Frames of the Couch film

[David G. Healy]

BM penned mightly:

Another typical reply from someone who has nothing else to offer. You are another one who has little knowledge of the photographical record and from the past postings you have made on this forum - you know little else about the assassination as well.

_________________

wow -- with that kind of response, maybe I was wrong passing the rumor. Then again, maybe not!

[Bill Miller]

BM penned mightly:

Another typical reply from someone who has nothing else to offer. You are another one who has little knowledge of the photographical record and from the past postings you have made on this forum - you know little else about the assassination as well.

_________________

wow -- with that kind of response, maybe I was wrong passing the rumor. Then again, maybe not!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You should do whatever you feel that you are qualified to do and so far that has been to only make silly random replies that never deal with any of the facts pertaining to the JFK assassination.

[Bill Miller]

If you look at the Mal Couch WC testimony again, he also mentions "the steps & the pathway" when trying to explain where he saw this blood.

It isn't clear he was talking about this area in the filmed sequence above but it is a real possibility.

It is odd that Couch would mention 'steps' unless there were steps near the loading dock of the TSBD or something he was referring to. I say this because he has spoken to Gary Mack on a few occassions and has always placed the blood stain near the corner of the TSBD on the sidewalk/pathway.

The man with the coat, a detective, looks back at the policeman who has just told the girl to move away, ignores him & continues to walk towards the dark patch on the path for a closer look & almost bumps heads with another detective(older guy in black, who resembles the CSI scene on the sixth floor) who also wants a closer look.

There were groves of people who went up that walkway and many of them could not have helped see the liguid on the sidewalk, but they would have seen it in color and not B&W. There has to be a reason so many people ignored it and moved on and I suspect that it was because they were able to quickly see that it was not blood, but rather something else.

The patch could be blood but it could also just be a spilt drink, plenty of kids ran up there behind the wall too.

If you want to rule out this as being blood then I guess you could show the scene to a pathologist or someone.

A CSI investigator saw the liquid in a frame I showed him and he said as I expected that the liquid was not spilled in one direction as if knocked over. He pointed out the uniformed pooling as if someone merely poured a liquid onto the sidewalk and it equally pooled outward. I have already shared what was said about what would be expected if it had been someone bleeded that profusely.

It is theorised that Gordon Arnold laid on the ground for a minute by his supporters(I am not one of them), I am of the opinion that even as late as Bond6(well over a minute) there is still no sign of anyone getting up from behind the wall.

I do not agree, for there is a sign of someone in light clothing in Moorman's photo and the same can be said about someone rising above the wall in a sitting or kneeling stance in the Bond. This would be compatible with rising up and removing the film from one's camera and handing it to one of the individuals in dark clothing as Arnold had described. So while not proven beyond all doubt, this is another instance where circumstantial evidence was found to support Arnold's story well after he had committed himself to it.

Edited February 10, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Denis Morissette]

I think the man in black who passes by the pool of something is Buddy Walthers. I would be surprised he did not mention to the WC the blood if it had been blood. But maybe it's not even Walthers.

[Shanet Clark]

Everyone look up at the photos Bill Miller has posted.

In the close up of the right hand photo, there is an arrow pointing

to a man in white standing at the break in the retaining wall.

This is where the blood was spilled.

This is the exact spot where the NIX home movie film shows

the CLASSIC GUNMAN in a white shirt tracking the limousine

with a gun barrel.

Thanks Bill for posting this pivotal clinching image of the White

Shirt Classic Gunman......

[Bill Miller]

Everyone look up at the photos Bill Miller has posted.

In the close up of the right hand photo, there is an arrow pointing

to a man in white standing at the break in the retaining wall.

This is where the blood was spilled.

This is the exact spot where the NIX home movie film shows

the CLASSIC GUNMAN in a white shirt tracking the limousine

with a gun barrel.

Thanks Bill for posting this pivotal clinching image of the White

Shirt Classic Gunman......

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shanet - you are making some really big errors in perspective as to your location of the liquid on the sidewalk and the alleged 'classic gunman' figure. When using the Nix film - the liguid would be due West of the notch in the wall, thus placing it to the left of the white car seen in the RR yard. Your alleged 'classic gunman' is on a line between the notch right at the wall the the South shelter wall. Of course, we have already danced over Moorman's photograph being genuine, thus there is no one seen between the notch in the wall and the South shelter wall.

I should also tell you that there is another Bond photo that shows just the head of someone in light clothing rising over the wall. Then came the upper body in the latter photo. The classic gunman figure is still seen in the Bell film well after the fact. I contend that it is because the light and shadows are still hitting the South shelter wall. Never-the-less ... at no time does the alleged classic gunman figure get down onto the ground so just his head can be seen rising above the wall. As I said - the alleged shape never moves at anytime.

Take note that there are two "white hats" on the walkway with their coats over their arm.

Edited February 10, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Steve Thomas]

Bill,

Take note that there are two "white hats" on the walkway with their coats over their arm.

I don't know if you meant to imply that these men are from the Homicde Bureau, but when I showed this picture to two former Dallas Policemen, one of them told me that these men would not be Detectives, precisely because they are carrying coats. To paraphrase, one of them said no Homicide Detective worth his salt would be investigating a crime scene carrying a coat.

Steve Thomas

[Bill Miller]

I don't know if you meant to imply that these men are from the Homicde Bureau, but when I showed this picture to two former Dallas Policemen, one of them told me that these men would not be Detectives, precisely because they are carrying coats. To paraphrase, one of them said no Homicide Detective worth his salt would be investigating a crime scene carrying a coat.

Steve Thomas

Yes - I implied that these men may be detectives from the Homicide division. They certainly seem to be buying their hats at the same store. Many people in the plaza that day had on coats or were carrying them, especially rain coats. Most professionals don't like to get their suit's wet, so they carry a light coat to put on in the event it starts to rain. That is not to say that this is the case here, but I would bet that even Homicide detectives wore coats/rain coats at times. So considering that it was raining earlier and it had just started to clear before the motorcade started, I imagine that it is possible that some of these men still had their coats with them at the time of the shooting.

[David G. Healy]

BM wrote:

Yes - I implied that these men may be detectives from the Homicide division. They certainly seem to be buying their hats at the same store. Many people in the plaza that day had on coats or were carrying them, especially rain coats. Most professionals don't like to get their suit's wet, so they carry a light coat to put on in the event it starts to rain. That is not to say that this is the case here, but I would bet that even Homicide detectives wore coats/rain coats at times. So considering that it was raining earlier and it had just started to clear before the motorcade started, I imagine that it is possible that some of these men still had their coats with them at the time of the shooting.

____________

Imagine = proof/fact? Not to worry, I won't quote you from the past -- Amazing Bill, simply amazing - this revelation sheds new light on the case you know 'everything' about -- truck on fellow traveler, truck on!

[Shanet Clark]

The detectives are obviously not all local

and they carry the extra raincoats over their arms to

cover things they might happen to pick up..........

[Bill Miller]

The detectives are obviously not all local

and they carry the extra raincoats over their arms to

cover things they might happen to pick up..........

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Some additional information that you may not know ...

The closest out of town detectives were in Fort Worth over 30 minutes away. The Darnell film was taken about 10 minutes following the assassination and well before anyone could have come from Fort Worth. I might add that the Fort Worth detectives had no jurisdiction in Dallas.

The Jim Murray photo above shows six local detectives with Oswald - one being Elmer Boyd on Oswald's immediate left. These were the local "white hats" so-to-speak.

Edited February 11, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Imagine = proof/fact? Not to worry, I won't quote you from the past -- Amazing Bill, simply amazing - this revelation sheds new light on the case you know 'everything' about -- truck on fellow traveler, truck on!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess we have something in common for I don't know what you are talking about either. If you have something to offer concerning the JFK assassination and quoting me will help, then by all means ... quote me anytime that you like.

[Shanet Clark]

{Rescinded}

lame thread

Edited February 11, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Bill Miller]

{Rescinded}

lame thread

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shanet - you posted in this thread a total of 7 times before this last remark about the thread being lame. I am wondering when did the thread become lame IYO? If nothing else - it was a good topic to show how people can get off on the wrong trail by not thinking the evidence through or checking their facts before hand. For instance ... I am sure that you didn't know how long after the assassination that the Darnell footage was shot, nor did you know where the closest outside detectives would have come from and how long it would have taken them to arrive in Dallas after hearing about the shooting. Those two pieces of information would be important in determining whether any outside detectives would be seen in Darnell's film. So IMO the thread wasn't totally lame for it should have taught some people a lesson in investigation techniques by way of example. This way that information can be applied to future questions that arise and the same mistakes won't have to be repeated.

Edited February 11, 2005 by Bill Miller

[Richard J. Smith]

The detectives are obviously not all local

and they carry the extra raincoats over their arms to

cover things they might happen to pick up..........

The closest out of town detectives were in Fort Worth over 30 minutes away. The Darnell film was taken about 10 minutes following the assassination and well before anyone could have come from Fort Worth. I might add that the Fort Worth detectives had no jurisdiction in Dallas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bill,

I can only assume Mr Clark is speculating that the "detectives" were agents of some sort, not necessarily policemen from another city such as Fort Worth. As you know, it is so easy to look at a photo and find ulterior motives, especially without corroboration. I believe your point is well taken, in that corroborative information is available and should be used. All too often, false conclusions are reached by not doing the comparison, or digging deeper into witness statements, interviews, testimony, etc. It seems there is an abundance of speculative opinion without corroborating fact these days. All one needs to do is voice an opinion and watch the bandwagon grow. Then again, maybe they were reverse MK/ULTRA'd.

RJS