Those Front Steps

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Those Front Steps  (Read 348930 times)

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5017
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #154 on: October 26, 2019, 04:26:01 PM »
Here’s the problem. I don’t think anybody actually knows that Campbell was wearing a dark hat and suit.

Also the alleged Campbell is used to identify the alleged Reid, and the alleged Reid is used to identify the alleged Campbell, so it’s circular.

Also the alleged Reid does not resemble the one known picture of Reid.

    This sounds more like Mr Chism

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #155 on: October 26, 2019, 05:15:11 PM »
     In the revered "Pictures Of The Pain", Trask details Wiegman having run into/seeing SA Lem Johns UP the knoll. How is this Not on the Wiegman Film? The Wiegman Film for close to 40 years was ballyhooed as being filmed Continuously. We NOW Know this was a bunch of baloney as would anyone that actually views the Wiegman Film. The current timelines assigned to many of the assassination films, photos, and the individuals captured on them has been Wrong for 55+ years.  If you look at the Lovelady and Shelly WC testimonies, they both said immediately after the shooting they crossed the Elm St Ext and then stood on that small island right across from the TSBD. They both testified that they stood there for roughly 3 minutes Before going down the Elm Ext and then into the fringe of the railroad yard.  The Lovelady and Shelley WC testimonies all by themselves render the Baker and Truly timelines to be BOGUS.

Nonsense! Messrs Lovelady and Shelley's WC testimonies are bogus----cf these gentlemen's original statements. They are both lying to (or rather: for!) the WC.

But yes---------the story told to the WC by Officer Baker and Mr Truly is also bogus. They encountered Mr Oswald at the front entrance, not in the second-floor lunchroom! Thumb1:

Online John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5129
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #156 on: October 27, 2019, 07:24:58 PM »
    "It has to be" is Proof of Nothing. Once again, You are proffering your Opinion as being Fact.

So says the man whose sole method of interaction on this site is to proffer his opinion as fact, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Hilarious.

JohnM

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #157 on: October 27, 2019, 11:04:31 PM »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #158 on: October 28, 2019, 12:37:34 AM »
“Thank heavens I brought my glow-in-the-dark coat to work with me!”

That would make sense in a professional situation.

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5017
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #159 on: October 28, 2019, 02:51:51 PM »
Geez Louise, another "member" crawls out from under his rock and starts attacking me, this gang banging just proves you're all running scared, fortunately I have the corroborating evidence on my side and you have a short list of nothing.
Btw you're way off target, my photo analysis is always on full display, I hide nothing, can you say the same?

JohnM

    Hilarious. You are getting hammered in Stereo on 2 threads simultaneously. When do we get the Mytton Mosaic or another one of your cartoon visual aids that proves nothing and mirrors a Woody Woodpecker short between the A and B movies?

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Those Front Steps
« Reply #160 on: October 28, 2019, 04:12:25 PM »
When carefully viewing early WiegmanFilm frames, the shadow image line on BillyLovelady/Image's right side appears not straight vertically. That to me indicates shadow line variation relative to Image angle, as well as camera height, angle, and distance. Just an observation, and no science involved.

No science involved indeed!  :D