Pat Speer , per your request.

[Mark Henceroth]

The Dark Side of The Bag

Well, scratch that. Exhibit 4 in the FBI's report of 12-9-63 is a photo of the bag when split. It shows both sides of the bag. One side which matches the side of the bag shown in Exhibit 14 (which most definitely does not match the side of the bag shown in the press photos) and one side which, although absent tape a la the bag in the press photos, also fails to match this bag. The proportions and characteristics are clearly not the same.

Well, this leaves us with the possible argument that the bags really share proportions and characteristics but that I have either pulled some sort of computer trick to alter the appearance of the bag in the news photos.

If you believe this, then, by all means, step up to the place and show us where I'm wrong.

Now stepping up to the plate Mark Henceroth,

The bag on the left is upside down.

Let me know if you want to see what it looks like when it's turned the right way.

I'll just post it, have fun, Here is what it looks like properly oriented, good luck with it,

[Pat Speer]

The Dark Side of The Bag

Well, scratch that. Exhibit 4 in the FBI's report of 12-9-63 is a photo of the bag when split. It shows both sides of the bag. One side which matches the side of the bag shown in Exhibit 14 (which most definitely does not match the side of the bag shown in the press photos) and one side which, although absent tape a la the bag in the press photos, also fails to match this bag. The proportions and characteristics are clearly not the same.

Well, this leaves us with the possible argument that the bags really share proportions and characteristics but that I have either pulled some sort of computer trick to alter the appearance of the bag in the news photos.

If you believe this, then, by all means, step up to the place and show us where I'm wrong.

Now stepping up to the plate Mark Henceroth,

The bag on the left is upside down.

Let me know if you want to see what it looks like when it's turned the right way.

I'll just post it, have fun, Here is what it looks like properly oriented, good luck with it,

Mark, Mark, Mark. I hope you're joking.

I acknowledge that, even though its proportions are distorted in the photo, the bag on the left (from FBI 14) is the split bag in the middle (from FBI 4). It is the taped side of the bag and is absolutely positively NOT upside down in my comparison. Just look at the tape in relation to the creases, etc. It matches.

Now what doesn't match is the non-taped side of the split bag in FBI 4, and the non-taped side of the bag in the press photos. They just don't match. Focus on the crease by my number 3 on FBI 4... Where is that crease on the press photo?

And, should you be wanting to push that someone merely refolded and/or taped the bag, but that it was clearly the original paper pulled from the building, I should warn you that in chapter 4d on my webpage I have compiled a mountain of reasons--BEYOND that the bags don't look alike--to think the bag in the archives is NOT the bag pulled from the building...only starting with the fact that the men who the DPD claimed found the bag were never asked to ID the bag shown in the FBI photos and presumably now in the archives...

Edited December 5, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Mark Henceroth]

The Dark Side of The Bag

Well, scratch that. Exhibit 4 in the FBI's report of 12-9-63 is a photo of the bag when split. It shows both sides of the bag. One side which matches the side of the bag shown in Exhibit 14 (which most definitely does not match the side of the bag shown in the press photos) and one side which, although absent tape a la the bag in the press photos, also fails to match this bag. The proportions and characteristics are clearly not the same.

Well, this leaves us with the possible argument that the bags really share proportions and characteristics but that I have either pulled some sort of computer trick to alter the appearance of the bag in the news photos.

If you believe this, then, by all means, step up to the place and show us where I'm wrong.

Now stepping up to the plate Mark Henceroth,

The bag on the left is upside down.

Let me know if you want to see what it looks like when it's turned the right way.

I'll just post it, have fun, Here is what it looks like properly oriented, good luck with it,

Mark, Mark, Mark. I hope you're joking.

I acknowledge that, even though its proportions are distorted in the photo, the bag on the left (from FBI 14) is the split bag in the middle (from FBI 4). It is the taped side of the bag and is absolutely positively NOT upside down in my comparison. Just look at the tape in relation to the creases, etc. It matches.

Now what doesn't match is the non-taped side of the split bag in FBI 4, and the non-taped side of the bag in the press photos. They just don't match. Focus on the crease by my number 3 FBI 4... Where is that crease on the press photo?

And, should you be wanting to push that someone merely refolded and/or taped the bag, but that it was clearly the original paper pulled from the building, I should warn you that in chapter 4d on my webpage I have compiled a mountain of reasons--BEYOND that the bags don't look alike--to think the bag in the archives is NOT the bag pulled from the building...only starting with the fact that the men who the DPD claimed found the bag were never asked to ID the bag shown in the FBI photos and presumably now in the archives...

Its clearly upside down Pat,not going to argue about it , just pointing it out as you asked to be done in your post.good luck,

[Pat Speer]

The Dark Side of The Bag

Well, scratch that. Exhibit 4 in the FBI's report of 12-9-63 is a photo of the bag when split. It shows both sides of the bag. One side which matches the side of the bag shown in Exhibit 14 (which most definitely does not match the side of the bag shown in the press photos) and one side which, although absent tape a la the bag in the press photos, also fails to match this bag. The proportions and characteristics are clearly not the same.

Well, this leaves us with the possible argument that the bags really share proportions and characteristics but that I have either pulled some sort of computer trick to alter the appearance of the bag in the news photos.

If you believe this, then, by all means, step up to the place and show us where I'm wrong.

Now stepping up to the plate Mark Henceroth,

The bag on the left is upside down.

Let me know if you want to see what it looks like when it's turned the right way.

I'll just post it, have fun, Here is what it looks like properly oriented, good luck with it,

Mark, Mark, Mark. I hope you're joking.

I acknowledge that, even though its proportions are distorted in the photo, the bag on the left (from FBI 14) is the split bag in the middle (from FBI 4). It is the taped side of the bag and is absolutely positively NOT upside down in my comparison. Just look at the tape in relation to the creases, etc. It matches.

Now what doesn't match is the non-taped side of the split bag in FBI 4, and the non-taped side of the bag in the press photos. They just don't match. Focus on the crease by my number 3 FBI 4... Where is that crease on the press photo?

And, should you be wanting to push that someone merely refolded and/or taped the bag, but that it was clearly the original paper pulled from the building, I should warn you that in chapter 4d on my webpage I have compiled a mountain of reasons--BEYOND that the bags don't look alike--to think the bag in the archives is NOT the bag pulled from the building...only starting with the fact that the men who the DPD claimed found the bag were never asked to ID the bag shown in the FBI photos and presumably now in the archives...

Its clearly upside down Pat,not going to argue about it , just pointing it out as you asked to be done in your post.good luck,

I get it, Mark. You're having some fun. Ha ha.

Edited December 5, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Mark Henceroth]

Its the same bag,

[Mark Henceroth]

What do you want from a guy who thinks he can prove the single bullet fantasy by drawing trajectory lines.

So you don't think the center bag is upside down as compared to the right one ?

[Pat Speer]

What do you want from a guy who thinks he can prove the single bullet fantasy by drawing trajectory lines.

So you don't think the center bag is upside down as compared to the right one ?

??? You claimed earlier that the left one was upside down compared to the middle. Now you're saying the center bag is upside down compared to the right? ???

Oh, I get it. In looking at your completely ludicrous comparison, you are not matching the bag on the left to the middle bag, as you originally claimed, but the one on the right to the middle one. And have turned it upside down.

You seem to think it matches. Oy vey. Look again at my comparison, Mark. the SEALED end of the bag is at the top in the middle bag and right bag (the one in the press photos). You have flipped it now so that the open end of the bag in the press photo lines up with the sealed end of the bag in the FBI photo. This makes no sense.

But you know this and are just joking, right?

Edited December 6, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Mark Henceroth]

Whatever, the left is the one I turned the right way to compare to the center,your photo compared the center to the right and those two are vertically opposite each other, the joke is your photo analysis, obviously you weren't serious when you asked anyone to step up and show where you use trickery although I am not sure that you used trickery the more I talk to you I'm starting to figure out that you probably just don't know any better. If you can't tell that the center photo is opposite the right photo ( the two in your analysis ) then I don't know what to say really other than it's amazing.

[Craig Lamson]

So Pat, what did you say the specs were for this photo again? 15 feet 50mm lens 35mm camera? HAS IT BEEN CROPPED? If so where is the original?

[Pat Speer]

Whatever, the left is the one I turned the right way to compare to the center,your photo compared the center to the right and those two are vertically opposite each other, the joke is your photo analysis, obviously you weren't serious when you asked anyone to step up and show where you use trickery although I am not sure that you used trickery the more I talk to you I'm starting to figure out that you probably just don't know any better. If you can't tell that the center photo is opposite the right photo ( the two in your analysis ) then I don't know what to say really other than it's amazing.

Mark, GET A CLUE. Only one end of the bag was opened. You have matched the open non-taped end of one bag with the taped-closed end of another. Your comparison is therefore upside down.

If you honestly believe this is incorrect, then please by all means post a close up comparison of the ENDS of the bag in your comparison, and show us how they match. This I'd love to see.

And, if that should be too challenging, post another comparison of the full length of the bag--pointing to the paper tape on the outside of the bag. The paper tape that does not exit on the outside of the side of the bag in the press photos...but is readily apparent in the FBI photos...

Edited December 6, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Pat Speer]

Pat:

Don't waste your breath on this guy.

Lee Farley just exposed him in the Dale Myers thread.

He's one of Duncan's boys. Remember Mike Williams, the guy who was sent over here with a picture of him with a rifle.

Well, Mark is another Mike. He was on Duncan's "Arlen Specter was right" forum and he proposed shooting the WC critics for being un American. He later called it a a joke.

So don't waste your time on him.

I have few problems with most LNs. I get along fine with Duncan (who is not an LN, last I checked) and Mike (who didn't start out to be one, but became one over time). I'm just scared Mark actually thinks he's right about this.

I mean, if Mark and others like him are unable to tell a closed end of a bag from an open end, wow, I don't know what to think...

[Martin Hinrichs]

No, I just don't take anyone seriously who says:

1. There is no evidence of a shot from the front (Mike Williams)

2. Who says we can prove the SBT with trajectory lines (Mark)

3. Then says we should contemplate killing all the critics for being un american.

If Pat likes fooling around with Duncan's guys, that is his choice. I warned him.

Hi Jim,

i agree with you on all three points.

In particular Point 3 is a lunatic and appaling threat.

He reminds me of a Neandertaler who jumped out of a timewindow.

I've reported already to moderator Evan Burton that his Pseudonym "Mark Henceroth" is

just a fantasy name and not his real name which violates the forum rules.

But i think it's wrong to say that members of Duncan's Forum posting over here are "Duncan's Guys"

or even "Team Duncan" as Bob Harris claimed.

We are all independend researcher.

I started once a Poll on Duncan's forum with the question whether there was a conspiracy or not.

Duncan voted "Not sure". So, he cannot be labeled as LN'er.

As far as i know, he is respecting both sides and voted "Not Sure" because of the famous

Tom Dillard photo from the TSBD within seconds after the headshot.

I never came in serious dispute with Duncan over the last two years.

Repect from each side.

The enhanced version shows a person on the west side of the six floor.

This picture shows the enhancement form the negative as Bill Miller confirmed

to me via email a while ago. I believe i never thanked Bill for that informations.

So, thank you Bill.

This picture alone proves conspiracy cause it makes no sense to claim Oswald

jumped over the boxes run to the west side with a rifle in his hand in front of the windows.

Apart from that no witness reported any such observation.

I Zig Zag run from east/south to north and west/south between the stacked box is impossible within the

given timeframe.

It supports Carolyn Arnold and Arnold Rowland statements.

Somehow i think in the bottom of his heart Duncan believes in a conspiracy. Not sure.

All the best

Martin

[Mark Henceroth]

Great work Martin, fifty years and you have a blurry picture of a light bulb to prove a conspiracy, jeez I can hardly wait to see what the next fifty years brings. Is your theory saying that Oswald could not have shot from there because every assassin knows that they should turn the lights off while shooting ?