Additional Claims about the Knoll-Wall

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

I hope you can see the red area that has, up until now, always

been associated with the red shirt of the man you were refering

to....

Alan,

I do not recollect referring to a man in a red shirt.

See my query to Ron. The man I refer to as the 'standing / walking man'

is not wearing a red shirt.

EBC

[Alan Healy]

I hope you can see the red area that has, up until now, always

been associated with the red shirt of the man you were refering

to....

Alan,

I do not recollect referring to a man in a red shirt.

See my query to Ron. The man I refer to as the 'standing / walking  man'

is not wearing a red shirt.

EBC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You say you see a "standing / walking man" in Willis6 but you are mistaken.

He is on sat on the steps next to Hudson & he is indeed wearing red.

Alan

Maybe you are refering to Willis7 Eugene?

That has a teenager running past this position but I do not

see who you can be talking about in Willis6 other than the

red shirted guy on the steps with Hudson.

Willis7

Edited February 11, 2005 by Alan Healy

[Alan Healy]

A really good full copy of Willis5 is rare in my experience, especially

of the quality of the above crop.

Alan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

http://www.geocities.com/quaneeri2/5700.jpg

This was not available when I tried it earlier but it seems ok today.

It's the best one I've seen Ron, thanks.

Alan

[Shanet Clark]

Great photo post

No overlays, lines, circles or cartoons!

Again we see men in suits, equally spaced, combing the evidentiary

kill site in a police action.

Note how the press bus is pointed directly at the south knoll triple overpass,

a shot from the left would have been more head-on at Zframe 313 than a

shot from the right (grassy Knoll)

At least 15 observers are on the overpass at the tracks ....

Can anyone identify the guy with a crew cut and Eisenhower jacket?

He is screaming air force intelligence southerner to me....

Edited February 11, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Bill Miller]

At least 15 observers are on the overpass at the tracks ....

There were 14 people on the Underpass at the time of the shooting. I think Holland said 11 RR workers - 2 policemen - and one guy in a suit and hat that he thought was with the police.

[Bill Miller]

Aside from Emmett Hudson's testimony and statements to his friends, family, and to the Press ... there is more proof that Hudson was standing with the man we see in the Willis photograph. Here is a photo example that I will go on to explain ...

If we look at the stance of both Hudson and unknown man in the Muchmore, Nix or Moorman images we will see that they are almost identical except Hudson's seat of his pants were baggier and his arms extended further back behind him. The man on the steps looks like he may have his hands in his pants pockets. Regardless, Hudson's arms extend much further back than the unknown man's arms do.

When we look at the unknown man's arms in the Willis photograph we don't see how Hudson plays a role in what we are looking at because of the lack of sharpness of the photo. Take a measure of the unknowns man's arms from his shoulder out to the elbow and then back to his hips and then see how long those arms would be if hanging down to his side. As Groden once said to me - they'd be far too long to be a human's arms. This is because part of Hudson's dark jacket has bled into the unknown man's coat and because their posture was so much the same in about every way, it looks like one dark jacket.

Another giveaway is that Hudson's pants were baggier in the seat. Look at the unknown man's pants on the left from the Willis photo. Do you see the bulge sticking out just behind and above his knees? Now look at Hudson in the Moorman photo and you will see that the dark shade area of his baggy pants starts just above the unknown man's knees. So we have two choices. The unknown man has a raccoon or something in his pants just above and behind his knees or we are seeing Hudson's baggy pants sticking out behind the unknown man. The location in conjunction with what we see of Hudson in the other films and photos makes me believe it to be the latter.

I am certain that if the Willis photo was sharp and clean that we would see the separation line between Hudson and the unknown man. There is a slight hint of such a line even in the poor blurry image we have left to work with. I have marked these possible lines with white arrows.

Bill

Edited February 12, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Ron Ecker]

Again we see men in suits, equally spaced, combing the evidentiary

kill site in a police action.

Several sheriff's deputies in suits were standing in front of the sheriff's office to watch the motorcade. When the shooting occurred, they all ran over to Elm Street.

Can anyone identify the guy with a crew cut and Eisenhower jacket?

He is screaming air force intelligence southerner to me....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you're referring to Jim Hicks. His story might make a good tragicomical novel or movie, but wouldn't do much to solve the JFK case.

Hicks was supposed to testify as an assassination witness in the Garrison investigation, but apparently Garrison wasn't too impressed with him. The most exciting thing that happened to Hicks in New Orleans was being thrown through a plate glass window by two guys who he met in a bar. Hicks spent some time in a mental hospital, and was eventually found beaten to death by a railroad track.

Ron

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Alan Healy

I am and have been all along referring to this photo

and have never made any reference to a man wearing a red shirt:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/arnold/willis8lg.jpg

Thank you.

EBC

Edited February 14, 2005 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

This is a picture of Guy Fawkes who attempted, along with others, to blow up

the British Houses of Parliament in 1605 in what became known as the Gunpowder Plot.

The style of dress of this person clearly points us to that conclusion.

As is evidenced by the colour of the Fawkes hat

we should be able to ascertain immediately that it is in light relief.

EBC

Edited February 15, 2005 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Alan Healy]

Alan Healy

I am and have been all along  referring to this photo

and have never made any reference to a man wearing a red shirt:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/arnold/willis8lg.jpg

Thank you.

EBC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As I already explained to you in a previous post, the person you are pointing to is sitting on the steps(not standing or running like you think) with Emmett Hudson & he is wearing a red shirt, like it or not.

Don't mention it, it's my pleasure.

Alan

Edited February 15, 2005 by Alan Healy

[Alan Healy]

This is  a picture of Guy Fawkes who attempted, along with others, to blow up

the British Houses of Parliament in 1605 in what became known as the Gunpowder Plot.

The style of dress of this person clearly points us  to that conclusion.

EBC

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So according to you this is the same "guy" we are seeing, on the steps, in that Willis picture too then?

I think I see a plot of some sort.

Thanks for the tip.

G'night.

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

"As I already explained to you in a previous post, the person you are pointing to is sitting on the steps(not standing or running like you think) with Emmett Hudson & he is wearing a red shirt, like it or not."

Thanks Alan. I have nothing against red shirts.Perhaps this is a 'red shirt' plot.

I got confused with those darned Willis numbers.

Come in number 8. Where were you?

Sorry.

Gene

Edited February 15, 2005 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Eugene C. - sorry to be so flippant about your photo enhancement -

it was actually pretty cool, but I question its evidentiary value....

Shanet,

Please feel free to question any of my postings.

I am, like you, searching for the truth.

Gene

[Don Roberdeau]

Good Day.... I note that since my most recent post, that most posters, still, are not evaluating what ARNOLD claims in the 1989 "Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza" oral history interview; most persons still are injecting their personal interpretation of ARNOLD's claims, versus what ARNOLD actually claims in the 1989, post-"The Men Who Killed Kennedy"-documentary interview.

One example is the precise location that ARNOLD claims he was standing in when the shotS ARNOLD claimed he heard passed him.... ARNOLD's claimed location in this 1989 interview is not supported by the MOORMAN polaroid mandatory line-of-sight, and, it is not supported by any other photographic line-of-sight west of the far-west end of the retaining wall edge.

Don Roberdeau

U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John" Plank Walker

Sooner, or later, the Truth emerges Clearly

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/DP.jpg

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/ROSE...NOUNCEMENT.html

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/BOND...PINGarnold.html

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/GHOS...update2001.html

T ogether

E veryone

A chieves

M ore

"When you have eliminated the impossible, what remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

---- Sherlock Holmes, "A Study In Scarlet," (1887) by A.C. DOYLE

Edited June 15, 2005 by Don Roberdeau

[Lee Forman]

One example is the precise location that ARNOLD claims he was standing in when the shotS ARNOLD claimed he heard passed him.... ARNOLD's claimed location in this 1989 interview is not supported by the MOORMAN polaroid mandatory line-of-sight, and, it is not supported by any other photographic line-of-sight west of the far-west end of the retaining wall edge.

Moorman crop of the southern end of the retaining wall.

- lee