Ron Ecker Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 But she is wearing white, and blackdogman is wearing black! The person could be in shadow but not wearing black or dark clothes. As I recall, Bill Miller thinks BDM is Arnold in shadow. Arnold was not wearing black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted October 18, 2008 Author Share Posted October 18, 2008 But she is wearing white, and blackdogman is wearing black! The person could be in shadow but not wearing black or dark clothes. As I recall, Bill Miller thinks BDM is Arnold in shadow. Arnold was not wearing black. Thanks Ron. Yes i agree, the area between the retainining wall and the picket fence does appear very dark in the photo and film images, due to the shadows cast by the trees. You only need to have a look at NIX FILM and see how the running man dissapears into the deep shadowy area, as he bolts from the steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 And didn't the Aerospace Corp say that they found the BDM in Willis to have the same color skin as Sitzman?? Is this not important???http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk..._Vol6_0065b.htm It would depend on how reliable their methodology was, of which I am ignorant. I assume they were experts, but so was the "expert" who said Frenchy was Charles Rodgers, which is hogwash. BTW what was Aerospace Corp doing, trying to prove that Sitzman was BDM? I note that they also said that Mrs. Kennedy's hat was distinguishable from flesh. Were they trying to debunk a rumor that Mrs. Kennedy was wearing a hat made out of human flesh? if the woman is holding a baby and both are in white, then why would the baby only be seen in Betzner or Willis??? It may or may not be the baby that is seen. BDM is so unrecognizable as a human form that it could be two forms together (e.g. adult and child), separate from the white whatever. Wasn't some of you saying in the past that this was a guy in a brimmed hat and he was shooting at the President??? Are such people allowed to change their minds based on new evidence? why would someone be so quick to think the BDM mystery has been solved because a post assassination film shows a black woman with a baby on the knoll??? Because she's standing with or by a man who looks just like the one who ran up the steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 (edited) Robin : A few thoughts...... Why would the woman's sweater appear to be very dark in the Darnell frame, yet very light in the Murray in front of the TSBD.....The man you are comparing appears to be wearing a light sweater on the steps, and still appears light in the Darnell frame......... Also it would appear that the wall area was in bright sunlight, which would mean that the front of the bench wall area..where the BDMN was caught on camera was also..The shade from the tree appears not to have reached that far as yet, also seen within some of the other photos taken, Moorman,Willis, Bond and such.... Emmett Hudson stated..... Page 559 Mr. LIEBELER. So, you were standing about where I placed the "X" on photograph No. 18 of Commission Exhibit No. 875. Tell me what you saw--tell me what happened to the best of your recollection. 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 down 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 560 Mr. LIEBELER. Did you watch the President after he got hit in the head like that? Mr. HUDSON. Well, as soon as everybody realized what had happened, you know, everybody went to going up the hill so we did too. Mr. LIEBELER. So, you only saw the President hit once; is that right, sir? Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir; I just saw him hit once. Mr. LIEBELER. That was in the head? Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir. Page 562 Mr. LIEBELER. Do you see this little pedestal back up here? Mr. HUDSON. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Just above the "X" where you were standing? Mr. HUDSON. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see anybody standing up there that you can remember, during the time the President went by? Mr. HUDSON. Oh, there was a bunch of people in there, you know, a whole bunch of them--a lot of people in there a lot of people in here. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see anybody standing up there taking motion pictures with a movie camera? Mr. HUDSON. Oh, yes; I seen people up there trying to get--taking pictures. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see a man with a moving picture camera? Mr. HUDSON. Not in particular, I didn't. It was such an exciting time--- now---I did notice a man back over here on this triangle. Mr. LIEBELER. Standing across Elm Street? Page 563 Mr. HUDSON. No, sir; I can't, unless it is one of these two men right here I can't tell--if I had that picture that was taken in the Times Herald .paper--I can show you myself in it. Mr. LIEBELER. Which one is that? Mr. HUDSON. Well, it was in the Times Herald paper the next morning after, I believe, after the assassination, maybe the evening after the assassination. Mr. LIEBELER. Look at this picture. Mr. HUDSON. [Examining picture referred to.] I don't know--if that's one of them men and myself or not up there. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/hudson.htm Marilyn Sitzman ......To Josiah Thompson....... November 29, 1966. Sitzman: Some ran ... I mean ... I finally got back up to the alcove. There was bunches of people just swarming back there, and I think almost everybody on that hill ran back up that way. And another thing that I remember this day: there was a colored couple. I figure they were between 18 and 21, a boy and a girl, sitting on a bench, just almost, oh, parallel with me, on my right side, close to the fence. Thompson: In other words, between you and the fence, there's a tree right next to the ... Sitzman: There's a tree, and there's another part of the marble or concrete, whatever they call it, slab, fence, whatever they call it, between that and the wooden fence. Thompson: Which direction was the bench facing when you ... Sitzman: It was facing towards the street. Thompson: Towards the street. Parallel? Downstreet? Facing forward? Sitzman: And they were eating their lunch, 'cause they had little lunch sacks, and they were drinking coke. The main reason I remember 'em is, after the last shot I recall hearing and the car went down under the triple underpass there, I heard a crash of glass, and I looked over there, and the kids had thrown down their coke bottles, just threw them down and just started running towards the back and I ... Of course, I don't see anything unusual in that because everybody else was running that way, 'cause when I look over on my left side, the people on the hill were all running back the same way too. snip Thompson: Could I ask you something about your gaze and actions immediately after the head shot? On the trailer of Mr. Zapruder's film, we noticed that he turned to his right and photographed the general area of the stockade fence, the trees and the stockade fence and that particular area. Did you turn in that direction after the head shot too? Sitzman: In a way, I have a feeling this: He might have heard the kids throw down the coke bottles and heard that crash or else maybe it was just what he saw could have caused a reaction where he'd jump, but I don't think it was the sound of bullets, because I didn't jump. Thompson: No. Sitzman: Because the pop bottle crashing was much louder than the shots were. Thompson: No, this is a slightly different thing. I remarked earlier that in the Zapruder film, around frame 318, 319, we see a very sudden jiggle in the film as if the photographer was startled by a noise or by seeing something, and earlier you suggested ... well, what did you suggest? Sitzman: Well, seeing what we saw when the bullet hit Kennedy's head and it opening up like this, you don't stand there very calmly and do nothing. I'm sure ... it ... to me, it would be a normal reaction to kind of jump or something. Thompson: In other words, one would be startled by what one saw there rather than necessarily by what one heard. Sitzman: Sure, sure. If you're the type of person that would react that way. Some would just immediately freeze. Some people would ... Some women would've probably passed out, some ... rather bloody .... Thompson: Darn right. I know. I've seen the films too. Now, to get to this area between the stockade fence and the cement abutment, or small mall: Did you turn after the shot to look in this general area? Sitzman: Yes. Thompson: And did you see anyone in this area? Sitzman: No, just the two colored people running back. Thompson: I see. They were already ... they'd gotten up from the bench and were now running around into the gap made between the stockade fence and the pergola. Sitzman: Either in the gap there or back in the alcove. I don't recall which way they went. I saw ... I heard the bottles crash, and of course I looked that way, to my right, right away, and they were getting up and running towards the back. And I turned back to see if there was anything in the front street, because then they didn't affect me one way or another. Thompson: To see if anything else was going on. Had you seen them sitting on the bench before you stood next to them? Sitzman: Oh year, yes. Everybody is ... oh, ten or fifteen minutes before, everybody was milling around down there, trying to find a place to stand and everything, and I know when we went over to get up on the marble thing, they were already sitting there. Thompson: Well, did you notice at any point whether either of these two moved up to the end of the, to the point of the wall? Sitzman: No. They may have. I don't know. Thompson: Of course, you were looking at the parade at that point, and you wouldn't have seen what they did. Sitzman: Yeah. I always have the feeling that they were still sitting on the bench, because when I looked over there, they were getting up from the bench. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/sitzman Though I realize some information from Marilyn did change. this is what she had to say about the young couple, they did remain sitting, so this then brings up the thought, that the young man could not have been sitting on the steps before the motorcade turned down into Elm, and also been on the bench all the time during.....?? Below you will see the wall in shade in the Jean Hill, though taken many years latter... I have also wondered If there were coke bottles thrown down, that broke,crashed according to Sitzman, why were they never seen within the Darnell frames........?? The last photo added , Darnell shows where the bench was......and one taken some years later showing the view of Zapruder & Sitzman from the pedestal towards the bench area.....for now.. FWIW..... Thanks.......B.... Edited October 19, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 Robin :A few thoughts...... Why would the woman's sweater appear to be very dark in the Darnell frame, yet very light in the Murray in front of the TSBD.....The man you are comparing appears to be wearing a light sweater on the steps, and still appears light in the Darnell frame......... Also it would appear that the wall area was in bright sunlight, which would mean that the front of the bench wall area..where the BDMN was caught on camera was also..The shade from the tree appears not to have reached that far as yet, also seen within some of the other photos taken, Moorman,Willis, Bond and such.... Emmett Hudson stated..... Page 559 Mr. LIEBELER. So, you were standing about where I placed the "X" on photograph No. 18 of Commission Exhibit No. 875. Tell me what you saw--tell me what happened to the best of your recollection. 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 down 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 560 Mr. LIEBELER. Did you watch the President after he got hit in the head like that? Mr. HUDSON. Well, as soon as everybody realized what had happened, you know, everybody went to going up the hill so we did too. Mr. LIEBELER. So, you only saw the President hit once; is that right, sir? Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir; I just saw him hit once. Mr. LIEBELER. That was in the head? Mr. HUDSON. Yes, sir. Page 562 Mr. LIEBELER. Do you see this little pedestal back up here? Mr. HUDSON. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Just above the "X" where you were standing? Mr. HUDSON. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see anybody standing up there that you can remember, during the time the President went by? Mr. HUDSON. Oh, there was a bunch of people in there, you know, a whole bunch of them--a lot of people in there a lot of people in here. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see anybody standing up there taking motion pictures with a movie camera? Mr. HUDSON. Oh, yes; I seen people up there trying to get--taking pictures. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see a man with a moving picture camera? Mr. HUDSON. Not in particular, I didn't. It was such an exciting time--- now---I did notice a man back over here on this triangle. Mr. LIEBELER. Standing across Elm Street? Page 563 Mr. HUDSON. No, sir; I can't, unless it is one of these two men right here I can't tell--if I had that picture that was taken in the Times Herald .paper--I can show you myself in it. Mr. LIEBELER. Which one is that? Mr. HUDSON. Well, it was in the Times Herald paper the next morning after, I believe, after the assassination, maybe the evening after the assassination. Mr. LIEBELER. Look at this picture. Mr. HUDSON. [Examining picture referred to.] I don't know--if that's one of them men and myself or not up there. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/hudson.htm Marilyn Sitzman ......To Josiah Thompson....... November 29, 1966. Sitzman: Some ran ... I mean ... I finally got back up to the alcove. There was bunches of people just swarming back there, and I think almost everybody on that hill ran back up that way. And another thing that I remember this day: there was a colored couple. I figure they were between 18 and 21, a boy and a girl, sitting on a bench, just almost, oh, parallel with me, on my right side, close to the fence. Thompson: In other words, between you and the fence, there's a tree right next to the ... Sitzman: There's a tree, and there's another part of the marble or concrete, whatever they call it, slab, fence, whatever they call it, between that and the wooden fence. Thompson: Which direction was the bench facing when you ... Sitzman: It was facing towards the street. Thompson: Towards the street. Parallel? Downstreet? Facing forward? Sitzman: And they were eating their lunch, 'cause they had little lunch sacks, and they were drinking coke. The main reason I remember 'em is, after the last shot I recall hearing and the car went down under the triple underpass there, I heard a crash of glass, and I looked over there, and the kids had thrown down their coke bottles, just threw them down and just started running towards the back and I ... Of course, I don't see anything unusual in that because everybody else was running that way, 'cause when I look over on my left side, the people on the hill were all running back the same way too. snip Thompson: Could I ask you something about your gaze and actions immediately after the head shot? On the trailer of Mr. Zapruder's film, we noticed that he turned to his right and photographed the general area of the stockade fence, the trees and the stockade fence and that particular area. Did you turn in that direction after the head shot too? Sitzman: In a way, I have a feeling this: He might have heard the kids throw down the coke bottles and heard that crash or else maybe it was just what he saw could have caused a reaction where he'd jump, but I don't think it was the sound of bullets, because I didn't jump. Thompson: No. Sitzman: Because the pop bottle crashing was much louder than the shots were. Thompson: No, this is a slightly different thing. I remarked earlier that in the Zapruder film, around frame 318, 319, we see a very sudden jiggle in the film as if the photographer was startled by a noise or by seeing something, and earlier you suggested ... well, what did you suggest? Sitzman: Well, seeing what we saw when the bullet hit Kennedy's head and it opening up like this, you don't stand there very calmly and do nothing. I'm sure ... it ... to me, it would be a normal reaction to kind of jump or something. Thompson: In other words, one would be startled by what one saw there rather than necessarily by what one heard. Sitzman: Sure, sure. If you're the type of person that would react that way. Some would just immediately freeze. Some people would ... Some women would've probably passed out, some ... rather bloody .... Thompson: Darn right. I know. I've seen the films too. Now, to get to this area between the stockade fence and the cement abutment, or small mall: Did you turn after the shot to look in this general area? Sitzman: Yes. Thompson: And did you see anyone in this area? Sitzman: No, just the two colored people running back. Thompson: I see. They were already ... they'd gotten up from the bench and were now running around into the gap made between the stockade fence and the pergola. Sitzman: Either in the gap there or back in the alcove. I don't recall which way they went. I saw ... I heard the bottles crash, and of course I looked that way, to my right, right away, and they were getting up and running towards the back. And I turned back to see if there was anything in the front street, because then they didn't affect me one way or another. Thompson: To see if anything else was going on. Had you seen them sitting on the bench before you stood next to them? Sitzman: Oh year, yes. Everybody is ... oh, ten or fifteen minutes before, everybody was milling around down there, trying to find a place to stand and everything, and I know when we went over to get up on the marble thing, they were already sitting there. Thompson: Well, did you notice at any point whether either of these two moved up to the end of the, to the point of the wall? Sitzman: No. They may have. I don't know. Thompson: Of course, you were looking at the parade at that point, and you wouldn't have seen what they did. Sitzman: Yeah. I always have the feeling that they were still sitting on the bench, because when I looked over there, they were getting up from the bench. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/sitzman Though I realize some information from Marilyn did change. this is what she had to say about the young couple, they did remain sitting, so this then brings up the thought, that the young man could not have been sitting on the steps before the motorcade turned down into Elm, and also been on the bench all the time during.....?? Below you will see the wall in shade in the Jean Hill, though taken many years latter... I have also wondered If there were coke bottles thrown down, that broke,crashed according to Sitzman, why were they never seen within the Darnell frames........?? FWIW..... Thanks.......B.... Hey Bernice - I had some similar thoughts. I think Robin is on the right track. The woman in the Darnell seems without a doubt the same as the one seen in the Murray - the only notable exception is the lighter colored sweater. There could be a simple explanation - she had the sweater off at 12:30, and redonned it when they left the area of the bench. On the sweater on the man - it appears to be differently shaded or colored depending upon what you are looking at - much like Hudson's shirt - esp when compared to the Towner. On Sitzman - doesn't seem so open and shut. Especially when one is dealing with a child. The man could have come running up the stairs, grabbed the child while she gathered up her things, and then they could have moved off. If she is BDM - and I still think it has a lot of merit - esp given the dark color of the shirt she appears to have been wearing sans the light sweater we see her in later - she would in all likelihood NOT been seated on the bench at the time of the arrival of the motorcade? The bench would be convenient to take care of the child - until the big event. I like it. I tried my best to enhance the highest quality Willis I have to see if there was anything better I could so - it's simply not happening. And mine is pretty good. For fun, a look at the Moorman, with the man on the stairs to provide some sort of scale. - lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 (edited) ""Hey Bernice - I had some similar thoughts. I think Robin is on the right track. The woman in the Darnell seems without a doubt the same as the one seen in the Murray - the only notable exception is the lighter colored sweater. There could be a simple explanation - she had the sweater off at 12:30, and redonned it when they left the area of the bench. On the sweater on the man - it appears to be differently shaded or colored depending upon what you are looking at - much like Hudson's shirt - esp when compared to the Towner. On Sitzman - doesn't seem so open and shut. Especially when one is dealing with a child. The man could have come running up the stairs, grabbed the child while she gathered up her things, and then they could have moved off. If she is BDM - and I still think it has a lot of merit - esp given the dark color of the shirt she appears to have been wearing sans the light sweater we see her in later - she would in all likelihood NOT been seated on the bench at the time of the arrival of the motorcade? The bench would be convenient to take care of the child - until the big event. I like it. I tried my best to enhance the highest quality Willis I have to see if there was anything better I could so - it's simply not happening. And mine is pretty good. For fun, a look at the Moorman, with the man on the stairs to provide some sort of scale. - lee "" Hi Lee: I do not know if Robin is on the right track... That she had a sweater off in one photo and on in another is a thought, but nothing more...... Yes of course the mans sweater appears to be lighter on the steps and darker in the Darnell as I stated, because he is in the shade, .......and also keeping in mind, the sun lit wall area, as Jack mentioned the BDM is all dark, she appears in light clothing...which also does not comply...with showing up in a sun lit area..... .....I doubt any Mom would place a child some months old on a bench by itself, that distance away from the wall, it appears to have been a few feet, they are very active and quick at that age, and if they turn. which they also do in their sleep,.......then the child could have fallen, so I cannot see that happening...I know I would never have done so....and would have reamed a daughter or daughter in law for doing the same... ......Sitzman states they were there when they climbed up on the pedestal and there during and she saw them rise from the bench and take off, after the head shot, as the limo was going under the underpass....throwing down their bottles ....She mentions nothing of either one being alone dashing back to the bench, or picking up a child off a bench or him or her running to each other... She would have been looking about straight at them in that direction, and would have seen and so she says saw their actions......So I have many questions as yet......and no conclusions on my part......and Marilyn says she saw them there before the motorcade, so it would appear if so, she had lots of time to have a good look at them....Also Hudson stated he was in his late 20's thereabouts, and M.S says they were kids in around 18 ish Thanks for the Willis, I did check with the Moorman earlier, and they are about the scale, but not positive.....This needs much more reseach imo..as it does not comply with what we do know and have known within the past research by many of the photo diggers, as I call them and some experts as well..........so I am not about to throw that out until checked into much further..as that is what would have to happen.. It also appears to me, just my own impression, that the young man on the steps in these scans of him, what have been posted in this thread, appears to be possibly seen as a darker completion, than could be shown in earlier versions...of the same photos....?? .....But that needs also to be delved into and looked at....Also I believe someone, Bill mentioned that the photos had not been searched as yet for the possibility that she was elsewhere along the parade route, so I do think there is much further work to be done within before any conclusion can be assertained.... Thanks for the come back.... Take care B..... Edited October 19, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted October 19, 2008 Author Share Posted October 19, 2008 Thanks Bernice. I welcome the information you provided, it's helps keep me honest. Keep in mind, that this is only a "THEORY" at this stage. NOTHING IS SET IN STONE. I am not sugesting for one moment that this is the last word in the BDM saga. I think it's healthy to put forward "NEW" theories every now and then, helps shake up the " OLD TIMERS " from there hybernation. LOL Thanks for the comments Lee. I'll leave you with this image shoing the " Running Man " in Nix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 keeping in mind, the sun lit wall area, as Jack mentioned the BDM is all dark, she appears in light clothing...which also does not comply...with showing up in a sun lit area..... I'm not qualified to discuss the sunlight conditions in that area at the time. However, I believe that Bill Miller has argued (in his theory that BDM is Arnold) that BDM is in the shadow of a tree. So maybe Miller could recap for us why he believes that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted October 19, 2008 Author Share Posted October 19, 2008 keeping in mind, the sun lit wall area, as Jack mentioned the BDM is all dark, she appears in light clothing...which also does not comply...with showing up in a sun lit area..... I'm not qualified to discuss the sunlight conditions in that area at the time. However, I believe that Bill Miller has argued (in his theory that BDM is Arnold) that BDM is in the shadow of a tree. So maybe Miller could recap for us why he believes that. Groden "Moorman" Zoomed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted October 19, 2008 Author Share Posted October 19, 2008 Blackdog image. I'll leave it up to the viewer to make up there own mind, what it is they see in the image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 (edited) Thanks Bernice.I welcome the information you provided, it's helps keep me honest. Keep in mind, that this is only a "THEORY" at this stage. NOTHING IS SET IN STONE. I am not sugesting for one moment that this is the last word in the BDM saga. I think it's healthy to put forward "NEW" theories every now and then, helps shake up the " OLD TIMERS " from there hybernation. LOL Hi Robin : I fully understand it is not a given at the present time, and all must be considered.I believe it is best IMO..that we combine the two....old and anything new is as always, interesting... New eyes and info is always, and has been appreciated..and thank heavens there is new input and a younger generation that have become interested........I have no problems ever with such... And if after further deeply researched,within the information that is accessible and past studies reviewed, with the whomevers input, a positive comes out from within.....that is great........imo......and Working together is so welcomed....and this is what I am seeing...kudos..to all.... It is as you say always healthy....Well....it shakes all up, new, mid and older...anything in this regard always appears to be so interesting, we all, I do believe thirst in some way for any possibilty of what may be seen as a break through within the realm..... "It has always taken a village."....and will continue to do so... Ron : Re Bill Miller's input, I cannnot recall, hopefully he shall....contribute..... If you look at the tree in the shade, that specific area, the BDM appears even darker than the shade ?? Have a look and see what you think.... Now Lee for you and all...... Something new I have noticed, and have cropped and enlarged the lady, within the Darnell frame, somewhat......... Now, please all have a look, if you will........As to me after trying to make some sense of this....... It appears at this time to me , that her foot, appears to be possibly on backwards to the rest of her body,...???? Also if that is her face on the left, which is hard to make out, then her foot is on the back of her body ????? If not, and her right side is her front, her head position seems impossible, or could be to her body stance.......... Jack, Robin, all please have a look, and post your thoughts.......... Thanks much..... B.... Edited October 19, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 (edited) Bernice...she is facing west, and the baby is on her right hip. The foot is pointing the correct direction. But thanks for pointing out the seeming oddity. I am more concerned that the man has NO FEET. Jack Edited October 19, 2008 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 Bernice...she is facing west, and the baby is on her right hip. The foot ispointing the correct direction. But thanks for pointing out the seeming oddity. Jack I think there is also another possibility - if she is in the process of trying to sooth the child, she could have been captured by Darnell in the process of rotating on her hips - moving the baby from side-to-side. That would create the awkward looking angle to the feet. I am still liking it. If you compare the man on the stairs in different media - his sweater is lighter [Nix] and darker [Muchmore]. The stain seen in the Darnell could have been the result of the broken bottle - that one is still a bit odd. - lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted October 19, 2008 Author Share Posted October 19, 2008 Hi Bernice. Yes i understand what you are saying. The foot you see is her right foot, the left one is hidden behind the ladies coat. She is standing side on to the black man and facing the wooden fence, with the child resting on her right hip. If you take the woman from the murray crop and turn her to the right, so that she is facing the camera and we see her front instead of her back. That is how i see the woman in Darnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 (edited) Bernice...she is facing west, and the baby is on her right hip. The foot ispointing the correct direction. But thanks for pointing out the seeming oddity. I am more concerned that the man has NO FEET. Jack Thanks Jack, should we not be able to see a part of her face, we have been trying it nothing new, and no matter how we turn we are able too see an outline of such...?? Does it appear to you, that the outline of the top front of her hair appears fair ?? Or it could be the suns reflection...... I had not even looked at the man up till now, you are correct where are his feet..?? Also here is another Darnell frame, showing he has no feet ?? But more of the bench.. All...... Now this woman is seen in Darnell, after the assn, a baby was never mentioned ever, in any of the past research, now a question, who is to say this is the woman with a baby who was on the bench ??? Even though a baby has never been mentioned till now....?? If there ever was one...?? Also keeping mind the age differences mentioned by Hudson & Sitzman....of the people involved.. Simply because she is now seen within the Darnell taken after the assn....and possibly in front of the TSBD...?...whether one agrees it or not, there are many questions yet to be clarified....and no documentation..... That is one problem, another is that Marilyn Sitzman, was interviewed after the BDMN was found. as well as the Nix wall shooter......I have read.. She never gave a statement, she did say that no one asked or was interested, in what a young woman had to say, which does not comply as many other young woman did....Marilyn said many things that did contradict her own statements down through her years...so I do regard her information with a question mark..?.... ..All of a sudden after these two characters were discovered, she is interviewed by Tink and she recalls a couple on the bench, ok giving her the benefit of the doubt she may have....or ???? In her remarks I believe she says they each had small bags with their lunch within, if you look at the photo of the Dets on the bench, examining such, it appears to be one bag and I do believe it mentions the trade name on the small bag... So, coming around again, how do we know, that a couple who was not reported to be there till some years later, who finally recalled this couple, and a baby that was never mentioned as well as a difference in ages........and how do we know who left the lunch bag, this photo was taken some time after, could not someone who had run up to the knoll after have left such......?? Also the bag seen in the Darnell on the bench is a very tall large bag, I believe Marilyn said they were small...?? I am looking for the DPD report on the bag..was this report and photo released before, or after the M.S interview in which she mentioned a couple.....?? Also if you read Hudson's information he states that this man who sat down on his left before the motorcade tuned the corner and came down, told him to the effect he could not find a parking spot, and so he had parked over there in one of the parking areas, and that he then walked up.....Up where, ?? Did he park in behind the TSBD parking lot, or elsewhere......over there....and did he walk down to the corner the and up Elm to where Hudson sat......?? That also is a possible.... There are many shade differences within the different types of films used, as well as the colour, that is a given.. Seen below is the no foot man, he has a hard time with such it would appear.. and as seen in a couple of frames from Muchmore.....his pants appear to be a tighter fit as well, as that he does at times have feet.. B... Edited October 20, 2008 by Bernice Moore 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