Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Hi all, Being new here, I dont know if this has been, or was disscussed at some point [im sure it has been]. Anyway, it has always puzzled me about why it was removed, how long after the assassination it was removed, and who removed it. I have heard many reasons why, when, and who, from many well known people in my readings, but never anything positive. Mostly speculation, I assume, as we may never know the "exact" answers. I have heard it was because of a bullet hole, a sight marker for the Zapruder film [alterations?], etc... I just wanted to throw this out here and maybe get some responces from you more knowledgeable folks, and maybe get some good answers to these questions. If it was disscussed, just point me in the right direction, and I'll be on my way!

thanks-smitty

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Very interesting topic... further, does anyone have an image that shows the purported damage to the sign after the shooting?

John, good question, Ive never seen anything either, but have heard of people "SEEING" a hole in it. [that bullet would have to be accounted for] I know this seems like an old, beat to death question..........but has there been anything positively answered about it? Not that I know of. To me, its like the Tippit killing. Lots of speculation, but nothing in concrete. Everybody seems to have their "own" answer to the nagging questions, but to me, this just starts these crazy "solutions" people come up with. I would just like to hear from some of the more "knowledgeable" people here, what their answers are to the sign removal. Like I said, if its been discussed before here, PLEASE send me to the previous postings, if possible, and I'll be GONE. I have heard that the sign was there for a few days after the shooting, and I have also heard that it was removed within a day. I have also read somewhere that the "city/county" workers removed it, and Ive heard it was just "gone" one day, with no one witnessing its removal. I have thought several things, other than the above. If there was nothing "sinister" about it, then maybe they removed it because it may have been in the way of "officials" taking investigation photos of the area and site. It looked pretty large, so I can see that it would get in the way of people taking photos from the ground/elevation, for the investigation. But then again, it has to be figured into the whole picture because it was there during the shooting. I can see where it was a "marking site", for the lack of a better term, for the Zapruder film if it WAS altered. One thing is for sure, from Zapruders film, [the one we see] Kennedy was deffinately hit while he was behind the sign. As he re-appears, he has his arms up, and is deffinately in distress. Not to "beat a dead horse", but I would just like to hear some other "versions" of why it may have been removed. Just my opinion. FWIW

thanks-smitty

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Eugene B. Connolly

Interesting point on Stemmons sign. I too have always wondered if a bullet had hit this sign and

wondered also about why and when and by whom the sign was removed. Where is it now?

If a bullet or projectile had hit the retaining wall ( or any other structure in Dealey Plaza would it

(the wall or any other structure) have been removed?

EBC

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting point on Stemmons sign. I too have always wondered if a bullet had hit this sign and

wondered also about why and when and by whom the sign was removed. Where is it now?

If a bullet or projectile had hit the retaining wall ( or any other structure in Dealey Plaza would it

(the wall or any other structure) have been removed?

EBC

Eugene, thanks for your input. I know that when I was there, you can see the "supposed" bullet strike on the south side of Elm manhole cover concrete form. It looks to be coming from the Records building, or the Dal-Tex building. If it was a bullet strike, and they knew it, they left it alone all these years from what i know of it. The curb where Mr. Tague was standing was left alone until one of the "Commisions" had it removed for testing, I believe. We know of the "supposed" bullet stikes in the south side grass that was checked by Ptl. Foster, Det. Walthers, and the "unknown" FBI guy, but there was nothing permanant left there. If the sign was "hit", it was destroyed long ago, im sure, because of the evidence left from it. All evidence was hidden and repaired immediately on the limo, so we know they were covering up whatever they could as soon as possible for evidence reasons. Thinking on the sign removal, if it was hit, or was a "marker" for the Zapruder film, why didnt they replace [an exact replica] it later in a "slightly different" place, say a foot or so, one way or another, just to throw off anybody looking for evidence later on checking the film? They could have said they removed it while they were doing their "investigation" as I stated earlier, and replaced it when they were done their work there. Why wasnt it replaced? Seems odd, I would think, as it drew alot of attention at the time that it WAS removed. Just another question to the "puzzle". Just my opinion, FWIW

thanks-smitty

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting point on Stemmons sign. I too have always wondered if a bullet had hit this sign and

wondered also about why and when and by whom the sign was removed. Where is it now?

If a bullet or projectile had hit the retaining wall ( or any other structure in Dealey Plaza would it

(the wall or any other structure) have been removed?

EBC

Eugene, thanks for your input. I know that when I was there, you can see the "supposed" bullet strike on the south side of Elm manhole cover concrete form. It looks to be coming from the Records building, or the Dal-Tex building. If it was a bullet strike, and they knew it, they left it alone all these years from what i know of it. The curb where Mr. Tague was standing was left alone until one of the "Commisions" had it removed for testing, I believe. We know of the "supposed" bullet stikes in the south side grass that was checked by Ptl. Foster, Det. Walthers, and the "unknown" FBI guy, but there was nothing permanant left there. If the sign was "hit", it was destroyed long ago, im sure, because of the evidence left from it. All evidence was hidden and repaired immediately on the limo, so we know they were covering up whatever they could as soon as possible for evidence reasons. Thinking on the sign removal, if it was hit, or was a "marker" for the Zapruder film, why didnt they replace [an exact replica] it later in a "slightly different" place, say a foot or so, one way or another, just to throw off anybody looking for evidence later on checking the film? They could have said they removed it while they were doing their "investigation" as I stated earlier, and replaced it when they were done their work there. Why wasnt it replaced? Seems odd, I would think, as it drew alot of attention at the time that it WAS removed. Just another question to the "puzzle". Just my opinion, FWIW

thanks-smitty

One could, if they so desire and have no other capabilities, speculate til hell freezes over in regards to the "Sign Problem", and still never have the answers.

Just more confusion and roaming in the land of the lost.

However, if one takes the time to research the matter, then there is acually very little that is difficult to understand in regards to the sign removal as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all, Being new here, I dont know if this has been, or was disscussed at some point [im sure it has been]. Anyway, it has always puzzled me about why it was removed, how long after the assassination it was removed, and who removed it. I have heard many reasons why, when, and who, from many well known people in my readings, but never anything positive. Mostly speculation, I assume, as we may never know the "exact" answers. I have heard it was because of a bullet hole, a sight marker for the Zapruder film [alterations?], etc... I just wanted to throw this out here and maybe get some responces from you more knowledgeable folks, and maybe get some good answers to these questions. If it was disscussed, just point me in the right direction, and I'll be on my way!

thanks-smitty

I too, have heard stories about the road sign being damaged from bullet, but I have found no concrete evidence of such. Not only would such a discovery have drawn a crowd of people to the sign where photograpghers would have had a field day, but there were photos of that sign taken during the weekend of the assassination and it looks undamaged to me. As far as moving it to throw off researchers - that makes no sense when all one has to do is choose a few of the many other reference points still unchanged to work recreations from.

Bill Miller

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all, Being new here, I dont know if this has been, or was disscussed at some point [im sure it has been]. Anyway, it has always puzzled me about why it was removed, how long after the assassination it was removed, and who removed it. I have heard many reasons why, when, and who, from many well known people in my readings, but never anything positive. Mostly speculation, I assume, as we may never know the "exact" answers. I have heard it was because of a bullet hole, a sight marker for the Zapruder film [alterations?], etc... I just wanted to throw this out here and maybe get some responces from you more knowledgeable folks, and maybe get some good answers to these questions. If it was disscussed, just point me in the right direction, and I'll be on my way!

thanks-smitty

I too, have heard stories about the road sign being damaged from bullet, but I have found no concrete evidence of such. Not only would such a discovery have drawn a crowd of people to the sign where photograpghers would have had a field day, but there were photos of that sign taken during the weekend of the assassination and it looks undamaged to me. As far as moving it to throw off researchers - that makes no sense when all one has to do is choose a few of the many other reference points still unchanged to work recreations from.

Bill Miller

Agreed. And I also think Thomas' attachment adds perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael,

When I used to spend hours studying the Z film, one of the very smallt hings I noticed was a slight dent/chip in the top left of the Stemmons sign from Z frame 183 onwards. It might just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but take a look and let me know what you think.

Edited by Adam Wilkinson
Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as moving it to throw off researchers - that makes no sense when all one has to do is choose a few of the many other reference points still unchanged to work recreations from.

Bill Miller[/b]

What about the possibility that a sign would have constituted an obstruction (especially around Z313) for a sniper on the 6th floor? That could provide a motive to move the sign before any reenactments were done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael,

When I used to spend hours studying the Z film, one of the very smallt hings I noticed was a slight dent/chip in the top left of the Stemmons sign from Z frame 183 onwards. It might just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but take a look and let me know what you think.

Thanks for all of your input guys. Nice attachment Tom, thanks. Adam, I will try and see if i can pick it out in the "copy" of the Z film i have. I have tried to check all photos i have of the sign, but as of yet, nothing. The pictures I have are "grainy", and hard to pin point anything. I have tried to see "light" holes through the sign, but like I said, its hard to make out. Its a shame noone that i know of, didnt get a real good "shot" [no pun intended] of the sign that day. Raymond, that could be a good possibliity. I dont know if the location of the sign would have extended that far to interfere with such a shot. I have a picture I took out of the sixth floor window [one over to the west] i can go back and look at it, and see if it might have been close. Estimating of course, the location of the sign back then. [maybe Ashton could "recreate" an image of the sight line with sign in place, with his "magic imaging machine" LOL!] I dont believe I have seen any photos from the window to Kennedys location with the sign still in place. There are alot of things that will go unanswered, as im sure that we all have nagging questions about. Such as the "pool of blood" found on the sidewalk by the pergola. I have heard that photos were taken of it that day, but as of yet, have not seen them anywhere. FWIW

thanks-smitty

Link to post
Share on other sites
"What about the possibility that a sign would have constituted an obstruction (especially around Z313) for a sniper on the 6th floor? That could provide a motive to move the sign before any reenactments were done."

If the Stemmons-sign was to obstruct the view from the depository's sixth floor, it must have been placed in the middle of the road.. especially for Z313. And it not being there, the Lincoln would have to take a most dramatic turn onto the sidewalk and up on the grass for the view to be obstructed...and to my knowledge SA Greer never did that.... I do not think the sign obstructed the view at any time. Atleast not the view a shooter in the "sniper's nest" would have had.

Go to the Mary Ferrell Foundation website, watch the reenactment photos.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What about the possibility that a sign would have constituted an obstruction (especially around Z313) for a sniper on the 6th floor? That could provide a motive to move the sign before any reenactments were done.

The road sign was off to the right in the photos taken of the street and could not of obstructed a view from the 6th floor.

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael,

When I used to spend hours studying the Z film, one of the very smallt hings I noticed was a slight dent/chip in the top left of the Stemmons sign from Z frame 183 onwards. It might just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but take a look and let me know what you think.

It might just be my eyes playing tricks on me

Nope! You apparantly have excellent eyesight.

Might want to take a look at Z200 and the slight "notch" on the right hand side.

Always helps to follow the vertical line which is just in from the outer edge of the sign, created by the difference in shade/texture, whether looking for the right notch, or for the left notch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...