Secret Service Agents Response

[Robert Mady]

Why did the WC have NORMAN, WILLIAMS and JARMAN reenact there positions at the windows during the assassination?

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

Robert

1) Evidence was changed, evidence was destroyed, evidence was created. Films and photographs can be created at anytime.

2) Hughes film and Martin film are taken at the exact same moments in time, two photographers captured the exact same scene from two angles. Cut!

3) Dillard is in the motorcade and captures the image within moments of the last shot, Powell is a half a block away, hears the shots, runs to DP, "sees some people pointing" and takes a photograph. The photographs are almost identical taken within ? Virtually everyone in DP except for BAKER and Cowboy had their attention toward the monument area, Powell thought the TSBD was more important because "some people were pointing"...

4) For what reason would the WC make NORMAN, WILLIAMS and JARMAN get down on the floor an reenact 11/22/1963? Because this way they may be photographed.

5) There is no reason not to believe that the film of LOVELADY in the basement was not staged, just as it is apparent as the steps scene was staged.

This was a coup, they were not playing for maybe, they did everything to assure the success of the coup and the cover-up.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

Witnesses that watched the motorcade from the 4th floor

ADAMS

DOORMAN

FOSTER

GARNER

HOLLIES

HOPSON

NELSON

STYLES

[Robert Mady]

The police stationed on the corner of Elm and Houston

One of them ran right past the TSBD steps and toward the rail yard, as seen in Couch film

One of them ran toward the monument area as also seen in the Couch film

One of them ran toward the grassy knoll area

These are three trained police officers stationed under the window of the TSBD, and they all run toward the rail yards.

Baker riding a motorcycle,

Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. As I was looking up, all these pigeons began to fly up to the top of the buildings here and I saw those come up and start flying around.
Mr. BELIN - From what building, if you know, do you think those pigeons came from?
Mr. BAKER - I wasn't sure, but I am pretty sure they came from the building right on the northwest corner.
Mr. BELIN - Then what did you see or do?
Mr. BAKER - Well, I immediately revved that motorcycle up and was going up there to see if I could help anybody or see what was going on because I couldn't see around this bend.
Mr. BELIN - Well, between the time you revved up the motorcycle had you heard any more shots?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir; I heard--now before I revved up this motorcycle, I heard the, you know, the two extra shots, the three shots.
Mr. BELIN - Do you have any time estimate as to the spacing of any of these shots?
Mr. BAKER - It seemed to me like they just went bang, bang, bang; they were pretty well even to me.
Mr. BELIN - They were pretty well even.
Anything else between the time of the first shot and the time of the last shot that you did up to the time or saw--
Mr. BAKER - No, sir; except I was looking up and I could tell it was high and I was looking up there and I saw those pigeons flying around there.

Everyone running are moving toward the rail yards, but BAKER ignores the consensus and runs into the TSBD because he witnessed pigeons flying off of roofs, he has to fight his way thru people trying to return to work to get to the door. And after a brief detour he finally gets to the roof and runs immediately to the West side to see the activity in the rail yards, then as an after thought he checks the roof for pigeon I guess?

Extraordinary isn't it BAKER claims to have seen flying pigeons three times during his testimony, three times? Wow, those must have been -some- pigeons.

The man was sharp he waited until all the shots were fired before he made his final decision to rev up the motorcycle and take action.

The man was so alert that not even a glimpse of movement escaped his attention, OSWALD was lucky he wasn't killed on the spot.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

To believe the WC/R is true you would have to believe that BAKER had better judgment than literally hundreds of witnesses located in DP.

Mr. BAKER - Well, to me, it sounded high and I immediately kind of looked up, and I had a feeling that it came from the building, either right in front of me or of the one across to the right of it.

According to BAKER there was an equal chance that he could have run into the Dal-Tex building. I wonder if the pigeons flying clock wise or counter clock wise in the sky influenced his final decision?

While everyone else conformed to consensus and ran to the rail yards, Baker upheld his strong belief that the key to the shots was connected to flying pigeons and fought his way thru the crowds to get to the TSBD and eventually to the roof. May be he didn't run to the West to see the rail yards, maybe the pigeons were circling the building.

sorry, this is the only image I have from the West side of the TSBD.

You guys have been researching this a long time was it seeing the flying pigeons or because this is were the shot came from and everyone but Baker ran there, that caused Baker to run immediately to the West side of the roof? May be in his own way he finally conformed to the consensus.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

Seriously

Can we stop the farce and know for certain that the assassination was the result of a coup and we have been confounded as to what happened by a continuous cover-up?

If you understand what I have been posting has a ring of truth to it, allow it to become real.

You can not be bound to their rules and find the truth.

Case in point, 51 years to comprehend a simple murder and there is still no consensus, we are probably more confounded today than they were in 1963 when it happened.

You can't ever get it right, if you are shackled to their evidence. Your playing their 'fools game'.

We live in an Idiocracy where everyone is king.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

Can we put the myth aside that any rifle shots were heard coming from the TSBD?

Let me show statistics

36 people claimed the TSBD as the source of the shots

17 civilians

19 were connected with government

65 people believed the shots came from the monument areas

53 civilians

12 were connected with government

I know there will immediately be a response showing so-and-so said, and in some cases you might be right because some of this analysis must be interpretation.

One would think this would be a pretty good consensus but the FBI and WC combined neglected to ask or record the majority of witnesses as to where they may have thought the shots had originated from, well after finding the rifle I guess they knew immediately where the shots originated from. I always forget was it the Mauser they found first of the Carcano rifle?

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Thomas Graves]

James, which one is LOVELADY?

All three images are of Lovelady. Bear in mind that he was smoking a cigarette in the first and third images, and these two images (actually it's just one image that's been reversed to make "bookends")` show his distorted face while (or immediately after) exhaling smoke through his visibly open mouth.

Note: You can even see the bald spot on the top of his head in the middle photo.

--Tommy

I'm not convinced the bookend images are of Lovelady. The hairlines are different. The angle of the neck relative to the top of the shoulders is different. The facial hair appears to be different. The real Lovelady's chin is more bony. The eyebrows are different. The way the shirt collar lies relative to the head is much different. The ears are different.

If one had the skill to draw the head and shoulder area of the two persons depicted one would draw two distinctly different persons.

Jon,

Different camera angles, lenses, and lighting conditions = Very different representations of the subject (Billy Lovelady)

All three images show the same hairline, IMHO. Looks like he needed a haircut on 11/22/63, especially the hair on his neck and around his ears.

The "bookend" images show him jutting his chin out while exhaling (cigarette smoke) through his mouth, thereby distorting his face.

In the middle picture, note the bottom edge of the bald spot.

And what about the plaid shirt he's wearing in the bookend images? To me it sure looks like the same shirt he still had and put on for Robert Groden in 1978:

--Tommy

Edited December 4, 2014 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Mady]

Thomas, I think you are correct, this is LOVELADY in both photos, the only ? I would have is the neck line is bothersome, FBI LOVELADY is fairly upright, TSBD LOVELADY is forward leaning, I don't know how to understand this difference.

But that may not be all: Are these two different LOVELADYS, a before and an after ?

The FBI photos where taken on 03/02/1964

If someone was forced to, how much weight could they loose in say three months?

Would it be interesting to be able to know what LOVELADY looked like on 11/22/1963?

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

LOVELADY, America needs you, you could help America avoid World War III, we need your assistance to _________________________________ .

Please sign here and here and here.

[Thomas Graves]

Thomas, I think you are correct, this is LOVELADY in both photos, the only ? I would have is the neck line is bothersome, FBI LOVELADY is fairly upright, TSBD LOVELADY is forward leaning, I don't know how to understand this difference.

But that may not be all: Are these two different LOVELADYS, a before and an after ?

The FBI photos where taken on 03/02/1964

If someone was forced to, how much weight could they loose in say three months?

Would it be interesting to be able to know what LOVELADY looked like on 11/22/1963?

Robert,

I think Lovelady is (probably momentarily) leaning his head and neck forward in the "bookend" images because he's exhaling cigarette smoke through his mouth. Note that his chin is jutting out and his mouth is open. If you watch a good copy of the John Martin film, you'll see that Lovelady is smoking a cigarette, and that he juts his chin out and exhales through his mouth. You can see the pertinent clip of the film I'm talking about on the "Oswald Leaving TSBD?" thread, post #1470.

I don't understand your question "Are these two different Loveladys, a before and an after?" and "Would it be interesting to be able to know what Lovelady looked like on 11/22/63?"

Lovelady was definitely "captured" in four films that I know of on 11/22/63. Unfortunately in all of them he's wearing that heavy plaid shirt (over his white t-shirt) and probably has a pack of cigarettes in his shirt pocket, so it's hard to tell how heavy he was on 11/22/63. He also needed a haircut.

The "bookend" images (actually just one image that's been reversed to make "bookends") were obviously taken on 11/22/63. They're from the Robert Hughes film. (Did you ever go to the "Oswald Leaving the TSBD?" thread to see what I posted for you, posts #1467 and #1470, when this thread was locked?)

The FBI photo, in the middle, was, according to you, taken on 3/02/64.

Same Billy Lovelady. Different camera angles, lenses, and lighting conditions.

As I said, he needed a haircut on 11/22/63 and was wearing a heavy shirt and probably had a pack of cigarettes in his shirt pocket, making him look even more barrel-chested than he was.

--Tommy

Edited December 4, 2014 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Mady]

Thomas, you might be correct on that, good observation, he appears to be smoking.

We do not know when LOVELADY was captured on film, you may assume it is the same day but there is no way to determine this with certainty.

Compelling doubt should arise when one considers the two films captured a single instant in time without an apparent reason to have exposed any film other than to prominently display LOVELADY in his attire, One might also note that almost everyone in these films have their back to the cameras, this is also true of the police station LOVELADY, the film was completely out of character for any film taken within the police station, it was not in a hallway, but in a quiet office space, with every ones back to the camera except LOVELADY. These coincidences and anomalies could arise suspicion.

LOVELADY before and LOVELADY after in the same shirt, supposedly on the same day.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Thomas Graves]

Thomas, you might be correct on that, good observation, he appears to be smoking.

We do not know when LOVELADY was captured on film, you may assume it is the same day but there is no way to determine this with certainty.

Compelling doubt should arise when one considers the two films captured a single instant in time without an apparent reason to have exposed any film other than to prominently display LOVELADY in his attire, One might also note that almost everyone in these films have their back to the cameras, this is also true of the police station LOVELADY, the film was completely out of character for any film taken within the police station, it was not in a hallway, but in a quiet office space, with every ones back to the camera except LOVELADY. These coincidences and anomalies could arise suspicion.

LOVELADY before and LOVELADY after in the same shirt, supposedly on the same day.

Robert,

I'm not going to argue with you, so after this post I'm no longer going to participate on this thread.

The John Martin film and the Robert Hughes film were shot in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.

A small section of both films was shot at the same time, at (almost exactly) the same place, and had the same subject matter -- the police activity and general commotion that was occurring on the front steps of the TSBD a few minutes after the assassination. (Eight to fifteen minutes after the assassination, according to Robert Groden.)

Both film sections or "clips" show Billy Lovelady in front of the TSBD. (Interestingly, the Martin clip also shows two other male TSBD employees -- Bonnie Ray Williams and Danny Arce -- at the same place and time as Lovelady. The Hughes clip shows Bonnie Ray Williams, too, but doesn't show Danny Arce because a man standing in front of the cameraman obscures our view of him.)

The clip from the Martin film clearly shows Lovelady smoking a cigarette. It is viewable in post #1470 of the "Oswald Leaving the TSBD?" thread. (John Martin worked in the Terminal Annex Building across the Plaza from the TSBD. You can research him and his 11/22/63 film if you want to.)

Now, it's perfectly understandable to me that two amateur photographers, John Martin and Robert Hughes, would be attracted to the police activity and general commotion that was going on at the front entrance of the TSBD eight to fifteen minutes after the assassination, and that both of them would happen to film the same "scene". The fact that Billy Lovelady was there at that time (as were fellow TSBD employees Bonnie Ray Williams and Danny Arce) and ended up in both the Martin film and the Hughes film does not seem strange to me all. After all, Lovelady and Williams and Arce worked in the TSBD. What's more, it's obvious that neither Lovelady nor Williams nor Arce was the center of the photographers' "attention" in either film.

I'm outta here...

--Tommy

Edited December 4, 2014 by Thomas Graves

[Robert Mady]

Thomas, if you read the testimony of LOVELADY you will know that he left the steps immediately after hearing the shots to go to the rail yards with SHELLEY (See image of them walking to rail yards in previous posts), LOVELADY did not return to the steps, he reentered the TSBD thru the dock doors which can be seen on the West end of the TSBD, there he remained on the first floor until after 1:00 at which time he took police officers to the sixth floor, the TSBD was sealed off by the police, how is he then able to be seen on the steps 8-15 minutes after the assassination?

Mr. BALL - And you stayed on the first floor then?
Mr. LOVELADY - I would say 30 minutes. And one of the policemen asked me would I take them up on the sixth floor.
Mr. BALL - Did you take them up there?
Mr. LOVELADY - Yes, sir; I sure did.

You insist the films are authentic because of what, Groden said? There is no discernable commotion on the steps, people are merely shuffling into the building.

The only important feature about this scene is LOVELADY prominently displayed for the camera, same characteristics of the police film. Can you understand that film and photographs can be staged at any time, that evidence was created to support the coup?

Tried to get back into the TSBD but were barred from entry a short time after the assassination, because the police had sealed the building.

JACOBS

DRAGOO

HOLT

JOHNSON

BAKER

GIVENS

KOUNAS

PARKER

The film shows people moving in or out of the building, if the TSBD was sealed how did LOVELADY get out of the building and then how did he get back in after the smoke break?

The question I would ask you to consider, is it possible that a scene can be staged?

No it is not understandable that two independent photographers captured these exact same scenes.

I provided two example that should be considered highly suspect.

The photographs of the TSBD, DILLARD claimed to take that photo instantly, NORMAN claimed immediately after the shootings the three men jumped up got together and talked about what happened and ran to the West windows to watch the activity in the rail yards, POWELL 1/2 a block away, claimed to run to DP (how much time does it take to run 1/2 of a block?)and immediately take a photograph because people were pointing, problem is there is NO evidence anyone ever pointed at the TSBD (every photograph shows peoples attention is on the monument area NOT the TSBD), lastly there were eight people watching the parade from the fourth floor, none of them can be seen in windows in either the DILLARD or POWELL photographs. Lastly why did the WC make the men on the fifth floor reenact what they did on 11/22/1963, for what conceivable reason? Every film shot in the police station was in commotion filled hallways, how did a photographer film in a private office and why would he have wanted to film the back of everyone walking away from him, just to capture the image of LOVELADY sitting, is this not a incredible coincidence? A stroke of incredible luck for the LOVELADY wore plaid revisionist.

In essence POWELL took a picture of the TSBD where some men were visible with their attention towards the rail yards, somehow POWELL interpreted this as to where the shots came from, even though all attention was on the knoll, is this the logic you want to embrace? That a military man connected with intelligence ignored the consensus, JUST like BAKER and took a photograph of the TSBD instead of the rail yards where virtually everyone's attention was?

The second is Martin and Hughes photographing the steps, there is nothing happening in these films other than LOVELADY smoking on the steps. There is no reason to film this and even if they had what is really the chances that two men are going to film at almost the exact instant in time.

Coincidences are real, but must be suspect because real coincidences are rare. Every researcher must know this. This photographic media presented is all too coincidental.

IS NORMAN looking directly at the camera, why is he looking that way when all of the activity is on the knoll? What are the chances that he would be looking directly at the camera in that moment?

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

Thomas, you expressing your desire to run away from the discussion may be a symptom of cognitive dissonance, you may not be able to cope with the evidence or have valid arguments to counter what is being posted so the next emotion generated would be flight to get away from trouble you can't cope with. You actually know that evidence posted may be true but will deny it because it goes against all of the dogma that you are entrenched in. I don't know if this is it, but this is the most common reaction to evidence viewed in a novel perspective, just please don't end the conversation with a animated icon, I hate those things.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Robert Mady