Jump to content
The Education Forum

Close-up of Duncan MacRae's Knoll shooter


Guest Eugene B. Connolly
 Share

Recommended Posts

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees. Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 364
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees. Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Hatman is talking through his hat? Mercy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees. Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Hatman is talking through his hat? Mercy.

Can I assume that you have nothing to add or are you just trolling?

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees." Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Hatman is talking through his hat? Mercy.

___________________________________

Bill,

Interesting post

I didn't realize that such an individual (wearing a hat) had been "seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location." Seen by whom, specifically?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees." Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Hatman is talking through his hat? Mercy.

___________________________________

Bill,

Interesting post

I didn't realize that such an individual (wearing a hat) had been "seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location." Seen by whom, specifically?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________________________

Thomas, Bowers mentioned the heavy set guy up by the fence when the shots rang out. Bowers got cut off by the Commission, but Mark Lane interviewed him and Bowers added that he saw a flash of light or smoke or something unusual at the fence as the President passed below. Ed Hoffman also saw this guy and said that he saw what looked like a puff of smoke come from this location while a man in a hat and suit had turned away from the fence holding a long gun. The man in that hat can be seen in Moorman's photo and in the Willis photo. See Groden's enlargement of the Willis photo in "The killing of a President". The figure is right in the corner and he blocks out the skylight behind him. This would be the same location that Sam Holland said he had heard a shot from just prior to seeing the smoke come through the trees.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees." Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Hatman is talking through his hat? Mercy.

___________________________________

Bill,

Interesting post

I didn't realize that such an individual (wearing a hat) had been "seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location." Seen by whom, specifically?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________________________

Thomas, Bowers mentioned the heavy set guy up by the fence when the shots rang out. Bowers got cut off by the Commission, but Mark Lane interviewed him and Bowers added that he saw a flash of light or smoke or something unusual at the fence as the President passed below. Ed Hoffman also saw this guy and said that he saw what looked like a puff of smoke come from this location while a man in a hat and suit had turned away from the fence holding a long gun. The man in that hat can be seen in Moorman's photo and in the Willis photo. See Groden's enlargement of the Willis photo in "The killing of a President". The figure is right in the corner and he blocks out the skylight behind him. This would be the same location that Sam Holland said he had heard a shot from just prior to seeing the smoke come through the trees.

Bill

__________________________

Bill,

Thanks.

Since I don't doubt that a gunman was at that location, I guess I should have worded my question differently-- "Who claimed that they'd seen someone standing there wearing a hat?

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're still not fooling anyone Bill. I did NOT say "The drum scan, as fuzzy as it is, is good enough for study on this matter"

I said it was good enough for study of this area ( the fence washout ) The fuzzy garbage is once again your ficticious addition.

For once I agree with you, Duncan ... you did not state the obvious about the fuzziness of the drum scan - I did! Further more, I wasn't quoting you, but rather mentioning something you said with an obvious observation pertaining to the lack of clarity concerning the drum scan. It seems that your ability to follow sentence structure is as poor as your ability to understand what you are looking at in photographs ... especially copies of B&W ones. I will post your remarks once again so maybe you can find someone over there to help explain it to you.

"That is not exactly true, Duncan. I told you that the original Moorman photo quite clearly shows that what you call a "washout" on your fuzzy copies is not that at all. You replied that your drum scan, as fuzzy as it is, was good enough for study on this matter. I have to ask how it is that if the lesser quality fuzzy drum scan is giving you a false impression that cannot be found on the actual original photo, then how can you say that using the drum scan is good enough. Do you mean that it is good enough for those of you who wish to invent assassins from degraded images?

Bill"

Any copies good or bad which I have seen of Moorman show the washout. Put your money where your mouth is and show us one which doesn't

The term "washout" is and always has been your word. Groden has several copies in his book and for the life of him he cannot understand why you say what you do either. More importantly was the fact that I told you that you should view the ORIGINAL photo (not copies) because no one that has done so has ever seen this "washout" as you call it. Your reply was that you have a copy of the drum scan and that was good enough. The point you made was in a sense saying you do not care to know the truth - you having copies that make something appear a certain way that the original photo does not show seems to be good enough for the purpose you intend to use it.

Like your ridiculous midget Hatman assassin you mean ?

Why would Moorman looking up hill at the fence make you think that anyone's head seen slightly above the fence would mean they must be a midget?

Do we need a crash course in perspective???

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question:

Why would someone prefer a road apple to the Hope diamond?

The answer:

In order to get Bill to treat with Gary to arrange for the posting on this thread a super high quality scan of Moorman from a time when Moorman was in better condition.

The purpose:

To render a better image of MacRae's sniper & of, to Bill's delight, Hatman.

I'm not sure that I follow your intent, but I guess it all lies with the individual researcher to decide just how interested is he or she in actually knowing what is and isn't there. The Museum isn't going to scan Moorman's photo to post on the Internet ... least ways I cannot see that happening. They do invite researchers to come to the Museum to view the materials they have on hand there. This would be done by appointment, which seems only reasonable. Those who are not that eager to spend any of their own time and money to go there really don't have much to complain about IMO.

The Hat Man issue is interesting because such an individual was seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location, along with a cloud of smoke being propelled through the trees." Josiah Thompson also went to Moorman's location to see if there was anything in the RR yard that could account for the "fedora" shape in Mary's photo and Josiah discovered there was not anything there and that what ever was there in Moorman's photo was only at that location during the assassination.

Bill

Hatman is talking through his hat? Mercy.

___________________________________

Bill,

Interesting post

I didn't realize that such an individual (wearing a hat) had been "seen at the fence when a shot was heard from that location." Seen by whom, specifically?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________________________

Thomas, Bowers mentioned the heavy set guy up by the fence when the shots rang out. Bowers got cut off by the Commission, but Mark Lane interviewed him and Bowers added that he saw a flash of light or smoke or something unusual at the fence as the President passed below. Ed Hoffman also saw this guy and said that he saw what looked like a puff of smoke come from this location while a man in a hat and suit had turned away from the fence holding a long gun. The man in that hat can be seen in Moorman's photo and in the Willis photo. See Groden's enlargement of the Willis photo in "The killing of a President". The figure is right in the corner and he blocks out the skylight behind him. This would be the same location that Sam Holland said he had heard a shot from just prior to seeing the smoke come through the trees.

Bill

__________________________

Bill,

Thanks.

Since I don't doubt that a gunman was at that location, I guess I should have worded my question differently-- "Who claimed that they'd seen someone standing there wearing a hat?

Thanks,

--Thomas

P.S. Is this the same hat we can see (from behind) in Z-412, Z-413, and Z-414?

_________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Thanks.

Since I don't doubt that a gunman was at that location, I guess I should have worded my question differently-- "Who claimed that they'd seen someone standing there wearing a hat?

Thanks,

--Thomas

P.S. Is this the same hat we can see (from behind) in Z-412, Z-413, and Z-414?

Ed Hoffman was specific about the hat. In the MWKK interview ... Ed demonstrated how the guy straightened his coat and adjusted his hat as he walked east along the fence.

The head seen in the Zapruder film is Emmett Hudson's as Emmett stood on the steps going from the walkway above the knoll and leading down to the street.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Thanks.

Since I don't doubt that a gunman was at that location, I guess I should have worded my question differently-- "Who claimed that they'd seen someone standing there wearing a hat?

Thanks,

--Thomas

P.S. Is this the same hat we can see (from behind) in Z-412, Z-413, and Z-414?

Ed Hoffman was specific about the hat. In the MWKK interview ... Ed demonstrated how the guy straightened his coat and adjusted his hat as he walked east along the fence.

The head seen in the Zapruder film is Emmett Hudson's as Emmett stood on the steps going from the walkway above the knoll and leading down to the street.

Bill

_________________________________

Thanks again, Bill.

To your knowledge, were there any other eyewitnesses besides Ed Hoffman who saw a shooter, wearing a hat, standing behind the fence at the time of the shooting (or immediately after it)?

Just curious.

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Thanks.

Since I don't doubt that a gunman was at that location, I guess I should have worded my question differently-- "Who claimed that they'd seen someone standing there wearing a hat?

Thanks,

--Thomas

P.S. Is this the same hat we can see (from behind) in Z-412, Z-413, and Z-414?

Ed Hoffman was specific about the hat. In the MWKK interview ... Ed demonstrated how the guy straightened his coat and adjusted his hat as he walked east along the fence.

The head seen in the Zapruder film is Emmett Hudson's as Emmett stood on the steps going from the walkway above the knoll and leading down to the street.

Bill

_________________________________

Thanks again, Bill.

To your knowledge, were there any other eyewitnesses besides Ed Hoffman who saw a shooter, wearing a hat, standing behind the fence at the time of the shooting (or immediately after it)?

Just curious.

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________________

The answer would be yes, someone besides Hoffman saw the man with the hat. Bowers was one such witness even though he failed to specifically mention the hat. Why do I say this? Because Bowers said that there were only TWO men along that portion of the fence when the President passed by below. One man stood back while the other man was up by the fence looking up the street at the approaching motorcade. The Willis enlargement in Groden's book shows this individual over the corner of the fence (and along the west stretch of fence) with the sky as a backdrop and he is quite clearly wearing something on his head that could be considered the same hat seen over the top of the fence at the Hat Man location in Moorman's photo. So Bowers substantiates the presence of this man in photos through his statements, while the two photos support Hoffman's description about tha man wearing a hat .... see how they all tie in together!

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't give a Donald what Groden thinks. Your relaying of Groden's supposed opinions can only be classed as hearsay, as they do not come directly from him to me or anyone else I know of. I'm having the discussion with you, not Groden. I have Groden's book...It shows the same effect.
Feel free to contact Robert, yourself and then it is no longer hearsay. Contact Trask who has seen the original photo ... or Mack ... or better yet - go see the photo for yourself, but of course to do any of these things would only move you closer to having to admit that your interpretation sucked and your lack of interest in doing so to date tells the true story in itself IMO.
I've told you before..Rick Janowitz took pics from my location from the Moorman position, confirming that my shooter was not a floating torso.That was a perspective study... Now you know very well that Hatman is an impossible shooter given his location behind the fence.

I would certainly like to see how Janowitz was able to show the sky between the floating torso and the top of the fence in his recreation image ... I am betting that it didn't happen. Hat Man is the only person seen at this location at the time the shot was heard from there, so what else shot at JFK which caused the smoke to be propelled through the trees? Try to keep in mind that Moorman took her photo AFTER the kill shot - not at the precise moment.

You say he could have been bending down and probably had withdrawn his weapon by the time Moorman took her pic. All I can say to that is given the time scale between Moorman and the shot..it's impossible in my opinion for this scenario to have taken place.
Anyone standing a foot or two from the fence with Moorman looking uphill would look just like what is seen in Moorman's photo. Hoffman is the eye witness to seeing this man with a gun. Holland and the others on the underpass heard the shot and seen the smoke. Bowers told Lane that something unusual happened there ... like a flash of light or smoke was visible.

Now how far can one move in 4/18ths of a second ... count off four frames of Toni Foster walking or Jackie rising up from the car while bringing her hand over her husband's head and we'll apply that to your opinion.

Don't ask me to back up and qoute what your previous opinion was. If anyone wants to find out your previous opinion, they can easily do a seach of the forum.

You blew two words in the quote above. But getting back on point ... you are posting garbage that the original Moorman photo doesn't show and that is and always will be your biggest obstacle to overcome.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

Thanks.

Since I don't doubt that a gunman was at that location, I guess I should have worded my question differently-- "Who claimed that they'd seen someone standing there wearing a hat?

Thanks,

--Thomas

Ed Hoffman was specific about the hat. In the MWKK interview ... Ed demonstrated how the guy straightened his coat and adjusted his hat as he walked east along the fence.

Bill

_________________________________

Thanks again, Bill.

To your knowledge, were there any other eyewitnesses besides Ed Hoffman who saw a shooter, wearing a hat, standing behind the fence at the time of the shooting (or immediately after it)?

Just curious.

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________________

"...beside Ed Hoffman...?"

Exactly. That's the issue, because if Ed Hoffman is shown to be a false witness, then Midget Man (AKA Hatman) is shown to be a concocted phantom.

Correcting a former error of mine, see this aerial with a yellow line showing Ed's alleged line of sight:

EDsightline.jpg

This line of sight is 267.02 yards long, more than 2 1/2 football fields. The line of sight traverses (goes through) a seven (7) lane highway which at the time in question is busily traveled be cars & eighteen wheelers, etc. This line of sight should be kept in mind when considering Ed's story because at this distance Ed's ability to identify the details presented in his story becomes extremely dubious.

Just taking one example out of a dozen Hoffman problems, consider that Ed says that "I (he) saw a puff of smoke. I thought it was a cigarette, but it wasn't , he had a gun." To an uncritical audience this sounds plausible. But, remember the 267 yard line of sight. As Ed is saying this he is standing by the picket fence aiming, by pantomime, an imaginary rifle over the fence at Elm. But, there's a problem. In Ed's pantomime Ed imitates what he saw his alleged sniper do by shouldering the imaginary rifle to his LEFT shoulder! Yes, that's right, Ed's sniper (a lefty :tomatoes ), as seen by Ed at a distance of 267 yards, had, as Ed pantomimes, his BACK toward Ed. Now, at this exact moment Ed sees a puff of smoke, again as Ed pantomimes to illustrate (using his hands), puff up beside of the alleged sniper's head but on the side of the sniper's head away from Ed. The obvious implication that Ed is at pains to make clear is that this puff of smoke emanated from the rifle at the rifle's chamber & not from the barrel in propulsion. What? The wind at the time was blowing south. Ed says only one shot was fired. Did Ed's sniper eject the casing instantly after firing? Ed does not mention the sniper or anyone else running to retrieve the ejected casing so it would not be found by the police (as it was, indeed, not found)... Well, this just one (typical) example of Ed's dog not hunting.

One other point. Here's a photo crop which illustrates that Ed's sniper's assistant would have been observed (as he was not, of course) by people standing a few feet away from the electrical box where Ed claims the assistant broke down the rifle & put it in a tool box. The red arrows indicate where individual spectators were standing as the limo went through the underpass. (left arrow probable, right certain) They would have seen the apocryphal rifle toss over the steam pipe. They did not see this, of course.

ColorDP2paint.jpg

The most embarrassing aspect of Ed's story is the gross & stark implausibility of the "rifle toss" canard. Ed's story is that the assassin fires a shot from behind the picket fence from a spot near hatman; that the assassin then walks west down along the fence toward the elevated (3') steamline pipe at the north end of the triple underpass; that the assassin tosses his rifle to an assistant, possibly tossing it over the steamline pipe; that the assistant then proceeds to the northern most of two switch boxes to disassemble the rifle to put it in a bag; and, finally, both assassin & assistant then casually walk away unseen. Sound good? Unfortunately there's a massive problem here. In the Bell film two men can be seen at the north wall of the triple underpass, the wall that runs from the underpass to connect with the western end of the picket fence. These two men are seen at this wall as the limo goes through the underpass on the way to Parkland. These two men are, therefore, standing, at the critical time, about 15 feet (!!) away from the switch box where Ed's "assistant" breaks down the rifle. Since there are zero bushes or trees in this area, this means that the two men could have & would have SEEN the assassin toss the rifle to the assistant & would have SEEN the assistant carrying the rifle to the switch box, breaking it down & carrying it away in a bag. :lol: It is possible that Ed's "rifle toss" occurred before the assassin reached the steamline pipe; if so, then, the assistant would have had to have jumped over the 3' steamline pipe or to have ducked under it, while carrying the rifle. What makes this whole scenario laughably implausible is the consideration that the assassin is executing a plan of escape that is, in its conception, the exact oppose of a plan designed to succeed. The assassin & his assistant walk to where there is an extremely high likelihood that they will be seen, and seen by any number of witnesses who are in the area of the switch boxes to view the motorcade. In other words, the assassin & his advisers, realizing the dangers, would have first of all have ruled out Ed's scenario as being the worst possible exit strategy, the one plan most likely to fail, the one plan most likely to expose the assassin. Conclusion: Ed's dog don't hunt.

Edited by Miles Scull
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This line of sight is 267.02 yards long, more than 2 1/2 football fields. The line of sight traverses (goes through) a seven (7) lane highway which at the time in question is busily traveled be cars & eighteen wheelers, etc. This line of sight should be kept in mind when considering Ed's story because at this distance Ed's ability to identify the details presented in his story becomes extremely dubious.

Miles,

As I walked the RR yard with Ed and his family one day - I looked at the lane of traffic passing by on Stemmon's Freeway and I do not have the keen eyesight that Ed had as a man with a loss of one of his senses ... and I could clearly see people with clarity through their opened car windows so to tell if they were a woman or a man ... even what color hair they had. You might want to hold on to your comments until you actually have been to Dealey Plaza and seen it for yourself.

Allow me to give you an example that you might possibly understand as to ones ability to see from the distance you claim Ed had. The Daniels camera, as with most cameras, doesn't show the detail that the naked eye sees and in fact, it makes things look slighty further away than they really are. Now when watching the Daniels film, do you not see the people on the south pasture well enough to have seen one of them holding a rifle if that had been the case? Now add the clarity that the naked eye sees with ... Get the point!

Just taking one example out of a dozen Hoffman problems, consider that Ed says that "I (he) saw a puff of smoke. I thought it was a cigarette, but it wasn't , he had a gun." To an uncritical audience this sounds plausible. But, remember the 267 yard line of sight. As Ed is saying this he is standing by the picket fence aiming, by pantomime, an imaginary rifle over the fence at Elm. But, there's a problem. In Ed's pantomime Ed imitates what he saw his alleged sniper do by shouldering the imaginary rifle to his LEFT shoulder! Yes, that's right, Ed's sniper (a lefty :tomatoes ), as seen by Ed at a distance of 267 yards, had, as Ed pantomimes, his BACK toward Ed. Now, at this exact moment Ed sees a puff of smoke, again as Ed pantomimes to illustrate (using his hands), puff up beside of the alleged sniper's head but on the side of the sniper's head away from Ed.

I assume that you are merely trying to play the devils advocate and aren't really as sllly as your response sounds to someone who knows Ed's story quite well and has walked every inch of the areas in question. Ed had seen the guy smoking a cigarette while waiting for the motorcade to show up. Proof of this could be the numerous cigarette butts that were found on the ground after the RR employees got to the location where they had heard the shot and had seen the smoke come through the trees ... of course, unless you think the man at the fence had all those cigarettes in his mouth at one time and was smoking them as JFK approached.

The obvious implication that Ed is at pains to make clear is that this puff of smoke emanated from the rifle at the rifle's chamber & not from the barrel in propulsion. What? The wind at the time was blowing south. Ed says only one shot was fired. Did Ed's sniper eject the casing instantly after firing? Ed does not mention the sniper or anyone else running to retrieve the ejected casing so it would not be found by the police (as it was, indeed, not found)... Well, this just one (typical) example of Ed's dog not hunting.

Does it really matter how the smoke got out of the gun ... its the same smoke Bowers told Mark Lane about and the same smoke seen being blown through the trees by assassination witnesses on the underpass and on the knoll. By the way ... look at Muchmore's film and take note at which direction Moorman and Hill's coats are blowing. If you are going to be a critic of witnesses, then the information that you are offering should at least be correct. the wind was blowing to the southeast at the time JFK was killed. And what rule says that a shooter has to take the time to eject a shell out of his gun and risk losing precious time in going undetected? Are you also aware of the smell of fresh burnt gunpowder being detected near the fence and in the street as the motorcade passed by below. The 6th floor of the TSBD was 6 stories in the air and a block east of the knoll, so unless the wind blew that gunpowder smell from the alleged snipers nest and carried it all around the world so to end up in front of the knoll ... it would appear to a reasonable person that a shot was fired from the RR yard near the fence.

You should also know that Hoffman didn't know the man had a gun until he turned around. Also, Seymour Weitzman's report told of talking to a RR worker who told him that after the shooting that he had seen someone toss something near the steam pipe. the worker had seen this through an opening in the tree foliage. This supports what Hoffman has said from his own observations. And if you should ever bother to actually visit the triple underpass - you will be forced to see that anyone standing on it as the people seen in Altgens 7, then you will find that you cannot see the area near the RR boxes. One more thing you seem oblivious to ... Ed saw a man go behind the RR box to dismantle the gun. Ed is talking about the man going out of sight behind the box from where he stood ... this does not mean that the man actually made it all the way to the RR box so to be seen by anyone on the underpass ... not that this was possible.

The most embarrassing aspect of Ed's story is the gross & stark implausibility of the "rifle toss" canard. Ed's story is that the assassin fires a shot from behind the picket fence from a spot near hatman; that the assassin then walks west down along the fence toward the elevated (3') steamline pipe at the north end of the triple underpass; that the assassin tosses his rifle to an assistant, possibly tossing it over the steamline pipe; that the assistant then proceeds to the northern most of two switch boxes to disassemble the rifle to put it in a bag; and, finally, both assassin & assistant then casually walk away unseen. Sound good?

See Weitzman's report ... maybe someone tossed a broom to another employee and told him to get down there in the street and clean up that mess ... sigh~ ... the point is that someone besides Ed saw something tossed near the steam pipe.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great analysis Miles. I do believe Ed did see something, but the detail is just too much for me to swallow, taking in to account the other people on the overpass who would have seens Ed's scenario.

Question for anyone reading this. Can anyone tell me the exact distance from the corner of the fence nearest to the first big tree?.... within a couple of feet.

I can see you thinking Miles made some good points for you have never been to the site to know any better.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...