Those Front Steps

[Alan Ford]

22 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

What makes you think there wasn't?

In any event, people generally know where a crosswalk is without one actually being painted in. They generally don't terminate at a business's front door, but at a sidewalk leading away from the crosswalk.

The east edge of the brick road constituting Elm Street Extension served as the western boundary of the natural crosswalk.

I don't think there was a crosswalk because I haven't seen a hint of such in any image from 11/22/63. Your second and third paragraphs above---------with their sudden pivot to implicit, not-actually-painted-in, 'natural' crosswalks-----------suggest you have drawn a blank too.

Look, Mr. Larsen, you got the Baker-in-Darnell thing right the first time round: he's running not for the front steps but in the direction of the mailboxes. I suspect you found this unsatisfactory, because there seemed no reason in the world why he would be running there. And so you convinced yourself, via a non-existent crosswalk and a non-existent change in Officer Baker's direction, that he must be heading for the intersection. He isn't. He's just continuing to run straight for the area by the mailboxes.

You established very well (via shadows) that he does not come into contact with Mr. Truly. There is some distance between them. This was great work. Now if one tunes out Mr. Truly's turning body and just follows Officer Baker and Officer Baker alone, the fact that this is a straight, uninterrupted, undeviated-from run from A to B becomes evident. It's really not complicated:

There is further work to be done now in teasing out what exactly that man by the mailboxes is doing. Because, unlike the crosswalk, he is actually a real element in the scene.

[Alan Ford]

Friends, by the time we lose sight of Officer Baker in Darnell, he is about to reach the sidewalk. His shadow on the ground ahead of him shows this

He appears to be slowing in pace somewhat----------------------------

---------------------------which makes perfect sense as he is about to bring himself to a stop on the sidewalk and challenge the man.

I also believe Officer Baker may have just used his right hand to grab his gun from its holster while crossing the Elm St. extension.

Had Mr. Darnell kept filming for a few seconds longer, we would surely be witnessing an altercation between Officer Baker and the man. It would have clarified much!

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

Look, Mr. Larsen, you got the Baker-in-Darnell thing right the first time round: he's running not for the front steps but in the direction of the mailboxes. I suspect you found this unsatisfactory, because there seemed no reason in the world why he would be running there. And so you convinced yourself ... that he must be heading for the intersection.

 

No.

What I did was look at the Darnell clip carefully and noticed, among other things, that we were looking at Baker's profile, and not his butt side. Which told me that he had veered to his right.

The difference between you and me, Alan, is that you shape the evidence to fit your theory whereas I shape my theory to fit the evidence.

 

[Alan Ford]

8 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

No.

What I did was look at the Darnell clip carefully and noticed, among other things, that we were looking at Baker's profile, and not his butt side. Which told me that he had veered to his right.

The difference between you and me, Alan, is that you shape the evidence to fit your theory whereas I shape my theory to fit the evidence.

Sorry, Mr. Larsen, but you anachronistically invented a crosswalk and built on this error by misreading the angle at which Darnell captures the gradual convergence of Officer Baker and the running woman as they head for the mailboxes area.

The last we see of Officer Baker, his shadow is still progressing forward to the curb. He is not suddenly moving laterally, as you claim.

The fact that we don't see him from "his butt side" simply shows that he's not heading for the front steps-----------a crucial point we are in full agreement on.

Like I say, you got this right-------brilliantly right---------the first time round. All I have done is make sense of what at the time was a perplexing conclusion-------Officer Baker is running towards the mailboxes area---------by filling in the all-important context (the man standing there).

And when I say that a man is standing there doing something very odd, that is not a claim or a theory, pet or otherwise. It is just an observation----------------------

[David Von Pein]

43 minutes ago, Alan Ford said:

The last we see of Officer Baker, his shadow is still progressing forward to the curb.

The GIF clip below shows that Officer Baker was certainly moving toward the curb, with his shadow "climbing the curb" (so to speak). And this "curb-climbing shadow" fact is occurring directly in front of the steps to the Depository, which is perfectly consistent with Baker's never-wavering claim that he went straight from his motorcycle to the front entrance of the TSBD.

(I can't recall who created this clip, so I don't know who inserted all the colored lines on it. But it wasn't me.)....

Related Discussion From April 2016:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1123.html

 

Edited March 1 by David Von Pein

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

Sorry, Mr. Larsen, but you anachronistically invented a crosswalk and built on this error by misreading the angle at which Darnell captures the gradual convergence of Officer Baker and the running woman as they head for the mailboxes area.

 

I did no such thing. I didn't use crosswalk lines to perform my analysis. I merely noticed and noted, after my analysis was completed, that Baker and the two woman followed pretty closely the lines of today's crosswalk.

 

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

The last we see of Officer Baker, his shadow is still progressing forward to the curb. He is not suddenly moving laterally, as you claim.

 

I never claimed that Baker suddenly moved laterally. He was in the process of veering to the right on his last step. So he was still approaching the steps, but not at the same rate as before. And he had turned enough that we don't have a clear view of his butt the way we do of the two women.

 

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

Like I say, you got this right-------brilliantly right---------the first time round.

 

I just spent some time studying more carefully all the clips I created for my analysis (many of which I didn't use in my presentation) and I will grant you this much: I now agree with you that Baker's initial path -- had he not veered right -- is very close to what is shown in the animated GIF you posted. He would have hit the outside wall of the TSBD right between the east side of the steps and the mailbox area. Again, had he not veered right.

 

[Alan Ford]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

The GIF clip below shows that Officer Baker was certainly moving toward the curb, with his shadow "climbing the curb" (so to speak). And this "curb-climbing shadow" fact is occurring directly in front of the steps to the Depository, which is perfectly consistent with Baker's never-wavering claim that he went straight from his motorcycle to the front entrance of the TSBD.

The ball was certainly rising toward the goal. And this rising ball fact is occurring directly in front of the goal, which is perfectly consistent with the penalty kicker's never-wavering claim that he kicked the ball straight into the net.

Edited March 1 by Alan Ford

[Alan Ford]

SL: I did no such thing. I didn't use crosswalk lines to perform my analysis. I merely noticed and noted, after my analysis was completed, that Baker and the two woman followed pretty closely the lines of today's crosswalk.

AF: With respect, no------------you explained Officer Baker's bizarrely zigzag posited route to the intersection by saying he was deliberately using the crosswalk. But there was no crosswalk, so that explanation collapses. Leaving you with a bizarrely zigzag posited route to the intersection taken by Officer Baker for no good reason. If he wanted to go to the intersection he'd just run in the darn direction of it. He is, I think we can agree, in a hurry

SL: I never claimed that Baker suddenly moved laterally. He was in the process of veering to the right on his last step. So he was still approaching the steps, but not at the same rate as before. And he had turned enough that we don't have a clear view of his butt the way we do of the two women.

AF: Apple and orange, Mr. Larsen: you are again leaving out of account the fact that Officer Baker and the running woman are approaching the mailboxes area from different angles. They are gradually converging on the same area. And, as already pointed out, the only way we'd "have a clear view of [Officer Baker's] butt" would be if he were running with his back to Darnell for the front steps. And you and I agree he was not doing that.

SL: I just spent some time studying more carefully all the clips I created for my analyss (many of which I didn't use in my presentation) and I will grant you this much: I now agree with you that Baker's initial path -- had he not veered right -- is very close to what is shown in the animated GIF you posted. He would have hit the outside wall of the TSBD right between the east side of the steps and the mailbox area. Again, had he not veered right.

AF: I'm afraid the idea that he "veered right" after running straight in the direction of the mailboxes not only has no basis in common sense, it also has the demerit of having zero visual evidence-------zero-------in its favor. No crosswalk; no "process of veering right". Just Officer Baker leaving his bike and making a consistent beeline for the mailboxes area. In short: the idea he is heading for the intersection has no more going for it than the idea he is heading for the front steps.

The directional mystery of his dash to somewhere east of the front steps has been solved. He's running to this:

The mystery which now needs solving is-----------------what exactly is this?

Edited March 1 by Alan Ford

[Sandy Larsen]

50 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I just spent some time studying more carefully all the clips I created for my analysis (many of which I didn't use in my presentation) and I will grant you this much: I now agree with you that Baker's initial path -- had he not veered right -- is very close to what is shown in the animated GIF you posted. He would have hit the outside wall of the TSBD right between the east side of the steps and the mailbox area. Again, had he not veered right.

 

Oops!

It turns out I made a mistake in my re-evaluation. Had Baker NOT veered to the right, he would have hit the outer TSBD wall to the east of the mailbox.

I was right the first time.

And Baker did veer to the right... Alan's evidence-shaping notwithstanding.

 

[Jamey Flanagan]

The mailboxes are right beside the front steps. I don't see how you can use a small clip as definitive proof of anything when we don't even follow Baker all the way to his destination in said clip. If you had other evidence that was a little bit stronger then you MIGHT could use this clip as corroborating evidence to the fact that he was not originally heading toward the front steps but toward the mailboxes or some other destination. If you had added any witness testimony at all that officer Baker approached a man standing by the mailboxes or that he saw a man there looking suspicious or something else to add weight to the clip then maybe more people would agree with your hypothesis.

As for "mailbox man", I think that was a great find and needs further investigation to see just who this could have been or what his purpose could have been. But I don't feel the Baker angle is strong enough for us to be arguing about amongst each other. Keep digging and hopefully you will find something else to bolster your claim.

I found a picture of Buell Wesley Frazier from his detainment post assassination. I was going to post it but no matter how much I cropped it there was a message saying I exceeded the max file size or whatever so I gave up. Anyway, if he was still wearing what he wore to work that day, then he had on a white shirt. Not a T-Shirt, but looked like a white dressy looking shirt with a collar on it. Was trying to find someone with a similar hairline or hairstyle to "mailbox man" and BWF was about the closest I could find. Most of the other guys I could find had ties on.

Just pure speculation here, but assuming Mr. Frazier could possibly be "mailbox man" (if he is located somewhere else in the clip then let me know), then you could say that immediately after the assassination he sees a bag lying over by the mailboxes that looked close enough to the one Oswald had bring to work that day.......OR........ Oswald never carried a long bag or curtain rods or anything and BWF had it in his backseat as part of an assignment. Nobody saw Oswald carry in anything. Frazier supposedly hung around in his vehicle for some time after Oswald approached the building. Say he was told to bring this fashioned bag and to plant it somewhere outside the TSBD to be found. He hides it somewhere near the mailboxes. Immediately following the assassination he gives it to a policeman. The corrupt Dallas cop thinks this would be more incriminating if found on the same floor as the rifle and takes it upstairs at some point. This is all just speculation. Just spitballing ideas to try and make sense of it. It is not a theory I personally support or would try and convince anyone to believe. Just trying to think of some kind of scenario for "mailbox man" and the package or whatever he is holding.

[Alan Ford]

7 hours ago, Jamey Flanagan said:

The mailboxes are right beside the front steps. I don't see how you can use a small clip as definitive proof of anything when we don't even follow Baker all the way to his destination in said clip. If you had other evidence that was a little bit stronger then you MIGHT could use this clip as corroborating evidence to the fact that he was not originally heading toward the front steps but toward the mailboxes or some other destination.

Darnell shows more than enough of Officer Baker's run to allow us determine his direction and establish that he is most certainly not "originally heading toward the front steps" but toward an area just east of them. If his intention is to get up those steps asap, then he's going about it a very peculiar way indeed...............

The man at the mailboxes cannot be Mr. Buell Wesley Frazier btw------------Darnell shows him still up on the entrance landing at this moment.

[Alan Ford]

19 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

This is a repeating clip of Officer Baker's last step. Click it to zoom in.

I single-stepped through the whole video, noted where his foot hits the asphalt, and drew a blue line through those point to map out his path. His very last foot-hitting-the-asphalt is hidden by the Suit-Wearing Man in the foreground, and so I had to estimate that [emphasis added, A.F.]. You can see Baker about to step on the blue line just after it curves.

Respectfully, Mr. Larsen, your estimate is off here. The curve added to your blue line is just as fanciful as your crosswalk. Officer Baker is not "veering right", he's not even in the "process of veering right"--------------he's just continuing to move toward the mailbox area. As he does so, his path is converging with that of the running lady.

At the time you were coming up with this curving blue line in 2016, you were understandably troubled by the inexplicability of Officer Baker's route in the direction of the mailboxes. And that understandable unease led you astray. I quote from your presentation:

[QUOTE]

It is obvious that Baker was not headed for the TSBD entrance. (He was headed to the right of it.) But if not, what explains the path he is taking? [font change added, A.F.] Compare his path to the crosswalk in this (modern) photo:

Officer Baker was simply following the crosswalk.

[END QUOTE]

But there was no crosswalk there 11/22/63, which fact renders your explanation for the path he is taking void. He is simply taking the shortest route from A to B-----------------B being the area by the mailboxes. C doesn't come into it.

And here's the crucial part: there is no longer any need to find an explanation for "the path he is taking", because we now have an explanation:

What's now needed is for us to try to explain the explanation!

[Paul Cummings]

Elm Street and FBI Gemberling report in 1964. No crosswalk.

 

Edited March 2 by Paul Cummings

[Sandy Larsen]

56 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said:

Elm Street and FBI Gemberling report in 1964. No crosswalk.

 

While it is true that I refer to the contemporary crosswalk lines in my presentation, I at no time considered them when I was doing my analysis.

I did my analysis first. After I had concluded that Officer Baker veered to his right, then I wrote the presentation. I was while writing my presentation that I noticed that Baker and the two women crossing the street were following the lines of the contemporary crosswalk.

BTW FWIW, of course there was a crosswalk there in 1963. It was unmarked, but people did routinely and legally cross there.

 

[Alan Ford]

1 hour ago, Paul Cummings said:

Elm Street and FBI Gemberling report in 1964. No crosswalk.

 

That's not the Elm Street extension