Ian Lloyd
-
Posts
307 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Ian Lloyd
-
-
52 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:
Questions thousands have pondered since 11,22,1963.
All one can do is speculate.
I guess whoever threw the rifle into a somewhat hidden place thought that doing so might give him a little more get away time before the police would find it and maybe identify it's ownership?
But how much time would be gained? As it turned out, less than an hour?...
-
According to the official story, an assassin fired from the 6th floor of the TSBD; the assassin fled the "sniper's nest", leaving behind boxes with prints on them and spent cartridges on the floor. During the escape, the assassin took the time to hide the rifle behind some boxes.
Why would he bother hiding it? It's not as if the rifle had the assassin's name written on it or anything...
Why not just leave it in the sniper's nest with the spent cartridges?
Or take it with him in case he was approached by a police officer or whoever? Apparently, he still had a bullet to shoot someone with...
-
7 minutes ago, Sean Coleman said:
Not much luck with a pic of the pistol holster, but this is an interesting Pic of a Carcano with its offset telescopic sight which for a right handed (right eyed) shooter could be slightly problematic.
I presume the scope is offset to allow for operation of the bolt?
Looks like the iron sights can still be used?
-
24 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:
Tom, there's another issue with the curtain rods: why the Dallas Police never contacted Ruth Paine about Oswald getting rods from her garage. They had Frazier saying Oswald told him he was going to Irving to pick up some curtain rods and brought them to work on the 22nd and Oswald denying he said that.
So why didn't they ask Mrs, Paine about the curtain rods ?
That's what you would do in a normal investigation, go to where he would have got them from and interview Mrs. Paine. Why didn't they do that ?
They just plain forgot...yet another easy mistake to make...😂
-
Was Marina's English reading & understanding good enough at this time for her to be able to navigate her way through all these postal forms?
-
29 minutes ago, Michael Kalin said:
The destruction of both statements given by Benavides (to DPD & FBI) indicates that the content contradicted details of what became WR's official narrative concerning Tippit's murder. Bowley, who appeared on Leavelle's witness list, was eliminated from the scene & superseded by Benavides.
In other words, the upshot was Bowley's banishment to the ether while Benavides, a DPD non-entity, rose to the status of major participant (WR pp.166-7). It follows that both DPD & FBI statements did not support his fulfillment of this role.
Wow, really? Is that all true?
-
5 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:
Derek, the best source of information on Curtis Craford in his later years is this article by Peter Whitmey who tracked him down in Oregon and talked to him a number of times: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/creatingapatsy.htm. Whitmey's article, "Creating a Patsy", is revised and expanded from an original publication in April 1998.
HSCA did not bother with finding Craford, and no researcher contacted Craford before Whitmey in 1989, even though Whitmey reported Craford was not hard to find.
More photos of Craford: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=198
What type/colour jacket is he wearing in that pic?
-
13 hours ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:
Made an enlargement of the best picture I could find (...), perhaps showing some more details
I can't help thinking the way "Lee Oswald" is written on the envelope looks to me like it's been done by someone trying to copy Oswald's handwriting...it just looks too deliberate, neat and doesn't give me the impression that it's naturally spontaneous or "free-flowing"...doesn't quite have the same "lean" to the writing either...very precise on the line...
-
20 hours ago, Pat Speer said:
Let's be clear. They weren't aiming for the head. They were aiming for the center of the target. But even so, their "success" rate was far less than Oswald's purported "success" rate, as their hits were not as close to the center of the target as the hits attributed to Oswald.
Here are the targets for shots 1 and 2. For the the first of these the test shooters were given all the time they needed, after performing some warm-up shots. (The hits attributed to Oswald are marked by red stars.) Now notice how their accuracy drops off considerably on the second target, after they began rapid fire. And then realize that the first shot attributed to Oswald was also rapid fire, as this shot is purported to have occurred as the limo cleared the trees.
Didn't Frazier testify that the aiming was high & to the right?
The all look low and to the left? -
Maybe draw a line on the pic?
-
What would be good, I think is if, say, a movie producer with the resources available, to commission a mannequin to JFK's height and build etc., mark the mannequin with the (supposed) positions of the bullet entry & exit wounds and, assuming (as we seem to be doing) that the bullet passed through JFK in a straight line, drill a hole through the mannequin at the marked points. The mannequin can then be used to correctly represent what CE903 is purportedly representing and see how that looks.
No need to impale any living (or deceased) people David (I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with impaling people?).
Just a matter of finding such a person with the resources who is interested enough in the truth, I guess.
-
Seems like he thinks the HSCA doctors were!!!😁
-
3 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:
But if Specter's metal rod was to be moved just a tiny bit to his left (toward the middle of the body of JFK's stand-in), you would still have the exact same entry and exit wound locations. No different. So CE903 works just fine in showing the positions of the entrance and exit wound locations (without having to impale the Kennedy stand-in).
Technically, yes, the bullet path depicted in CE903 isn't 100% to-the-millimeter accurate laterally, and that's because the WC wasn't willing to sacrifice the life of the man sitting in for JFK in the limousine. But don't you think that at least a few millimeters of lateral slack can be granted Arlen Specter and the WC concerning this matter?
That's why I suggested a mannequin be used!?!?...
CE903 does not depict the true bullet path (as you have conceded) and would require more than "...a few millimetres..." of movement to match the true bullet path - or the WC interpretation of the true bullet path, I should say.
-
Bowley said he picked his daughter up from the R. L. Thornton school at 12:55. A quick look on Google maps, using a car, shows that the journey time is pretty much 15 minutes.
-
5 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
Oh brother! Cry me a river, Pat!
Your complaint about the "moving" of the wound totally ignores the fact that the original wording that was going to appear in the WCR made no sense at all---and would have been, in fact, just flat-out WRONG (not to mention stupid). As Jean Davison put it in 2014:
"[Gerald] Ford didn't need to move the back wound up. And in fact he didn't, since the phrase he revised put the wound on "his back at a point slightly above the shoulder." It can't be above the shoulder and still be in the back. (Except maybe in conspiracyland where apparently anything is possible.) .... I doubt that Ford, for one, knew the exact location of the back/neck wound. I think he recognized that the sentence as written couldn't possibly be right since there's nothing "in the back slightly above the shoulders." By definition, above the shoulders is "neck." Ford tried to correct it and made matters worse. One thing I feel certain of is that there was no rational motive for anyone to "raise" the back wound. Moving it to the neck doesn't support the SBT, no matter what suspicion may tell you. An entry in the neck would destroy the SBT trajectory." -- Jean Davison
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/gerald-ford-and-sbt.html
-----------------
And to verify--IN PHOTOGRAPHIC FORM--that what Jean said back in 2014 is the absolute truth (i.e.: "An entry in the neck would destroy the SBT trajectory"), there's my favorite WC exhibit, No. 903, which Pat & I have hashed and re-hashed the merits of many times over the years, which demonstrates for all time that the WC most certainly DID NOT "raise" the back wound up into the "Neck" of John Kennedy. The wound in CE903 is exactly where it should be and exactly where the autopsy photo shows it to be---in the UPPER BACK. And furthermore, CE903 also demonstrates that the back wound WAS, indeed, anatomically HIGHER than the trach/neck wound, because this JFK stand-in is in the same position in the limo that JFK was in on 11/22. He's not leaning forward, nor was JFK on 11/22. So, of course, any bullet coming downward at an angle of approx. 17 degrees (like CE399 was) is going to result in a back wound that has no choice BUT to be anatomically higher than the exit wound for that missile....
CE903 Shows the path of the bullet above the right shoulder of JFK.
A mannequin should have been used with holes in the bullet hole locations and the rod passed through those holes.
CE903 does not show the true path of the bullet.
-
How reliable was the dictabelt? Did it always start/stop reliably based on signals? There's a "Long pause of about 15 seconds" noted in a transcript - what's that?
Some more information:
The Dallas Police Department's Channel 1 Dictabelts: The Chain of Possession (jfk-assassination.net)
-
Would still be good to know what type of clock was being used in the dispatcher's room - analogue or digital. If digital, then the time stamps could always be 59 seconds out either way just on that clock, if analogue, it may be worse as it is likely to be less accurate, the times could me estimations by the reader and, depending on the clock location relative to the person reading it, parallax error could also be introduced.
-
Strange, I just clicked on the link & it worked and I don't subscribe...
-
-
Duplicate as I thought this hadn't worked!
-
-
-
On 7/19/2022 at 3:46 AM, Greg Doudna said:
Here is the full text of the FBI document which refers to the find of that revolver turned in to the Dallas Police, as posted in Gil Jesus, “The Gun in the Bag”, https://jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/983/gun-bag.
MEMORANDUM
TO SAC, DALLAS (89-43) DATE: 11/25/63
FROM SA RICHARD E. HARRISON
SUBJECT: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY
On 11/23/63, Patrolman J. RAZ brought into the Homicide and Robbery Bureau, Dallas PD, a brown paper sack which contained a snub-nosed .38 caliber Smith & Wesson, SN 893265.
This gun had the word "England" on the cylinder and had been found at approximately 7:30 AM in a brown paper sack, together with an apple and an orange, near the curb at the corner of Ross and Lamar Streets and was turned in by one Willie Flat, white male, 9221 Metz Drive, employed at 4770 Memphis, to the Dallas PD.
2-Dallas
REH:cah
(2) FBI DL 89-43-636
9Emphais mine)
What did LHO reportedly say he took to work on the morning of the 22nd?
-
16 hours ago, Bill Brown said:
"She [Markham] said the bus time was 1:15."
No. She did not say that. Ball asked her what time she got her bus. Strange way to ask a question and we cannot determine for ourselves exactly how Markham interpreted the question. Therefore, we can not know for sure what her answer meant. She could just as easily be saying that she got to her bus stop at 1:15. Don't put words in her mouth.
OK, I stand corrected. As you say, it's a matter of interpretation...
Mr. BALL. You know what time you usually get your bus, don't you?
Mrs. MARKHAM. 1:15.
Mr. BALL. So it was before 1:15?
Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, it was.
"We know the bus time was actually 1:12."
THE bus? No, we don't know that. A bus stopped there at 1:12 and another one stopped there approximately ten minutes later. She never gives a time of 1:12 or 1:22.
Well, you've stated that a bus stopped there at 1:12. OK. Maybe she didn't necessarily know the exact time a bus would stop there and never said 1:12 but she certainly said 1:15 and that she was at the stop before 1:15. Not sure why she would leave at 1:00 if she intended catching a bus at 1:22 knowing it was only a 6 or 7 minute walk.
"...when he [Bowley] arrived at the Tippit scene and checked his watch, it read 1:10..."
The verbal time stamps all throughout the police tapes, combined with Bowley's own descriptions of his actions upon arriving on the scene, completely destroy the idea that Bowley arrived at the scene at 1:10.
Why?
Why bother hiding the rifle?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
I think the assassination may well have been considered a 'suicide mission ' given the level of protection afforded JFK from the cops & SS; The shooter would surely have realised that they weren't going to take long to figure out where the shots came from and swarm all over the building. This is what makes me wonder why the assassin would waste precious seconds trying to conceal the weapon?...unless, of course, he didn't...