Kathleen Collins Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Also on here recently there was another thread where someone wondered why the lights were seen above the pergola.....but they were not lights,they were in the background in the distance....in the parking lot...But you would have sworn that they were there on top...background structures and trajectories...they call it. B.... Bernice, that was me trying to figure out those lights on the arcade. It turned out to be railway lights or signals from behind the arcade, which were movable. End of a mystery. Kathy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Kathleen: I recalled the thread, and posted a photo and the explanation..I believe.. It is very difficult at times, to figure out what is in the distance and or up close, So we go to the books or what is available and double check...hopefully the answers are there..that is the important part...if and when possible.. Evan: In Trask's book, and also within the motorcade studies, it states that one more convertible was not available that day, for the LBJ, SS. ??.. They were provided by Earl Hayes Chevrolet, and were used by the dignitaries and the photographers, others were on buses, which were # 13 & 14th in the motorcade. All were placed many cars back of the presidential Lincoln X 100, in fact the photog convertibles were 6th, 7th, and 8th..none up front.. So as seen the door was open to jump out quickly if the need to arose...is the explanation ..The door is seen ajar as well on...Main St. for instance...see attached, I think this is another Dillard photo.. ...not positive.. ......as well as we see it ajar on Houston Street as they approached the TSBD.. in a Hughes photo... B.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 (edited) posted by bernice:http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&id=10957 faces south from somewhere by the collonade. A few frames later, a guy goes up to the fence, apparently unseen by the cop who are directing these people and raises his hand and appers to point at this spot. Is there any photo that indicates that a slat (or part thereof) here was movable? (image) ********* There are others seen, Jack and others have said there were a vine type tree plants every now and again planted along the fence... Here is another Darnell frame, and a couple of Gifs.none of them are really clear, but you can see now there are two of them spaced apart.....could be...if that is the mark that you are pointing out... I think they are the plants growing up along the sides of the fence.....they show stems branching off. I have add another it shows other similar branches behind the policeman along the fence.... B Thx, B for the Darnell gif, et al., because I noticed here & in other frames a man in a dark suit standing where the north edge of the sidewalk disappears under & at his feet, who has a light colored overcoat draped over his right hand. This man: carries his overcoat in a normal way. He drapes it over his right forearm such that it touches his elbow as you can see his hand. But the man here: carrying a light colored overcoat (gray trench coat?) has his overcoat draped over his hand & away from his crooked elbow by a foot at least. This man is hiding a concealed weapon. M ****************** Hi Miles: Don't know.......to me it appears he is holding two coats, one over each arm, and is perhaps smiling as the lady closest to the camera approaches him....?? Wondering if she was the Misses, and she took off up the steps and into the parking lot and left him holding all...and he is perhaps just catching up to her.......then again he may have two weapons one under each coat..... but I just kind of doubt it...?? Have a look.... B... Edited May 4, 2007 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Hynonen Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Bernice, great photo that color one in post #122. I wish the other ones of that day of the knoll and TSBD were of that quality and sharpness, alas not so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Another image showing the fence line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Thx, B for the Darnell gif, et al., because I noticed here & in other frames a man in a dark suit standing where the north edge of the sidewalk disappears under & at his feet, who has a light colored overcoat draped over his right hand. This man: carries his overcoat in a normal way. He drapes it over his right forearm such that it touches his elbow as you can see his hand. But the man here: carrying a light colored overcoat (gray trench coat?) has his overcoat draped over his hand & away from his crooked elbow by a foot at least. This man is hiding a concealed weapon. M ****************** Hi Miles: Don't know.......to me it appears he is holding two coats, one over each arm, and is perhaps smiling as the lady closest to the camera approaches him....?? Wondering if she was the Misses, and she took off up the steps and into the parking lot and left him holding all...and he is perhaps just catching up to her.......then again he may have two weapons one under each coat..... but I just kind of doubt it...?? Have a look.... B... Hi Bernice, Here's another, subsequent frame (frame 2) showing the man with a hidden weapon (Gunman): As you can see here the lady has not yet reached the man (Gunman) with the light colored coat draped over his right hand. Yet the second coat, which you guessed was over Gunman's left hand in this frame (frame 1): has disappeared. Where did it go? It couldn't have been returned to the lady as she has not yet reached Gunman as seen in frame 2. The answer is an optical illusion. The second coat was actually over the right arm of the man immediately to the left of Gunman. As he walks by Gunman he carries the second coat along with him & that's where it goes. You can just see a glimpse of it through a slight chink by the lady's left elbow in frame 2. So, Gunman has only one coat. Now, frame 2 shows even more clearly how Gunman is holding his coat over his hand & not over his forearm. Underneath that coat there is a weapon. Malcolm Summers: "I ran across the--Elm Street to right there toward the knoll. It was there [pointing to a spot on the knoll]--and we were stopped by a man in a suit and he had an overcoat--over his arm and he, he, I saw a gun under that overcoat. And he--his comment was, "Don't you all come up here any further, you could get shot, or killed," one of those words. A few months later, they told me they didn't have an FBI man in that area. If they didn't have anybody, it's a good question who it was. " Another interesting, telling point. Gunman is not moving, not looking about for clues, not searching for assassins, not talking to anyone. He is looking at what people around him are doing. He seems to be in charge of his area & have an assignment. Bernice, is he part of the ops team? M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 (edited) Hi Miles: Who said this guy was a shooter...or had a gun, ?? Those are your thoughts though and you are entitled. Lots of men it seems had one overcoat, and over their arm, they wore them that morning because of the rain. The man in the lighter suit to the right, has a dark overcoat over his arm...nearest to the fence......the man you are commenting on is not the same person......he has a dark suit and a light overcoat.... He seems to have a light coat over his left shoulder in the first frames..possibly.?. .or it could be a part of another person ? Another look and I believe you are correct and it belongs to someone else . Malcolm Summers, yes he stated that a few days later..that he saw a man with a gun..."toward the knoll" there are many areas on the knoll.. "Don't you all come up here any further" which part...?? He was not specific at all..that I recall and was not near the knoll, ...if so it is hard to tell exactly where he meant..but will check for myself. I doubt they knew exactly where their FBI men were specifically, at any time that day.. If you get into their information, they are hard to pin down IMO..there is not all that much, and their reports are scanty..Also they left a lot of witnesses information out of their statements, changed others, so I kind of doubt theirs would be in any better order......imo.. The film is such a short clip, I think Darnell said it is 10 seconds, so we do not know, if the man was waiting for that lady, or whomever, or just arriving there for a look around...he does not appear to be looking around in the clip...seems to be just arriving... I do not see him looking around..but perhaps just arriving... If he was a part of any ops team, I seriously doubt he would still be there...or just arriving ?? Some also have tried to tie Summers story into the Files story ..I have noticed with his info or what some try to inform us helps back his .... this keeps cropping up, subtley but is here...perhaps you believe his story, I do not...but I have mentioned that before to you...then again to each their own...... Here are the Darnell frames in order ......as he has swung away from the fence.. B.. Edited May 5, 2007 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 (edited) Hi Miles:Who said this guy was a shooter...or had a gun, ?? Those are your thoughts though and you are entitled. Lots of men it seems had one overcoat, and over their arm, they wore them that morning because of the rain. The man in the lighter suit to the right, has a dark overcoat over his arm...nearest to the fence......the man you are commenting on is not the same person......he has a dark suit and a light overcoat.... He seems to have a light coat over his left shoulder in the first frames..possibly.?. .or it could be a part of another person ? Another look and I believe you are correct and it belongs to someone else . Malcolm Summers, yes he stated that a few days later..that he saw a man with a gun..."toward the knoll" there are many areas on the knoll.. "Don't you all come up here any further" which part...?? He was not specific at all..so it is hard to tell where he meant.. I doubt they knew exactly where their FBI men were specifically, at any time that day.. If you get into their information, they are hard to pin down IMO..there is not all that much, and their reports are scanty..Also they left a lot of witnesses information out of their statements, changed others, so I kind of doubt theirs would be in any better order......imo.. The film is such a short clip, I think Darnell said it is 10 seconds, so we do not know, if the man was waiting for that lady, or whomever, or just arriving there for a look around...he does not appear to be looking around in the clip...seems to be just arriving... I do not see him looking around..but perhaps just arriving... If he was a part of any ops team, I seriously doubt he would still be there...or just arriving ?? Some also have tried to tie Summers story into the Files story ..I notice his info or what some inform us that backs his info..... keeps cropping up, perhaps you believe his story, I do not...but I have mentioned that before to you...but to each their own...... Here are the Darnell frames in order ......as he has swung away from the fence.. Thanks B.. I'm with You on this one Bernice. All i see is two men from the DPD looking over a crime scene. No gun. ? It is just a pity and a discrace that they didn't block of the road to traffic, and rope off the grassy knoll and Carpark area to preserve any evidence that may be there. I guess to rope off the grassy knoll area may insinuate that it played a part in the assassination, we couldn't have that now could we. After all that area was in the WEST, and Oswald was in the EAST. Edited May 5, 2007 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 (edited) Hi Miles:Who said this guy was a shooter...or had a gun, ?? Those are your thoughts though and you are entitled. Lots of men it seems had one overcoat, and over their arm, they wore them that morning because of the rain. The man in the lighter suit to the right, has a dark overcoat over his arm...nearest to the fence......the man you are commenting on is not the same person......he has a dark suit and a light overcoat.... He seems to have a light coat over his left shoulder in the first frames..possibly.?. .or it could be a part of another person ? Another look and I believe you are correct and it belongs to someone else . Malcolm Summers, yes he stated that a few days later..that he saw a man with a gun..."toward the knoll" there are many areas on the knoll.. "Don't you all come up here any further" which part...?? He was not specific at all..that I recall and was not near the knoll, ...if so it is hard to tell exactly where he meant..but will check for myself. I doubt they knew exactly where their FBI men were specifically, at any time that day.. If you get into their information, they are hard to pin down IMO..there is not all that much, and their reports are scanty..Also they left a lot of witnesses information out of their statements, changed others, so I kind of doubt theirs would be in any better order......imo.. The film is such a short clip, I think Darnell said it is 10 seconds, so we do not know, if the man was waiting for that lady, or whomever, or just arriving there for a look around...he does not appear to be looking around in the clip...seems to be just arriving... I do not see him looking around..but perhaps just arriving... If he was a part of any ops team, I seriously doubt he would still be there...or just arriving ?? Some also have tried to tie Summers story into the Files story ..I have noticed with his info or what some try to inform us helps back his .... this keeps cropping up, subtley but is here...perhaps you believe his story, I do not...but I have mentioned that before to you...then again to each their own...... Here are the Darnell frames in order ......as he has swung away from the fence.. B.. Hi Bernice, Thanks for the Darnell frames. BTW, you forgot the first frame. Here it is, in case you don't have it: By closely examining each of the 8 frames you will see that the man in question (AKA "Gunman") is in the same position & stance & posture in each frame. He does not move or turn. Therefore, it is logical to assume that he has been there in that position for sometime before he is filmed & that he continues to remain there after he is filmed. Everybody else IS moving. Gunman is rooted & stationary. No one carries his overcoat in the unnatural, counter intuitive manner of having it draped over his hand. No one except Gunman. Gunman with a weapon under his overcoat which is bunched up over his right hand & not draped over his forearm. David Scheim(1) summarizes: "After the shooting, Dallas Police officer Joe M. Smith encountered another suspicious man in the lot behind the picket fence [on the grassy knoll]. Smith told the Warren Commission that when he drew his pistol and approached the man, the man "showed [smith] that he was a Secret Service agent." Another witness also reported encountering a man who displayed a badge and identified himself as a Secret Service agent. But according to Secret Service Chief James Rowley and agents at the scene, all Secret Service personnel stayed with the motorcade, as required by regulations, and none was stationed in the railroad parking lot [behind the grassy knoll]. It thus appeared that someone was carrying fraudulent Secret Service credentials--of no perceptible use to anyone but an escaping assassin. (Scheim 30-31) This adds heavy weight to Summers' testimony. And to the case that Gunman is suspicious. An Ops man. Bernice, this is only a theory or a case. Thx again for posting all the photos! M Edited May 5, 2007 by Miles Scull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 (edited) Hi Miles: Yes I left it out, trying to conserve a wee bit of space,as I have been posting so many of the photos....but thank you very much. You mention that to you, this man has not moved forward...But to me, he has, if you study the frames, he is in the sunlight as he begins to approach Darnell, you then see his suit jacket one shoulder in sun, the other in shade, which appears dark. ...as he moves towards the photographer, he is then completely in the shade and his suit is all of the same darker shade....in the last frame his foot, right I believe it is is also stepping forward..recall this is only about 10 second of film. Yes, Officer Smith did approach a man with gun in hand, and this man showed him id from his back pocket, that seemd to him to be SS cridentials...accepted those and let him go, and regretted it from then on....but the man was wearing a sports shirt, looked to him like a garage mechanic , and had dirty figernails. There were others than ran into what they thought were SS men, one of your favorites, Ed Hoffman as well, Sam Holland also mention behind the fence seeing two policemen and a plain clothesman, Officer Weitzman also, believed he met more than one SS man, behind the fence, he also found what seemed to him to be a piece of bone on the street and turned it over to one he thought was also SS.. Officer Harkness also ran into whom he thought were SS behind the TSBD, he said there were some that told him they were SS. But according to the SS themsleves, Sorrels was the only one who did return to the Plaza, approximately an hour later..... There were other siteings as well...They were all over the place it seems... Now how many were Detectives, the DPD.Curry's men who dressed and wore the white hats ...or Sheriffs Decker's men, who dressed and wore dark fedora hats..and how many were Pretenders ?? We don't know, except I do not think they have dirty finger nails, nor look like a mechanics..There were men in that Plaza, who were not what they represented themselves to be, that is a given.... The problem with Summers information is that it has been added to, and not by him..... .....it was done by a friend through marriage, and he was never at the top of the stairs nor behind the fence area...The man he encountered was, behind the TSBD...along with the people he was with...... He went from the grass on the south side of Elm St, across the road and followed the crowd, to the street, (second Elm) than runs behind the TSBD...He seemed very sincere and his story has not basically changed..he was with the crowd and he and the others were stopped..also.....the man told them to stop, that they could get shot up there and to go back.. He did have an overcoat over his arm which Malcolm thought was unusual, how?I do not know seems there were others as well, as it had been raining, but anyway..he said he noticed a gun under that persons arm, not a shoulder holster.....it seemed to him to be in a pocket or concealed under the coat.....The man didn't show any identification, and that it was only his dress that made him think he was a detective or an FBI , that it was an order " Y'all better not come up here. You better stay back because you could get shot up there".. He hung around for a few minutes could not see anything and left. Now recall he never ran up the steps, nor was ever behind the wooden fence.....but, now here is the rest of the story...gets better... ....Al Maddox was a Deputy Sheriff...and his daughter married Malcolms son....and they got to know each other pretty good.....and one night 25 years later...Al says that Malcolm told him this that many years later.....that....quoting Al.." I got to know him as the man who ran up the grassy knoll and was told by a man ""Get back down there or I'll blow your head off.."" or something to that effect . The man showed him a badge of some kind and had what Malcolm thought was an Uzi type gun under his coat."..and that is the rest of the story..... all those years later, and well maybe they had had a few coffees, I have no idea, but this is how the legends grow...and what did and did not imo happen has gotten all the more messed up... I recall you said you tried to deal the same as I have with mainly first evidence and witnesses recall.. at that time.......well imo here is one that should be forgotten about.. This above is from Marrs and Sneed.. There is much more on the witnesses in Marrs, Crossfire, as well as in Larry Sneeds book.No More Silence.. as well as William Law,& Alan Eaglesham's, In the Eye of History..also the witness tapes from Mark Oakes. and others... as well.. Posted is a photo of the street that runs behind the TSBD,to the RR parking lot.. this area was where Malcolm followed the crowd to....This may help in some way.... Thanks B.... P.S.Robin if DPD and or Sheriffs men, they would be armed, and would have such in holsters, I do think.. Tx.. Edited May 6, 2007 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 Hi Miles:Who said this guy was a shooter...or had a gun, ?? Those are your thoughts though and you are entitled. Lots of men it seems had one overcoat, and over their arm, they wore them that morning because of the rain. The man in the lighter suit to the right, has a dark overcoat over his arm...nearest to the fence......the man you are commenting on is not the same person......he has a dark suit and a light overcoat.... He seems to have a light coat over his left shoulder in the first frames..possibly.?. .or it could be a part of another person ? Another look and I believe you are correct and it belongs to someone else . Malcolm Summers, yes he stated that a few days later..that he saw a man with a gun..."toward the knoll" there are many areas on the knoll.. "Don't you all come up here any further" which part...?? He was not specific at all..so it is hard to tell where he meant.. I doubt they knew exactly where their FBI men were specifically, at any time that day.. If you get into their information, they are hard to pin down IMO..there is not all that much, and their reports are scanty..Also they left a lot of witnesses information out of their statements, changed others, so I kind of doubt theirs would be in any better order......imo.. The film is such a short clip, I think Darnell said it is 10 seconds, so we do not know, if the man was waiting for that lady, or whomever, or just arriving there for a look around...he does not appear to be looking around in the clip...seems to be just arriving... I do not see him looking around..but perhaps just arriving... If he was a part of any ops team, I seriously doubt he would still be there...or just arriving ?? Some also have tried to tie Summers story into the Files story ..I notice his info or what some inform us that backs his info..... keeps cropping up, perhaps you believe his story, I do not...but I have mentioned that before to you...but to each their own...... Here are the Darnell frames in order ......as he has swung away from the fence.. Thanks B.. I'm with You on this one Bernice. All i see is two men from the DPD looking over a crime scene. No gun. ? It is just a pity and a discrace that they didn't block of the road to traffic, and rope off the grassy knoll and Carpark area to preserve any evidence that may be there. I guess to rope off the grassy knoll area may insinuate that it played a part in the assassination, we couldn't have that now could we. After all that area was in the WEST, and Oswald was in the EAST. Robin, I'm curious. What did you mean when you wrote this: "No gun. ? " Kathy Hi Kathy. In a previous post there was a comment that a gun may be hidden under a coat. I don't beleive this to be the case, The cops were not afraid to expose there guns, as can be seen in a number of images were a uniformed officer has his gun drawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 Robin,I'm curious. What did you mean when you wrote this: "No gun. ? " Kathy Hi Kathy. In a previous post there was a comment that a gun may be hidden under a coat. I don't believe this to be the case, The cops were not afraid to expose there guns, as can be seen in a number of images were a uniformed officer has his gun drawn. Bernice, Many thanks for ample & informative reply. As you point out there were bogies galore. What suggests that "Gunman" is hiding a gun is the odd position of his overcoat, which is over his hand & not over his forearm. Also, the shape of his overcoat, bunched over his hand, suggests something being held concealed in his hand. What could it be? A deck of cards? A small box of cracker jacks? A radio? Who knows? Only the Shadow? The theory is that this man is not a cop, who would not need to hide his gun, but is a bogie who hides his weapon a la Summers' report. Etc. On the subject of Ed Hoffman being too far away to see accurately & the inconsistencies of his story, see this aerial which sets Ed about 250 yards away (!) from Sarti who was in uniform: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 Bernice, Robin, Chris, Duncan, et al.: In the images below: 1.) Is the "X" in the street accurately placed for Z-313? 2.) Is the camera's placement correct for Hatman's viewpoint? (Maybe 2 or 3 feet too close to the fence corner?) 3.) If yes to 1.) & 2.), then would you agree that, in that case, the movement of the head on impact is completely wrong for a head shot from Hatman? 4.) Do you agree that the impact head movement IS consistent with a shooter at 33 feet from the fence corner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 [Answers1./ As far as I know, Yes 2./ Question...Do you mean Hatman who is about 15 ft from the fence or my shooter at 33ft? 3./ yes or no, I couldn't answer that. 4./ I don't know, this would require an expert analysis..Someone qualified like Cyril Wecht could maybe answer this. I have no contact with him. Duncan Hi Duncan, I don't think Wecht would want to offer an answer. Dr. WECHT. I believe, sir, such things as straight lines in relationship to horizontal and vertial trajectories, positions of two human beings, measurements of the Zapruder film, the timing of it, the timing of the test-firing of the Mannlicher-Carcano weapon, I believe, sir, these fall very much into the realm of the hard physical sciences as opposed to the kind of things that we, as physicians, are often involved in--did the heart attack follow the emotional or physiological distress; did the cancer come about after the blow to the breast--those are in the realm of speculation and reasonable differences. In my opinion, I think that the evidence that has been discussed today, the physical measurements, the laws of mathematics, of physics, and so on, I believe, sir, that these do not fall within the realm of reasonable differences of opinion. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/hscawech.htm Kathy Duncan, Kathy & Wecht make a good point. However, epistemology aside, it might be simple geometry at work. If you take this frame: it is seen that the head is (already) turned to the left & that the shoulders are (already) canted over to the left. The entrance is upper right temple. The contention is that the impact's trust back from a shot fired from 10 to 15 ft (from the corner) must be different from that fired from 33 to 38 ft (from the corner). A Hatman shot would push the head more toward the left & less toward the rear than would a Duncan figure shot. See: This is the point of Duncan's figure: This is further down from the fence corner for perspective: The Z frames 313 to 320 show a trust back to the rear which, because of the absence of a additional, commensurate & corresponding trust movement to the left, indicates a trajectory of from 33 ft. A Hatman shot would have forced the head to the left, which is not seen in the frames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miles Scull Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 This is about as much analysis as I can give on the trajectory Miles. Duncan Great work, Duncan! Thanks. This will convert Bernie, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now