Dale K. Myers On The Acoustics Photographic Evidence

[David Von Pein]

"You know, Davey Boy, it's bad enough when you deny the evidence." -- Jim "Oswald Didn't Shoot Anybody" DiEugenio

Is there anybody else out there who is enjoying the pot-kettle nature of the above ridiculous comment as much as I am?

[David Von Pein]

Unlike yourself, David, Jim D does not deny evidence - he deals with it.

No, he doesn't. He thinks all of the evidence against Oswald is fake and/or planted. He has to think that. Otherwise, his precious patsy is so obviously guilty.

If "dealing" with the evidence is attempting to prove that 100% of it has been faked and/or manipulated (a la the O.J. Simpson Scheme Team), then I think I'll jump off Jimbo's ship right now. Because it's sinking. And common sense (alone) sinks that ship.

Edited November 28, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David G. Healy]

Unlike yourself, David, Jim D does not deny evidence - he deals with it.

No, he doesn't. He thinks all of the evidence against Oswald is fake and/or planted. He has to think that. Otherwise, his precious patsy is so obviously guilty.

If "dealing" with the evidence is attempting to prove that 100% of it has been faked and/or manipulated (a la the O.J. Simpson Scheme Team), then I think I'll jump off Jimbo's ship right now. Because it's sinking. And common sense (alone) sinks that ship.

You love to over simplify and misrepresent the positions of others, don't you Dave? I'm not sure if you think people buy the garbage you constantly spew forth or if you're just saying crap you know to be untrue because you're desperate for attention. Either way, your arguments are, like yourself, all fur coat and no knickers.

I've also noticed how often you like to invoke the "common sense" argument. Seems to me that you're living proof what Mark Twain once said is true: Common sense is what uneducated people attribute to themselves.

Martin -- thank you. When it comes to DVP, his 'common sense' rhetoric, not to mention his blind faith in Bugliosi's RH and ALL matters regarding the WCR. No truer were ever spoken: "Common sense is what uneducated people attribute to themselves."

Frankly, I like this Twain truism, especially when one considers the WCR: "It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." -- Mark Twain

Edited November 28, 2010 by David G. Healy

[John Dolva]

I think my hypothesis re the Tague strike being a wheel weight steel clip and lead smear leaving a typical turcoidal (sic) pattern on the concrete curb has merit. It happened earlier and Buddy Walters turned it into that Tague was oblivious of into a stumbling block for all time.

edit grammar

Edited November 28, 2010 by John Dolva

[Pat Speer]

Bill wrote:

It also stops right afte the presidential limo turns the corner, so we don't know what comes next. But we can see for sure McClain or another cycle isn't in the picture, and it's at least 120 feet, - and could be as much as 180 feet, the paramitors they laid out. And they also said they had to allow for five feet - either way in their prediction of where the microphone was - when the first shot was recorded. I know a football field is 300 feet (100 yards) and the length of that block of Houston Street is approximately that, so there's probably 180 feet in that last frame and no McLain.

Actually Bill,

Houston St. from corner building to corner building is 201Ft.

Add the sidewalks on both ends and your at 222Ft.

This according to Robert West back in 63/64.

chris

Okay, So the Hughes film says there's nobody there, yet Blakey says this:

Blakey: "Ultimately, the committee found film coverage of a motorcycle policeman on Houston Street several car lengths behind the president's limo as it turned in front of the Texas School Book Depository, from Houston onto Elm, the place that the acoustical experts suggested it would be. The officer riding the motorcycle was identified as H.B. McLain, who rode 120-180 feet – five to seven car lengths behind the president's limo, who was on the left side of the motorcade, with a microphone, unlike other Dallas police motorcycles, mounted on the left handlebar. Officer McLain testified before the committee that his microphone also stuck open quite frequently without his knowledge."

Bill, this film was the Dorman film, and it shows McClain rounding the corner something like 5 or 6 seconds after the acoustics evidence needs him to.

No, it shows A motorcycle cop that could be either McClain or J.W. Courson. There is nothing visible in the film to positively identify it as either one.

As I recall, McLain ID'ed himself. One would think a motorcycle officer could recognize his own image. Thomas says it was Courson, without any evidence beyond that he wants it to be Courson. Thomas also admits a photo of two motorcycle officers passing the grassy knoll is a photo of Courson and McLain. This means he believes McClain was just ahead of Courson. Problem. The Dorman film shows the corner for several seconds before it shows the rider Thomas says is Courson. This means that Courson would have to have picked up something like 5-6 seconds on McLain between the corner and the knoll. The motorcycle taking the turn is not going particularly fast. This means that, in order for Thomas to be right, and for the rider to be Courson, two things would have to have happened 1) McLain, who Thomas claims inexplicably raced up to the corner of Elm BEFORE the first shot, would have to have slowed his bike to a crawl across the plaza, and 2) Courson would have to have cruised up to the corner, and then RACED his bike down Elm.

This didn't happen. And we shouldn't pretend it did. In order for Thomas to be right, McLain--a CONSPIRACY THEORIST--would have to be lying about 1) his behavior before the shots 2) his behavior after the shots, and 3) his appearance in the Dorman film. There's also this. The acoustic evidence, as I recall, necessitates that the rider with the open mic drive at a near constant speed. Thomas has him RACE up to the corner, and then SLOW to a crawl.

It simply doesn't work.

Edited December 1, 2010 by Pat Speer

[William Kelly]

Bill wrote:

It also stops right afte the presidential limo turns the corner, so we don't know what comes next. But we can see for sure McClain or another cycle isn't in the picture, and it's at least 120 feet, - and could be as much as 180 feet, the paramitors they laid out. And they also said they had to allow for five feet - either way in their prediction of where the microphone was - when the first shot was recorded. I know a football field is 300 feet (100 yards) and the length of that block of Houston Street is approximately that, so there's probably 180 feet in that last frame and no McLain.

Actually Bill,

Houston St. from corner building to corner building is 201Ft.

Add the sidewalks on both ends and your at 222Ft.

This according to Robert West back in 63/64.

chris

Okay, So the Hughes film says there's nobody there, yet Blakey says this:

Blakey: "Ultimately, the committee found film coverage of a motorcycle policeman on Houston Street several car lengths behind the president's limo as it turned in front of the Texas School Book Depository, from Houston onto Elm, the place that the acoustical experts suggested it would be. The officer riding the motorcycle was identified as H.B. McLain, who rode 120-180 feet – five to seven car lengths behind the president's limo, who was on the left side of the motorcade, with a microphone, unlike other Dallas police motorcycles, mounted on the left handlebar. Officer McLain testified before the committee that his microphone also stuck open quite frequently without his knowledge."

Bill, this film was the Dorman film, and it shows McClain rounding the corner something like 5 or 6 seconds after the acoustics evidence needs him to.

No, it shows A motorcycle cop that could be either McClain or J.W. Courson. There is nothing visible in the film to positively identify it as either one.

As I recall, McLain ID'ed himself. One would think a motorcycle officer could recognize his own image. Thomas says it was Courson, without any evidence beyond that he wants it to be Courson. Thomas also admits a photo of two motorcycle officers passing the grassy knoll is a photo of Courson and McClain. This means he believes McClain was just ahead of Courson. Problem. The Dorman film shows the corner for several seconds before it shows the rider Thomas says is Courson. This means that Courson would have to have picked up something like 5-6 seconds on McClain between the corner and the knoll. The motorcycle taking the turn is not going particularly fast. This means that, in order for Thomas to be right, and for the rider to be Courson, two things would have to have happened 1) McClain, who Thomas claims inexplicably raced up to the corner of Elm BEFORE the first shot, would have to have slowed his bike to a crawl across the plaza, and 2) Courson would have to have cruised up to the corner, and then RACED his bike down Elm.

This didn't happen. And we shouldn't pretend it did. In order for Thomas to be right, McLain--a CONSPIRACY THEORIST--would have to be lying about 1) his behavior before the shots 2) his behavior after the shots, and 3) his appearance in the Dorman film. There's also this. The acoustic evidence, as I recall, necessitates that the rider with the open mic drive at a near constant speed. Thomas has him RACE up to the corner, and then SLOW to a crawl.

It simply doesn't work.

The bottom line is the photo evidence is incomplete, and that the acoustical evidence cannot be confirmed or refuted by it, and instead the acoustical echo evidence either contains a forensic fingerprint or it doesn't, and that must be determined by recreating the HSCA acoustical echo analysis and not by arguing over what the photo evidence shows or doesn't show.

That's the only way it can work.

BK

[William Kelly]

Bill wrote:

It also stops right afte the presidential limo turns the corner, so we don't know what comes next. But we can see for sure McClain or another cycle isn't in the picture, and it's at least 120 feet, - and could be as much as 180 feet, the paramitors they laid out. And they also said they had to allow for five feet - either way in their prediction of where the microphone was - when the first shot was recorded. I know a football field is 300 feet (100 yards) and the length of that block of Houston Street is approximately that, so there's probably 180 feet in that last frame and no McLain.

Actually Bill,

Houston St. from corner building to corner building is 201Ft.

Add the sidewalks on both ends and your at 222Ft.

This according to Robert West back in 63/64.

chris

Okay, So the Hughes film says there's nobody there, yet Blakey says this:

Blakey: "Ultimately, the committee found film coverage of a motorcycle policeman on Houston Street several car lengths behind the president's limo as it turned in front of the Texas School Book Depository, from Houston onto Elm, the place that the acoustical experts suggested it would be. The officer riding the motorcycle was identified as H.B. McLain, who rode 120-180 feet – five to seven car lengths behind the president's limo, who was on the left side of the motorcade, with a microphone, unlike other Dallas police motorcycles, mounted on the left handlebar. Officer McLain testified before the committee that his microphone also stuck open quite frequently without his knowledge."

Bill, this film was the Dorman film, and it shows McClain rounding the corner something like 5 or 6 seconds after the acoustics evidence needs him to.

No, it shows A motorcycle cop that could be either McClain or J.W. Courson. There is nothing visible in the film to positively identify it as either one.

As I recall, McLain ID'ed himself. One would think a motorcycle officer could recognize his own image. Thomas says it was Courson, without any evidence beyond that he wants it to be Courson. Thomas also admits a photo of two motorcycle officers passing the grassy knoll is a photo of Courson and McClain. This means he believes McClain was just ahead of Courson. Problem. The Dorman film shows the corner for several seconds before it shows the rider Thomas says is Courson. This means that Courson would have to have picked up something like 5-6 seconds on McClain between the corner and the knoll. The motorcycle taking the turn is not going particularly fast. This means that, in order for Thomas to be right, and for the rider to be Courson, two things would have to have happened 1) McClain, who Thomas claims inexplicably raced up to the corner of Elm BEFORE the first shot, would have to have slowed his bike to a crawl across the plaza, and 2) Courson would have to have cruised up to the corner, and then RACED his bike down Elm.

This didn't happen. And we shouldn't pretend it did. In order for Thomas to be right, McLain--a CONSPIRACY THEORIST--would have to be lying about 1) his behavior before the shots 2) his behavior after the shots, and 3) his appearance in the Dorman film. There's also this. The acoustic evidence, as I recall, necessitates that the rider with the open mic drive at a near constant speed. Thomas has him RACE up to the corner, and then SLOW to a crawl.

It simply doesn't work.

The bottom line is the photo evidence is incomplete, and that the acoustical evidence cannot be confirmed or refuted by it, and instead the acoustical echo evidence either contains a forensic fingerprint or it doesn't, and that must be determined by recreating the HSCA acoustical echo analysis and not by arguing over what the photo evidence shows or doesn't show.

That's the only way it can work.

BK

[Chris Davidson]

Pat,

I think a better way of addressing the acoustics (while including McClain in the mix) is starting with Zframe 313 + 326 and work backwards.

Keeping in mind that the first sound/s were thought to be firecrackers/cycle backfire.

chris

Edited December 1, 2010 by Chris Davidson

[William Kelly]

The bottom line is the photo evidence is incomplete, and that the acoustical evidence cannot be confirmed or refuted by it, and instead the acoustical echo evidence either contains a forensic fingerprint or it doesn't, and that must be determined by recreating the HSCA acoustical echo analysis and not by arguing over what the photo evidence shows or doesn't show.

That's the only way it can work.

BK

You are absolutely right, Bill.

It's all predictions and analyses thar are frought with potential errors. All "must haves" and "couldn't haves." But the bottom line is that there is no film or photograph that shows the acoustically required position. It's frustrating, but right now that's what we're stuck with.

I wonder if Pat has a reasonable answer for my questions:

Why did five of the test shots fired in Dealey Plaza match acoustically five of the suspect impulses on the dictabelt?

Why did they match in the correct 1-2-3-4-5 topographic order?

Why did the distance from the first matching microphone to the last (143 feet) and time from first to last impulse (8.3 seconds) indicate that the Police motorcycle was travelling at 11 mph - perfectly matching the speed of JFK's limo?

Why does the 4.8 second gap between the third and fourth shots on the tape perfectly fit the 4.8 second gap between the flipping of Connally's lapel and the explosion of JFK's head?

Why does the fourth "random impulse" have the acoustic fingerprint of a gunshot fired from the grassy knoll?

Oh and BTW, Pat. In my relatively short 31 years I've seen tons of people misidentify themselves in photographs - and I'm talikng about photographs showing faces.

I agree Martin,

I can't think of any of the photo evidence has been conclusive of anything.

The tramps, the Z-film, the backyard photos, the pictures of people in the crowd (Bush, Milteer), the attempt to match the acoustics with the photo evidence or even the Dillard/Powell photos, which proved to the HSCA photo experts that the boxes in the window were moved between the minute and a half the photos were taken - which while conclusive to the HSCA panal and supportive of the court clerk from across the street who saw someone in the window moving things around at the time, yet Craig Lamson disagees. So nobody apparently agrees on what any of the photo evidence means.

I think the acoustical evidence is solid, and the more that it is studied, or other acoustical evidence is studied, the more it will become generally accepted.

We've been trying to get Congressional Oversight hearings on the JFK Act for over ten years now.

Rep. Kucinich has scheduled a Congressional Hearing today to take new tesimony on the acoustical evidence in the Kent State shootings, but there's strong action being taken to prevent the hearings from taking place and chances are they will be cancelled.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Krause-to-Congress-On-Dec-by-Laurel-Krause-101129-954.html

By Laurel Krause - (whose sister Allison was killed at Kent State)

The government crossed the line

in the killing of four young people

in the killing of our Allison

as she rallied against the war on May 4, 1970

A civil rights battle on U.S. soil in our times

Kent State is personal for us yet important for all

Representative Dennis Kucinich

upon learning of the new audio truth

discovered in the Kent State Tape

Launched a Kent State congressional inquiry

and scheduled a hearing

Calling for swift examination of the new evidence

found in the Kent State Tape

Scheduling a Kent State hearing before Congress

before the Domestic Policy subcommittee

for Wednesday, December 1st, this week

Yet In these political times

with Congress soon adjourning for 2010

and our government's concerted effort

to keep truth at Kent State covered up

Kucinich's Congressional Kent State Hearing is

AT HIGH RISK OF CANCELLATION

Allison's family asks all who read this

LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD

Join our urgent Kent State Call-2-Action

Demand Truth at Kent State in 2010

Send a note to http://kucinich.house.gov/Contact/

Make a call to 202-225-5871

Send inbound calls to Representative Kucinich

HOLD the KENT STATE HEARING

this week, on Wednesday December 1st at 2 p.m.

Arthur Krause knew the importance

of the Kent State Tape

My dad knew it held the truth

of what happened at Kent State

even though back in 1970

and until just recently

truth from the Kent State Tape was locked up

in a jumbled maze of analog antiquity

Dad passed away over 20 years ago

Dad sought truth and justice at Kent State

demanding to know what happened to our Allison

Taking it to the courts yielded only

road blocks, cover-ups and threats

Every effort to uncover and face

the deadly inhumanity of Kent State

was completely thwarted

A series of seamless stonewalls

Never examining the wrongs of Kent State

No accountability for the killings of Kent State

Not one person or group ever held responsible

Not one apology uttered

Yet governmental claims were consistent:

There was no order to fire

The Guard reacted to sniper fire

The Guard felt under attack from the students

A government-fabricated pack of lies

that has now transformed

into the recorded history

of the killings of Kent State

That is " until 2010

and the examination of the Kent State Tape

40 years after the shootings

the Kent State Tape that Dad held so dear

finally examined using

tools of state-of-the-art audio technology

unlocking the true record of what occurred

at Kent State on May 4, 1970

Sounds expertly analyzed by

world-class forensic scientist Stuart Allen

commissioned by the Cleveland Plain Dealer

to explore the Kent State Tape

for the very first time

Whether copy or original is moot

Truth is recorded in the Kent State Tape

A tape does not remember, forget or change its story

The Kent State Tape does not lie

At the Kent State Truth Tribunal in NYC

October 2010 with Stuart Allen examining

Hearing and unraveling the labyrinth of deadly sounds

including shots and national guard commands

and a violent altercation with FBI-paid Terry Norman

all contributing to the shootings at Kent State 1970

The government denied

orders to fire were isolated, heard and verified

orders of Guard, Prepare to Fire

orders of Alright, Guard, Fiii-

with the last word of the deadly order stepped on

by a barrage of 67 shots over 13 seconds

[John Dolva]

And they were marching away from a pretty empty (nearby) field to a ridge where they wheeled in concert and assumed the position. and the order to open fire was given.

Nixon agonised over this tragic event, begging for help to find a way to blame the students. His aid wrote in his notes that night 'there is an opportunity in everything'.

There are oral accounts that these were hardened killers having already acted in Cleveland, not the green troops at all they tried to make them out to be.

edit typo

Edited December 1, 2010 by John Dolva

[Paul Baker]

"You know, Davey Boy, it's bad enough when you deny the evidence." -- Jim "Oswald Didn't Shoot Anybody" DiEugenio

Is there anybody else out there who is enjoying the pot-kettle nature of the above ridiculous comment as much as I am?

I can't say I'm enjoying this. Reading Jim's words, and listening to his words on Black Op Radio ... well, to be honest I can't help but feel sorry for him. He doesn't believe Oswald shot anyone. He doesn't even think that any shots were fired from the sniper's nest window. I read somewhere that he believes (or at one time believed) that Walter Kronkite was part of the plan.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Paul Baker