BOWERS VERY LIMITED VIEW FROM THE TOWER.

[Chris Bristow]

After mapping out Bowers lines of sight to Emmet Hudson and to Elm St. I did not accept the results, but I have rechecked it multiple times now and believe it is correct. 
 The key factor in mapping bowers view is the slope angle from the top of Bowers window to the top of the stairs at the patio(The stair top denotes the bottom of Bowers line of sight to Hudson and Elm St.) the tower window at 448ft HASL and the top of the steps at 426 ft, along with the distance from window to stairs being 320 ft, gives a downward line of sight of 3.9 degrees. This slope angle has a drop of 0.83" per ft which can be used to determine how much of Elm St, or the limo, or Hudson, that Bowers could see. 
   The distance from the stair top to the limo was 78 ft.. 78 ft with a drop of 0.83 per ft = 5.4 ft of drop. So with the stair top at 426 ft - 5.4 ft drop, means Bowers view of Elm was at about 420 ft HASL. The street level of Elm at that point is 413 ft. That means Bowers could not see the first 7 ft above ground level at the middle lane where the limo was. Even if I give a couple extra feet, Bowers could not have seen the limo below a height of 5 ft. The limo would have been almost completely invisible to Bowers.
 Maybe Bowers recollection is a mixture of what he really saw conflated with what he heard of other witnesses accounts. 
 He would not have been able to see DPD Heygood drop his bike at the curb either. Or maybe as Heygood attempted to jump the curb Bowers may have seen just seen his head. 
 I had assumed the insert photo(bottom right), which shows the view from the tower, also shows what I thought was the south curb of Elm St, but that is impossible. Bowers lowest view to the the south curb would be about 5 ft above the curb. Even if I give it a couple extra feet and lower it to 3 ft, Bowers could not see the south curb of Elm St at all.
  From the tower, Bowers line of sight to the middle of Main St, 170 ft  from the steps, indicates the curb in the insert photo was Main St, not Elm. Intuitively that seem very wrong but the math seems to prove this.
 
The second issue is with Bowers lateral line of sight. The corner of the pergola may very well have blocked any view to Heygood, Mudd, or Emmet Hudson. The photo of the steps(lower left) was taken just 2 ft off of Hudson's line of sight to the tower and in that photo the tower is hidden behind the pergola. If you moved that photo 2 ft left to match Hudson's Line of sight, it would shift the view to the tower by 10 ft. That may allow Hudson to see the window and Bowers to see Hudson. But Bowers would have to be standing at the far west side of his window.  The window sits 8.5 ft in from the edge of the roof. So maybe Hudson would have been able to see about 1.5 ft of the window. This is a close call and it would require a photo taken from Hudson's exact location to verify if Bowers could have seen Hudson at all.
  Going back to the 3.9 degree vertical slope angle,  Bowers could only see about the top 20 inches of Hudson's body. Hudson's position, 11 steps down from the top,  placed him 66 inches below the stair top. Being 20 ft from the stair top gives 17 inches of slope angle drop(20 ft x 0.83" per ft = 17 inches drop.). If Hudson was 5'9" tall then bowers could only see 20" of Hudson at the most. That would make it impossible for Bowers to give a description of the color of Hudson's pants or Mr Mudd's pants. I think that eliminates any possibility of the two men Bowers described being Emmet Hudson and Mudd.
 In the photo insert from the tower window(Lower right), I shopped in an image of a person to give an idea of how much Hudson would have appeared above the stair top from bowers position. It would be hard to see how Bowers would mistake that person for someone standing up on the top of the knoll.
 

[Benjamin Cole]

There seems a real paucity of photos taken from inside the Union Terminal Tower, that would show what Bowers could see. 

This is what I found online:

Of course, the trees and foliage may have changed over the years. 

Seems to me that automobiles and foliage would have obscured Bowers' view into the junction of the stockade fence, which is where many suspect a gunsel or smoke-and-bang diversion was situated.  

Whether Bowers could see much into the opening onto Elm Street...well, you tell me. 

 

 

[Chris Bristow]

12 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

There seems a real paucity of photos taken from inside the Union Terminal Tower, that would show what Bowers could see. 

This is what I found online:

Of course, the trees and foliage may have changed over the years. 

Seems to me that automobiles and foliage would have obscured Bowers' view into the junction of the stockade fence, which is where many suspect a gunsel or smoke-and-bang diversion was situated.  

Whether Bowers could see much into the opening onto Elm Street...well, you tell me. 

 

 

That is a better copy than the one I posted. But the stairs are not visible in  any view from the tower. So are we looking at part of  the stairs that curve down to Elm, or do we see the grass area between the stairs and fence? Or is it a bit of both? Hudson is very close to the line between seeing him or him being blocked by the pergola. I can't determine this from the photos taken from the tower. The lines of sight suggest we are seeing mostly the grass area just west of the steps.
Maybe the dark area to the right is just the fence or maybe it is the large tree sitting sitting near the patio. I suggested in my post that we are seeing Main St in the background not Elm. That seemed absurd to the but the math of the angle and drop doesn't allow us to see Elm.
 The area behind the east fence is hard to see. But according to the lines of sight we should see behind the fence. It looks like we are seeing the corner of the fence on the left and the north end of it on the right, but that does not agree with the lines of sight We may be seeing the opposite. The light and shadows on the west side of the east fence may be creating an illusion.

 

Edited September 14 by Chris Bristow

[Benjamin Cole]

55 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

That is a better copy than the one I posted. But the stairs are not visible in  any view from the tower. So are we looking at part of  the stairs that curve down to Elm, or do we see the grass area between the stairs and fence? Or is it a bit of both? Hudson is very close to the line between seeing him or him being blocked by the pergola. I can't determine this from the photos taken from the tower. The lines of sight suggest we are seeing mostly the grass area just west of the steps.
Maybe the dark area to the right is just the fence or maybe it is the large tree sitting sitting near the patio. I suggested in my post that we are seeing Main St in the background not Elm. That seemed absurd to the but the math of the angle and drop doesn't allow us to see Elm.
 The area behind the east fence is hard to see. But according to the lines of sight we should see behind the fence. It looks like we are seeing the corner of the fence on the left and the north end of it on the right, but that does not agree with the lines of sight We may be seeing the opposite. The light and shadows on the west side of the east fence may be creating an illusion.

 

CB-

You have raised interesting questions in your excellent post.

Hopefully, someone can get permission to enter the Union Terminal Tower and take clear, crisp photos. Odd that this has not been done. 

I am a CT'er, but Bowers is looking more iffy, the more we learn. His Nov. 22 affidavit is rather anodyne. 

I always say, we have to equally skeptical of both CT and LN narratives and evidence. 

[Larry Hancock]

Actually it has been done and published multiple places including in a couple of journals...possibly in the DPUK journal.  Somebody got in and filmed views out of each window in the tower.  Which I could tell  you exactly where to find it but someone must recall seeing it. 

 

[Ron Bulman]

I've stood backed up to the south side of the tower, a floor below Bowers view, looking at the back side of the fence.  He had a clear view of it from 30 - 40 yards away.  As well as the yard, overpass and down it to the south.

It's not about a glimpse of the motorcade passing.  What he saw, what he said, what he didn't. 

Edited September 14 by Ron Bulman

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Actually it has been done and published multiple places including in a couple of journals...possibly in the DPUK journal.  Somebody got in and filmed views out of each window in the tower.  Which I could tell  you exactly where to find it but someone must recall seeing it. 

 

Well, let us hope someone decides to upload crisp images, that is photos taken giving the public a "Bowers' eye" onto the possible sniper's or diversionist's area. I checked on Youtube, and if a film has been uploaded there, I could not find it. 

Of course, trees and foliage have changed. A Ford Econoline van or two parked in the wrong place could obscure sight-lines also. 

 

 

 

[Chris Bristow]

7 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

CB-

You have raised interesting questions in your excellent post.

Hopefully, someone can get permission to enter the Union Terminal Tower and take clear, crisp photos. Odd that this has not been done. 

I am a CT'er, but Bowers is looking more iffy, the more we learn. His Nov. 22 affidavit is rather anodyne. 

I always say, we have to equally skeptical of both CT and LN narratives and evidence. 

Yes his testimony is strange and we are left guessing as to his motive or memory. Thank for the compliment.

Edited September 14 by Chris Bristow

[Chris Bristow]

2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I've stood backed up to the south side of the tower, a floor below Bowers view, looking at the back side of the fence.  He had a clear view of it from 30 - 40 yards away.  As well as the yard, overpass and down it to the south.

It's not about a glimpse of the motorcade passing.  What he saw, what he said, what he didn't. 

Yes he had a pretty clear view to a knoll shooter located anywhere behind the fence. Although if a shooter was standing at the rear of a parked sedan, the 5 ft high roof would block much of Bowers view.  The southeast corner of the fence was just over 100 yards away according to Google Earth but I don't doubt Bowers could still identify people standing in that general area.
 I think his testimony about the motorcade and Heygood is relevant because it goes to the lack of accuracy of his recall. He also mentioned the limo entering the underpass which he could not see but could only infer.
   As to the bike racing up the knoll incline, I could only assume he conflated his actual visual memory with another witnesses account because it seems no bike cop actually raced up the knoll. Maybe he just saw a bit of Heygood attempting to jump the curb and that created a false memory of seeing a bike ride up the knoll. Our mind sometimes fills in the blanks based on assumptions and we create false memories. Dodd did see Haygood dump his bike at the curb and leave it there, which matches the films, so I trust that is what happened. His story of a bike racing up the knoll is just another anomaly that makes him seem less credible.
  Bowers has stated that he saw no one in the parking area behind the fence. The problem is, if the two men he described were on the south side(Grass side) of the fence he could not have seen or described the "Fairly dark trousers" one of them was wearing. The only explanation that remained was that he saw Hudson and Mudd, who was wearing a plaid shirt. But Bowers line of sight did not allow him to see and describe the pants he saw one of them wearing. He also said those two men were in direct line with the mouth of the underpass. His description of the two mean was detailed and It seems the only plausible answer is that he did see the two men on the parking lot side, even though he denied seeing anyone in the parking lot. That is the testimony that bothers me the most. where did he see those two people?

[Chris Bristow]

5 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Actually it has been done and published multiple places including in a couple of journals...possibly in the DPUK journal.  Somebody got in and filmed views out of each window in the tower.  Which I could tell  you exactly where to find it but someone must recall seeing it. 

 

A better photo would be nice. But the tower view does not show the stairs, so my question about whether Bowers could see Hudson won't be solved unless a photo is taken from Hudson's position looking back towards the tower. Or possibly a photo from the tower that has a stand-in for Hudson's location.  It is too close a call to use mapped out lines of sight from Google Earth to answer it definitively.
   If Bowers couldn't see Hudson then he didn't see Mudd or Heygood dumping his bike either. If that is true then the question remains, who did Bowers see in a white shirt and dark trouser and who did he see with a plaid shirt?  

[Chris Davidson]

[Pat Speer]

I think it was Kathy Beckett who posted this image some time ago. This is the view of Bowers Tower from next to where Emmet Hudson was standing on the steps. Bowers said he saw someone with a plaid shirt walking back and forth on the other side of the fence from him. This image helped convince me this could have been the man standing with Hudson in the Muchmore film and Moorman photo--who I had previously ID'ed as F. Lee Mudd. 

 

Edited September 14 by Pat Speer

[Chris Bristow]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

I think it was Kathy Beckett who posted this image some time ago. This is the view of Bowers Tower from next to where Emmet Hudson was standing on the steps. Bowers said he saw someone with a plaid shirt walking back and forth on the other side of the fence from him. This image helped convince me this could have been the man standing with Hudson in the Muchmore film and Moorman photo--who I had previously ID'ed as F. Lee Mudd. 

 

I appreciate the photo but it appears to be taken from a few ft west of Hudsons's position. It still might help to narrow the possibilities if I can determine the camera position in the photo. Thanks

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

CD-

Great photo, appears period c. 1963. But where was it shot from? Was it shot on 11/22? 

Also, do we know if any relatively large vehicles, perhaps a Ford Econoline (urban van) were parked anywhere near the junction of the two fences? 

 

[Chris Bristow]

8 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

That is a great photo. Thanks for that. The point where the top of the shadow(The top of the stairs) meets the pergola is a very good match for the photos already posted here. It has to have been taken from the same basic altitude as the tower window. It looks like the camera was at the east side of the window. What I can't identify is the small tree in the center of the gap between pergola and the fence.