Jump to content
The Education Forum

Photographic Evidence


Recommended Posts

Hi to all. My first post in the forum & I have some questions regarding the photographic evidence which i hope somebody may be able to shed some light on.

In Robert Groden's book KOTP on pages 56-57 how long after the last shot was this picture taken?.The guy looking over the fence, could this person be same guy that joined two gents on the steps (as seen in the muchmore footage) & then turned & ran following the head shot?

Do any of the gents in this picture resemble the guy encountered by the first policeman on the knoll?

Could BDM be the guy joining two others on the knoll steps during the shooting?

Are there any other photos of the figure in the Dal-tex building?

If DCM & UM were part of a signal team to unseen assassins & DCM was photographed with a radio then why use visual signs when surely this is as obvious as talking into a radio during the shooting.

Any thoughts or answers?

Apologies if this seems a bit rushed but I'm also trying to get my childrens dinner sorted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If DCM & UM were part of a signal team to unseen assassins & DCM was photographed with a radio then why use visual signs when surely this is as obvious as talking into a radio during the shooting.

many thanks jim.

As there could be no certainty that radio communications would work on the day [witness the DPD technical difficulties], a visual signal was a good fallback in case the radios failed. Planning for all contingencies required this as a Plan B, just in case.

FWIW....

Good questions...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As there could be no certainty that radio communications would work on the day [witness the DPD technical difficulties], a visual signal was a good fallback in case the radios failed.  Planning for all contingencies required this as a Plan B, just in case.   

Great observation! When I read this, I thought immediately about what the British naturalist Thomas Huxley said in 1859 when he finished reading Darwin's theory of natural selection in On the Origin of Species: "How stupid that I didn't think of that!"

I think you've explained exactly why those two guys were conspicuously waving and pumping an umbrella as if radios didn't exist.

Welcome and thank you for joining the forum.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As there could be no certainty that radio communications would work on the day [witness the DPD technical difficulties], a visual signal was a good fallback in case the radios failed.  Planning for all contingencies required this as a Plan B, just in case.   

Great observation! When I read this, I thought immediately about what the British naturalist Thomas Huxley said in 1859 when he finished reading Darwin's theory of natural selection in On the Origin of Species: "How stupid that I didn't think of that!"

I think you've explained exactly why those two guys were conspicuously waving and pumping an umbrella as if radios didn't exist.

Welcome and thank you for joining the forum.

Ron

Some excellent points here. I have also exchanged views over the years that the reason for the umbrella pumping and waving was to distract the Secret Service Agents. This is a logical possibility as the USSS primary focus on a moving motorcade are the threats within close proximity to the protective party.

One concern with the pumping of the umbrella and waving as a fallback as a signal if the radios failed is the timeline issue. Due to the short timespan of the limo on main, a triangulation of shooters would rely on visuals and shoot off the startle reaction of the others shots being fired in the sequence and would not allow for the luxery of radio communications, once the sequence began. This reverts back to action v. reaction v. response delays.

My major concern with the UM and DCM being part of the assassination team is their close proximity to the target which is in a moving vehicle made of metal and steel and with shots being fired from various angles of shot origin. A bit to close for comfort in my opinion with issues of riccochet and shot displacement. I put this into the same catagory of doubt that some feel that Greer and Kellerman were in on it.

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[A bit to close for comfort in my opinion with issues of riccochet and shot displacement. I put this into the same catagory of doubt that some feel that Greer and Kellerman were in on it.

Al

Amen! And some people even assert that Connally was in on it! I find it difficult to believe that LBJ would expose his close friend Connally to the gunfire, although I do admit that John has offered convincing evidence that LBJ had a strong motive to need to become president in the fall of 1963.

Connally was a real gutsy guy. I think Connally could have had LBJ dump JFK (rather than vice-versa) by going to JFK and saying, "Mr, President, resign for health reasons, or every paper in the country will have this file regarding you and Ellen Rometsch. If you resign for health resigns I assure you that Lyndon and I will do everything in our power to see that this story is forever buried."

What choice would Kennedy have had? There was no way he could have survived that. In GB, of course, the PM had just resigned over the Profumo affair (sexual infidelity of a Cabinet member) even though the PM himself was not involved.

Parenthetically, Mark Howell tells me (I'll check his source) that when JFK and MacMillan met in Key West in 1961 JFK made remarks to MacMillan re womanizing and MacMillian was shocked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Robert Groden's book KOTP on pages 56-57 how long after the last shot was this picture taken?.The guy looking over the fence, could this person be same guy that joined two gents on the steps (as seen in the muchmore footage) & then turned & ran following the head shot?

This photo was taken a minute or more after the shooting. Note that the Dark Complected Man (far left) is already making his way down the street after having sat on the curb.

The fellow who turned and ran was wearing dark trousers, unlike the guy looking over the fence.

Do any of the gents in this picture resemble the guy encountered by the first policeman on the knoll?

The men in suits are deputies who ran over from in front of the sheriff's office where they were watching the parade.

Could BDM be the guy joining two others on the knoll steps during the shooting?

Possibly.

Are there any other photos of the figure in the Dal-tex building?

I don't think so, but there is another photo of the guy sitting on the fire escape, right over the purported shooter. It's Altgens 5 (p. 324 in POTP; the man is cropped out in TKOAP, p. 15), taken while the limo is on Houston, and it's a clear view of the man on the fire escape but from far away. I wish someone would blow him up to try to get a better look at him.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And some people even assert that Connally was in on it!  I find it difficult to believe that LBJ would expose his close friend Connally to the gunfire, although I do admit that John has offered convincing evidence that LBJ had a strong motive to need to become president in the fall of 1963.

Connally could have been in on it, but thought it would happen at the Trade Mart, when he and Mrs. Connally were out of the way.

Then, when it happened at Dealey Plaza, Connally was so surprised he said, "My God, they're going to kill us all!"

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was also not helpful to the overall cover-up as he insisted adamantly until the end - as did his wife Nellie - that the first shot which struck JFK was an entirely different bullet from the one which hit him soon after. Not much of a "team player"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

many thanks Ron for your input.

i haven't seen the Muchmore footage in a long time but if i remember correctly the third guy on the steps is off back up the steps at the time of the headshot thus this man would be in the vacinity of Gordon Arnold/BM etc & must rank as an acomplice or at least a much sort after witness.

regards jim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roy Hargraves goes to some length in describing what the signalman's role was, and why there would need to be more than one of them - see Larry Hancock's 'Someone would have talked.' Page ? The Noel Twyman interview of Hargraves and GPH's brother Robert.

If you consider the landscape, unless there are signalmen up near the corner of Elm and Houston that have not yet been discovered, you can segment the operation into three separate fusillades, fired at different intervals, when the target was in range of certain locations, using a combination of hand and radio signals.

At center would be DCM, who was visible to most of the operatives, save perhaps the guys in the office buildings. If you draw a line on an aerial map, you can see that DCMs location is like the center of a spoked wheel.

Radios were used extensively - this per photographic analysis I did myself, but radios couldn't be used without reservation out in the open [e.g. near the Stemmons Freeway sign]. We see DCM using one after the target has been successfully eliminated. I also believe Red Shirt Man can be seen using his as well.

Speculating on TSBD that radios would be critical, because I do not know if they had an unobscured view of DCM from both windows.

The DalTex 2nd floor window [under the fire escape] has a very clear view of one of the operatives on his radio. It's big and bulky, and the closest I could come to making it is a Motorola 220, known as 'The brick.' I have close-ups of the window and attempted to pull the shooter forward also. IMO, he is to the left [our right] of the man in the window. If you look almost directly below this window, standing in the street, you find a man that looks like Danny Garcia Arce. Standing in front of Danny is another man on a radio - IMO.

If a team was also located on the other side of the underpass, it would have required a signalman on the underpass and a radio at a minimum - IMO. The issue of the DPD open mic shouldn't be ruled out as coincidence. I agree with Robert Charles Dunne - you wouldn't take the risk. Execute the plan, always have a back-up, plausible denial and enough dope on your operatives to distance yourself and blackmail them :plane .

If you examine the area, you find some genuine logic behind the movement of 'Red shirt man' on the stairs at Elm, and 'Gin and Tonic' man across the street. However, I don't credit the umbrella pumping with being a signal, personally. DCM's upraised fist was signal enough. IMO the umbrella pumping was a personal send off 'F :o you' from those personally involved for their perception of Kennedy's failure to provide the umbrella of cover promised during BOP. Anything about Chamberlain should be deferred to WILT Chamberlain, and Louis Witt should comply with providing photos of himself from 1963 if he wants anyone to believe his patently absurd story.

But to specifically address one of the questions originally raised:

In Robert Groden's book KOTP on pages 56-57 how long after the last shot was this picture taken?.The guy looking over the fence, could this person be same guy that joined two gents on the steps (as seen in the muchmore footage) & then turned & ran following the head shot?

Not a chance in hell - IMO. The man seen on the stairs is incomplete. He has sticks for legs, and an unfinished left foot. He is an almosy identical cut & paste template in Muchmore and Nix. He is what I call, 'The Phantom.'

When Emmett Hudson was presented with visual evidence of his location in Dealey Plaza, during his WC testimony, he was provided with the Altgens and a photo from the FBI re-enactment. Brilliant, IMO, as he would have asked too many questions concerning the lack of people on the steps behind him, behind the retaining wall, and who exactly the clown was standing next to him.

Emmett makes it VERY clear: The young man arrived before the motorcade. They had some discussion. They sat on the steps. The young man worked on Industrial, so he said, but managed to find parking in one of the parking lots up there [at the knoll? With everyone else?]. They separated shortly before the motorcade arrived. The young man threw himself prone, and knew that shots were being fired at the President [when oddly enough no one else did]. He urged Emmett to go prone, which Emmett says that he did. Emmett then heard a shot go directly over his head - fired from either behind the retaining wall, behind the fence, or from the man hiding behind the tree in front of the fence.

The Phantom, as seen in Nix is transparent. He is awkward. He turns and runs when no one else in the entire Plaza does. He disappears [laugh] into the shadow of the Texas Live Oak. What a joke. Clearly he is not Emmett's young man. And if you examine him with a good photoshop program, you find that grass can be seen through his body.

See Hudson's testimony for more detail.

Most likely this man was generated as a specific alteration geared to create a diversion. I can only theorize that it was to cover the men on the stairs, and possibly the man crouching behind the tree, who can be seen in Moorman. He is a non-entity, a piece of fictionalized Government cover-up nonsense. They use this technique more than once. It was high tech stuff for 1963, but unfortunately, in 2005 it's like watching an Ed Wood movie.

Worth watching however, is the young man, whom I call "Red Shirt Man." See how he was 'changed' in early generations of the Moorman photo, to what he looks like in later versions. See him act like a fan at the world cup when Kennedy gets hit in Muchmore. See him sitting down like a lot of the other operatives - was this not planned in advance? Watch the Cuban guy run to his location in the aftermath. You can see this in TKOAP.

Here's my question. Why does Emmett remain seated? Is it only Emmett that continues to sit in that location, or is there someone else there as well? Did one of these jokers get clipped by 'friendly' fire, or return fire? Is that where the pools of blood originated? The Wiegman film is one reason that I ask.

Jean Hill saw blood on the stairs. She pointed out the area to Jack White. It was on the stairs, not the level part of the sidewalk. Jean's testimony concerning the location of the shots, the man running and the blood became seriously compromised when she allowed Arlen Specter to draw a scale model of the Plaza. See the Hill exhibit in the WR. She had to place everything within an area of a few millimeters in diameter. Ingenious! Someone get him elected to an office of genuine importance for that role.

Malcolm Couch saw blood behind the retaining wall and captured it on film. This area was photographed and published in newspapers. Malcolm goes into some detail concerning this area in his WC testimony.

Someone informed me that an ex-FBI agent who rushed to the scene and was there within 10 minutes, parked his car over yet another pool of blood in the back parking lot area, close to the pergola.

Per MIDP, 2 men, Jerry Coley and Charlie Mulkey saw another pool of blood - was this one at the sidewalk at the TSBD, near it's back corner, on the unnamed road, or on the steps, as the book implies?

Who got tagged, and by whom?

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some excellent points here. I have also exchanged views over the years that the reason for the umbrella pumping and waving was to distract the Secret Service Agents. This is a logical possibility as the USSS primary focus on a moving motorcade are the threats within close proximity to the protective party.

One concern with the pumping of the umbrella and waving as a fallback as a signal if the radios failed is the timeline issue. Due to the short timespan of the limo on main, a triangulation of shooters would rely on visuals and shoot off the startle reaction of the others shots being fired in the sequence and would not allow for the luxery of radio communications, once the sequence began. This reverts back to action v. reaction v. response delays.

My major concern with the UM and DCM being part of the assassination team is their close proximity to the target which is in a moving vehicle made of metal and steel and with shots being fired from various angles of shot origin. A bit to close for comfort in my opinion with issues of riccochet and shot displacement. I put this into the same catagory of doubt that some feel that Greer and Kellerman were in on it.

Al

Hi Al:

Thanks for the comments. Your suggestion that the UM was placed there to distract the USSS agents is a viable one, albeit not flashy enough to have actually caught their attention, from what I can tell.

As for these two men placing themselves in harm's way in DP, one must assume that ALL parties to the event were doing precisely that, for there could have been no guarantees that any of them would leave Dealey Plaza alive.

Regarding Greer and his curious driving display that day, there are two distinct avenues of speculation.

The first is the Cooper/Linton school of thought - filched wholesale from Newcomb's and Adams' unpublished "Murder From Within" - that Greer actually shot the President. I dismiss that on its face as ludicrous, as any clear copy of the Z-film makes plain. How could the driver have killed his key passenger without anyone in [or outside] the car noticing?

The second theory is that Greer deliberately slowed to a crawl in order for the assassins' bullets to more easily and accurately find their mark, a perfectly reasonable piece of speculation [particularly given the appalling response time of most SS agents on the scene.]

However, as I usually find a mundane explanation more compelling than a fanciful one, I would suggest a perfectly natural reason for Greer to slow the vehicle to a stop, without him being a conspirator.

Were the shots coming from behind the car - per the official version - Greer would undoubtedly have pumped the gas and sped off. However, had the shots been fired from in front of the car - per the windshield bullet hole - his perfectly natural, instinctive response would have been to brake the car, rather than continue INTO the line of fire.

We seem to agree on Greer, at least.

In any case, re: the UM and DCM, if we dismiss their roles as signalmen, we are back at Square One, attempting to rationalize their highly anomalous behaviour, and their apparent collaboration, during the ultimate treasonous crime. Odd behaviour at the crime scene marks them as worthy of our scrutiny. Irrespective of whether one accepts they were signalmen on that day, Louis Witt's rationale to the HSCA is nonsensical in the extreme. If they did NOT play a role in the day's events, precisely how does one explain their behaviour? Umbrella-pumping as a symbolic allusion to Joe Kennedy? Utter rubbish.

Amen!  And some people even assert that Connally was in on it!  I find it difficult to believe that LBJ would expose his close friend Connally to the gunfire, although I do admit that John has offered convincing evidence that LBJ had a strong motive to need to become president in the fall of 1963.

color]

Hi Tim:

Please bear in mind that original plans called for Senator Yarborough to share the limo with the equally "liberal" President, while the "conservative" Vice President and his friend the Texas Governor were to ride together in the followup car. There was quite a stink raised about these seating arrangements before Kennedy himself, apparently, settled the issue by insisting on the final seating configuration we see on film.

At this juncture, what could be said? Assuming Connally were a conspirator, would he volunteer to Kennedy that he refused to ride in the President's limo? What possible reason could he give for such a refusal? [FWIW... I believe Connally was out of the loop - he had argued AGAINST the Texas visit from the outset - though others will disagree.]

In the event that Connally knew nothing in advance about the assassination, but Johnson did, would Johnson have argued more strenuously in order to save a friend? Doubtful. To accept this, one must ignore all we have learned about the Vice President's pathalogical disregard for anything that stood between him and his aims. If the accidental/collateral-damage murder of Connally assured Johnson's ascension to the Oval Office, I suspect the Vice President would not have thought twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Al:

Thanks for the comments. Your suggestion that the UM was placed there to distract the USSS agents is a viable one, albeit not flashy enough to have actually caught their attention, from what I can tell.

As for these two men placing themselves in harm's way in DP, one must assume that ALL parties to the event were doing precisely that, for there could have been no guarantees that any of them would leave Dealey Plaza alive.

Regarding Greer and his curious driving display that day, there are two distinct avenues of speculation.

The first is the Cooper/Linton school of thought - filched wholesale from Newcomb's and Adams' unpublished "Murder From Within" - that Greer actually shot the President. I dismiss that on its face as ludicrous, as any clear copy of the Z-film makes plain. How could the driver have killed his key passenger without anyone in [or outside] the car noticing?

The second theory is that Greer deliberately slowed to a crawl in order for the assassins' bullets to more easily and accurately find their mark, a perfectly reasonable piece of speculation [particularly given the appalling response time of most SS agents on the scene.]

However, as I usually find a mundane explanation more compelling than a fanciful one, I would suggest a perfectly natural reason for Greer to slow the vehicle to a stop, without him being a conspirator.

Were the shots coming from behind the car - per the official version - Greer would undoubtedly have pumped the gas and sped off. However, had the shots been fired from in front of the car - per the windshield bullet hole - his perfectly natural, instinctive response would have been to brake the car, rather than continue INTO the line of fire.

We seem to agree on Greer, at least.

In any case, re: the UM and DCM, if we dismiss their roles as signalmen, we are back at Square One, attempting to rationalize their highly anomalous behaviour, and their apparent collaboration, during the ultimate treasonous crime. Odd behaviour at the crime scene marks them as worthy of our scrutiny. Irrespective of whether one accepts they were signalmen on that day, Louis Witt's rationale to the HSCA is nonsensical in the extreme. If they did NOT play a role in the day's events, precisely how does one explain their behaviour? Umbrella-pumping as a symbolic allusion to Joe Kennedy? Utter rubbish.

Hello John, Great to have you posting here as I appreciate your approach and knowlege of the assassination.

I obviously do not believe Greer was involved as it could have been a suicidal mission on his part, and he could have actually brought the limo to a halt and used the excuse that he was contemplating his next move to get free of the gunfire as an excuse, which he did not do. Another explanation beyond what you pointed out as his reluctance to drive into the gunfire as the shot burst through the windshield (and I have respect for that theory), is that when he looked over his shoulder to check the commotion to the rear, he may have simply subconsciously applied the brakes in order to control the vehicle. In previous slow moving motorcades where motorcycles outriders were utilized, they formed a "flying wedge" pattern to the front of the limo (as I have attached). Greer could have subconsciously applied the brakes due to the normal close proximity of the motorcycles on previous motorcades, that were not present here. In order to understand Greer's actions, we must put ourself in his place at the time, instead of critiqing his performance with what we know or assume now.

As far as UM and DCM goes, I feel we can read too much into their actions. I have taken part in numerous security details involving Presidents, VP and candidates for the office and in this election year particularly, have been the local LE liaison to the USSS for motorcade planning and duties. It never ceases to imaze me the strange individuals these visits bring out and the strange behavior they show when the motorcade passes. Some of the actions and signs I have seen were laughable now, but concerning at the time, and they were harmless after all.

Amen!  And some people even assert that Connally was in on it!  I find it difficult to believe that LBJ would expose his close friend Connally to the gunfire, although I do admit that John has offered convincing evidence that LBJ had a strong motive to need to become president in the fall of 1963.

color]

Hi Tim:

Please bear in mind that original plans called for Senator Yarborough to share the limo with the equally "liberal" President, while the "conservative" Vice President and his friend the Texas Governor were to ride together in the followup car. There was quite a stink raised about these seating arrangements before Kennedy himself, apparently, settled the issue by insisting on the final seating configuration we see on film.

At this juncture, what could be said? Assuming Connally were a conspirator, would he volunteer to Kennedy that he refused to ride in the President's limo? What possible reason could he give for such a refusal? [FWIW... I believe Connally was out of the loop - he had argued AGAINST the Texas visit from the outset - though others will disagree.]

In the event that Connally knew nothing in advance about the assassination, but Johnson did, would Johnson have argued more strenuously in order to save a friend? Doubtful. To accept this, one must ignore all we have learned about the Vice President's pathalogical disregard for anything that stood between him and his aims. If the accidental/collateral-damage murder of Connally assured Johnson's ascension to the Oval Office, I suspect the Vice President would not have thought twice.

I couldn't agree more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...