What is now known about "The Radio Man" in Dealey Plaza?

[Sean Coleman]

Ah. Yes. How boring, excitement over.

[Chris Davidson]

10 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Umbrella Man, Dark-Complexioned Man (DCM), and a shooter in the storm drain: an hypothesis

I'm going to make a stab at interpreting DCM and Umbrella Man. I am skeptical of the Chamberlain appeasement symbol explanation. The motions of Umbrella Man and DCM, the what appears to be a radio with DCM, the sitting the way they do, and neither of them coming forward in any form until Witt in the 1970s, and the striking position exactly where JFK was shot driving by, add up to suspicion this was part of the assassination.

My analysis. Fact one: Umbrella Man is Witt, because the appearance matches as well as the confession.

Often the reason someone comes forward with something not previously disclosed is because it is going to come out anyway. The standard rule, e.g. with politicians, is when embarrassing or negative information is about to be disclosed from a hostile source, better to do so oneself first, "get in front of the story". The reason Witt came forward then, but not earlier, would be because he believed or realized he was going to be outed.  

Fact two: it is unlikely Witt would have been witting to any assassination plot details in advance. If he was, it would be expected that he would either have been killed unless he was able to disappear into hiding, but neither happened.

Speculation: Witt was asked, and either did as a favor, or perhaps for pay (doesn't matter), to do the umbrella signal when JFK's limousine was arriving at a certain position on Elm, and asked to keep it confidential, prepared in advance to give some other reason. The "some other reason" Witt had prepared or suggested to him from the beginning would be the appeasement symbol. What Witt actually was told was perhaps a photographer explained to Witt he needed the signal from Witt at a certain location to know when to start taking photos or film footage, but also gave some reason to Witt why he did not want that reason or his identity revealed and obtained Witt's agreement to confidentiality. The "cover story" of the appeasement-symbol was agreed at the outset as Witt's explanation if anyone asked at the time (no one did).

Witt successfully stayed under the radar unidentified until he came forward (to preempt being outed) to HSCA in the 1970s.

The reason Witt might not come forward following the assassination, or, when about to be outed years later did not tell truthfully to HSCA that a "photographer" whom he either did or did not know had arranged with him as a favor to signal when the limo was at a certain point, might be explained for two reasons. First, because that would force Witt to identify the photographer friend or associate to whom Witt had promised confidentiality, to which may or may not be added fear of consequences depending on who it was. So Witt stuck to the planned cover story. The other reason would be Witt would come under intense scrutiny, likely for life and possibly with criminal prosecution consequences, as suspected of being part of the assassination enhanced by his failure to come forward earlier with what he knew. Simpler to give the standby appeasement-symbol explanation, sounds plausible.

If Witt was asked to do so to assist a photographer, that opens the possibility that it might not really have been about a photographer needing a signal.

A conclusion from reasoning: Witt was innocent of advance knowledge of the assassination as related to his actions. If he was told and believed it was for a photographers' signal purpose Witt might or might not have continued to believe that after the assassination, viewing it, just as many others than Witt today view it, as a freak coincidence that JFK had been shot in the head a moment later.

Fact three (a further conclusion from reasoning): It is likely Witt did not know DCM (as Witt said he did not), but DCM is another story, and DCM may have been witting to the assassination. That is, Witt was innocent and doing what he thought was for a confidential, but innocent, purpose for a photographer. Witt did not choose to have DCM near him, but DCM chose to be near Witt.

Four (conclusion based on the radio with DCM): DCM is witting to the assassination.

Five (from reasoning): the movements of both DCM and Umbrella Man functioned (unwittingly in the case of Witt, no pun intended) as a signal seen by a shooter, who was prepared to shoot but not in a position to see the approach of the presidential limousine himself.

Six (from reasoning): the hypothesized shooter must be in line of sight to Umbrella Man and DCM (which is not saying much since they could be seen from nearly all directions, however not all directions could see Umbrella Man and DCM but could not also see the presidential limousine approach).

With that foundation, the Proposal or Hypothesis: the signal was to an assassin shooting from the storm drain. Prepared for one shot, able to see both Umbrella Man and DCM, but not able to see the approach of the presidential limousine (for such a shooter, a signal such as given by Umbrella Man and DCM was necessary).

Forget crazy ideas of an assassin crawling through drainage pipes 3 feet in diameter to exit somewhere else. Just forget all that, not reasonable. Those notions are not necessary to consideration of a storm-drain shooter. All that needs to be supposed is a lifting of the manhole cover, a man descends, the manhole cover is replaced. The shot is fired, one single shot. The assassin remains in place, perhaps as long as until nightfall, then makes his exit again via lifting of the manhole cover and letting it back down. 

Because that storm drain (referring to the one just ahead of JFK's limousine on the north side when JFK was shot in the head) is in public view, there must be, in such a scenario, some mechanism for subterfuge disguising the fact that a man was let down into that manhole cover surreptitiously. In fact, such a thing happened the morning of the assassination: a truck was stalled, stopped right on the sidewalk, in at least approximately and plausibly the exact location, of the manhole cover. Forget all the debates over claimed witnessing of Ruby as driver or a man with a cap walking up the Grassy Knoll with something that someone thought could have been a rifle. The hypothesis is that it was all about getting a man into the storm drain surreptitiously, full stop. The truck was stalled quite a while before it was repaired and moved. Just a couple of hours before JFK was shot in that approximate location on Elm Street. 

The activity of that stalled truck could be a mechanism for a man to have been let down surreptitiously into the storm drain and the manhole cover put back on, however the specifics of the subterfuge worked.  In such a way that that could have happened in broad daylight with police officers in the vicinity and members of the public, other traffic driving around, and no one noticed. 

Man in place, the truck is fixed and leaves, in time for the presidential parade to proceed.

Forget stories of Roselli in the storm drain. Just nonsense. It would not have been Roselli. Focus first on analysis of viability of a shooter in the storm drain itself, and forget trying to identify him until it is first established credibly that one could have been there. 

The most serious objection to the storm drain shooter idea has been that at the position of JFK at Z313 (the head shot), there is not line of sight or fire from the storm drain--the limousine was not close enough, was too far back by, what, maybe 10-20 feet or so. This has been shown and photographed and appears a fairly compelling argument that a JFK head shot at Z313 is ruled out from the storm drain on that grounds alone (apart from any other arguments or issues). 

However, there have been recurring proposals that there was an additional shot at ca. Z328 or 330, after the Z313 head shot (or two shots at Z312-313 if there were two then a split-second apart, as some think). 

The reconstruction of the shots and their points of origin, and harmonization with the medical evidence and so on, is over my head in terms of present research ability or conclusions to know. So I do not know whether these conjectures are viable in terms of the larger picture of evidence. If they are clearly and definitively falsified (e.g. a shot at ca. Z328-330) the hypothesis fails. All I know is these are conjectures on the table set forth independently, and a couple of them become of much interest if they are viable (in terms of other physical evidence), in terms of the present hypothesis.

The two key points I noticed and put together, to form this hypothesis, are these:

• A shot at Z328-330 would allow just enough time for forward movement of the presidential limousine to give a perfect shot for an assassin shooting from the storm drain, if one was there. The objection that Z313 is not close enough to be viable, is removed at ca. Z328-330.
• There has been a history of independent argument that there was a shot at ca. Z328-330 (primarily drawing from blur analysis, and some witness accounts of a post-Z313 shot).
• The trajectory of a shot fired from the storm drain at ca. Z328-330, if there was such a shooter, would go somewhat upward and be from a little to the right--the shot would miss the windshield, and assuming Connally was not in the way (he had fallen over by that time?), could have hit JFK in the throat--the notorious entrance wound to the throat that it looked like--and exited through the rear of JFK's head at the place where reports located a wound near the EOP. Because of the unusual violent backward motion--and to the left--of JFK's head from the shot(s) at Z312-Z313--a shot at ca. Z328-330 from the trajectory of the storm drain could be about right for a through-and-through shot, entrance the throat, under the brain, out the back of the head near the EOP.
• Again, this is out of my league to know if that shot is medically (or trajectory) viable. However I did read in Pat Speer's chapters on the shots, that Cyril Wecht had at an early stage supposed exactly that trajectory for one of the shots--entrance at the throat, exit the lower back of the head--although Wecht then abandoned it. (Speer himself argues for the same through-and-through trajectory between those two points but in the opposite direction, entrance rear of the head and exit the throat. Much of Speer's discussion is therefore of interest, just the hypothesis here is the early Wecht view of going in the opposite direction from Speer's reconstruction.) Without claiming to know for sure on these matters myself, my reasoning is that if someone with as much forensic pathology experience as Wecht could have originally found a throat-to-ca. rear EOP shot trajectory plausible, well then, maybe it is plausible.
• The notion of the throat wound of JFK being an entrance has all along seemed appealing in terms of the reported witnesses' shape of that wound, with the main objections to the front shot being a perceived inability to explain where, if so, the bullet went, and why it did not end up in the back seat of the limousine. But most such notions assume a downward or horizontal trajectory from say, the overpass area. Few have considered a sloping upward trajectory from the storm drain which would pass through JFK's neck and head in a thrown-back unusual position, with the bullet then passing over the rear seat of the limousine, possibly still headed slightly upward. The problem of what happened to the bullet if there was a shot from the front--not in JFK's neck, and not in the back seat of the limousine--is removed.

The argument for this hypothesis is some things seem to fit or mesh. The argument is vulnerable in that it has several key moving parts all of which must be true and it is over my head to know for sure whether all stand.

Just as the narrowly failed ambush attempt on de Gaulle--a conspiracy to assassinate de Gaulle by crossfire--so a shooter in the storm drain would be perfect in a similar conspiracy to shoot JFK, for concealment, and if timed right, a perfect shot.

Back to Umbrella Man and DCM. They function to signal to the assassin in the storm drain. He gets one shot, takes it, hits JFK in the throat. 

A storm drain shooter would explain one of the most puzzling witness reports, from many witnesses: smelling smoke in the vicinity of the limousine.

And reports of a shot fired very close to the limousine (misunderstood by Newcomb and Adams early on as being from the driver!--but a storm drain shooter would account for the same evidence). 

If there was an assassination in broad daylight such as at Dealey Plaza, there aren't too many ways to work the shooters without being seen. From the storm drain would be one such. Some have suggested a decoy shot from the Grassy Knoll, to draw attention to the sound.

Just as the conspiracy to assassinate de Gaulle failed, the Dealey Plaza attempt on JFK's life could also have failed. Some attempts work, some don't. One risk with a storm drain shooter would be if some law enforcement thought to look in that storm drain and would see a person there. But for whatever reason that did not happen. (There is no known report of any officer saying they looked in that storm drain and confirmed no one was there.)

But just in case with that risk, maybe someone--an accomplice--could be outside the storm drain, perhaps set to decoy or interfere or draw an officer's attention away from the storm drain if an officer did look like showing interest there. With that in mind ... notice DCM not only sitting near the storm drain, but looking around with the storm drain in his eyesight. Maybe it means nothing.

In this reconstruction, the man in the storm drain, due to all the people milling around, might be imagined to remain there with a thermos of coffee and some sandwiches until nightfall. Then in the dead of night some van or truck comes through Dealey Plaza, something happens, the man is retrieved and they are out of there, mission accomplished and body intact. 

DCM never came forward, and although there have been a few conjectures, there is no secure photo identification of DCM. But in this reconstruction: 

• there would have been an assassin in the storm drain, responsible for a shot at ca. Z328-330 which hit JFK from the lower right and front in the throat; that shooter successfully escaped, identity unknown.
• DCM was party to it, identity also unknown.

Its a conjecture. I don't claim its more than that.  

Viewing limitation is the eastern sewer side/wall.

Earliest viewing opportunity would be approx extant z353 depending on JFK's height above the street.

 

[Robert Reeves]

4 hours ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Hi Robert. That is a very interesting clip. It could be a wave, and yet it could signify a spot-on 'hit'. = "Got him - good one!"

 

@Mervyn Hagger  the possible interaction between DCM and driver Greer. The arm raised by DCM followed by an acknowledging hand raised from the steering wheel by driver Greer?

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:

Viewing limitation is the eastern sewer side/wall.

Earliest viewing opportunity would be approx extant z353 depending on JFK's height above the street.

 

Thank you Chris D. This is important because if there is a falsification it is a service to all concerned and saves time to find out early rather than later, like Edison is said to have said about his 100th failed attempt to find a filament that would work for a light bulb: it is progress by ruling out something that is a deadend.

A key issue is could a standing DCM and Umbrella Man have been visible to someone in the storm drain. From your photo on the left, it does not look like it.

However I have read that the opening of the storm drain was wider (meaning here in vertical depth) in 1963 before some kind of road improvement or repaving was done post-1963 reflected in that photo. I do not know the status of that claim's verification (do you?). Can it be excluded that a person inside a storm drain with a possibly greater-vertical-depth opening in 1963 could have seen the umbrella of Umbrella Man? Note the angle of eyesight in your photo at left is not positioned to the far right of the opening of the storm drain looking east on Elm, which is the question at issue. 

If, say, the lower part of the storm drain opening in your photo on the left, which looks like road pavement, was not there or lower in Nov 1963, could that open up the possibility that JFK's upper body and head, of JFK sitting in the back of the limousine, could be visible from the storm drain earlier than Z353? (Also, as long as considering all possibilities, is a shot at Z353 excluded?)

One could also consider a modification to the hypothesis: on the hypothesis that there was a shooter in the storm drain requiring a signal: maybe the signal did not come from the umbrella/DCM but from one of the persons on the south side of Elm across the street from the storm drain, by some prearranged signal of movement, say with a camera or a piece of clothing or whatever. In that case no purpose would be served for a storm drain shooter by Umbrella Man pumping the umbrella, which would be unrelated. 

Edited August 13, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Steve Thomas]

Were any leads ever developed with respect to the radio itself?

That's a pretty sophisticated piece of equipment for the average joe on the street.

I don't know why, but I just got a flash of the IBM guys in Johnny Brewer's She Store.

Steve Thomas

[Mervyn Hagger]

1 hour ago, Robert Reeves said:

@Mervyn Hagger  the possible interaction between DCM and driver Greer. The arm raised by DCM followed by an acknowledging hand raised from the steering wheel by driver Greer?

 

 

Hi Robert, I am sorry I thought you were directing me to the windscreen/windshield. Okay, I get it, but was the arm raised long before the car drew parallel. The Zapruder film image almost drops off the screen. No criticism, just asking.

[Chris Davidson]

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Thank you Chris D. This is important because if there is a falsification it is a service to all concerned and saves time to find out early rather than later, like Edison is said to have said about his 100th failed attempt to find a filament that would work for a light bulb: it is progress by ruling out something that is a deadend.

A key issue is could a standing DCM and Umbrella Man have been visible to someone in the storm drain. From your photo on the left, it does not look like it.

However I have read that the opening of the storm drain was wider (meaning here in vertical depth) in 1963 before some kind of road improvement or repaving was done post-1963 reflected in that photo. I do not know the status of that claim's verification (do you?). Can it be excluded that a person inside a storm drain with a possibly greater-vertical-depth opening in 1963 could have seen the umbrella of Umbrella Man? Note the angle of eyesight in your photo at left is not positioned to the far right of the opening of the storm drain looking east on Elm, which is the question at issue. 

If, say, the lower part of the storm drain opening in your photo on the left, which looks like road pavement, was not there or lower in Nov 1963, could that open up the possibility that JFK's upper body and head, of JFK sitting in the back of the limousine, could be visible from the storm drain earlier than Z353? (Also, as long as considering all possibilities, is a shot at Z353 excluded?)

One could also consider a modification to the hypothesis: on the hypothesis that there was a shooter in the storm drain requiring a signal: maybe the signal did not come from the umbrella/DCM but from one of the persons on the south side of Elm across the street from the storm drain, by some prearranged signal of movement, say with a camera or a piece of clothing or whatever. In that case no purpose would be served for a storm drain shooter by Umbrella Man pumping the umbrella, which would be unrelated. 

Other fish to fry.

Good Luck.

Mr. ALTGENS - This would put me at approximately this area here, which would be about 15 feet from me at the time he was shot in the head--about 15 feet from the car on the west side of the car--on the side that Mrs. Kennedy was riding in the car.

[Joe Bauer]

2 hours ago, Mart Hall said:

Just as this thread was getting interesting. A fuller picture of the photo reveals the man to have a camera and is wearing a coat rather than a jacket like DCM.

 

 

AH HA!

That part of this DCM mystery is SOLVED!

Thank you Mart!

Great sleuthing skills!

[Cory Santos]

deleted

[Robert Reeves]

If you were wearing an odd shaped jacket in dealey plaza and stood just feet away from the president as his head exploded, and you do not intend to be part of the effort to solve the crime, you might wear something over the said distinctly odd jacket so you do not stand out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Vince Palamara]

On 8/12/2023 at 2:17 PM, Mervyn Hagger said:

Personally, I find this entire video very confusing, even though I stopped and restarted it several times. The music is entirely too loud and unnecessary. It is distracting. The idea of the man on the grass talking to the man on the bridge is plausible, but the comment about the rifle and the policemen on the fence who could see what was on the other side of the bridge implies that the man with a radio (which does indeed seem to make sense visually and verbally, having a rifle that the policeman could see .... Well that implies that not only was the policeman part of a plot, but so were the railroad workers unless they were blind. But they spotted smoke from behind the fence at the top of the grass covered little hill. That does not make sense. I am not sure what your thesis is regarding this entire sequence but I cannot agree with you that it is definitive of anything. It seems to raise a lot of questions about the point you are trying make above the din of that music.

I agree about the music- that part of the video was from another channel creator.

[Vince Palamara]

On 8/12/2023 at 2:08 PM, Paul Brancato said:

Nice Bartok soundtrack. The second part of the video could use some explanation. Did you do the video Vince?

It is a compilation. The first part is mine but the majority is another uploader I credit. It's a little bit of a mish mash but he focused on the same area I did, so I decided to compile them.