Alan Ford

If this is his shadow on that larger (i.e. higher) mailbox------------- -----------then he seems to be standing a little in front (i.e. south) of it, perhaps somewhat west of its middle?

I have already stated explicitly that the "plotters" would not have been troubled in the least by the world's hearing about the actions of this man by the mailboxes. Do try to keep up! 👍

~Yawn~ I suggest that, if you wish to debate with someone who is arguing that the Darnell film was altered, you betake yourself and your feeble little contrarian strawman to a thread where someone is arguing that the Darnell film was altered. Because this ain't that.

Your question is incoherent: the guy can be seen in the Darnell film. As for the "evil plotters", it won't bother them in the least if the world thinks the assassination is the work of pro-Castroites

Fair question, Mr. Lloyd! We need to start with a striking fact: the Bell film shows that this man was not by those mailboxes while Pres. Kennedy was passing the building. Thus we seem to be dealing not with a straightforward demonstration but with something different------------something post hoc. On the scenario I have been positing, this man by the mailboxes (whoever he be) has been tasked with helping to put a political 'signature' on what he has been led to believe will be a just-finished non-lethal shots-fired incident. Perhaps what he has just set alight is a 'Cuba Libre' flag or some equally unmistakeable signifier of the political intent behind the highly provocative firing of shots. On my hypothesis, this man (again: whoever he be) doesn't yet know that an actual shooting has taken place. But he is surely seconds away from finding out--------------and thus seconds away from aborting mission. Thus, if there is a planned next bit of his stunt with the burning [flag?], one that perhaps will be more overt (e.g. walking out towards the street with the burning [flag?]), then that next bit does not materialize. All we have is what Darnell shows------------and what Darnell shows is enough to establish something very out of the ordinary (which has caught the attention of a motorcycle cop). Even if what was planned was to be no more than the burning or partial burning of a flag in that spot, it could do the job nicely. All that's needed is someone on hand in the vicinity to take a photo or film of him and his action, and the location directly underneath from the SN will 'tell' the rest of the story. (Of course, if he is a well-known Castroite agitator, then that's a big bonus.) On the above basic scenario, the plan was for the newspapers and TV news later that day to lead with images of a man burning an anti-Castro flag just after a missed-shots incident in Dealey Plaza. But something horribly in excess of a missed-shots incident ended up happening, and this guy by the mailboxes had to be erased from history.

I'll take your two points in turn, Mr. Flanagan: 1. I believe those excised Towner frames may have shown some giveaway detail in Pres. Kennedy's behavior-------related, as I surmise, to the frantic waving of an object on the lower west side of the doorway. I suspect Pres. Kennedy showed a little too much interest in that doorway, such as to suggest foreknowledge on his part that something planned was about to go down. 2. The scene was one of chaos and confusion. (How many people even noticed Umbrella Man down the street?) Darnell does however show us that at least two people did notice this man by the mailboxes, and that one of those two people was none other than Officer Marrion Baker. He would have been given excellent reason afterwards not to mention it on the record. Darnell proves that his on-the-record 'recollection' of having dashed straight up those front steps was a lie. Now: if the man by the mailboxes were just some innocent eccentric with no relevance to the case, why would Officer Baker have needed to erase the encounter?

Possible, I guess, Mr. Bacon, though I lean towards a flag: a political signature for what has (or was meant to have) just happened. It's worth noting by the way that the location is hardly random---------------this guy is underneath the SN pair of windows. Apart from anything else, this location gives him a handy 'out' should he be challenged by law enforcement (which he is in fact about to be): OFFICER: 'Hey, what the hell you doing?' MAN: 'Someone just threw this out of that window up there!'

Friends, it remains a deeply intriguing scene------------------------ I asked 3 questions: 1. Who is this man? // 2. What is he doing? // 3. Why is Officer Marrion Baker dashing towards him? Now previously I insisted that the long object is BEHIND the street barrier. This was because part of it seemed to peep out from BENEATH the barrier. However! I'm not at all so sure about that anymore. If one looks closely at the area in question in Mr. Davidson's stabilized gif (above)-------------- --------------it becomes evident that there is movement between it and the leg of the street barrier. Moreover! This movement appears to be in sync with the overall (slightly swaying) movement of the long object. This would seem to place the bottom section of the long object IN FRONT OF the crossbeam of the barrier. And yet! We can still see the diagonal black stripe on the crossbeam just 'behind' it. I am talking about the second stripe from viewer's left----------------- How is this possible? Shouldn't that stripe be covered by the bottom of the long object? Wouldn't said bottom of long object need to be transparent for the stripe to still be visible? Well, there is an alternative explanation for the stripe's visibility 'behind' the bottom of the long object: that part of the lower section of the long object is NO LONGER THERE, for it has just been consumed by flame. And indeed, if one looks VERY closely at the point marked below------------- --------------one sees a flickering suggestive of flame: In which case the flame is NOT confined to this area-------------- ---------------but is present lower down too.

Has Mr. Larsen been permanently relieved of his duties as a Moderator, or has he merely been suspended from same for a short period? One can only hope it's not the latter. As a poster Mr. Larsen has made some valuable contributions here over the years, and will hopefully continue to do so; but (as I and others can all too well testify) his moderation style became disgracefully petty and autocratic, to the point where real damage was being done to the forum by his control-freak tendencies. Fatally, he evinced a sorry inability to distinguish between his own opinions as poster and his role as Moderator. His treatment of Mr. Speer was just shocking. Bravo to Mr. Gordon for intervening! 👍

Identifying this man facially is impossible due to the poor quality of the film frames. And the image of his head------even his hair-------is horribly unstable from frame to frame

I at first thought the long object was a paper sack-------the paper sack, in fact. It's still very possible. However, Mr. Chris Davidson's posting of the GIF below, along with the flickering noted in the last post, made me consider a second possibility: a flag that has just been set alight. Political protest. A congruent first guess as to what the box-like object the man is standing behind: a box out of which the flag has just been taken. Cf. perhaps: what Mr. Spaulding Jones' saw in Mr. Oswald's hands in the elevator that morning: A congruent first guess as to what the object standing in front of the west mailbox might be: To set alight a flag quickly, douse part of it with gasoline and strike a match.............

CLUES! 1. The man is not just standing there holding out away from his body, and at a strange angle, a long object of some description. He is also standing behind what looks like a box- or case-like object: 2. Just in front of the west mailbox stands an object that does not belong to the mailbox: 3. There is a flickering at the lower part of the object held by the man. May be paper or something flapping in the wind. May be something else entirely. But it's fast.

That's not the Elm Street extension

Respectfully, Mr. Larsen, your estimate is off here. The curve added to your blue line is just as fanciful as your crosswalk. Officer Baker is not "veering right", he's not even in the "process of veering right"--------------he's just continuing to move toward the mailbox area. As he does so, his path is converging with that of the running lady. At the time you were coming up with this curving blue line in 2016, you were understandably troubled by the inexplicability of Officer Baker's route in the direction of the mailboxes. And that understandable unease led you astray. I quote from your presentation: [QUOTE] It is obvious that Baker was not headed for the TSBD entrance. (He was headed to the right of it.) But if not, what explains the path he is taking? [font change added, A.F.] Compare his path to the crosswalk in this (modern) photo: Officer Baker was simply following the crosswalk. [END QUOTE] But there was no crosswalk there 11/22/63, which fact renders your explanation for the path he is taking void. He is simply taking the shortest route from A to B-----------------B being the area by the mailboxes. C doesn't come into it. And here's the crucial part: there is no longer any need to find an explanation for "the path he is taking", because we now have an explanation: What's now needed is for us to try to explain the explanation!

Darnell shows more than enough of Officer Baker's run to allow us determine his direction and establish that he is most certainly not "originally heading toward the front steps" but toward an area just east of them. If his intention is to get up those steps asap, then he's going about it a very peculiar way indeed............... The man at the mailboxes cannot be Mr. Buell Wesley Frazier btw------------Darnell shows him still up on the entrance landing at this moment.