Miles Scull Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Can anyone estimate a time elapse from Z-313 for Bond 4 ? Thx[image] Rough quick rough estimate is easy Miles, if you want an exact second to second analysis you'll have to say. Wiegman. Captures the limo entering the underpass = 9secs after Z313 Stops filming the Hesters 10secs later =19secs // Runs down to the Newmans & is there behind the lamp post in Bond4 fiming them = 30secs total for B4 IMHO I may as well use this post to talk about Hudson in Willis5 too. Bill's analysis of what "we" have availlable to us of that photo with the help of Robert Groden, IMO is correct. Small signs of Hudson are seen as part of the RAM there. http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/5246.jpg but I've kind of made my mind up that that is RAM we are seeing, so Hudson has to be there behind him IMHO. Although Gary Mack has said not too long ago, that he can still only see two men in scans from the best copies of Willis5 available. Just in case you were wondering where the name "the third man" came from Miles.... As there is only two men seen in W5, many thought(& some still do) that BDM came down to join them on the steps in time for Moorman5. Thus, they think the man in W5 is Hudson & it's actually BDM who is "the third man" in M5. Alan, Good & thanks! Why is Hudson closer to the sidewalk stairs than RSM after 30 sec. from Z-313, if RSM was already lying on the sidewalk when Hudson lay himself down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Healy Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I told you already, RSM is the one & only man who Hudson refers to.The older guy was not mentioned at all. Hudson mentions the guy standing to his left when they stood up as the president came onto Elm Street and he testified that this man was standing on his left when the first shot rang out. Hudson's testimony about that is seen below. But you already said that in your opinion Hudson got mixed up over who was telling him to lie down after the shots & I already told you, that does not work for me. I agree it was the RSM who did the shouting but I think Hudson knew that from sitting down with him afterwards for a full minute at least. IMO he got mixed up over who stood next to him, or like I said, some switching took place. The bottom line is, you can't take anything a witness said as gospel, just because there is a man seen standing next to Hudson during a six second period, does not mean that has to be the same man he talked too before the shooting & about afterwards. Whoever the man was who shouted at him said "get down, lay down mister" repeatedly & Hudson would not have mentioned which way the guy was laying on the "sidewalk" unless it was relevant to where he himself was going to park his butt. If this alleged relation of the man comes forward again, I hope to God you don't see him first, you will have him saying all types of "stuff" simply to support your version. If he's legit & he says his old man once worked on Industrial Boulevard, what then? It's a shame Robert did not stop what he was doing to grill this dude. He must get this type of thing a lot though, that could explain Robert's reluctance to get too excited about it. Buff my "foot". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Healy Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Why is Hudson closer to the sidewalk stairs than RSM after 30 sec. from Z-313, if RSM was already lying on the sidewalk when Hudson lay himself down? IMHO Miles??? It's just another reason why we can't take what someone said literally. How are we to know without having him here to ask & even then, how would we know what we would get from him would be accurate? Sorry if that's not the answer you wanted but maybe someone else will have a thought on it. Like I said before, I doubt the way a man is laying down on the true sidewalk, behind the wall 15' feet away, would of been significant enough to mention but, as we really don't know what RAM did as he leaves Nix's FOV, anything is possible. Maybe he just remembered he had some chips left in that bag on the bench? That is more believable to me than a man running out of fear for his safety because that's not what I see at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted November 2, 2007 Author Share Posted November 2, 2007 I may as well use this post to talk about Hudson in Willis5 too.Bill's analysis of what "we" have availlable to us of that photo with the help of Robert Groden, IMO is correct. Small signs of Hudson are seen as part of the RAM there. http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/5246.jpg but I've kind of made my mind up that that is RAM we are seeing, so Hudson has to be there behind him IMHO. In Groden's enlargement of the Willis photo - the skinny man who stood next to Hudson does have signs of Hudson being seen just beyond him. The distance the arms angle back and bend at the elbow and then to the pockets is one such example. Hudson's arms are overlapping just slightly which looks like one set of really long arms, but its just two men seen at a distance whose dark coats are blending together. The other hint is in the seat of the skinny man's pants as far down as behind the knee area. Note the sag/bulge. Then go look at Hudson in Muchmore or Moorman's photo and you will note the skinny man is wearing rather well fitting pants and Hudson's are baggy in the seat. Hudson's pants are also causing the odd looking bulge to the back of the skinny man's pants as well. Its because of the distance to the subject from the camera and the slight blurring that makes it difficult to see Hudson from the front in the Willis photo, but never-the-less - the signs are there. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted November 2, 2007 Author Share Posted November 2, 2007 It's a shame Robert did not stop what he was doing to grill this dude.He must get this type of thing a lot though, that could explain Robert's reluctance to get too excited about it. Groden said that he was extremely busy when the guy came by talking to him. Robert has a lot of merchandise setting out and when there is a crowd of people picking stuff up and laying it down and this is ongoing ... he can lose track of things pretty easily. Robert once told me how much in shortages he has on a busy day and it was not anything to sneeze at. I did ask Robert to be sure to get this guys contact information the next time he saw him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted November 2, 2007 Author Share Posted November 2, 2007 Why is Hudson closer to the sidewalk stairs than RSM after 30 sec. from Z-313, if RSM was already lying on the sidewalk when Hudson lay himself down? If I had to make a reasonable guess ... he probably knew that he would be in the way of people who were going to be moving up the steps. In Towner #3 there are already two men seen on the walkway or going up the steps ... we don't know if any person(s) took that route before Towner took his photo. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Alan : I see Ken has not replied, he may be busy or away....so here you go..... B...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Bailey Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 In my opinion, the guy on the steps (Jack Lawrence) limped to cover behind the wall after he was shot in leg from a bullet fragment. This explains the blood puddle behind the wall. Don, this is just my opinion, but you should consider writing for the tabloids. That puddle seen in the Darnell film looks like someone poured the rest of their hot Coke out on the sidewalk after it had gotten warm. Because if someone was shot in the leg or anywhere else ... do you have any idea as to how badly they would be wounded and how long they would have needed to remain at that location to leak enough blood out onto the ground to make a puddle that large in one spot or have you not considered that? And if someone was leaking blood out to make a puddle that large, then there should have at the very least been droplets of blood seen elsewhere along what ever path they would have taken and there was none reported. Bill Bill, Thanks for the job offer but I don't want to take away your job. My guess is you have no idea of the blood found in Dealey Plaza on that fateful day. John Simkin started this topic almost 2 years ago: Coley and Mulkey Blood http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...08&hl=couch "Coley and Mulkey stood on Houston Street near the entrance of the old county jail. They therefore did not see or hear the shooting, however, when news spread to them they went to Dealey Plaza. While walking down the steps on the grassy knoll, they discovered a pool of blood (Mulkey actually tasted it to make sure it was blood). The two men estimated that there must have been a pint of blood on the steps close to the fence on the grassy knoll." This is quoting Malcolm Couch in the Clifton (TX) Record, 11/22/2000: "I started toward the building where I had seen the rifle in the window. Then I saw something very weird. There was a trail of blood from the spot where the shooting occurred to the entrance of the Texas School Book Depository. I pointed it out to a man with me. "Just then an FBI man stepped out of the building, and in his hand was an object dripping blood. It looked like a piece of hairy flesh. I know I didn't imagine this. The scene is very clear to me." In 1955 the Coca-Cola parent company broke with its long-standing policy of only utilizing a single-sized container for their product. In addition to the original 6.5 ounce size, the company introduced ten, twelve, sixteen, and twenty-six ounce bottles. 1 US pint = 16 US fluid ounces Ok, so someone poured out a full 16 oz. bottle of coke? It does not make sense. If you knock over a bottle of coke not all of the contents will spill out unless you hold it upside down. Where is the empty coke bottle in the Couch film of the steps?? It's a puddle of blood!! Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Rheberg Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Miles asks: "Why is Hudson closer to the sidewalk stairs than RSM after 30 sec. from Z-313, if RSM was already lying on the sidewalk when Hudson lay himself down?" The explanation is easy, Miles. Someone else was on the sidewalk warning Hudson to “lay down.” By sidewalk, I mean just that. Not the steps. Not the landing which Hudson called “a broad place.” But “the sidewalk” which is exactly what Hudson said. And the only relevant sidewalk in that area is the one at the top of the stairs where that “someone else” had already headed -- the only person it could have been. Not RSM who was in the grass, but the other man in the Moorman photo. The “young fellow.” The one from Industrial Boulevard. The man to Hudson’s left. Let Hudson speak for himself, and the mystery is over. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Where is Bowers view as seen on this 1967 overhead photo. What does towards the mouth of the underpass mean. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Healy Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Alan :I see Ken has not replied, he may be busy or away....so here you go..... B...... Exceptional. (a permenant link to it) http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff188/B...e-HudsonFBI.jpg Many thanks Bernice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Miller Posted November 3, 2007 Author Share Posted November 3, 2007 Ok, so someone poured out a full 16 oz. bottle of coke? It does not make sense. If you knock over a bottle of coke not all of the contents will spill out unless you hold it upside down.Where is the empty coke bottle in the Couch film of the steps?? It's a puddle of blood!! Don No one said that a full bottle of Coke was poured out. And to be honest, I could have poured a cup of coffee out on the sidewalk and it made a pattern as large as that wet spot seen in the Couch film, which BTW is on the sidewalk and not the steps. And I really find it hard to swallow that anyone tasted blood for only an idiot would have done something like that and if they were that dumb, then it would explain why no one else supported that puddle as being blood. Now, seeing how you are in a detective frame of mind regardless of how gullible you may appear, let us say that someone had been shot in the leg as you alleged in a previous response ... how long would you estimate someone needed to stand in one spot to have that much blood get passed the clothing of the pants - socks - and shoes ... in order to form a puddle that large onto the sidewalk? And then you want people top believe that someone who lost that much blood was able to then pass 100's of witnesses and not have anyone seeing his blood soaked clothing. It sounds to me that you put as much time into this one as you did the three men on the steps fiasco. And what about the bottle? Didn't Sitzman say something about hearing a bottle thrown and being broken during the shooting ... I believe she did. But if I follow your way of thinking ... for a soda to have been poured out onto the ground, then there must be a bottle laying next to the puddle ... now is that what you are implying? I'm not buying that one. Bill Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Healy Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 If I had looked a little closer, I would of realised that RAM does not make it to the wall before he goes out of shot in Nix. He's not even close, sorry. http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff188/B...gman/NixRAM.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Healy Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Miles asks: "Why is Hudson closer to the sidewalk stairs than RSM after 30 sec. from Z-313, if RSM was already lying on the sidewalk when Hudson lay himself down?"The explanation is easy, Miles. Someone else was on the sidewalk warning Hudson to “lay down.” By sidewalk, I mean just that. Not the steps. Not the landing which Hudson called “a broad place.” But “the sidewalk” which is exactly what Hudson said. And the only relevant sidewalk in that area is the one at the top of the stairs where that “someone else” had already headed -- the only person it could have been. Not RSM who was in the grass, but the other man in the Moorman photo. The “young fellow.” The one from Industrial Boulevard. The man to Hudson’s left. Let Hudson speak for himself, and the mystery is over. Ken Ken, okay that last paragraph in the FBI statement. Even with Moorman's photo to hand, the best Hudson could manage was that "one of these two men".. stated where he worked. He did not specify. Frustrating. However, like you said, since he has knowledge of that picture & while giving testimony for the WC he later refers to it, it makes sense to me now that the man seen on Hudson's left on the steps is who he talked to & about. Having RAM dive down behind the wall, is not really a problem for me, we don't have evidence for it but we have no evidence he ran into the RR yard either. I thought he already made it behind the wall in Nix, I was mistaken, he's not yet off the steps, anything could of happened. There are a few who still believe they see signs of a body rising up from behind the wall in Bond5 & 7 but IMO, only superior copies of those images will tell for sure. It doesn't mean it's RAM though, since there is at least one person already behind the wall in Nix as he makes his bolt up the steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Miles asks: "Why is Hudson closer to the sidewalk stairs than RSM after 30 sec. from Z-313, if RSM was already lying on the sidewalk when Hudson lay himself down?"The explanation is easy, Miles. Someone else was on the sidewalk warning Hudson to “lay down.” By sidewalk, I mean just that. Not the steps. Not the landing which Hudson called “a broad place.” But “the sidewalk” which is exactly what Hudson said. And the only relevant sidewalk in that area is the one at the top of the stairs where that “someone else” had already headed -- the only person it could have been. Not RSM who was in the grass, but the other man in the Moorman photo. The “young fellow.” The one from Industrial Boulevard. The man to Hudson’s left. Let Hudson speak for himself, and the mystery is over. Ken Ken, okay that last paragraph in the FBI statement. Even with Moorman's photo to hand, the best Hudson could manage was that "one of these two men".. stated where he worked. He did not specify. Frustrating. However, like you said, since he has knowledge of that picture & while giving testimony for the WC he later refers to it, it makes sense to me now that the man seen on Hudson's left on the steps is who he talked to & about. Having RAM dive down behind the wall, is not really a problem for me, we don't have evidence for it but we have no evidence he ran into the RR yard either. I thought he already made it behind the wall in Nix, I was mistaken, he's not yet off the steps, anything could of happened. There are a few who still believe they see signs of a body rising up from behind the wall in Bond5 & 7 but IMO, only superior copies of those images will tell for sure. It doesn't mean it's RAM though, since there is at least one person already behind the wall in Nix as he makes his bolt up the steps. If I had looked a little closer, I would of realised that RAM does not make it to the wall before he goes out of shot in Nix.He's not even close, sorry. http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff188/B...gman/NixRAM.gif Alan, Right you are! Mr. HUDSON - Well there was a young fellow, oh, I would judge his age about in his late twenties. He said he had been looking for a place to park and he walked up there and he said he finally just taken a place over there in one of them parking lots, and he come on down there and said he worked over there on Industrial and me and him both just sat there first on those steps. When the motorcade turned off of Houston onto Elm, we got up and stood up, me and him both. He was on the left side and I was on the right and so the first shot rung out and, of course, I didn't realize it was a shot, what was taking place right at that present time, and when the second one rung out, the motorcade had done got further on down Elm, and you see, I was trying to get a good look at President Kennedy. I happened to be looking right at him when that bullet hit him - the second shot. Hudson is saying that "young fellow" stood next to him from the time the motorcade turned off of Houston onto Elm until the second shot. But the man standing next to Hudson in Moorman ran away in seconds after the second shot. Mr. LIEBELER - Did you see that shot hit anything - the third shot? Mr. HUDSON - No, sir. I'll tell you - this young fellow that was sitting there with me - standing there with me at the present time, he says, "lay down, Mister, somebody is shooting the President." He says, "Lay down, lay down." and he kept repeating, "Lay down." so he was already laying down one way on the sidewalk, so I just laid down over on the ground and resting my arm on the ground and when that third shot rung out and when I was close to the ground - you could tell the shot was coming from above and kind of behind. Hudson is saying that after the man ran up the stairs the "young fellow" (RSM), who had stood with him since the motorcade turned off of Houston onto Elm, told him to lie down. This means that the photographic evidence does not agree or comport with Hudson's testimony. It contradicts Hudson. Miller's explanation for this is that Hudson became confused & imagined that, when the the man ran up the stairs & was replaced by RSM,... that RSM was the man who ran away & had been by him all the while. One man became another man in Hudson's mind: a doppelgänger. Miller is saying, therefore, that Hudson had a very powerful hallucination. Very good. This renders Hudson unreliable & not credible & so vitiates Hudson's testimony as valid. This appalling development was noticed by Ken, who realized that the only remotely plausible scenario was that "run-away-man" dashed to safety behind the retaining wall & then comically shouted in a huge, stentorian voice instructions to Hudson. Mr. LIEBELER - Did you see that shot hit anything - the third shot? Mr. HUDSON - No, sir. I'll tell you - this young fellow that was sitting there with me - standing there with me at the present time, Hudson means the "young fellow" who had sat with him & stood with him during the period of time that Husdon is recalling, which period of time Hudson calls the "present time," SAYS to him at the time of the third shot: "Lay down." Hudson uses the verb "SAYS," not shouts not yells not screams. This clearly means that the person who says to Hudson "Lay down, lay down'' is a person who is close enough to Hudson to be heard in the din of the passing motorcade by means of a volume level & loudness of tone which is below that of someone yelling or shouting. The only person who could SAY this was RSM. he says, Hudson uses the verb: says. "lay down, Mister, somebody is shooting the President." Hudson's use of the word "Mister" is significant. Why? Would the man who had run up the stairs (to allegedly lie down on the sidewalk behind the retaining wall) have looked to see Hudson & RSM, practically in one another's arms, and have called out to them: "Lay down, Mister?'' Why warn only one to lie down & not the other? But, if RSM was saying this, then, of course, since he was addressing only one man as the other had run away, he would naturally say to Hudson: "Lay down, Mister (singular)." He says, Again, Hudson uses SAYS, "Lay down, lay down." and he kept repeating, "Lay down." Hudson says that the "young man" kept repeating "Lay down." Hudson indicates that length of time passes while this repeating goes on. During this time Hudson receives these warnings. Hudson explains that he then does something for certain reasons. What are these reasons? First Hudson explains that the "young man is already lying ONE WAYon the sidewalk. so So. Hudson uses this conjunction "so" to indicate connection & causation. (He did this, so I did this.) he was already laying down one way on the sidewalk, Hudson explains. so So. Hudson uses this conjunction "so" to indicate connection & causation. (He did this, so I did this.) I just laid down over on the ground Hudson is saying that the reason he lay on the GROUND was because the "young fellow" had already laid down on the sidewalk ONE WAY and there was NO ROOM there for Hudson to lie down THERE. Hudson explains that he had to lie down on the ground, he had no other choice. Hudson is trying to explain his actions & movements so that it is clear to LIEBELER why he, Hudson, could apprehend & judge the origin & direction of the third shot. He is answering the question put to him by LIEBELER, and, since Hudson grasps the great importance of the question, Hudson is attempting to be as clear as he can be. and resting my arm on the ground and when that third shot rung out and when I was close to the ground - you could tell the shot was coming from above and kind of behind. So, a close study of Hudson's exact words leads to the conclusion that Hudson meant that RSM warned him to "lay down." The possibility that "run-away-man" so warned Hudson is eliminated. QED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now