DOCUMENTARY: "Beyond 'JFK'; The Question of Conspiracy"

[Miles Scull]

Hi Miles:

" No see above"?? gee that appears to me that your mind is made up, in cement ??

Then the question why are we discussing this, comes to mind..??......................

Thanks

B......

Hi Miles:

" No see above"?? gee that appears to me that your mind is made up, in cement ??

Then the question why are we discussing this, comes to mind..??

Hi Bernice. Many thanks for your continuing analysis & interest in the Ed Hoffman story. Especially, thanks for your great photos! Oh no, I'm open to any info which will add credence to Ed's story. Originally, I took Ed's story at face value. But recently I've been looking into his story & have found many inconsistencies which cannot be resolved. If Ed's story is true, then, of course, certain implications follow. For example, Ed's story adds to the evidence of a shooter at the fence & thus undermines the Warren Report. However, Ed's story, if not true, is not needed to establish a shooter from the fence; hence, there is no problem in that sense.

I was in error and you were correct on the tossing of said rifle to the RR ? man over the pipe..brain drain.??

I watched Sam Holland again this afternoon, in his interview with Mark Lane "Rush to Judgement, I believe it was

originally made in 67...he states words to the effect they were milling about,

where the footprints and all were, he speaks of looking in the area of the fence and around for empty shells

and such with the DPD and others, so there had to be room in front of said cars for them to do so..

And if not there would not have been any footprints of any kind, to be found in the first place, and they were many,

as told by several.....witnesses....

He does say to get to that area they did vault and climb over cars...but if it your belief that the cars were all parked

right up against the fence and therefore there could not be any footprints either, fine with me, that is your opinion..

The video is also available here on Johns list..

I've viewed Lane's interview with Sam Holland several times. The trampled area as seen in Roberdeau's map is correct, but the cars further west along the fence from the trampled area most probably impeded Sam from running along the fence to reach the trampled area. That is the implication of his commentary that he & others had to vault & climb over cars to reach the trampled area at the snipers fire point. The implication is that Sam probably proceeded in a zig-zag course along the rear of the cars parked nosed in along the fence. The aerial photo taken on 11-23-63 shows this arrangement & also the foliage hanging over the fence from its south flank which also would have presented impediment to quick & easy transit.

If you want to suspect Ed's information, that is up tp you.....

And up to you too, if you begin to notice problems, big problems, with Ed's story.

I have never heard nor seen one witness that ever stated, you have to believe me....I give them all the benefit of the doubt, as

they were there, and I was not..though I realise with time information from ...some now has changed to some degree..

When Jim Marrs first spoke to Ed I think around 87 ish...?..he did find the FBI information that backed up what he had related

to him,about him contacting them.....

Ed said that the Dallas Police tried to give him money if he would desist from telling them his story to them. Do you believe this?

Ed also at the Thanksgiving celebration with his family,...

snip

......But it is up to the individual as to what you believe or choose not to...

Indeed!

I did go looking in the files ...I thought perhaps you might have been interested in what I did find, but now I get the

impression that you will not be, as you state " Ed's story is highly suspect"....and it appears to me, imo your mind is made up,

but that is up to you and is your opinion and I respect such..........but will post for whomever may be..

Many thanks, B. I certainly do appreciate your help & valuable resources, especially the photos. Great! Here are a few quotes which I hope you will find of interest:

1.) For an exhaustive critique & dismantling of Hoffman see, for example: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/hoffman.htm

2.) The yardman was actually reporting to Weitzman that he, while atop the overpass & from the overpass, had seen through a bush (read "a bush" to mean "a screen of foliage," which reading is clearly a tortured stretch, of course)..., that he the yardman had seen something THROWN by someone.

This line of conjecture contains a flaw. The verb ''THROWN" is the operative action verb. How did the yardman know something had been THROWN? From the view point of the overpass, judging from the Nix film, it would have been possible to see, through the foliage, a person walking west along the fence & to see such a person throw (or toss as Hoffman might say) a rifle, or something (!), to another man. If the viewer told Weitzman that he had seen something thrown by someone, then Hoffman's characterization of a two handed toss forward at a height below shoulder height becomes dubious as the fence is 5 feet. Would the assassin want to advertise his presence by tossing a rifle higher than the fence height, so it could be seen sailing through the air? Ah, the flying rifle theory! This would be foolhardy, as the overpass spectators had a view from elevation. Was there a toss?

Richard C. Dodd, who had been standing with Holland atop the overpass at the time of Z-313, ran to the steamline pipe & electrical boxes & there met a RR special agent who had been in that area & not on the overpass at Z-313. This means that this agent could have been the yardman who reported to Weitzman he had seen something thrown. Since the agent was in the yard area at Z-313, then it is logical to suppose that other yardmen were in that area, working, at Z-313. Any of these could have reported to Weitzman seeing some thing thrown; their view would have been from the north side of the fence.

Something else to consider is the timing. If the sniper tossed his rifle to an assistant, then where exactly did the toss occur? If it was east of the steamline pipe, then did the assistant jump over the steam line to get to the electrical box; or did he duck under the steamline with the rifle in hand. Did the toss occur at the steamline, the rifle being tossed over the line? A lot of time is being consumed. Why then would not the RR agent Dodd met have seen the assistant carrying a rifle, breaking down a rifle & walking away with a bag? Indeed, why would not the running Holland have seen the assistant or any yardman working in the yard not have seen the assistant? Why would a professional sniper team run such a risk of exposure, even if the assistant was dressed yardman cloths? Wasn't Lee Bowers staring at the fence? Was it because there never was an assistant?

One thing I find puzzling & incredible in Hoffman's testimony. He says that shortly after the assassination he approached FBI & DP to tell them what he had seen. He says he had great difficulty communicating to them his knowledge in his excited state. Hoffman says these men didn't seen to want to understand him & that they offered him money to go away. Offered him money to go away?

3.) Yeah, I too have a soft spot in my heart for good ol' Ed, but, unfortunately, the bumper to bumper parked cars parked adjacent to & along the north side of the picket fence, the fact that the switch boxes were so close to the north side of the overpass, the presence of the Katy RR agent already standing by the switch boxes at Z-313, even the intervening trains blocking Ed's view, and all the other contradictions in Ed's story indicate what Ed's father knew about his son: that he could make up stories & often did, as in this case.

4.) The most embarrassing aspect of Ed's story is the gross & stark implausibility of the "rifle toss" canard. Ed's story is that the assassin fires a shot from behind the picket fence from a spot near hatman; that the assassin then walks west down along the fence toward the elevated (3') steamline pipe at the north end of the triple underpass; that the assassin tosses his rifle to an assistant, possibly tossing it over the steamline pipe; that the assistant then proceeds to the northern most of two switch boxes to disassemble the rifle to put it in a bag; and, finally, both assassin & assistant then casually walk away unseen. Sound good? Unfortunately there's a massive problem here. In the Bell film two men can be seen at the north wall of the triple underpass, the wall that runs from the underpass to connect with the western end of the picket fence. These two men are seen at this wall as the limo goes through the underpass on the way to Parkland. These two men are, therefore, standing, at the critical time, about 15 feet (!!) away from the switch box where Ed's "assistant" breaks down the rifle. Since there are zero bushes or tress in this area, this means that the two men could have & would have SEEN the assassin toss the rifle to the assistant & would have SEEN the assistant carrying the rifle to the switch box, breaking it down & carrying it away in a bag. It is possible that Ed's "rifle toss" occurred before the assassin reached the steamline pipe; if so, then, the assistant would have had to have jumped over the 3' steamline pipe or to have ducked under it, while carrying the rifle. What makes this whole scenario laughably implausible is the consideration that the assassin is executing a plan of escape that is, in its conception, the exact oppose of a plan designed to succeed. The assassin & his assistant walk to where there is an extremely high likelihood that they will be seen, and seen by any number of witnesses who are in the area of the switch boxes to view the motorcade. In other words, the assassin & his advisers, realizing the dangers, would have first of all have ruled out Ed's scenario as being the worst possible exit strategy, the one plan most likely to fail, the one plan most likely to expose the assassin. Conclusion: Ed's dog don't hunt.

5.) Thx, Bernice, if you can blow up this .jpg you will see that on 11-22(or 23-date of photo)-63 a man standing at column 2 of the balustrade (column man) could easily have seen Ed's apocryphal rifle toss. Remember, Column Man would have heard clearly the crack or report of the kill shot to his immediate left &, consequently, would have had a reflex reaction to look to his left to see, amazingly, the assassin pitch his rifle. Of course, no pitch ever occurred. If Ed's toss occurred in the blind area, then, of course, Column Man would have seen the assassin's assistant leap over or duck under the steam pipe with the rifle!. It's noteworthy that Ed changed his story from the assassin throwing the rifle with his palms up to throwing it with his palms down.... just one of the numerous contradicting inconsistancies.... [bTW, note the cars parked along, against the long arm of the picket fence. How could the shooter have walked west down along the fence between these cars & the fence? Maybe he shuffled side stepping, crab-wise?]

6.) Ed Hoffman- Hoffman is a deaf mute man who claims to have been in the Dealey Plaza area at the time of the assassination. He claims to have seen a man behind the grassy knoll shoot the president, then move towards the triple underpass, and toss the gun to a man knelt down behind a track switchbox. This man then supposedly took the gun apart, put it in a small carrying box, and both men strolled away in opposite directions. Now, I've been to Dealey Plaza, walked behind the stockade fence, and walked over to the triple underpass where S.M. Holland and several other watched the motorcade and witnessed the assassination. The distance between the bridge and the area of the stockade fence where a would be assassin would be located, is not the far, and the fact that an assassin would move towards the direction of the underpass, and toss a gun to an accomplice, who in turn took the gun apart right in that area, suspends my belief. Hoffman said he tried to communicate with a police officer immediately after the shooting but being a deaf mute, he was unsuccessful, and then decided not to come forward until 20-25 years later. I have to fall into the category of not believing his story. -- http://www.geocities.com/metsman_2001/misinfo.html

7.) QUOTE(Bill Miller @ Mar 25 2007, 10:02 AM)

But Hoffman DID want to be given a test from the beginning, but he was told that it was not possible to test a deaf mute.

To look closely, however:

Polygraphing techniques for the deaf have been around since the 60s & have been refined over the years (Dr. Matte: "A Technique for Polygraphing the Deaf." Polygraph, Vol. 2, Nr.3, 1980. Journal of the American Polygraph Association.) Thus, Ed could have seen to it that he WAS polygraphed had he really wanted to be polygrahed. Perhaps there was a reason to avoid a polygraph? What could that reason be?

Ed, in The Men Who Killed Kennedy(1988), looked intelligent, prosperous & well educated, driving a not inexpensive car.

Deaf mutes use sign language which enables them to communicate very effectively with non-signing hearing & speaking people. Why? Just to give only one reason, deaf mutes are introduced to non-signing hearing & speaking people from their earliest years & learn ways & means to communicate with same. It becomes a life study.

For example, Ed, on approaching an FBI or DPD officer would have showed a posture of someone shooting a rifle & then he would have pointed to the RR yard & then perhaps he would have pointed to his eye suggesting that he had seen a marksman. The officer, having the recent gunfire on his mind, would not think this pantomime was a request for alms, would he? The officer might have been in a hurry. But would he have said: Here, take $5.00 & good day to you? Of course not.

On balance, unfortunately, Ed Hoffman's story is not reasonably to be belived.

[David G. Healy]

Hi Miles:

" No see above"?? gee that appears to me that your mind is made up, in cement ??

Then the question why are we discussing this, comes to mind..??......................

Thanks

B......

Hi Miles:

" No see above"?? gee that appears to me that your mind is made up, in cement ??

Then the question why are we discussing this, comes to mind..??

Hi Bernice. Many thanks for your continuing analysis & interest in the Ed Hoffman story. Especially, thanks for your great photos! Oh no, I'm open to any info which will add credence to Ed's story. Originally, I took Ed's story at face value. But recently I've been looking into his story & have found many inconsistencies which cannot be resolved. If Ed's story is true, then, of course, certain implications follow. For example, Ed's story adds to the evidence of a shooter at the fence & thus undermines the Warren Report. However, Ed's story, if not true, is not needed to establish a shooter from the fence; hence, there is no problem in that sense.

I was in error and you were correct on the tossing of said rifle to the RR ? man over the pipe..brain drain.??

I watched Sam Holland again this afternoon, in his interview with Mark Lane "Rush to Judgement, I believe it was

originally made in 67...he states words to the effect they were milling about,

where the footprints and all were, he speaks of looking in the area of the fence and around for empty shells

and such with the DPD and others, so there had to be room in front of said cars for them to do so..

And if not there would not have been any footprints of any kind, to be found in the first place, and they were many,

as told by several.....witnesses....

He does say to get to that area they did vault and climb over cars...but if it your belief that the cars were all parked

right up against the fence and therefore there could not be any footprints either, fine with me, that is your opinion..

The video is also available here on Johns list..

I've viewed Lane's interview with Sam Holland several times. The trampled area as seen in Roberdeau's map is correct, but the cars further west along the fence from the trampled area most probably impeded Sam from running along the fence to reach the trampled area. That is the implication of his commentary that he & others had to vault & climb over cars to reach the trampled area at the snipers fire point. The implication is that Sam probably proceeded in a zig-zag course along the rear of the cars parked nosed in along the fence. The aerial photo taken on 11-23-63 shows this arrangement & also the foliage hanging over the fence from its south flank which also would have presented impediment to quick & easy transit.

If you want to suspect Ed's information, that is up tp you.....

And up to you too, if you begin to notice problems, big problems, with Ed's story.

I have never heard nor seen one witness that ever stated, you have to believe me....I give them all the benefit of the doubt, as

they were there, and I was not..though I realise with time information from ...some now has changed to some degree..

When Jim Marrs first spoke to Ed I think around 87 ish...?..he did find the FBI information that backed up what he had related

to him,about him contacting them.....

Ed said that the Dallas Police tried to give him money if he would desist from telling them his story to them. Do you believe this?

Ed also at the Thanksgiving celebration with his family,...

snip

......But it is up to the individual as to what you believe or choose not to...

Indeed!

I did go looking in the files ...I thought perhaps you might have been interested in what I did find, but now I get the

impression that you will not be, as you state " Ed's story is highly suspect"....and it appears to me, imo your mind is made up,

but that is up to you and is your opinion and I respect such..........but will post for whomever may be..

Many thanks, B. I certainly do appreciate your help & valuable resources, especially the photos. Great! Here are a few quotes which I hope you will find of interest:

1.) For an exhaustive critique & dismantling of Hoffman see, for example: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/hoffman.htm

2.) The yardman was actually reporting to Weitzman that he, while atop the overpass & from the overpass, had seen through a bush (read "a bush" to mean "a screen of foliage," which reading is clearly a tortured stretch, of course)..., that he the yardman had seen something THROWN by someone.

This line of conjecture contains a flaw. The verb ''THROWN" is the operative action verb. How did the yardman know something had been THROWN? From the view point of the overpass, judging from the Nix film, it would have been possible to see, through the foliage, a person walking west along the fence & to see such a person throw (or toss as Hoffman might say) a rifle, or something (!), to another man. If the viewer told Weitzman that he had seen something thrown by someone, then Hoffman's characterization of a two handed toss forward at a height below shoulder height becomes dubious as the fence is 5 feet. Would the assassin want to advertise his presence by tossing a rifle higher than the fence height, so it could be seen sailing through the air? Ah, the flying rifle theory! This would be foolhardy, as the overpass spectators had a view from elevation. Was there a toss?

Richard C. Dodd, who had been standing with Holland atop the overpass at the time of Z-313, ran to the steamline pipe & electrical boxes & there met a RR special agent who had been in that area & not on the overpass at Z-313. This means that this agent could have been the yardman who reported to Weitzman he had seen something thrown. Since the agent was in the yard area at Z-313, then it is logical to suppose that other yardmen were in that area, working, at Z-313. Any of these could have reported to Weitzman seeing some thing thrown; their view would have been from the north side of the fence.

Something else to consider is the timing. If the sniper tossed his rifle to an assistant, then where exactly did the toss occur? If it was east of the steamline pipe, then did the assistant jump over the steam line to get to the electrical box; or did he duck under the steamline with the rifle in hand. Did the toss occur at the steamline, the rifle being tossed over the line? A lot of time is being consumed. Why then would not the RR agent Dodd met have seen the assistant carrying a rifle, breaking down a rifle & walking away with a bag? Indeed, why would not the running Holland have seen the assistant or any yardman working in the yard not have seen the assistant? Why would a professional sniper team run such a risk of exposure, even if the assistant was dressed yardman cloths? Wasn't Lee Bowers staring at the fence? Was it because there never was an assistant?

One thing I find puzzling & incredible in Hoffman's testimony. He says that shortly after the assassination he approached FBI & DP to tell them what he had seen. He says he had great difficulty communicating to them his knowledge in his excited state. Hoffman says these men didn't seen to want to understand him & that they offered him money to go away. Offered him money to go away?

3.) Yeah, I too have a soft spot in my heart for good ol' Ed, but, unfortunately, the bumper to bumper parked cars parked adjacent to & along the north side of the picket fence, the fact that the switch boxes were so close to the north side of the overpass, the presence of the Katy RR agent already standing by the switch boxes at Z-313, even the intervening trains blocking Ed's view, and all the other contradictions in Ed's story indicate what Ed's father knew about his son: that he could make up stories & often did, as in this case.

4.) The most embarrassing aspect of Ed's story is the gross & stark implausibility of the "rifle toss" canard. Ed's story is that the assassin fires a shot from behind the picket fence from a spot near hatman; that the assassin then walks west down along the fence toward the elevated (3') steamline pipe at the north end of the triple underpass; that the assassin tosses his rifle to an assistant, possibly tossing it over the steamline pipe; that the assistant then proceeds to the northern most of two switch boxes to disassemble the rifle to put it in a bag; and, finally, both assassin & assistant then casually walk away unseen. Sound good? Unfortunately there's a massive problem here. In the Bell film two men can be seen at the north wall of the triple underpass, the wall that runs from the underpass to connect with the western end of the picket fence. These two men are seen at this wall as the limo goes through the underpass on the way to Parkland. These two men are, therefore, standing, at the critical time, about 15 feet (!!) away from the switch box where Ed's "assistant" breaks down the rifle. Since there are zero bushes or tress in this area, this means that the two men could have & would have SEEN the assassin toss the rifle to the assistant & would have SEEN the assistant carrying the rifle to the switch box, breaking it down & carrying it away in a bag. It is possible that Ed's "rifle toss" occurred before the assassin reached the steamline pipe; if so, then, the assistant would have had to have jumped over the 3' steamline pipe or to have ducked under it, while carrying the rifle. What makes this whole scenario laughably implausible is the consideration that the assassin is executing a plan of escape that is, in its conception, the exact oppose of a plan designed to succeed. The assassin & his assistant walk to where there is an extremely high likelihood that they will be seen, and seen by any number of witnesses who are in the area of the switch boxes to view the motorcade. In other words, the assassin & his advisers, realizing the dangers, would have first of all have ruled out Ed's scenario as being the worst possible exit strategy, the one plan most likely to fail, the one plan most likely to expose the assassin. Conclusion: Ed's dog don't hunt.

5.) Thx, Bernice, if you can blow up this .jpg you will see that on 11-22(or 23-date of photo)-63 a man standing at column 2 of the balustrade (column man) could easily have seen Ed's apocryphal rifle toss. Remember, Column Man would have heard clearly the crack or report of the kill shot to his immediate left &, consequently, would have had a reflex reaction to look to his left to see, amazingly, the assassin pitch his rifle. Of course, no pitch ever occurred. If Ed's toss occurred in the blind area, then, of course, Column Man would have seen the assassin's assistant leap over or duck under the steam pipe with the rifle!. It's noteworthy that Ed changed his story from the assassin throwing the rifle with his palms up to throwing it with his palms down.... just one of the numerous contradicting inconsistancies.... [bTW, note the cars parked along, against the long arm of the picket fence. How could the shooter have walked west down along the fence between these cars & the fence? Maybe he shuffled side stepping, crab-wise?]

6.) Ed Hoffman- Hoffman is a deaf mute man who claims to have been in the Dealey Plaza area at the time of the assassination. He claims to have seen a man behind the grassy knoll shoot the president, then move towards the triple underpass, and toss the gun to a man knelt down behind a track switchbox. This man then supposedly took the gun apart, put it in a small carrying box, and both men strolled away in opposite directions. Now, I've been to Dealey Plaza, walked behind the stockade fence, and walked over to the triple underpass where S.M. Holland and several other watched the motorcade and witnessed the assassination. The distance between the bridge and the area of the stockade fence where a would be assassin would be located, is not the far, and the fact that an assassin would move towards the direction of the underpass, and toss a gun to an accomplice, who in turn took the gun apart right in that area, suspends my belief. Hoffman said he tried to communicate with a police officer immediately after the shooting but being a deaf mute, he was unsuccessful, and then decided not to come forward until 20-25 years later. I have to fall into the category of not believing his story. -- http://www.geocities.com/metsman_2001/misinfo.html

7.) QUOTE(Bill Miller @ Mar 25 2007, 10:02 AM)

But Hoffman DID want to be given a test from the beginning, but he was told that it was not possible to test a deaf mute.

To look closely, however:

Polygraphing techniques for the deaf have been around since the 60s & have been refined over the years (Dr. Matte: "A Technique for Polygraphing the Deaf." Polygraph, Vol. 2, Nr.3, 1980. Journal of the American Polygraph Association.) Thus, Ed could have seen to it that he WAS polygraphed had he really wanted to be polygrahed. Perhaps there was a reason to avoid a polygraph? What could that reason be?

Ed, in The Men Who Killed Kennedy(1988), looked intelligent, prosperous & well educated, driving a not inexpensive car.

Deaf mutes use sign language which enables them to communicate very effectively with non-signing hearing & speaking people. Why? Just to give only one reason, deaf mutes are introduced to non-signing hearing & speaking people from their earliest years & learn ways & means to communicate with same. It becomes a life study.

For example, Ed, on approaching an FBI or DPD officer would have showed a posture of someone shooting a rifle & then he would have pointed to the RR yard & then perhaps he would have pointed to his eye suggesting that he had seen a marksman. The officer, having the recent gunfire on his mind, would not think this pantomime was a request for alms, would he? The officer might have been in a hurry. But would he have said: Here, take $5.00 & good day to you? Of course not.

On balance, unfortunately, Ed Hoffman's story is not reasonably to be belived.

that's a bit presumptive, eh?

And... "... on BALANCE, UNFORTUNATELY, Ed Hoffman's story is NOT REASONABLY to be BELIEVED." [emphasis mine] What does THAT mean? Can't SBT-Lone Nutter's simply say, they believe a EYEwitness lied? Now the SBTheorist's are *sign* literate.... oh-wee...

Edited April 18, 2007 by David G. Healy

[Miles Scull]

On balance, unfortunately, Ed Hoffman's story is not reasonably to be believed.

that's a bit presumptive, eh?

And... "... on BALANCE, UNFORTUNATELY, Ed Hoffman's story is NOT REASONABLY to be BELIEVED." [emphasis mine] What does THAT mean? Can't SBT-Lone Nutter's simply say, they believe a EYEwitness lied? Now the SBTheorist's are *sign* literate.... oh-wee...

Hi Dave, thx for looking in.

No, there's no agenda here other than to examine the believability of ED Hoffman's story. (What Lone Nutters want to do is their business, not mine. ) The sniper at the fence is NOT disproved by the understanding that Ed's story is bogus. The interesting & important consequence of the collapse of Ed's story is the opening up of new views as to exactly how the sniper might exited from his position at the fence. That's new.

By the way, the aerial photo shown above was taken late in the afternoon of Sunday, November 24, 1963. Still, the argument is the same: the cars nosed in to the fence would have impeded easy & open transit down along the fence.

[Bernice Moore]

Hi Miles:

I think ? you are presuming, perhaps that they all ran immediately behind the fence,within a second??

I know that some used that word,

but the photos tell a different story....I believe they took off after the Limo had proceeded under the overpass...there would

have been, what a minute two between....?? anyway, a short time, to them in all the excitement, yes imo it would seem immediately..

I think you see your man at the Post in the Cabluck?, this was taken from the first bus, the motorcade was stopped for a short

time at the corner of Houston and Elm, and then as it proceeded the photographers mention it took some maneuvering, to get that bus around that

sharp turn, so we are looking at minutes here..not many but some...

Here below is the Cabluck..with Officer Hargood, up on the wall, enlarged and clear..where I think you saw your man ??

You will see the man I believe you mention

is to Hargis' left, he has a white hat on and appears to be carrying a white, or light overcoat over his arm...his hand appears to

be towards his mouth, walkie, cough who knows....?? he has begun to walk

towards the fence, others to his left, from the RR, have not as yet begun to move....neither has the crowd where they ended up

to and around Hargis a very short time later, they are moving but have not reached him as yet...

......The 11 RR men standing together are not seen as yet....in this photo...

Also,you mention that if Ed has not seen what he says he did, this would change in some way how the shooter or shooters got

away.....?? I believe that is the gist of your comment, that is not clear to me...I do not see how..what he saw or did not see, would

change in anyway how they may have escaped....?? Sims from the roof of the Post Office saw what could have been, the younger man with

longish hair, run towards the RR tracks down over and towards the back of the TSBD.....from what he relates, no one was there

at that time or tried to stop him....so if a RR officer was in that vacinity....????? and keeping in mind that Bowers saw a RR man walk away

over the RR tracks...

Ed mentions the man I believe, hurrying then walking slowly behind the fence towards the direction

of the far corner of the fence, that is where the DPD Hargis ?stopped the man with dirty fingernails who was there upon his entrance to the parking lot.

...after parking his bike... could they have been one and the same..he then cleared him as a SS agent with ID and he walked

away, sharp that DPD....I realise after the officer was sorry he had not arrested him but the damage was done...

Many, many DPD, officers immediately were running up behind Zapruder, where he says they were shooting or a shot came from, behind him....why I do

wonder, if there was not a shooter there..?.The cyclists also headed immeditely for the fence area, these are trained officers, who recognise

in what directions shots come from....surely they could not all have been wrong, or is the ole echo, reverberations to be believed .??

If, as you mention the man at the corner would have seen a rifle being thrown over the steam pipe..then I guess he never came forward

either, unless he was someone who had been stationed there to keep all away from such corner, during...?? and if so, then he would have

done so for a reason, because he knew shots were going to be fired from that area...So either another lost witness or another accomplice,

one or tother, but that does not affect Ed's story here nor there...nor does that his information correlates many other witnesses change

in any way....so what about all the other witnesses, putting Ed on the back burner for now...Or do you not think there were any shots from

behind the fence, and perhaps think they were only from the TSBD, or from the back....?? Just asking..

As far as Ed saying the FBI offered him money, heck, I would believe anyone over the FBI, after seeing their behaviour in all this and their

manipulations, and that of their boss, and the Dallas FBI office, and if they did that is the least, by far...and he didn't take it if so, so he sure

has put up with all this for years now, not for money or fame, he sure doesn't have that...

except for what he worked for, and once a year if his health is good enough, he visits the Plaza,

to say hello to all, and he does not sell his autograph, never written a book, now that's the way to get rich, write a conspiracy book..LOL.

So why has he put up with it all, gee maybe cause he is telling he truth and always has....or perhaps because he favors others taking aim

for whatever reason......?? I really do not know why anyone would put up with it all, unless it was the truth....

Whatever, is your opinion, which I respect, and here below are also, some photos from the parking lot taken immediately after, you can see,

the bushes did not hang over the fence and obstruct parking, and what you see from your areial view are their shadows..

.....they were a type of vine.....also the cars were not parked like sardines, where no one could move about......there were designated areas

for parking....though the lot was full......keeping in mind people had to get in and out, of their vehicles..

Also below is Sam Hollands map, which he drew that shows the footprints in front and the space between

the fence and the cars..for cars to park and people to get in and out of same, they need a two foot distance on each side, at approx...yes I believe

them when they say they were running and climbing over such, to get there as fast as possible, or hopefully catch someone responsible, and not

wasting time, trying to maneuver in between each car, and I do imagine some were parked closer to the fence itself than others.....

But anyway take a look at below, may help with your studies in some way...

The large Dillard below was taken just before Cabluck, in the same time range.. and the RR workers have not begun to move....

the photographer Atkins is running to catch up with photo car #2...FWIW..

And thanks for the offer, but no thanks for the McAdams disinformation link to his sites information, been there done that....and am not interested, but like they

say to each their own.....

B......

Edited April 19, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Miles Scull]

Hi Miles:

Bernice, thanks as always for posting these interesting photos! Great.

I think ? you are presuming, perhaps that they all ran immediately behind the fence,within a second??

No.

I know that some used that word,

but the photos tell a different story

Correct.

....I believe they took off after the Limo had proceeded under the overpass...there would

have been, what a minute two between....?? anyway, a short time, to them in all the excitement, yes imo it would seem immediately..

No. I'm talking about the Bell film wherein the limo is seen passing through the triple underpass, or under the overpass as might be said. The Bell film shows two men standing behind the balustrade at a point about 15 feet from the switch box. These men were standing there at Z-313. They did not run there after Z-313. Therefore, they would have seen the assassin's assistant with the rifle! They did not because he was never there. Ed's story does not work. The man standing at the second column & about 5 feet from the steam pipe is seen at that position before Hargood mounts the wall. He also could have been at that position at Z-313. He also would have seen Ed's apocrophal "sniper's assistant" tippytoeing about.

To repeat:

4.) The most embarrassing aspect of Ed's story is the gross & stark implausibility of the "rifle toss" canard. Ed's story is that the assassin fires a shot from behind the picket fence from a spot near hatman; that the assassin then walks west down along the fence toward the elevated (3') steamline pipe at the north end of the triple underpass; that the assassin tosses his rifle to an assistant, possibly tossing it over the steamline pipe; that the assistant then proceeds to the northern most of two switch boxes to disassemble the rifle to put it in a bag; and, finally, both assassin & assistant then casually walk away unseen. Sound good? Unfortunately there's a massive problem here. In the Bell film two men can be seen at the north wall of the triple underpass, the wall that runs from the underpass to connect with the western end of the picket fence. These two men are seen at this wall as the limo goes through the underpass on the way to Parkland. These two men are, therefore, standing, at the critical time, about 15 feet (!!) away from the switch box where Ed's "assistant" breaks down the rifle. Since there are zero bushes or tress in this area, this means that the two men could have & would have SEEN the assassin toss the rifle to the assistant & would have SEEN the assistant carrying the rifle to the switch box, breaking it down & carrying it away in a bag. It is possible that Ed's "rifle toss" occurred before the assassin reached the steamline pipe; if so, then, the assistant would have had to have jumped over the 3' steamline pipe or to have ducked under it, while carrying the rifle. What makes this whole scenario laughably implausible is the consideration that the assassin is executing a plan of escape that is, in its conception, the exact oppose of a plan designed to succeed. The assassin & his assistant walk to where there is an extremely high likelihood that they will be seen, and seen by any number of witnesses who are in the area of the switch boxes to view the motorcade. In other words, the assassin & his advisers, realizing the dangers, would have first of all have ruled out Ed's scenario as being the worst possible exit strategy, the one plan most likely to fail, the one plan most likely to expose the assassin. Conclusion: Ed's dog don't hunt.

but like they

say to each their own.....

You bet, B, here I think you have hit the nail on the head with a sledge hammer! Indeed, after all these years it's been customary to take Ed's story at face value. Now, unfortunately, a careful analysis peels away the rind to reveal the core of Ed's hoax. Ed's story simply does not add up. Of course, however, I know it's hard to abandon long held, cherished convictions. So I honor your right to believe anything you choose. Tallyho!

B......