Lovelady in Darnell and it's Ramifications.

[Jack Nessan]

This is just an attempt at clarification. I realize that Tom’s (and the late Sandy Larsen’s) identification of Tartan Skirted Woman as Gloria Calvery is extremely important to him for some reason. What I don’t quite understand is why. (Assuming we can trust Gloria’s grave marker, her name was Calvery and not Calvary as it is often misspelled.)

To be clear, I’m not insisting Tartan Skirted Woman isn’t Calvery. I’m just puzzled.

Back in the day, a well-respected researcher named Linda Giovanna Zambanini debated the identification of Calvery with Tom and Sandy, and serious researchers such as Robin Unger, Bart Kamp and others were aligned with Linda in believing that Chubby Crying Woman in the image below was in fact Calvery. It seemed to me that Linda and her supporters made a good case, using old photos, that Chubby Crying Woman looks a lot more like Calvery than Holt (as Tom claims). There was certainly some facial similarity between Calvery and Holt.

Now, however, I see that Linda has “tentatively” joined the Tartan Skirted Woman brigade at the Calvery memorial site. She has an arrow pointing to Tartan Skirted Woman but with a question mark: “Gloria Calvery?”

We will concede that it is Tartan Skirted Woman going up the steps with All White Woman, but my question is, “Why must this be Calvery? What’s the great significance?”

For Tartan Skirted Woman to be Calvery, the following would have to be true:

1. Westbrook’s recollection in 2016 as to where she was standing would have to be dead wrong.

2. Westbrook’s identification of Calvery in the photos would have to be dead wrong, even though “her” Calvery is dressed completely differently from Tartan Skirted Woman.

3. Westbrook’s identification of herself would have to be dead wrong. According to Tom, the woman Westbrook thinks is herself, from both the front and back in photos, is actually Simmons-Nelson. One of the women standing with Tartan Skirted Woman is presumably Tom’s Westbrook, but she didn’t recognize herself in 2016?

Westbrook’s recollection was so strong that she confidently disagreed with the supposed identification of Calvery by the latter’s own son.

Shelley’s statement the day of the JFKA has him encountering Calvery across the street; at the WC, he has her “running back up there,” apparently meaning the steps. Lovelady told the WC that Calvery came “running up to us.” Molina told the WC he was on the steps and saw Truly go in but did not encounter Calvery until he was inside the lobby and she came in. Frazier didn’t identify Calvery by name at the WC but said the “somebody” who was crying that JFK had been shot was “right before I went back in” the building. These statements scarcely mesh. They would mesh a lot better - wouldn't they? - if Shelley and Lovelady encountered Calvery at some point before she reached the steps.

Shouldn’t Shelley’s recollection the day of the JFKA carry considerable weight? He gratuitously inserted this in a very short affidavit within a very short time after the event.

What would be the big deal if Shelley and Lovelady actually encountered Calvery in the vicinity but not on the steps as depicted in the frames with Tartan Skirted Woman and All White Woman? What’s the big deal?

Back in the day, at least two people (including Robert Prudhomme) questioned what on earth the significance of all this is supposed to be. Tom answered something about the FBI fabricating multiple statements in an effort to alter when Shelley and Lovelady left the steps and the identification of Calvery being the key to it all. Robert pointed out that this seemed to be an awfully “elaborate” scheme just for that purpose. Later, Sandy responded to Bart Kamp, “Gloria Calvery is an integral part of the Shelley, Lovelady, Adams, Baker 2nd-floor-fabrication nexus that was used to cover up Oswald's alibi.”

Is that the big deal with Tartan Skirted Woman being Calvery – she’s the key to a massive FBI/WC hoax? If that’s it, I don’t say she isn’t Calvery but am certainly much less inclined to think she is.

Dan is trying to prove this is true. 

 

Re: Lovelady in Darnell and it's Ramifications.«
 Reply #232 on: Yesterday at 02:49:41 AM »

Adams, Styles, Shelley and Lovelady are in the area near the first floor elevators 50 to 70 seconds after the shooting.
Truly and Baker arrive on the scene 10 to 20 seconds later.
Obviously, these are guesstimates but it's somewhere in this ballpark IMO

He totally ignores and dismisses the statements of the DPD Harkness, Barnett and Detective Sawyer which meshes with the statements of Adams and Styles as to time stamps on their trek around the TSBD. Bottom line is they left much later than they thought and stated. Which in turn meshes with what Shelley and Lovelady stated, as to the encounter at the elevator. This was done to death in this thread. 

Vicki Adams: The Lost Interview (jfkassassinationforum.com)

Apparently, now he is taking a whole different path trying to prove the same thing.

[Duncan MacRae]

[Lance Payette]

"For over a century, social scientists have been conducting experiments concerning people’s ability to estimate the duration of a stressful incident. Those studies have consistently shown not only that most people have enormous difficulty estimating the length of these events but also that the vast majority of these errors are in the same direction – toward overestimating the duration of a stressful event. Overestimation can vary substantially depending on the amount of stress accompanying the event."

“Testing Jurors’ Understanding of Eyewitness Reliability Evidence,” Jurimetrics 177, 198 (Winter 2006).

One source states that time estimates are often exaggerated by 2.5 to 5 times the actual duration. Another very large study showed that overestimates of 3-4 times were common.

I happen to think Pat Speer’s estimates may be unrealistically short because he was trying to make everything fit with Adams' supposed sighting, which I do not think occurred at all, but I think he is on the right track.

For the reasons stated above, precision is impossible. Surely, a Presidential motorcade that suddenly turns into an assassination would have to be just about the ultimate stressful and chaotic event. If we try to work out a scenario that meshes ten participants’ recollections, we are likely to end up way off base. Films and photos can serve as anchors if their exact timing is known – but even then, as we see with the Calvery issue, there can be uncertainty as to who and what they actually show.

CTers never seem to take these variables into account and instead cherry-pick from the accounts and photos to create a conspiracy-oriented scenario. If Fred says two minutes and John says five, and Fred's estimate is a better fit for the conspiracy narrative, then John is lying and the conspirators "got to him."

BTW, doesn't Duncan's video support that Westbrook's Calvery is likely the one whom everyone would remember crying and saying JFK had been shot?

[Jack Nessan]

"For over a century, social scientists have been conducting experiments concerning people’s ability to estimate the duration of a stressful incident. Those studies have consistently shown not only that most people have enormous difficulty estimating the length of these events but also that the vast majority of these errors are in the same direction – toward overestimating the duration of a stressful event. Overestimation can vary substantially depending on the amount of stress accompanying the event."

“Testing Jurors’ Understanding of Eyewitness Reliability Evidence,” Jurimetrics 177, 198 (Winter 2006).

One source states that time estimates are often exaggerated by 2.5 to 5 times the actual duration. Another very large study showed that overestimates of 3-4 times were common.

I happen to think Pat Speer’s estimates may be unrealistically short because he was trying to make everything fit with Adams' supposed sighting, which I do not think occurred at all, but I think he is on the right track.

For the reasons stated above, precision is impossible. Surely, a Presidential motorcade that suddenly turns into an assassination would have to be just about the ultimate stressful and chaotic event. If we try to work out a scenario that meshes ten participants’ recollections, we are likely to end up way off base. Films and photos can serve as anchors if their exact timing is known – but even then, as we see with the Calvery issue, there can be uncertainty as to who and what they actually show.

CTers never seem to take these variables into account and instead cherry-pick from the accounts and photos to create a conspiracy-oriented scenario. If Fred says two minutes and John says five, and Fred's estimate is a better fit for the conspiracy narrative, then John is lying and the conspirators "got to him."

BTW, doesn't Duncan's video support that Westbrook's Calvery is likely the one whom everyone would remember crying and saying JFK had been shot?

Was this written about men by men?

They needed to take into account that women do not hurriedly go anywhere. Ever. It does not matter if it is wives, girlfriends, sisters, mothers, acquaintances, fellow employees, daughters, or whoever. They doddle along leaving because they do not want to forget something. The great part is the women think they are leaving quickly, and God help you if you say anything.

[Tom Graves]

What would be the big deal if Shelley and Lovelady actually encountered Calvery in the vicinity but not on the steps as depicted in the frames with Tartan Skirted Woman and All White Woman? What’s the big deal? Back in the day, at least two people (including Robert Prudhomme) questioned what on earth the significance of all this is supposed to be. Tom answered something about the FBI fabricating multiple statements in an effort to alter when Shelley and Lovelady left the steps and the identification of Calvery being the key to it all. Robert pointed out that this seemed to be an awfully “elaborate” scheme just for that purpose. Later, Sandy responded to Bart Kamp, “Gloria Calvery is an integral part of the Shelley, Lovelady, Adams, Baker 2nd-floor-fabrication nexus that was used to cover up Oswald's alibi.” Is that the big deal with Tartan Skirted Woman being Calvery – she’s the key to a massive FBI/WC hoax? If that’s it, I don’t say she isn’t Calvery but am certainly much less inclined to think she is. [emphasis added by T.G.]

Dear Lance,

It's ironic that you, great debunker of CTs that you are, are creating one of your own by suggesting that I conspired with Sandy Larsen to implicate the FBI in the assassination of JFK, when it was Larsen (RIP) and Robert Prudhomme who were conspiracy theorists extraordinaire (the latter sent me a PM or email at two o'clock one morning, accusing me of being a "disinfo agent").

Truth-be-told, I started out on this Gloria Calvery "journey" just trying to determine whether or not the alleged dark-complected gal standing "near" the Stemmons Freeway sign with two other gals in the Zapruder film really was Gloria Calvery, as Thierry "The Moon Landings Were Faked" Speth had led our very own Robin Unger and like-minded Don Roberdeau to believe, and which Unger and Roberdeau had, in turn, led us to mistakenly believe for so many years.

So, I started reading the FBI statements of witnesses, and I chanced upon that of Stella Mae Jacob in which she identified herself as "an American Indian" and said that during the motorcade, she and her two TSBD coworkers, Gloria Jeanne Holt and Sharon Simmons, were standing about fifty yards (one said "about halfway between the TSBD and the triple underpass" or words to that effect) down Elm Street, on the south side (the same one who said "about halfway" didn't mention which side) of it and near the curb. I also read the FBI statements of Holt and Simmons and noticed that they said that during the motorcade they were standing about fifty yards down Elm Street, on the south side of it and near the curb.

In identical, or near-identical, language.

"I, Stella Mae Jacob, freely furnish the following voluntary statement to Eugene F. Petrakis and A. Raymond Switzer, who have identified themselves to me as Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  I am an Indian female and reside at 508 South Marsalis, Dallas, Texas.  I was born on May 31, 1943 in Wright City, Oklahoma, and have been employed at the Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elm, Dallas, Texas, as typist in the billing department since the 1st of July, 1963.  At approximately 12 :00 p .m . on November 22, 1963. I left the Depository building and walked down toward the Stemmons expressway underpass west of the building approximately fifty yards and took up a position on the curb on the south side of Elm Street to await the presidential procession. I was accompanied by Sharon Simmons, now Mrs. Nelson, and [Gloria] Jeanne Holt, both employees of the Texas School Book Depository. I was still standing on the curb at the time president John F. Kennedy was shot I do not recall seeing Lee Harvey Oswald at any time on November 22, 1963, and did not see him at the time of the assassination.  I did not observe any strangers in the building on the morning of November 22, 1963. Following the assassination of the president, I tried to return to work in the Texas School Book Depository, but was told by other employees that no one would be allowed in the building so I did not return to work that day. I did not personally know Lee Harvey Oswald although I recall seeing him on several occasions in the lunchroom. I have read this two page statement, initialed each page and each correction and find it true and correct to the best o£ my knowledge." /s/ Stella Mae Jacob  [emphasis added]

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf

Then, I looked at the photos and films that showed Elm Street during the motorcade, but I couldn't find a group of three gals anywhere on the south side of it, much less fifty yards down it and near its curb.

Can you?

Given the fact that in Z-60 (see below) the black-haired "Gloria Calvary" (sic) of Speth, Unger and Roberdeau has her head turned to her right and we can see that her complexion is darker than any other human flesh visible in said frame, and given the fact that in the black-and-white Darnell clip that was taken a few minutes after the assassination, this same gal seems to be dark complected and have an "Indian nose" (as Sandy Larsen pointed out), and given the fact that the crying, light-haired gal next to her in that Darnell clip has, iirc, been identified as Gloria Jeanne Holt by her brother, it's reasonable to assume that the three gals aren't Unger's and Roberdeau's "Calvary, Hicks, and Reed" or Westwoods "Mystery Gal, Calvert (sic), and Westwood, but Stella Mae Jacob, Gloria Jeanne Holt, and Sharon Simmons, and if that's the case, we must ask ourselves, "Where the heck was big/tall, glasses-wearing Gloria Calvery with her three South-West Publishing Company colleagues during the motorcade (they all said they were standing on the south side of Elm Street, about halfway between the TSBD and the triple underpass!!!)."

https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z060.jpg

I don't remember accusing the FBI (as Robert Prudhomme did) of altering the statements of Jacob, Holt, and Simmons. What I do remember saying is that either the three gals were together in the same room when they were giving their statements, and the first one to do so mistakenly said "south side" and the other two gals followed suit, or the FBI mistakenly believed that the first one was correct in saying "south side" and created "boiler text" for the other two gals in that regard in an honest attempt to expedite said statement-taking and/or typing-up.

Shall I explain to you, once again, how Sandy Larsen and I determined that real-deal Calvery was none other than Robin Unger's and Dan Roberdeau's then-unlabeled mysto person standing to the immediate left of John Templin in their respective Internet labeled-in-yellow Zapruder Frame and Map?

-- Tom

PS Here, for your reading pleasure, are the FBI statements of Gloria Jeanne Holt and Sharon Simmons:

"I, Gloria Jeanne Holt, freely furnishthe following voluntary statement to Eugene F. Petrakis and A. Raymond Switzer who have identified themselves to me as Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

"I am a Caucasian female and reside at 2521 Pleasant Drive, Dallas, Texas. I was born on March 27, 1945 in Dallas, Texas, and have been employed at the Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elm Street, Dallas, as a clerical employee in the billing department since the middle of July,
1963.

"At approximately 12 :10 P.M. on November 22, 1963, I left the Depository building and walked down toward the Stemmons expressway underpass west of the building approximately fifty yards and took up a position on the curb on the south side of Elm Street to await the presidential procession. I was accompanied by Sharon Simmons, now Mrs . Nelson, and Stella Jacob, both-employee of the Texas School Book Depository. [emphasis added]

"I was still standing on the curb at the time the president was shot. I do not recall seeing Lee Harvey Oswald at any time on November
 22, 1963, and did not see him at the time of the assassination.

"I did not observe any strangers in the building on the morning of November 22, 1963.

"Following the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, I tried to return to work in the Texas School Book Depository but was told
 by other employees that no one would be allowed in the building, so I did not return to work that day.

"I did not personally know Lee Harvey Oswald although I recall seeing him on several occasions."

[Dated, witnessed, and signed]

. . . . . . .

"I, Mrs. Sharon Nelson nee Simmons, hereby freely and voluntarily make the following statement to E. J. Robertson
 who has identified himself as a Special Agent of the F.B.I.

"My name is Sharon Nelson nee Simmons, and I reside at 409 East 9th Street, Apt. 202, Dallas, Texas. I am 20 years
 of age, born February 24, 1944, at Abilene, Texas. I am a white female and am employed as a Clark for the Texas School
 Book Depository.

"At the time President Kennedy was shot I was standing on the sidewalk on Elm Street about midway between the
Texas School Book Depository Building and the underpass on Elm Street.

"I was with Jeannie Holt, 2521 Pleasant Drive, Dallas, and Stella Jacob, 508 South Marsalis, Dallas, at the time
the President was shot.

"I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at the time President
 Kennedy was shot.

"I do not remember seeing any person in the Texas School Book Depository Building on the morning of November 22, 1963, who was a stranger to me.

"I left the Texas School Book Depository Building at about 12 :20 PM on November 22, 1963, and never returned to this building on that date. "I have read the above statement consisting of one and one half pages and is true and correct to the best of my knowledge."

[Dated, witnessed, and signed]

[Royell Storing]

This is just an attempt at clarification. I realize that Tom’s (and the late Sandy Larsen’s) identification of Tartan Skirted Woman as Gloria Calvery is extremely important to him for some reason. What I don’t quite understand is why. (Assuming we can trust Gloria’s grave marker, her name was Calvery and not Calvary as it is often misspelled.)

To be clear, I’m not insisting Tartan Skirted Woman isn’t Calvery. I’m just puzzled.

Back in the day, a well-respected researcher named Linda Giovanna Zambanini debated the identification of Calvery with Tom and Sandy, and serious researchers such as Robin Unger, Bart Kamp and others were aligned with Linda in believing that Chubby Crying Woman in the image below was in fact Calvery. It seemed to me that Linda and her supporters made a good case, using old photos, that Chubby Crying Woman looks a lot more like Calvery than Holt (as Tom claims). There was certainly some facial similarity between Calvery and Holt.

Now, however, I see that Linda has “tentatively” joined the Tartan Skirted Woman brigade at the Calvery memorial site. She has an arrow pointing to Tartan Skirted Woman but with a question mark: “Gloria Calvery?”

We will concede that it is Tartan Skirted Woman going up the steps with All White Woman, but my question is, “Why must this be Calvery? What’s the great significance?”

For Tartan Skirted Woman to be Calvery, the following would have to be true:

1. Westbrook’s recollection in 2016 as to where she was standing would have to be dead wrong.

2. Westbrook’s identification of Calvery in the photos would have to be dead wrong, even though “her” Calvery is dressed completely differently from Tartan Skirted Woman.

3. Westbrook’s identification of herself would have to be dead wrong. According to Tom, the woman Westbrook thinks is herself, from both the front and back in photos, is actually Simmons-Nelson. One of the women standing with Tartan Skirted Woman is presumably Tom’s Westbrook, but she didn’t recognize herself in 2016?

Westbrook’s recollection was so strong that she confidently disagreed with the supposed identification of Calvery by the latter’s own son.

Shelley’s statement the day of the JFKA has him encountering Calvery across the street; at the WC, he has her “running back up there,” apparently meaning the steps. Lovelady told the WC that Calvery came “running up to us.” Molina told the WC he was on the steps and saw Truly go in but did not encounter Calvery until he was inside the lobby and she came in. Frazier didn’t identify Calvery by name at the WC but said the “somebody” who was crying that JFK had been shot was “right before I went back in” the building. These statements scarcely mesh. They would mesh a lot better - wouldn't they? - if Shelley and Lovelady encountered Calvery at some point before she reached the steps.

Shouldn’t Shelley’s recollection the day of the JFKA carry considerable weight? He gratuitously inserted this in a very short affidavit within a very short time after the event.

What would be the big deal if Shelley and Lovelady actually encountered Calvery in the vicinity but not on the steps as depicted in the frames with Tartan Skirted Woman and All White Woman? What’s the big deal?

Back in the day, at least two people (including Robert Prudhomme) questioned what on earth the significance of all this is supposed to be. Tom answered something about the FBI fabricating multiple statements in an effort to alter when Shelley and Lovelady left the steps and the identification of Calvery being the key to it all. Robert pointed out that this seemed to be an awfully “elaborate” scheme just for that purpose. Later, Sandy responded to Bart Kamp, “Gloria Calvery is an integral part of the Shelley, Lovelady, Adams, Baker 2nd-floor-fabrication nexus that was used to cover up Oswald's alibi.”

Is that the big deal with Tartan Skirted Woman being Calvery – she’s the key to a massive FBI/WC hoax? If that’s it, I don’t say she isn’t Calvery but am certainly much less inclined to think she is.

   If you believe that Calvery is pictured above, then Shelley's, "Running BACK UP There," does Not apply to the TSBD. These 3 women were coming Down from being UP on the knoll.

[Lance Payette]

I note that the woman in the light scarf in Duncan's video, who would presumably be Westbrook, is fairly attractive and appears to have a slight gap in her front teeth. This would match all photos I have seen of Westbrook, including those from that era. She also appears to be just about exactly the right height, judging from the color photos that Westbrook herself provided to the Sixth Floor Museum. I'm not dogmatic about this because I have no reason to be, but this is an awful lot of coincidences and it's increasingly difficult for me to accept that Tartan Skirted Woman is Calvery. (No, Tom, you don't need to explain to me how you cracked the Calvery code because I've read it all and, while I don't insist you are wrong, I don't think you're going to convince me you're right. Westbrook seems to still be alive - if she changes her story, I'll certainly listen.)

Tom thinks I'm accusing him of "conspiring" with Sandy Larsen? What does that mean? Call it what you will, but I have reviewed umpteen threads and posts on this issue at the Ed Forum, and Tom and Sandy were practically orgasmic in their mutual admiration over what "they" had discovered. It's all what "we" have done on this issue. This from Tom in 2018:

"All I can say is that I consider Sandy to be a truly great American who has done very, very good work on many valuable subjects (excluding, of course, the Arcane Art known as 'The H&L And The Two Marguerites Theory'), and I don't know what I'd do, on this wonderful forum, without him!"