Toni Glover

[Lance Payette]

    With respect to the memories of 11/22/63 eyewitnesses, I find their peripheral memories to be the most valuable. Glover says that she has no memory of Euins being crouched down below her standing position on the stone pedestal. And she adds that she would have remembered seeing him in this position at that point in time. This is Important Eyewitness Information. Virgin Information. There are far too many researchers looking for a smoking gun of some sort. The remaining eyewitnesses have peripheral memories such as Glover's "No Euins" that has been completely ignored. This is why the Sixth Floor interviews consistently produce Nothing of note. The probing questions are Not Asked. Questions like: (1) Did you see the Umbrella Man? (2) Did you see the Dark Complected Man? (3) Did you see SA Lem Johns jump out of the LBJ SS Car and run down Elm St toward the JFK Limo? (4) Did you smell Gun Powder? (5) Where did you park? (6) What did you see when returning to your car? etc. It's "dots" of information such as this that will solve this case. The Sixth Floor Museum interviews have always been more about selling tickets/$$ and PR vs unearthing real information.   

OK, an 11-year-old kid at the time does not recall seeing Euins decades later. How on earth is this significant? Despite the lovely and talented Toni Glover feeling sure she would have noticed and recalled a young Black guy in a hat decades later, the lovely and talented Lance says . I can definitely recall being in the Alice Vail lunch area when the JFKA was announced, but I couldn't tell you today if King Kong and Godzilla were standing beside me. This is zero evidence that Euins wasn't there or was lying about where he was - except in conspiracy world, where we lap this stuff up like mother's milk. Perhaps Dentist Don has pushed me over the edge, but I pretty much don't care what anyone said after the mid-1960s.

If anyone cares, the obsessive Dale Myers does a good job of discussing the changes in Euins' story here: https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2012/01/.

And here's a pretty good collection of all that Euins and Harkness said: https://tangodown63.com/amos-euins-statements/.

[Royell Storing]

  This is what you run into with Cold Cases. Old People with Old Memories.  It's the peripheral stuff laying dormant within a vivid memory that can provide a "dot" connecting several other "dots". Officer Luke Mooney discovered the sniper's nest, and was called to give WC Testimony pertaining to his sniper's nest discovery. The peripheral "DOTS" within his WC testimony/memory were that he remembered that the Huge Gates that open into the Elm St Ext were "Wide Open". And, on the other side of those Wide Open Huge Gates was a dock with a Door that opened directly into the TSBD 1st Floor. And, standing next to that same Door on the TSBD 1st Floor was the Stairwell. Yeah, THAT Stairwell.  Why would 2 Huge Gates that by my estimation were each roughly 8' by 12' need to be "Wide Open"? "Wide Open" after the Assassination (per Mooney), "Wide Open during the assassination, (Couch Film), and "Wide Open" before the assassination, (Towner Film)? Why would 1 Man that already worked inside the TSBD and had access to the TSBD, need those 2 Huge Gates "Wide Open" before, during, and after the assassination? Oswald/One Man wouldn't. These "dots" all lead to a TSBD covert entrance and exit route used by More than 1 Man. These peripheral Memory "dots" have ALL been there for years. 61+ years.   

[Royell Storing]

Euins is an assassination eyewitness that claims he saw shots being fired from the TSBD 6th Floor sniper's nest. He claimed he crouched next to the Glover Pedestal for cover. Glover directly refutes his Pedestal story. You do Not believe a key JFK Assassination eyewitness being discredited is "significant"? This, and your blanket rejecting any memory dating back before 1965 would make your being seated on a jury an extremely tough sell.

[Charles Collins]

    With respect to the memories of 11/22/63 eyewitnesses, I find their peripheral memories to be the most valuable. Glover says that she has no memory of Euins being crouched down below her standing position on the stone pedestal. And she adds that she would have remembered seeing him in this position at that point in time. This is Important Eyewitness Information. Virgin Information. There are far too many researchers looking for a smoking gun of some sort. The remaining eyewitnesses have peripheral memories such as Glover's "No Euins" that has been completely ignored. This is why the Sixth Floor interviews consistently produce Nothing of note. The probing questions are Not Asked. Questions like: (1) Did you see the Umbrella Man? (2) Did you see the Dark Complected Man? (3) Did you see SA Lem Johns jump out of the LBJ SS Car and run down Elm St toward the JFK Limo? (4) Did you smell Gun Powder? (5) Where did you park? (6) What did you see when returning to your car? etc. It's "dots" of information such as this that will solve this case. The Sixth Floor Museum interviews have always been more about selling tickets/$$ and PR vs unearthing real information.   

I have sometimes wondered if Euins could have been sitting on the other pedestal and just mistakenly designated the wrong pedestal due to a faulty memory. See yellow arrow in the image below.

[Tom Graves]

Euins is an assassination eyewitness that claims he saw shots being fired from the TSBD 6th Floor sniper's nest. He claimed he crouched next to the Glover Pedestal for cover. Glover directly refutes his Pedestal story. You do Not believe a key JFK Assassination eyewitness being discredited is "significant"? This, and your blanket rejecting any memory dating back before 1965 would make your being seated on a jury an extremely tough sell.

Storing,

Do you think the footage showing Euins with the police right after the assassination was faked?

[Charles Collins]

The nice thing with Buell Frazier and Dentist Don is that we can see how their "memories" have evolved since 1963 or 1964 and can recognize the obvious fact that memories and truth don't get better with time. They are lying, simple as that, and those of us who aren't wearing tinfoil beanies with propellors on top know it. Those who first surface 30, 40, 50 or more years after the assassination are impossible to cross-reference in this manner. By legal evidentiary standards, they have zero credibility. They may not even be intentionally fabricating, but not only are memories extremely fallible but every one of us, including me, has been subjected to 60+ years of media coverage of the JFKA, mostly CT-oriented because that's more exciting than saying the WC got it right. I just don't think these latter-day witnesses add anything and serve only to confuse. I say again, the number of these characters who have led serious researchers on wild goose chases in the UFO field is just astonishing.

Yes, some of them apparently have some pretty obvious agendas other than telling the truth. However, some of the witnesses didn’t pay much attention (if any) to the controversy and subsequent investigations and plethora of books, movies, etc. over the years surrounding the assassination. I don’t believe Toni Glover has an agenda other than wanting to tell her story about her experience. She says she has been writing her book for about ten years now and doing research to help with relating it to some of the other aspects. I am looking forward to reading it.

[Tom Graves]

I have sometimes wondered if Euins could have been sitting on the other pedestal and just mistakenly designated the wrong pedestal due to a faulty memory. See yellow arrow in the image below.

Unfortunately, that other pedestal is on the other side of the horseshoe-shaped reflecting pool.