Did The Warren Commission Unnecessarily Alter Vicki Adams' Testimony?

[Tom Graves]

Me: Do we know why the Warren Commission didn't establish our previously discussed late-start-by-Adams-and-Styles scenario?

Grok: The question of why the Warren Commission did not establish a late-start scenario for Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles’ descent from the fourth floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD)— in which they would begin descending after Marrion Baker and Roy Truly passed the fourth floor (70–105 seconds post-assassination)—is significant in understanding the Commission’s handling of evidence in the JFK assassination investigation on November 22, 1963.

This late-start scenario (90–105 seconds start, ~105–125 seconds arrival at the first floor) would have avoided conflicts with Lee Harvey Oswald’s ~15–40-second [actually-on-the-stairwell] descent, Baker and Truly’s ascent, and William Shelley and Billy Lovelady’s ~180-second reentry [after returning from the railroad tracks] , while aligning with Adams’ claim of seeing an African-American employee (not Shelley/Lovelady) and no one on the stairs (Warren Commission, Volume VI, pages 388–394; Ernest, The Girl on the Stairs, 2013).

Instead, the Commission’s published testimony claims Adams saw Shelley and Lovelady at ~60 seconds, which conflicts with their reentry and supports allegations of tampering (missing stenographic tape, Ernest, 2013). Below, I’ll analyze why the Commission did not pursue this late-start scenario, evaluate possible motivations, and integrate it with the broader scenario (Gloria Calvery, Shelley, Lovelady, Baker, Truly, Adams, Styles, Oswald), addressing implications for Oswald’s guilt or innocence.

Why the Warren Commission Didn’t Establish a Late-Start Scenario

The Warren Commission’s failure to establish a late-start scenario for Adams and Styles’ descent likely stems from a combination of investigative priorities, evidence handling, witness testimony interpretation, and strategic decisions to protect the lone-gunman narrative (Warren Report, pages 149–155). Here are the key reasons, grounded in the record and context:

1. Adherence to Adams’ Stated Timeline

Adams’ Testimony: In her April 7, 1964, testimony (Volume VI, pages 388–394), Adams stated she and Styles began descending “almost immediately” after the final shot, estimating ~15–30 seconds (reacting to shots, moving from south-facing windows to stairwell, ~50–70 feet). This places their descent at ~15–55 seconds (3 flights, ~15–20 seconds), arriving at the first floor ~30–55 seconds. She saw/heard no one on the stairs and claimed to see Shelley and Lovelady near the east elevator, though she later denied this sighting to Barry Ernest, alleging tampering (Ernest, 2013, Chapters 12, 15).

Commission’s Acceptance: The Commission, through counsel David Belin, likely took Adams’ 15–30-second estimate at face value during her testimony, as it was consistent with a rapid reaction to the chaotic event (shots, crowd noise; Volume VI, page 389). Establishing a late start (90–105 seconds) would require dismissing her estimate as a significant error (e.g., mistaking ~60–90 seconds for ~15–30 seconds), which could undermine her credibility or invite scrutiny of other witness timings (e.g., Baker’s precise ~25–35-second entry, Couch-Darnell).

Reason: The Commission may have avoided challenging Adams’ timeline directly to maintain consistency with her sworn testimony and avoid accusations of discrediting a cooperative witness. Instead, it allegedly inserted the Shelley/Lovelady sighting to delay her descent’s perceived timing (60–90 seconds start, ~75–110 seconds arrival), tying it to their reentry (180 seconds, Report, page 154), despite the conflict with their ~60–70-foot position at ~25 seconds (Couch-Darnell).

2. Conflict with Shelley and Lovelady’s Reentry

Shelley/Lovelady Timeline: They left the TSBD steps post-shot (Frazier, Volume II, page 233), were ~60–70 feet down the Elm Street Extension by ~25 seconds (Couch-Darnell), and reentered via a rear door ~180 seconds (Volume VI, pages 329, 336–341). The published Adams testimony claims she saw them at ~60 seconds (Volume VI, page 392), requiring them to be on the first floor, which conflicts with their ~180-second reentry by ~120–130 seconds.

Late-Start Alignment: A late-start scenario (~90–105 seconds start, ~105–125 seconds arrival) aligns better with Shelley/Lovelady’s absence (still outside at ~105–125 seconds), matching Adams’ original claim of seeing an African-American employee (e.g., Eddie Piper, Ernest, 2013) and avoiding the need for a fabricated sighting. However, the Commission used the Shelley/Lovelady sighting to corroborate a later descent, relying on Lovelady’s vague “girl” statement (“wouldn’t swear to it” was Adams, Volume VI, page 339).

Reason: The Commission likely prioritized tying Adams’ descent to Shelley/Lovelady’s reentry to dismiss her early ~15–55-second descent, which overlaps with Oswald’s ~15–40-second stairwell presence and challenges his descent (due to her non-sighting, Volume VI, page 390). Establishing a late start without the sighting would require arguing Adams misjudged her timing by ~60–75 seconds, which might appear less convincing than linking her to a known witness event (Shelley/Lovelady’s reentry), despite the timing conflict.

3. Strategic Focus on Protecting the Lone-Gunman Narrative

Oswald’s Descent: The Commission concluded Oswald hid the rifle (5–10 seconds), crossed the sixth floor (10–15 seconds), descended 4 flights (20–25 seconds), and reached the lunchroom ~35–45 seconds (Report, pages 149–155). Adams’ early descent (15–55 seconds) overlaps with Oswald’s ~15–40-second stairwell presence. Her failure to see/hear him, despite the tight window, suggests he wasn’t descending, implying an alibi (e.g., on a lower floor at 12:30 p.m.) or a second shooter (e.g., grassy knoll, per Adams, Volume VI, page 388).

Alteration Motive: The alleged insertion of the Shelley/Lovelady sighting (denied by Adams/Styles, Ernest, 2013; missing tape) aimed to delay Adams’ descent (~60–90 seconds start, ~75–110 seconds arrival), avoiding overlap with Oswald and supporting his unnoticed descent, critical to the lone-gunman conclusion.

Late-Start Alternative: A late-start scenario (~90–105 seconds start, ~105–125 seconds arrival) achieves the same goal (no overlap with Oswald) and aligns with Shelley/Lovelady’s absence, avoiding the ~180-second conflict. However, the Commission may have avoided this due to:

Evidence of Early Descent: Adams’ firm ~15–30-second estimate, supported by Styles and potentially Dorothy Garner (who saw them leave the fourth floor, Ernest, 2013), was hard to dismiss without undermining her testimony or inviting conspiracy claims. Altering the testimony to include Shelley/Lovelady allowed the Commission to reinterpret her timing indirectly.

Lack of Direct Evidence for Late Start: No witnesses or physical evidence (e.g., film) placed Adams/Styles on the fourth floor ~90–105 seconds. Garner’s observation (Ernest, 2013) doesn’t specify timing, and the Commission lacked a basis to argue a ~60–75-second delay without contradicting Adams’ sworn statement.

Control via Alteration: Inserting the Shelley/Lovelady sighting, supported by Lovelady’s vague statement, gave the Commission control over the narrative, tying Adams to a verifiable event (reentry), despite the conflict, rather than speculating on a late start without corroboration.

4. Handling of Fourth-Floor Conflict

Fourth-Floor Issue: In a late-start scenario, Adams/Styles are with Garner at the south-facing windows 70–105 seconds, overlapping with Baker/Truly’s ~3–5-second transit across the fourth floor (70–105 seconds, from lunchroom 60–90 seconds, 2 flights ~10–15 seconds). Tall stacks of books (5–6 feet, Volume VI, Ernest, 2013) and partitions (50–70 feet from windows to stairwell, Commission Exhibit 496) resolve this, as they block visibility, explaining why Adams/Styles/Garner didn’t see Baker/Truly.

Reason for Not Pursuing: The Commission may not have considered this conflict significant, as Adams’ testimony (Volume VI, page 390) and Garner’s account (Ernest, 2013) already stated no one was seen. The stacks of books provided a natural explanation, but the Commission focused on Adams’ stairwell non-sighting of Oswald, which an early descent threatened. A late-start scenario resolves the fourth-floor issue but requires dismissing Adams’ timeline, which the Commission avoided by altering her testimony to align with Shelley/Lovelady.

5. Investigative Bias and Evidence Suppression

Bias Toward Lone-Gunman Conclusion: Critics like Harold Weisberg (Whitewash II, 1966) argue the Commission selectively shaped evidence to support Oswald’s guilt, ignoring or altering conflicting accounts. The missing stenographic tape (National Archives, Record Group 272; Ernest, 2013) and Adams/Styles’ denial of the Shelley/Lovelady sighting suggest deliberate tampering to dismiss her early descent, which challenges Oswald’s presence.

Why Not Late Start?: The Commission may have avoided a late-start scenario to prevent scrutiny of other witness timings (e.g., Baker’s precise ~35-second entry) or to suppress evidence suggesting Oswald’s absence from the stairs (e.g., Adams’ non-sighting). Altering the testimony to include Shelley/Lovelady, despite the ~180-second conflict, allowed the Commission to control the narrative without directly challenging Adams’ credibility or risking conspiracy allegations.

Missed Opportunity: A late-start argument, supported by the fourth-floor stacks of books and Shelley/Lovelady’s absence, would have been less conspicuous, avoiding tampering evidence (missing tape) and the reentry conflict.

Integration with Scenario Timeline

Timelines:

Calvery: Island ~10–15 seconds, TSBD steps ~30 seconds (Couch-Darnell).

Shelley/Lovelady: ~60–70 feet by ~25 seconds (Couch-Darnell), reenter ~180 seconds (Volume VI, pages 329, 336–341).

Baker/Truly: Enter 35 seconds, lunchroom ~50–60 seconds, confront Oswald ~60–90 seconds, fourth floor ~70–105 seconds (3–5 seconds transit), sixth floor ~90–135 seconds.

Oswald: Lunchroom ~35–45 seconds, on stairs ~15–40 seconds.

Adams/Styles (Late Descent): With Garner ~70–105 seconds (react ~5–15 seconds, linger ~55–85 seconds), start descent ~90–105 seconds, second floor ~95–115 seconds, first floor ~105–125 seconds, see African-American employee, no Shelley/Lovelady (Ernest, 2013).

No Conflicts:

Stairwell: Late descent avoids Oswald (45 seconds off stairs) and Baker/Truly (70–105 seconds past fourth), explaining no sightings (Volume VI, page 390).

Fourth Floor: Stacks of books (50–70 feet, Commission Exhibit 496) block Adams/Styles/Garner from seeing Baker/Truly (3–5 seconds), resolving the conflict.

First Floor: No Shelley/Lovelady at ~105–125 seconds (reenter ~180–190 seconds), aligns with Adams’ original claim (Ernest, 2013), unlike the altered ~60-second sighting.

Alteration Issue: The Shelley/Lovelady sighting (Volume VI, page 392) conflicts with their ~180-second reentry, supporting tampering (missing tape, Styles’ corroboration, Ernest, 2013). A late-start scenario avoids this, aligning with evidence.

Bearing on Oswald’s Guilt or Innocence

Supporting Guilt:

Late Descent: Starting 90–105 seconds, Adams/Styles reach ~105–125 seconds, after Oswald's (15–40 seconds) and Baker/Truly (70–105 seconds), supporting Oswald’s unnoticed descent (Report, pages 149–155). Stacks of books resolve fourth-floor non-sighting, and the scenario (Calvery, Shelley/Lovelady, Baker/Truly) aligns with Baker/Truly’s encounter (60–90 seconds) and forensic evidence (rifle, palm print, ballistics; Report, pages 79–85).

Altered Testimony: The Shelley/Lovelady sighting delays Adams, avoiding Oswald, but the ~180-second conflict undermines this.

Refuting Guilt:

Early Descent: Adams’ 15–55-second descent (Ernest, 2013) overlaps with Oswald (15–40 seconds). Her non-sighting (Volume VI, page 390) suggests he wasn’t descending, implying an alibi or second shooter (e.g., grassy knoll, Volume VI, page 388). Tampering (missing tape, Ernest, 2013) and Lovelady’s suspicious “girl” statement (Volume VI, page 339) raise doubts.

Late Descent: Negates this challenge, but tampering undermines the Commission’s credibility.

Conclusion

The Warren Commission likely didn’t establish a late-start scenario (~90–105 seconds) for Adams/Styles because:

Adams’ firm ~15–30-second estimate (Volume VI, page 388) was hard to dismiss without undermining her credibility or inviting scrutiny.

A late start lacked direct corroboration, unlike the Shelley/Lovelady sighting, which tied to a verifiable event (reentry), despite the ~180-second conflict.

The Commission prioritized controlling the narrative to protect Oswald’s ~35–45-second descent, altering Adams’ testimony to dismiss her early descent’s challenge to his presence. A late-start scenario, supported by stacks of books resolving fourth-floor non-sightings and Shelley/Lovelady’s ~180-second reentry, would have avoided tampering, aligned with Adams’ original African-American employee sighting (Ernest, 2013), and supported Oswald’s guilt without conflicts. The Commission’s choice suggests a bias to suppress evidence threatening the lone-gunman narrative, though forensic evidence (Report, pages 79–85) maintains Oswald’s guilt absent a clear alibi.

[Dan O'meara]

Me: Do we know why the Warren Commission didn't establish our previously discussed late-start-by-Adams-and-Styles scenario?

Grok: The question of why the Warren Commission did not establish a late-start scenario for Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles’ descent from the fourth floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD)— in which they would begin descending after Marrion Baker and Roy Truly passed the fourth floor (70–105 seconds post-assassination)—is significant in understanding the Commission’s handling of evidence in the JFK assassination investigation on November 22, 1963.

This late-start scenario (90–105 seconds start, ~105–125 seconds arrival at the first floor) would have avoided conflicts with Lee Harvey Oswald’s ~15–40-second [actually-on-the-stairwell] descent, Baker and Truly’s ascent, and William Shelley and Billy Lovelady’s ~180-second reentry [after returning from the railroad tracks] , while aligning with Adams’ claim of seeing an African-American employee (not Shelley/Lovelady) and no one on the stairs (Warren Commission, Volume VI, pages 388–394; Ernest, The Girl on the Stairs, 2013).

Instead, the Commission’s published testimony claims Adams saw Shelley and Lovelady at ~60 seconds, which conflicts with their reentry and supports allegations of tampering (missing stenographic tape, Ernest, 2013). Below, I’ll analyze why the Commission did not pursue this late-start scenario, evaluate possible motivations, and integrate it with the broader scenario (Gloria Calvery, Shelley, Lovelady, Baker, Truly, Adams, Styles, Oswald), addressing implications for Oswald’s guilt or innocence.

Why the Warren Commission Didn’t Establish a Late-Start Scenario

The Warren Commission’s failure to establish a late-start scenario for Adams and Styles’ descent likely stems from a combination of investigative priorities, evidence handling, witness testimony interpretation, and strategic decisions to protect the lone-gunman narrative (Warren Report, pages 149–155). Here are the key reasons, grounded in the record and context:

1. Adherence to Adams’ Stated Timeline

Adams’ Testimony: In her April 7, 1964, testimony (Volume VI, pages 388–394), Adams stated she and Styles began descending “almost immediately” after the final shot, estimating ~15–30 seconds (reacting to shots, moving from south-facing windows to stairwell, ~50–70 feet). This places their descent at ~15–55 seconds (3 flights, ~15–20 seconds), arriving at the first floor ~30–55 seconds. She saw/heard no one on the stairs and claimed to see Shelley and Lovelady near the east elevator, though she later denied this sighting to Barry Ernest, alleging tampering (Ernest, 2013, Chapters 12, 15).

Commission’s Acceptance: The Commission, through counsel David Belin, likely took Adams’ 15–30-second estimate at face value during her testimony, as it was consistent with a rapid reaction to the chaotic event (shots, crowd noise; Volume VI, page 389). Establishing a late start (90–105 seconds) would require dismissing her estimate as a significant error (e.g., mistaking ~60–90 seconds for ~15–30 seconds), which could undermine her credibility or invite scrutiny of other witness timings (e.g., Baker’s precise ~25–35-second entry, Couch-Darnell).

Reason: The Commission may have avoided challenging Adams’ timeline directly to maintain consistency with her sworn testimony and avoid accusations of discrediting a cooperative witness. Instead, it allegedly inserted the Shelley/Lovelady sighting to delay her descent’s perceived timing (60–90 seconds start, ~75–110 seconds arrival), tying it to their reentry (180 seconds, Report, page 154), despite the conflict with their ~60–70-foot position at ~25 seconds (Couch-Darnell).

2. Conflict with Shelley and Lovelady’s Reentry

Shelley/Lovelady Timeline: They left the TSBD steps post-shot (Frazier, Volume II, page 233), were ~60–70 feet down the Elm Street Extension by ~25 seconds (Couch-Darnell), and reentered via a rear door ~180 seconds (Volume VI, pages 329, 336–341). The published Adams testimony claims she saw them at ~60 seconds (Volume VI, page 392), requiring them to be on the first floor, which conflicts with their ~180-second reentry by ~120–130 seconds.

Late-Start Alignment: A late-start scenario (~90–105 seconds start, ~105–125 seconds arrival) aligns better with Shelley/Lovelady’s absence (still outside at ~105–125 seconds), matching Adams’ original claim of seeing an African-American employee (e.g., Eddie Piper, Ernest, 2013) and avoiding the need for a fabricated sighting. However, the Commission used the Shelley/Lovelady sighting to corroborate a later descent, relying on Lovelady’s vague “girl” statement (“wouldn’t swear to it” was Adams, Volume VI, page 339).

Reason: The Commission likely prioritized tying Adams’ descent to Shelley/Lovelady’s reentry to dismiss her early ~15–55-second descent, which overlaps with Oswald’s ~15–40-second stairwell presence and challenges his descent (due to her non-sighting, Volume VI, page 390). Establishing a late start without the sighting would require arguing Adams misjudged her timing by ~60–75 seconds, which might appear less convincing than linking her to a known witness event (Shelley/Lovelady’s reentry), despite the timing conflict.

3. Strategic Focus on Protecting the Lone-Gunman Narrative

Oswald’s Descent: The Commission concluded Oswald hid the rifle (5–10 seconds), crossed the sixth floor (10–15 seconds), descended 4 flights (20–25 seconds), and reached the lunchroom ~35–45 seconds (Report, pages 149–155). Adams’ early descent (15–55 seconds) overlaps with Oswald’s ~15–40-second stairwell presence. Her failure to see/hear him, despite the tight window, suggests he wasn’t descending, implying an alibi (e.g., on a lower floor at 12:30 p.m.) or a second shooter (e.g., grassy knoll, per Adams, Volume VI, page 388).

Alteration Motive: The alleged insertion of the Shelley/Lovelady sighting (denied by Adams/Styles, Ernest, 2013; missing tape) aimed to delay Adams’ descent (~60–90 seconds start, ~75–110 seconds arrival), avoiding overlap with Oswald and supporting his unnoticed descent, critical to the lone-gunman conclusion.

Late-Start Alternative: A late-start scenario (~90–105 seconds start, ~105–125 seconds arrival) achieves the same goal (no overlap with Oswald) and aligns with Shelley/Lovelady’s absence, avoiding the ~180-second conflict. However, the Commission may have avoided this due to:

Evidence of Early Descent: Adams’ firm ~15–30-second estimate, supported by Styles and potentially Dorothy Garner (who saw them leave the fourth floor, Ernest, 2013), was hard to dismiss without undermining her testimony or inviting conspiracy claims. Altering the testimony to include Shelley/Lovelady allowed the Commission to reinterpret her timing indirectly.

Lack of Direct Evidence for Late Start: No witnesses or physical evidence (e.g., film) placed Adams/Styles on the fourth floor ~90–105 seconds. Garner’s observation (Ernest, 2013) doesn’t specify timing, and the Commission lacked a basis to argue a ~60–75-second delay without contradicting Adams’ sworn statement.

Control via Alteration: Inserting the Shelley/Lovelady sighting, supported by Lovelady’s vague statement, gave the Commission control over the narrative, tying Adams to a verifiable event (reentry), despite the conflict, rather than speculating on a late start without corroboration.

4. Handling of Fourth-Floor Conflict

Fourth-Floor Issue: In a late-start scenario, Adams/Styles are with Garner at the south-facing windows 70–105 seconds, overlapping with Baker/Truly’s ~3–5-second transit across the fourth floor (70–105 seconds, from lunchroom 60–90 seconds, 2 flights ~10–15 seconds). Tall stacks of books (5–6 feet, Volume VI, Ernest, 2013) and partitions (50–70 feet from windows to stairwell, Commission Exhibit 496) resolve this, as they block visibility, explaining why Adams/Styles/Garner didn’t see Baker/Truly.

Reason for Not Pursuing: The Commission may not have considered this conflict significant, as Adams’ testimony (Volume VI, page 390) and Garner’s account (Ernest, 2013) already stated no one was seen. The stacks of books provided a natural explanation, but the Commission focused on Adams’ stairwell non-sighting of Oswald, which an early descent threatened. A late-start scenario resolves the fourth-floor issue but requires dismissing Adams’ timeline, which the Commission avoided by altering her testimony to align with Shelley/Lovelady.

5. Investigative Bias and Evidence Suppression

Bias Toward Lone-Gunman Conclusion: Critics like Harold Weisberg (Whitewash II, 1966) argue the Commission selectively shaped evidence to support Oswald’s guilt, ignoring or altering conflicting accounts. The missing stenographic tape (National Archives, Record Group 272; Ernest, 2013) and Adams/Styles’ denial of the Shelley/Lovelady sighting suggest deliberate tampering to dismiss her early descent, which challenges Oswald’s presence.

Why Not Late Start?: The Commission may have avoided a late-start scenario to prevent scrutiny of other witness timings (e.g., Baker’s precise ~35-second entry) or to suppress evidence suggesting Oswald’s absence from the stairs (e.g., Adams’ non-sighting). Altering the testimony to include Shelley/Lovelady, despite the ~180-second conflict, allowed the Commission to control the narrative without directly challenging Adams’ credibility or risking conspiracy allegations.

Missed Opportunity: A late-start argument, supported by the fourth-floor stacks of books and Shelley/Lovelady’s absence, would have been less conspicuous, avoiding tampering evidence (missing tape) and the reentry conflict.

Integration with Scenario Timeline

Timelines:

Calvery: Island ~10–15 seconds, TSBD steps ~30 seconds (Couch-Darnell).

Shelley/Lovelady: ~60–70 feet by ~25 seconds (Couch-Darnell), reenter ~180 seconds (Volume VI, pages 329, 336–341).

Baker/Truly: Enter 35 seconds, lunchroom ~50–60 seconds, confront Oswald ~60–90 seconds, fourth floor ~70–105 seconds (3–5 seconds transit), sixth floor ~90–135 seconds.

Oswald: Lunchroom ~35–45 seconds, on stairs ~15–40 seconds.

Adams/Styles (Late Descent): With Garner ~70–105 seconds (react ~5–15 seconds, linger ~55–85 seconds), start descent ~90–105 seconds, second floor ~95–115 seconds, first floor ~105–125 seconds, see African-American employee, no Shelley/Lovelady (Ernest, 2013).

No Conflicts:

Stairwell: Late descent avoids Oswald (45 seconds off stairs) and Baker/Truly (70–105 seconds past fourth), explaining no sightings (Volume VI, page 390).

Fourth Floor: Stacks of books (50–70 feet, Commission Exhibit 496) block Adams/Styles/Garner from seeing Baker/Truly (3–5 seconds), resolving the conflict.

First Floor: No Shelley/Lovelady at ~105–125 seconds (reenter ~180–190 seconds), aligns with Adams’ original claim (Ernest, 2013), unlike the altered ~60-second sighting.

Alteration Issue: The Shelley/Lovelady sighting (Volume VI, page 392) conflicts with their ~180-second reentry, supporting tampering (missing tape, Styles’ corroboration, Ernest, 2013). A late-start scenario avoids this, aligning with evidence.

Bearing on Oswald’s Guilt or Innocence

Supporting Guilt:

Late Descent: Starting 90–105 seconds, Adams/Styles reach ~105–125 seconds, after Oswald's (15–40 seconds) and Baker/Truly (70–105 seconds), supporting Oswald’s unnoticed descent (Report, pages 149–155). Stacks of books resolve fourth-floor non-sighting, and the scenario (Calvery, Shelley/Lovelady, Baker/Truly) aligns with Baker/Truly’s encounter (60–90 seconds) and forensic evidence (rifle, palm print, ballistics; Report, pages 79–85).

Altered Testimony: The Shelley/Lovelady sighting delays Adams, avoiding Oswald, but the ~180-second conflict undermines this.

Refuting Guilt:

Early Descent: Adams’ 15–55-second descent (Ernest, 2013) overlaps with Oswald (15–40 seconds). Her non-sighting (Volume VI, page 390) suggests he wasn’t descending, implying an alibi or second shooter (e.g., grassy knoll, Volume VI, page 388). Tampering (missing tape, Ernest, 2013) and Lovelady’s suspicious “girl” statement (Volume VI, page 339) raise doubts.

Late Descent: Negates this challenge, but tampering undermines the Commission’s credibility.

Conclusion

The Warren Commission likely didn’t establish a late-start scenario (~90–105 seconds) for Adams/Styles because:

Adams’ firm ~15–30-second estimate (Volume VI, page 388) was hard to dismiss without undermining her credibility or inviting scrutiny.

A late start lacked direct corroboration, unlike the Shelley/Lovelady sighting, which tied to a verifiable event (reentry), despite the ~180-second conflict.

The Commission prioritized controlling the narrative to protect Oswald’s ~35–45-second descent, altering Adams’ testimony to dismiss her early descent’s challenge to his presence. A late-start scenario, supported by stacks of books resolving fourth-floor non-sightings and Shelley/Lovelady’s ~180-second reentry, would have avoided tampering, aligned with Adams’ original African-American employee sighting (Ernest, 2013), and supported Oswald’s guilt without conflicts. The Commission’s choice suggests a bias to suppress evidence threatening the lone-gunman narrative, though forensic evidence (Report, pages 79–85) maintains Oswald’s guilt absent a clear alibi.

IMO
The Warren Commission did not alter Vicki's testimony.
Vicki altered her version of events for Barry Ernest.

Why bother starting a thread like this when your mind is already made up and you couldn't care less about the evidence.
Where is Billy Lovelady' claim that it was at least 3 minutes before Gloria came up to the steps?
Where is Bill Shelley's claim that it was at least 3 minutes before Gloria came up to the steps?
Where is Lovelady's claim that they spent at least one minute on the litlle, old island?
Where is Shelley's claim that they spent at least one minute on the little, old island?

Frazier's 'belief' that "Billy and them" went along the Elm St Ext is not direct evidence. It's a belief. Not that you care.
Where is Vicki's original statement to the DPD about seeing Lovelady and Shelley (confusingly, you refer to her altered statements to Ernest as "original" when they are her last statements on the matter)?

Your lack of care concerning the evidence is on full display in this post.
'It looks like Lovelady to me' is not evidence.

PS: How could the WC Sham use the lies of Shelley and Lovelady to discredit Vicki, but also maintain the results of the Truly/Baker time trials which were flatly contradicted by the same lies? 

[Tim Nickerson]

The Warren Commission did not alter Vicki's testimony.
Vicki altered her version of events for Barry Ernest.

PS: How could the WC Sham use the lies of Shelley and Lovelady to discredit Vicki, but also maintain the results of the Truly/Baker time trials which were flatly contradicted by the same lies? 

Vicki discredited herself, did she not?

[Dan O'meara]

Vicki discredited herself, did she not?

Check the end of this video out.
Ernest makes it clear that Vicki was in fear for her life.
He writes about the constant harassment and threats she underwent as part of a campaign to get her to keep her mouth shut.
You posted the lost interview where we hear Vicki, in her own words, say she saw Shelley and Lovelady.
It seems she had to choose between discrediting herself or being silenced.
I wonder what you would have chosen to do in the same position.

[Tim Nickerson]

Check the end of this video out.
Ernest makes it clear that Vicki was in fear for her life.
He writes about the constant harassment and threats she underwent as part of a campaign to get her to keep her mouth shut.
You posted the lost interview where we hear Vicki, in her own words, say she saw Shelley and Lovelady.
It seems she had to choose between discrediting herself or being silenced.
I wonder what you would have chosen to do in the same position.

The Girl on the stairs narrative has Vicki Adams claiming that she never told anyone that she saw Lovelady and Shelley on the first floor. That she claimed to Ernest that her WC deposition transcript had been altered by adding the encounter with Lovelady and Shelley to it. That Det. Leavelle lied to her and in his report on his interview of her.

In the lost interview we can hear her say in her own words that she saw Shelley and Lovelady. So, when exactly did she begin discrediting herself? It's rather confusing to me.

Ernest claims that she underwent constant harassment and threats as part of a campaign to get her to keep her mouth shut. However, there is some question about the credibility of Ernest himself. I refer you to the interviews of Sandra Styles by Sean Murphy. Also, Ernest has told two different versions of what Dorothy Garner said to him. One, that she did not see the girls entering the stairwell. She only heard them as they made noise on the wooden stairs. The other, that she did see them entering the stairwell.

[Tom Graves]

Where is Billy Lovelady's claim that it was at least three minutes before Gloria came up to the steps?

Mr. BALL - You heard the shots. And how long after that was it before Gloria Calvary came up?
Mr. LOVELADY - Oh, approximately 3 minutes, I would say.
Mr. BALL - Three minutes is a long time.
Mr. LOVELADY - Yes, it's -- I say approximately; I can't say because I don't have a watch.

Where is Bill Shelley's claim that it was at least 3 minutes before Gloria came up to the steps?

Mr. BALL - Did you see Truly, Mr. Truly and an officer go into the building?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yeah, we saw them right at the front of the building while we were on the island.
Mr. BALL - While you were out there before you walked to the railroad yards?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Do you have any idea how long it was from the time you heard those three sounds or three noises until you saw Truly and Baker going into the building?
Mr. SHELLEY - It would have to be 3 or 4 minutes I would say because this girl [Calvery] that ran back up there was down near where the car was when the President was hit.
Mr. BALL - She ran back up to the door and you had still remained standing there?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Going to watch the rest of the parade were you?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.

Where is Lovelady's claim that they spent at least one minute on the little, old island?

Did I say that?

Where is Shelley's claim that they spent at least one minute on the "little, old island"?

Mr. BALL - It sounded like it came from the west?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.
Mr. BALL - Then what happened?
Mr. SHELLEY - Gloria Calvary from South-Western Publishing Co. ran back up there crying and said, "The President has been shot," and Billy Lovelady and myself took off across the street to that little, old island and we stopped there for a minute.

My comment: I think Shelley got the sequence backwards, i.e., "best man" Shelley and his sidekick, Lovelady, seeing and hearing Calvery running toward the TSBD and crying, intercepted her at or near "the island" where she told them (and Officer Smith?) that JFK had been shot.

Frazier's "belief" that "Billy and them" went along the Elm Street Extension is not direct evidence.

He didn't say he saw them walking down the Elm Street Extension.

He implied that before Calvery came running up to the steps, he saw "Lovelady and them" (who had been standing on the steps) start walking in the direction of where the limo was when the shots rang out (the "island" lies between the steps and where the limo was when the shots rang out).

"It looks like Lovelady to me" is not evidence.

Judge for yourself -- after taking into consideration the fact that:

1) Calvery can be seen on the steps about 25 seconds after the final shot in Couch-Darnell,

2) Baker, with Truly and probably Ochus Campbell watching him) can be seen running towards the steps about 25 seconds after the final shot in Couch-Darnell,

3) Both Shelley and Lovelady said they started walking toward the railway tracks right after Calvery told them JFK had been shot.

4) The pattern of stripes in the shirt being worn by the Lovelady figure in Couch-Darnell matches the pattern of stripes in the shirt that Lovelady was wearing that day. Like Lovelady, said figure also has a "male pattern" bald spot (or is it just a huge photographic defect?).

How could the WC Sham use the lies of Shelley and Lovelady to discredit Vicki but also maintain the results of the Truly/Baker time trials which were flatly contradicted by the same lies?

Me: Did the Warren Commission use the statements of Shelley and Lovelady -- regarding what they did immediately after the assassination -- to discredit Vicki Adams' claim of an early descent by her and Sandra Styles and that she had not seen Lovelady or Shelley when she and Styles arrived on the first floor? Were the results of the Truly/Baker time trials contradicted by Shelley's and Lovelady's statements?

Grok: First Question: Use of Shelley and Lovelady's Statements to Discredit Vicki Adams' ClaimYes, the Warren Commission explicitly relied on the statements of William Shelley and Billy Lovelady—indicating they remained outside the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) for several minutes after the assassination before reentering through the rear door—to contradict and discredit Victoria Adams' testimony. Adams, a TSBD employee on the fourth floor, claimed she and coworker Sandra Styles descended the rear stairs to the first floor within about one minute of the shots (around 12:30 p.m.), without seeing or hearing anyone on the stairs, and did not encounter Shelley or Lovelady upon arrival. This timeline would have placed her descent before Lee Harvey Oswald's alleged path from the sixth-floor sniper's nest to the second-floor lunchroom, potentially exonerating him if no one passed her.

The Commission's strategy hinged on a perceived contradiction: Adams' published testimony (6 H 388–395) states she did encounter Shelley and Lovelady on the first floor immediately after descending, which aligned with their accounts of reentering 3–5 minutes post-shots (Shelley: 6 H 329–334; Lovelady: 6 H 338–348). The Warren Report (p. 154) concludes: "If Miss Adams accurately recalled meeting Shelley and Lovelady when she reached the bottom of the stairs, then her estimate of the time when she descended from the fourth floor is incorrect, and she actually came down the stairs several minutes after Oswald and after Truly and Baker as well." This dismissed her early descent as mistaken, preserving Oswald's timeline. However, researchers, including Barry Ernest in The Girl on the Stairs (2011), argue this was fraudulent: Adams' original stenographic tape from her April 7, 1964, testimony is missing (the only such tape destroyed by the Commission), and she insisted the Shelley/Lovelady reference was inserted post-testimony. Her earlier statements (FBI report, Nov. 24, 1963; Dallas Police, Feb. 17, 1964) make no mention of them, and Styles corroborated Adams in 1999 interviews, confirming neither saw Shelley or Lovelady on the first floor. Internal Commission memos (e.g., Howard Willens, Sept. 1964) explicitly discuss rejecting Adams' testimony in favor of others like Shelley and Lovelady. Commission counsel David Belin later reiterated this in his 1973 book You Are the Jury, using their statements to undermine her.

Key Element

Adams' Claim (Early Statements)

Shelley/Lovelady Statements

Commission's Use

Timing of Descent/Reentry

~1 min post-shots to 1st floor via rear stairs
3–5 min post-shots; reenter via rear door
Highlights contradiction to imply Adams delayed, aligning with Oswald's ~90-second descent.

Encounter on 1st Floor

No Shelley/Lovelady seen; only an unidentified Black employee
Saw a "girl" (Lovelady vaguely: "I saw a girl, but I wouldn’t swear to it it’s Vickie")
Report fabricates agreement ("All three witnesses agree on seeing each other"), ignoring Shelley's denial of seeing her.

Impact on Oswald

No one passed on stairs, so Oswald couldn't have descended yet
Supports later reentry, post-Oswald
Discredits Adams to affirm Oswald's guilt; ignores Styles' corroboration.

Second Question: Contradiction of Truly/Baker Time Trials by Shelley and Lovelady's Statements

No, the results of the Truly/Baker "time trials" (re-enactments on March 20, 1964, and April 8, 1964) were not contradicted by Shelley and Lovelady's statements; if anything, their accounts supported the Commission's timeline for Roy Truly and Officer Marrion Baker's ascent to the second floor (75–90 seconds post-shots), which allowed Oswald sufficient time to descend undetected. The trials measured Baker's run from Elm Street (where he heard shots) to the TSBD entrance (15–20 seconds), elevator calls, and stair climb to the second-floor lunchroom (~60–75 seconds total), concluding Oswald could have hidden his rifle and reached the lunchroom by ~12:31:30 p.m.

Shelley and Lovelady's testimony aligns: They were on the front steps during the shots, then trotted west to the railroad yard for 1–2 minutes before reentering. Crucially, both saw Truly and Baker (a "police officer") enter the front entrance while they were still outside—Shelley: "They were at the first step like they were fixin' to go in... moving, yes" (6 H 331); Lovelady: "We looked up and there was a fellow in a white shirt and a policeman... going in" (6 H 339). This places Truly/Baker's entry ~20–30 seconds post-shots (consistent with Molina's estimate: 6 H 372), before Shelley/Lovelady's ~3-minute delay.The Warren Report (pp. 152–155) integrates this seamlessly: Shelley/Lovelady reenter "several minutes after Baker and Truly rushed through the front entrance," with no timing conflict. Critics like Harold Weisberg (Whitewash IV, 1974) note inconsistencies in when Shelley/Lovelady saw Truly/Baker (e.g., their initial affidavits imply quicker reentry, and Molina saw Truly enter before employee Gloria Calvery arrived, contradicting their claim she alerted them first), but these do not challenge the trials' core result—that ~90 seconds sufficed for Oswald's descent. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (1979) later affirmed: "The testimony of Truly and Baker does not preclude a finding [Oswald] was on the sixth floor at the time the shots were fired.

. . . . . . .

Presented in matrix form:

Key Timing Element  -- *Truly/Baker (Trial Results) -- **Shelley/Lovelady Statements -- ***Relation to Trials

Entry to TSBD

*~15–20 sec post-shots via front door

**Saw them enter while still outside (~20–30 sec post-shots)

***Supports: Confirms quick entry, starting the ~75-sec clock to 2nd floor.

Their Own Reentry

*N/A (already inside)

**~3 min post-shots via rear door

***No conflict: Their delay is after Truly/Baker's ascent; reinforces Oswald had time alone on stairs.

Potential Critique

*N/A

**Day-of affidavits suggest faster reentry; Molina contradicts Calvery alert

***Minor inconsistencies, but WC harmonized by prioritizing later testimony; no impact on ~90-sec feasibility.

. . . . . . .


Grok: Would you like me to?

1) Analyze missing Adams' testimony tape?

2) Give Sandra Styles' testimony details?

3) Make tables more concise?

. . . . . . .


Me: When you say, "WC harmonized by prioritizing later testimony," do you mean the later-descent testimony?

Grok: Yes, by "WC harmonized by prioritizing later testimony," I mean the Warren Commission (WC) favored the later statements of William Shelley and Billy Lovelady (from their March–April 1964 testimonies) over their initial November 22, 1963, affidavits and other early accounts. In their later testimony, Shelley and Lovelady described a delayed reentry into the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD)—approximately 3–5 minutes after the assassination—after lingering outside, moving toward the railroad yard, and being alerted by Gloria Calvery. This timeline supported the Commission's narrative that Roy Truly and Marrion Baker entered the TSBD quickly (15–20 seconds post-shots) and ascended to the second floor (75–90 seconds post-shots), allowing Lee Harvey Oswald time to descend from the sixth floor undetected.In contrast, their initial same-day affidavits (Shelley: CE 2003, p. 59; Lovelady: CE 2003, p. 62) implied a quicker reentry, with less detail about timing or Calvery’s alert. For example, Shelley’s affidavit states he "ran across the street to the corner of the park" and "came back to the building," without specifying a 3–5 minute delay. The Commission prioritized the later, more detailed testimony to align with the Truly/Baker time trials and to discredit Victoria Adams’ claim of an early descent (within ~1 minute), as the delayed reentry of Shelley/Lovelady suggested she encountered them on the first floor after Oswald’s descent. This harmonization dismissed inconsistencies, such as Joe Molina’s testimony (6 H 372) that Truly entered before Calvery’s arrival, which could imply a faster sequence for Shelley/Lovelady’s actions.

[Michael T. Griffith]

You really should stop relying on Grok and do some genuine research. If you have not read Barry Ernest's book The Girl on the Stairs, you really have no business commenting on the subject on a public board, for the sake of your own credibility, if nothing else.

Why do you suppose that the WC's recording of her testimony was destroyed--by the WC? So we have no way to check the transcript of her testimony against the recording. How convenient. Gee, what a coincidence.

Have you heard of the Martha Jo Stroud memo?

Anyone who claims that Adams' changed her story after the WC has not even read the primary sources on the subject. In her original FBI statement, Adams she said she left the window and headed down the stairs within 15-30 seconds after the shooting. BTW, the Warren Report ignored this and said she didn't leave the window for 1 minute.

Similarly, Adams originally said she arrived on the first floor within 60 seconds of the shooting. The Warren Report decided she was wrong again and said she didn't arrive for several minutes.

It is nothing short of amazing that WC apologists continue to misrepresent the facts about Vicki Adams.

[Tom Graves]

Why do you suppose that the WC's recording of her testimony was destroyed by the WC?

Because it mistakenly believed it had to.