A few photodigitally enhanced Badgeman photos

[Bill Miller]

I've never been under fire, so I probably don't know what I'm talking about. But it seems to me that if someone fired a shot from behind you over your left shoulder, you would instinctively dive to your right, thus moving away from the shooter as well as getting lower, instead of diving to your left, getting lower but also putting yourself right under the shooter, the easier for him to take you out too if he wants to.

That's all.

Ron, I think that Arnold realized that someone was shooting at the President and JFK was traveling left to right, so Arnold went the other direction just as Hudson and the guy on the steps next to him had done.

Bill

[Ron Ecker]

Bill,

That makes sense. That said, my own hypothesis (as I've previously stated) is that BDM was a black couple that moved from the bench to the front end of the wall, ducked down out of sight during the shooting, and got up again and ran away, leaving a Coke bottle on the wall.

I won't say that Occam's Razor applies here, but I think Sitzman had no reason to make up a story about seeing a black couple behind the wall (and remains of someone's lunch were found at the bench), whereas Arnold could have made up a story about himself, as other people have done in this case, and trying to prove his story involves shadows, waist lines, etc. that seem to move away from the proverbial razor. But you may be right. Whoever it was, he or she didn't shoot the president (though some folks argue that too).

Ron

Edited March 2, 2006 by Ron Ecker

[Bill Miller]

I won't say that Occam's Razor applies here, but I think Sitzman had no reason to make up a story about seeing a black couple behind the wall (and remains of someone's lunch were found at the bench), whereas Arnold could have made up a story about himself, as other people have done in this case, and trying to prove his story involves shadows, waist lines, etc. that seem to move away from the proverbial razor. But you may be right. Whoever it was, he or she didn't shoot the president (though some folks argue that too).

Ron

Sitzman didn't lie IMO, but what you don't seem to understand is that as the crowds were cheering as the motorcade approached ... she never looked back to the bench and instead looked towards the entrance in the plaza for the President's arrival.

As far as Arnold making up his story ... he told about the details before they were ever photographically discovered, so unless he was another 'Amazing Kreskin' type of individual - he told the truth and part of his story is supported by Senator Ralph Yarborough.

Bill

Edited March 2, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Robin Unger]

QUOTE:

In 1993 Ralph W. Yarborough was interviewed at his Austin home by historian David Murph of Texas Christian University. Murph reminded Yarborough that he had been quoted as saying he had witnessed a man on the grassy knoll throw himself down on the ground, and that the man had impressed him as a combat veteran.

Yarborough seemed puzzled to hear that his words had been applied to someone standing on the grassy knoll. That couldn't possibly be correct, he insisted repeatedly. "Remember where I was in the motorcade — with the Johnsons," he cautioned Murph, "too far back to have been able to see anyone [on the knoll] drop to the ground when firing began.

Take a look at Altgens 6 as kennedy is clutching his throat and Secret Service agents are looking around for the shooter, the Johnson's are totally oblivious as to what has just happened, they are smiling.

Yarborough was in the same car.

This is what he said about the first shot.

QUOTE:

Golz wrote, Arnold's "presence on the grassy knoll was confirmed Saturday by former U.S. Sen. Ralph Yarborough of Texas, who was riding in the motorcade two cars behind the presidential limousine. He was a passenger in a car with Vice President Lyndon Johnson and Mrs. Johnson.

Immediately on the firing of the first shot I saw the man you interviewed throw himself on the ground," Yarborough told The News. "He was down within a second of the time the shot was fired and I thought to myself, 'There's a combat veteran who knows how to act when weapons start firing.

So the Johnson's were oblivious to the first shot, but Yarborough who was sitting behind them saw it all.

I find that hard to beleive.

Edited March 3, 2006 by Robin Unger

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Here are a few BDM enhancements.

What can YOU see?

The usual tools were used to enhance this photograph

which is the original Willis 5 jpeg kindly posted by Ron Ecker

last year.

Please feel free to copy,download etc., etc., etc.

EBC

Edited March 3, 2006 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Bill Miller]

"Take a look at Altgens 6 as kennedy is clutching his throat and Secret Service agents are looking around for the shooter, the Johnson's are totally oblivious as to what has just happened, they are smiling.

Yarborough was in the same car.

This is what he said about the first shot.

QUOTE:

Golz wrote, Arnold's "presence on the grassy knoll was confirmed Saturday by former U.S. Sen. Ralph Yarborough of Texas, who was riding in the motorcade two cars behind the presidential limousine. He was a passenger in a car with Vice President Lyndon Johnson and Mrs. Johnson.

Immediately on the firing of the first shot I saw the man you interviewed throw himself on the ground," Yarborough told The News. "He was down within a second of the time the shot was fired and I thought to myself, 'There's a combat veteran who knows how to act when weapons start firing."

I have posted on this in detail on Lancer's forum and will touch on it briefly here ....

Not only are the Johnson's smiling in Altgens #6, but so is Yarborough. JFK and Yarborough were friends, so unless one thinks Ralph was aware that shots were being fired by the time Altgens took his photograqph and was smiling about it .... the Senator was UNAWARE of gunfire at that moment. I spoke to Golz in detail on the subject of Yarborough and it was quite clear to me that Ralph, upon hearing what he recognized to be the first sound of gunfire, noticed a serviceman above the south corner of the wall who immediately dove to the ground. The physically and mentally aging Yarborough that Murph spoke to in the latter part of the Senator's life before he died did falter when asked about what he saw when the shooting started because there is a big difference in when Yarborough was aware of gunfire and when gunfire was later known to have started.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

"Take a look at Altgens 6 as kennedy is clutching his throat and Secret Service agents are looking around for the shooter, the Johnson's are totally oblivious as to what has just happened, they are smiling.

Yarborough was in the same car.

This is what he said about the first shot.

QUOTE:

Golz wrote, Arnold's "presence on the grassy knoll was confirmed Saturday by former U.S. Sen. Ralph Yarborough of Texas, who was riding in the motorcade two cars behind the presidential limousine. He was a passenger in a car with Vice President Lyndon Johnson and Mrs. Johnson.

Immediately on the firing of the first shot I saw the man you interviewed throw himself on the ground," Yarborough told The News. "He was down within a second of the time the shot was fired and I thought to myself, 'There's a combat veteran who knows how to act when weapons start firing."

I have posted on this in detail on Lancer's forum and will touch on it briefly here ....

Not only are the Johnson's smiling in Altgens #6, but so is Yarborough. JFK and Yarborough were friends, so unless one thinks Ralph was aware that shots were being fired by the time Altgens took his photograqph and was smiling about it .... the Senator was UNAWARE of gunfire at that moment. I spoke to Golz in detail on the subject of Yarborough and it was quite clear to me that Ralph, upon hearing what he recognized to be the first sound of gunfire, noticed a serviceman above the south corner of the wall who immediately dove to the ground. The physically and mentally aging Yarborough that Murph spoke to in the latter part of the Senator's life before he died did falter when asked about what he saw when the shooting started because there is a big difference in when Yarborough was aware of gunfire and when gunfire was later known to have started.

Bill

[Alan Healy]

I spoke to Golz in detail on the subject of Yarborough and it was quite clear to me that Ralph, upon hearing what he recognized to be the first sound of gunfire, noticed a serviceman above the south corner of the wall who immediately dove to the ground. The physically and mentally aging Yarborough that Murph spoke to in the latter part of the Senator's life before he died did falter when asked about what he saw when the shooting started because there is a big difference in when Yarborough was aware of gunfire and when gunfire was later known to have started.

If Golz ever persuaded the Senator to say he saw someone behind the wall or even in a uniform then let him come here & show some proof!

All we know is what the senator told of this diving man in "TMWKK" & for you to know suggest him describing the exact interpretation of the Arnold figure in Moorman is too much for me to stomach.

Stop talking & start producing some evidence, your hearsay holds little clout.

I'll stick with the description he gave in the filmed interview for now thank you!

The movements of Charles Hester is far more consistant with Yarboroughs descriptions.

Both Charles & his wife ended up on the ground about 10-15' from that bench they were near.

She ran & dropped to the ground, Charles dove down next to her & they were both to the senators right, just like where he said was looking in "TMWKK".

Yarborough read of Arnolds story in the DMN article & he put the two together.

Wrongly so IMO.

The only reason he mentioned a military connection is because they way he dove to the ground(like a infantryman used to being in the line of fire or trained) that is very clear to anyone watching the filmed interview.

This is like someone seeing a man running towards the knoll & telling us "I thought he was a policeman", why? Because he ran straight up the steps after the shooting without any regard for his own safety".

Now if the man had a uniform on there would be no reason to think, you would know!

This IS exactly what Yarborough said, "I thought he was an infantryman" & because of what he did, not how he looked.

So Golz has no record of these further details?

How queer!

Alan

[Alan Healy]

Here are a few BDM enhancements.

What can YOU see?

Eugene I think everyone can tell from that picture that it's pretty worthless for study purposes when it comes to Blackdogman.

If I didn't know the source of the photo I'd say it would have to be a dog.

What do you see btw?

Alan

/Woof!

[Robin Unger]

Arnold "Overseas Cap"

The only evidence i see for the shape of a man wearing a dog eared shape cap is the crop Bill keeps posting from Jack's Badgeman image.

Jack has already explained in an earlier post, that the shapes in the Badgeman image are only HIS interpretation.

He went on to explain that he used colored oils to try to highlight only what "he saw" and to try and give the viewer an idea of where to look .

QUOTE:

Re your question about the "colorization"...it was an 11x17

black and white print of very high quality, to which I applied by hand transparent

photo oils to separate the tonal values and was only intended to show people

WHAT I SEE IN THE PHOTO. It was not done by computer, but was a hand

staining of colors to help people visualize. It was not scientific, but artistic.

People try to imply that it was something I did to falsify the image when all

it was ever intended to do was to show viewers where to look and what to

look for.

Thanks for your interest.

Jack

When i look at Jacks b/w version i see Badgeman and RR man clearly, but i do not see the Arrnold figure the same way jack sees it.

I agree with Ron that the so called Black dog man is a composite of two people.

IMO there is no "positive evidence" that a man in a uniform and cap was EVER FILMED in the grassy knoll area on the 22.11.63

If the photo's exist i have never seen them. !

Edited March 4, 2006 by Robin Unger

[Ed O'Hagan]

The individual aiming the camera in the middle of the picture is wearing what looks like a peaked hat. A second individual is to his right and is pointing with his outstretched right arm. On his left is a policeman who has his arm poked through the space between the pointed tops of the upright boards of the fence.

The camera looks like it has a telescopic lens. The photographer is holding the camera with his right hand and adjusting the lens with his left. hand.

Just an impression of what I see, and accordingly it may or may not be helpful. I have not followed the 'pros and cons' of this portion of the discussion, so even if I am correct I have no idea of the significance of any of it.

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Thanks to Ed O'Hagan for his excellent work on the BDM photo I posted.

Very interesting impressions which provide plenty of food for thought, Ed.

Superb, Ed - as always.

-O-

Following Nancy Eldrith's recent request

for some close ups of the Badgeman Photo

to ascertain any figures in the background

I offer the following enhancements.

Here are some enhanced photographs of a section of

Jack White's Moorman photograph posted earlier.

Thanks Jack. This is the area to the Badgeman's left.

ASSUMING the badgeman is real is there anyone else real

there?

Nancy. Download these and open them in your

graphic software programmes Photoshop or Paintshop Pro

or any good equivalent software. You can also use ACDSee etc.

Use the zoom to get in closer.

The usual tools were used to enhance these photos.

Edited March 6, 2006 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Ed O'Hagan]

Ron observed, " Badgeman is also hatless. So with no visible badge or hat, there is nothing in particular on which to base the assumption that the figure is that of a policeman. Correct?"

Correct ! No badge, no hat , and nothing in particular on which to base the assumption that the figure is that of a policeman... and additionally I would want to observe, NO FACE EITHER . I have posted the attached picture earlier in this thread, and when Ron asked what it was supposed to depict , I told him it was a closer view of the 'face'. To date nobody has commented on the appearance of the 'face', so this time I have added the little lemon coloured dot to assist one's visual interpretation of what is actually being depicted.

Eugene, would you kindly send me a message via the board's member contact system, and I'll e-mail a copy of what the Nix camera captured at that exact same moment in time. Somewhere on my Iomega disks I have the entire Nix frame, and when I find it I'll post it. For the time being I have only the area to 'Badgeman's' right available on my HD, but that should be sufficent to give you a head start in seeing that there were camera -equipped Badgemen in abundance behind the fence on the GK that day. The only thing is that the one who 'was' actually wasn't..... Keep your eye on that little lemon dot, and smile, you may be on Candid Camera, for all you know.

[Jack White]

Ed...I find it odd that you cannot discern the FACE of BADGEMAN.

Over the years I have found that 99% of viewers can make it

out when shown at a large size as below.

Jack

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Ed, here's my take on the BDM figure.

In the top photograph I have changed

the perspective slightly to give some depth

to the figure.

The annotated bottom photo gives my impression

of what I think I can see. I may be totally wrong -

especially as regards the 'long object'.

Your valued input would be appreciated.

Regards

EBC

Edited March 7, 2006 by Eugene B. Connolly