Has anyone on here ever compiled a list or register of witnesses that were never called by the Warren Commission to give testimony? Or is such a list available on the net? Does anyone have any good links on this subject? Thank youFirst, because of how long the list is you will need to call Georgia-Pacific to make sure their warehouses are full of paper. You don't want to run out
Has anyone on here ever compiled a list or register of witnesses that were never called by the Warren Commission to give testimony? Or is such a list available on the net? Does anyone have any good links on this subject? Thank you
One place that might be helpful in this is the list of Dealey Plaza eyewitnesses on the Sixth Floor Museum website. The oral history section includes a section on eyewitnesses. I know some of them didn?t come forward for many years. Dr. Toni Glover is one. She was 11-years old and with her mother. Her mother never did come forward.
This might be helpfulI could not find Bill Chapman on the list, this has got to be an error
JFK Key Persons
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/finding-aids/jfk-key-persons
If memory serves, I think some of these people didn't testify.
Very constructive thank you. Do you do magic tricks too?You already knew the answer to your own question. By dragging others into it that would be considered less than constructive. I know you understand and you are welcome, in advance.
How about a list of significant witnesses that were ignored / weren't called?
Thank you all for your helpful replies and links (apart from Mr Kleindick). Much appreciated!In your previous post, you thanked me, but now you exclude me from any appreciation. Unable to make up your mind? The late Gary Mack who was the curator at the 6th-floor museum was like that. You should apply for a lone nut job, you would fit right in.
Thank you Gary, was Newman called to testify to the WC? Also was Roger Craig called to testify or Victoria Adams?Here you go and try not to smoke too much of the good stuff, I believe it is impairing you
How about people.. called before the Warren Commission- that were witnesses to absolutely nothing?That would be almost every witness they called all to make the WC report fat there was even talk about letting witnesses tip a few cocktails back to stretch testimony out and making the report extra fat.
Thank you Gary, was Newman called to testify to the WC? Also was Roger Craig called to testify or Victoria Adams?
Here you go and try not to smoke too much of the good stuff, I believe it is impairing youWhat Ms Adams had to say..the Commissioners did not wish to hear...
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/wit.htm
Mr. BELIN - All right.IOW the pergola area.
Miss ADAMS - And from our vantage point we were able to see what the President's wife was wearing, the roses in the car, and things that would attract men's attention. Then we heard---then we were obstructed from the view.
Mr. BELIN - By what?
Miss ADAMS - A tree and we heard a shot, and it was a pause, and then a second shot, and then a third shot.
It sounded like a firecracker or a cannon at a football game, it seemed as if it came from the right below rather than from the left above.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/normal_Altgens_crop.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Mary Woodward is the smiling light-haired woman above the limousine's flag staff in the Altgens photograph, taken during the shooting. Above and behind Woodward is the Depository and Elm Street extension. Woodward was standing on the sidewalk, not sitting on the knoll, per Fox. |
The 1965 book "The Unanswered Questions About President's Assassination" by Sylvan Fox was one of the most widely-distributed books critical of the WC.
"With Mrs. Hill at the time of the shooting was a friend of hers, Mary Moorman.
Mrs. Moorman was in the same place at the same time. But she was never
summoned to testify before the Warren Commission.
Nor was Charles Drehm [sic], a Dallas carpet salesman who told the Dallas
Times Herald he was about 10 feet from the President's car at the moment of
the shooting. Drehm, the Times Herald said, "seemed to think the shots came
from in front of or beside the President."
Nor did the Commission call O.V. Campbell, the vice president of the book
depository, who was standing in front of the building with Roy Truly, the
depository, at the time of the assassination. Campbell was quoted in the
Dallas Morning News as saying he "ran towards a grassy knoll west of the
building" because he thought the shots were coming from there.
Nor did the Commission call four women employed by the Dallas Morning
News who were on the grassy knoll itself. One of the four, Mary Woodward,
wrote an eyewitness account of the assassination for the Morning News.
She said she and her three companions were sitting on the knoll overlooking
Elm Street when they heard "a horrible, ear-shattering noise coming from\
behind us and a little to the right."
Readers are left with the impression that witnesses were totally ignored by the Commission.
Moorman: Affidavit Nov. 22, 1963; FBI Report Nov. 23, 1963
( According to Wikipedia: "She was called by the Warren Commission to
testify, but due to a sprained ankle, she was unable to be questioned." )
Brehm: FBI Report, Nov. 25, 1963
( "He also stated that it seemed quite apparent to him that the shots came
from one of two buildings back at the corner of Elm and Houston Streets." )
Campbell: FBI Reports Nov. 24 and 28, 1963
( "At this time, he heard a loud report, which at first he considered to be a
fire cracker or some object set off by a crank and believed the noise
came from away from his building. This illusion, he explained, may have
been due to the sound bouncing off the building and other objects in the
vicinity. After hearing two more such reports, he realized they must have
been rifle shots and since President KENNEDY's car had advanced just
out of his vision, he went forward a few feet to observe this automobile" )
Mary Woodward: FBI Report Dec. 7, 1963
( Woodward was standing on the sidewalk, not sitting on the knoll. )
VOLUNTARY STATEMENT. Not Under Arrest Form No. 86http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/price.htm
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF DALLAS, TEXAS
Before me, the undersigned authority, on this the 22nd day of November A.D. 1963 personally appeared Mr. J. C. Price, Address: 2602 Astor, Dallas, Age 62, Phone No. WH 1-1940. Bus. Terminal Annex, Gen. Service RI 8-5611, Ext 3105.
Deposes and says:
This day at about 12:35 PM I was on the roof of the Terminal Annex Bldg on the NE corner when the presidential motorcade came down Main to Houston, North on Houston and then West on Elm. The cars had proceeded west on Elm and was [sic] just a short distance from the Tripple [sic] underpass, when I saw Gov. Connelly [sic] slump over. I did not see the president as his car had gotten out of my view under the underpass. There was a volley of shots, and then much later, maybe as much as five minutes [sic!] later, another one. I saw one man run towards the passenger cars on the railroad siding after the volley of shots. This man had a white dress shirt, no tie and kahki [sic] colored trousers. His hair appeared to be long and dark and his agility running could be about 35 yrs [sic] of age. He had something in his hand. I couldn't be sure but it may have been a head piece. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
/s/ J. C. Price
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 22nd day of Nov A. D. 1963
/s/ [unintelligible]
Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/price.htmA hat apparently. Took me a long time to find that out. I think it might be in one of Prices other testimonies somewhere. Possibly his Clay Shaw testimony. The Clay Shaw testimony is very illuminating once he gives more details. His sighting is not of a shooter on the knoll as one would take it the way he describes it in his earlier accounts.
What is a "head piece"?
A hat apparently. Took me a long time to find that out. I think it might be in one of Prices other testimonies somewhere. Possibly his Clay Shaw testimony. The Clay Shaw testimony is very illuminating once he gives more details. His sighting is not of a shooter on the knoll as one would take it the way he describes it in his earlier accounts.
A hat apparently. Took me a long time to find that out. I think it might be in one of Prices other testimonies somewhere. Possibly his Clay Shaw testimony. The Clay Shaw testimony is very illuminating once he gives more details. His sighting is not of a shooter on the knoll as one would take it the way he describes it in his earlier accounts.MK Can you provide a link to this Price testimony at the Shaw trial?
MK Can you provide a link to this Price testimony at the Shaw trial?
QuoteVOLUNTARY STATEMENT. Not Under Arrest Form No. 86
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
COUNTY OF DALLAS, TEXAS
Before me, the undersigned authority, on this the 22nd day of November A.D. 1963 personally appeared Emmett Joseph Hudson, Address 107 South Bishop, Dallas, Texas Age 56 , Phone No. WH 2-2008
Deposes and says:
I am presently employed by the City of Dallas, Texas in the Park Department. I have been so employed for the past 6 years. My position is to take care of the property on the West side of Houston Street between Houston Street and the Tripple [sic] Underpass. I also take care of the fountain in front of the Union Terminal. This day a was sitting on the front steps of the sloping area and about half way down the steps. There was another man sitting there with me. He was sitting on my left and we were both facing the street with our backs to the railroad yards and the brick building. At the same time the President's car was directly in front of us, I heard a shot and I saw the President fall over in the seat. I do not know who this other man was that was sitting beside me. In our conversation he talked about having a hard time finding a place to park. He also talked about working somewhere over on Industrial Blvd. This man said Lay down and we did. I definately [sic] heard 3 shots. The shots that I heard definately [sic] came from behind and above me. When I laid down on the ground I laid on my right side and my view was still toward the street where the President's car had passed. I did look around but I did not see any firearms at all. This shot sounded to me like a high powered rifle.
/s/ Emmett J. Hudson
Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 22nd day of Nov A. D. 1963
/s/ C. M. Jones
Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONhttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/franzen.htm
Date: 11/24/63
Mr. JACK FRANZEN, 10572, [sic] Cromwell Circle, telephone FL 7-3717, who is employed by the Fox and Jacob Construction Company, 9106 Soverign [sic] Row, was contacted in response to a telephone call received from him at 1900 Main Street.
Mr. FRANZEN advised he and his wife and small son were standing in the grass area west of Houston Street and south of Elm Street at the time the President's motorcade arrived at that location at approximately 12:30 PM on November 22, 1963. He said he heard the sound of an explosion which appeared to him to come from the President's car and noticed small fragments flying inside the President's car and immediately assumed that someone had tossed a firecracker inside the automobile. He heard a second and third and possibly a fourth explosion and recognized these sounds as being shots fired from some firearm. At the same time he noticed blood appearing at the top and sides of the head of President Kennedy. He noticed a colored family consisting of a man, woman and small child nearby and at the sound of these shots the man picked up the small boy and ran with the woman west on Elm Street toward the overpass. During the ensuing confusion he remembers looking at the side of the building occupied by the Texas School Book Depository, located across Elm Street from his position but does not remember seeing anything of a suspicious nature with regard to that building. He noticed the men, who were presumed to be Secret Service Agents, riding in the car directly behind the President's car, unloading from the car, some with firearms in their hands, and noticed police officers and these plain clothesmen [sic] running up the grassy slope across Elm Street from his location and toward a wooded and bushy area located across Elm Street from him.
Because of this activity he presumed the shots which were fired came from the shrubbery or bushes toward which these officers appeared to be running.
He looked over the crowd which had assembled along both sides of Elm Street in this block but noticed nothing which appeared unusual among these spectators.
Mr. FRANZEN advised he is aware that the information which he has furnished may not be of any particular significance but advised in view of his close proximity to the President's vehicle at the time of these shots, felt that he possibly should furnish whatever information he could.
on 11/22/63 at Dallas, Texas File # DL 89-43
by Special Agents Alfred C. Ellington and Joseph L. Loeffler [sp?]
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/price.htm
What is a "head piece"?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/franzen.htm
The accounts of Price and Franzen are meant to indicate shots from the front?Of the motorcade? Can you read?
Of the motorcade? Can you read?
Has anyone on here ever compiled a list or register of witnesses that were never called by the Warren Commission to give testimony? Or is such a list available on the net? Does anyone have any good links on this subject? Thank you
I don't understand the significance of posting the accounts of Price and Franzen.They did not testify.
They did not testify.
The Commission was not planning on calling Ike Altgens. Only after some bad press about this "goof" was Mr. Altgens summoned, for a late July appearance.
And, yes, there was a good reason for trying to keep his testimony from being heard.
Does anyone know why?
I don't know why. Please enlighten me.
Has anyone on here ever compiled a list or register of witnesses that were never called by the Warren Commission to give testimony? Or is such a list available on the net? Does anyone have any good links on this subject? Thank you
He was certainly one of the best witnesses.
That's him in Z333 to about Z358ish, camera at the ready.
His pictures were on the "wire" soon after.
Altgens stated that he was "about" 15ft away from the President" when JFK was hit in the head with the last shot.
Since the street is about 30feet wide, that puts JFK directly opposite Altgens, who is standing facing the street, camera prefocused to 15 ft, about to snap the shutter.
And thats about Z345 to Z350, which certainly throws a monkey wrench in the whole official shooting sequence.
Remember, also, that in 64, we are ten plus years away from Zfilm release.
The Commitee first tried to ignore Altgens, then reluctantly took his testimony, and filed it away, never knowing that Altgens was a vital "supporting actor" in the Zapruder cinema production.
"There was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head. That was the last shot--that much I will say with a great degree of certainty."Z 349 he's kind of hard to miss.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/altgens.htm
There was only one head shot. Altgens only described one head shot. When he said that he was 15 feet away at the time, he was wrong.
Z 349 he's kind of hard to miss.
Was about to press the shutter when the last shot hit the president.
Hit by splatter.
Prefocused to 15 ft. Half the width of the street.
There were two head shots.
Three hits in total.
All from the rear.
Z 349 he's kind of hard to miss.
Was about to press the shutter when the last shot hit the president.
Hit by splatter.
Prefocused to 15 ft. Half the width of the street.
There were two head shots.
Three hits in total.
All from the rear.
Do you believe Altgens is or is not responsible for the 2 photos taken of the motorcade after it turned onto Houston street?Which "two photos"? Altgens 6, is, of course, his photo. Which other photo?
Which "two photos"? Altgens 6, is, of course, his photo. Which other photo?
Addendum: Altgens 5 and 6 would be ..Altgens'.
Let's remain on topic. Assassination witness. Reluctantly called, and ignored.
Release of Zapruder highlights his importance. And contradicts WC.
While we're there, notice man to our right, Altgens' left, diving to the ground, reacting to what?
I think he's getting at the photo of the limousine with the first floor of the Depository in the back ground, which was followed by the photo of the limousine with the Underpass beyond.
Where does it say the WC was reluctant to call Altgens?
You think a pre-focus of 15 feet meant that he heard a shot which the limousine was that distance from him? Geeze.
Malcolm Summers ( had no idea where shots were coming from and was just following the herd):
"Yesterday, November 23, 1963, I was standing on the terrace of the small park on Elm Street
to watch the President's motorcade. The President's car had just come up in front of me when
I heard a shot and saw the President slump down in the car and heard Mrs. Kennedy say,
"Oh, no," then a second shot and then I hit the ground as I realized these were shots. Then all
of the people started running up the terrace away from the President's car and I got up and
started running also, not realizing what had happened. In just a few moments the President's
car sped off and everyone was just running around towards the railroad tracks and I knew
that they had somebody trapped up there. I imagine I stayed there 15 or 20 minutes and then
went over on Houston Street to where I had my truck parked."
He evidently thought no one "trapped up there" was going to be found.
IMO Having the autopsy doctors testify without the autopsy photos, x-rays etc. was critical for the coverup and more essential to it's continuation than the omission of testimony from witnesses we basically now know the content of.
The photos of the entrance wound in the back of JFK's skull, slightly above and slightly to the right of the EOP, requested by the autopsy doctors at autopsy, were noticed missing by Dr. Fink in a January 1967 review of the materials in the Archive.
Very convenient when LBJ's Clark Panel '67 report moved that entrance wound 4 inches up on JFK's skull in response to critics pointing out a EOP wound didn't jibe with a shot from the 6th floor SE corner of the TSBD.
A photo of the inside of JFK's right lung was also noticed missing from the Archive by the Clark Panel. That photo could have shown the direction and path of the wound to JFK's back and throat.
Very convenient also since Jerry Ford had changed the WCR final draft describing it's location from entering JFK's back to entering the back of his neck.
Which "two photos"? Altgens 6, is, of course, his photo. Which other photo?
Addendum: Altgens 5 and 6 would be ..Altgens'.
Let's remain on topic. Assassination witness. Reluctantly called, and ignored. Release of Zapruder highlights his importance. And contradicts WC.
While we're there, notice man to our right, Altgens' left, diving to the ground, reacting to what?
I think he's getting at the photo of the limousine with the first floor of the Depository in the back ground, which was followed by the photo of the limousine with the Underpass beyond.
Where does it say the WC was reluctant to call Altgens? Ce1407. It's in the first few paragraphs.
You think a pre-focus of 15 feet meant that he heard a shot which the limousine was that distance from him? Geeze. That's his testimony
Malcolm Summers ( had no idea where shots were coming from and was just following the herd):
"Yesterday, November 23, 1963, I was standing on the terrace of the small park on Elm Street
to watch the President's motorcade. The President's car had just come up in front of me when
I heard a shot and saw the President slump down in the car and heard Mrs. Kennedy say,
"Oh, no," then a second shot and then I hit the ground as I realized these were shots. Then all
of the people started running up the terrace away from the President's car and I got up and
started running also, not realizing what had happened. In just a few moments the President's
car sped off and everyone was just running around towards the railroad tracks and I knew
that they had somebody trapped up there. I imagine I stayed there 15 or 20 minutes and then
went over on Houston Street to where I had my truck parked."
He evidently thought no one "trapped up there" was going to be found.
Is Malcolm the guy heading toward the ground? That's a rather telling action/reaction. I don't really care about anything else involving him. What, exactly, is he reacting to?
Bullets were being fired, a man had been hit in the head 40 or so feet from him, and he thought he (Summers) might be killed.
Yeah, hearing the third shot about Z345ish.
Anyhow, back to Altgens. CE1407. Warren Commission And the attempt to ignore him.
LOL. What shot at Z345ish?" There was flesh particles that flew out the side of his head in my direction.."
What about CE1407? The Doorman issue? And if they were going to ignore Altgens, why did they call him to testify?
"You think a pre-focus of 15 feet meant that he heard a shot which the limousine was that distance from him? Geeze." Your answer: "That's his testimony"
It is?
"I was prepared to make a picture at the very instant the President was shot.
I had refocused to 15 feet because I wanted a good closeup of the President
and Mrs. Kennedy, and that's why I know that it would be right at 15 feet,
because I had prefocused in that area, and I had my camera almost to my
eye when it happened and that's as far as I got with my camera."
He says he focused the camera to 15 feet and didn't take the shot. The President was shot before Altgens raised his camera for such a photo and thus was not in the 15 foot range. Even when the President passed by Altgens and was nearest, Altgens didn't raise his camera, due to shock he said.
"in response to critics pointing out a EOP wound didn't jibe with a shot from the 6th floor SE corner of the TSBD"
Lane and Meagher didn't make no such claim. They maintained there was no skull entry wound at the rear of the skull, contending it entered the front of the skull. They implied the autopsy surgeons were incompetent and part of a cover-up.
Then the Clark Panel found the four-inch discrepancy and all the shade about Humes and Boswell disappeared. They were suddenly competent pathologists who were very accurate in locating the rear entry wound. The Clark Panel, and later the HSCA Forensic Panel, were inaccurate or the autopsy materials substituted or forged.
It doesn't work to any advantage to dishonestly "move" the skull entry wound upwards. Studivan, who says the shot came from the SN window, believes the lower entry point is accurate and that the bullet deflected upward to exit where it is seen to in the Zapruder film.
"Above the shoulder" was more ambiguous than "back of the base of the neck," which reflected language expressed in the Autopsy Report. The Clark Panel and other review used language similar to Ford's.
The autopsy doctors requested photos of the inside of the skull and outside of the skull at the EOP wound.
Those photo's absence in the Archives was noted during autopsy Doctor Fink's '67 review.
All 3 autopsy doctors stuck by their initial EOP wound location until death.
The 1967 NA Inspection by Humes, Boswell Finck did not note any autopsy image was missing.
Their report describes a picture showing the interior of the skull.
Boswell and Finck supported Humes' claim of what he alone "measured" with "slightly above".
Humes did note a precise measurement from the skull midline. The exterior surface of the occipital bone near the EOP does not have a prominent midline. The parietal bone, where the Clark Panel located the entry wound, does have a midline.
???
"The 1967 NA Inspection by Humes, Boswell Finck did not note any autopsy image was missing."
::)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/dhor-insapp-01_0001_0153.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/Humes_0056a.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/Humes_0107b.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/Humes_0050a.jpg)
(https://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/shaw.jpg)
for the coverup
LOL. What shot at Z345ish?
What about CE1407? The Doorman issue? And if they were going to ignore Altgens, why did they call him to testify?
"You think a pre-focus of 15 feet meant that he heard a shot which the limousine was that distance from him? Geeze." Your answer: "That's his testimony"
It is?
"I was prepared to make a picture at the very instant the President was shot.
I had refocused to 15 feet because I wanted a good closeup of the President
and Mrs. Kennedy, and that's why I know that it would be right at 15 feet,
because I had prefocused in that area, and I had my camera almost to my
eye when it happened and that's as far as I got with my camera."
He says he focused the camera to 15 feet and didn't take the shot. The President was shot before Altgens raised his camera for such a photo and thus was not in the 15 foot range. Even when the President passed by Altgens and was nearest, Altgens didn't raise his camera, due to shock he said.
"I thought we had photographed the outside and inside of entry wound in skull."
Finck presumably thought there was a photo showing the entry wound on the bare skull, but it actually showed the entry wound with the scalp in place. Finck himself signed off on this in the 1967 Inspection. And there certainly is a photograph showing the inside of the entry wound on the skull. Finck signed off on that, also.
It's strange that Finck could forget those two things in the course of one month.
???
There was a coverup?
Go back to sleep Biil.
Walter Winborn and Thomas Murphy (both interviewed by Stuart Galanor in May 1966)
In May of 1966 I spoke with railroad workers Thomas Murphy and Walter Winborn, who were standing on the triple overpass at the time of the assassination. I asked Murphy, "Could you tell me where you thought the shots came from?"
Murphy. Yeah, they come from a tree to the left, of my left, which is to the immediate right of the site of the assassination.
Galanor. That would be on that grassy hill up there.
Murphy. Yeah, on the hill up there. There are two or three hackberry and elm trees. And I say it come from there.
Galanor. Well, was there anything that led you to believe that the shots came from there?
Murphy. Yeah, smoke.
Galanor. You saw smoke?
Murphy. Sure did.
Galanor. Could you tell me exactly where you saw the smoke?
Murphy. Yeah, in that tree. (See Cover-up, 59)
Walter Winborn told me he saw "smoke that come out from under the trees on the right hand side of the motorcade." The FBI agents who interviewed Winborn for the Warren Commission, however, did not mention in their report that he had seen smoke on the knoll.
Galanor. Did you tell them about that, that you saw smoke on the grassy knoll?
Winborn. Oh yes. Oh yes.
Galanor. They didn’t include it in their report.
Winborn. Well.
Galanor. Do you have any idea why they didn’t?
Winborn. I don’t have any idea. They are specialists in their field, and I’m just an amateur. (See Cover-up, 60)
James Leon Simmons testimony at Shaw trial:
A: Well, he fell and there was matter and a halo of blood.
Q: Which way did he fall?
A: To his left.
Q: What did the limousine do then?
A: It paused and then accelerated real fast after the motorcycle got out the way.
Q: Did it go under the Triple Overpass?
A: Yes, sir, went directly under us.
Q: It went under you because you were standing on the overpass?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: At the time you saw this red halo, what did that appear to you to be?
A: To the left side of his head.
Q: Can you tell us what direction this went in, this matter?
A: It went over the side of the car.
Q: Which side of the car?
A: The left side.
Q: Now at the time you heard the second and third shot did you notice anything unusual in the area of the grassy knoll?
A: Well, after I heard the shots I looked to see if I could see where they were coming from and underneath the trees up on the grassy knoll by the fence I detected what appeared to be a puff of smoke or wisp of smoke.
Q: From which direction did these noises appear to come from?
A: In front and the left.
Then we have Aynesworth mitigating the smoke, turning it into Harkness' motorcycles exhaust. An physical and logistical impossibility.
Walter Winborn told researchers that he saw smoke come from the trees when the shots were fired.
Note that Thomas Murphy said the same thing.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=4271#relPageId=41&tab=page
That is not what the FBI report stated that they said...
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1417.pdf
Then we have Aynesworth mitigating the smoke, turning it into Harkness' motorcycles exhaust. An physical and logistical impossibility.
So that statement therefor cancels out what three other guys ultimately said? I see ::)
"Mr. JOHNSON stated that white smoke was observed near the pavilion, but he felt that
this smoke came from a motorcycle abandoned near the spot by a Dallas policeman."
So that statement therefor cancels out what three other guys ultimately said? I see ::)
How do you figure that?I have considered many aspects and potential sources and you should know this.
Would you rather no consideration be given other potential sources of "smoke"?
...He heard sounds that could have been shots. Mr. JOHNSON stated at that time he did not know that it was shots and he could not say how many shots he heard. His attention remained on the vehicle carrying President KENNEDY and he observed this car until it sped away. Mr. JOHNSON stated that white smoke was observed near the pavilion, but he felt that this smoke came from a motorcycle abandoned near the spot by a Dallas policeman.Often... Report supporters claim that no officer had driven his bike all the way up the knoll to the pavilion like some have mentioned.
I have considered many aspects and potential sources and you should know this.
Let's consider Mr Johnson's statements for what they offer.... Often... Report supporters claim that no officer had driven his bike all the way up the knoll to the pavilion like some have mentioned.
I agree. Certainly no pictures show this. So how could a motorcycle that was not up by the pavilion be emitting smoke next to the pavilion?
Mr Johnson didn't seem to know that there was a shooting at all so he could not state where the shots [that he didn't hear] came from or how many there were.
Mr Johnson didn't seem to know anything and was not called to testify.
Some [as the guys I mentioned above] did see something of interest but they were not called to testify.
Oodles of people [too many to list] who didn't know anything were called to testify however.
So [as I figure] this non-investigation was nothing but a sham ;)
If we're going by the initial report of how Johnson described things ..."If we're going by..."
James Simmons: Heard three shots from the direction of the Depository and saw "exhaust fumes of smoke".
Simmons at the Shaw trial----A: Well, after I heard the shots I looked to see if I could see where they were coming from and underneath the trees up on the grassy knoll by the fence I detected what appeared to be a puff of smoke or wisp of smoke.
Why wasn't the "smoke" under the trees, or a portion of it, captured in the Moorman photo, and the Muchmore and Nix films during the assassination?You go by whatever you want. You always will anyway.
But who knows? Smoke can travel.Maybe the smoke in the pictures above came from a hamburger stand?
"If we're going by..." You go by whatever you want. You always will anyway.
(https://i.gifer.com/GcsB.gif)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TLxk6_guQpI/AAAAAAAAFfQ/qbO0Ity5XdI/s1600/216.+Frame+From+Dave+Wiegman+Film.jpg)
Maybe the smoke in the pictures above came from a hamburger stand?
Wow! along comes someone who still believes that's "smoke" in the Wiegman film.
The smoke appears to be moving in that film. Strongest evidence of a gunman there.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/digitalcollections_baylor3.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Wiegman Film | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/Couch/20160719-211323.JPG) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Couch Film | (https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/snapshot20111219191702.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Bell Film |
Wow! It's 2020 and along comes someone who still believes that's "smoke" in the Wiegman film. It's like finding a species thought extinct.
(https://www.broadinstitute.org/files/styles/landing_page/public/generic-pages/images/circle/Sidebars-_coelacanthe_413x273.jpg)
You still believe the direction of the wind that was taken at an airport miles away
You still believe the direction of the wind that was taken at an airport miles away
The answer is blowin' in the wind"Blowin' in the Wind" is a song written by Bob Dylan in 1962.
- Peter, Paul, and Mary
You believe this is "smoke"?
(https://i.gifer.com/GcsB.gif)
It most certainly is smoke.
| (https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/d0b2eb5d88eafa2b71b10df0617f57dd53bcd6e8/0_113_5200_3119/master/5200.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=7ea33c2805b9bfca4285de7fe3d3442f) | (https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/101041/width668/image-20151106-16235-ao8ar3.jpg) | (https://1v1d1e1lmiki1lgcvx32p49h8fe-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/1573522017-11693122-3x2-large-960x540.jpg) |
It does not matter what you think it matters what these 5 people saw and corroborated. It is not the end of the world, Organ, but you are blind. Now use your ears and listen to the video 5 witnesses from 4 locations
| Bowers | Saw some "unusual occurrence", probably visual ("flash of light or smoke") in "that area" (the opening between the pergola and the east end of the fence, about where a black couple reportedly ran from). Bowers said he saw no one behind the fence. | Holland | Holland's line-of-sight coincides with the back of the retaining wall, where a black couple reportedly ran from, and is similar to what Bowers reported. | Dodd | Same line-of-sight as Holland. | Simmons | Similar line-of-sight as Holland, but Simmons originally said he "saw exhaust fumes of smoke near the embankment in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building." | Olivier | :D |
Olivier :D
It most certainly is smoke. It does not matter what you think it matters what these 5 people saw and corroborated. It is not the end of the world, Organ, but you are blind. Now use your ears and listen to the video 5 witnesses from 4 locationsPeter...It seems that these guys would have to be waterboarded to watch any conflicting FIRST HAND testimony!
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/d0b2eb5d88eafa2b71b10df0617f57dd53bcd6e8/0_113_5200_3119/master/5200.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=7ea33c2805b9bfca4285de7fe3d3442f) (https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/101041/width668/image-20151106-16235-ao8ar3.jpg) (https://1v1d1e1lmiki1lgcvx32p49h8fe-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/1573522017-11693122-3x2-large-960x540.jpg)
That's three now, Thought extinct ... but with us today.
Bowers Saw some "unusual occurrence", probably visual ("flash of light or smoke") in "that area" (the opening between the pergola and the east end of the fence, about where a black couple reportedly ran from). Bowers said he saw no one behind the fence. Holland Holland's line-of-sight coincides with the back of the retaining wall, where a black couple reportedly ran from, and is similar to what Bowers reported. Dodd Same line-of-sight as Holland. Simmons Similar line-of-sight as Holland, but Simmons originally said he "saw exhaust fumes of smoke near the embankment in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building." Olivier :D
I guess we're not going to hear from Hudson and Sitzman, who were feet from the fence corner, who reported no rifle being fired so near them, saw no smoke and detected no smell of a gun having been fired.
Sitzman the liar who insisted her Ukrainian-born boss go home after he had forgot to bring his camera to work that day?
Sitzman who has an answer for everything like the bottle of soda hitting the concrete? That idiot, you mean? She would not last under any serious questioning.
Oh! but she also said Sitzman stated, "I have no qualms saying that I'm almost sure that there was someone behind the fence or in that area up there [near the fence], but I'm just as sure that they had silencers because there was no sound."
Mr. LIEBELER. An echo effect?The Secret Service denied having anyone in the plaza from their agency.
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.; and this woman came up to me and she was just in hysterics. She told me, "They are shooting the President from the bushes." So I immediately proceeded up here.
Mr. LIEBELER. You proceeded up to an area immediately behind the concrete structure here that is described by Elm Street and the street that runs immediately in front of the Texas School Book Depository, is that right?
Mr. SMITH. I was checking all the bushes and I checked all the cars in the parking lot.
Mr. LIEBELER. There is a parking lot in behind this grassy area back from Elm Street toward the railroad tracks, and you went down to the parking lot and looked around?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; I checked all the cars. I looked into all the cars and checked around the bushes. Of course, I wasn't alone. There was some deputy sheriff with me, and I believe one Secret Service man when I got there.
I got to make this statement, too. I felt awfully silly, but after the shot and this woman, I pulled my pistol from my holster, and I thought, this is silly, I don't know who I am looking for, and I put it back. Just as I did, he showed me that he was a Secret Service agent.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you accost this man?
Mr. SMITH. Well, he saw me coming with my pistol and right away he showed me who he was.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember who it was?
Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I don't--
The Secret Service denied having anyone in the plaza from their agency.
Maybe he was just grilling hamburgers back there? :-\
Someone's nationality has relevance?
It's the critics who couldn't handle the truth. Lane and Thompson, who interviewed her, didn't like her non-confirmation of a grassy knoll shooter.
Only late in life, influenced by books and TV, did she off-handedly allow the possibility. But she was always consistent from early on about the black couple's actions and that there was no gunman behind the fence.
You think Smith literally examined the ID?Richard Dodd, one of the railroad workers on top of the triple overpass, told Mark Lane about a Katy Railroad "Special Agent" who was among the guys "checking cars" in the parking lot atop the GK after the assassination. Ever since I heard that, I've wondered if the MKT Dick was the "Agent" that Smith ran into. The MKT railroad detectives really did have badges that prominently featured "Special Agent," and I can see Smith seeing those words on an MKT badge, and not paying too much attention to the rest. There's really not much int the way of proof to the contention, but it makes more sense than most if not all of the other notions I've seen floated as to the "SS Agent's" identity. At least Dodd can place the guy at the scene, and the lot's adjacency to the railroad yard would lead to the reasonable expectation that the MKT agent would be in the area. I guess the conspiracy theorists can run with it too; instead of a fake SS agent, the GK conspirator could have been a fake MKT detective! Woo Hoo! Just that Ofc Smith didn't pay attention to the cover and wound up inadvertently drawing attention to an encounter that otherwise would have gone unremarked upon.
Read his recollection. He's already assumed the man is with the Secret Service: "Of course, I wasn't alone. There was some deputy sheriff with me, and I believe one Secret Service man when I got there."
Then he "felt awfully silly". Then the man "showed" him he was an agent. Flashed some ID that Smith assumed was SS? Could have been a plainclothes officer.
If that's smoke in Wiegman, they were using artillery on the knoll.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/d0b2eb5d88eafa2b71b10df0617f57dd53bcd6e8/0_113_5200_3119/master/5200.jpg?width=1920&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=7ea33c2805b9bfca4285de7fe3d3442f) (https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/101041/width668/image-20151106-16235-ao8ar3.jpg) (https://1v1d1e1lmiki1lgcvx32p49h8fe-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/1573522017-11693122-3x2-large-960x540.jpg)
That's three now, Thought extinct ... but with us today.
Bowers Saw some "unusual occurrence", probably visual ("flash of light or smoke") in "that area" (the opening between the pergola and the east end of the fence, about where a black couple reportedly ran from). Bowers said he saw no one behind the fence. Holland Holland's line-of-sight coincides with the back of the retaining wall, where a black couple reportedly ran from, and is similar to what Bowers reported. Dodd Same line-of-sight as Holland. Simmons Similar line-of-sight as Holland, but Simmons originally said he "saw exhaust fumes of smoke near the embankment in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building." Olivier :D
I guess we're not going to hear from Hudson and Sitzman, who were feet from the fence corner, who reported no rifle being fired so near them, saw no smoke and detected no smell of a gun having been fired.
The parameters of rationalizing start when you ignored the most important part which makes Sitzman completely inconsistent. The fact that she contradicted herself means she was inconsistent. Not a big deal since LHO was never convicted.
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/zapfence.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Sitzman view | (https://sites.google.com/site/lightboxzframes/lightbox/z400-z486/Lost-Bullet-z469.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Z469 - No "smoke" one sec after Wiegman clear frame |
Since we both know what she said, that would be another witness of yours who would fall short of helping your narrative. Completely useless to you, but more important another hostile witness caught playing make-believe.
Since we know Mr. Zapruder's film was altered and since we know he was a native of Ukraine which fell under the umbrella of the Soviet Union then we can say it is very fishy.
LHO wasn't born there. Who would have ever thought, old man Zapruder with his perfect cover? You wouldn't suspect a haberdasher, would you? Don't be lazy, start looking at shady Abraham. Something just is not right about that guy.
Now you're trying to convince me what she said is not important."I have no qualms" simply means she would state it if it were true and she's willing to consider the possibility. Hardly goes with her no longer maintaining she heard three shots from her left (area of Depository) and that she saw no gunman or gunsmoke from the fence.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Sitzman view
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Z469 - No "smoke" one sec after Wiegman clear frame
I can't find the source of the "qualms" quote. If it's from her 1993 Sixth Floor Museum interview, it is prefaced with:
Q: "What is your analysis of the possibility of a gunman, a second gunman,
being behind that picket fence."
A: "After looking at the film and doing a lot of reading ... etc., I would say
there's a very good possibility there was somebody back there, but they
had a silencer. I don't know who was shooting where, but there was
nobody standing behind that close with a rifle except a silencer on it."
I guess looking at the film means the 1991 "JFK" movie. And she's asked about a "possibility". Not what she actually remembered firsthand, which goes back a long way.
" I talked to Marilyn Sitzman, 202 S. Lancaster who said her boss, Abraham Zaprutes,
RI 8 6071, had movies of the shooting. She said the shots came from that way and
she pointed at the old Sexton Building."
-- Report of Deputy Sheriff John Wiseman, Nov. 23, 1963
(the Depository was formerly known as the Sexton Building)
I see. This is a game to you.
The Zapruder film certainly wasn't altered. And I fail to see how the Soviet Union had any influence on Zapruder.
Couldn't quite keep in those Nazi dog whistles.
You think Smith literally examined the ID?
The MKT railroad detectives really did have badges that prominently featured "Special Agent," .. instead of a fake SS agent, the GK conspirator could have been a fake MKT detective!I actually have two "Special Agent" badges....available in any pawn shop.
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.; and this woman came up to me and she was just in hysterics. She told me, "They are shooting the President from the bushes." So I immediately proceeded up here.Maybe she just heard the Bar-B-Q firewood popping huh?
I actually have two "Special Agent" badges....available in any pawn shop.
Anyway, what about the woman who was screaming?Maybe she just heard the Bar-B-Q firewood popping huh?
I guess we're not going to hear from Hudson and Sitzman, who were feet from the fence corner, who reported no rifle being fired so near them, saw no smoke and detected no smell of a gun having been fired.I guess you want a 8X10 glossy of a rifleman behind the fence :-\
Sitzman: And as far as the sound of the shots go, the first one, as I said, sounded like a firecracker, and the second one that I heard sounded the same, because I recall no difference whatsoever in them. And I'm sure that if the second shot would have come from a different place -- and the supposed theory is they would have been much closer to me and on the right side -- I would have heard the sounding of the gun much closer, and I probably had a ringing in my head because the fence was quite close to where we were standing, very close. Ah, it just sounded the same way.http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/sitzman.htm
Sitzman: There was a ... there was thousands of people coming out of that building after I got back there. There was reporters, there were just people from the street I remember coming up and asking questions.
The screaming woman? Didn't happen. Didn't exist.
The witnesses Bowers, Holland, Dodd, Simmons, Oliver didn't really see anything.
OK.I guess you want a 8X10 glossy of a rifleman behind the fence :-\
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/sitzman.htm
"Supposed theory"... "Thousands" :D
Nonsense. There was several people who reported shots from other than the Depository.Nonsense? Then accept their claims as at a probability or at least a possibility.
Do you now think the "smoke" in the Wiegman film is from a Bar-B-Q?
you kooks... your bias.Works both ways pal.
Nonsense. There was several people who reported shots from other than the Depository. The Warren Commission called Officer Joe Smith to testify.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/99/43/EqKB8Dri_o.jpg)
Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a picture, an aerial view of the area that is marked Commission
Exhibit No. 354.
...
Mr. LIEBELER. I will put the No. 4 in a circle on the spot of approximately where you
were standing at the time the motorcade went by. Is that approximately correct?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. You were facing east up Elm Street away from the triple underpass?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER. So that your back was in fact turned to the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. SMITH. Yes.
...
Mr. SMITH. I started up toward this Book Depository after I heard the shots, and I didn't
know where the shots came from. I had no idea, because it was such a ricochet.
Mr. LIEBELER. An echo effect?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.; and this woman came up to me and she was just in hysterics.
She told me, "They are shooting the President from the bushes." So I immediately
proceeded up here.
Mr. LIEBELER. You proceeded up to an area immediately behind the concrete structure
here that is described by Elm Street and the street that runs immediately in front
of the Texas School Book Depository, is that right?
Mr. SMITH. I was checking all the bushes and I checked all the cars in the parking lot.
...
Mr. LIEBELER. Down around the---let's put a No. 5 there at the corner here behind this
concrete structure where the bushes were down toward the railroad tracks from
the Texas School Book Depository Building on the little street that runs down in
front of the Texas School Book Depository Building.
Mr. SMITH. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now you say that you had the idea that the shots may have come from
up in that area?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; that is just what, well, like I say, the sound of it. That was the most
helpless and hopeless feeling I ever had.
Mr. LIEBELER. Well, you mentioned before there was an echo from the shots in the area.
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.
...
Mr. LIEBELER. After you heard the shots, you proceeded down along the bushes here
between the street that runs in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building
and Elm Street to approximately point 5, and then when you went down looking
to the cars, you then had occasion to look up at the railroad tracks running over the
triple underpass?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.
They probably saw what Bowers said he saw. Some peculiar visual movement behind the retaining wall. Holland originally said" "But the puff of smoke I saw definitely came from behind the arcade through the trees." and testified:
Mr. HOLLAND - There was a shot, a report, I don't know whether it was a shot. I can't say
that. And a puff of smoke came out about 6 or 8 feet above the ground right out from under
those trees. And at just about this location from where I was standing you could see that
puff of smoke, like someone had thrown a firecracker, or something out."
...
Mr. STERN - When you ran behind the picket fence after the shots were fired, did you
come near the area where the station wagon was parked?
Mr. HOLLAND - Went up to behind the arcade as far as you could go.
Mr. STERN - So, you would have passed where this station wagon was?
Mr. HOLLAND - Yes.
Holland thought it could have been a firecracker thrown out from the pergola, the first place he ran to after the shots.
Sitzman, who was in a position to see as she was a few feet from the fence corner, said the only unusual thing she saw happen in the area was a black couple running from there. She saw no gunman or gunsmoke, heard no gunshot, smelled no gunpowder.
Emmett J. Hudson, standing on the steps a few feet from the fence corner, was supposedly a few feet away and downwind from where the "smoke" was and he didn't observe or smell it. Nor heard it; he thought all the shots came from behind (to his left) the motorcade.
Mr. LIEBELER - But you are quite sure in your own mind that the shots came from the
rear of the President's car and above it; is that correct?
Mr. HUDSON - Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you have any idea that they might have come from the Texas School
Book Depository Building?
Mr. HUDSON - Well, it sounded like it was high, you know, from above and kind of behind
like - in other words, to the left.
Mr. LIEBELER - And that would have fit in with the Texas School Book Depository, wouldn't it?
Mr. HUDSON - Yes.
Well, that's lower than the standard of proof you kooks expect for a SN gunman. And then you would say it was a fake photo.
There were shells found at the SN and a rifle on the same floor; some witnesses saw a "pipe", rifle and a man with a rifle at the SN window. We have nothing like that for the grassy knoll "gunman". Even you think the Weigman film "smoke" is from a BBQ.
So witness veracity depends on how they accommodate your bias.
Of the 216 witnesses who were interviewed by the FBI or the Warren Commission, 73 of them were Dallas Police Officers,
Dallas Deputy Sheriffs, Secret Service Agents and other government employees who traditionally tend to identify with
the government’s case. Thus, the tabulation of 216 witnesses (culled from the Warren Commission’s 26 Volumes and from
Commission Documents stored in the National Archives) does not constitute a random sample of the witnesses to the
assassination. Hence, it cannot be the basis for an accurate statistical analysis of witness accounts. What happens if
we separate out the 73 government employees from the 143 nongovernment employees?
143 Nongovernment Employees 73 Government Employees
Depository 22 Depository 26
Knoll 44 Knoll 8
http://www.history-matters.com/analysis/witness/Sort216Witness.htm
| Name | Comments | Direction or Vicinity | ||
| Jack Bell | Depository | |||
| Malcolm Couch | Saw rifle barrel | Depository | ||
| Tom Dillard | Depository | |||
| Robert Jackson | Saw rifle | Depository |
Many of the Government witnesses were riding in the motorcade, somewhat detached from crowd noise and large reflective surfaces, with some having lines-of-sight to the Depository. Let's compare with some of the non-Government witnesses in the motorcade:"appear to have honestly related their experiences" Equally or probably more often these things are not what they seem. This also can be said about the two clowns claim about seeing a rifle or rifle barrel.
Name Comments Direction or Vicinity Jack Bell Depository Malcolm Couch Saw rifle barrel Depository Tom Dillard Depository Robert Jackson Saw rifle Depository
So many "Government" witnesses and non-Government witnesses in the motorcade appear to have honestly related their experiences.