“The lights all went out,” and the elevators stopped while JFK was murdered. Shelley and Lovelady were near the bottom of the back staircase, by the electrical panel... and Vickie Adams saw them ... until everyone's story changed...

[Jim Hargrove]

44 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I (currently) believe that everybody has been fooled by these films supposedly showing Lovelady. This guy is not Lovelady.

I believe that Lovelady wore a red and white vertically striped shirt that day. That is what he told the FBI. (Source) Some say that the FBI was just confused by the photos they took of Lovelady wearing the red and white striped shirt. Perhaps... but then how does one explain Billy himself telling the press that the red and white striped shirt is what he wore? (Source: New York Herald Tribune, May 24, 1964. Commission Exhibit 1408, Volume 22) Why would Billy say that? I say because it is true. His mind would be changed by the FBI later on.

Years later Lovelady was photographed with the red PLAID shirt on. Problem is, this one doesn't have a pocket. The one shown the DPD office film DOES have a pocket. The shirt Lovelady wore for the photograph was nearly identical, but not a perfect match.

Forum member Bill Miller pointed out another difference that I hadn't noticed... the white stripes on one shirt are noticeably wider than on the other shirt.

I have a theory that explains the shirt weirdness but I'm not ready to go public with it. My theory explains how the Oswald alibi coverup (i.e the 2nd floor encounter) was concocted.

Sandy,

It looks to me like Lovelady was wearing a plaid shirt, at least in police headquarters.  The FBI report about the vertically striped shirt appears to be inaccurate. 

https://youtu.be/FnwhfOQz3Fg

 

[John Butler]

"A home movie, shot in colour by John Martin, was rediscovered in the 1970s. The film shows a crowd of people outside the main entrance of the TSBD a few minutes after the assassination. One of the people is unmistakeably Billy Lovelady. He is wearing a long–sleeved check shirt with red squares and white and blue horizontal and vertical stripes."

This is not a home movie but a .gif presentation of 95 frames.  It looks like a movie but, it is not a film.  So, what is the source of this .gif?  What is the source of the frames?  Which movie are they from?

Ron Bulman says, "I don't remember ever seeing this before.  Thanks.  The cop does push the Black guy down through the door, which no one else seems to care about but the other Black guy, does he not?  Why?"

I haven't seen this "film" before either.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

23 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Sandy,

It looks to me like Lovelady was wearing a plaid shirt, at least in police headquarters.  The FBI report about the vertically striped shirt appears to be inaccurate. 

https://youtu.be/FnwhfOQz3Fg

 

 

Jim,

This is what I believe:

The person in that video you posted is not Lovelady.

When I am presented with clear, contradictory pieces of evidence, I don't just blow off the ones I don't like. Rather I work to reconcile the contradictions. Much like what John Armstrong has done with the evidence of two Oswalds.

 

Having said that, let me ask you a question:

You believe that the plaid-shirt-wearing guy near Fritz's office is Lovelady. Yet you don't believe the plaid-shirt-wearing guy in the Martin and Hughes films are Lovelady. Right? I mean, that's essentially what you told Toni when he brought those films up.

Tony,

I have Lovelady's own words in his own handwriting describing the shots and stating, "After it was over we went back into the building....."  Not a word about all the later nonsense about spending nearly a half hour outside doing this and that.

So is it your contention that the plaid-shirt-wearing guy near Fritz's office is different than the plaid-shirt-wearing guy shown in Martin and Hughes?

 

I don't believe any of these plaid-shirt-wearing guys are Lovelady. I believe that Lovelady went back into the building shortly after the shooting, most likely though the front door. And that Shelley did the same.

 

[Tony Krome]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

 

I (currently) believe that everybody has been fooled by these films supposedly showing Lovelady. This guy is not Lovelady.

I believe that Lovelady wore a red and white vertically striped shirt that day. That is what he told the FBI. (Source) Some say that the FBI was just confused by the photos they took of Lovelady wearing the red and white striped shirt. Perhaps... but then how does one explain Billy himself telling the press that the red and white striped shirt is what he wore? (Source: New York Herald Tribune, May 24, 1964. Commission Exhibit 1408, Volume 22) Why would Billy say that? I say because it is true. His mind would be changed by the FBI later on.

Years later Lovelady was photographed with the red PLAID shirt on. Problem is, this one doesn't have a pocket. The one shown the DPD office film DOES have a pocket. The shirt Lovelady wore for the photograph was nearly identical, but not a perfect match.

Forum member Bill Miller pointed out another difference that I hadn't noticed... the white stripes on one shirt are noticeably wider than on the other shirt.

I have a theory that explains the shirt weirdness but I'm not ready to go public with it. My theory explains how the Oswald alibi coverup (i.e the 2nd floor encounter) was concocted.

 

 

I'm open to anything as long as it makes sense. The Lovelady footage down at the station is a little suspect. The edit as the camera pans into the office allows for shenanigans, the huge clock for time-stamping, and of course the fortunate timing of the footage allows us to see the two Oswald looking characters together. The guys behind all this were pretty smart, and thats the challenge right now to sift the xxxx from the shiny.

Anyway, I'm hoping to see if anyone can talk me out of thinking that's Brennan on the top landing. If it is Brennan, I can time stamp that footage.

[John Butler]

What is a .gif?  A .gif is produced from software that allows one to string together film frames or photos in a continuous order.  If you set the time for the appearance of each element of the .gif at 1 second then you have the appearance of a film.  What you string together can be anything from anywhere.  Therefore, you can not assess the validity of the entire piece but, only assess the content validity of each element consisting of a frame or photo.  Setting a 1 second rate for each element to appear in the .gif you are throwing out many other frames from a film.  Using a .gif in this manner as a "home movie" or "film" is disinformation.

In order to assess the content validity of each element of the .gif one needs to know the source and the order the .gif sequence come form.  In each element of the .gif one needs to assess the content for photo manipulation. 

Edited April 17, 2019 by John Butler

[John Butler]

This is the first frame from the so-called "home movie".  There looks like there are problems with it.

Billy Lovelady appears to be related to Phil Willis, The Flat-headed See Through Man, with their genetically flat heads and closely related at that.  Or, is that photo manipulation with someone who can't cut out figures realistically.  This is a fraud taking information from what could be the Dallas Police film and pasting into a film, I going to assume Robert Hughes.

That's speculation on the film sources for this photo manipulation. 

Edited April 17, 2019 by John Butler

[Paul Jolliffe]

You know, as I re-read Lovelady's first day affidavit, it occurred to me that Billy Lovelady was probably not the kind of guy who was particularly precise in his writing. His phrase "after it was over" seems to imply an immediacy (to us) that he may not have intended or even contemplated.

Could "after it was over" actually refer to a period of say, 20 minutes? 30 minutes? More?

For Billy Lovelady, was the "it" confined solely to the assassination itself, or did "it" also refer to the subsequent general hub-bub and milling around outside, before being allowed to re-enter the TSBD?

I am not advocating a specific position here, merely pointing out that because the Warren Commission did not pin down exactly what Billy Lovelady meant by "after it was over", it is difficult (if not impossible) for us to come to firm conclusions here.

As for Shelley's first day affidavit, he did not mention Lovelady, and nor (as far as I know) was Shelley later identified in either the Hughes film or the Martin film. Because Shelley did write that he was told to guard the elevator shortly after the shots, I think we can say he did go back into the TSBD quickly. (Exactly how quickly? I don't know.) But, he really was back inside soon unless someone can point Shelley out in either of the two films mentioned.

Lovelady's affidavit is a little more suspect - the phrase "we went back into the building and went to work." is what Lovelady originally intended and wrote. However, because the last three words (and the period ending the sentence!) were stricken out and replaced with "took some police officers up to search the building" , I can't help but wonder if someone was "helping" simple Billy Lovelady with his timing of his actions on his affidavit.

Jim's reasonable contention that Lovelady re-entered the TSBD immediately after the shots is based on the idea that Lovelady must have helped in the police search. After all, that's what Lovelady wrote on 11/22/63, right?

However, I wonder  about that though because that's not what Lovelady first wrote - his own earliest extant version of his actions, which omitted his help in the police search (plus the imagery of the Hughes and Martin films, assuming they are authentic) seems to allow for Lovelady to be outside of the TSBD for several minutes before returning.

So, to sum up, I tentatively believe that William Shelley probably did return to the TSBD quite quickly after the shots.

But Billy Lovelady? Maybe not so soon after the shots. (Many minutes later? Perhaps.)

What about Adams and Styles?

Well, they could not have seen Lovelady at the foot of the stairs when they ran down if he was still out front. And he may well have been exactly there!

What about Shelley?

Hard to say for sure one way or the other, but right now, I'm leaning toward no, they probably did not see him.

(Having said all of that, whether Shelley or Lovelady were or were not near the fuse boxes in the TSBD shortly after the shots in no way invalidates John Armstrong's hypothesis that the passenger elevator may have been used as an escape route for at least one of the sixth floor team. Personally, I find that hypothesis very intriguing.)

Edited April 17, 2019 by Paul Jolliffe

[John Butler]

"I am not advocating a specific position here, merely pointing out that because the Warren Commission did not pin down exactly what Billy Lovelady meant by "after it was over", it is difficult (if not impossible) for us to come to firm conclusions here. "

After is directly after an event as if lining up dominoes one after the other.  A secondary definition for after specifies what and when whatever occurred after the event.  Ex.  I ate lunch after we came back from town.  Lovelady could be using words loosely according to his own understanding.  However, he is dead and we can't check that.

Here is something interesting about Lovelady at the Dallas Police station.  Looks like an insert to me.  What did Jack White say about sanded edges?

Are images like this the source for the "home movie" posted earlier.

Edited April 17, 2019 by John Butler

[Jim Hargrove]

Sheesh… is there ANYTHING that’s clear cut in this whole friggin topic? We do have the right building, eh?

Regarding Sandy’s comments above, if Lovelady actually WAS wearing this shirt on 11/22/63 (a big IF), then do we have a picture of him at all that day?
 

[Chris Davidson]

If this is not the same person in both frames, somebody did a masterful job.

[Tony Krome]

10 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Sheesh… is there ANYTHING that’s clear cut in this whole friggin topic? We do have the right building, eh?

Regarding Sandy’s comments above, if Lovelady actually WAS wearing this shirt on 11/22/63 (a big IF), then do we have a picture of him at all that day?
 

haha, like Ferrie said in JFK;

"It's a mystery! It's a mystery wrapped in a riddle inside an enigma!"

[John Butler]

1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:

If this is not the same person in both frames, somebody did a masterful job.

Not so masterful.  Did you see Lovelady's flat head?  But, knowing you and your confreres you'll have some kind of explanation for that that will challenge someone's credibility.

Lovelady in that shirt is disinformation to show that he was really Doorway Man in Altgens 6.  The Police Station film seems to be the same.  After looking at both I count them as fraudulent.  Doorway Man in Altgens 6 is someone who has a Lovelady face mask applied to the figure.  The figure itself is a badly cut out figure from elsewhere.  Just look at the left shoulder which has a good portion of it missing.  Except for the face mask Lovelady and Doorway man has nothing in common.

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Sheesh… is there ANYTHING that’s clear cut in this whole friggin topic? We do have the right building, eh?

Regarding Sandy’s comments above, if Lovelady actually WAS wearing this shirt on 11/22/63 (a big IF), then do we have a picture of him at all that day?
 

 

Jim,

I believe it is Lovelady that we see in Altgens 6. But I also believe that the photo was touched up before it was released to show a plaid pattern for the shirt. I just purchased a couple of 11/23/63 newspapers on e-Bay to see if I am right. I'm expecting there to be no plaid.

We also have Lovelady in Couch and Darnell. Unfortunately we can't make out the shirt.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2019 by Sandy Larsen

[Jim Hargrove]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I believe it is Lovelady that we see in Altgens 6. But I also believe that the photo was touched up before it was released to show a plaid pattern for the shirt. I just purchased a couple of 11/23/63 newspapers on e-Bay to see if I am right. I'm expecting there to be no plaid.

Why on earth would anyone want to change the shirt pattern?  Seems like a long shot that any of these old newspapers will answer the alteration question, doesn't it?

[Ray Mitcham]

5 hours ago, John Butler said:

Not so masterful.  Did you see Lovelady's flat head?  But, knowing you and your confreres you'll have some kind of explanation for that that will challenge someone's credibility.

Lovelady in that shirt is disinformation to show that he was really Doorway Man in Altgens 6.  The Police Station film seems to be the same.  After looking at both I count them as fraudulent.  Doorway Man in Altgens 6 is someone who has a Lovelady face mask applied to the figure.  The figure itself is a badly cut out figure from elsewhere.  Just look at the left shoulder which has a good portion of it missing.  Except for the face mask Lovelady and Doorway man has nothing in common.

Lovelady is leaning out so he could follow the parade down Elm Street. His shoulder isn't missing he is leaning.