The Education Forum

# Altgens: - A Closer Look.

## Recommended Posts

Brain Twister & help request for Duncan, Chris, Robin, Bernice, et al.:

Would the man in white shorts up by the fence see the back side of the AIRPORTS sign he were to look at it from his position in this photo? Where does the plane of the AIRPORTS sign intersect

the fence? At a point how far (#ft.?) west along the fence from its corner does the intersect occur? Thanks.

I'd say YES he would be able to see it. If you look at the shadow just behind his feet which runs up to the hole in the fence, then draw a straight line from through and beyond both reference points towards the road, you'll see that the line runs behind the sign. As the man is in the shadow area, he would therefore be behind the sign and able to see the back of the sign.

Duncan

Excellent Duncan! Now see this:

And this below, then, is the sniper's view, exactly? (!) What would this point's distance be from the corner of the fence? As Hamlet said: "That is the question."

• Replies 126
• Created

#### Posted Images

Excellent Duncan! Now see this:

And this below, then, is the sniper's view, exactly? (!) What would this point's distance be from the corner of the fence? As Hamlet said: "That is the question."

I could only hazard a guess of around 30ft.

Duncan

Duncan,

So, in your view your figure in the Moorman is at around 30 feet? Not around 25'. I agree. Can you plot this?

Also, do you recognize the drawer of this?

##### Share on other sites

Duncan,

So, in your view your figure in the Moorman is at around 30 feet? Not around 25'. I agree. Can you plot this?

Also, do you recognize the drawer of this?

Miles,

I guess somewhere between 30 and 35ft would be more accurate. I've been hunting the web for a clear full frontal shot of the fence in order to try and count the individual pickets to this point, but no luck so far. I don't know who the drawer is. Could it maybe be a sketch from the Stone movie?

Duncan

OK, Duncan. Then your Moorman figure is a little to the left of Shorts Man as seen in the photo below. Yes? I don't have the CAD software, but my guess is that by taking a known number such as the height of the fence (5') as a unit, that, then, one could lay a series of that "unit" along the length of the fence from its corner to your Moorman figure spot using this photo below in magnification:

Can do? Oh, the drawing? It's by James Files.

Miles

Edited by Miles Scull
##### Share on other sites

Miles/Duncan

Do you know when the Ft.Worth sign was replaced, and was it moved from its' 1963 spot.

Some more pictures from the Holland/Lane interview.

chris

##### Share on other sites

Miles/Duncan

Do you know when the Ft.Worth sign was replaced, and was it moved from its' 1963 spot.

Some more pictures from the Holland/Lane interview.

chris

Chris

Right. It looks like it was not moved, judging from its spatial relationship to the adjacent lamppost, for example. If the the sign was moved, then was the lamppost also moved, correspondingly? If you can blow this 11-24-64 photo up, you can see the sign & lamppost:

So, the lamppost has been moved directly across the sidewalk from the curb to just outside of the sidewalk's north boarder. The lamppost's current position corresponds spatially to the sign as though the sign did not move. The sign did not move. QED

So, then, where is Duncan's figure as seen in Moorman? 25'? 30'? 35'?

##### Share on other sites

Miles/Duncan

Do you know when the Ft.Worth sign was replaced, and was it moved from its' 1963 spot.

Some more pictures from the Holland/Lane interview.

chris

Chris,

Here's another view... Your opinion? Has the sign been moved?

Miles

##### Share on other sites

Miles/Duncan

Do you know when the Ft.Worth sign was replaced, and was it moved from its' 1963 spot.

Some more pictures from the Holland/Lane interview.

chris

Chris,

Here's another view... Your opinion? Has the sign been moved?

Miles

Miles,

I have no idea.

It would be better to ask someone with extensive first hand knowledge of the changes.

Which is not me.

Just threw the sign position aspect in, to make sure we're covering as many bases as possible.

chris

##### Share on other sites

The single pole sticking up, Miles in that one photo which was taken approx

40 feet from the corner of the fence, is a no parking sign pole...that photo was

taken some years later, 2005, see the upright metal poles behind the fence, and the

back of the new sign... the sign is not the same as it was...back in 63..they

have all been replaced now..during the years..

They have been using and or replacing the metal rods..now for support behind the fence as sections have been

replaced I believe...which used to be

4 1/2 feet high from the back side, and 5 feet from the front Elm side , due to the lay of

the land..in 63..not sure now ..what the heights are..

The grassy knoll itself is approx 200 feet long...Dealey Plaza, itself approx 300 feet, the size of

The steps area, was rebuilt some years ago, after torrential rains and the hill slide down......

they then re-enforced and built it back up...and also cemented the area where the bench had been the day

of the shooting, that was grass and dirt back in 63......also note the parking lot has now

through the years been asphalted......it was all dirt and gravel.. many changes have taken

place through the years......see below..

The signs and the lamp poles have pretty well all been moved as far as I know from the

reading I have done, some several times down through the years. They just moved

the lamp post you see near the Turnpike sign, a matter of weeks ago again...photos showing such

are on a thread on the F.....

also some Trees. have been moved and replaced......in the park..

The Stemmons Freeway sign according to Penn Jones, and others, was moved shortly after the

assassination, others within months..

That is also one reason it is so difficult today for the

researchers who go to the plaza, to be able to gauge any true measurements....

All it seems has been made as difficult as possible....

or is it just progress..... sure...It was designated as a Historical Site many years before

the city took the least bit interest in trying to contain the changes, now they are trying, so it is said,

to change it back....to how it was....

The Files sketch that Jimmy did, that you posted......was made when he had changed his mind, from

at first marking on the map on the 27th of Aug. 1992, see below.....and stating he was

on the grass on the knoll, to the right of the pergola, near the TSBD......when he shot the President.

When he drew this sketch, his story had changed

he was now shooting the President from 40 feet down the fence from the corner...... that

changed again to being approx 10 feet from the corner....now the last I read it is 20

feet from the corner ??...imo, too many changes to be taken seriously......

This below shows you the parking sign on that pole..and others.

..Perhaps we shall get some help soon...with all the sign business.......

P.S. The photo seen below showing the empty parking sign pole was taken in 2005..imprinted on

the bottom...probably taken on a visit to the site.....?

B..

Edited by Bernice Moore
##### Share on other sites

The single pole sticking up, Miles in that one photo which was taken approx

40 feet from the corner of the fence, is a no parking sign pole...that photo was

taken some years later, see the upright metal poles behind the fence, and the

back of the new sign... the sign is not the same as it was...back in 63..they

have all been replaced now..during the years..

They have been using the metal rods..now for support behind the fence which used to be

4 1/2 feet high from the back side, and 5 feet from the front side, due to the lay of

the land..in 63..not sure now ..what the heights are..

The grassy knoll itself is approx 200 feet long...Dealey Plaza, itself approx 300 feet, the size of

The steps area, was rebuilt some years ago, after torrential rains and the hill slide down......

they then re-enforced and built it back up...and also cemented the area where the bench had been the day

of the shooting, that was grass and dirt back in 63......also note the parking lot has now

through the years been asphalted......it was all dirt and gravel.. many changes have taken

place through the years......see below..

The signs and the lamp poles have pretty well all been moved as far as I know from the

reading I have done, some several times down through the years. They just moved

the lamp post you see near the Turnpike sign, a matter of weeks ago again...photos showing such

are on a thread on the F.....

also some Trees. have been moved and replaced......in the park..

The Stemmons Freeway sign according to Penn Jones, and others, was moved shortly after the

assassination, others within months..

That is also one reason it is so difficult today for the

researchers who go to the plaza, to be able to gauge any true measurements....

All it seems has been made as difficult as possible....

or is it just progress..... sure...It was designated as a Historical Site many years before

the city took the least bit interest in trying to contain the changes, now they are trying, so it is said,

to change it back....to how it was....

The Files sketch that Jimmy did, that you posted......was made when he had changed his mind, from

at first marking on the map on the 27th of Aug. 1992, see below.....and stating he was

on the grass on the knoll, to the right of the pergola, near the TSBD......when he shot the President.

When he drew this sketch, his story had changed

he was now shooting the President from 40 feet down the fence from the corner...... that

changed again to being approx 10 feet from the corner....now the last I read it is 20

feet from the corner ??...imo, too many changes to be taken seriously......

This below shows you the parking sign on that pole..and others.

..Perhaps we shall get some help soon...with all the sign business.......

B..

Tremendous explication & in depth detail, Bernice. Great photos! Thanks.

One point: when exactly was this No Parking sign post, seen in Files drawing, put up or installed? I have heard not until very recently. Now, if it was installed where it is now seen at some date after, let's say, 1996, then what does that say about the dating of Files drawing as seen here:

It would be useful to learn when this No Parking sign was installed. Anyone know? It might be possible to find a dated photo which does not show the sign? I understand that the lamppost was moved in the early 1980s. Could the No Parking sign have been installed as long ago as that?

##### Share on other sites

Miles:

The new parking sign and pole were put up after Nov. 1963....after the day of the shooting, that day it was attached

to the lamp pole....as seen below in a cropped Cancellare taken the day of the assassination.....

The original parking sign on the pole was still there in 64.....the photo below was taken the day of the reconstruction

of the assassination,from the overpass and it is dated and marked as such.......all I know about that one...other than that would

be Spring, May 64 I think.....not positive on the month..right now..

The next was taken a few years ago..the pole, sign and no parking sign have been moved also at least 3

lamp posts have been added ..compared to 1964..

The last two are from this year, from Jack White, he has mentioned that he knows of the signs being moved

three times, these compare the lamp post and the sign now, and how they were in 2003...as you can see more

changes......these are from the post recently done on the forum...

I have read of someone, name gone, getting in touch with the Dallas Board of Works, but they were told

that there were no records kept on such.........?? But you could try them again..

B......

Edited by Bernice Moore
##### Share on other sites

Compare shape of President Kennedy's head

in the Willis photograph and in the Moorman photograph.

Allowing for different angle there seems to be a definite indent

and bulge on the crown and left poll respectively.

What is that round area at the upper left?

Could that be an entry wound?

Two almost simultaneous shots?

One from left back and then one from right front?

EBC

***********************

Hi Eugene:

Thanks for the colourization and your work.......

There are some who think that what you mention about a left head wound was very

possible......and also witnesses, who mentioned such........

B.....

Wounds to the Left of JFK's Head?

When I first became interested in the JFK assassination, I thought that I would be able to fully understand at least one aspect of the case - the medical evidence. I now realise how naive that thought really was. There can't be many parts of the case that are more confusing, contentious or crucial.

Initially I wanted to illustrate how confusing the medical evidence can be and how easy it is to paint different versions of what really happened - this article presents the evidence for wounds to the left of JFK's head. However, while writing this article, I have to say that it might support some startling conclusions.

Most of the available evidence points to wounding in the right rear (occipito-parietal) of the head:

The Zapruder film shows wounding in the right

Most of the reports from the Parkland Memorial Hospital doctors mention wounding in the right rear (1).

Most of the eye-witnesses report wounding in the right rear (2).

The major wounds disclosed in the autopsy photographs and x-rays were in the right of the skull.

So where does the evidence for wounds in the left come from?

What's the Evidence?

Remarkably, the evidence comes form several doctors, a priest, a Secret Service agent and JFK's press secretary.

Dr. Jenkins

Dr. Marion T Jenkins was Professor and Chairman of Anaesthetics. His natural position in the trauma room would be at the head of the patient monitoring and administering anaesthetics or, as with JFK, oxygen. He would have had a good chance to study the head wound carefully. Bearing this in mind, part of Jenkins' testimony to the Warren Commission is extraordinary:

"Dr. JENKINS. I do not know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process.

Mr. SPECTER. The autopsy report disclose no such development, Dr Jenkins.

Dr. JENKINS. Well, I was feeling for - I was palpating here for a pulse to see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so I thought there was a wound there also." (3)

Notice that Specter, very carefully, does not say that there was no wound in the left temporal area, rather he says that the autopsy report doesn't disclose such a wound. We know that the autopsy report failed to disclose many things which were apparent - the atrophied adrenal glands, for example (4) Was a wound in the left side of the head omitted too?

Two pages after this remarkable testimony, Jenkins asks to go o ff the record for a discussion with Specter. One page later, the questioning continues:

"Mr. SPECTER: Aside from that opinion [that one bullet must have traversed the President's pleura], have any of your other opinions about the nature of his wounds or the sources of the wounds been changed in any way?

Dr. JENKINS. No; one other. I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline, because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a wound there (indicating).

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the left temporal area?

Dr. JENKINS. Yes; the left temporal, which could have been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating), but you have answered that for me. This was my only other question about it." (5)

Jenkins was obviously bothered by his recollection of a left wound and he is very specific about its location. It is particularly suspicious that Specter seems to have "answered that" after an off the record discussion.

Dr. McClelland

Dr. Robert N McClelland attended JFK in Parkland Memorial Hospital. He testified to the Warren Commission and they reproduced his admission note for JFK written at 16:45 22/11/63 regarding the treatment the President received. McClelland wrote, "The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple" (6).

At this time he was Assistant Professor of Surgery, he would not be expected to mistake the site of a wound in any patient. But JFK was not just any patient, he was the President. I suggest that McClelland would have written a very carefully considered admission note for this patient.

In a short admission note, this divergence from the "official" line is easily spotted. Yet Specter did not ask McClelland to clarify this statement, he directed McClelland away from re-reading his report by asking him to check his signature. Specter then asked whether McClelland would stand by his report before bringing questioning to a speedy halt (7).

In an interview with Gerald Posner, Jenkins claims that McClellands's impression of a wound to the left temple is mistaken and stems from a short exchange between the pair when McClelland entered Trauma Room 1. Jenkins claims that McClelland asked where JFK was hit. Jenkins claims that he was searching for a temporal pulse at this time and that McClelland assumed that Jenkins was pointing out a wound. As we can see previously from Jenkins' own testimony, however, it is quite likely that Jenkins was indeed pointing to an area he thought was wounded (8).

Dr. Giesecke

Dr. Adolf H Giesecke, an anaesthetist, would also have been at JFK's head - the best place to get a good look at the head wounds. Once again, he too mentions damage to the left of JFK's head when giving testimony to the Warren Commission:

"Dr. GIESECKE. It seemed to me that from the vertex to the left ear, and from the browline to the occiput on the left-hand side of the head the cranium was entirely missing.

Mr. SPECTER. Was that the left-hand side of the head, or the right-hand side of the head?

Dr. GIESECKE. I would say the left, but this is just my memory of it." (9)

Why didn't Specter pursue this? With Jenkins he was keen to have the doctor change his recollections or to add a note of doubt ("The autopsy report disclose no such development . . ."), but with Giesecke he allows it to pass without comment. Perhaps Specter was worried that getting Giesecke to think carefully about the site of the exit wound he saw would lead to a discussion of a frontal entrance wound.

Dr. Stewart

Dr. David Stewart was in attendance in Parkland Memorial Hospital when the President and Governor Connally were brought in for emergency treatment. He spent most of his time with Governor Connally. He was interviewed on KNEW television by John Dolan in 1967.

"Dolan said he was particularly concerned with the statement about the shot that killed the President coming from the front'. Stewart said, " Yes, sir. This was the finding of all the physicians who were in attendance. There was a small wound in the left front of the President's head and there was a quite massive wound of exit at the right backside of the head and it was felt by all of the physicians at the time to be a wound of entry which went in the front". (10)

Father Huber

Father Oscar L Huber was one of the priests that gave the last rites to the already dead JFK (11). Part of the ceremony included tracing a cross on the President's forehead using holy oil. Obviously, Father Huber would have been in an excellent position to look at JFK's head wounds. Father Huber was quoted in the press the weekend that the President died saying that he had seen a terrible wound over the President's left eye (12).

Malcolm Kilduff

In 1963, Malcolm Kilduff was JFK's Press Secretary. In a 1991 interview with Harrison Livingtsone, Kilduff gives this remarkable response:

"Livingstone: As you know, the face was not damaged at all. No witness saw any damage to the head past the midline of the skull, forward of the right ear.

Kilduff: Forward of the right ear? No! Forward of the left ear, they did. I did. The bullet came in on the right side and exited the left side." (13)

SSA William Greer

Secret Service Agent William Greer drove the Presidential limousine through Dallas on November 22nd 1963 and must have got a look at JFK's head when they arrived at Parkland Memorial Hospital.

Greer described to author David Lifton how JFK's head "looked like a hard-boiled egg with the top chopped off" (14). This would mean damage to the left as well as the right.

Dr. Boswell

Dr. J Thornton Boswell, one of the Bethesda Naval Hospital autopsists, described much damage to the left of JFK's skull and brain (15):

Explaining a 10cm area marked on the left of the skull diagram, Boswell said, "This was a piece of 10 centimetre bone that was fractured off the skull and was attached to the under surface of the skull." (16)

On the front of the autopsy face sheet prepared by Boswell there is a small dot at left eye labelled "0.4cm" (17).

On the back of the autopsy face sheet prepared by Boswell an arrow at the presumed wound of entry points to the front and left (18).

On Boswell's drawing of JFK's skull there is a 3cm rectangle at the site of the left eye with a ragged margin seemingly indicating a fracture or missing bone (19).

Dr. Humes

Dr. James J Humes, the lead autopsist at JFK's autopsy, described massive wounds in the left of JFK's head and brain (20):

In the scalp, Humes described two enormous tears "c = From the left margin of the main defect across the midline antero-laterally for a distance of approximately 8cm." and "d = From same starting point as c 10cm posterio-laterally"(21).

In the skull, Humes described "complete fracture lines" meaning that the skull bone was broken right through (22):

". . . multiple complete fracture lines are seen to radiate from both the large defect at the vertex and the smaller wound in the occiput. These vary greatly in length and direction, the longest measuring approximately 19 cm." (23). The word "radiate" implies damage to the left of the skull. This is supported by the phrase, "vary greatly in length and direction".

In the brain, Humes described a "1.5cm tear through the left cerebral peduncle" deep in the brain (24).

Summary

The evidence for wounding in the left of JFK's head comes from the following sources:

Four Parkland doctors (two who would have been at JFK's head) - admittedly, one was hearsay

Two autopsy surgeons

A priest

A Secret Service Agent

JFK's press secretary.

Conclusion

I recently had the chance to walk around Dealey Plaza several times, slowly and thoughtfully. I have heard it said that an assassin could have hit JFK with a rock thrown from anywhere in the plaza, but had previously dismissed this as flippant. Having walked round there myself, it does not seem to me that a shot from just about anywhere would be difficult - including a shot from JFK's left, from the other grassy knoll.

On the other hand, Dr. Kemp Clark (the only Parkland doctor we can trust to have had a good look at JFK's head) did not describe the extent of damage noted at the autopsy. David Lifton has more than raised the mere possibility that JFK's body could have been tampered with prior to the autopsy in Washington DC.

Notes

(1) Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits, Commission Exhibit 392, cited hereafter in format CE 392.

(2) Robert Groden, "The Killing of a President", p86 - 88.

(3) Testimony of Dr. Marion T Jenkins, WC 6H48 (page 48 of the sixth volume Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits).

(4) Harrison Livingstone, "High Treason 2", New York, Carroll & Graf, 1992 p179

(5) Testimony of Dr. Marion T Jenkins, WC 6H51.

(6) Dr. McClelland's Parkland Memorial Hospital Admission Note , CE 392.

(7) Testimony of Dr. Robert N McClelland, WC 6H35.

(8) Gerald Posner, "Case Closed"

(9) Testimony of Dr. Adolf H Giesecke, WC 6H74

(10) Harold Weisberg, "Post Mortem", self published, 1975 p60 -61

(11) William Manchester, "The Death of a President", p258

(12) Philadelphia Sunday Bulletin, November 24 1963

(13) Harrison Livingstone, "High Treason 2", New York, Carroll & Graf, 1992 p447

(14) David Lifton, "Best Evidence", New York, Carroll & Graf, 1988 p448

(15) Autopsy Face Sheet completed by Dr. J Thornton Boswell (CE 397) and discussion in "Best Evidence" chapter 18

(16) Testimony of Dr. J Thornton Boswell to the House Select Committee on Assassinations, HSCA 7 p253 (page 253 of the seventh volume of hearings)

(17) CE 397 (WC 17E45)

(18) Sylvia Meagher, "Accessories After The Fact", Vintage Booke Edition, June 1992 p161

(19) CE 397 (WC 17E46)

(20) Autopsy Report, Kennedy, John F., CE 387 & Supplementary Report, CE 391

(21) CE 387

(22) Ibid

(23) Ibid

(24) CE 391

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Ian Griggs for generous access to his copy of the Warren Commission 26 volumes of hearings and exhibits.

Edited by Bernice Moore
##### Share on other sites

Credit: Lee Forman.

Here are some of Lee's photo's.

He sent me a CD containing about 150 photo's he had taken while in Dealey Plaza.

Miles.

Edited by Robin Unger
##### Share on other sites

Credit: Lee Forman.

Here are some of Lee's photo's.

He sent me a CD containing about 150 photo's he had taken while in Dealey Plaza.

Miles.

__________________________________

Stupid question:

Do the two red marks in the street represent where the limo was at the time of the fatal shot(s)? If not, what?

Thanks,

--Thomas

__________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
##### Share on other sites

Brain Twister & help request for Duncan, Chris, Robin, Bernice, et al.:

Would the man in white shorts up by the fence see the back side of the AIRPORTS sign he were to look at it from his position in this photo? Where does the plane of the AIRPORTS sign intersect

the fence? At a point how far (#ft.?) west along the fence from its corner does the intersect occur? Thanks.

I'd say YES he would be able to see it. If you look at the shadow just behind his feet which runs up to the hole in the fence, then draw a straight line from through and beyond both reference points towards the road, you'll see that the line runs behind the sign. As the man is in the shadow area, he would therefore be behind the sign and able to see the back of the sign.

Duncan

Excellent Duncan! Now see this:

And this below, then, is the sniper's view, exactly? (!) What would this point's distance be from the corner of the fence? As Hamlet said: "That is the question."

Hello Duncan,

Cutler's map at the front of Trask's Pictures of the Pain is very accurate, as is Don Roberdeau's plat. Using the former, your "shooter" appears to be 33 feet - +/- one or two feet - west of the fence corner.

Gary Mack

So, what next?

Duncan

OK, Duncan, excellent! Just as you estimated.

Now, referencing the above post, the bottom photo should be the exact position & view point of a possible shooter. This is important because it allows for a trajectory which clears the Hudson tree to the right (from the sniper's view point) of its trunk. This means that a spotter could have signaled the shooter on seeing the umbrella expand, for example. Also, the best position is down the fence, thus allowing for a further shot should Z-309 fail. Shooting from points closer to the fence corner is reducing success probabilities because of the Hudson tree being in the way. Note by shooting to the left of the trunk the sniper must worry about finding his scope view suddenly obstructed by the trunk as he tracks on target from left to right. A trained sniper would opt for a field of fire bordered to the left by the Hudson tree trunk & to the right by the lamppost & Turnpike sign; thus, the widest unobstructed field of fire & the broadest kill zone is obtained. Note, also, that this also allows for more opportunities where the target is moving toward the shooter from a greater distance away from the shooter; thus the target moves more slowly across the field of fire from the 33' point. A shooter from 10' from the corner of the fence would see a quicker moving target AND a narrower field of fire &/or a tree obstruction. Also, the 33' spot logically explains the head movement beginning at Z-313.

So, Duncan, here's the sniper.

The Files' story should be looked into again because there is certain evidence in his interviews' commentaries which indicates that Files is confused in his recollection of where he was exactly. He says 10'. But he remarks about fearing that the sign (which he calls the Stemmons sign) will end his chance as he scopes on target left to right. Files could have mistaken the Stemmons sign for the Turnpike sign, because shooting before the Stemmons sign from a point at 10' from the corner of the fence would have meant shooting to the left of Umbrella man, which doesn't make sense. Files also points to a copy of Moorman & then points to "the sign" just off the margin of the photo to where the Turnpike sign would have been. Then there is Files' drawing, which is a ditto of viewpoint of point 33' from fence corner. Files has put in the No Parking post, but that may be because he was drawing from a latter day photo & didn't know the difference after 40 years.

Files is an unlikely candidate to be sure, but it's funny that in certain important ways he does things right.

Edited by Miles Scull
##### Share on other sites

Sorry, slightly off topic!

Duncan, I am very impressed with your work here!! Your attention to detail and the ability to assimilate the information presented to you shows to me the seriousness you place on your research.

Great job!!

Kathy

Hear, hear Kathy Beckett!

Duncan, Robin, Chris, Bernice, et al.,

Just wondering if there are any other frames' stills available from Nix such as this one:

Thx

### Announcements

×

• #### Store

×
• Create New...