow line being LOVELADY, can anyone prove this is not LOVELADY by revealing the true identity of the man in the short sleeved shirt shielding his eyes? Conclusive proof.

Does anyone have Altgens # 6 labeled with identification of people on the steps and in the photograph? Any general map of who was on the steps not depicted in A6?

Bernice and James, thank you for posting the images of CONNALLYS clothing although interesting, it is not what I am looking for. I am searching for an image of the displaying back of CONNALLYS shirt, it would be best to see it on a mannequin similar to the photograph in link of the front of the shirt.

Gary, do you have photographs of the back of CONNALYS shirt you could post? Photographs of the Back of CONNALLYS jacket? thanks in advance.

Gary, thank you for such a comprehensive response. It is very much appreciated.

Chris what happens when you alter the orientation of CONNALLY Face him forward maybe turned or twisted slightly to his left Bent forward in a crouching position with his head near his knees. What shooting location is now dictated by this trajectory?

Gary, you are a wealth of knowledge and I thank you for generously taking the time to share. To answer your question, the WC would want to provide evidence that the shot that wounded CONNALLY had a trajectory that had a plausible connection with the wounds on KENNEDY. The WC by necessity would have attempted to influence our perception of where the wounds were located to better fit their story. Moving the location of CONNALLYS wounds a few inches can change alignments dramatically resulting in different trajectories. Am I correct in interpreting medical description to mean the wound was between the shoulder blade and the armpit and could also be termed to be on his side? How low or high was the wound? If I feel the bottom of shoulder blade, the wound was between the bottom of this bone and the fold of the armpit? The askew shirt the FBI photographed provides visual proof that the shirt was maybe rolled inward to move the wound more towards the back and material definitely pulled higher to raise the side wound significantly. Gary, this explanation for the askew shirt supports contention the WC attempted to align seven wounds and one bullet. We must be skeptical about evidence improperly displayed, there cannot be any realistic reason a professional forensic agent could be so careless about presenting and recording vital evidence and then this recorded evidence readily accepted at all levels within the FBI as adequate is absurd. There is something inherently wrong with this evidence and unequivocal acceptance of it by the FBI and WC should not have been appropriate. Are there no photographs depicting the side wound on CONNALLY? His chest or his leg?

Gary, that is correct, I am still curious if the locations of CONNALLYS wounds could have been altered, particularly the back wound. The first impression I had of CONNALLYS wound was that the first entry wound was below his right armpit, on his side or almost on his side. Could this have been moved by description and deception to more towards his back to better accommodate a shot from the rear and possibly higher?

Gary Murr, can you tell me what CONNALLYS x-rays showed concerning primary wound of entry?

I have been advised to discontinue posting evidence, analysis and conjecture on the Assassination Four Shot Model until the website and online documentary become available, I think this is good advice. Since the JFK assassination community does not seem to be willing or capable of addressing the evidence already presented it seems counterproductive to continue to present additional evidence to a community that prefers to remain asleep, uninvolved or uncommitted. It is obvious that there are dragons that need to be slain before this evidence can become real to researchers, nor am I able to deal with your fears that dictate the model requires the blessing from ruling 'pundits' before miraculously becoming acceptable. Just...please...keep in mind the 'pundits' and 'academics' have spent their lives proving myths, they will not alter their dogmas until no one will longer listen to their words. If you can see that any piece of evidence that I have presented is valid, it is the beginning of the end of a myth because virtually everything posted is in conflict with what you now most likely believe, start with that one piece of evidence and start deconstructing the lies. Last bit of yada yada, keep in mind, in reality I have already provided abundant evidence that is conclusively disproving contemporary theories, how much evidence do you require to change your mind, will there ever be enough? Don't wait for my website, you have all the evidence required to start to unravel the lies and to see the truth. Start Deconstructing The Lies. Best wishes Be Well Bob Mady

Obvious farce.

If anyone wants to contact me I just set-up a new mail address DeconstructiongTheLies@gmail.com I would welcome all serious inquiries and comments. If there is any intention to email criticism of the model, please don't, I would prefer it be done on open forum. Also I really do not care what your opinion of me or the model is, I care about what evidence has not been accounted for that you feel may affect the validity of the Assassination Four Shot Model.

Brad, I really appreciate your advise, as I told you because of your communications with me I am moving forward with populating the website that I already possessed and have begun to consult to produce an online book, we even discussed this morning doing a short YOUTUBE video to introduce the concepts to a wider audience (may ask for some assistance on this from you) Honestly I am not looking to debate those that profess other theories and beliefs, as far as I am concerned they are obsolete and a waste of our time, the purveyors of these theories hopefully will discover that their theories do not reflect reality and in time the theories will fade away. I am interested in having people with good intent critique this model and then start researchers not only seriously considering and understanding its ramifications, but to start analyzing data based on it, the more hands working on this the better. Brad, seriously please do not consider removing your posts, this is not some pristine sanitized thread, this is an ongoing dialog and all honest comments are welcome. You have made significant contributions and I thank you for them.

Malcolm, Thank you, I am elated and humbled and gratified that people are understanding the message.

Brad, as previously stated, I have explored where the evidence exists without regard for commonly held beliefs. The beliefs are what prevented me from realizing the truth of this scenario sooner, it was when I let go of all the indoctrination the truth became apparent, self-evident. This model changes everything, it eliminates the WC/R and Conspiracy theories from any possibility of having validity, you might understand that much if not all that we currently believe needs to be re-examined in the light of this novel perspective. We need to purge from our beliefs, the lies, before we will see clearly what the assassination really entailed. The first step must be the realization that everything we believed in is gone, it is a new world. Jump on the train, but you must leave your baggage behind. Understand the model then look yourself for evidence to satisfy your curiosity, but understand the model and how evidence supports the model first. you need the foundation if you intend to build a house.

I believe there are two primary reasons no one has disputed your theory: (1) Many of us believe it to be plausible, and in total accord with the evidence; and (2) David Von Pein hasn't weighed in on this one. No one, in my experience, bows down to the altar of Warren more than Von Pein. Edited by Mark Knight, Today, 05:48 AM. Mark, who is David Von Pein and why is his opinion a determinant?

Brad, let me ask you a question, do you want to learn about the assassination or do you want others to tell you what they think happened? Start by reading the Affidavits created on 11/22 and 11/23/1963 and start with MARY MOORMAN, JEAN HILL, EMMETT HUDSON, MALCOLM SUMMERS, WILLIAM NEWMAN, GAYLE NEWMAN, JEAN NEWMAN, SAM HOLLAND... and save the deputy sheriffs for last. Listen to all of the witness interviews broadcast on 11/22/1963. Discover the truth.

Formal address to this Forum I have been posting a great deal of evidence and analysis. The existence of this evidence was used to construct proofs used to create the Assassination Four Shot Model. This model precludes the WC/R and Conspiracy theories from being real, evidence creating this model literally dissolves almost everything that is believed about the assassination. In 8,000 views we understand no one has posted evidence contradicting, conflicting, or disproving this information. Why is that?

Brad, I would suggest to fully comprehend what the evidence is one needs to find out for themselves. One huge problem is that we have been told so many things that have been untrue and introduced to so many theories that it is difficult to impossible to divorce oneself from the these lies and myths, what you may discover is that most of what we now believe is true is just lies. All I will say is that I have only found evidence for four shots. This is based on photographic evidence and testimonial evidence. I won't try to defend evidence for only four shots, other than to suggest to anyone reading this thread to please start the analysis for your self, I will help guide anyone who wishes to begin this journey to awakening to the truth. If anyone can produce evidence and proof of additional shots I will be thrilled to fairly review the data. Until then, four shots is exactly what evidence dictates. Brad as I have tried to explain to a leading proponent of the 9, 10 or 11 shot theory, that if 'they' intended to frame OSWALD with three shots, how could they have explained 9, 10 or 11 wounds if they all were on different people? or 9, 10 or 11 people killed. This is insane. IMO The reason there were three rifle shots is because they needed an extra shot to account for the single silent shot, fortunately the last rifle shot ricocheted of a curb and by accident injured TAGUE, I don't believe this shot was intended for anything other than to account for the sound of three rifle shots.

Chris you basically have it but are you incorporating all of the aspects that it entails Such as the three rifle shots starting at Z-313. We have discussed that there is probably three seconds of film removed from Z-313 to Z-325, in that the CONNALLYS movements during this period of time is not possible and the only conceivable explanation is that frames had to have been removed. You can't then use the 3 to 3.5 seconds and project that on the remaining frames to get any sort of result for distances traveled. There is no longer any correlation if frames have been altered. Maybe I am just not catching on to what your posting, keep going sometimes I am slow on the draw, but seemly accurate on the aim, so carry on please. Sorry to have interrupted.

Chris, according to a popular Sprague map of DP with marked locations of limo on Elm for specific frames the speed of the limo appears to be relatively constant. When each marked location is measured against Z-313 then frame difference is divided by distance, the distance is fairly constant. What is the probability that the Zapruder film was not altered with significant frame removal after Z-133 until Z-313? In other words what we are seeing in the Z-film until Z-313 is actual timing of the assassination and that frames were primarily removed following Z-313 to cover CONNALLYS movements and the limo slowing to allow CLINT HILL to board? Also my point on the Assassination Four shot Model, can't compare the WC/R three shots timing to three rifle shots in the A4 model because the timing is not the same in any respect, that was my point. I could not understand why there was any comparison made. I am interested to understand how you are determining lost frames.

Chris, maybe I am not comprehending your posts, let me study it again tomorrow

I just consulted with my daughter and she is going to collaborate with me to produce an online book, she will do the writing, which will be great for anyone that will care to read it. A question to readers, I need to find a format for an online book that has the capacity to display photographs and play animated gifs and video and audio formats. I envision this book to contain all of the evidence available so that the reader can decide for themselves what is true or not true by having the evidence available in one place to decipher. Anyone know of good software or internet service that can handle these functions to produce an online book? Thanks in advance for any help on this. (Elvis - very funny Brad --> PS thanks for the heads up you gave me)

Gary, how many were taken and are they readily available to be examined? Gary, I will bow to your expertise in the matter, but reserve my skepticism, in that the person at the FBI would have had to be another incompetent dolt of an agent to display vital evidence in such a haphazard manner. I just don't believe this askew shirt is anything but a deception. There must be more. IMO You previously posted that info to me when I brought up the askew shirt.

I have noticed some discussions about the website I mentioned, although the website is a reality, work has not yet begun on populating it with information and the online book will depend on my daughter editing it for me, she actually is a brilliant writer (I hope she will actually do the writing) To those who wonder who I really am, my picture is on every post, that is me. That is my real name as posted. Someone proposed that I might even be David Lifton, I am not, although I am honored to be mentioned in the same sentence as Mr. Lifton, as I have stated I believe Mr. Lifton was ground breaking with the revelation that JFK's body was altered, this information was vital to understanding the depths of the deception and I most certainly owe Mr. Lifton a great deal for helping to shake me awake. If you read this post Mr. Lifton I would love to converse with you on the Assassination Four Shot Model, with complete certainty it corroborates all shots coming from the right side and no shots coming from behind. I would dearly love to know your evolution of thoughts on this matter. If my style imitates others it is by coincidence, if my conclusion parallels others then that is because somehow we came to the same conclusions. The ideas about the Assassination Four Shot Model are mine and mine alone, if someone before me came up with the exact same ideas it is because they realized the same thing that I realized. I do not intend to presume that I am the only person who realized the truth, but I am the only person I know of that is now posting it and attempting to make others aware of the inherent problems with all the other current theories and offering a viable solution. Do I have all the answers, NO, and please don't put me in that box, no one will have all the answers. Also as stated I am concentrating on the mechanics of the assassination, leave it to the true academics to determine the politics and power groups who manipulated the system to their wills and to the curious to determine who stood and fired weapons at our President. All of this is important. I anticipate the website will present a more readable version of information from posts made on this website and another. (there are 14 threads on other website that provides additional details on various aspects of the Assassination Four Shot Model, including a technique on how testimonies can easily and effectively be analyzed to establish trends, need more check it out, posted under Bob Mady) I am not holding anything back, whatever I uncovered I have shared on posts, this is why the information comes in bursts, this is why I need to know what you guys are thinking because I should have the answers to your questions if what I know is true is in deed true. So please post your questions, comments, and serious critiques of this information, if the reasoning is flawed we should all be aware of it, we can all learn from good questions.