You Couldn't Make This Up

[Guest Duncan MacRae]

In the third floor window of the Dal-Tex building, the assassin ( Jim Braden ) cuts the Venetian blinds with scissors, to make space for a high powered rifle to poke through.

He then smashes a hole in the window with his rifle butt, so that the high powered rifle can poke through both the scissors altered blinds and the smashed out hole in the window.

The outwardly blown smashed jagged glass, caused by the rifle butt, flies outwards and downwards, missing all of the people standing below.

No one who is standing below hears or sees anything, no bystanders below screaming and shouting in undescribable agony, while rolling around with the sharp pieces of broken glass sticking out of their heads and other body parts, and dripping all over with the fresh running blood from their fresh open flesh cut wounds.

The assassin waits for the limo to start making the turn on to Elm, then when the limo is in site, he pokes the high powered rifle through the scissors cut Venetian blinds and rifle butt blown out window.

No one below looks up to see where the broken glass came from, so they don't see the assassin, they don't care, and no one ever reports this, what is to them, an insignificant event.

The coast is clear, it's hit time.

The assassin takes aim, and fires his shot which misses, just, but the bullet impact on the ground blows up debris on to JFK'S head and hair.

JFK balls his hand in to a fist in reaction to this shot, and then proceeds to check the dusty debris on his head and hair, with his balled fist.

JFK isn't overly perturbed by the rifle sound, the striking of the bullet on the ground, and the debris spray dirtying his head and hair, why should he be?

JFK simply wipes the inconvenient dusty debris from his head and hair and continues on his journey, smiling and waving at the crowd, pretending for appearances sake that nothing happened, and knowing with absolute confidence and certaintly, that Jackie would not be hit if other shots were fired.

Another shot fires and misses.

Another shot fires and hits Kennedy in the throat.

Another shot fires and strikes Connally

Another shot fires and misses at Zapruder frame 285

Another shot fires at Zapruder frames 312/313 hitting JFK's head

Another shot fires miliseconds after Zapruder frame 313 hitting JFK's head.

Within a minute, and after a total of 7 shots, because of his vanity, and because he ignored the warning from the Venetian blind cutting window smashing assassins dust debris blasting shot, JFK is toast.

You couldn't make this up, but Bob Harris did.

Edited November 1, 2010 by Duncan MacRae

[William Kelly]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

In the third floor window of the Dal-Tex building, the assassin ( Jim Braden ) cuts the Venetian blinds with scissors, to make space for a high powered rifle to poke through.

He then smashes a hole in the window with his rifle butt, so that the high powered rifle can poke through both the scissors altered blinds and the smashed out hole in the window.

The outwardly blown smashed jagged glass, caused by the rifle butt, flies outwards and downwards, missing all of the people standing below.

No one who is standing below hears or sees amything, no bystanders below screaming and shouting in undescribable agony, while rolling around with the sharp pieces of broken glass sticking out of their heads and other body parts, and dripping all over with the fresh running blood from their fresh open flesh cut wounds.

The assassin waits for the limo to start making the turn on to Elm, then when the limo is in site, he pokes the high powered rifle through the scissors cut Venetian blinds and rifle butt blown out window.

No one below looks up to see where the broken glass came from, so they don't see the assassin, they don't care, and no one ever reports this, what is to them, an insignificant event.

The coast is clear, it's hit time.

The assassin takes aim, and fires his shot which misses, just, but the bullet impact on the ground blows up debris on to JFK'S head and hair.

JFK balls his hand in to a fist in reaction to this shot, and then proceeds to check the dusty debris on his head and hair, with his balled fist.

JFK isn't overly perturbed by the rifle sound, the striking of the bullet on the ground, and the debris spray dirtying his head and hair, why should he be?

JFK simply wipes the inconvenient dusty debris from his head and hair and continues on his journey, smiling and waving at the crowd, pretending for appearances sake that nothing happened, and knowing with absolute confidence and certaintly, that Jackie would not be hit if other shots were fired.

Another shot fires and misses.

Another shot fires and hits Kennedy in the throat.

Another shot fires and strikes Connally

Another shot fires and misses at Zapruder frame 285

Another shot fires at Zapruder frames 312/313 hitting JFK's head

Another shot fires miliseconds after Zapruder frame 313 hitting JFK's head.

Within a minute, and after a total of 7 shots, because of his vanity, and because he ignored the warning from the Venetian blind cutting window smashing assassins dust debris blasting shot, JFK is toast.

You couldn't make this up, but Bob Harris did.

Edited November 1, 2010 by William Kelly

[Dean Hagerman]

No one who is standing below hears or sees amything, no bystanders below screaming and shouting in undescribable agony, while rolling around with the sharp pieces of broken glass sticking out of their heads and other body parts, and dripping all over with the fresh running blood from their fresh open flesh cut wounds

[Robert Harris]

Rather than Duncan's ridiculous misrepresentation of my analysis, interested readers should look at what I actually said and the evidence I presented. As you watch this, keep several facts in mind:

1. JFK's reactions during the Towner film in which he starts to wave and then balls his hand into a fist and falls to his left, are totally unique. They are dramatically different from anything he did in Dallas that day and different from anything he is known to have done prior to that throughout his entire life.

2. The darkened area in that third floor window contains clear evidence that the cords which held the blinds together had been cut, along with a section of the slats. Even my most fanatical critics were unable to present a plausible alternative explanation for what we see in that window.

3. The third floor of the Daltex was where the only professional criminal to be apprehended in Dealey Plaza that day was located. Arguments that he was not skilled with firearms because he wasn't arrested for shooting anyone are silly. For all we know, he could have shot a hundred people but didn't get caught. And we don't know who was up there with him. What we do know, is that he was a lifelong professional criminal with ties to David Ferrie and Carlos Marcello, and that the night before the assassination he was with Jack Ruby at the Cabana hotel a short distance from the murder scene.

For anyone who is objective enough to consider the actual facts associated with this issue, rather than auto-dismissing it with no justification, the following presentations explain them in detail.

[Robert Harris]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

Bill, the fact that a professional criminal was never caught shooting anyone does not prove that he didn't or couldn't. And although Braden was the one who got caught, we don't know who else might have been there with him.

And your argument that he was not a good marksman tells me that you are clueless about what I said about those early shots, each of which either missed the President entirely or were far off course, and for a very good reason.

If you wish to publicly dismiss my theory, I suggest that you at least make an effort to understand it and then provide legitimate justification for your rebuttal - something no-one else has been able to do, at least up to this point.

Frankly, I would really appreciate a serious effort by a knowledgeable skeptic to refute my analysis.

[William Kelly]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

Bill, the fact that a professional criminal was never caught shooting anyone does not prove that he didn't or couldn't. And although Braden was the one who got caught, we don't know who else might have been there with him.

And your argument that he was not a good marksman tells me that you are clueless about what I said about those early shots, each of which either missed the President entirely or were far off course, and for a very good reason.

If you wish to publicly dismiss my theory, I suggest that you at least make an effort to understand it and then provide legitimate justification for your rebuttal - something no-one else has been able to do, at least up to this point.

Frankly, I would really appreciate a serious effort by a knowledgeable skeptic to refute my analysis.

Robert,

I've studied Jim Braden more than any other person on the planet, and would still like to talk with him if he can be located alive.

He never hit anybody, shot anybody, or was involved in any violent crimes whatsoever. I have a copy of his rap sheet.

Con-men are proud of the fact that they don't resort to violence or even steal, but convince their marks to give them the money because of their own greed.

Braden's crime career consisted of bilking wealthy widows, one of whom was an early founder of Magnolia Oil company, a company that comes into play when DeMohrenschildt set up a party of Magnolia employees so Oswald could be introduced to the Paines.

The fact that he wasn't caught in any violent crimes in a sixty year career was because he wasn't involved in any.

He was a mobster however, and he was connected to a lot of other shaddy people, incuding oil executives, Hunt, and the New Orleans crew that Ferrie was connected with, and he was most certainly in the Dal -Tex building and was taken into custody by Sheffif deputy Lummie Lewis because he was a suspicious person, and there's something suspicious going on here, but I can assure you that Braden was not a shooter.

Whoever shot JFK was a professional, and connected to whoever set up the ambush, and not just a bunch of Texas Yahoos.

And I'm sorry about not paying attention to your theory, but the only theory that I can debunk totally is the offical theory that Oswald killed the President alone becasue he was a deranged lone nut. That I know is wrong.

Rather than propose or debunk all of the theories that can be imagined, I have taken a different approach, and that is to determine what evidence we still have, what new evidence can be developed that can be introduced into a court of law, and identifying what witnesses are still living who have yet to be properly deposed under oath, and try to get that done.

From that, the truth will emerge without having to propose or debunk any theories.

Bill Kelly

[Dean Hagerman]

my most fanatical critics

You dont have any "fanatical critics" Robert

Just researchers who dont believe in some of your garbage theories

Some of the stuff that you have came up with over the years I have agreed with or considered that it could be possible

But this new stuff is just killing me Robert

[Robert Harris]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

Bill, the fact that a professional criminal was never caught shooting anyone does not prove that he didn't or couldn't. And although Braden was the one who got caught, we don't know who else might have been there with him.

And your argument that he was not a good marksman tells me that you are clueless about what I said about those early shots, each of which either missed the President entirely or were far off course, and for a very good reason.

If you wish to publicly dismiss my theory, I suggest that you at least make an effort to understand it and then provide legitimate justification for your rebuttal - something no-one else has been able to do, at least up to this point.

Frankly, I would really appreciate a serious effort by a knowledgeable skeptic to refute my analysis.

Robert,

I've studied Jim Braden more than any other person on the planet, and would still like to talk with him if he can be located alive.

He never hit anybody, shot anybody, or was involved in any violent crimes whatsoever. I have a copy of his rap sheet.

Con-men are proud of the fact that they don't resort to violence or even steal, but convince their marks to give them the money because of their own greed.

Braden's crime career consisted of bilking wealthy widows, one of whom was an early founder of Magnolia Oil company, a company that comes into play when DeMohrenschildt set up a party of Magnolia employees so Oswald could be introduced to the Paines.

The fact that he wasn't caught in any violent crimes in a sixty year career was because he wasn't involved in any.

He was a mobster however, and he was connected to a lot of other shaddy people, incuding oil executives, Hunt, and the New Orleans crew that Ferrie was connected with, and he was most certainly in the Dal -Tex building and was taken into custody by Sheffif deputy Lummie Lewis because he was a suspicious person, and there's something suspicious going on here, but I can assure you that Braden was not a shooter.

Whoever shot JFK was a professional, and connected to whoever set up the ambush, and not just a bunch of Texas Yahoos.

And I'm sorry about not paying attention to your theory, but the only theory that I can debunk totally is the offical theory that Oswald killed the President alone becasue he was a deranged lone nut. That I know is wrong.

Rather than propose or debunk all of the theories that can be imagined, I have taken a different approach, and that is to determine what evidence we still have, what new evidence can be developed that can be introduced into a court of law, and identifying what witnesses are still living who have yet to be properly deposed under oath, and try to get that done.

From that, the truth will emerge without having to propose or debunk any theories.

Bill Kelly

Bill, did you even read my response??

Your totally unsupported assertion about Braden is outrageous. You have no idea whether he was involved in violent crimes or not. You only know that he wasn't caught at it. By your reasoning Al Capone was also totally nonviolent and never hurt anyone

And why do you ignore the possibility/likelihood that he was with others who DID have a violent track record?

This is a very poor argument which originated with lone nutters years ago in the CompuServe forum. And it is just as bogus now as it was then.

And no, you are certainly not obligated to read or view my analysis. But attacking analysis which you know nothing about is outrageously dishonest. I expect that from the Duncans and Von Peins of the world, but not from you.

[William Kelly]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

Bill, the fact that a professional criminal was never caught shooting anyone does not prove that he didn't or couldn't. And although Braden was the one who got caught, we don't know who else might have been there with him.

And your argument that he was not a good marksman tells me that you are clueless about what I said about those early shots, each of which either missed the President entirely or were far off course, and for a very good reason.

If you wish to publicly dismiss my theory, I suggest that you at least make an effort to understand it and then provide legitimate justification for your rebuttal - something no-one else has been able to do, at least up to this point.

Frankly, I would really appreciate a serious effort by a knowledgeable skeptic to refute my analysis.

Robert,

I've studied Jim Braden more than any other person on the planet, and would still like to talk with him if he can be located alive.

He never hit anybody, shot anybody, or was involved in any violent crimes whatsoever. I have a copy of his rap sheet.

Con-men are proud of the fact that they don't resort to violence or even steal, but convince their marks to give them the money because of their own greed.

Braden's crime career consisted of bilking wealthy widows, one of whom was an early founder of Magnolia Oil company, a company that comes into play when DeMohrenschildt set up a party of Magnolia employees so Oswald could be introduced to the Paines.

The fact that he wasn't caught in any violent crimes in a sixty year career was because he wasn't involved in any.

He was a mobster however, and he was connected to a lot of other shaddy people, incuding oil executives, Hunt, and the New Orleans crew that Ferrie was connected with, and he was most certainly in the Dal -Tex building and was taken into custody by Sheffif deputy Lummie Lewis because he was a suspicious person, and there's something suspicious going on here, but I can assure you that Braden was not a shooter.

Whoever shot JFK was a professional, and connected to whoever set up the ambush, and not just a bunch of Texas Yahoos.

And I'm sorry about not paying attention to your theory, but the only theory that I can debunk totally is the offical theory that Oswald killed the President alone becasue he was a deranged lone nut. That I know is wrong.

Rather than propose or debunk all of the theories that can be imagined, I have taken a different approach, and that is to determine what evidence we still have, what new evidence can be developed that can be introduced into a court of law, and identifying what witnesses are still living who have yet to be properly deposed under oath, and try to get that done.

From that, the truth will emerge without having to propose or debunk any theories.

Bill Kelly

Bill, did you even read my response??

Your totally unsupported assertion about Braden is outrageous. You have no idea whether he was involved in violent crimes or not. You only know that he wasn't caught at it. By your reasoning Al Capone was also totally nonviolent and never hurt anyone

And why do you ignore the possibility/likelihood that he was with others who DID have a violent track record?

This is a very poor argument which originated with lone nutters years ago in the CompuServe forum. And it is just as bogus now as it was then.

And no, you are certainly not obligated to read or view my analysis. But attacking analysis which you know nothing about is outrageously dishonest. I expect that from the Duncans and Von Peins of the world, but not from you.

I don't discount the idea of a shot being taken from the Dal-Tex building, but Braden didn't take it if there was one.

Have you read Peter Noyes' book Legacy of Doubt?

Have you read the two days of secret testimony he gave to the HSCA?

Mary Ferrell has it.

Have you read the postings I've made on Braden at my blog?

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12/jim-braden-1948-camden-nj-mug-shot.html

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12/bradens-camden-arrest-report.html

And I haven't attacked your analysis other than to say that Jim Braden didn't shoot anybody, and neither did Oswald.

And you certainly do keep Duncan and DVP busy, good on you. Keep it up.

BK

[John Dolva]

Wish James was still around. It's just a notion concerning DeM's wife and the Phoenix.

[Robert Harris]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

Bill, the fact that a professional criminal was never caught shooting anyone does not prove that he didn't or couldn't. And although Braden was the one who got caught, we don't know who else might have been there with him.

And your argument that he was not a good marksman tells me that you are clueless about what I said about those early shots, each of which either missed the President entirely or were far off course, and for a very good reason.

If you wish to publicly dismiss my theory, I suggest that you at least make an effort to understand it and then provide legitimate justification for your rebuttal - something no-one else has been able to do, at least up to this point.

Frankly, I would really appreciate a serious effort by a knowledgeable skeptic to refute my analysis.

Robert,

I've studied Jim Braden more than any other person on the planet, and would still like to talk with him if he can be located alive.

He never hit anybody, shot anybody, or was involved in any violent crimes whatsoever. I have a copy of his rap sheet.

Con-men are proud of the fact that they don't resort to violence or even steal, but convince their marks to give them the money because of their own greed.

Braden's crime career consisted of bilking wealthy widows, one of whom was an early founder of Magnolia Oil company, a company that comes into play when DeMohrenschildt set up a party of Magnolia employees so Oswald could be introduced to the Paines.

The fact that he wasn't caught in any violent crimes in a sixty year career was because he wasn't involved in any.

He was a mobster however, and he was connected to a lot of other shaddy people, incuding oil executives, Hunt, and the New Orleans crew that Ferrie was connected with, and he was most certainly in the Dal -Tex building and was taken into custody by Sheffif deputy Lummie Lewis because he was a suspicious person, and there's something suspicious going on here, but I can assure you that Braden was not a shooter.

Whoever shot JFK was a professional, and connected to whoever set up the ambush, and not just a bunch of Texas Yahoos.

And I'm sorry about not paying attention to your theory, but the only theory that I can debunk totally is the offical theory that Oswald killed the President alone becasue he was a deranged lone nut. That I know is wrong.

Rather than propose or debunk all of the theories that can be imagined, I have taken a different approach, and that is to determine what evidence we still have, what new evidence can be developed that can be introduced into a court of law, and identifying what witnesses are still living who have yet to be properly deposed under oath, and try to get that done.

From that, the truth will emerge without having to propose or debunk any theories.

Bill Kelly

Bill, did you even read my response??

Your totally unsupported assertion about Braden is outrageous. You have no idea whether he was involved in violent crimes or not. You only know that he wasn't caught at it. By your reasoning Al Capone was also totally nonviolent and never hurt anyone

And why do you ignore the possibility/likelihood that he was with others who DID have a violent track record?

This is a very poor argument which originated with lone nutters years ago in the CompuServe forum. And it is just as bogus now as it was then.

And no, you are certainly not obligated to read or view my analysis. But attacking analysis which you know nothing about is outrageously dishonest. I expect that from the Duncans and Von Peins of the world, but not from you.

I don't discount the idea of a shot being taken from the Dal-Tex building, but Braden didn't take it if there was one.

Have you read Peter Noyes' book Legacy of Doubt?

Have you read the two days of secret testimony he gave to the HSCA?

Mary Ferrell has it.

Have you read the postings I've made on Braden at my blog?

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12/jim-braden-1948-camden-nj-mug-shot.html

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12/bradens-camden-arrest-report.html

And I haven't attacked your analysis other than to say that Jim Braden didn't shoot anybody, and neither did Oswald.

And you certainly do keep Duncan and DVP busy, good on you. Keep it up.

BK

Bill, why do you continue to make the unsupported assertion that Braden didn't fire a weapon that day?? The fact that he wasn't caught in a violent crime does NOT prove that he never committed one. And it sure as hell doesn't prove that he wasn't with people that day who did.

And yes, I own and have read Noyes book and I have read at least one of your blogs on Braden. But I saw nothing that proves that he never committed a violent crime - only that he had not been caught or arrested for it.

As for a secret HSCA testimony by Noyes, no I have not seen that. Do you have a link to it?

[Robert Harris]

This illustration which Phil Dragoo posted at the JFK History forum provides a good explanation for what we are seeing in that window.

[William Kelly]

And you certainly do keep Duncan and DVP busy, good on you. Keep it up.

BK

Have you actually been following the threads, Bill? If you had, you would know that DVP has made no contributions towards debunking Bob's nonsense.

I'm also surprised that you commend someone who has just called you dishonest in his above post.

Robert, You can say anything you want about Jim Braden and I won't say a word. I can assure you however, that when the shooters are identified, they will be professional shooters, and not con artists like Braden.

And it's Jim Braden's two days of secret testimony that was taken behind closed doors and then sealed for fifty years by G. R. Blakey and was released by the JFK Act.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=402799

Check out what Braden had to say when he was grilled by the HSCA laywers and investigators.

There's certainly more to Braden than meets the eye, especially his activities in New Orleans in the summer of '63 when he operated out of the office of an oil geologist (Vernon Main, Jr.) on the same floor of the Perre Marquette office building, just down the hall from G. Ray Gill and David Ferrie.

And Duncan, DVP may have not entered into this argument but you guys seem to have a history of enjoying these little debates, and if you go to McAdams forum you'll find that Mr. Harris has kept all of you guys pretty busy.

What is he saying that disturbs you so much?

As for him calling me dishonest, well he doesn't know me and he can call me and Jim Braden anything he wants and it doesn't mean anything as far as I'm concerned.

Carry on gentlemen.

Bill Kelly

Edited November 1, 2010 by William Kelly

[Daniel Meyer]

So how many threads are you going to start to take up space for this BS?

Jim Braden never fired a gun in his life.

He was a con man and swindler, with no record of violence in his lenghtly rap sheet.

Whoever shot JFK in the back and the head, was, as Sam Giancana said, a good marksman,

something Lone Nutters won't even give Oswald credit for.

BK

Bill, the fact that a professional criminal was never caught shooting anyone does not prove that he didn't or couldn't. And although Braden was the one who got caught, we don't know who else might have been there with him.

[...]

Robert,

I've studied Jim Braden more than any other person on the planet, and would still like to talk with him if he can be located alive.

He never hit anybody, shot anybody, or was involved in any violent crimes whatsoever. I have a copy of his rap sheet.

Con-men are proud of the fact that they don't resort to violence or even steal, but convince their marks to give them the money because of their own greed.

[...]

Bill, did you even read my response??

Your totally unsupported assertion about Braden is outrageous. You have no idea whether he was involved in violent crimes or not. You only know that he wasn't caught at it. By your reasoning Al Capone was also totally nonviolent and never hurt anyone

And why do you ignore the possibility/likelihood that he was with others who DID have a violent track record?

This is a very poor argument which originated with lone nutters years ago in the CompuServe forum. And it is just as bogus now as it was then.

And no, you are certainly not obligated to read or view my analysis. But attacking analysis which you know nothing about is outrageously dishonest. I expect that from the Duncans and Von Peins of the world, but not from you.

Robert Harris: I have grown to respect the intelligence, observational ability, and sincerity of both you and William Kelly.

Mr. Kelly is not dismissing the possibility that you may know what you're talking about regarding a shooter in the Dal-Tex building.

I politely suggest you not dismiss the possibility that Mr. Kelly may know what he's talking about regarding the the Modus operandi of Jim Braden.

Thanks, D.M.

[David Josephs]

And this illustration by me, provides an even better explanation of what is really being seen.

Duncan... looks like someone moving boxes at Dal Tex as well

That's a much better image and clean up of Alt6 than I've seen... thanks. It really doesn't look like broken glass

plus you'd think with the zillions of eyes all over that place, someone would have said something about broken glass.

I too feel a shot was very possible during Towner - not from the broken-glass window but from one of the other 2 windows or from the roof. That it did miss (other speak of a shot hitting the pavement and kicking up debris) and there may have been a reaction by JFK seems very plausible given other testimony and other reactions...

yet that wasn't the killzone, so for a pro to take a shot prior to his reaching the best triangulation risks giving away his position.

I offer these enhancements... Seems the fire-escape column of windows is more likely the culprit. Even the 3rd floor window there looks

open with someone standing there.... yet it does not appear that way in the full image. and next to that is the 2nd story fireescape window that definitely looks as if someone is there.

Yet another prime example of not having the largest and best images available. After all these years and research how is it we do not have a repository of the very best images for analysis? with free FTP clients all over, file size should no longer matter. soapbox sermon over.....

DJ