Jump to content
The Education Forum

Louis Steven Witt : Umbrella Man


Recommended Posts

Brian - no offense. If you look on the internet, though, you'll find that there already has been a limo-gun theory floated, related to the two projections on the trunk of the limo, behind the death seat. (Forgive me, but I've forgotten what the function of those two projections was.)

I, myself, have had a hard time tracing the head shot path back to a forward location, and once stayed up until 3 a.m. trying to rationalize it in these pages, a fool's errand.

+++

Umbrella Man - he'd make a great Novel, though...

Hi David, absolutely none taken, and thanks. I have a theory about the back or shoulder wound but I will leave it till another day!

See you

Brian

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The UM and the DCM gave the "fire away" signal - nothing more, nothing less.

How many other umbrellas are observable in Dallas from earlier parts of the parade route?

Was waving an umbrella a popular form of deriding JFK?

To shoot a poison dart at JFK, one would have to aim it and pull off a great shot to hit him in the throat area.

The UM doesn't look like he's aiming the umbrella - he is just pumping it.

I agree that Witt isn't the UM, but instead someone the CIA coached into perjuring himself for the benefit of the HSCA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Brian O Connor' date='Oct 13 2009, 05:30 PM' post='173202'

Dealy Plaza is such a big place, and all things considered, I wonder why the UM would choose that particlar place to stand rather than say, accross the road , well out of harms way, and in clear view of the Book depository, the grassy knoll, the Daltex building, somone down in the drains, the Stemmons freeway bridge etc.

Cause` the place he choose looks to me to be a pretty awful choice, if he were trying to signal someone say on on the knoll, or someone hunkered in the drains for example, obscured as he was, by a great big TRAFFIC SIGN! And, why do they erect traffic signs and where do they get placed? They give directions, and they are set up where they in clear view of the road and easily seen by the drivers passing by. So, pumping his umbrella in the air in front of a great big road sign, who would be most likely to see it first?

[/quote/b]

hi brian ...''who would be most likely to see it first?'' I imagine only those perhaps who were watching for the signal.if as some say lho could see from the tsbd 6th floor window past signs people and all i imagine those who were ready and waiting could also...you bring up another thought why was the sign taken down after, some did say a shot hit it..and it showed a bullet hole...B

[/quote/b]

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that Witt isn't the UM, but instead someone the CIA coached into perjuring himself for the benefit of the HSCA.

I half agree with you Christopher... I don't believe Witt was the Umbrella man. I'll fully agree with you if you can explain why the CIA coached him into saying completely the wrong story.

Umbrella man is clearly standing still with the Umbrella open Yet he told the HSCA "I think I got up and started fiddling with that umbrella trying to get it open, and at the same time I was walking forward, walking toward the street".

He has a clear view of the President. yet he told the HSCA he didn't see "because of this thing (the umbrella) in front of me....My view of the car during that length of time was blocked by the umbrella's being open".

Why would the CIA coach someone to tell completely the wrong story ?

Edited by Mark Haley
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no real problem with accepting Witt may not be the original UM. I just see no reason to believe there was anything sinister in that. Some people will confess to anything...even murder, to get publicity. I also dont accept there was anything sinister in the original UM actions on the day of the assassination for the same reasons I posted earlier i.e. A member of an assassins team would never act so conspicuously, why would he have to? A simple raising of the arm, waving a hat or lifting a placard welcoming the president would have done the job just as well and gone completely unnoticed. Can anyone explain that away? Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.

Edited by Denis Pointing
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have no problem accepting Witt as UM if it was not for the fact that he lied about what he was doing when the limo came by. If he simply didn't know what he was talking about, then he must not have been there, so he was lying about being there. This raises the question of who would put Witt up to going to the HSCA and why. If there was nothing sinister about UM, whoever he was, why did someone go to the trouble of getting him falsely identified as innocent Mr. Witt? Unless that someone was Mr. Witt himself, just trying to get fifteen minutes of fame by perjuring himself before Congress. But if I were Mr. Witt and I was going to do that, I would make sure I knew something about UM's actions before I went testifying about being him. Whoever sent Mr. Witt didn't bother to give him any coaching.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have no problem accepting Witt as UM if it was not for the fact that he lied about what he was doing when the limo came by. If he simply didn't know what he was talking about, then he must not have been there, so he was lying about being there. This raises the question of who would put Witt up to going to the HSCA and why. If there was nothing sinister about UM, whoever he was, why did someone go to the trouble of getting him falsely identified as innocent Mr. Witt? Unless that someone was Mr. Witt himself, just trying to get fifteen minutes of fame by perjuring himself before Congress. But if I were Mr. Witt and I was going to do that, I would make sure I knew something about UM's actions before I went testifying about being him. Whoever sent Mr. Witt didn't bother to give him any coaching.

thanks ron.......IF UM WAS NOT A PART OF SOMETHING THAT DAY..THOUGH I BELIEVE WITT STATED DCM WAS A STRANGER..WHOMEVER ......HE SITS BESIDE SOMEONE WHO HAD A RADIO ON HIM, WALKIE OR WHATEVER TYPE, AND DID SPEAK INTO SUCH SHOWN IN A PHOTO AFTER..THE ASSASSINATION AND THEN DCM WALKS AWAY WITH THE AERIAL SHOWING STICKING UP ON THE BACK OF HIS JACKET...SO I AM THINKING HE IN SOME WAY MUST HAVE KNOWN DCM OR OF HIM..AS A CONTACTAND WAS THERE AS A PART......B...

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have no problem accepting Witt as UM if it was not for the fact that he lied about what he was doing when the limo came by. If he simply didn't know what he was talking about, then he must not have been there, so he was lying about being there. This raises the question of who would put Witt up to going to the HSCA and why. If there was nothing sinister about UM, whoever he was, why did someone go to the trouble of getting him falsely identified as innocent Mr. Witt? Unless that someone was Mr. Witt himself, just trying to get fifteen minutes of fame by perjuring himself before Congress. But if I were Mr. Witt and I was going to do that, I would make sure I knew something about UM's actions before I went testifying about being him. Whoever sent Mr. Witt didn't bother to give him any coaching.

thanks ron.......IF UM WAS NOT A PART OF SOMETHIMG THAT DAY..THOUGH I BELIEVE WITT STATED DCM WAS A STRANGER..WHOMEVER HE SITS BESIDE SOMEONE WHO HAD A RADIO ON HIM, WALKIE OR WHATEVER TYPE, AND DID SPEAK INTO SUCH SHOWN IN A PHOTO AFTER..THE ASSASSINATION AND THEN DCM WALKS AWAY WITH THE AERIAL IS SHOWING STICKING UP ON THE BACK OF HIS JACKET...SO I AM THINKING HE IN SOME WAY MUST HAVE KNOWN DCM OR OF HIM..AS A CONTACTAND WAS THERE AS A PART......B...

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites
Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.

Discussing somebody holding an umbrella above his head, standing a few feet away from the President Of The USA as he gets shot is hardly meaningless, especially when the HSCA apparently ignores obviously flawed evidence given by a man purporting to be him. Why did they disregard it?

While I personally don't believe Witt was part of a conspiracy, you're referring to Umbrella Man. In my opinion 2 entirely different men. It's hard to have any "facts or reason" when the original character was allowed to simply walk away un-challenged never to be heard of again.

With Witt's testimony easily blown out of the water, surely believing Umberella Man might have been part of a conspiracy is as valid as believing he isn't. There's no 'facts or reason' either way...just a man standing within a few feet of a doomed President jigging an umbrella about above his head.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no real problem with accepting Witt may not be the original UM. I just see no reason to believe there was anything sinister in that. Some people will confess to anything...even murder, to get publicity. I also dont accept there was anything sinister in the original UM actions on the day of the assassination for the same reasons I posted earlier i.e. A member of an assassins team would never act so conspicuously, why would he have to? A simple raising of the arm, waving a hat or lifting a placard welcoming the president would have done the job just as well and gone completely unnoticed. Can anyone explain that away? Because all I'm reading so far are post's from members saying they believe UM was part of the conspiracy. That's all very interesting and they are certainly entitled but without facts or reason to back it up its meaningless.

I stand by the fact stated in post #7, paragraph 2. Having grown up in the 1960s, I could elaborate - Lenny Bruce would have elaborated had he seen the tableau of these odd companions. I'm surprised that the image, if innocent, wasn't exploited in period magazines.

Unless photos were altered, and I don't believe these were, the radio and antenna on the "Latin" or "Cuban" look very compelling. Might there be facts proving this guy was a Kennedy protector, not a JFK-killer?

Scenario: The "Cuban" is there to give a "simple raising of the arm," telling Cuban hit team members or radio coordinators that a fatal wound is not delivered by that logistical point ahead of the front team. Umbrella man is there as a partner, to allow the non-Cuban hitters to discern the "Cuban" from any stray Mexican male in the Texas street - "He's the guy in white, next to the guy holding the black umbrella!"

The umbrella is a signature directed toward Kennedy and his crew, and supporters of the assassination: This coup is authored by the military and its partners in intel, who will not countenance appeasement in Cuba or SE Asia. SE Asia is especially connected to the umbrella by WW II. These guys see SE Asia as a policy hangover from the Japanese surrender and the subsequent lamented loss of China.

One fact is that we are responding to incongruities that we don't fully understand: A dark man in a light coat. A light man in a dark coat. Together.

So this is a theory of congruity based on a situational fact of xenophobia (post #7, paragraph 2) that, in its negative form, explains presence and propinquity in the curbside photos.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to post
Share on other sites
Here you go, Bernice.

The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???

chris

Thanks Chris.

Very nice little GIF

Numerous times i have heard different people refer to the umbrella as twirling.

To my eyes the umbrella doesn't so much twirl but appears to be tilted back up over Um's head so as to give him an unobstructed view of the Limo.

After looking at this for years i have come to the conclusion that there is nothing sinister in there actions.

Um wasn't the only one carrying an umbrella that day, in Lee Forman's Rickerby/Cancellare scan we see the black lady on the knoll steps also carrying an umbrella.

Umbrella_Man_Dark_Complected_Man__(DCM).jpg

Also i beleive the shape in DCM'S jacket to be a folded up newspaper which he is later seen to have in his back pants pocket.

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to post
Share on other sites
Here you go, Bernice.

The umbrella is in what position, when JFK first reaches for his throat???

chris

MANY THANKS CHRIS...I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOURS THAT I TRIED TO UPLOAD WOULD NOT BUT THEN THAT IS ABOUT ALL I CAN DO WITH THEM BUT I DO ENJOY COLLECTING SUCH....I WOULD VENTURE TO THINK IT THE UMBRELLA APPEARS TO BE ON IT'S WAY AND STRAIGHTENING BACK UP......FROM A QUICK LOOK.......THANKS AGAIN YOU DO MAKE THEM THE BEST ALWAYS...IMO...TAKE CARE B...

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...