Hoffman couldn't hear, White didn't hear, Murphy heard.

[Duncan MacRae]

It becomes a "fact" that a left handed Hoffman demonstrating to a TV camera what he saw means the shooter was left-handed. Great logic.

No - It simply means that it is a fact that Hoffman was visually depicting the actions of a man shooting with his left finger on the Trigger.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Recently i saw a few old mentions on forums re the jfklimo &/or Queen Mary stopping or slowing on Stemmons Fwy onramp below Hoffman's Lookout. And, i  remembered that Hoffman had on at least one occasion (in youtubes or in books etc)  "mentioned" that Queen Mary had stopped below him on the Stemmons  onramp.
This "mention" by Hoffman is praps the most important bit of info re the whole Hoffman saga (ie his 100% krapp story of seeing a shooter shoot a shot over the paling fence etc).
It confirms that Hoffman was on Stemmons, but where? -- there are 6 possibilities – Hoffman was…..
1. Sitting at Hoffman's Lookout (out of view in the Bell footage, hidden by trees).
2. The Gawker, ie the guy (seen in Bell) sitting on the western barricade of Stemmons overpass (20 yd south of Hoffman's Lookout).
3. The guy driving the falcon (Falcon seen in Bell) very slowly near (2) & probly then stopping between (2) & (1).
4. The passenger that (seen in Bell) jumps out of the Falcon near (2).
5. One of the say 6 guys (seen in Bell) walking south up Stemmons overpass near (1) & (2).
6. Somewhere on the overpass nearer the rail bridge (with all of the queuers) where the Fwy was blocked 100 yd north.

I reckon that Hoffman was driving the Falcon (2). If the JFK limo or Queen Mary stopped or nearly (by up to 30 sec) then that would have given Hoffman a chance to (stop & get out of his Falcon &) see JFK, &/or to see Hickey (holding his AR15). Otherwise, if the JFK limo or Queen Mary did not stop/slow, then they would have passed the rail bridge & been on Stemmons before Hoffman got out of his Falcon.
Anyhow, it seems that Hoffman did indeed get a glimpse of JFK &/or the AR15, rather than seeing the rears of the cars far away disappearing up Stemmons past the rail bridge.

And, it makes sense that the jfklimo or Queen Mary or both turned their lights off -- this might also turn the siren off -- turning the siren(s) off would help the agents to talk (about the direction to hozzie).
Yes, Hoffman  was there, driving his Falcon. Duzz Hoffman's book have a pix of his Falcon? A pix might confirm that the Falcon seen in Bell is indeed (the same as) Hoffman's Falcon.
I wonder who was Hoffman's passenger -- it was a big guy.

PENN JONES T H E CONTINUING INQUIRY VOLUME IV, NUMBER 9 APRIL 22, 1980 THE STOP-AND-GO MOTORCADE by Gary Mack
When retired Dallas Police Officer Earle V. Brown told me the motorcade stopped on the Stemmons Freeway access ramp (see March 1980 TCI), my first thought was verification. From all written information, including the Warren Commission volumes, there's no direct indication whatsoever that such an event really happened. The TCI printing deadline was moved back some 10 days to accommodate all I knew at that time.
Afterward, I called Brown again to ask if he was absolutely certain about what he saw. He said he'd been thinking about it for the past week and there was no doubt - the motorcade, with the Kennedy limousine in front, came to a halt for some 30 seconds.
Brawn didn't remember any specifics - there may have been one or two motorcycles, he couldn't recall anyone getting out of a car, one of the men had what appeared to be a big automatic rifle. But the two men in the front seat of the limousine were talking and gesturing, and that's why Brown concluded, right then, they didn't know the location of the nearest hospital. Secret Service guidelines, of course, required that knowledge.
3 I'd heard that Jesse Curry can be reasonable with critics and remembered that his wife had called our radio station two years ago to say thanks for treating her husband fairly on our talk shows. So, seeking verification of Brown's story, I called the former Dallas Chief of Police. Since this was to be our first discussion, I decided not to press the man too hard for answers. He's in the phone book, I dialed the number and Chief Curry himself answered. If he recognized my name or the radio station, he gave no indication. He did agree to answer a few questions. When asked if his car was ever behind Kennedy's, Curry denied it by repeating his Warren Commission testimony that he led the motorcade to Parkland. When I next told him some "newly discovered" films and photographs showed he pulled to his left in the Triple Underpass, slowed down, then speeded up and cut in between JFK and his Secret Service escort car, Curry still denied being behind Kennedy.
There was no real reason to argue the point, so I asked about the speed of the motorcade out of Dealey Plaza and on up to Stemmons. Curry said they were accelerating "pretty good" until the motorcycle officer pulled up and they talked briefly. He didn't remember the officer's name, even when I mentioned Martin, Chaney and Jackson. "I leaned out my window and said to him 'Were those shots?' and he said 'Yes and the President's hurt pretty bad.' And I said 'Well get us to the hospitall' "
I asked where this conversation took place and he said "somewhere just before Stemmons." %'he big question, how fast were you going, made him pause before answering "Probably '^tive or six miles an hour."
When told of Officer Brown's account, Curry denied they stopped, but revised his speed estimate to "pretty slow, maybe two to three miles an hour."
Before I could ask him to think about it more carefully, Curry unexpectedly volunteered "You know, they didn't even know where the hospital wasi" "There have been rumors about………



…………….. *>“In the telephone conversation not long before he died Curry confirmed to me that another police officer had witnessed [second hand testimony] the motorcade came to a virtual halt on the *access ramp to the Stemmens*. Patrolman Earl Brown was on the railroad overpass which spans Stemmons (not the triple underpass) and saw the cars come to a complete stop for nearly 30 seconds as it approached him.
He told this information to Earl Golz of the Dallas Morning News, and repeated it to me when I called him for verification. Unknown to me was that Jim Bowles, in his reconstruction had already allowed for 15-20 seconds for the temporary stop in addition to the time it took from the Plaza to the access road.
Curry told me they slowed down for two reasons: to find out from motorcycle officer if anyone was hurt, and to inform the Secret Service of the location of the nearest hospital.”
NOTE: The access ramp to the Stemmons FWY is some 700 feet beyond the Pavilion where Zapruder filmed the JFK head shot – and some 400 feet beyond the triple underpass. Earl Brown was 400 feet to the right on another railroad overpass.
In reading Vince Palamara’s ‘Fifty-nine Witnesses: Delay on Elm Street’ , I see enough controversy between “the car slowed down” to “the car stopped momentarily” to conclude that choosing which testimony is correct is a matter of the bias of the person attempting to make a case one way or the other…………….

The following info re the motorcade stopping on the Stemmons onramp is from the www & forums.
DPD Officer Earle Brown, on the railway overpass above Stemmons, told Earl Golz in March 1980 that he saw the limo and 4 other cars stop on the Stemmons on-ramp for at least 30 secs.
Brown later repeated his story for Gary Mack.
Officer Doug Jackson told Mack in 1981 that he and Chaney raced after the lead car, caught up with it after about 30 secs, and Chaney spoke through the window to Curry.
Curry told another researcher in 1979 that Chaney caught up with him as they began climbing the Stemmons on-ramp.
Curry told Mack that he slowed down in order to find out if anyone had been hit, as he was unaware that anyone had been hit until Chaney told him.
He also said he then had to tell the limousine driver, Secret Service agent Bill Greer, how to get to Parkland Hospital, before issuing “Go to hospital” order.
Curry told the Warren Commission that he did not transmit on Channel 2 until after he spoke to Motorcycle Officer Jim Chaney.
DPD Officer Courson said the lead car had slowed sufficiently for him to catch it on the Stemmons access road, and Courson was 100-120 feet behind McLain in the motorcade, and McLain was himself about 140 feet behind the Presidential limo when the shots were fired. Courson was approx. 80 yds behind JFK at Z-313.

So, it makes sense that the JFK limo stopped for at least 30 sec on the onramp,
to get directions from the SSA agents on Queen Mary, which also stopped (probably side by side).
Both limos turned off their flashing lights & sirens so that they could converse (Hoffman).
Using their radios would have been quicker, but would have been public & embarrassing.
Why did Curry (in the lead car) stop on the onramp & ask Officer Chaney if anyone had been hurt?
Curry could have driven up to the rear of the 2 limos & asked them directly.
But i suppose that Curry did not suspect that JFK & Connally had been shot, Curry was probly only worried about the general public etc getting shot.
JFK & Connally ducking down out of sight was of no concern.
Anyhow, it appears that the guys in Queen Mary were no wiser re the best way to get to Parklands.
So, Greer & Kellerman must have hollered to Curry & Co when the lead car finally reached the limos.
Curry then probly told Greer to follow the lead car, & the lead car probly took the lead again (Curry was the driver).
And it makes sense that the JFK limo was stopped for at least 30 sec.

I made a new thread re the motorcade stopping for 30 sec on the Stemmons onramp.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3885.msg153369.html#msg153369

[Duncan MacRae]

[Fergus O'brien]

I guess Jean hill is the one you are saying is genuine but unreliable . Hoffman and Oliver the dodgy self proclaimed witnesses .

I can certainly understand any witness reliability being questioned , i dont think any witness should just be automatically thought to be 100% accurate and reliable . Because as we know witnesses are rarely 100% accurate in what they say they saw or heard , and one witness will often contradict another . That said because two witnesses may appear to be contradicting each other it does not necessarily then follow that one or indeed both were wrong , both may have been correct in what they said but just saw different things from a different vantage .

When it comes to this case certainly witnesses get attacked , or labeled unreliable or liars , some times i feel its unwarranted and unfair . But some times a witness has indeed done some thing that warrants their criticism . In that sense i can understand some of the criticism for example of Jean hill . Her story seems to have evolved over the years where she added new details . However on the other hand she has also been attacked to a degree unfairly . For example in regards the dog she thought she saw , on the day she saw something for split seconds flowers and a cuddly toy and thought it was a small dog . This is one of the things about humans some times our eyes play tricks on us especially if we only see a thing for split seconds .She naively on that tragic day not very long after witnessing the shooting was asked to recount what she observed , at that time mary moormon was stood next to her , i am not aware of mary contradicting her at that time , but people can feel free to chime in on that as perhaps i did not see an interview on that day in which she did . But jean rather naively told the reporter that she thought she saw a small dog in the limo , she said she knew she must be wrong . She was then asked to repeat what she said for the camera , she said ABOUT THE DOG ALSO ? and she was told yes . To this day that is one of the things she is attacked on . But yes on other matters her reliability is attacked by LN and in some cases i cant say its unwarranted .

But by the same token our LN friends often refuse to criticize their own witnesses who have been shown to be some what unreliable or arguably wholly unreliable .They cite a witness today as reliable and credible and then tomorrow will pop up and attack the same witness . For example Wes frazier or Earlene roberts , and 10th and patton witnesses such as Markham and Reynolds .I dont know if this is a thread for a discussion in general of the reliability or unreliability or the the very least questionable nature of all witnesses in this case , maybe it is best to keep it to the 3 above mentioned witnesses in the video Duncan posted . As those three really could fill up a thread each , and i know they have been discussed at length already on this forum .But we should be having open and frank discussions about witnesses .

However we know hill was indeed there on elm street . Mr hoffman is open to debate because we just cant see him on film or photo on that bridge in the distance .So his presence cant be proven but neither then logically can it be disproven  , because we did not see a person it does not automatically mean they were never there . So we have to then look at what he claimed .But in doing so we need to remember that this man was deaf and could not speak .a non deaf person can hear sounds , shots , voices , screams etc , Mr hoffman could do none of that . All such a person could do was look and try to make some sense of the very scary and crazy situation that would unfolded before them . And we have to consider that as he could not speak that every thing he had to tell would have had to be interpreted by a third party .

In regard Miss oliver . I am aware of why LN attack her reliability . But again as with Miss hill some times it is unfair , some times i can understand why they might have a problem with her for sure . But however one thought always strikes me in regards to Miss oliver . LN say she is not the Babushka woman , a lady who undeniably existed and was there on elm street . But in 60 years i am unaware of any woman or indeed the Family of any woman to come forward and call her a liar . And say I WAS THE BABUSHKA LADY , MY MOTHER WAS THE BABUSHKA LADY , MY SISTER WAS THE BABUSHKA LADY . This person was feet from jfk as he was shot and killed , seen on film and im sure has been talked about countless times on tv and on sites like this over 60 years now . But not a single person (also claiming to be the babushka lady ) has come forward to my knowledge to say she is a liar .

[Duncan MacRae]

Beverly Oliver's 1977 HSCA Interview

[Michael T. Griffith]

Ed Hoffman was a credible witness. The problems with Hoffman's account--the alleged changes in his story, etc.--resulted partly from faulty sign-language interpretation and partly from deliberate misrepresentation. It is amazing that WC apologists even attack a deaf man who immediately tried to tell his story to his dentist soon after the shooting and who immediately shared his story with family members when he got home. Here's a good article by Mark Arnold on Hoffman's experience:

https://fromanativeson.com/2023/07/14/jfk-evidence-series-1-eyewitness-to-tragedy-the-ed-hoffman-story-by-mark-arnold/

Says Arnold,

The one constant in the whole Ed Hoffman narrative, is that if one takes the time and care necessary to understand him, his story has never changed: that on Friday, November 22, 1963, he was standing on Stemmons Freeway with an excellent view east, into the area behind the picket fence atop the grassy knoll, and there saw two men work together, one of them shooting at the President with a rifle; the other breaking it down and making his getaway through the rail yard.

[Duncan MacRae]

Ed Hoffman was a credible witness.

  https://www.jfk-assassination.net/hoffman.htm

[Michael T. Griffith]

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/hoffman.htm

No, it is not amazing at all. Their attention could have been drawn to any number of other events in the plaza after the shots rang out. It is not unusual for a group of people who witness a major event to notice different aspects of the event and to miss other aspects of it.

You choose to believe that Hoffman made up his story, even though several people who knew him, along with family members, said that he urgently tried to share with them what he had seen after the shooting.

If Hoffman had seen Oswald in the sixth-floor window, you guys would be falling all over yourselves to cite Hoffman's urgent efforts to immediately tell others about what he'd seen, and you would (correctly) argue that those efforts indicate he was sincere and truthful. But because his account destroys the lone-gunman theory, you look for any excuse to attack him and to reject his account.

Did you even read Mark Arnold's article? You should also read Casey Quinlan and Brian Edwards' book on Ed Hoffman titled Beyond the Fence Line.