Robert Prudhomme Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 It would prove everything except the guy walking down the Elm St. extension being Lovelady. I'm sorry but, the latest enhancement of the stills from Gerda Dunckel's gif even make some of the people's heads, as well as "Shelley's" suit jacket, appear to have a vaguely similar pattern to Lovelady's plaid shirt. Let's face it, there just is not enough detail in the film to honestly ID the two men as Shelley and Lovelady, just as we cannot honestly ID PM as Oswald. However, a difference in height between "Lovelady" and "Shelley" can easily be determined, and there is no doubt "Shelley" is taller. That is why I believe finding Shelley's true height in 1963 will finally tell us if this is actually S & L seen walking down the Elm St. extension. Until then, all of this discussion about Lovelady's shirt is a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 30, 2016 Author Share Posted October 30, 2016 (edited) It would prove everything except the guy walking down the Elm St. extension being Lovelady. I'm sorry but, the latest enhancement of the stills from Gerda Dunckel's gif even make some of the people's heads, as well as "Shelley's" suit jacket, appear to have a vaguely similar pattern to Lovelady's plaid shirt. Let's face it, there just is not enough detail in the film to honestly ID the two men as Shelley and Lovelady, just as we cannot honestly ID PM as Oswald. However, a difference in height between "Lovelady" and "Shelley" can easily be determined, and there is no doubt "Shelley" is taller. That is why I believe finding Shelley's true height in 1963 will finally tell us if this is actually S & L seen walking down the Elm St. extension. Until then, all of this discussion about Lovelady's shirt is a waste of time. Howdy Bob! Well, if that's what you really think, then why do you keep participating in it? -- Tommy Question: Are those (spider-webbery) "patterns" which you refer to in Couch kinda random in nature, or are they very geometrically-arranged , as is the distinctive and easy-to-see pattern on Lovelady's shirt as he's walking down Elm St Ext.? No, they aren't are they. Nice try, Bob. Really. Edited October 30, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 They are NOT a plaid pattern on a shirt, not unless Shelley was wearing plaid too. Why don't you try finding some real proof, and stop this nonsense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 30, 2016 Author Share Posted October 30, 2016 (edited) They are NOT a plaid pattern on a shirt, not unless Shelley was wearing plaid too. Why don't you try finding some real proof, and stop this nonsense? Howdy Bob! I guess you never did get your eyes checked, did you, Bob? I hear it's not too expensive at Walmart if you buy some glasses. Maybe if you try squinting? -- Tommy Edited October 30, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 (edited) Was Shelley wearing plaid, too? Edited October 30, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 And to think we were giving Brian Doyle and Duncan MacRae a hard time about the enhancements Duncan made to "Prayer Woman". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 30, 2016 Author Share Posted October 30, 2016 (edited) Is Shelley wearing plaid, too? Howdy Bob! Non-agenda driven logic and the ability to physically see what you don't believe in seem to be foreign concepts to you, Bob. But, IMHO, you're quite good at being contrary and stubborn, and excellent at avoiding answering those questions which make you feel uncomfortable by replying, "But what about ...?" -- Tommy Edited October 31, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted October 30, 2016 Share Posted October 30, 2016 Oh I am, am I? How tall was Bill Shelley, or do you not want to discuss this topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 31, 2016 Author Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Oh I am, am I? How tall was Bill Shelley, or do you not want to discuss this topic? Howdy Bob! (When i sent you that PM saying "Bye for now" a few hours ago, I didn't know if I'd get all my last-minute errands accomplished this evening before leaving on my prospecting adventure early tomorrow morning, but I did, so here I am!) To answer your question, I'd say Shelley was about 5' 8" - 5' 9", and that Lovelady was about 5' 6". If I remember correctly, Bonnie Ray Williams was pretty tall, So, assuming that neither Arce nor Williams nor Shelley are "slouching down" in this photo, do you still think Shelley was as short as you've said he was? -- Tommy Edited October 31, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 31, 2016 Author Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) On 10/30/2016 at 7:53 PM, Thomas Graves said: On 10/30/2016 at 2:13 PM, Robert Prudhomme said: Oh I am, am I? How tall was Bill Shelley, or do you not want to discuss this topic? Howdy Bob! (When I sent you that PM saying "Bye for now" a few hours ago, I didn't know if I'd get all my last-minute errands accomplished this evening before leaving on my prospecting adventure early tomorrow morning, but I did, so here I am!) To answer your question, I'd say Shelley was about 5' 8" - 5' 9", and that Lovelady was about 5' 6". If I remember correctly, Bonnie Ray Williams was pretty tall, So, assuming that neither Arce nor Williams nor Shelley are "slouching down" in this photo, do you still think Shelley was as short as you've said he was? -- Tommy PS It looks like Shelley was wearing a hat in Couch, after all. (lol) Edited November 6, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Wow. I mean, just, wow. Well, you see, Michael, it's this way. The more time spent talking about trivial things such as Lovelady's shirt pocket, the less attention is paid to topics that might actually unravel this murder case. The operative word here is "distraction". I believe that something as simple as a pocket disappearing can lead to a significant discovery.There has to be, after all, a (less-than-innocent) explanation for the disappearance. Edited October 31, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted October 31, 2016 Author Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Wow. I mean, just, wow. Well, you see, Michael, it's this way. The more time spent talking about trivial things such as Lovelady's shirt pocket, the less attention is paid to topics that might actually unravel this murder case. The operative word here is "distraction". I believe that something as simple as a pocket disappearing can lead to a significant discovery.There has to be, after all, a less-than-innocent explanation for the disappearance. Dear Sandy, As you know, or at least I hope you do, I honestly think the pocket did not disappear at all, but that it's simply difficult for most people to make out in Groden's 1976 photo. But even if it did disappear, there are several innocent and plausible scenarios in which Lovelady could have been photographed in a plaid shirt that was only slightly different from the long-sleeved, (reddish) plaid shirt he was photographed in on 11/22/63 by Ike Altgens in "Altgens 6," by Robert Hughes as the limo passed by the TSBD (as well as when Lovelady was smoking on the steps of the TSBD after the assassination), and by Charles Buck of WFAA-TV as the "male patterned" and the birth-dot marked or scarred left eyebrow Lovelady was sitting in a chair in the DPD's Homicide and Robbery Department, for cryin' out loud, at 2:02 pm on that fateful day. And let us not ignore the fact that in Couch, Lovelady was photographically "captured" about 20 seconds after the assassination, sporting the distinctive bald spot on the top-rear of his head, his vertical white scar on the left side of his head, and wearing a long-sleeved plaid shirt with bold white stripes in the same places as they are other photos of him, while walking / running down the Elm Street Extension towards the railway yard. I don't want to be rude, Sandy, but why in the world can't you accept that? Is it just too mundane, or too simple, for your taste? Are you perhaps driven to perceive things in the JFK assassination according to some kind of predetermined, conspiratorial-minded, very specific "agenda"? I'm sorry, Sandy, but if that's the case, then really ... what kind of "researcher" is that? Sincerely, -- Tommy FWIW, At this stage of my learning process (I've been "at it" for about ten years now), I don't really care where Lovelady (or Shelly, for that matter) went, or what Lovelady / Shelley were doing, say, 45 seconds after the assassination. I'm just trying to show you (and other serious thinkers) why I am personally convinced that Billy Nolan Lovelady was walking / running down Elm Street Extension about twenty seconds after the final shot. If I am unable to convince you of that little thing, then "so be it." Edited October 31, 2016 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Tommy, Why is it so important to you that it was Bill Lovelady walking down Elm Street Extension with Bill Shelley? I don't recall saying that that wasn't Bill Lovelady. (It may well have been, and I assume it was, but I'm not fully convinced of it.) I've said only that 1) I don't believe the guy in the Martin Film (post assassination) is Lovelady; 2) the red plaid shirt Lovelady was photographed in post-assassination-day isn't the same one worn by that guy, in part because it doesn't have a pocket; and 3) Lovelady's post-assassination-day plaid shirt fit rather snugly on him and became even more snug with time. Edited October 31, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Somebody added a pocket to a B&W copy of Groden's Lovelady photo. So that the shirt would match the ones worn by other alleged Lovelady's. (See these below.) Click the following image to enlarge it, then to zoom in by holding down the Ctrl key while pushing + several times. You'll see the top part of a pocket on Lovelady, the guy on the left. It's been photoshopped in. Check the color version of the image below and you will see that it does not have the pocket. I imagine either an LNer made this photo, or an anti-Cinque guy. Edited October 31, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 As I converted the Groden photo into Black and white, I assume that you are accusing me of photoshopping it. As I didn't, and, as you can see the pocket in the black and white photo, you have proven that it is there. Just that you couldn't see it in the colour version. I'm not going to argue with you any further. It's just a waste of time. You are right about one thing. I certainly am an anti Cinque guy. He is crackers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now