JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Dan O'meara on September 28, 2025, 04:56:19 AM
-
There are a number of forum members who have certain expertise when it comes to image analysis.
I am completely out of my comfort zone with that sort of thing, so I need a helping hand trying to understand how the image below was created.
(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
The identification of Lovelady in the above image has been described as "conclusive" and "definitive".
Even though the known testimonial evidence relating to this identification, when taken as a whole, completely refutes this identification (as I've been arguing on a different thread).
It has boiled down to so-called researchers simply ignoring the evidence because how can the "testimonial evidence affect what we can see with our own eyes?"
After all, just look at the level of detail in the shirt. It is clearly Lovelady's shirt because it is so distinctive and we can clearly see the pattern of it.
At some point in the debate on the other thread I posted this crop from the Gerda Dunkel footage:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wMQ2KzcZ/Shelley-Lovelady-Dunkelclose.png)
I was struck by the lack of detail on 'Lovelady's' shirt.
There didn't seem to be even the faintest trace of it.
I knew Kamp had used Photoshop to sharpen the images but when I tried it I got nothing.
So I had a look on the Prayer Man website where other forum members kept pointing me towards to see if I could get a better understanding. In the part about the image Kamp writes:
"For starters, take a look at the Gerda Dunckel gifs below and check Lovelady’s shirt in the very first few frames and also check out the large still I snagged from PBS Breaking The News, click to enlarge, yes that shirt is checkered, compare it to other garments of a lighter colour or the polka dot coat which do not smudge due to motion and quality loss. Then look at Shelly, with his black suit and his facial and hair features."
I've already posted the Dunkel image and there is no checkered image there so he must be referring to the PBS image posted on the website, from which I got this image (all I did was blow the image up and crop it from the original image):
(https://i.postimg.cc/KY2vK8GC/Lovelady-Kemp1.png)
Now, with all the best will in the world, I'm not seeing the checkered pattern that Kamp is insisting is there.
I can see four pieces of rectangular, what I would call, photographic 'noise' impinging on the right side of' Lovelady' as we look at him and there is a similar effect bleeding over between the two men. But no checkered pattern.
If any of our resident images can make a comment on my assessment of this I would be grateful.
So, we then come to the image that the amazing level of detail on Lovelady's shirt appears to be taken from. As Kamp explains:
This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives.
(https://i.postimg.cc/JzWQPSR5/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
And this is where my complete lack of expertise kicks in.
In the above image we can now clearly see that there is a defined pattern on Lovelady's shirt.
There is a square of a lighter shade around the two men. I don't know if it was like that when Kemp originally got the image or if this is a result of his work on the image. If it is I would really like to see the original image
But here's the thing I'm not getting. To my eye, the Sprague image (from which we get the "definitive" Lovelady) lacks an incredible amount of detail compared to this large crop PBS image:
(https://i.postimg.cc/zvzyySNN/Lovelady-Kemp3.png)
Note in PBS image, the pattern of the first floor 'windows',the concrete lattice in front of the windows, and then notice the complete lack of it in the Sprague image. Just compare the two images in general and we acn see that the PBS image is a far more detailed, yet the close-up of Lovelady in that image does not have any hint of the incredible shirt pattern in the inferior Sprague image.
Can anyone help me understand this?
LATER EDIT:
If anyone has, or can point me to, the Couch film that has the amazing level of detail please could you post it because every version I've come across so far is not anywhere near close the definition required
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
His name isn't Kemp.
It's Kamp.
Bart Kamp.
-- Tom
PS While you're at it, you should try to find out how Kamp created "Lovelady's" bald spot.
-
Personally, I do believe I see traces of white running across the PBS pictured shirt. Like a checkered pattern would have. Same goes for that woman wearing the jacket with the scarf in the bottom (R) of the same image. If she is actually wearing a checkered pattern coat of some sort, I think that verifies what I think I can see on the alleged Lovelady shirt. Does anyone definitely know what that woman on the bottom (R) was wearing?
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
His name isn't Kemp.
It's Kamp.
Bart Kamp.
-- Tom
PS While you're at it, you should try to find out how Kamp created "Lovelady's" bald spot.
My bad, lil' thomas. I'll get it changed.
Hopefully, when someone with a bit of expertise chips in I'll understand even the bald spot, as that doesn't appear on any other images along with the checkered pattern.
No bald spot, no checkered pattern.
These are such fine details I just can't get my head round how it was done.
-
Personally, I do believe I see traces of white running across the PBS pictured shirt. Like a checkered pattern would have. Same goes for that woman wearing the jacket with the scarf in the bottom (R) of the same image. If she is actually wearing a checkered pattern coat of some sort, I think that verifies what I think I can see on the alleged Lovelady shirt. Does anyone definitely know what that woman on the bottom (R) was wearing?
Not convinced I'm seeing the pattern in PBS, just 'noise'
Would be good to get the opinion of someone with a bit of expertise as I'm a bit over "it looks like that to me"
(https://i.postimg.cc/WbbVhpDM/Lovelady-PBSSprague.png)
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
-
I've tried as much as I can, blindly messing about with sharpening, contrast, etc., to bring out the pattern in the shirt but to no avail:
(https://i.postimg.cc/26KZdGvm/Lovelady-Royellextreme.png)
The more I look at it, the more mystified I am by the Sprague picture that Kamp used to create his 'Lovelady' image.
Compared to the image I cropped from the incredibly high quality Crouch footage that Royell steered me too, the Sprague image is totally inferior.
Yet, out of nowhere, there is this unbelievable amount of detail in the Sprague image - but only in Lovelady's shirt!
This level of detail is not to be seen anywhere in the larger image.
What am I missing?
-
Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep ...
CTers are so entertaining when they go completely off the deep end. If Michael would weigh in on this issue, my life would be complete. It almost makes me sorry to be trapped in this prison of rational thought.
The checkered pattern is also obvious on the PBS image, which Bart and his minions presumably didn't fake with the Photoshop Checkered Shirt program. To nail down the provenance of the questioned images once and for all, Bart himself explained that they are from an "R*KC scan of a Couch print" from the Richard E. Sprague Collection at the National Archives. Bart first posted them nearly ten years ago.
Bart, who does have a way with words, observed:
"I am going to put an end to this debate whether Lovelady and Shelly stayed on the steps ,,, to which certain people subscribe to for some obscure reason, there is just plenty to refute this rubbish assertion.
"Obscure," indeed, which is presumably why so many people, including me, are unable to fathom the point of Dan's endless thread on the "ramifications" of all this.
Next step in the evolution: There were two identical shirts, one on HARVEY and one on LEE. At least that I can understand.
-
The bald spot doesn't appear on any other images along with the checkered pattern.
No bald spot, no checkered pattern.
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Are you denying that real-deal Lovelady had a bald spot and was wearing a "checkered" / "plaid" shirt that day?
-- Tom
-
You put the possible shirt pattern aside, that shirt does drape the upper body on that photo just as it does with Lovelady. And those are Lovelady's slouching shoulders too. Just think of how we see Lovelady when he is sitting down inside Police HQ and Oswald is led past him. ALL of this points right at Lovelady. There is nothing visually ruling him out. Nothing.
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Are you denying that real-deal Lovelady had a bald spot and was wearing a "checkered" / "plaid" shirt that day?
-- Tom
Really? ::)
I'm pointing out the undeniable fact that the images I've posted of Lovelady (The PBS and Royell) have no checkered pattern and no bald patch. IN THESE IMAGES THERE IS NO CHECKERED PATTERN AND NO BALD PATCH.
The real Lovelady was obviously wearing a shirt with a checkered pattern and had a bald patch. These are the two things you've been using to identify Lovelady in the image Bart Kamp created.
But in the best available images independent of Kamp (and images of a far superior quality) THERE IS NO CHECKERED PATTERN AND NO BALD PATCH.
Do I need to draw you a diagram?
xxxx it...I'll draw you a diagram.
This is the image Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTD6GGhq/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage Royell pointed me to:
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPLNtZDq/Couch-Royell.png)
Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of Lovelady would come from the superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of Lovelady that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?
Surely even you can understand the point that is being made.
Try not to troll your way out of this for once.
Try and actually engage.
The composite below consist of the two 'Loveladys' taken directly from the images above.
The KAMP image, although of an inferior quality to the ROYELL image, shows a wealth of detail not present in the superior image.
How can this be?
(https://i.postimg.cc/jjc6Qc8h/KAMPr-OYELL.png)
-
You put the possible shirt pattern aside, that shirt does drape the upper body on that photo just as it does with Lovelady. And those are Lovelady's slouching shoulders too. Just think of how we see Lovelady when he is sitting down inside Police HQ and Oswald is led past him. ALL of this points right at Lovelady. There is nothing visually ruling him out. Nothing.
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
You misunderstand, Royell.
I'm not saying, and I have never said, that Lovelady can be ruled out by simply looking at the image above.
What I'm saying is that you cannot look at this image and make a positive identification of Lovelady from it.
The image is simply not good enough to make a positive ID of anyone.
Furthermore, this crop of 'Lovelady' comes from the best quality Couch image available and it does not show a checkered pattern or a bald spot.
The mystery is this - how could Kamp generate a more detailed image of Lovelady's shirt and bald spot from an inferior image? Particularly when the 'Lovelady' from the superior image has none of this fine detail.
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Perhaps it does come from the best quality Couch image available, but you did over-enlarge it a bit, didn't you.
Regardless, at least two blurry white stripes are visible in Lovelady's shirt in your version.
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Perhaps it does come from the best quality Couch image available, but you did over-enlarge it a bit, didn't you.
Regardless, at least two blurry white stripes are visible in Lovelady's shirt in your version.
-- Tom
:D :D
Did I over-enlarge it, lil' thomas?
Is it too big for you, Diddums?
Would you prefer a smaller one?
What an idiotic thing to post ::)
And I'm glad you agree that there's no checkered pattern or bald spot visible in the best quality Couch image.
Can you still identify Lovelady from the image, lil' thomas?
Now that there's no checkered pattern or bald spot?
Are you going to abandon the identification like you did with Ochus?
Good lad.
-
[...]
Dear Dan "I Was A Bad Boy So They Made Me Stood in the Corner" O'meara,
Do you think JFKA conspiracy theorist Bart Kamp (with an "a") painted that bald spot on Lovelady's head and those stripes on his shirt?
-- Tom
-
Dear Dan "I Was A Bad Boy So They Made Me Stood in the Corner" O'meara,
Do you think JFKA conspiracy theorist Bart Kamp (with an "a") painted that bald spot on Lovelady's head and those stripes on his shirt?
-- Tom
All I'm interested in is how Kamp managed to extract the extraordinary level of detail in his Lovelady image, considering there isn't the slightest hint of a bald spot or checkered pattern in far superior images.
Before you throw Bart under the bus, it would be good to get the opinion of someone more knowledgeable when it comes to image enhancement.
-
My only reservation is the Neck. If I was asked to describe Lovelady, I would lead off with his being somewhat on the "burly" side. This pictured guy has a skinny neck. And that skinny neck in relation to the pointed chin also does not remind me of Lovelady.
-
There isn't the slightest hint of a bald spot or checkered pattern in far-superior images of Lovelady.
Dear Dan "I Was A Bad Boy So They Made Me Stood In The Corner" O'meara,
When you say "far superior images" what "images" are you referring to?
Martin's and Hughes' film footages which show Lovelady as he's smoking on the TSBD steps about 30 minutes after the final shot?
The film footage showing him as he's sitting and watching the police bring Oswald past him a couple of hours after the final shot?
-- Tom
-
Dear Dan "I Was A Bad Boy So They Made Me Stood In The Corner" O'meara,
When you say "far superior images" what "images" are you referring to?
Martin's and Hughes' film footages which show Lovelady as he's smoking on the TSBD steps about 30 minutes after the final shot?
The film footage showing him as he's sitting and watching the police bring Oswald past him a couple of hours after the final shot?
-- Tom
What images am I referring to?
Are you joking?
I've got a feeling that you're not joking, which is quite disturbing.
Read REPLY#10
-
What images am I referring to?
Are you joking?
I've got a feeling that you're not joking, which is quite disturbing.
Read REPLY#10
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I totally understand your inability to articulate what you're "thinking."
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I totally understand your inability to articulate what you're "thinking."
-- Tom
Are you high?
-
My only reservation is the Neck. If I was asked to describe Lovelady, I would lead off with his being somewhat on the "burly" side. This pictured guy has a skinny neck. And that skinny neck in relation to the pointed chin also does not remind me of Lovelady.
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
It is not possible to make an identification of either man based solely on this image.
This is, by far, the highest quality image we have from the Couch footage and it reveals there is no checkered pattern on the shirt and no bald spot. These are the two factors people have been using to make the Lovelady identification and they are not present.
It appears Tommy the Troll's suggestion - that Kamp faked his Lovelady image - might have something to it.
So many people have been suckered in by that image even though it is humanly impossible for it to be Lovelady and Shelley walking along along the Elm St ext. in the time this image was taken, if you accept their WC testimonies. The only way Nutters like Mr Frodo and old man Payette can uphold this seriously flawed identification is by acknowledging that Shelley and Lovelady lied through their teeth during their WC testimonies.
Both of these Nutters have tied themselves up in knots trying to make it work and have come out looking like fools.
The old man has argued that Shelley and Lovelady met Gloria on the steps before they were pictured in Darnell AND HAS SIMULTANEOUSLY ARGUED that Shelley and Lovelady left the steps before Gloria got there!!
And Pinko has fabricated a scenario where Lovelady and Shelley immediately race from the steps and meet Gloria on the "little, old island".
Talk about prisoners of rational thought ::)
-
It appears that Kamp faked his Lovelady image.
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Gee, I wonder what kind of paintbrush Bart used to create that bald spot on "Lovelady's" head and those stripes in his shirt?
http://www.prayer-man.com/tsbd/billy-nolan-lovelady/
What's your best guess, danny BOY?
-- Tom
-
There also was the claim that Calvery ran up to DPD Officer Smith and told him about shots being fired through the bushes BEFORE veering over to then yammer at Lovelady and Shelley.
Getting back to Lovelady and Shelley going down the Elm St Ext, I do believe the Couch Film is more likely than not supplying evidence of this being Lovelady/Shelley. If I was on a jury, I wouldn't convict Lovelady and Shelley using this Couch Film to ID them. But I do find it difficult to believe that: (1) Immediately after the Kill Shot, (2) 2 random guys that just happen to resemble Lovelady and Shelley, (3) Decided to meander down the Elm St Ext. That's just too big a stretch for me to buy into.
-
I have asked Bart Kamp if he would care to comment on Dan's claim of fakery. If he would, I'll pass it along. When riffraff CTers like Dan start accusing CT luminaries like Bart of fakery, we have reached some sort of nadir of lunacy.
I did not get this from Bart, but I independently learned that the enhancement was done in 2011 by renowned photo researcher Gerda Dunckel, whom I'm guessing probably didn't fake it. I believe she may have started a thread here on the subject that can no longer be retrieved. I know nothing about Gerda, but 95% of the references to her use the term "renowned."
Since Dan is once again in the process of making a fool of himself, perhaps someone would like to call him "renowned" and make him feel better? You don't have to be nasty and say what he's renowned for. :D :D :D
(https://zodiackilleridentified.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/gerda-1-e1651059184941.jpg)
-
I have asked Bart Kamp if he would care to comment on Dan's claim of fakery. If he would, I'll pass it along. When riffraff CTers like Dan start accusing CT luminaries like Bart of fakery, we have reached some sort of nadir of lunacy.
I did not get this from Bart, but I independently learned that the enhancement was done in 2011 by renowned photo researcher Gerda Dunckel, whom I'm guessing probably didn't fake it. I believe she may have started a thread here on the subject that can no longer be retrieved. I know nothing about Gerda, but 95% of the references to her use the term "renowned."
Since Dan is once again in the process of making a fool of himself, perhaps someone would like to call him "renowned" and make him feel better? You don't have to be nasty and say what he's renowned for. :D :D :D
(https://zodiackilleridentified.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/gerda-1-e1651059184941.jpg)
Once again, you're talking utter nonsense.
The image you posted is NOT a Gerda Dunkel image.
You have been corrected on this issue THREE TIMES now.
According to Kamp - "Terry Martin visits the National Archives in Washington for me and finds a huge Couch film print in Richard E Sprague’s collection."
This is a copy of the Sprague print at the Prayer Man website:
(https://i.postimg.cc/JzWQPSR5/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at this image.
Look at how unbelievably poor it is.
It's washed out and lacks all fine detail - except for Lovelady's shirt!
In contrast, look at this far superior Couch image from "4 Days in November":
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
Compare it to the Sprague image.
Look at how more superior this image is. Look at how much more detail is in this image.
Yet there is no hint whatsoever of the checkered pattern in this image or the 'bald spot'.
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
I wish I knew more about image enhancement because I can't figure out how this far superior image shows none of the fine detail we see in the shirt in the inferior Sprague image.
How can this be?
How does that work?
Any idea's old-timer?
And, by the way, how are you getting along with your timeline?
-
I will let Bart answer if he chooses to do so. At least two sources credit the image to Gerda Dunckel. The image I posted here is NOT from the Prayer Man site, and the site where I did find it credits it to Dunckel. Indeed, it is not from Greg Parker's old site either, but that site credited Gerda and linked to an old thread here. Perhaps someone further enhanced an image Gerda had previously enhanced. I know that she was "renowned" for having identified Lovelady and Shelley in the Couch film. I really don't care. You are simply a CT blathering blowhard who must resort to claims of "fakery" - even by CTers far more respected than you can ever hope to be - in order to preserve your nutcase arguments. You have ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS to be accusing anyone of fakery. Claims of fakery are the last refuge of CT nutcases, as we see again and again.
From a 2012 thread at Greg Parker's old site: "Thanks to some superb film work by researcher Gerda Dunckel (Couch film/Lovelady and Shelley?), we now know that S & L left the front steps several seconds before Baker even arrived there. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,6724.24.html."
Even more: Bart then posted the images seen at the Prayer Man site on the same thread on Greg's forum in 2016, calling them (as at PM) an "R*KC scan." He said, "I applied various ways of sharpening to the inserts." Hence, the PM enhancements are by Bart. The issue of fakery was not raised because, presumably, Dan was not yet born in 2016 or at least his mommy wouldn't let him play with the laptop. ::)
Whatever.
-
I will let Bart answer if he chooses to do so. At least two sources credit the image to Gerda Dunckel. The image I posted here is NOT from the Prayer Man site, and the site where I did find it credits it to Dunckel. Indeed, it is not from Greg Parker's old site either, but that site credited Gerda and linked to an old thread here. Perhaps someone further enhanced an image Gerda had previously enhanced. I know that she was "renowned" for having identified Lovelady and Shelley in the Couch film. I really don't care. You are simply a CT blathering blowhard who must resort to claims of "fakery" - even by CTers far more respected than you can ever hope to be - in order to preserve your nutcase arguments. You have ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS to be accusing anyone of fakery. Claims of fakery are the last refuge of CT nutcases, as we see again and again.
From a 2012 thread at Greg Parker's old site: "Thanks to some superb film work by researcher Gerda Dunckel (Couch film/Lovelady and Shelley?), we now know that S & L left the front steps several seconds before Baker even arrived there. http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,6724.24.html."
Even more: Bart then posted the images seen at the Prayer Man site on the same thread on Greg's forum in 2016, calling them (as at PM) an "R*KC scan." He said, "I applied various ways of sharpening to the inserts." Hence, the PM enhancements are by Bart. The issue of fakery was not raised because, presumably, Dan was not yet born in 2016 or at least his mommy wouldn't let him play with the laptop. ::)
Whatever.
You're just a dithering old fool who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Firstly, I haven't accused anyone of faking anything. You are to stop peddling this lie IMMEDIATELY.
Secondly, for the FOURTH time - the image Kamp 'sharpened' to create the image of 'Lovelady' (that you beleive is "conclusive") comes from the Sprague print. It does not come from Gerda, R*KC scans or anywhere else.
The image Kamp used does not come from any extant version of the Couch footage I can find or any scan of it.
It is a single print that I would very much like to see the original of.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about, as you've ably demonstrated time and time again.
Cite where you got the image from you claim is from Gerda Dunkel.
And don't forget about the timeline you're supposed to be working on. Do you think you're just going to slither out of that?
It's time you started backing your claims up.
Explain to the forum how Shelley and Lovelady could be filmed by Couch walking along the extension 25 seconds after the assassination.
Remember, you've already accepted that Shelley and Lovelady were on the front steps when Gloria ran up to them.
-
I quote Bart:
"The bald patch is a total giveaway.
I used 4 different sharpening techniques in photoshop."
Whatever, carry on.
(It is kind of a total giveaway.)
-
BUMP - In anticipation of ............................... STAY TUNED .............................................
Dear Comrade Storing,
The waiting is killing me!
Hopefully you'll receive the "peer review" of your tinfoil-hat JFKA CT from Vladimir Putin any minute now!
-- Tom
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
This is a Couch Film snippet showing a car parked alongside the Island on the corner of the Elm St Ext. This car is NOT visible on the Wiegman Film footage of this exact same area. Wiegman filmed this area roughly 30 seconds BEFORE Couch did. I believe this same car was moving down the Elm St Ext when Wiegman filmed this area. Roughly 30 seconds later when this Couch still frame was shot, that car had finished traveling down the Elm St Ext and parked on the corner. (Even though this was a well posted, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone). I believe that the plan was to immediately make a (R) hand turn onto Elm St as soon as the JFK Motorcade was no longer blocking this cars' pathway to do so. Prior to the JFK Motorcade getting out of way of this car, DPD Officer Smith ran by this car in order to check the bushes that ran down the Elm St Ext, and DPD Motorcycle Officer Baker turned his motorcycle onto Elm St, (directly in front of this car), parked his motorcycle at the curb, and then on foot ran directly in front of this car as he headed for the TSBD. This spooked the 2 Guys inside the car, and they exited the car.
The 2 Guys we see above are the 2 Guys that were seconds earlier inside the car. They have exited the car and are moving down the Elm St Ext. They are distancing themselves from the car as they see DPD Law Enforcement beginning to cluster around the TSBD. I do Not believe these 2 Guys are Lovelady & Shelley. The shorter man is alleged to be Lovelady. Lovelady was a burly/husky man. Lovelady had almost No Neck. The shorter man on this Couch Film snippet has a long, skinny neck. A "pencil neck". This shorter man is NOT Lovelady.
I believe these 2 Guys are distancing themselves from the car due to a recently fired rifle being inside the trunk. That rifle was fired through the bushes that extend down the Elm St Ext. These are the same bushes that we see DPD Officer Smith checking on the Couch/Darnell films. Why else would this car be traveling down the Elm St Ext while the JFK Limo was still on Elm St? Why else would we see this car 15-20 minutes later still parked at the corner? (Hughes film snippet showing the front steps of the TSBD). The 2 Guys above are a shooter and a spotter and that was their getaway car that they were forced to abandon.
-
This is a Couch film snippet showing a car parked alongside the Island on the corner of the Elm Street Extension. This car is not visible in the Wiegman film footage of this exact same area.
Dear Comrade Storing,
You do realize, don't you, that Robert Hughes filmed the TSBD entrance from the left side of the pole?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
You do realize, don't you, that Robert Hughes filmed the TSBD entrance from the left side of the pole?
-- Tom
I believe a lot of your erroneous conclusions are due to your basing them on inferior JFK Assassination images. There are very good images out there, but they are scant. You gotta do some serious research to unearth them. This includes DVD's like the Nat Geo piece that blew up Hackerott. Don't dance around, spell out whatever you really mean and maybe I can help you.
-
I believe a lot of your erroneous conclusions are due to your basing them on inferior JFK Assassination images. There are very good images out there, but they are scant. You gotta do some serious research to unearth them. This includes DVD's like the Nat Geo piece that blew up Hackerott. Don't dance around, spell out whatever you really mean and maybe I can help you.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Did James tell you he's "throwing in the towel"?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
You do realize, don't you, that Robert Hughes filmed the TSBD entrance from the left side of the pole?
-- Tom
What are you trying to avoid saying? You're never gonna learn anything if you are afraid of going on the record.
-
What are you trying to avoid saying? You're never gonna learn anything if you are afraid of going on the record.
Dear Comrade Storing,
What are you trying to say?
-- Tom
-
Stop with the "Who's On First?" stuff. I got Hackerott outta mothballs, so I'll exchange serious image observations with him. You wanna play games, you play alone.
-
[...]
Dear Comrade Storing,
It's a pity that the evil, evil MYSTO CAR is probably parked alongside the "island" and therefore hidden behind the gaggle of onlookers in the Weitzman clip (which James Hackerott so expertly pointed out with his Couch-Darnell / Weigman overlays), because if it is, it's just another anomaly in the anomaly-ridden JFKA which "useful idiot" sleuths like you have taken advantage of over the years to create tinfoil-hat anti-CIA, anti-FBI, anti-[fill in the blank] conspiracy theories.
Carry on, Comrade Storing!
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
It's a pity that the evil, evil MYSTO CAR is probably parked alongside the "island" and therefore hidden behind the gaggle of onlookers in the Weitzman clip (which James Hackerott so expertly pointed out with his Couch-Darnell / Weigman overlays), because if it is, it's just another anomaly in the anomaly-ridden JFKA which "useful idiot" sleuths like you have taken advantage of over the years to create tinfoil-hat anti-CIA, anti-FBI, anti-[fill in the blank] conspiracy theories.
Carry on, Comrade Storing!
-- Tom
Wow! It is the images on the "WIEGMAN" fIlm that Hackerott and I are discussing. Not "Weitzman" as you claim above.
At least now you are saying, "...car is PROBABLY parked alongside the island...". This is progress with respect to your evolving image analysis abilities.
The Hackerott "overlay" you mention did Not use the absolute best Wiegman still frame in the visual aid he put together. I believe this reveals much concerning the detail of the Wiegman Film copy that he currently is examining/using. "Unsolved History JFK, Death in Dealey Plaza" DVD is available on Ebay. I highly recommend it primarily for the JFK Assassination Films and still frames this Discovery Channel presentation includes. Wiegman also tells his 11/22/63 story on this presentation.
It is not easy for many JFK Assassination Researchers to accept that a "getaway" car has been on the Couch/Darnell Films for 61+ years. I am hoping that someone with the technical expertise will try to retrieve whatever is on the front license plate of this "getaway" car. There is at least 1 good Darnell still frame showing the entire front license plate on this car. There is a different color extending across the middle of the plate from L-R. Knowing the plate # might open some doors as to who was involved. As I mentioned earlier, this "getaway" car was parked/abandoned for an extended period of time in a, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone. Maybe that car was issued a DPD ticket containing the License Plate Number?
-
Wow! It is the images on the "WIEGMAN" fIlm that Hackerott and I are discussing. Not "Weitzman" as you claim above.
At least now you are saying, "...car is PROBABLY parked alongside the island...". This is progress with respect to your evolving image analysis abilities.
The Hackerott "overlay" you mention did Not use the absolute best Wiegman still frame in the visual aid he put together. I believe this reveals much concerning the detail of the Wiegman Film copy that he currently is examining/using. "Unsolved History JFK, Death in Dealey Plaza" DVD is available on Ebay. I highly recommend it primarily for the JFK Assassination Films and still frames this Discovery Channel presentation includes. Wiegman also tells his 11/22/63 story on this presentation.
It is not easy for many JFK Assassination Researchers to accept that a "getaway" car has been on the Couch/Darnell Films for 61+ years. I am hoping that someone with the technical expertise will try to retrieve whatever is on the front license plate of this "getaway" car. There is at least 1 good Darnell still frame showing the entire front license plate on this car. There is a different color extending across the middle of the plate from L-R. Knowing the plate # might open some doors as to who was involved. As I mentioned earlier, this "getaway" car was parked/abandoned for an extended period of time in a, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone. Maybe that car was issued a DPD ticket containing the License Plate Number?
Wowie zowie!!!
Nice catch, Comrade Storing!!!
By the way . . .
Among the women who are standing near the tip of the "island" in Weitzman I mean Wiegman, there's one who's wearing a dark-colored blouse or sweater and a light colored skirt (she's also visible in Couch-Darnell but she's turned to her right to look down towards the triple underpass), and to her immediate left in Weitzman I mean Wiegman there's a woman who's wearing all dark-colored clothes and is leaning forward (they both have their arms crossed).
If you'll look at the area between their lower legs in Weitzman I mean Wiegman at the 01:17 mark, I MIGHT BE WRONG -- but think you can see the tire and the hubcap of the evil, evil MYSTO GETAWAY CAR, which lines up perfectly with where the EVIL, EVIL MYSTO GETAWAY Car's right-front tire would be -- as indicated in James' masterfully aligned overlay of the pertinent Couch-Darnell frame and the Weitzman I mean Wiegman frame.
https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=4acfbdfe9e621853&sxsrf=AE3TifPQscII5B33689WN5ASLy4V67ymfw:1761253738909&udm=7&fbs=AIIjpHxU7SXXniUZfeShr2fp4giZ1Y6MJ25_tmWITc7uy4KIeoJTKjrFjVxydQWqI2NcOhYPURIv2wPgv_w_sE_0Sc6QogS5TvEDp7UpbJYBVowPixqwW1m3RxusXeC54mlaBukI-u11T8A4p_RoeB8Zd5XkUrSSuQd1RmntXpoeT5OCau1r5sZxcabp8_wMX507cRuTxRAAlmoUaYXhQYLDPQWL9DB5tQ&q=%22wiegman+film%22+jfk&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjYgd67nbuQAxUDiO4BHbLSG9QQtKgLegQIFxAB&biw=1592&bih=744&dpr=1#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:63d72787,vid:u3xR0WBPo8I,st:0
-
The women you are referencing are standing on the Wrong Side of the Traffic Light Pole. The "getaway" car was parked with its' front bumper roughly even with the Traffic Light Pole. The car stretched BACK toward the railroad yard. If you are basing your claims on the above posted copy of the Wiegman Film, you need to shop around for a higher definition copy. This might explain your observational issues.
-
The women you are referencing are standing on the Wrong Side of the Traffic Light Pole. The "getaway" car was parked with its' front bumper roughly even with the Traffic Light Pole. The car stretched BACK toward the railroad yard. If you are basing your claims on the above posted copy of the Wiegman Film, you need to shop around for a higher definition copy. This might explain your observational issues.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Are you saying that the car Officer Baker is running in front of in the Couch clip isn't your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR?
If not, where, then, is your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR parked in the Couch clip?
Next to the "island," but behind the car Officer Baker is running in front of?
Next to the "island," but in front of the car that Officer Baker is running in front of?
Where-oh-where is your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR in the Couch clip, Comrade Storing?
-- Tom
-
All you have to do is examine the opening 40 seconds of the Darnell Film that the Sixth Floor Museum posted on You Tube. It's rumored to be a 1st generation copy. The car is very easy to see on this copy of the Darnell Film. The fact you are asking me for the location of the car tells me you have Failed to do your research.
-
All you have to do is examine the opening 40 seconds of the Darnell Film that the Sixth Floor Museum posted on You Tube. It's rumored to be a 1st generation copy. The car is very easy to see on this copy of the Darnell Film.
So, the car that Officer Baker's running in front of in the Couch clip IS your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR.
Good!
Thanks for answering my question!
. . . . . . . .
EDIT: Oops, it looks as though I was wrong about the tire and hubcap on Storing's MYSTO "AVBANDONED" GETAWAY CAR in the Wiegman clip. I thought those two women I referred to were standing on the "island," but now I realize they were standing in the street near it, so the camera's perspective of the area visible between their lower legs isn't high enough to show a tire on a car parked next to the "island," much less its hubcap.
-
So, the car that Officer Baker's running in front of in the Couch clip IS your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR.
Good!
Thanks for answering my question!
. . . . . . . .
EDIT: Oops, it looks as though I was wrong about the tire and hubcap on Storing's MYSTO "AVBANDONED" GETAWAY CAR in the Wiegman clip. I thought those two women I referred to were standing on the "island," but now I realize they were standing in the street near it, so the camera's perspective of the area visible between their lower legs isn't high enough to show a tire on a car parked next to the "island," much less its hubcap.
Thanks for the admission above. All I ask is that you view: (1) A GOOD copy of the Wiegman Film showing the Island, and (2) The Darnell Film posted on You Tube by the Sixth Floor Museum. The Wiegman Film does NOT show the parked CAR we see Officer Baker running past on the Darnell Film. The Wiegman Filming of the Island was done about 25 seconds before the Darnell Film shows the same Island, the parked CAR, Officer Baker running past the car.
-
Thanks for the admission above. All I ask is that you view: (1) A GOOD copy of the Wiegman Film showing the Island, and (2) The Darnell Film posted on You Tube by the Sixth Floor Museum. The Wiegman Film does NOT show the parked CAR we see Officer Baker running past on the Darnell Film. The Wiegman Filming of the Island was done about 25 seconds before the Darnell Film shows the same Island, the parked CAR, Officer Baker running past the car.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR is probably hidden behind that gaggle of women in the Wiegman clip.
-- Tom
-
"Probably"? We see NO CAR parked alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film. The Wiegman Film does show the spectators standing atop the Island. We can see between these spectators, yet we see NO CAR parked alongside the Island behind them. We can even see the street surface behind these spectators. But, we see NO CAR. It's not there yet.
-
We can even see the street surface behind these spectators. But we see no car.
Dear Comrade Storing,
When you overlay the frame from Couch-Darnell which best shows the car with its analog from Wiegman (as James has done), can you see the surface of the street between the ladies who are standing in the street near the tip of the "island"?
If not, isn't it possible that they're blocking your view of what you think in Couch-Darnell is The Abandoned Getaway Car?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
When you overlay the frame from Couch which best shows the car with its analog from Wiegman (as James has done), can you see the surface of the street between the ladies who are standing in the street near the tip of the "island"?
If not, isn't it possible that they're blocking your view of what you think in Darnell is The Abandoned Getaway Car?
-- Tom
I continue urging you to use the Traffic Light Pole as a landmark. The Front Bumper of the car is is close to even with that Traffic Light Pole. The Traffic Light Pole is standing atop the Island. The ladies you are referencing are STANDING ON THE STREET to the viewer's (R) of that Traffic Light Pole. The car would not be behind these ladies, "standing in the street near the tip of the Island". The TIP of the Island is to the (R) of the Traffic Light Pole.
-
I continue urging you to use the Traffic Light Pole as a landmark. The Front Bumper of the car is is close to even with that Traffic Light Pole. The Traffic Light Pole is standing atop the Island. The ladies you are referencing are STANDING ON THE STREET to the viewer's (R) of that Traffic Light Pole. The car would not be behind these ladies, "standing in the street near the tip of the Island". The TIP of the Island is to the (R) of the Traffic Light Pole.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Look at your beloved Traffic Light Pole and the "No Parking Pole" to the right of it in James' nicely aligned overlay montage and ask yourself if they seem to be the same distance apart in both the Couch-Darnell frame and in the Wiegman frame.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?topic=4597.40
Answer: Yes, they do. Close enough for government work, anyway. (Pardon the pun.)
Now, look at your MYSTO "ABANDONDED" GETAWAY CAR in the Couch-Darnell part of James' nicely aligned overlay montage and figure out where it should be in the Wiegman part of James' nicely aligned overlay montage in relation to the "No Parking Pole" IF IT (YOUR MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR) WERE ALREADY THERE.
Wanna know why you can't see it in the Wiegman portion of James' nicely aligned overlay montage?
BECAUSE IT'S HIDDEN BY ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE STANDING EITHER IN THE STREET NEAR THE ISLAND OR ON THE ISLAND.
D'OH!
-- Tom
-
The car should be visible stretching behind the Fedora Man on the Wiegman Film. The Fedora Man is standing to the viewer's (L) of the Signal Light Pole. You want the car to be positioned on the tip of the Island. It was not parked there. The Darnell Film shows Officer Baker running across/over the Island. The Traffic Light Pole and the FRONT BUMPER of the car are on his LEFT. Both the Traffic Light Pole and the Car are not on the tip of the Island. All you need to do is view a good copy of the Wiegman Film and the Darnell Film posted on You Tube by the Sixth Floor Museum. This is reality on 11/22/63. Stop screwing around with homemade over lays and lego car visual aids.
-
Both the traffic light pole and the car are not on the tip of the Island.
Dear Comrade Storing,
I've rewritten your "sentence" because your writing sucks so hard.
Here it is:
"Neither the traffic light pole nor the car are on the tip of the 'island.'"
Regardless, I've never claimed that your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR in Couch-Darnell is parked ON the tip of the "island."
LOL!
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
I've rewritten your "sentence" because your writing sucks so hard.
Here it is:
"Neither the traffic light pole nor the car are on the tip of the 'island.'"
Regardless, I've never claimed that your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR in Couch-Darnell is parked ON the tip of the "island."
LOL!
-- Tom
You would be better off doing your own research vs swearing by something that was "created" out of thin air. If you look closely at that overlay, it extends BEYOND the tip of the Island. That is Not where the car was parked. You basically have bought into a woman being sawed in half. An illusion. The Wiegman and Couch/Darnell Films are the Real Deal. Buy into what you see on them.
-
You would be better off doing your own research vs swearing by something that was "created" out of thin air. If you look closely at that overlay, it extends beyond the tip of the Island. That is not where the car was parked. You basically have bought into a woman being sawed in half. An illusion. The Wiegman and Couch/Darnell Films are the Real Deal. Buy into what you see on them.
Dear Comrade Storing,
I have no idea which woman you're talking about.
Regardless, do you believe that the montage that James created by overlaying the Couch-Darnell frame that best shows the front part of the MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR with a frame from Wiegman that puts all of the non-human elements (e.g., the "Freeway Signs Pole," the "Signal Light Pole," and the HUGE GATES, etc., etc.) in the same place as they are in the corresponding Couch-Darnell frame was improperly done, or that said montage can't be used to figure out where your MYSTO "ABANDONDED" GETAWAY CAR might be "hiding" behind the throng of people in Wiegman?
Scroll down to look at James' montage for the first time. (LOL)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
I have no idea which woman you're talking about.
Regardless, do you believe that the montage that James created by overlaying the Couch-Darnell frame that best shows the front part of the MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR with a frame from Wiegman that puts all of the non-human elements (e.g., the "Freeway Signs Pole," the "Signal Light Pole," and the HUGE GATES, etc., etc.) in the same place as they are in the corresponding Couch-Darnell frame was improperly done, or that said montage can't be used to figure out where your MYSTO "ABANDONDED" GETAWAY CAR might be "hiding" behind the throng of people in Wiegman?
Scroll down to look at James' montage for the first time. (LOL)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
Please explain the pointed object laying across the Island on the Wiegman still frame. You gotta problem here. A Big, Big Problem on a Wiegman still frame you are swearing by. I am waiting for your explanation.
-
Please explain the pointed object laying across the Island on the Wiegman still frame. You gotta problem here. A Big, Big Problem on a Wiegman still frame you are swearing by. I am waiting for your explanation.
Oh, you mean the fin of the car that was in front of Wiegman's car as it appeared in the cropped-and-pasted, ten-frames-earlier frame that James pasted into the main frame to give us an expanded view of the scene?
What about it?
In order to show us a wider "landscape" view of the scene, James melded the frame from approx. 01:16 to the frame from approx. 01:28 in the "JFK - Wiegman Film Enhanced One Frame Per Second Part One" clip that's available to view on the Internet.
There are ten frames in that interval. (Count the "jumps.")
Question:
How many frames per second did Wiegman's camera shoot?
Answer:
I don't know.
Do you?
Does it really matter?
Note how the shoulder of the woman standing "next to" Fedora Man is correctly spliced together from the two frames, as is the pole that they're standing "next to"?
What's your problem, Comrade Storing?
Scroll down to James' fine overlay montage and take your second look at it.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-
Oh, you mean a previous-frame "ghost image" of the fin of the car that was in front of Wiegman's car?
What about it?
In order to show us a wider "landscape" view of the scene, James melded the frame from approx. 01:16 to the frame from approx. 01:28 in the "JFK - Wiegman Film Enhanced One Frame Per Second Part One" clip that's available to view on the Internet.
There are ten frames in that interval.
Question:
How many frames per second did Wiegman's camera shoot?
Answer:
I don't know.
Do you?
Does it really matter?
Note how the shoulder of the man standing next to "Fedora Man" is correctly spliced together from the two frames, as is the pole that they're standing "next to"?
What's your problem, Comrade Storing?
Scroll down to James' fine overlay montage:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
How can you claim anything based on a still frame that you NOW admit includes at least 1 "Ghost Image"? In addition to that, you admit that same still frame has also been subjected to "splicing". That Wiegman still frame has flat out been Sliced-And-Diced. This is why I encourage you to stick with the Film(s) and still frame(s) "as is". I'm not even going to go into the "Lego Car" stuff. That is comical.
-
How can you claim anything based on a still frame that you NOW admit includes at least 1 "Ghost Image"? In addition to that, you admit that same still frame has also been subjected to "splicing". That Wiegman still frame has flat out been Sliced-And-Diced. This is why I encourage you to stick with the Film(s) and still frame(s) "as is". I'm not even going to go into the "Lego Car" stuff. That is comical.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Read it again and you'll realize that I deleted the phrase "ghost image" before you posted.
Why?
Because the fin isn't really a ghost image but an integral part of a frame that was taken about half-a-second earlier than the main frame and which was cropped by James and melded by him to said larger, half-a-second-later frame in order to give us an expanded view of the scene, and specifically of the area where your MYSTO ABANDONED GETAWAY CAR is probably hidden by the gaggle of people who are standing either on the "island" or in the street near it.
Do you have a problem with that?
Do you think that gaggle of people reassembled itself during that half-second?
Even if it did, what would it matter?
If anything, they HELPED you by hiding your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR so you can jump up and down and yell, Look! The MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR hasn't gotten there quite yet!!!"
LOL!
-- Tom
-
Your admitted "deletion" of admitting to a "ghost image", is right in line with your deletion of "you lost me" with respect to Hackerott's shadow work. As Joe Louis used to say, "You can run, but you can't hide". You are running now. You're lack of knowledge will continue to expose you over and over. Just do the research. You will not have to "hide your tracks" with these repeated deletions if you do the work and arm yourself with Knowledge.
-
Your admitted "deletion" of admitting to a "ghost image", is right in line with your deletion of "you lost me" with respect to Hackerott's shadow work. As Joe Louis used to say, "You can run, but you can't hide". You are running now. You're lack of knowledge will continue to expose you over and over. Just do the research. You will not have to "hide your tracks" with these repeated deletions if you do the work and arm yourself with Knowledge.
Dear Comrade Storing,
I hadn't thought it all the way through and I misspoke.
Now deal with it.
If that gaggle of people somehow reassembled itself during that half-second, then for reasons I explained in my previous post, you and the entire tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist alternate-world universe should be very grateful that it did.
Because as it stands right now, it looks as though you and The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") will be sharing the next Nobel Prize for your respective out-of-this-world accomplishments.
COMRADE ROYELL STORING AND HIS KGB-APPOINTED PEER REVIEWERS HAVE SOLVED THE JFK ASSASSINATION!!!!!!
(sarcasm)
-- Tom
-
Sure, people make mistakes. But they do Not try to sweep them under the rug/Delete Them. This is what you are repeatedly doing and it reflects poorly on every claim you make.
-
Sure, people make mistakes. But they do Not try to sweep them under the rug/Delete Them. This is what you are repeatedly doing and it reflects poorly on every claim you make.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Did I sweep my misstatement "under the rug," or did I correct it with a thorough explanation in my next post?
It seems as though you're the one who's stirring up dust clouds because you can't deal with said explanation.
Bottom line: Why do you distrust James' overlay montage?
Do you think it was deviously manipulated by him to make it only seem as though there were about ten motorcade watchers standing on a certain part of the "island" and near it in those two half-second-apart Wiegman frames so that people like me could say, "Storing's MYSTO 'ABANDONED' GETAWAY CAR is probably out of view behind them"?
Stop weeping sweeping and answer the question, Comrade Storing.
-- Tom
-
I did an arduous review over the weekend. There is no question. What I believe is a "getaway" car is not parked alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film.
-
I did an arduous review over the weekend. There is no question. What I believe is a "getaway" car is not parked alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Do you think James Hackerott improperly spliced-together the two half-second-apart Wiegman frames and/or improperly aligned the finished product with the infamous Couch-Darnell frame (which shows the front part of the car that Officer Baker ran in front of) in his overlay montage?
If so, why then does the woman standing to the right of "Fedora Man" in the Wiegman frames have a whole body, why is the pole to the right of her a straight vertical line (and why is it the exact same distance, photographically speaking, from the right side of the HUGE GATES' dark entrance), and why do the architectural features of the TSBD so closely align in the two frames?
If not, why can't you realize that the densely packed group of people mostly to the right of that woman (but also including her and "Fedora Man" and maybe someone else to the left of her) is probably hiding your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR from Wiegman's camera's view?
Have you even looked at the overlay montage by James Hackerott, yet?
Here it is.
Just scroll down to it.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
Hint: Use your computer's mouse to place the digital "arrow" on the car that Officer Baker's running in front of in Couch-Darnell and leave it there as James' overlay montage morphs from the Couch-Darnell into the corresponding Wiegman frame that James incorporated in it just for you.
Look! The digital "arrow" is now exactly where the right terminus of that "gaggle" is!
In other words, that "gaggle of people" is perfectly situated to obscure the MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR from Wiegman's camera's view!!!
And . . . gasp . . . the "gaggle" has so many people in it that it extends far enough to the left to hide the whole enchilada!!!
-- Tom
-
You know that gaggle does not extend 18 feet to the (L) of the Signal Light Pole. 18' Left and close to 5' high? Suppose I claimed there was a shooter firing from inside a car that was obscured by that gaggle? That would get laughed off this Forum. Your 18' X 5' disappearing space act is Cinque worthy. Prove me wrong or just say "Uncle" if this is all you got.
-
You know that gaggle does not extend 18 feet to the (L) of the Signal Light Pole. 18' Left and close to 5' high? Suppose I claimed there was a shooter firing from inside a car that was obscured by that gaggle? That would get laughed off this Forum. Your 18' X 5' disappearing space act is Cinque worthy. Prove me wrong or just say "Uncle" if this is all you got.
Dear Comrade Storing,
What are you basing your estimation of the length of the car on?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
What are you basing your estimation of the length of the car on?
-- Tom
I asked you to "prove me wrong" and you instead go Perry Mason. This shows you have No Evidence. Just say "Uncle" and I'll lay it out for you. Until then, YOU need to prove me wrong. This is why I continue to ask you to put in the time and familiarize yourself with the pertinent assassination films and the Elm St Ext in general. You currently are badly lacking in these areas. Your currently claiming there is a complete "Black Out" area that is 17' X 5' is a laughable. Prove me wrong.
-
I asked you to "prove me wrong" and you instead go Perry Mason. This shows you have no evidence. Just say "Uncle" and I'll lay it out for you. Until then, you need to prove me wrong. Your current claim that there is a complete "Black Out" area that is 17' X 5' is laughable.
Dear Comrade Storing,
From left ("Fedora Man" on the island) to right (Woman-All-In-Black on the street -- to the right of whom might be a part of the car), there are about ten people in that "gaggle."
The people who comprise it are more than five feet tall, and each of them is about two-feet wide.
Ten times two equals twenty.
-- Tom
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
From left ("Fedora Man" on the island) to right (Woman-All-In-Black on the street), there are about ten people in that "gaggle."
The people who comprise it are more than five feet tall, and each of them is about two-feet wide.
Ten times two equals twenty.
-- Tom
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
"About" 10 people? Laughable. The gaggle is Not standing shoulder to shoulder across the Island. They are Not all on the correct (L) side of the Signal Light Pole. I don't wanna be insulting, but your wasting my time with this babble. This is where you are at. Prove me wrong.
-
The gaggle isn't standing shoulder-to-shoulder across the Island.
I didn't say that it was.
Part of "the gaggle" is standing on the "island," and the other part of "the gaggle" is standing in the curved line of spectators that stretches from the sidewalk in front of the TSBD to the "island."
They aren't all on the correct (L) side of the Signal Light Pole.
What in the world do you mean by "the correct side"?
In the Couch-Darnell part of James' overlay montage, the front of the car is on the right side of the "Signal Light Pole," from the perspective of Couch and Darnell.
You CAN see, can't you, that the right edge of the shoulder-to-shoulder "gaggle" starts at that exact spot, and that the nine or ten person "gaggle" extends all the way to "Fedora Man" up on the "island"?
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
-
You continue placing the car in the Wrong place alongside the Island. The car's front bumper is a little bit BEHIND THE SIGNAL LIGHT POLE. The car stretches BACK from that point 17.5 feet toward the railroad yard. This "getaway" car can be seen in the same position alongside the Island on: (1) Darnell Film, (2) Couch Film, (3) Hughes Film, and (4) Martin Film. Same car, same location. You need to closely examine these films in order to understand the position of the car and why it does NOT appear on the Wiegman Film. That car is simply Not There yet. The Sixth Floor Museum's recently released 1st Generation Copy of the Darnell Film is extremely helpful. Relative to each other, the viewer can see the position of the Signal Light Pole vs The Car vs Officer Baker, vs the curving edge of the Island.
-
You continue placing the car in the Wrong place alongside the Island. The car's front bumper is a little bit BEHIND THE SIGNAL LIGHT POLE. The car stretches BACK from that point 17.5 feet toward the railroad yard. This "getaway" car can be seen in the same position alongside the Island on: (1) Darnell Film, (2) Couch Film, (3) Hughes Film, and (4) Martin Film. Same car, same location. You need to closely examine these films in order to understand the position of the car and why it does NOT appear on the Wiegman Film. That car is simply Not There yet. The Sixth Floor Museum's recently released 1st Generation Copy of the Darnell Film is extremely helpful. Relative to each other, the viewer can see the position of the Signal Light Pole vs The Car vs Officer Baker, vs the curving edge of the Island.
Dear Comrade Storing,
I "get it" that your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR was parked a little bit behind the "Signal Light Pole" / "No Parking Pole" in Hughes and Martin clips. I'm just saying that from the perspective of the Couch-Darnell and Wiegman films, the front of the very same car is visible to us to the right of the "Signal Light Pole" / "No Parking Pole," and that the reason we can't see it in the latter is because the gaggle of spectators is hiding it from view.
(If it's the same car that's in the National Geographic video, it's a 1958 Pontiac)
Question: Do you think the way James spliced together two half-second-apart Wiegman frames in his Couch-Darnell / Wiegman overlap montage was devious or misleading?
Ya gotta scroll down to it:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
-
You seem to believe that Wiegman ONLY filmed the Fedora Man from 1 Single Angle. WRONG! This is why I continue urging you to study the assassination films. You are operating from a position of ignorance until you familiarize yourself with the Wiegman Film along with the other films. For starters, I believe you have to be looking at a substandard copy of the Wiegman Film. The overwhelming majority of the Wiegman Film copies in circulation are horrid. And the still frame used by Hackrotte in the overlay is not the best Wiegman still frame of Fedora Man and the backdrop behind him.
All someone has to do to disprove my discovery is post an image of that car being in that position alongside the Island BEFORE the JFK Limo entered Dealey Plaza. That image does Not exist. If that car had been parked in that "No Parking At Any Time" zone before the JFK Motorcade entered Dealey Plaza, DPD would have had it towed outta there immediately. I continue to issue the blanket challenge, "Prove Me Wrong". The Elm St Ext was an overlooked assassination hotbed on 11/22/63. You had: (1) Shot(s) from the bushes, (2) "Wide Open" Huge Gates, and (3) "Getaway" Car rolling down the Elm St Ext while the JFK Limo was still on Elm St.
-
The still frame used by Hackrotte (sic) in the overlay is not the best Wiegman still frame of Fedora Man and the backdrop behind him.
Dear Comrade Storing,
James Hackerott spliced together two frames from Wiegman (that were taken about half-a-second apart) in order to make the montage sufficiently wide as to show both "Fedora Man" on the left and the area to the right where the front of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR would be visible if it wasn't hidden by the gaggle of people.
Regardless, you haven't answered my question:
Do you think James' splicing together those two Wiegman frames and his juxtaposing the finished product with the Couch-Darnell frame in his overlay montage was disingenuous or misleading?
Hint: Ya gotta scroll down to it:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
PS You forgot to mention the fake policeman with only one glove.
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
James Hackerott spliced together two frames from Wiegman (that were taken about half-a-second apart) in order to make the montage sufficiently wide as to show both "Fedora Man" on the left and the area to the right where the front of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR would be visible if it wasn't hidden by the gaggle of people.
Regardless, you haven't answered my question:
Do you think James' splicing together those two Wiegman frames and his juxtaposing the finished product with the Couch-Darnell frame in his overlay montage was disingenuous or misleading?
Hint: Ya gotta scroll down to it:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
PS You forgot to mention the fake policeman with only one glove.
You and Hockerott are focusing on the (R) of Fedora Man. The car stretches BACK to Fedora Man's (L). Roughly 17.5 FEET to the (L) of Fedora Man. The overlay does NOT show us 17.5 feet to the (L) of Fedora Man. We have already covered this.
-
You and Hockerott (sic) are focusing on the area to the right of Fedora Man. The car stretches back to Fedora Man's (L). Roughly 17.5 FEET to the left of Fedora Man.
Dear Comrade Storing,
It's too bad that the longitudinal axis of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR (and the parallel "island") weren't perfectly perpendicular (or should I say parallel?) to the lenses of Couch's, Darnell's and Wiegman's cameras, but it wasn't, and therefore, the front part of the car appears to be well to right of the traffic light pole in Couch and Darnell. The important thing is that James' spliced-together Wiegman frame lines up well with the pertinent frames from Couch and Darnell (i.e., Couch, Darnell, and Wiegman shot the scene from almost identical positions in the Elm Street / Houston Street intersection, and therefore objects in Couch and Darnell can be compared location-wise, with objects in Wiegman to see whether or not they moved from where they were about twenty seconds earlier in Wiegman, and if so, how much and in which direction.
I contend that if the gaggle of about ten shoulder-to-shoulder people had remained in place for about twenty seconds after the final shot, we wouldn't be able to see any part of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAAY CAR in any part of Couch-Darnell.
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
It's too bad that the longitudinal axis of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR (and the parallel "island") weren't perfectly perpendicular (or should I say parallel?) to the lenses of Couch's, Darnell's and Wiegman's cameras, but it wasn't, and therefore, the front part of the car appears to be well to right of the traffic light pole in Couch and Darnell. The important thing is that James' spliced-together Wiegman frame lines up well with the pertinent frames from Couch and Darnell (i.e., Couch, Darnell, and Wiegman shot the scene from almost identical positions in the Elm Street / Houston Street intersection, and therefore objects in Couch and Darnell can be compared location-wise, with objects in Wiegman to see whether or not they moved from where they were about twenty seconds earlier in Wiegman, and if so, how much and in which direction.
I contend that if the gaggle of about ten shoulder-to-shoulder people had remained in place for about twenty seconds after the final shot, we wouldn't be able to see any part of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAAY CAR in any part of Couch-Darnell.
-- Tom
The ONLY Film that matters in this discussion is the Wiegman Film. Specifically, the Wiegman Film snippet showing Fedora Man. What the Darnell/Couch film shows of the car is Not Important. We see this same car on the Hughes Film and the Martin Film. Same Car, Same Spot. The Darnell/Couch Films are not the sole source for verifying this car was parked alongside the Island. What DOES MATTER is the Wiegman Film NOT SHOWING any trace of this car on the (L) of Fedora Man. A 17.5' X 4' automobile. And why is that? This car was NOT THERE Yet!
-
What the Darnell/Couch film shows of the car is unimportant.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Question:
Do the Coutch and Darnell films accurately capture the location of THE HUGE GATES in relation to other non-movable objects or features in the field of view?
Answer:
Yes, of course.
Question:
If your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR were a permanent, non-movable feature in the Darnell film (like the edge of the building where THE HUGE GATES start), wouldn't it be hidden behind the gaggle of people in the Wiegman film?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
It's too bad that the longitudinal axis of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR (and the parallel "island") weren't perfectly perpendicular (or should I say parallel?) to the lenses of Couch's, Darnell's and Wiegman's cameras, but it wasn't, and therefore, the front part of the car appears to be well to right of the traffic light pole in Couch and Darnell. The important thing is that James' spliced-together Wiegman frame lines up well with the pertinent frames from Couch and Darnell (i.e., Couch, Darnell, and Wiegman shot the scene from almost identical positions in the Elm Street / Houston Street intersection, and therefore objects in Couch and Darnell can be compared location-wise, with objects in Wiegman to see whether or not they moved from where they were about twenty seconds earlier in Wiegman, and if so, how much and in which direction.
I contend that if the gaggle of about ten shoulder-to-shoulder people had remained in place for about twenty seconds after the final shot, we wouldn't be able to see any part of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAAY CAR in any part of Couch-Darnell.
-- Tom
This car is roughly 17.5' X 4' and you're telling me that somehow this entire car has somehow completely disappeared from the Wiegman Film? That is David Copperfield and his disappearing elephant worthy.
With respect to, "..... people had remained in place for about twenty seconds....", I ask you to review the Towner Film vs the Wiegman Film with respect to individuals movement on/around the Island. And this includes Fedora Man. I continue urging you to actually DO THE RESEARCH and review the JFK Assassination Films/Images. It is obvious that your JFK Assassination Image foundation is currently lacking. Please get off of your duff and do the legit research work and catch up. ALL of this is available on You Tube. Stop screwing around with Lego Car visual aids, overlays, and "shadow dancing" guess work. Try actually examining good copies of the JFK assassination films.
-
With respect to, "..... people had remained in place for about twenty seconds....", I ask you to review the Towner Film vs the Wiegman Film with respect to individuals movement on/around the Island. And this includes Fedora Man. I continue urging you to actually DO THE RESEARCH and review the JFK Assassination Films/Images. It is obvious that your JFK Assassination Image foundation is currently lacking. Please get off of your duff and do the legit research work and catch up. ALL of this is available on You Tube. Stop screwing around with Lego Car visual aids, overlays, and "shadow dancing" guess work. Try actually examining good copies of the JFK assassination films.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Why did you leave out my word, "If"?
Are you dishonest, or just stupid?
Here's my complete sentence. I've done a little editing in a (probably futile) attempt to help you understand:
"I contend that if the gaggle of about ten shoulder-to-shoulder people [that we see in Wiegman] had remained in place for about twenty [more] seconds after the final shot, we wouldn't be able to see any part of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" GETAWAY CAR in any part of Couch-Darnell [, either]"
-- Tom
PS "Royell Storing -- the Fox News of JFKA researchers."
-
I quote Bart:
"The bald patch is a total giveaway.
I used 4 different sharpening techniques in photoshop."
Whatever, carry on.
(It is kind of a total giveaway.)
I see that, whilst I was on holiday, we lost a deluded blowhard. I'd say "Good Riddance" but he'll be back as he likes to 'retire' every now and then just to see who'll miss him.
"The bald patch is a total giveaway."
Why is this such an idiotic thing to post?
The point of this thread is to question the validity of the image that Bart Kamp 'sharpened', that appears to show Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm St Ext. about 25 seconds after the shooting. It is an image taken from "a huge Couch film print in Richard E Sprague’s collection".
The image appears to show the distinctive chequered pattern of Lovelady's shirt and his distinctive bald patch.
(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
The issue is this - there is no other image, taken from any version of the Couch footage, that shows this level of detail regarding Lovelady's shirt and bald patch.
It might then be assumed that Kamp's Lovelady image was taken from the best version of the Couch film and that is why it's got so much detail.
But this is not the case.
In fact, the opposite is true - Kamp's Lovelady image comes from one of the worst versions of Couch. The image it is taken from is completely washed out and has no fine detail in it - apart from Lovelady's shirt and bald patch!!
(https://i.postimg.cc/JzWQPSR5/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at how poor this image is. Look at how washed out it is.
There are many versions of the Couch footage on the internet, all of varying quality and most of a superior quality to this 'Sprague print' version.
The best quality version I've come across is from "Four Days In November". Look at how superior this image is when compared to the Sprague print. Look at how clear it is and how much detail is contained in this image.
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
However, when I focus on the two individuals in question, and in particular 'Lovelady', we see no sign of a chequered pattern or a bald patch:
[u(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
This leads me to conclude that the image 'sharpened' by Kamp has been manipulated in such a way as to create the chequered pattern and bald patch. These features are not present on any extant version of the Couch footage I can find.
Whether deliberately or inadvertently, the Sprague image is fake. The original version of Couch does not show a chequered pattern OR a bald patch. These features have been added to the Sprague print and to that print alone.
All of this was pointed out to the Deluded One and all he could muster was - "The bald patch is a total giveaway."
How can it be that no other version of the Couch footage has the chequered pattern or the bald patch? - "The bald patch is a total giveaway."
How can one of the worst copies of the Couch footage produce an image with such fine detail? - "The bald patch is a total giveaway."
How can Kamp's 'fake' image be used to identify Shelley and Lovelady? - "The bald patch is a total giveaway."
-
[...]
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
You and Comrade Storing are on the same side, now, because he no longer wants the two guys who are walking/running towards the Elm Street Extension about 25 seconds after the final shot in Couch-Darnell to be William Shelley and Billy Lovelady, but . . . gasp . . . THE GETAWAY-CAR-ABANDONING, missing-everything "SNIPER IN THE BUSHES" and his SPOTTER!!!
LOL!
-- Tom
-
DAN - Good to have you back. Having an adult at the table making acute observations followed by educated opinions is always welcome.
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
You and Comrade Storing are on the same side, now, because he no longer wants the two guys who are walking/running towards the Elm Street Extension about 25 seconds after the final shot in Couch-Darnell to be William Shelley and Billy Lovelady, but . . . gasp . . . THE GETAWAY-CAR-ABANDONING, missing-everything "SNIPER IN THE BUSHES" and his SPOTTER!!!
LOL!
-- Tom
You asked me to fill in the blanks for you, and the above is what I get in return? Again, "Prove Me Wrong" regarding this car Not being on the Wiegman Film. Once we get close to the 11/22/63 anniversary, many of the Old Guard Heavy Hitters will stop by here to pay their respects. I'll run the Wiegman EVIDENCE by them when that time comes. Thus far, you have been unable to post any EVIDENCE to refute what I have found. THIS, is a much bigger discovery than you realize. There is no logical/innocent reason for a car to be coming down the Elm St Ext while the JFK Limo was still on Elm St. And then this same car remained parked in a clearly posted, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone well after traffic was flowing down Elm St? Also, how do you believe the shooter on the 6th Floor planned on exiting the TSBD and then leaving Dealey Plaza? Do the research and think this completely through.
-
You asked me to fill in the blanks for you, and the above is what I get in return? Again, "Prove Me Wrong" regarding this car Not being on the Wiegman Film. Once we get close to the 11/22/63 anniversary, many of the Old Guard Heavy Hitters will stop by here to pay their respects. I'll run the Wiegman EVIDENCE by them when that time comes. Thus far, you have been unable to post any EVIDENCE to refute what I have found. THIS, is a much bigger discovery than you realize. There is no logical/innocent reason for a car to be coming down the Elm St Ext while the JFK Limo was still on Elm St. And then this same car remained parked in a clearly posted, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone well after traffic was flowing down Elm St? Also, how do you believe the shooter on the 6th Floor planned on exiting the TSBD and then leaving Dealey Plaza? Do the research and think this completely through.
Dear Comrade Storing,
In case you missed it on the other thread:
To answer your question, there are ten or eleven people (who are, btw, about 20% smaller in Darnell than they are in Wiegman), standing shoulder-to-shoulder in front of your MYSTO "ABANDONED" 1958 PONTIAC BONNEVILLE GETAWAY CAR . . . gasp . . . on both the right and the left sides of the traffic light pole.
In addition to the fact that your MYSTO "ABANDONED" 1958 PONTIAC BONNEVILLE GETAWAY CAR is parked at a size-diminishing angle in Darnell, it is, just like the people standing in front of it, about 20% smaller in Darnell that it would be in Wiegman if they weren't standing shoulder-to-shoulder in front of it.
Hint: Ya gotta scroll down to it.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4597.40.html
-- Tom
PS At the 08:57 mark in the National Geographic Video, "Manhunt: The Search for JFK's Killer," as your MYSTO "ABANDONED" 1958 PONTIAC BONNEVILLE GETAWAY CAR is virtually surrounded by policemen, I mean cops, one can see that not only is the driver's side window all the way down, but there's a man sitting behind the wheel.
-
"...a man sitting behind the wheel"? Have you joined the Jake Maxwell Club? It's "observations" such as this that make me believe there is: (1) an issue regarding the detail of the JFK Assassination Images you are examining, (2) the monitor you are using, and/or (3) possibly your eyesight in general. And your additional "observation" claiming people are standing "shoulder to shoulder" forming a wall that COMPLETELY obstructs the view of a 17.5' x 4' vehicle is further proof as to (1), (2), and/or (3) above. For the record, there is NOBODY standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Fedora Man on his (L). The car in question would extend beyond Fedora Man's (L). This is why we can see the car parked on the other side of the street. You seriously need to upgrade your JFK Assassination Image Library.
-
"...a man sitting behind the wheel"? Have you joined the Jake Maxwell Club? It's "observations" such as this that make me believe there is: (1) an issue regarding the detail of the JFK Assassination Images you are examining, (2) the monitor you are using, and/or (3) possibly your eyesight in general. And your additional "observation" claiming people are standing "shoulder to shoulder" forming a wall that COMPLETELY obstructs the view of a 17.5' x 4' vehicle is further proof as to (1), (2), and/or (3) above. For the record, there is NOBODY standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Fedora Man on his (L). The car in question would extend beyond Fedora Man's (L). This is why we can see the car parked on the other side of the street. You seriously need to upgrade your JFK Assassination Image Library.
Dear Comrade Storing,
More like 5', isn't it?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
More like 5', isn't it?
-- Tom
I do my best to Not exaggerate. The roof would be the height measurement listed for a car, but if all you were able to see was a fender, that max height figure would not be accurate.
Seriously, I think the images you are examining are substandard. Probably older stuff. The bulk of the Wiegman Film copies out there/You Tube are very bad. Same goes for a lot of the Couch Film copies. Both films are usually blurry and Wiegman of course is jiggly too. If you have a DVD Player look around for, "Unsolved History JFK, Death in Dealey Plaza" DVD. This will give you a good copy of the Wiegman Film. There are a lot of other very good/sharp images on that Discovery Channel/Gary Mack presentation. As long as your DVD Player and the Monitor you are using produce good picture definition, this DVD is an excellent addition to a JFK Assassination Library. It provides a very broad image foundation to build on. And if you use Ebay, do not be afraid to throw a lower $$/offer at a vendor there. That place is filled with "Mom & Pop" vendors. They are very good at quickly responding and can use the business.
-
". . . a man sitting behind the wheel"?
Look harder, Comrade Storing.
If you "click-click" it to the right spot, you'll even see his hairline.
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
You and Comrade Storing are on the same side, now, because he no longer wants the two guys who are walking/running towards the Elm Street Extension about 25 seconds after the final shot in Couch-Darnell to be William Shelley and Billy Lovelady, but . . . gasp . . . THE GETAWAY-CAR-ABANDONING, missing-everything "SNIPER IN THE BUSHES" and his SPOTTER!!!
LOL!
-- Tom
Hey Pinko,
I've really missed your sad little efforts to make human contact.
Say, are you still telling lies about how your Shelley and Lovelady could be filmed on the Elm Street extension 25 seconds after the shooting?
Of course you are, you sad little man.
Just to stay on topic, as far as the thread is concerned - do you have any ideas about how Kamp's Lovelady image was created?
Of course you don't, you sad little man.
-
Hey Pinko,
I've really missed your sad little efforts to make human contact.
Say, are you still telling lies about how your Shelley and Lovelady could be filmed on the Elm Street extension 25 seconds after the shooting?
Of course you are, you sad little man.
Just to stay on topic, as far as the thread is concerned - do you have any ideas about how Kamp's Lovelady image was created?
Of course you don't, you sad little man.
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Did you visit your hero, "former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin, during your vacation I mean holiday?
I'd be surprised if he didn't give you a medal for all of the work you've done for him!
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Did you visit your hero, "former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin, during your vacation I mean holiday?
I'd be surprised if he didn't give you a medal for all of the work you've done for him!
-- Tom
Dear Pinko Jerkov,
everyone knows you're the only person on this forum who has a hard-on for all things Russian.
You never let up about them, you starry-eyed fool.
Any thoughts about the topic of the thread ( :D :D :D)?
-
Dear Pinko Jerkov,
everyone knows you're the only person on this forum who has a hard-on for all things Russian.
You never let up about them, you starry-eyed fool.
Any thoughts about the topic of the thread ( :D :D :D)?
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Did your "Uncle Vladdy" let you [you-know-what] his [you-know-what]?
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Did your "Uncle Vladdy" let you [you-know-what] his [you-know-what]?
-- Tom
Dear Comrade Jerkov,
I'd appreciate it if you didn't project your fantasies on to me.
I notice you've thrown up yet another zero-Reply thread, it must be some kind of record.
And it's about your hero as well. Isn't that nice.
Listen up, troll.
This thread, like all the threads you troll, is about a specific subject - the creation of the 'Lovelady' image that buffoons such as yourself and your mentor, Lance "It's Time For My Nap" Payette, have swallowed down without question (a very LN trait).
Do you have anything to add to this subject?
-
Dear Comrade Jerkov,
I'd appreciate it if you didn't project your fantasies on to me.
I notice you've thrown up yet another zero-Reply thread, it must be some kind of record.
And it's about your hero as well. Isn't that nice.
Listen up, troll.
This thread, like all the threads you troll, is about a specific subject - the creation of the 'Lovelady' image that buffoons such as yourself and your mentor, Lance "It's Time For My Nap" Payette, have swallowed down without question (a very LN trait).
Do you have anything to add to this subject?
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I love it when one tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist (you) calls another tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist (Bart Kamp) a liar and a fabricator.
LOL!
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I love it when one tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist (you) calls another tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist (Bart Kamp) a liar and a fabricator.
LOL!
-- Tom
I'm not calling Kamp a liar and a fabricator.
That description applies to you.
You're the one inventing tall tales to get Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street Ext. within 25 seconds.
BOTH you and your mentor, Lance "Is it Time For My Meds" Payette, independently came up with the same lie - that BOTH Shelley and Lovelady ran across to the "little, old island" immediately after the shots and met Gloria coming the other way.
This is an out-and-out fabrication and lie.
You had to come up with this lie because you have swallowed down Kamp's Lovelady image like a good little boy. Even though I've demonstrated that the image MUST be false.
What does this say about your integrity as a researcher?
-
I'm not calling Kamp a liar and a fabricator.
That description applies to you.
You're the one inventing tall tales to get Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street Ext. within 25 seconds.
BOTH you and your mentor, Lance "Is it Time For My Meds" Payette, independently came up with the same lie - that BOTH Shelley and Lovelady ran across to the "little, old island" immediately after the shots and met Gloria coming the other way.
This is an out-and-out fabrication and lie.
You had to come up with this lie because you have swallowed down Kamp's Lovelady image like a good little boy. Even though I've demonstrated that the image MUST be false.
What does this say about your integrity as a researcher?
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Bart won't appreciate your calling him a liar and a fabricator.
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Bart won't appreciate your calling him a liar and a fabricator.
-- Tom
Do you appreciate being called it because I see you've not denied it.
Because you can't deny it.
Because you have been peddling the lie that Lovelady ran out to the island and met Gloria there.
Because you can't get your Shelley and Lovelady on the extension within 25 seconds without peddling this lie.
What happened to you, Pinko?
-
Do you appreciate being called it because I see you've not denied it.
Because you can't deny it.
Because you have been peddling the lie that Lovelady ran out to the island and met Gloria there.
Because you can't get your Shelley and Lovelady on the extension within 25 seconds without peddling this lie.
What happened to you, Pinko?
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I've said at least once in the past that Shelley almost certainly intercepted his running and crying friend, Calvery, on-or-near the "island," and, after hearing from her that JFK had been shot, may have signaled his buddy, Lovelady (still on the steps) to join him on a quick walk / jog down to the railway yard / parking lot to see what was going on.
Don't you remember?
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I've said at least once in the past that Shelley almost certainly intercepted his running and crying friend, Calvery, on-or-near the "island," and, after hearing from her that JFK had been shot, may have signaled his buddy, Lovelady (still on the steps) to join him on a quick walk / jog down to the railway yard / parking lot to see what was going on.
Don't you remember?
-- Tom
"........ALMOST Certainly" ?? Stop with your continued speculation. Post Facts.
-
"........ almost certainly"?
Dear Comrade Storing,
Shelley had been best man at her recent wedding.
Can you prove that he didn't intercept her on or near the "island" to see what she was crying and bellowing about?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Shelley had been best man at her recent wedding.
Can you prove that he didn't intercept her on or near the "island" to see what she was crying and bellowing about?
-- Tom
Are you now abandoning your Hughes Film claim? I don't know what your JFK Assassination Library consists of, but I can tell you that Trask's "Pictures Of The Pain" does not agree with the timeline you have slapped on the Hughes snippet showing the TSBD front steps after the kill shot. Try doing some legit research and stop the BS:
-
Are you now abandoning your Hughes Film claim?
Dear Comrade Storing,
What "Hughes Film claim"?
-- Tom
PS Has Vladimir Putin sent you his "peer review" of your CT, yet?
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
I've said at least once in the past that Shelley almost certainly intercepted his running and crying friend, Calvery, on-or-near the "island," and, after hearing from her that JFK had been shot, may have signaled his buddy, Lovelady (still on the steps) to join him on a quick walk / jog down to the railway yard / parking lot to see what was going on.
Don't you remember?
-- Tom
Of course I remember, Pinko.
This is the lie...sorry, fabrication... I'm talking about, so obviously I remember.
I've argued all along that Shelley immediately ran from the steps and met Gloria coming the other way. He states this in his affidavit. (People such as yourself have to ignore the fact that, during his WC testimony, Shelley completely changes his story, stating that he stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria ran up).
The 'fabrication' I have to keep calling you out on is the part where Shelley calls Lovelady to join him. You've invented that. It's your fabrication. It is not based on any testimonial evidence whatsoever. It's a lie you have to tell because you can't find any other way of getting Lovelady and Shelley on to the Elm Street Ext. within 25 seconds.
You have swallowed down Kamp's 'Lovelady' image without question even though it has been demonstrated that this image is dubious, to say the least, and now it's been pointed out that it's physically impossible for Shelley and Lovelady to do what they attested to in their WC testimonies AND be on Elm St within 25 seconds, you've had to invent this lie. If it's any comfort, Lance "I think I've Had An Accident" Payette did exactly the same thing.
On the other hand, my own identification of Lovelady in Darnell does not require me to lie my way through an explanation and makes perfect sense with the known timings:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Why does your Shelley look so heavy and have a receding hairline all of a sudden?
Did Bart Kamp fake that, too?
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Why does your Shelley look so heavy and have a receding hairline all of a sudden?
-- Tom
He's wearing a black, baggy suit and it is absolutely impossible to say anything about his hairline from such a poor quality image.
The suit trousers are tight around the calf area unlike the usual straight-cut trousers:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GpFLXxXS/Shelleywalking.png)
There are two reasons I believe this is Shelley.
The first is that the individual in question fits the general description - white male wearing a baggy black suit. There is nothing visually to refute the identification but, because the images are so poor, there is nothing in the image that can be used to make a positive identification of Shelley.
Which takes us to the second point - the timings of events.
Immediately after the shots Shelley runs across the street to the 'island' where he meets Gloria coming the other way. He then returns to the steps and re-enters the building.
As you point out, Shelley was the best man at Gloria's wedding. Gloria is distraught about what she has just witnessed and is racing back to the building from her position on Elm Street. It makes sense that Shelley would return to the steps with Gloria as he listens to what she saw.
Gloria reaches the steps and has her interaction with Lovelady as she tells everyone there about the shooting of the President. That is what we are seeing in the image below;
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
In terms of timings, it makes sense that we would see Shelley in this image. When we watch the actual Darnell clip, the man I've identified as Shelley can be seen walking towards the front steps with his back to the camera. He then turns to his left to reveal he is quite slender and not at all as heavy as his baggy suit seems to indicate from behind.
I believe this is Shelley returning to the steps having accompanied the distraught Gloria across the street. He then seems to turn as Baker approaches him.
The timings work perfectly without any need to lie.
Your desperate insistence that you can discern this man's hairline from such a poor image is just part of your failed attempt to keep the Kamp 'Lovelady' identification alive. Even though it is refuted by the testimonial evidence and the image has been demonstrated to be suspect.
None of this 'proves' it's Shelley. It is just the best fit for all the available evidence.
What's important is to remember that, whichever Shelley identification is correct, both Shelley and Lovelady lied in their WC testimonies and the question has to be asked - why would they do that? What are they trying to hide?
-
He's wearing a black, baggy suit and it is absolutely impossible to say anything about his hairline from such a poor quality image.
The suit trousers are tight around the calf area unlike the usual straight-cut trousers:
(https://i.postimg.cc/GpFLXxXS/Shelleywalking.png)
There are two reasons I believe this is Shelley.
The first is that the individual in question fits the general description - white male wearing a baggy black suit. There is nothing visually to refute the identification but, because the images are so poor, there is nothing in the image that can be used to make a positive identification of Shelley.
Which takes us to the second point - the timings of events.
Immediately after the shots Shelley runs across the street to the 'island' where he meets Gloria coming the other way. He then returns to the steps and re-enters the building.
As you point out, Shelley was the best man at Gloria's wedding. Gloria is distraught about what she has just witnessed and is racing back to the building from her position on Elm Street. It makes sense that Shelley would return to the steps with Gloria as he listens to what she saw.
Gloria reaches the steps and has her interaction with Lovelady as she tells everyone there about the shooting of the President. That is what we are seeing in the image below;
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
In terms of timings, it makes sense that we would see Shelley in this image. When we watch the actual Darnell clip, the man I've identified as Shelley can be seen walking towards the front steps with his back to the camera. He then turns to his left to reveal he is quite slender and not at all as heavy as his baggy suit seems to indicate from behind.
I believe this is Shelley returning to the steps having accompanied the distraught Gloria across the street. He then seems to turn as Baker approaches him.
The timings work perfectly without any need to lie.
Your desperate insistence that you can discern this man's hairline from such a poor image is just part of your failed attempt to keep the Kamp 'Lovelady' identification alive. Even though it is refuted by the testimonial evidence and the image has been demonstrated to be suspect.
None of this 'proves' it's Shelley. It is just the best fit for all the available evidence.
What's important is to remember that, whichever Shelley identification is correct, both Shelley and Lovelady lied in their WC testimonies and the question has to be asked - why would they do that? What are they trying to hide?
The man above is Not the same guy that is labeled as "Shelley" on the older posted Darnell Still Film. If you look at the recently released 1st Generation Darnell Film Copy, that guy on Darnell is clearly too wide to be the same guy labeled as Shelley above. This new copy of the 1st half of the Darnell Film makes that older still frame showing the TSBD front steps obsolete.
-
The man above is not the same guy that is labeled as "Shelley" on the older posted Darnell Still Film. If you look at the recently released 1st Generation Darnell Film Copy, that guy on Darnell is clearly too wide to be the same guy labeled as Shelley above. This new copy of the 1st half of the Darnell Film makes that older still frame showing the TSBD front steps obsolete.
Dear Comrade Storing,
What guy on (sic) what Darnell?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
What guy on (sic) what Darnell?
-- Tom
Go to YOU TUBE. Search - "NBC 5 Archive Collection | Assassination Aftermath in Dealey Plaza | Darnell Film" by - SixthFloorMuseum
That is roughly the 1st :40 Seconds of the Darnell Film. That man in the suit that is alleged to be Shelley is clearly too wide on this 1st generation copy.
The opening of this :40 also shows the 3 camera cars to be at a Dead Stop. The driver of Camera Car #2 is standing outside of the car. This is indicative of how long these cars have been sitting there stock still. This is why this opening of the Darnell Film had been "lost". It throws the currently assigned timelines of everyone pictured in this Darnell Film and the Couch Film too into a cocked hat. This also means that the JFK Limo was on Elm St LONGER than its' currently assigned timeline too. Whether that is due to a prolonged "rolling stop" and/or "dead stop". Wiegman filming the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass mandated that this snippet of camera cars being at a dead stop become "lost".
-
Do a google search for "NBC 5 Archive Collection Assassination Aftermath in Dealey Plaza Darnell Film" by the Sixth Floor Museum. It's roughly the first 40 seconds of the Darnell film. In this first-generation copy, the man in front of the steps at the 0:04 mark whom O'meara alleges is Shelley is clearly too wide to be him.
[Translated into comprehensible English by T.G.]
I agree.
-
I agree.
This is why I believe you are examining inferior JFK Assassination Images. You now easily see on this 1st Generation Copy of the Darnell Film what I am talking about with respect to the incorrect Shelley ID. The same goes for your examining a better copy of the Wiegman Film and seeing there is NO CAR to the (L) of Fedora Man or behind Fedora Man.
-
This is why I believe you are examining inferior JFK Assassination Images.
Dude,
I saw those frames of O'meara's broad-shouldered "Shelley" a long time ago and speculated that he might be Truly's boss, Ochus V. Campbell.
-- Tom
-
Dude,
I saw those frames of O'meara's broad-shouldered "Shelley" a long time ago and speculated that he might be Truly's boss, Ochus V. Campbell.
-- Tom
Then it was pointed out to you that Campbell was wearing a hat that day, so you dropped it and quietly moved on.
-
Then it was pointed out to you that Campbell was wearing a hat that day, so you dropped it and quietly moved on.
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
That doesn't make your broad-shouldered "Shelley" Shelley.
-- Tom
-
Dude,
I saw those frames of O'meara's broad-shouldered "Shelley" a long time ago and speculated that he might be Truly's boss, Ochus V. Campbell.
-- Tom
YOU admit to "speculated". The much clearer images on the 1st generation copy of the Darnell Film are conclusive. You're Welcome.
-
You admit to "speculated". The much clearer images on the 1st generation copy of the Darnell Film are conclusive. You're Welcome.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Are you always right?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Are you always right?
-- Tom
Again, update the JFK Assassination Images that you are currently basing your conclusions on. Start this updating with the worst images you are using. The Wiegman Film should be high on this list. That film made you look like Mr Magoo with respect to the total absence of the "escape car". If you have a good DVD Player, buy the Discovery Channel presentation that Gary Mack hosted. That's a very broad based image heavy presentation. There are so many images jammed into it, you gotta frame-by-frame it in order to catch every image flashing across the screen. It also has the Towner Film, and a very good uncropped Willis 5 among other photos.
-
[...]
Dear Comrade Storing,
Why did the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil [fill in the blank] send such a crummy "sniper and spotter" to shoot JFK "from the bushes"?
They missed everything!
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Why did the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil [fill in the blank] send such a crummy "sniper and spotter" to shoot JFK "from the bushes"?
They missed everything!
-- Tom
You do know that Max Holland is claiming that the 1st shot fired from the sniper's nest missed? Also, the HSCA claimed the 4th shot fired from behind the picket fence missed. So why is it so difficult to believe that a shot fired from "the bushes" missed?
-
You do know that Max Holland is claiming [sic] that the 1st shot fired from the Sniper's Nest missed?
Will-we?
My comment: Although Max Holland is probably wrong that the bullet glanced off the traffic signal's mast arm at hypothetical "Z-107," it's totally plausible that Oswald missed everything with his shot at hypothetical "Z-124" because it, like Holland's conjectured "Z-107" shot, was steeply-downward-angled and therefore Oswald had to stand and lean forward awkwardly while firing it.
Also, the HSCA claimed the 4th shot fired from behind the picket fence missed.
As you know, the only reason the HSCA concluded there had been a fourth shot (gasp . . . from the bushes) was because it misinterpreted some sounds on the infamous Dictabelt recording.
D'oh!
-
You miss the point. The claim of a possible missed shot is not rare.
-
You miss the point. The claim of a possible missed shot is not rare.
Dear Comrade Storing,
A missing-everything, steeply-downward-angled shot at a rapidly moving target is easy to understand; a missing-everything horizontal shot by a professional sniper and his spotter is hard to understand.
Why did the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil [fill in the blank] send such a crummy sniper and spotter to shoot at JFK "from the bushes"?
And after missing miserably with their one-and-only shot, why did they try to join the motorcade in their "getaway car" instead of just leaving their rifle in it and mingling innocent-like "to see what the heck's going on, and maybe even to help catch the bad guy!!!"?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
A missing-everything, steeply-downward-angled shot at a rapidly moving target is easy to understand; a missing-everything horizontal shot by a professional sniper and his spotter is hard to understand.
Why did the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil [fill in the blank] send such a crummy sniper and spotter to shoot at JFK "from the bushes," anyway?
And after missing miserably with their one-and-only shot, why did they try to join the motorcade in their "getaway car" instead of just leaving the rifle in it and mingling innocent-like with the crowd "to see what the heck's going on, and maybe even to help catch the bad guy!!!"?
-- Tom
-
Will-we?
My comment: Although Max Holland is probably wrong that the bullet glanced off the traffic signal's mast arm at hypothetical "Z-107," it's totally plausible that Oswald missed everything with his shot at hypothetical "Z-124" because it, like Holland's conjectured "Z-107" shot, was steeply-downward-angled and therefore Oswald had to stand and lean forward awkwardly while firing it.
As you know, the only reason the HSCA concluded there had been a fourth shot (gasp . . . from the bushes) was because it misinterpreted some sounds on the infamous Dictabelt recording.
D'oh!
I continue urging you to "Do The Research". The HSCA claimed that the 4th shot/Missed Shot came from behind the Picket Fence. To my knowledge they made no mention of "the bushes". (Though that would strengthen my Discovery).
-
The HSCA claimed that the 4th shot/missed shot came from behind the picket fence.
To my knowledge the HSCA made no mention of "the bushes".
Close enough for government work (pardon the pun).
Regardless of the exact location, it was a missing shot.
Which begs the question:
Why-oh-why did the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil [fill in the blank] send such a crummy sniper (and spotter!!!, according to your tinfoil-hat CT) to kill JFK?
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
A missing-everything, steeply-downward-angled shot at a rapidly moving target is easy to understand; a missing-everything horizontal shot by a professional sniper and his spotter is hard to understand.
Why did the evil, evil CIA or the evil, evil [fill in the blank] send such a crummy sniper and spotter to shoot at JFK "from the bushes"?
And after missing miserably with their one-and-only shot, why did they try to join the motorcade in their "getaway car" instead of just leaving their rifle in it and mingling innocent-like "to see what the heck's going on, and maybe even to help catch the bad guy!!!"?
-- Tom
Regarding the sniper's nest shooter, you somehow left out the parts: (1) shooter is standing straight up, (2) firing straight down, (3) firing through a 1/4 open window, (4) leaves hulls behind, and (5) leaves weapon behind. If this is not a "frame job", it has got to be a, "crummy sniper".
-
Regarding the sniper's nest shooter, you somehow left out the parts: (1) shooter is standing straight up, (2) firing straight down, (3) firing through a 1/4 open window, (4) leaves hulls behind, and (5) leaves weapon behind. If this is not a "frame job", it has got to be a "crummy sniper".
Dear Comrade Storing,
1) Not straight up; standing and awkwardly leaning forward
2) Not straight down, but at a steep downward angle, nevertheless
3) Through a 1/3 open window
4) So what if he left the three shells behind?
5) Should he have taken the short-rifle downstairs with him, walked a quarter-of-a-mile and gotten on the bus with it?
6) He was a former Marine sharpshooter. Anyone would have had a hard time making that first shot.
D'oh!
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
1) Not straight up; standing and awkwardly leaning forward
2) Not straight down, but at a steep downward angle, nevertheless
3) Through a 1/3 open window
4) So what if he left the three shells behind?
5) Should he have taken the short-rifle downstairs with him, walked a quarter-of-a-mile and gotten on the bus with it?
6) He was a former Marine sharpshooter. Anyone would have had a hard time making that first shot.
D'oh!
Guy's a "sharpshooter" and he then tries a half arsed 1st shot? Why leave your own rifle behind and then simply walk to a bus? Think it through. Doesn't fit.
-
Why leave your own rifle behind and then simply walk to a bus?
Dear Comrade Storing,
Should he have taken it with him?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Should he have taken it with him?
-- Tom
Did the shooter that took out Kirk leave his rifle there at the scene? Nope.
-
Did the shooter that took out Kirk leave his rifle there at the scene? Nope.
So, Oswald couldn't have killed JFK because his short-rifle was found partially hidden on the same floor as the "Sniper's Nest" (He would have taken it with him like the guy who killed Charlie Kirk!), three shells that had been fired from it were found on the "Sniper's Nest" floor, and his fingerprints were found on it as well as on two of the of the smaller boxes in the aforementioned "Sniper's Nest," etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
HE WAS FRAMED!!!
(LOL)
-
So, Oswald couldn't have killed JFK because his short-rifle was found partially hidden on the same floor as the "Sniper's Nest" (He would have taken it with him like the guy who killed Charlie Kirk!), three shells that had been fired from it were found on the "Sniper's Nest" floor, and his fingerprints were found on it as well as on two of the of the smaller boxes in the aforementioned "Sniper's Nest," etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
HE WAS FRAMED!!!
(LOL)
If this was all tied up with a bow, they would Not NOW be lengthening the elapsed firing time for the 3 shots to 11+ seconds. And I would not be Discovering the "getaway car" and proving a Conspiracy.
-
If this was all tied up with a bow, they would not now be lengthening the elapsed firing time for the 3 shots to 11+ seconds. And I would not be discovering the "getaway car" and proving a conspiracy.
Dear Comrade Storing,
"They" who?
The evil, evil Deep State?
Btw, it's not "11 seconds."
According to a 2020 analysis by Roselle and Scearce of the conscious reactions of seven prime witnesses to the sounds of Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot, it was only 10.2 seconds in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza.
-- Tom
https://d7922adf-f499-4a26-96d4-8ab2d521fa35.usrfiles.com/ugd/d7922a_e280e26982b44f2c97c6e6e27026e385.pdf
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
"They" who?
The evil, evil Deep State?
Btw, it's not "11 seconds."
According to a 2020 analysis by Roselle and Scearce of the conscious reactions of seven prime witnesses to the sounds of Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot, it was only 10.2 seconds in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza.
-- Tom
https://d7922adf-f499-4a26-96d4-8ab2d521fa35.usrfiles.com/ugd/d7922a_e280e26982b44f2c97c6e6e27026e385.pdf
Have you ever heard of Max Holland? Have you ever watched, "The Lost Bullet"? If you really want to get seriously involved in ongoing JFK Assassination discussion(s), you need to increase your JFK Assassination knowledge. This means adding to your current JFK Assassination Reference Library. Rome wasn't built in a day, but NOW is the time to begin. Brick-by-brick. Book-by-book.
-
Have you ever heard of Max Holland? Have you ever watched, "The Lost Bullet"?
Dear Comrade Storing,
What an ignorant question.
What would you like to know about it?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
What an ignorant question.
What would you like to know about it?
-- Tom
You admit to being clueless about the elapsed firing time for all 3 shots now being almost doubled. Max Holland has addressed this directly via his Sixth Floor Museum presentation. It is posted on YOU TUBE. Holland has also moved the physical position of the JFK Limo on Elm St to make this extended firing time work. You are WAY Behind the curve. This is why I urge you to increase your JFK Assassination Knowledge Foundation. Learn how to walk before trying to run. You're currently stumbling.
-
You admit to being clueless about the elapsed firing time for all three shots now being almost doubled. Max Holland has addressed this directly via his Sixth Floor Museum presentation. It is posted on YouTube. Holland has also moved the physical position of the JFK limo on Elm Street to make this extended firing time work.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Are you talking about something Max did fifteen years ago?
-- Tom
You are way behind the curve. This is why I urge you to increase your JFK Assassination Knowledge Foundation. Learn how to walk before trying to run. You're currently stumbling.
Dear Comrade Storing,
That's a suggestion I refuse to accept.
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Are you talking about something Max did fifteen years ago?
-- Tom
Dear Comrade Storing,
That's a suggestion I refuse to accept.
-- Tom
Where do you think this very early 1st shot, (before Zapruder filmed the JFK Limo), was hatched from? This started with Holland and that cockamamie stuff of his regarding a bullet striking the signal light support beam. There is ZERO EVIDENCE of a bullet striking that signal light. If You or I were to propose something of this nature, with ZERO EVIDENCE to support it, would see us getting laughed off of this forum. Holland somehow gets his schtick broadcast by National Geographic and guys like Gary Mack/"Sixth Floor Museum" are falling all over themselves to support it. Any wild scenario supporting a "lone gunman" is granted free rein with a cheering section to go along with it. You promote a "conspiracy" and you are immediately forced to run through a gauntlet.
-
Where do you think this very early 1st shot, (before Zapruder filmed the JFK limo), was hatched from? This started with Holland and that cockamamie stuff of his regarding a bullet striking the signal light support beam. There is zero evidence of a bullet striking that signal light. If You or I were to propose something of this nature, with zero evidence to support it, would see us getting laughed off of this forum. Holland somehow gets his schtick broadcast by National Geographic and guys like Gary Mack/"Sixth Floor Museum" are falling all over themselves to support it. Any wild scenario supporting a "lone gunman" is granted free rein with a cheering section to go along with it. You promote a "conspiracy" and you are immediately forced to run through a gauntlet.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Holland did find an old painted-over shallow dent on the top of the mast arm near its juncture with the signal box.
I thought you knew that.
Regardless, based on the fine work of Roselle and Scearce, I think Oswald fired his first, missing-everything, shot about a second later at hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133 after a 17-second, film-saving pause.
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Holland did find an old painted-over shallow dent on the top of the mast arm near its juncture with the signal box.
I thought you knew that.
Regardless, based on the fine work of Roselle and Scearce, I think Oswald fired his first, missing-everything, shot about a second later at hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133 after a 17-second, film-saving pause.
-- Tom
Sure I knew. But how about telling the WHOLE STORY. Holland originally claimed a bullet bounced off of the traffic signal itself. When an examination of the signal failed to show anything, he then took a fine tooth comb to the support arm. There he found a mere ding, which could easily have been the result of a very common Southern hail storm. Same old double standard being applied here. Anything claiming to support a shot from the sniper's nest gets an automatic free pass.
-
Sure I knew. But how about telling the WHOLE STORY. Holland originally claimed a bullet bounced off of the traffic signal itself. When an examination of the signal failed to show anything, he then took a fine tooth comb to the support arm. There he found a mere ding, which could easily have been the result of a very common Southern hail storm. Same old double standard being applied here. Anything claiming to support a shot from the sniper's nest gets an automatic free pass.
Dear Comrade Storing,
What makes you think I think Holland's theory is correct?
Why are you obsessing on Holland's theory?
You do realize, don't you, that Roselle and Scearce's hypothetical "Z-124" is about a second after Holland's hypothetical "Z-107"?
You do realize, don't you, that Brian Roselle has shown that it was possible that James Tague was nicked by a piece of concrete struck off the curb by a largish bullet fragment from the Z-313 head shot?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
What makes you think I think Holland's theory is correct?
Why are you obsessing on Holland's theory?
You do realize, don't you, that Roselle and Scearce's hypothetical "Z-124" is about a second after Holland's hypothetical "Z-107"?
You do realize, don't you, that Brian Roselle has shown that it was possible that James Tague was nicked by a piece of concrete struck off the curb by a largish bullet fragment from the Z-313 head shot?
-- Tom
Or maybe Tague's injury was the result of a shot fired from the, "Bushes/Shrubs/The Garden"?
That car had No Reason to be rolling down the Elm St Ext while the JFK Limo was under fire on Elm St. That car had No Reason to still be parked in a "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone, long after traffic was freely rolling down Elm St. That Car was a, "Getaway Car"!
-
Or maybe Tague's injury was the result of a shot fired from the, "Bushes/Shrubs/The Garden"? That car had no reason to be rolling down the Elm Street Extension while the JFK limo was under fire on Elm Street. That car had no reason to still be parked in a "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone, long after traffic was freely rolling down Elm Street. That car was a "Getaway Car"!
Dear Comrade Storing,
1) The lead-and-antimony smear on the curb had no copper in it.
2) "Getaway Car" or Getaway Car?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
1) The lead-and-antimony smear on the curb had no copper in it.
2) "Getaway Car" or Getaway Car?
-- Tom
With respect to Holland's "The Lost Bullet", that "lost bullet" is alleged to have struck the signal light support beam and then caromed down to the curb near Tague. Are you refuting this Holland claim?
-
With respect to Holland's "The Lost Bullet", that "lost bullet" is alleged to have struck the signal light support beam and then caromed down to the curb near Tague. Are you refuting this Holland claim?
Dear Comrade Storing,
I think it's more likely that Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot occurred at Roselle's and Scearce's hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming (after a 17-second film-saving pause) at Z-133, and that the curb (and therefore Tague) was nicked by a largish bullet fragment from Oswald's Z-313 fatal head shot.
I hope that's okay with you, Comrade Storing.
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
I think it's more likely that Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot occurred at Roselle's and Scearce's hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming (after a 17-second film-saving pause) at Z-133, and that the curb (and therefore Tague) was nicked by a largish bullet fragment from Oswald's Z-313 fatal head shot.
I hope that's okay with you, Comrade Storing.
-- Tom
You have the Tague curb being struck by, "....a largish BULLET fragment...". Yet, you also claim there was "no copper" in the smear on the same curb. How do you make both claims work?
-
You have the Tague curb being struck by "a largish bullet fragment," yet you also claim there was "no copper" in the smear on the same curb. How do you make both claims work?
Dear Comrade Storing,
I figure the curb was struck by either a chunk of lead-antimony core from Oswald's Z-313 head shot, or by an ice bullet fired by your "Bad Guys In The Bushes."
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
I figure the curb was struck by either a chunk of lead-antimony core from Oswald's Z-313 head shot, or by an ice bullet fired by your "Bad Guys In The Bushes."
-- Tom
My blanket challenge of "Prove Me Wrong" regarding the "getaway car" remains standing. And it is standing exceptionally taller with each passing day as we approach the 62 yr anniversary. Respectfully, this discovery of a "getaway car" just withstood the scrutiny of yet another extremely well respected JFK Assassination Researcher. That "getaway car" is Not Present alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film.
-
My blanket challenge of "Prove Me Wrong" regarding the "getaway car" remains standing. And it is standing exceptionally taller with each passing day as we approach the 62- year anniversary. Respectfully, this discovery of a "getaway car" just withstood the scrutiny of yet another extremely well-respected JFK Assassination Researcher. That "getaway car" is not present alongside the Island on the Wiegman film.
Dear Comrade Storing,
Your "Bad Guys in the Bushes" shot an ice bullet, right?
-- Tom
-
Dear Comrade Storing,
Your "Bad Guys in the Bushes" shot an ice bullet, right?
-- Tom
I am not familiar with an "ice bullet" itself or the weapon(s) that possibly fire one.
-
I am not familiar with an "ice bullet" itself or the weapon(s) that possibly fire one.
Perhaps you should look into it, Sonderführer Storing.
It's either that, or they just plum missed.
-- Tom
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
[url(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png[/img]
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
(http://https[img)
This Couch Film still frame is taking place roughly 20 seconds after the kill shot. There's no way Shelley and Lovelady could have talked with Calvery and then began walking down the Elm St Ext in only 20 seconds. The 2 guys we see have just exited their "getaway" car.
-
This Couch film still frame is taking place roughly 20 seconds after the kill shot. There's no way Shelley and Lovelady could have talked with Calvery and then began (sic) walking down the Elm Street Extension in only 20 seconds. The two guys we see have just exited their "getaway" car.
Okay.
(LOL!)
-
This is the 'Lovelady' image Bart Kamp produced from a large print obtained for him from the collection of Richard Sprague.
[ur(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
This image seems to include an incredible amount of detail, particularly on the shirt of 'Lovelady'.
However, the print from which Kamp got this 'Lovelady' image is of such poor quality that is very hard to understand how this amount of detail could be present when far superior pictures show no such detail.
Kamp alludes to this contradiction in his description of how he came across the Sprague print:
"This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives."
How can it be that the Sprague print "doesn't overall have much information", yet the part of it showing Lovelady's shirt does?
This is a copy of the Sprague print that Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTD6GGhq/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail. As Kamp points out, there is not much overall information in this print, as it is of such poor quality.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage taken from "Four Days In November":
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPLNtZDq/Couch-Royell.png)
Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image, how much more information is present overall.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of 'Lovelady' would come from this superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of 'Lovelady' that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?
This is a crop of 'Lovelady' from the Sprague print and 4 Days.
https://i.postimg.cc/mrqqFMCw/Lovelady-Sprague4Days.png[/img]
How was Kamp able to obtain such fine detail from the inferior Sprague print when no such detail is present in the far superior copy from 4 Days? (http://[img)
-
I agree with you regarding Kamp probably enhancing the alleged Lovelady shirt. Kamp fudged things to fit his Prayer Man scenario. I do not believe that: (1) Calvery could travel to Lovelady & Shelley, (2) tell them about JFK being shot, (3) Lovelady & Shelley then be filmed walking down the Elm St Ext, (4) ALL within 20 seconds following the kill shot.
-
I agree with you regarding Kamp probably enhancing the alleged Lovelady shirt. Kamp fudged things to fit his Prayer Man scenario. I do not believe that: (1) Calvery could travel to Lovelady & Shelley, (2) tell them about JFK being shot, (3) Lovelady & Shelley then be filmed walking down the Elm Street Extension (4) ALL within 20 seconds following the kill shot.
Dear Sonderführer Storing,
How many feet from the "island" do you figure big, tall Calvery was standing during the motorcade?
Regardless, do you think she casually strolled there after she saw the President's head get blown off a few feet away?
-- Tom
-
I agree with you regarding Kamp probably enhancing the alleged Lovelady shirt. Kamp fudged things to fit his Prayer Man scenario. I do not believe that: (1) Calvery could travel to Lovelady & Shelley, (2) tell them about JFK being shot, (3) Lovelady & Shelley then be filmed walking down the Elm St Ext, (4) ALL within 20 seconds following the kill shot.
Common Sense tells us it is impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, tell everyone there about the assassination, after which Shelley and Lovelady are pictured walking down the Elm St Ext.
100% that did not happen.
Trolls like Tom are not interested in Common Sense or what's possible in reality.
As far as he is concerned, Kamp has magically produced an image of Lovelady and no amount of evidence can change what's left of his mind.
However, it is perfectly possible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps in the allotted time, where Darnell pictured her telling Lovelady and everyone on the steps about the assassination:
(https://i.postimg.cc/JnLcscP6/Lovelady-Darnell-Close.png) (https://postimages.org/)
-
[...]
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Trolls who call other people "troll" are the biggest trolls of all.
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Trolls who call other people "troll" are the biggest trolls of all.
-- Tom
Do some research and take part in the debates.
Your constant trolling is embarrassing.
#growup
-
[...]
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
You need to be made to stood in the corner and look at the wall for three hours.
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
You need to be made to stood in the corner and look at the wall for three hours.
-- Tom
A few posts ago I tried to get this thread back on track.
I'll try again.
Why not have a grown up discussion about the points I'm raising?
This is the 'Lovelady' image Bart Kamp produced from a large print obtained for him from the collection of Richard Sprague.
(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
This image seems to include an incredible amount of detail, particularly on the shirt of 'Lovelady'.
However, the print from which Kamp got this 'Lovelady' image is of such poor quality that is very hard to understand how this amount of detail could be present when far superior pictures show no such detail.
Kamp alludes to this contradiction in his description of how he came across the Sprague print:
"This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives."
How can it be that the Sprague print "doesn't overall have much information", yet the part of it showing Lovelady's shirt does?
This is a copy of the Sprague print that Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTD6GGhq/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail. As Kamp points out, there is not much overall information in this print, as it is of such poor quality.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage taken from "Four Days In November":
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPLNtZDq/Couch-Royell.png)
Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image, how much more information is present overall.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of 'Lovelady' would come from this superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of 'Lovelady' that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?
This is a crop of 'Lovelady' from the Sprague print and 4 Days.
(https://i.postimg.cc/mrqqFMCw/Lovelady-Sprague4Days.png)
How was Kamp able to obtain such fine detail from the inferior Sprague print when no such detail is present in the far superior copy from 4 Days?
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Why don't you ask Bart?
After all, he, too, is a tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist.
(But at least he had the good sense to post the following 10 September 2021 interview of Tennent H. Bagley's friend, (JFKA CT!!!) Malcolm Blunt.)
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Why don't you ask Bart?
After all, he, too, is a tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist.
(But at least he had the good sense to post the following 10 September 2021 interview of Tennent H. Bagley's friend, (JFKA CT!!!) Malcolm Blunt.)
-- Tom
I'm asking you to join in with a grown up discussion of the issues raised.
What are your opinions about the issues I'm raising in this thread?
-
I'm asking you to join in with a grown up discussion of the issues raised.
What are your opinions about the issues I'm raising in this thread?
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Have you reached out to Bart, yet?
Maybe he'll tell you.
But of course, you won't believe him because he doesn't support your particular tinfoil-hat JFKA CT.
LOL!
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Have you reached out to Bart, yet?
Maybe he'll tell you.
But of course, you won't believe him because he doesn't support your particular tinfoil-hat JFKA CT.
LOL!
-- Tom
::)
Of course you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man.
Keep on trolling Walk:
-
Of course, you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man. Keep on trolling.
Says the KGB-approved King of the Trolls.
-
::)
Of course you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man.
Keep on trolling Walk:
He doesn't have the JFK Assassination "foundation" to respond to your pin-point questions. I try to encourage him, but right now he's the class clown.
-
[...]
Dear Sonderführer Storing,
Are you and danny BOY o'meara ever going to synchronize your tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theories?
Vladimir Putin is counting on you!!!
-- Tom
-
Who are these 2 guys that we are seeing 20 seconds after the kill shot? And why are they headed toward the RR Yard only 20 seconds after the kill shot? ............... STAY TUNED .................................................
-
In case everyone has forgotten, somewhere up above I report on my exchange with Bart Kamp in which he explains what he did. I don't know him well at all, but he's always seemed gentlemanly and approachable. I just used the contact form at the Prayer Man site and heard back by email a couple of days later. If you folks think Bart "faking" the images is an actual possibiliy - which I'm betting you don't - WHY DON'T YOU FOLLOW UP WITH BART? (We know why you don't: You know full-well this is nonsense, but you're having too much fun to let it go. That, and the fact that you're afraid to take your accusatons directly to Bart.) Prove me wrong and CONTACT BART!
-
In case everyone has forgotten, somewhere up above I report on my exchange with Bart Kamp in which he explains what he did. I don't know him well at all, but he's always seemed gentlemanly and approachable. I just used the contact form at the Prayer Man site and heard back by email a couple of days later. If you folks think Bart "faking" the images is an actual possibiliy - which I'm betting you don't - WHY DON'T YOU FOLLOW UP WITH BART? (We know why you don't: You know full-well this is nonsense, but you're having too much fun to let it go. That, and the fact that you're afraid to take your accusatons directly to Bart.) Prove me wrong and CONTACT BART!
This is the 'Lovelady' image Bart Kamp produced from a large print obtained for him from the collection of Richard Sprague.
(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
This image seems to include an incredible amount of detail, particularly on the shirt of 'Lovelady'.
However, the print from which Kamp got this 'Lovelady' image is of such poor quality that is very hard to understand how this amount of detail could be present when far superior pictures show no such detail.
Kamp alludes to this contradiction in his description of how he came across the Sprague print:
"This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives."
How can it be that the Sprague print "doesn't overall have much information", yet the part of it showing Lovelady's shirt does?
This is a copy of the Sprague print that Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTD6GGhq/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail. As Kamp points out, there is not much overall information in this print, as it is of such poor quality.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage taken from "Four Days In November":
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPLNtZDq/Couch-Royell.png)
Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image, how much more information is present overall.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of 'Lovelady' would come from this superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of 'Lovelady' that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?
This is a crop of 'Lovelady' from the Sprague print and 4 Days.
(https://i.postimg.cc/mrqqFMCw/Lovelady-Sprague4Days.png)
How was Kamp able to obtain such fine detail from the inferior Sprague print when no such detail is present in the far superior copy from 4 Days?
-
Contact form: http://www.prayer-man.com/misc/contact/.
-
Not only does Kamp have a problem with the pattern, the jacket is a light color. Lovelady's shirt was Dark colored.
-
Not only does Kamp have a problem with the pattern, the jacket is a light color. Lovelady's shirt was Dark colored.
Dear Sonderführer Storing,
It's funny when one tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist accuses another tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist of fabricating evidence.
Keep up the good work.
-- Tom
-
Dear Sonderführer Storing,
It's funny when one tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist accuses another tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist of fabricating evidence.
Keep up the good work.
-- Tom
None of us want "fabricated evidence". We don't need it. .............. STAY TUNED .............................
-
Hey, if Dan is wrong, and those 2 guys moving away in Darnell ARE Lovelady and Shelly then that makes it even MORE a mystery as to whom the 2 white men were that Baker saw by the rear elevators. Why did not Truly identify them to Baker as employees like Truly did when Oswald was encountered in the 2nd floor lunchroom?
-
Hey, if Dan is wrong, and those 2 guys moving away in Darnell ARE Lovelady and Shelly then that makes it even MORE a mystery as to whom the 2 white men were that Baker saw by the rear elevators. Why did not Truly identify them to Baker as employees like Truly did when Oswald was encountered in the 2nd floor lunchroom?
That film footage of those 2 Guys moving down the Elm St Ext is 20 seconds after the kill shot. There simply is not enough time for Calvary to tell Lovelady/Shelly what has happened and for them to be filmed moving down the Elm St Ext.
-
Hey, if Dan is wrong, and those 2 guys moving away in Darnell ARE Lovelady and Shelly then that makes it even MORE a mystery as to whom the 2 white men were that Baker saw by the rear elevators. Why did not Truly identify them to Baker as employees like Truly did when Oswald was encountered in the 2nd floor lunchroom?
There is no mystery as to whom the two white men were that Baker saw by the rear elevators because these two men were identified by Vicki Adams.
Adams testifies that she hit the first floor about 60 seconds after the shooting and that she interacted with Shelley and Lovelady, who were in that area. Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive in the same area, where Baker sees the two white men, who can only be Shelley and Lovelady.
As Royell indicates, it is physically impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, have the interaction with Lovelady and then for Shelley and Lovelady to be filmed well down the Elm Street Ext. around 20 - 25 seconds after the shooting. It is physically impossible.
Those who blindly accept Kamp's identification of Lovelady have to ignore this impossibility.
They have to ignore the affidavits of Shelley and Lovelady which make no mention of a trip along the Elm Street Ext., hanging around the railroad yard then entering through the west door.
They have to ignore Lovelady's next two statements to the FBI, in which he insists both he and Shelley rushed to the area where the limo had sped away from.
And Shelley's statement about accompanying police officers to the railroad yard and staying there for 10 minutes.
And the testimony of both Shelley and Lovelady that they stayed on the front steps for at least three minutes before Gloria came up.
And that more than three minutes after the shooting they saw Baker and Truly still outside the TSBD building!
They have to ignore the Baker/Truly time trials, the Darnell footage and the testimony of Vicki Adams.
On top of everything they ignore, they then have to invent a scenario for which there is not a scrap of evidence - that both Shelley and Lovelady ran out to the "little, old island" immediately after the shooting where they both ran into Gloria!!
They do all this rather than question the validity of Bart Kamp's highly dubious 'Lovelady' image.
-
Contact form: http://www.prayer-man.com/misc/contact/.
Bump :D
-
There is no mystery as to whom the two white men were that Baker saw by the rear elevators because these two men were identified by Vicki Adams.
Adams testifies that she hit the first floor about 60 seconds after the shooting and that she interacted with Shelley and Lovelady, who were in that area. Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive in the same area, where Baker sees the two white men, who can only be Shelley and Lovelady.
As Royell indicates, it is physically impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, have the interaction with Lovelady and then for Shelley and Lovelady to be filmed well down the Elm Street Ext. around 20 - 25 seconds after the shooting. It is physically impossible.
Those who blindly accept Kamp's identification of Lovelady have to ignore this impossibility.
They have to ignore the affidavits of Shelley and Lovelady which make no mention of a trip along the Elm Street Ext., hanging around the railroad yard then entering through the west door.
They have to ignore Lovelady's next two statements to the FBI, in which he insists both he and Shelley rushed to the area where the limo had sped away from.
And Shelley's statement about accompanying police officers to the railroad yard and staying there for 10 minutes.
And the testimony of both Shelley and Lovelady that they stayed on the front steps for at least three minutes before Gloria came up.
And that more than three minutes after the shooting they saw Baker and Truly still outside the TSBD building!
They have to ignore the Baker/Truly time trials, the Darnell footage and the testimony of Vicki Adams.
On top of everything they ignore, they then have to invent a scenario for which there is not a scrap of evidence - that both Shelley and Lovelady ran out to the "little, old island" immediately after the shooting where they both ran into Gloria!!
They do all this rather than question the validity of Bart Kamp's highly dubious 'Lovelady' image.
Which begs the question as to where did these 2 Guys come from in order to put them in the position of heading down the Elm St Extension only 20 seconds after the Kill Shot? These 2 Guys got out of their "getaway" car parked alongside the Island, and were moving down the Elm St Ext behind DPD Officer Smith. They were "shadowing" Officer Smith. They did Not want Smith running into their 6th Floor accomplice(s) that would be using the "wide open" Huge Gates to exit the TSBD.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
This is a Couch still frame showing 2 guys next to the "getaway" car. It was taken only 20 seconds after the kill shot. I believe these 2 guys were previously sitting inside the car. The Police activity around them has forced them to exit the car. It is physically impossible for any other 2 eyewitnesses to be in this same position only 20 seconds after the kill shot. They are now in the process of distancing themselves from this vehicle. This deserted "getaway" car was parked in a clearly posted, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone. It would be sitting in this same spot for 3+ hours following the assassination.
-
This is a Couch still frame showing two guys next to the "getaway" car. It was taken only 20 seconds after the kill shot. I believe these 2 guys were previously sitting inside the car. The Police activity around them has forced them to exit the car. It is physically impossible for any other two eyewitnesses to be in this same position only 20 seconds after the kill shot. They are now in the process of distancing themselves from this vehicle. This deserted "getaway" car was parked in a clearly posted, "No Parking at Any Time" zone. It would be sitting in this same spot for three-plus hours following the assassination.
Dear Royell,
Those two guys (one of whom is wearing a suit and a "pompadour" hairstyle just like William Shelley, and the other of whom has a receding hairline, a bald spot, and is wearing a plaid / striped shirt like Billy Lovelady) are not "next to" your mythological "Getaway Car."
Twenty seconds after the final shot?
How do you know it wasn't 25, 28, 31 or [fill in the blank] seconds?
The 1958 Pontiac Bonneville "Abandoned Getaway Car" was left in a no parking zone for at least three hours?
Gasp . . . did the evil, evil Deep State bad guys eventually come and tow it away, or did one of their agents forget to hotwire it for that long?
-- Tom
-
Dear Royell,
Those two guys (one of whom is wearing a suit and a "pompadour" hairstyle just like William Shelley, and the other of whom has a receding hairline, a bald spot, and is wearing a plaid / striped shirt like Billy Lovelady) are not "next to" your mythological "Getaway Car."
Twenty seconds after the final shot?
How do you know it wasn't 25, 28, 31 or [fill in the blank] seconds?
The 1958 Pontiac Bonneville "Abandoned Getaway Car" was left in a no parking zone for at least three hours?
Gasp . . . did the evil, evil Deep State bad guys eventually come and tow it away, or did one of their agents forget to hotwire it for that long?
-- Tom
You continue showing this Forum that you have failed to research the Elm St Extension. It's only a 2 lane road. Very narrow. There's the "getaway" car parked inside a "NO PARKING" zone on one side of the street, and the Corvair across from it on the other side of the street. This places the "2 guys" right alongside the "getaway" car. This is clear on the Couch film still frame. It is also clear on the Couch film Reverse Negative.
-
The Elm Street Extension is a two-lane lane street. The "Getaway Car" is parked in a "No Parking" zone on one side of the street and the two guys are on the other side of the street.
Dear Royell,
Correct.
The two guys (Shelley and Lovelady, or two evil, evil Deep-State agents who look just like them) aren't "next to" the so-called "Abandoned Getaway Car" -- they're across the street from it.
-- Tom
-
Dear Royell,
Correct.
The two guys (Shelley and Lovelady, or two evil, evil Deep-State agents who look just like them) aren't "next to" the so-called "Abandoned Getaway Car" -- they're across the street from it.
-- Tom
"Across the street" from the "getaway" sits the Corvair. That is a very narrow street. Do your research and look at the Nat Geo snippet showing Officer Harkness's 3 wheel motorcycle double-parked alongside Inspector Sawyer's car. There's simply no room.
-
Dear Royell,
When suit and pompadour hairstyle-wearing Shelley and plaid-shirt-wearing Lovelady (with his receding hairline and bald spot) started walking towards the railway yard / parking lot from the TSBD steps (or perhaps from where they had spoken with Gloria Calvery on or near the "island") should they have walked down the sidewalk so as to not get something like a jaywalking ticket?
-- Tom
-
Dear Royell,
When suit and pompadour hairstyle-wearing Shelley and plaid-shirt-wearing Lovelady (with his receding hairline and bald spot) started walking towards the railway yard / parking lot from the TSBD steps (or perhaps from where they had spoken with Gloria Calvery on or near the "island") should they have walked down the sidewalk so as to not get something like a jaywalking ticket?
-- Tom
You see Officer Baker there? Baker's timeline is that he was inside the TSBD 30 seconds after the kill shot. This means what we are seeing on this Couch still frame is happening roughly 20 seconds after the kill shot. 20 seconds is simply Not enough time for Calvery to move down the Elm St sidewalk, talk with Shelley and Lovelady, and then for Shelley and Lovelady to begin walking down the Elm St Extension. Now, if you wanna change the 62+ yr old time stamping of DPD Officer Baker, I would be interested in hearing that. Of course, having Officer Baker enter the TSBD at a later point in time, also then changes when Baker confronts Oswald inside the TSBD 2nd floor lunchroom too. And, the Later that you put Baker on the stairwell inside the TSBD, the better the chance that Sandra Styles & Vicki Adams had completed coming down that same stairwell ahead of Baker even reaching it. This would then bolster the Adams/Styles claim claim of Not hearing Oswald coming down that same stairwell from the 6th floor sniper's nest.
-
You see Officer Baker there? Baker's timeline is that he was inside the TSBD 30 seconds after the kill shot. This means what we are seeing on this Couch still frame is happening roughly 20 seconds after the kill shot. 20 seconds is simply Not enough time for Calvery to move down the Elm St sidewalk, talk with Shelley and Lovelady, and then for Shelley and Lovelady to begin walking down the Elm St Extension. Now, if you wanna change the 62+ yr old time stamping of DPD Officer Baker, I would be interested in hearing that. Of course, having Officer Baker enter the TSBD at a later point in time, also then changes when Baker confronts Oswald inside the TSBD 2nd floor lunchroom too. And, the Later that you put Baker on the stairwell inside the TSBD, the better the chance that Sandra Styles & Vicki Adams had completed coming down that same stairwell ahead of Baker even reaching it. This would then bolster the Adams/Styles claim claim of Not hearing Oswald coming down that same stairwell from the 6th floor sniper's nest.
Dear Royell,
If Calvery (who was standing to the left of John Templin in the Zapruder film) ran, how many seconds do you think it took her to reach "the island"?
-- Tom
-
Dear Royell,
Perhaps you missed it:
1) If long-legged Gloria Calvery (who was standing to the immediate left of John Templin in the Zapruder film and who had just seen JFK's head get blown off) ran, how many seconds do you think it took her to reach "the island"?
2) Didn't Officer Baker listen to his radio and look down towards the Triple Underpass before he started running towards the TSBD steps?
3) Mark Tyler has Officer Baker running in front of your "Abandoned Getaway Car" about 27 seconds after the final shot, more than enough time for Calvery to tell Shelley and/or Lovelady that JFK had been shot and more than enough time for Shelley and Lovelady to get as far down Elm Street Extension towards the railway yard / parking lot as we see them in Couch-Darnell.
https://www.marktyler.org/mc63.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawK4zONleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFFODdsRHVIa2RSUGZJNllFAR6Zx-0JB5zBmwy-qakJKtfLfY5vcW9V2IqOrNXjP-oezkHhb-av38NlRUa-uA_aem_2d95NRPz2dpt6k_03l7iYg
-- Tom
-
You also have to move Lovelady and Shelley from their standing position in front of the TSBD. This is Not all about Calvery. You are claiming 3 moving pieces + a conversation in only 20 seconds.
Are you claiming that after hearing shots fired, Officer Baker then just stood there listening to his motorcycle radio? Seriously?
-
You also have to move Lovelady and Shelley from their standing position in front of the TSBD. This is not all about Calvery. You are claiming three moving pieces and a conversation in only twenty seconds.
Dear Royell,
Perhaps you missed it:
1) If long-legged Gloria Calvery (who was standing to the immediate left of John Templin in the Zapruder film and who had just seen JFK's head get blown off) ran, how many seconds do you think it took her to reach "the island"?
2) Didn't Officer Baker listen to his radio and look down towards the Triple Underpass before he started running towards the TSBD steps?
3) Mark Tyler has Officer Baker running in front of your "Abandoned Getaway Car" about 27 seconds after the final shot.
https://www.marktyler.org/mc63.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawK4zONleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFFODdsRHVIa2RSUGZJNllFAR6Zx-0JB5zBmwy-qakJKtfLfY5vcW9V2IqOrNXjP-oezkHhb-av38NlRUa-uA_aem_2d95NRPz2dpt6k_03l7iYg
-- Tom
-
You see Officer Baker there [in Darnell]? Baker's timeline is that he was inside the TSBD 30 seconds after the kill shot. This means what we are seeing on this Couch still frame is happening roughly 20 seconds after the kill shot. 20 seconds is simply not enough time for Calvery to move down [sic] the Elm St sidewalk, talk with Shelley and Lovelady, and then for Shelley and Lovelady to begin walking down the Elm Street Extension. Now, if you want to change the 62+ yr old time stamping of DPD Officer Baker, I would be interested in hearing that.
Dear Royell,
I refer you to the Warren Commission testimony of Marrion L. Baker
Page 248
Mr. BELIN. After you parked your motorcycle, did you notice anything that was going on in the area?
Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir. As I parked here ---
Mr. BEIJN. You are pointing on Exhibit 361 to the place that you have marked with “B.”
Mr. BAKER. And I was looking westward which would be in this direction.
Mr. BELIN. By that, you are pointing down the entrance to the freeway and kind of what I will call the peninsula of the park there?
Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Toward the triple underpass.
Representative Boggs. Where is the underpass?
Mr. BAKER. The underpass is down here. This is really Elm Street, and this would be Main and Commerce and they all come together here, and there is a triple overpass.
Representative Boggs. Right.
Mr. BAKER. At this point, I looked down here as I was parking my motorcycle and these people on this ground here, on the sidewalk, there were several of them falling, and they were rolling around down there, and all these people were rushing back, a lot of them were grabbing their children, and I noticed one, I didn’t know who he was, but there was a man who ran out into the crowd and back.
Mr. BELIN. Did you notice anything else?
Mr. BAKER. Except there was a woman standing --- well, all these people were running, and there was a woman [Gloria Calvery?] screaming, “Oh, they have shot that man, they have shot that man.”
Mr. BELIN. All right. Now, you are on Exhibit 361, and you are pointing to people along the area or bordering the entrance to that expressway and that bit of land lying to the west and north, as to where you describe these people, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER. That is correct, sir.
Mr. DULLES. Would you mark where the overpass would be, right at the end of those lines, just so we get oriented on it.
Mr. BELIN. I am trying to see down here.
Mr. DULLES. I just wanted to get a general idea.
Mr. BELIN. On Exhibit 361, sir, it wouldn’t show but it basically would be off in this direction coming down this way. The entrance to the freeway would go down here and the overpass would roughly be down here.
Mr. DULLES. As far as that?
Mr. BELIN. Yes, sir; I think Mr. Redlich is going to get a picture that will better describe it.
Mr. DULLES. All right.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Is there anything else you saw there, Officer Baker, before you ran to the building?
Mr. BAKER. No, sir; not at that time.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Then what did you do after surveying the situation?
Mr. BAKER. I had it in mind that the shots came from the top of this building here.
Mr. BELIN. By this building, you are referring to what?
Mr. BAKER. The Book Depository Building.
. . . . . . .
Page 259
Mr. Baker. And then I ran, kind of running walk, and went all the way around [the TSBD roof]. First, I glanced over this side here, because the last thing I heard here on the radio was the Chief saying, “Get some men up on that railroad track.”
Mr. BELIN. Did you hear that on your police radio?
Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir; that was the last thing I heard.
Mr. BELIN. As you were getting off your motorcycle?
Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir.
. . . . . .
Page 266
Mr. BELIN. All right. Did any other officer say anything to you about what he saw or thought what happened?
Mr. BAKER. I talked to several of them, but I can’t remember exactly, you know, just what their story was.
Mr. BELIN. Was there anyone you talked to who thought the shots came from the front?
Mr. BAKER. No, sir; not except that the Chief of Police, that is the only one. Now, that, like I say, that is the last thing I heard over that radio is, “Get some men up on that railroad [sic].” Now, that could mean they either came from the side, which is due north, or right across in front of him. You know-
Mr. BELIN. Well, apart from the statement you testified to that the Chief of Police made over the radio about the underpass, was there any policeman or patrolman who was in the motorcade who in any way indicated to you that the shots came from the front?
Mr. BAKER. No, sir.
. . . . . . .
My comments:
About 35 seconds after the final shot (i.e., about the time Baker was entering the TSBD according to Mark Tyler), Chief of Police Curry said over the radio, “Get men on top of that over . . . underpass. See what happened up there. Go up to the overpass.”
. . . . . .
Of course, having Officer Baker enter the TSBD at a later point in time, also then changes when Baker confronts Oswald inside the TSBD 2nd floor lunchroom. And the later you put Baker on the stairwell inside the TSBD, the better the chance that Sandra Styles & Vicki Adams had completed coming down that same stairwell before Baker's even reached it.
Not if Baker entered the TSBD about 35 seconds after the final shot, and not if Adams underestimated by about thirty seconds the length of time she and Styles spent on the fourth floor before starting down. That way, Oswald, Baker and Truly could have been inside the lunchroom or its "vestibule" when Adams and Styles were transiting the North-West corner of the second floor.
This would then bolster the Adams/Styles claim of not hearing Oswald coming down that same stairwell from the 6th floor sniper's nest.
Correct.
-- Tom
-
The above is indicative of why some people chose to use a shotgun. It randomly throws stuff all over the place. If you want an extra 5 seconds, you still need 25 seconds to: (1) Put Calvery, Lovelady, & Shelley in motion, (2) Have the 3 converge), (3) They then converse, and, (4) Shelley and Lovelady begin moving down the Elm St Ext. (For whatever reason). Still not possible.
With respect to "Oh they have shot that man, they have shot that man". That general verbiage is referenced by Witt/Umbrella Man in his HSCA Testimony. Except Witt says it was being repeated by a lady somewhere BEHIND him. Witt and The Cuban were sitting on the retaining wall at this point in time. Behind the 2 of them was The Knoll. Do you still want to Speculate that this was Calvery saying this? This is why a broad JFK Assassination Foundation is critical. Do your research. It is a time consuming Brick-By-Brick journey. But well worth the effort.
You Speculate that Calvery, Shelley, & Lovelady held their "Pow-Wow" on the Island. So I am guessing this would be on the very corner of the Island. About where Officer Baker ran across the Island? This would also place the 3 of them in front of the "getaway" car, just like Baker was. So, in order for Shelley and Lovelady to then be filmed walking down the Elm St Extension, they would 1st have to walk around the front of the "getaway" car and then move down the Elm St. Ext. Why wouldn't Shelley and Lovelady instead proceed in a straight line from the corner of the Island and then walk passed the front and back passenger doors of the "getaway" car? Why would they go out of their way to walk around the front of the "getaway" car and then proceed down the Elm Ext? Maybe you now want to move that "Pow-Wow" to being conducted in front of the TSBD? Of course, there is precious Tick/Tock involved with this relocation.
-
Even if your scenario is given another five seconds, it still doesn't have the twenty-five seconds it needs to: 1) have Calvery, Shelley, and Lovelady converge and converse, and 2) have Shelley and Lovelady begin moving down Elm Street Extension.
Dear Royell,
Calvery was only about fifty yards from the "island" during the motorcade and could have gotten to it in ten or twelve seconds. Shelley, who was on the steps and had been best man at Calvery's wedding, could have heard her bellowing, and, with Lovelady, intercepted her on-or-near the "island." After a five-second "pow-wow" between those three, there was plenty of time left in my scenario for 1) Shelley and Lovelady to get as far down Elm Street Extension as we see them in Couch-Darnell, and 2) for Calvery to get to the TSBD steps in time to be "captured" there in Darnell.
-- Tom
With respect to "Oh they have shot that man, they have shot that man," that general verbiage is referenced by Witt/Umbrella Man in his HSCA Testimony. Except Witt says it was being repeated by a lady somewhere behind him. Witt and The Cuban were sitting on the retaining wall at this point in time. Behind the two of them was The Grassy Knoll. Do you still want to speculate that this was Calvery saying this?
Dear Royell,
The only reason I included that part of Baker's testimony is to disprove your statement that he ran immediately to the TSBD upon parking his motorcycle. Heck, he even testified that he was still at his motorcycle when he heard Police Chief Curry say twenty-seven seconds after the final shot, "Get someone up on the [triple] underpass (aka "the railroad track" in Baker's terminology).
-- Tom
You speculate that Calvery, Shelley, and Lovelady held their "pow-wow" on the "island." I'm guessing this would be on the very corner of the "island," about where Officer Baker ran across it. This would also place the three of them in front of the "getaway" car, just like Baker was. So, in order for Shelley and Lovelady to then be filmed walking down the Elm St Extension, they would first have to walk around the front of the "getaway" car and then move down the Elm Street Extension. Why wouldn't Shelley and Lovelady instead proceed in a straight line from the corner of the "island" and then walk past the front and back passenger doors of the "getaway" car? Why would they go out of their way to walk around the front of the "getaway" car and then proceed down the Elm Street Extension?
Dear Royell,
You assume that Shelley and Lovelady had already decided -- before hearing from Calvery on-or-near the "island" that JFK had been shot -- to walk down to the railway yard / parking lot.
Why do you assume that?
-- Tom
Note: The above has been translated from Storing Speak into intelligible English.
-
There is no evidence that Calvery was "bellowing".
You did not address why Shelley and Lovelady would walk around the front of the "getaway" car and then be on the driver's side of the "getaway" car vs merely walking directly toward the railroad yard/alongside the Passenger doors of the car. It makes no sense for them to go from the Island to the Driver's side of the car.
-
There is no evidence that Calvery was "bellowing."
Dear Royell,
Okay, how about "hollerin'", then?
Isn't that what they do in your neck of the woods?
You did not address why Shelley and Lovelady would walk around the front of the "getaway" car and then be on the driver's side of the "getaway" car vs merely walking directly toward the railroad yard/alongside the Passenger doors of the car. It makes no sense for them to go from the Island to the Driver's side of the car.
Dear Royell,
Since big and tall and red-haired (and therefore easy-to-spot) Calvery was within 10 to 12 seconds of the "island" and was bookin' it to the TSBD, Shelley and his sidekick, Lovelady, may have intercepted her in "the middle of" Elm Street Extension, itself.
Does that work for you?
-- Tom
-
Dear Royell,
Okay, how about "hollerin'", then?
Isn't that what they do in your neck of the woods?
Dear Royell,
Since big and tall and red-haired (and therefore easy-to-spot) Calvery was within 10 to 12 seconds of the "island" and was bookin' it to the TSBD, Shelley and his sidekick, Lovelady, may have intercepted her in "the middle of" Elm Street Extension, itself.
Does that work for you?
-- Tom
The above is proof of your trying "this and that" in order to make it work. That's not evidence. What you're doing is like a kid screwing around with a chemistry set and ending up with a stink bomb.
-
The above is proof of your trying "this and that" in order to make it work. That's not evidence. What you're doing is like a kid screwing around with a chemistry set and ending up with a stink bomb.
Dear Royell,
In other words, you have no rational response and all you can so is hurl insults.
You poor little "useful idiot," you.
-- Tom
-
Dear Royell,
Okay, how about "hollerin'", then?
Isn't that what they do in your neck of the woods?
Dear Royell,
Since big and tall and red-haired (and therefore easy-to-spot) Calvery was within 10 to 12 seconds of the "island" and was bookin' it to the TSBD, Shelley and his sidekick, Lovelady, may have intercepted her in "the middle of" Elm Street Extension, itself.
Does that work for you?
-- Tom
The above is why You and The Nutty Professor are "2 peas inna pod". You guys are repeatedly revising your previous position(s). Just buckle down, put in the time, and do the deep-dive research. And remember to remove your Red/Cyan Glasses.
-
Bump! This is too important to simply let pass by. Here we see Officer Baker and Lovelady right in front of the TSBD front door. And at the same time, the Couch still frame shows those 2 Guys right alongside the "getaway" car. Why? Because these 2 Guys just got out of that car and are now distancing themselves from this intended "getaway" car. Those 2 Guys are obviously Not Shelley & Lovelady. We see Lovelady is still standing in front of the TSBD at the very same time that these 2 Guys are moving away from the car. The only way these 2 Guys could be in this position 20 seconds after the Kill Shot, is if they had just got out of that car.
I can't even follow your tortured logic. In fact, I don't see any evidence of logic at all. Everything you are arguing is one assumption after another. You assume the car was a "getaway". You assume two guys just got out of that car. You assume who those two guys are. Do you ever propose anything that is based on actual evidence.
-
I can't even follow your tortured logic. In fact, I don't see any evidence of logic at all. Everything you are arguing is one assumption after another. You assume the car was a "getaway". You assume two guys just got out of that car. You assume who those two guys are. Do you ever propose anything that is based on actual evidence.
The "theory" has always been that the 2 Guys/Silhouettes we see alongside the car on the Couch Film, was Shelley & Lovelady. As you can see, Lovelady is still in front of the TSBD front door, when these 2 Guys are walking alongside the car. Both still frames showing the 2 Guys and Lovelady on the TSBD steps, also include Officer Baker. Baker is in both still frames. This Proves these 2 still frames are happening almost simultaneously. Like building a wall, I have put together the "getaway" car one brick at a time. Some bricks bigger than others, but still 1 at a time. I have just destroyed the "theory" that the 2 Guys/Silhouettes are Shelley and Lovelady. Do you know of any 2 male eyewitnesses, that would have been able to get next to the "getaway" car only 20 seconds after the kill shot? Those 2 Guys/Silhouettes on the Couch Film still frame had to of exited the car.
-
The "theory" has always been that the 2 Guys/Silhouettes we see alongside the car on the Couch Film, was Shelley & Lovelady. As you can see, Lovelady is still in front of the TSBD front door, when these 2 Guys are walking alongside the car. Both still frames showing the 2 Guys and Lovelady on the TSBD steps, also include Officer Baker. Baker is in both still frames. This Proves these 2 still frames are happening almost simultaneously. Like building a wall, I have put together the "getaway" car one brick at a time. Some bricks bigger than others, but still 1 at a time. I have just destroyed the "theory" that the 2 Guys/Silhouettes are Shelley and Lovelady. Do you know of any 2 male eyewitnesses, that would have been able to get next to the "getaway" car only 20 seconds after the kill shot? Those 2 Guys/Silhouettes on the Couch Film still frame had to of exited the car.
So you don't think Baker could be in the same location at two different times.
Still waiting for your proof the car was a getaway car.
-
So you don't think Baker could be in the same location at two different times.
Still waiting for your proof the car was a getaway car.
Baker is pictured with Lovelady. Lovelady is standing very close to the TSBD front door. At this same time, the 2 Guys are pictured standing alongside the car. This means that it is impossible for 1 of these 2 guys to be Lovelady. And the Lovelady ID on that still frame is very solid. This man not only looks like Lovelady, but that man is in almost the same position that Lovelady is in on the Altgens Photo.
The car being a "getaway" car traces back to the Wiegman Film NOT SHOWING a car parked alongside the Island, several feet back from the corner. This means this car was traveling down the Elm St Extension as Wiegman filmed the area around the Island. The car was traveling down the Elm Ext while shots were being fired at JFK. The car parked alongside the Island inside a clearly posted, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone. After the 2 Guys inside the car bolted, that car sat parked there for 3+ Hrs after the kill shot. This car moving down the Elm St Ext while shots were being fired, and then parking in a "NO PARKING..." zone was well planned. I believe this "getaway" car was intended for the shooting team inside the sniper's nest.
-
Baker is pictured with Lovelady. Lovelady is standing very close to the TSBD front door. At this same time, the 2 Guys are pictured standing alongside the car. This means that it is impossible for 1 of these 2 guys to be Lovelady. And the Lovelady ID on that still frame is very solid. This man not only looks like Lovelady, but that man is in almost the same position that Lovelady is in on the Altgens Photo.
The car being a "getaway" car traces back to the Wiegman Film NOT SHOWING a car parked alongside the Island, several feet back from the corner. This means this car was traveling down the Elm St Extension as Wiegman filmed the area around the Island. The car was traveling down the Elm Ext while shots were being fired at JFK. The car parked alongside the Island inside a clearly posted, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone. After the 2 Guys inside the car bolted, that car sat parked there for 3+ Hrs after the kill shot. This car moving down the Elm St Ext while shots were being fired, and then parking in a "NO PARKING..." zone was well planned. I believe this "getaway" car was intended for the shooting team inside the sniper's nest.
So a parking violation is your proof that the car was a getaway car.
I feel silly even asking you this but were is your proof there was a shooting team inside the TSBD.
-
So a parking violation is your proof that the car was a getaway car.
I feel silly even asking you this but were is your proof there was a shooting team inside the TSBD.
The "NO PARKING...." zone was close to the corner. No vehicle could have gotten in front of this car without hanging out onto Elm St. This ensured the "getaway" car could immediately turning onto Elm St when traffic was flowing again. They knew nobody would take this "NO PARKING...." spot, and they could pull into it at the very last moment. This spot alongside the Island was close to the corner, and close to the "wide open" Huge Gates. The Huge Gates provided clandestine entrance and exit to the TSBD.
The "getaway" car was picking up a shooting team. Shooter + Spotter. Shooter + Spotter exited the TSBD via the Huge Gates, and then intended to get into the "getaway" car that was mere feet outside the Huge Gates.
-
The "No Parking" zone was close to the corner. No vehicle could have gotten in front of this car without hanging out onto Elm St. This ensured the "getaway" car could immediately turning onto Elm St when traffic was flowing again. They knew nobody would take this "No Parking...." spot, and they could pull into it at the very last moment. This spot alongside the Island was close to the corner, and close to the "wide open" Huge Gates. The Huge Gates provided clandestine entrance and exit to the TSBD. The "getaway" car was picking up a shooting team. Shooter + Spotter. Shooter + Spotter exited the TSBD via the Huge Gates and intended to get into the "getaway" car that was mere feet outside the Huge Gates.
Dear Royell,
You didn't answer John Corbett's question, i.e., "What's your proof that there was a 'shooter team' inside the TSBD?"
-- Tom
-
The "NO PARKING...." zone was close to the corner. No vehicle could have gotten in front of this car without hanging out onto Elm St. This ensured the "getaway" car could immediately turning onto Elm St when traffic was flowing again. They knew nobody would take this "NO PARKING...." spot, and they could pull into it at the very last moment. This spot alongside the Island was close to the corner, and close to the "wide open" Huge Gates. The Huge Gates provided clandestine entrance and exit to the TSBD.
The "getaway" car was picking up a shooting team. Shooter + Spotter. Shooter + Spotter exited the TSBD via the Huge Gates, and then intended to get into the "getaway" car that was mere feet outside the Huge Gates.
All you have done is point out one POSSILBLE explanation for the circumstances and ignored all other possible explanations. That doesn't constitute proof. It's been my experience in the 3+ decades I have engaged with conspiracy hobbyists that is typically the way their minds work. They assume that everything they observe has a sinister explanation. People park in NO PARKING zones all the time. That doesn't mean they are part of an assassination team. Why would you think this one is evidence of a getaway car, especially since the car didn't getaway for 3 hours.
-
All you have done is point out one POSSILBLE explanation for the circumstances and ignored all other possible explanations. That doesn't constitute proof. It's been my experience in the 3+ decades I have engaged with conspiracy hobbyists that is typically the way their minds work. They assume that everything they observe has a sinister explanation. People park in NO PARKING zones all the time. That doesn't mean they are part of an assassination team. Why would you think this one is evidence of a getaway car, especially since the car didn't getaway for 3 hours.
There is no other explanation for a car to be: (1) Moving down the Elm St Ext while shots are being fired, (2) Then pull over and park in a, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone", (3) And then leave the car parked there for 3+ Hrs after the shots were fired. This "getaway" car was parked close to the "Wide Open" Huge Gates, and very close to Elm St. A hit team coming down from the 6th floor would take under 1 minute to use the back stairway and then exit via the Huge Gates. At that point they would hop right into the "getaway" car parked just outside of the Huge Gates. And the Elm St Extension was a dead street. There was nobody viewing the JFK Motorcade from back there to see anyone walking out of those Huge Gates. It was a very good plan. The quick action of Officer Smith and Officer Baker running past that car only 20 seconds after the Kill Shot spooked the 2 Guys inside the "getaway" car. They exited the car and distanced themselves from it. We see these 2 Guys on the Couch Film as they moved away from the car. This is why the deserted "getaway" car remained parked in that same spot for 3+ hours after the kill shot.
-
There is no other explanation for a car to be: (1) Moving down the Elm St Ext while shots are being fired, (2) Then pull over and park in a, "NO PARKING At Any Time" zone", (3) And then leave the car parked there for 3+ Hrs after the shots were fired.
Correction. There is no other explanation you can think of. Huge difference.
-
Correction. There is no other explanation you can think of. Huge difference.
So tell this Forum your own explanation for ALL of this. My "challenge" stands.
-
So tell this Forum your own explanation for ALL of this. My "challenge" stands.
I don't have an explanation because there isn't enough information to form one. I can speculate about a possible scenario without stating it as if it were fact which is what you do.
A car started down the Elm St. extension, only to be stopped as the motorcade reached Houston and Elm. Once the shots were fired, there was resulting chaos. Traffic came to a standstill and the occupant(s) realizing they weren't going to be able to exit any time soon, simply parked the car and left on foot to wherever they were intending to go. They came back 3 hours later after things had calmed down.
There's as much evidence for my scenario as there is for yours and while yours sounds more interesting, mine is mundane and far more plausible. It doesn't require me to assume there was a sniper team inside the TSBD for which there is no evidence.
-
It doesn't require me to assume there was a sniper team inside the TSBD for which there is no evidence.
But John, Royell Storing has PROVEN that it's a getaway car :D :D
-
But John, Royell Storing has PROVEN that it's a getaway car :D :D
To his satisfaction.
-
I don't have an explanation because there isn't enough information to form one. I can speculate about a possible scenario without stating it as if it were fact which is what you do.
A car started down the Elm St. extension, only to be stopped as the motorcade reached Houston and Elm. Once the shots were fired, there was resulting chaos. Traffic came to a standstill and the occupant(s) realizing they weren't going to be able to exit any time soon, simply parked the car and left on foot to wherever they were intending to go. They came back 3 hours later after things had calmed down.
There's as much evidence for my scenario as there is for yours and while yours sounds more interesting, mine is mundane and far more plausible. It doesn't require me to assume there was a sniper team inside the TSBD for which there is no evidence.
For starters, do you know for a fact that whoever parked that car in the "NO PARKING........" Zone, did come back? Do you know for certain that this "getaway" car was Not towed out of Dealey Plaza by law enforcement?
I am the only person over 62+ years to ever notice that this car is Not on the Wiegman Film. And, I am NOW tying those 2 Guys moving away from the car on the Couch Film to this same car. I have now Proven that these 2 Guys are NOT Shelley and Lovelady. Brick by Brick, Fact by Fact, I continue proving that this car was an intended "getaway" car. To this point, nobody has produced anything that disproves my claim. My Challenge Stands!
-
For starters, do you know for a fact that whoever parked that car in the "NO PARKING........" Zone, did come back? Do you know for certain that this "getaway" car was Not towed out of Dealey Plaza by law enforcement?
Of course I don't know. That's why I said up front there wasn't enough information for me to give an explanation. There is only room for speculation since there are so many unknowns. The difference between us is I know when I am speculating while you treat your speculations as if they are proven facts. To be fair, you aren't the only conspiracy hobbyist I have dealt with over the years who exhibits this trait. I find it to be quite common and almost a requirement to be a conspiracy hobbyist.
I am the only person over 62+ years to ever notice that this car is Not on the Wiegman Film.
That should tell you something....but probably won't.
And, I am NOW tying those 2 Guys moving away from the car on the Couch Film to this same car. I have now Proven that these 2 Guys are NOT Shelley and Lovelady. Brick by Brick, Fact by Fact, I continue proving that this car was an intended "getaway" car. To this point, nobody has produced anything that disproves my claim. My Challenge Stands!
This is where you turn to speculation. You haven't proven jack. You don't even understand what constitutes proof. The person with the hypothesis has the burden of proof. It is up to you to prove your hypothesis. Nobody else has the burden of disproving it. It's all on you to prove what you claim. It's as if I proposed that there are herds of pink unicorns roaming on the far side of the moon and the reason none of our spacecraft have observed them is because they duck into a deep crater whenever they detect a spacecraft flying by. Prove me wrong. If you can't, it must be a fact.
-
Of course I don't know. That's why I said up front there wasn't enough information for me to give an explanation. There is only room for speculation since there are so many unknowns. The difference between us is I know when I am speculating while you treat your speculations as if they are proven facts. To be fair, you aren't the only conspiracy hobbyist I have dealt with over the years who exhibits this trait. I find it to be quite common and almost a requirement to be a conspiracy hobbyist.
That should tell you something....but probably won't.
This is where you turn to speculation. You haven't proven jack. You don't even understand what constitutes proof. The person with the hypothesis has the burden of proof. It is up to you to prove your hypothesis. Nobody else has the burden of disproving it. It's all on you to prove what you claim. It's as if I proposed that there are herds of pink unicorns roaming on the far side of the moon and the reason none of our spacecraft have observed them is because they duck into a deep crater whenever they detect a spacecraft flying by. Prove me wrong. If you can't, it must be a fact.
I have proven that is NOT LOVELADY walking next to the car on the Couch Film. This was repeated by people such as yourself for 62+ years to the point of being widely accepted. To this day you are echoing this JFK Urban Legend. The Image Evidence which includes Officer Baker is conclusively. Lovelady is Not one of those "2 Guys" walking away from the car on the Couch Film. So what 2 guys could get into this position alongside the car only 20 seconds after the kill shot? Answer - "2 Guys" that were previously sitting inside that car.
-
Common Sense tells us it is impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, tell everyone there about the assassination, after which Shelley and Lovelady are pictured walking down the Elm St Ext.
100% that did not happen.
Trolls like Tom are not interested in Common Sense or what's possible in reality.
As far as he is concerned, Kamp has magically produced an image of Lovelady and no amount of evidence can change what's left of his mind.
However, it is perfectly possible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps in the allotted time, where Darnell pictured her telling Lovelady and everyone on the steps about the assassination:
(https://i.postimg.cc/JnLcscP6/Lovelady-Darnell-Close.png)
This is a Blowup of a Darnell Film still frame. That figure you see showing a ton of "forehead" is Lovelady. He is standing on almost the very same spot as we saw him on the classic Altgens photo. This is Lovelady. This is 20 seconds after the Kill Shot.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
[url(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
This is a still frame from the Couch Film. On the extreme (R) we see Officer Baker running toward the TSBD front door. This is only 20 seconds after the Kill Shot. Those "2 Guys" you see alongside the car, have just gotten out of that car. Officer Baker and Officer Smith having just run by this intended "getaway" car, have flushed them out of the car.
-
Of course I remember, Pinko.
This is the lie...sorry, fabrication... I'm talking about, so obviously I remember.
I've argued all along that Shelley immediately ran from the steps and met Gloria coming the other way. He states this in his affidavit. (People such as yourself have to ignore the fact that, during his WC testimony, Shelley completely changes his story, stating that he stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria ran up).
The 'fabrication' I have to keep calling you out on is the part where Shelley calls Lovelady to join him. You've invented that. It's your fabrication. It is not based on any testimonial evidence whatsoever. It's a lie you have to tell because you can't find any other way of getting Lovelady and Shelley on to the Elm Street Ext. within 25 seconds.
You have swallowed down Kamp's 'Lovelady' image without question even though it has been demonstrated that this image is dubious, to say the least, and now it's been pointed out that it's physically impossible for Shelley and Lovelady to do what they attested to in their WC testimonies AND be on Elm St within 25 seconds, you've had to invent this lie. If it's any comfort, Lance "I think I've Had An Accident" Payette did exactly the same thing.
On the other hand, my own identification of Lovelady in Darnell does not require me to lie my way through an explanation and makes perfect sense with the known timings:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
This is a Darnell Film still frame showing the front of the TSBD only 20 seconds after the kill shot. On the (L) we see Officer Baker running toward the TSBD front door. Between Officer Baker and that TSBD front door, we see BILLY LOVELADY. Lovelady is standing in almost the very same spot we see him on the classic Altgens photo. Without a doubt, this is Lovelady and Officer Baker 20 seconds after the kill.
-
This is a Darnell Film still frame showing the front of the TSBD only 20 seconds after the kill shot. On the (L) we see Officer Baker running toward the TSBD front door. Between Officer Baker and that TSBD front door, we see BILLY LOVELADY. Lovelady is standing in almost the very same spot we see him on the classic Altgens photo. Without a doubt, this is Lovelady and Officer Baker 20 seconds after the kill.
Who cares?
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
[(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
This is a Couch Film still frame. It happened at 20 seconds after the kill shot. On the extreme (R) you see Officer Baker running toward the TSBD front door. Behind Officer Baker, we see "2 Guys" moving away from a parked car. In front of Officer Baker, standing on the TSBD front steps, is BILLY LOVELADY. It is Physically Impossible for either of the "2 Guys" we see behind Officer Baker to be Bill Lovelady. Billy Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time.
-
Common Sense tells us it is impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, tell everyone there about the assassination, after which Shelley and Lovelady are pictured walking down the Elm St Ext.
100% that did not happen.
Trolls like Tom are not interested in Common Sense or what's possible in reality.
As far as he is concerned, Kamp has magically produced an image of Lovelady and no amount of evidence can change what's left of his mind.
However, it is perfectly possible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps in the allotted time, where Darnell pictured her telling Lovelady and everyone on the steps about the assassination:
(https://i.postimg.cc/JnLcscP6/Lovelady-Darnell-Close.png)
This is a Darnell Film still frame Blowup. It is timestamped as being 20 seconds after the kill shot. The figure you see with all the forehead showing is Billy Lovelady. He is standing on the steps in front of the TSBD. He is almost standing in the very same spot that the Altgens photo showed him to be standing. Without a doubt, this is Lovelady 20 seconds after the kill shot. Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time. Lovelady is Not one of the "2 Guys" distancing themselves from the "getaway" car on the Couch Film.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
DAN - It doesn't matter if there is a pattern or something else on that shirt. Above, I have proven that Lovelady is standing on the steps in front of the TSBD when this Couch still frame was taken only 20 seconds after the kill shot. Bart Kamp needs to realize that these "2 Guys" have just jumped out of the "getaway" car they are now distancing themselves from. As technology sharpens these JFK Assassination Images, it's JFK Urban Legends such as this Lovelady ID that are being put asunder.
-
Bart Kamp needs to realize that these "2 Guys" have just jumped out of the "getaway" car they are now distancing themselves from.
You have a lot of nerve telling anybody, much less a researcher of the quality of Bart Kamp, what they "need to realize." Or perhaps you should just sit in the getaway car for three hours like your imaginary conspirators meant to do?
-
You have a lot of nerve telling anybody, much less a researcher of the quality of Bart Kamp, what they "need to realize." Or perhaps you should just sit in the getaway car for three hours like your imaginary conspirators meant to do?
Thanks for agreeing with my having Proved that Bart Kamp got it wrong. Lovelady is clearly standing on the steps in front of the TSBD, at the very same time that these "2 Guys" are moving away from the "getaway" car. I am not familiar with the overall track record of Kamp. With respect to the "Lovelady ID" that Kamp has been pushing for some time now, Kamp got it wrong.
-
Thanks for agreeing with my having Proved that Bart Kamp got it wrong. Lovelady is clearly standing on the steps in front of the TSBD, at the very same time that these "2 Guys" are moving away from the "getaway" car. I am not familiar with the overall track record of Kamp. With respect to the "Lovelady ID" that Kamp has been pushing for some time now, Kamp got it wrong.
You can say "getaway car" another thousand times and it's still not going to make it a getaway. Not even if you say it while tapping your ruby slippers together. It's still going to just be a car.
-
You have a lot of nerve telling anybody, much less a researcher of the quality of Bart Kamp, what they "need to realize." Or perhaps you should just sit in the getaway car for three hours like your imaginary conspirators meant to do?
I have proven: (1) Kamp is wrong, (2) That Ain't Officer Haygood, and, (3) That CAR is NOT on the Wiegman Film. I know it hurts having your hero taken down, but my batting average beats his all to heck. Ignore those You Tube bells and whistles surrounding this guy, do the math, and get some immediate treatment for your "Storing Derangement Syndrome" (SDS).
-
There are a number of forum members who have certain expertise when it comes to image analysis.
Are you being serious or did you just post that for laughs. You succeeded at the latter.
-
You guys continue bowing at the Kamp alter, but he did totally botch his Lovelady ID. And then there's his "Prayer Man" debacle. His scorecard has him right on track to become the next curator at the Sixth Floor Museum.
-
You guys continue bowing at the Kamp alter, but he did totally botch his Lovelady ID. And then there's his "Prayer Man" debacle. His scorecard has him right on track to become the next curator at the Sixth Floor Museum.
And they'll make a life-size wax figure of you and put it in the "Useful Idiots" wing of the Kremlin.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
SHANKS - KAMP and YOU got the above Lovelady ID WRONG. And, YOU also boned the Officer Haygood ID on the Darnell Film. And let's not forget your claiming that Witt's HSCA Testimony was ALL hunky dory. This runs your current record to 0-3. I haven't seen a losing streak like this since Cinque. Is that what you are chasing?
-
SHANKS - KAMP and YOU got the above Lovelady ID WRONG. And, YOU also boned the Officer Haygood ID on the Darnell Film. And let's not forget your claiming that Witt's HSCA Testimony was ALL hunky dory. This runs your current record to 0-3. I haven't seen a losing streak like this since Cinque. Is that what you are chasing?
Well in addition to you being a joke of a photo analyst, you apparently aren't good at reading comprehension either, because I have never said a word on this forum, or to you, about Billy Lovelady.
-
Well in addition to you being a joke of a photo analyst, you apparently aren't good at reading comprehension either, because I have never said a word on this forum, or to you, about Billy Lovelady.
Great. Now you are running away from Bart Kamp. You are yet another that likes to simply throw in with others. YOU, individually, have absolutely nothing to offer. You're nothing more than a "band waggoner". A 'Back Slapper". Now that I have blown up the Bart Kamp ID of Lovelady, you are jumping off. The problem with jumping off is you are Now All Alone. And exactly what do you Now, all by your lonesome, have to offer? Nothing! Absolutely Nothing!! There is not an Original JFK Assassination thought in your head. Never has been.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png[/img]
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
(http://[img)
The timestamp for the above image is 20 seconds after the Kill Shot. The "2 Guys" we see alongside the "getaway" Car are NOT Lovelady and Shelley. The cavalierly awarded Lovelady/Shelley ID's have stood for decades. Those ID's are WRONG! I have conclusively proven we are Not seeing Lovelady and Shelley based on images showing both of them being on the TSBD Steps as Officer Baker runs toward the TSBD. Where did these "2 Guys" on the above image come from in order to arrive at this position next to the "getaway" car only 20 seconds after the Kill Shot? These "2 Guys" simply got out of the "getaway" car. They are now moving toward the "Wide Open" Huge Gates and the railroad yard. They are distancing themselves from their NOW Abandoned "Getaway" Car. This car would be in this same position for 3+ Hrs minimum.
-
Of course I remember, Pinko.
This is the lie...sorry, fabrication... I'm talking about, so obviously I remember.
I've argued all along that Shelley immediately ran from the steps and met Gloria coming the other way. He states this in his affidavit. (People such as yourself have to ignore the fact that, during his WC testimony, Shelley completely changes his story, stating that he stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria ran up).
The 'fabrication' I have to keep calling you out on is the part where Shelley calls Lovelady to join him. You've invented that. It's your fabrication. It is not based on any testimonial evidence whatsoever. It's a lie you have to tell because you can't find any other way of getting Lovelady and Shelley on to the Elm Street Ext. within 25 seconds.
You have swallowed down Kamp's 'Lovelady' image without question even though it has been demonstrated that this image is dubious, to say the least, and now it's been pointed out that it's physically impossible for Shelley and Lovelady to do what they attested to in their WC testimonies AND be on Elm St within 25 seconds, you've had to invent this lie. If it's any comfort, Lance "I think I've Had An Accident" Payette did exactly the same thing.
On the other hand, my own identification of Lovelady in Darnell does not require me to lie my way through an explanation and makes perfect sense with the known timings:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
Bump regarding Lovelady/Shelley being on the TSBD as Officer Baker ran toward the TSBD.
The "2 GUYS" alongside the "getaway" car on the Couch Film are NOT Lovelady and Shelley.
-
As keen-eyed observers know, Royell's posts are now invisible to me because he has been consigned to the nutcase wing of the Ignore bin. However, since this silly thread is now back up near the top of the first page, I can only assume that HE HAS CONTACTED BART KAMP, as I DID and as I SUGGESTED AT LEAST FIVE TIMES THAT HE OR DAN O'MEARA DO and that he is now sharing with the forum the fruits of his dialogue with Bart. If I am mistaken, please allow me to live with my comforting assumptions and don't break the news that, no, Royell is all hot air and not man enough to contact Bart.
-
Interesting how the guy on the steps has on shirt that is too Fuzzy to determine any stripes , similar to the shirt on the guy walking away that Dan questions is Lovelady because … not sure there are any stripes… hehe
-
Common Sense tells us it is impossible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps, tell everyone there about the assassination, after which Shelley and Lovelady are pictured walking down the Elm St Ext.
100% that did not happen.
Trolls like Tom are not interested in Common Sense or what's possible in reality.
As far as he is concerned, Kamp has magically produced an image of Lovelady and no amount of evidence can change what's left of his mind.
However, it is perfectly possible for Gloria to make it back to the front steps in the allotted time, where Darnell pictured her telling Lovelady and everyone on the steps about the assassination:
(https://i.postimg.cc/JnLcscP6/Lovelady-Darnell-Close.png)
If this ain't Lovelady, " l'll eat a bug". (As Cal Worthington used to say).
That balding/massive forehead of Lovelady is his "calling card". Plus, this balding figure is standing very close to where Lovelady was captured on Altgens 6. DPD Officer Baker is running directly toward this figure. BEHIND Officer Baker are the "2 Guys" that just exited the "getaway" car on the Couch and Darnell Films. Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time. Lovelady is Not one of the "2 Guys" that we see moving away from the intended "getaway" car.
-
There are a number of forum members who have certain expertise when it comes to image analysis.
I am completely out of my comfort zone with that sort of thing, so I need a helping hand trying to understand how the image below was created.
(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
The identification of Lovelady in the above image has been described as "conclusive" and "definitive".
Even though the known testimonial evidence relating to this identification, when taken as a whole, completely refutes this identification (as I've been arguing on a different thread).
It has boiled down to so-called researchers simply ignoring the evidence because how can the "testimonial evidence affect what we can see with our own eyes?"
After all, just look at the level of detail in the shirt. It is clearly Lovelady's shirt because it is so distinctive and we can clearly see the pattern of it.
At some point in the debate on the other thread I posted this crop from the Gerda Dunkel footage:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wMQ2KzcZ/Shelley-Lovelady-Dunkelclose.png)
I was struck by the lack of detail on 'Lovelady's' shirt.
There didn't seem to be even the faintest trace of it.
I knew Kamp had used Photoshop to sharpen the images but when I tried it I got nothing.
So I had a look on the Prayer Man website where other forum members kept pointing me towards to see if I could get a better understanding. In the part about the image Kamp writes:
"For starters, take a look at the Gerda Dunckel gifs below and check Lovelady’s shirt in the very first few frames and also check out the large still I snagged from PBS Breaking The News, click to enlarge, yes that shirt is checkered, compare it to other garments of a lighter colour or the polka dot coat which do not smudge due to motion and quality loss. Then look at Shelly, with his black suit and his facial and hair features."
I've already posted the Dunkel image and there is no checkered image there so he must be referring to the PBS image posted on the website, from which I got this image (all I did was blow the image up and crop it from the original image):
(https://i.postimg.cc/KY2vK8GC/Lovelady-Kemp1.png)
Now, with all the best will in the world, I'm not seeing the checkered pattern that Kamp is insisting is there.
I can see four pieces of rectangular, what I would call, photographic 'noise' impinging on the right side of' Lovelady' as we look at him and there is a similar effect bleeding over between the two men. But no checkered pattern.
If any of our resident images can make a comment on my assessment of this I would be grateful.
So, we then come to the image that the amazing level of detail on Lovelady's shirt appears to be taken from. As Kamp explains:
This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives.
(https://i.postimg.cc/JzWQPSR5/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
And this is where my complete lack of expertise kicks in.
In the above image we can now clearly see that there is a defined pattern on Lovelady's shirt.
There is a square of a lighter shade around the two men. I don't know if it was like that when Kemp originally got the image or if this is a result of his work on the image. If it is I would really like to see the original image
But here's the thing I'm not getting. To my eye, the Sprague image (from which we get the "definitive" Lovelady) lacks an incredible amount of detail compared to this large crop PBS image:
(https://i.postimg.cc/zvzyySNN/Lovelady-Kemp3.png)
Note in PBS image, the pattern of the first floor 'windows',the concrete lattice in front of the windows, and then notice the complete lack of it in the Sprague image. Just compare the two images in general and we acn see that the PBS image is a far more detailed, yet the close-up of Lovelady in that image does not have any hint of the incredible shirt pattern in the inferior Sprague image.
Can anyone help me understand this?
LATER EDIT:
If anyone has, or can point me to, the Couch film that has the amazing level of detail please could you post it because every version I've come across so far is not anywhere near close the definition required
Just look at those "Bag Ladies" standing on the very corner of the Island as the Elm St sidewalk wraps around the corner. There is only a fine sliver of the Island between that Traffic Signal Pole and the Elm St Extension. Fedora Man was standing close to the Traffic Signal Pole on the Wiegman Film. What we see through the legs of Fedora Man is the actual surface street of the Elm St Extension. And why are we able to see the surface street behind him? Because the "getaway" car is Not parked on the Elm St Extension. Not Yet!
-
This is a Darnell Film still frame Blowup. It is timestamped as being 20 seconds after the kill shot. The figure you see with all the forehead showing is Billy Lovelady. He is standing on the steps in front of the TSBD. He is almost standing in the very same spot that the Altgens photo showed him to be standing. Without a doubt, this is Lovelady 20 seconds after the kill shot. Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time. Lovelady is Not one of the "2 Guys" distancing themselves from the "getaway" car on the Couch Film.
If that’s Lovelady then its doubtful that he and Shelly can do all they said they did and get back to the west.side rear door entrance in time to be the 2 unidentified men that Baker and Truly met 50 secs later at the rear elevators 1st floor.
But it can’t be Oswald there on the steps 20
sec post shots either because everyone has been gradually led to believe that the Altgens 6 photo at Z255 must be Lovelady even though no one has replicated that weird position and photograph it such that the lower shirt sleeve (with no hand !?) appears IN FRONT of whom ever the black guy is standing at the base of the steps. ( it’s either Roy Lewis or the big guy named Carl something).
-
If that’s Lovelady then its doubtful that he and Shelly can do all they said they did and get back to the west.side rear door entrance in time to be the 2 unidentified men that Baker and Truly met 50 secs later at the rear elevators 1st floor.
But it can’t be Oswald there on the steps 20
sec post shots either because everyone has been gradually led to believe that the Altgens 6 photo at Z255 must be Lovelady even though no one has replicated that weird position and photograph it such that the lower shirt sleeve (with no hand !?) appears IN FRONT of whom ever the black guy is standing at the base of the steps. ( it’s either Roy Lewis or the big guy named Carl something).
I agree. That was Not Lovelady & Shelley that were back by the freight elevator when Truly and Baker were back there. There is Nothing to support that claim.
-
I agree. That was Not Lovelady & Shelley that were back by the freight elevator when Truly and Baker were back there. There is Nothing to support that claim.
That’s right because Adams /Stiles got to the ground floor by 60 secs and if they saw Lovelady / Shelley then it’s an amazing teleportation trick.
-
That’s right because Adams /Stiles got to the ground floor by 60 secs and if they saw Lovelady / Shelley then it’s an amazing teleportation trick.
The :50 seconds after the kill shot there were "2 Guys" near the freight elevator is a screwy story. That's exceptionally quick for anyone to get back there.
Bart Kamp is now challenging the Oswald/Officer Baker 2nd floor lunchroom confrontation. He thinks that did Not happen. Baker/Truly arriving at the freight elevator :50 seconds after the kill shot, may might been fabricated to fit their arriving at the 2nd Floor at the same time as Oswald allegedly did.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
Those "2 Guys" alongside the "getaway" car above, just exited that vehicle. DPD Officer Smith, (on the (L)), just ran past the driver side of their car, and they witnessed DPD Motorcycle officer Baker, ( running behind them), rounding the corner and parking his motorcycle along the Elm St Curb. All of this is happening about 20 seconds after the Kill Shot. These conspirators did Not anticipate law enforcement being all around them this quickly. They are now distancing themselves from this "getaway" car and heading toward the "wide open" Huge Gates. Their expected passenger(s) would soon be exiting those same "wide open" Huge Gates.
-
That’s right because Adams /Stiles got to the ground floor by 60 secs and if they saw Lovelady / Shelley then it’s an amazing teleportation trick.
What's an amazing teleportation trick?
Lovelady and Shelley had to walk to the back of the first floor.
It's a distance of around 80 feet from the front steps.
This can be walked in 20 seconds at a very leisurely pace.
-
What's an amazing teleportation trick?
Lovelady and Shelley had to walk to the back of the first floor.
It's a distance of around 80 feet from the front steps.
This can be walked in 20 seconds at a very leisurely pace.
We see Lovelady and Shelley are still standing on the TSBD front steps as Officer Baker runs toward the TSBD. This would be about 25 seconds after the Kill Shot. This leaves them 35 seconds to immediately leave the TSBD front steps and then travel to the 1st floor freight elevator area. They never testified that they took this trip to the freight elevator and the 35 second time restraint also rules it out. Those 2 guys back by the freight elevator were Not Lovelady and Shelley.
-
We see Lovelady and Shelley are still standing on the TSBD front steps as Officer Baker runs toward the TSBD. This would be about 25 seconds after the Kill Shot. This leaves them 35 seconds to immediately leave the TSBD front steps and then travel to the 1st floor freight elevator area. They never testified that they took this trip to the freight elevator and the 35 second time restraint also rules it out. Those 2 guys back by the freight elevator were Not Lovelady and Shelley.
Victoria Adams hit the first floor running around 60 seconds after the shooting and she saw Shelley and Lovelady not far from the elevators.
Truly and Baker arrived seconds later and Baker saw two white men in the same area.
Your suggestion that Shelley and Lovelady could not have made it from the front steps to somewhere near the elevators in 35 seconds is utter nonsense. It's no more than 80 feet and can be covered comfortably in 15 to 20 seconds.
In their initial statements both Lovelady and Shelley basically said they went straight back in the building after the shooting (Shelley ran across the street and back). They lied about their movements in subsequent statements.
-
Victoria Adams hit the first floor running around 60 seconds after the shooting and she saw Shelley and Lovelady not far from the elevators.
Truly and Baker arrived seconds later and Baker saw two white men in the same area.
Your suggestion that Shelley and Lovelady could not have made it from the front steps to somewhere near the elevators in 35 seconds is utter nonsense. It's no more than 80 feet and can be covered comfortably in 15 to 20 seconds.
In their initial statements both Lovelady and Shelley basically said they went straight back in the building after the shooting (Shelley ran across the street and back). They lied about their movements in subsequent statements.
What Lovelady/Shelley "initial statements" are you referring to? I see they gave WC Testimony, but I am Not familiar with their "initial statements".
-
What Lovelady/Shelley "initial statements" are you referring to? I see they gave WC Testimony, but I am Not familiar with their "initial statements".
On the day of the assassination Shelley and Lovelady gave affidavits to the Dallas Police Department.
These are the initial statements they made regarding their activities around the time of the assassination.
By "initial" I mean that these are the very first official statements they made.
In his affidavit Shelley basically said that, after the shots he ran across the Elm Street Extension, met Gloria Calvery coming the other way, returned to the building and went inside to phone his wife.
In his affidavit Lovelady states that after the shooting he went back inside the building.
In their later lies both men insist that after the shooting they stood on the steps for around 3 minutes, spoke with Gloria Calvery, wandered across to the concrete spur that divides the Elm Streets, saw Truly and Baker outside the building, wandered down to the railroad yard where they stayed for a few minutes, then entered the building via the little known west door.
Both men forget to mention all this in their initial statements because what they actually did was as follows:
Both men were stood on the front steps when the shots were fired.
Shelley ran across the extension and bumped into a distraught Gloria Calvery who was screaming that the President had been shot. He ran back to the steps with her while she told Lovelady, and everyone else on the steps about the shooting. While this was happening Baker arrives and goes up the front steps into the lobby. Shelley, Lovelady and Truly go up the steps and enter the lobby. Shelley and Lovelady make their way to the back of the first floor while Baker is talking to Truly. Adams sees Shelley and Lovelady as she races to the back door. Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive on the scene where Baker sees the two white men who can only be Shelley and Lovelady.
-
According to Lovelady in WC testimony, He said he left the steps and went out about 100 yds and then he went back into the TSBD by the WEST side door( at the northwest side of TSBD) . He estimated about 3 minutes had elapsed from having left the front steps to having returned to enter the TSBD.
I take it Dan has concluded that Lovelady and Shelley are fabricating this story of leaving the front steps and they were doing that to discredit Adams /Stiles 60 sec time estimate reaching the ground floor because that puts Dorothy Garners leaving the 4th floor office as soon as 30 secs post shots. Thus, No way Oswald could not be seen by Garner if that timeline was reasonably established via Adams seeing Lovelady at the rear elevators.
So it may be that the WC wanted to avoid Dorothy Garner since they did not call her as a witness. And if Adams is to be believed that she saw Lovelady when she got to the 1st floor by 60 secs post shots, then it’s not implausible that the WC might decide that Adams time should be established based on Loveladys 3 minute timeline.
My problem is I find it hard to believe that Lovelady and Shelly who had nothing to gain and whom would be taking a quit a risk of perjury would go this extent of fabricating a story and giving WC testimony to substantiate it.
What other possibility other than some alteration of the Darnell film using the Wiegman film image of Lovelady ( presumably him) on the steps and the conspirators missed seeing those 2 guys that look like Lovelady and Shelley?
-
On the day of the assassination Shelley and Lovelady gave affidavits to the Dallas Police Department.
These are the initial statements they made regarding their activities around the time of the assassination.
By "initial" I mean that these are the very first official statements they made.
In his affidavit Shelley basically said that, after the shots he ran across the Elm Street Extension, met Gloria Calvery coming the other way, returned to the building and went inside to phone his wife.
In his affidavit Lovelady states that after the shooting he went back inside the building.
In their later lies both men insist that after the shooting they stood on the steps for around 3 minutes, spoke with Gloria Calvery, wandered across to the concrete spur that divides the Elm Streets, saw Truly and Baker outside the building, wandered down to the railroad yard where they stayed for a few minutes, then entered the building via the little known west door.
Both men forget to mention all this in their initial statements because what they actually did was as follows:
Both men were stood on the front steps when the shots were fired.
Shelley ran across the extension and bumped into a distraught Gloria Calvery who was screaming that the President had been shot. He ran back to the steps with her while she told Lovelady, and everyone else on the steps about the shooting. While this was happening Baker arrives and goes up the front steps into the lobby. Shelley, Lovelady and Truly go up the steps and enter the lobby. Shelley and Lovelady make their way to the back of the first floor while Baker is talking to Truly. Adams sees Shelley and Lovelady as she races to the back door. Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive on the scene where Baker sees the two white men who can only be Shelley and Lovelady.
Thanks. You basically believe Shelley and Lovelady lied in their WC Testimonies.
Your having Lovelady and Shelley go through the TSBD front door and then walk back to the freight elevator, throws off the WC timeline of Truly and Baker going back there. And likewise, Baker then confronting Oswald inside the 2nd floor lunchroom. You are resetting those timelines.
-
Those "2 Guys" alongside the "getaway" car above, just exited that vehicle. DPD Officer Smith, (on the (L)), just ran past the driver side of their car, and they witnessed DPD Motorcycle officer Baker, ( running behind them), rounding the corner and parking his motorcycle along the Elm St Curb. All of this is happening about 20 seconds after the Kill Shot. These conspirators did Not anticipate law enforcement being all around them this quickly. They are now distancing themselves from this "getaway" car and heading toward the "wide open" Huge Gates. Their expected passenger(s) would soon be exiting those same "wide open" Huge Gates.
It looks to me in both Kamps image as well as the darker image that the guy is wearing a SHORT sleeve shirt .
-
Thanks. You basically believe Shelley and Lovelady lied in their WC Testimonies.
Your having Lovelady and Shelley go through the TSBD front door and then walk back to the freight elevator, throws off the WC timeline of Truly and Baker going back there. And likewise, Baker then confronting Oswald inside the 2nd floor lunchroom. You are resetting those timelines.
No, read the post again.
-
No, read the post again.
Personally, I believe the current assigned timelines of those involved have been jiggered in order to get Officer Baker in position to allegedly see a figure moving on the other side of the vestibule door window. Your scenario of Lovelady/Shelley going through the TSBD front door actually resets these timelines where they should be. You need to put on your Big Boy Pants and accept this. Sure, you're gonna have to dodge the barbs that will instantly be hurled at you, but they also did likewise to Nikola Tesla. And look where he stands today.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
DAN - You did an Outstanding job on this entire thread. Start to finish top notch. I do Not always agree with you, but your positions and the visual aids you supply to support your positions are A-1. YOU and "The Nutty Professor" compliment each other well. And I mean this in a good way. If we were to compile a "TOP 10 Threads EVER", this thread would make that list. Maybe in the Top 5. This thread is without a doubt a very educational and entertaining thread. That is a tuff combination to put together. But, YOU did it. Congrats!
-
So the consensus among the One Glove Bogus Imposter Haygood Huge Gates Getaway Car faction is that Bart Kamp, Mr. Prayer Man himself and one of the all-time CT proponents (as well, I might add, as a seemingly very nice guy and a highly respected researcher), somehow faked his images of Shelley and Lovelady for no apparent reason? Yeah, makes sense, I like it! ::)
If Royell ever congratulates me on the quality of my work, maybe I'll just kill myself.
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
PAYETTE - This has absolutely nothing to do with whether Bart Kamp is a "nice guy" or not. Lovelady is standing on the steps in front of the TSBD when this Couch still frame was taken. It is physically impossible for the individual on the (R) to be Lovelady. Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time.
-
So the consensus among the One Glove Bogus Imposter Haygood Huge Gates Getaway Car faction is that Bart Kamp, Mr. Prayer Man himself and one of the all-time CT proponents (as well, I might add, as a seemingly very nice guy and a highly respected researcher), somehow faked his images of Shelley and Lovelady for no apparent reason? Yeah, makes sense, I like it! ::)
If Royell ever congratulates me on the quality of my work, maybe I'll just kill myself.
This thread is asking genuine questions that neither you, nor anyone else, has been able to answer.
How did Bart Kamp come up with the extraordinarily detailed picture of 'Lovelady' from a degraded image? Why can't this detail be recreated from a far superior image?
It's not complicated.
It is beyond simple.
You have no explanation, not even a theory, not even a suggestion.
You offer nothing.
So, why not be a good boy and stick to topics that you can contribute to.
-
This thread is asking genuine questions that neither you, nor anyone else, has been able to answer.
How did Bart Kamp come up with the extraordinarily detailed picture of 'Lovelady' from a degraded image? Why can't this detail be recreated from a far superior image?
It's not complicated.
It is beyond simple.
You have no explanation, not even a theory, not even a suggestion.
You offer nothing.
So, why not be a good boy and stick to topics that you can contribute to.
Well, let's see:
1. I contacted Bart Kamp and asked for his explanation of the image. He was kind enough to respond. I shared that response here. Since the title of the thread is "How Did Bart Kamp Create the Lovelady Image?" - well, my little contribution seems rather relevant to me.
2. I repeatedly posted Bart's contact information and challenged anyone with the cojones to do so to contact him directly. While boldly accusing Bart of fakery, no one else had the cojones to contact him. Why? We know why: because Bart, his work and his reputation are way out of your league and it's way more fun to accuse and speculate than actually attempt to resolve an issue that might eviscerate some beloved conspiracy factoid.
Royell is a Grade A buffoon. Everyone here, presumably including you, knows it. If the question as to how Bart enhanced the image is "beyond simple," THEN ASK HIM, I could crush a Grape ooooh yummy yummy.
-
Well, let's see:
1. I contacted Bart Kamp and asked for his explanation of the image. He was kind enough to respond. I shared that response here. Since the title of the thread is "How Did Bart Kamp Create the Lovelady Image?" - well, my little contribution seems rather relevant to me.
2. I repeatedly posted Bart's contact information and challenged anyone with the cojones to do so to contact him directly. While boldly accusing Bart of fakery, no one else had the cojones to contact him. Why? We know why: because Bart, his work and his reputation are way out of your league and it's way more fun to accuse and speculate than actually attempt to resolve an issue that might eviscerate some beloved conspiracy factoid.
Royell is a Grade A buffoon. Everyone here, presumably including you, knows it. If the question as to how Bart enhanced the image is "beyond simple," THEN ASK HIM, I could crush a Grape ooooh yummy yummy.
How did Kamp get such amazing detail from such a degraded image?
Why can't this level of detail be recreated from a superior image?
You have swallowed down his identification of 'Lovelady' wholesale, without even bothering to contemplate these questions.
Even though you are now aware of this issue you still swallow it down.
You're so critical of Royell, but what does that make you? Gullible? Lazy?
Here's a thought for you to mull over - it is impossible to to get greater detail from the inferior image. Have a little think about this FACT.
So, the question remains, still unanswered - How did Bart Kamp create the Lovelady image?
PS: that you think this question doesn't need answering because Kamp is such an amazing researcher speaks volumes about your approach to uncovering the truth.
-
How did Kamp get such amazing detail from such a degraded image?
Why can't this level of detail be recreated from a superior image?
You have swallowed down his identification of 'Lovelady' wholesale, without even bothering to contemplate these questions.
Even though you are now aware of this issue you still swallow it down.
You're so critical of Royell, but what does that make you? Gullible? Lazy?
Here's a thought for you to mull over - it is impossible to to get greater detail from the inferior image. Have a little think about this FACT.
So, the question remains, still unanswered - How did Bart Kamp create the Lovelady image?
PS: that you think this question doesn't need answering because Kamp is such an amazing researcher speaks volumes about your approach to uncovering the truth.
Some lonely people have "idols". Sometimes to the extent of being a "crush". Payette thinks he was emailing with Kamp. It was probably more like he got in touch with a "poser" inna basement, onna keyboard, that was laughing his Bahookie off. This is exactly why old people get fleeced. They take Everything at face value. This includes this claimed "Lovelady Image". You have asked a very simple question regarding a JFK Assassination Image. There is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong, is that the guy attacking you is probably sitting on a deed to the Brooklyn Bridge as his retirement "nest egg".
-
Some lonely people have "idols". Sometimes to the extent of being a "crush". Payette thinks he was emailing with Kamp. It was probably more like he got in touch with a "poser" inna basement, onna keyboard, that was laughing his Bahookie off. This is exactly why old people get fleeced. They take Everything at face value. This includes this claimed "Lovelady Image". You have asked a very simple question regarding a JFK Assassination Image. There is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong, is that the guy attacking you is probably sitting on a deed to the Brooklyn Bridge as his retirement "nest egg".
Is this supposed to be witty or are you actually insane? (Well, I suppose it could be both - couldn't it?) This was not my first communication with Bart. So let's factor this new wrinkle into our conspiracy theory: Lance was actually communicating with Fake Email Bogus Imposter Kamp! Yeah, I like it. It's no more insane that EVERY SINGLE ONE of your other insane posts, so it does have that going for it. Come on, you are just effing D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-E for attention at any price.
-
Since you can see Westbrook and Reed on the steps in the Couch/Darnell clip the timing of the clip is how long it took the two to run back to the steps, talk quickly to Lovelady & Shelley telling them the president had been shot, and then proceed up the front steps where they run face to face in to Molina (Molina not Lovelady)...I'm guessing 25 to 30 seconds...
Seeing how all the testimony ingredients are all there there is no doubt the two men who were sharpened by Kamp are very definitely Lovelady and Shelley...When I tried to tell this to Armstrong he told Hargrove I was an idiot and cut me off...I respect Armstrong but he's just stubbornly wrong on this one...
The running woman by Baker in the white blouse and black skirt is Karan Hicks who followed Westbrook and Reed to the Depository...
-
Since you can see Westbrook and Reed on the steps in the Couch/Darnell clip the timing of the clip is how long it took the two to run back to the steps, talk quickly to Lovelady & Shelley telling them the president had been shot, and then proceed up the front steps where they run face to face in to Molina (Molina not Lovelady)...I'm guessing 25 to 30 seconds...
Seeing how all the testimony ingredients are there there is no doubt the two men who were sharpened by Kamp are very definitely Lovelady and Shelley...When I tried to tell this to Armstrong he told Hargrove I was an idiot and cut me off...I respect Armstrong but he's just stubbornly wrong on this one...
The running woman by Baker in the white blouse and black skirt is Karan Hicks who followed Westbrook and Reed to the Depository...
So you are changing the elapsed time after the kill shot that we are seeing Baker approaching the front steps of the TSBD? Baker is supposed to be crossing the Island at :20 seconds after the kill shot. Your extending this time stamp, also then extends the time stamping of Officer Baker seeing something on the other side of the 2nd Floor vestibule window.
-
Is this supposed to be witty or are you actually insane? (Well, I suppose it could be both - couldn't it?) This was not my first communication with Bart. So let's factor this new wrinkle into our conspiracy theory: Lance was actually communicating with Fake Email Bogus Imposter Kamp! Yeah, I like it. It's no more insane that EVERY SINGLE ONE of your other insane posts, so it does have that going for it. Come on, you are just effing D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-E for attention at any price.
Well let's see: (1) YOU got ripped off $1,000 with the Bogus JFK Assassination Pics, (2) YOU claimed to be "buds" with Kamp, and, (3) Above, YOU steal Rickey Henderson's 3rd person routine. That's 3. "Yer Out!"
-
For the purpose of identifying Lovelady and Shelley I guess it doesn't really matter if it is 20 seconds after the shots...I prefer a little longer because it gives Adams & Styles time to squeak out the rear exit just ahead of Truly & Baker...
Baker saw Oswald standing stationary looking out on to the 2nd Floor staircase landing...When Oswald saw a cop suddenly appear he flinched back and went in to the Lunch Room...This triggered Baker's cop pursuit instincts and he went after Oswald in to the Lunch Room...Baker could never tell the Commission he saw Oswald slack-jawed and looking out at the staircase landing because it would show he was in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the assassination like Hosty admitted to Nigel Turner...What caused Oswald to get up from his lunch and go to the Vestibule door window was Adams & Styles as they clattered by on the landing...The one question the Commission never asked Truly & Baker was "Do you think Oswald was in the Lunch Room the whole time?"...
-
For the purpose of identifying Lovelady and Shelley I guess it doesn't really matter if it is 20 seconds after the shots...I prefer a little longer because it gives Adams & Styles time to squeak out the rear exit just ahead of Truly & Baker...
Baker saw Oswald standing stationary looking out on to the 2nd Floor staircase landing...When Oswald saw a cop suddenly appear he flinched back and went in to the Lunch Room...This triggered Baker's cop pursuit instincts and he went after Oswald in to the Lunch Room...Baker could never tell the Commission he saw Oswald slack-jawed and looking out at the staircase landing because it would show he was in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the assassination like Hosty admitted to Nigel Turner...What caused Oswald to get up from his lunch and go to the Vestibule door window was Adams & Styles as they clattered by on the landing...The one question the Commission never asked Truly & Baker was "Do you think Oswald was in the Lunch Room the whole time?"...
Yes, I too believe that the :20 time stamping is too quick for Officer Baker to accelerate up Houston St, turn onto Elm St around the Camera Cars, park his motorcycle at the Elm St. curb, run up the crowded sidewalk, and then cross the Island onto the Elm St Ext.
Even with this extended timeline, I do Not believe that is Shelley/Lovelady walking down the Elm St Ext on the Couch/Darnell films. I believe that Dan O'meara has done an excellent job of disproving this being Shelley/Lovelady.
-
In Kamp's sharp enlargements you can see Shelley's black jacket and white button down shirt collar coming up above his jacket collar...Shelley's "Duck's Bahookie" hair doo is also seen...Lovelady's plaid shirt pattern and bald spot are visible...The timing is also the exact time that they were said to head up to the Knoll to check out what Gloria Calvery told them...Pretty much a done deal...
What makes the pair definitely Lovelady & Shelley with reasonable certainty is the fact Shelley can be seen pulling up and turning his head to talk to Karan Hicks as she ran by...It is very quick but you can see it in the best slow motion Gerda Dunkel You Tube blow-ups...For some reason Shelley changed talking to Karan Hicks at the concrete island to Gloria Calvery...That swap may have been an honest mistake due to memory or a deliberate muddying of evidence to avoid any witnessing of the conspiracy...
I think I did a bugaboo and called Calvery "Westbrook" in other posts...(Ooops)
-
In Kamp's sharp enlargements you can see Shelley's black jacket and white button down shirt collar coming up above his jacket collar...Shelley's "Duck's Bahookie" hair doo is also seen...Lovelady's plaid shirt pattern and bald spot are visible...The timing is also the exact time that they were said to head up to the Knoll to check out what Gloria Calvery told them...Pretty much a done deal...
What makes the pair definitely Lovelady & Shelley with reasonable certainty is the fact Shelley can be seen pulling up and turning his head to talk to Karan Hicks as she ran by...It is very quick but you can see it in the best slow motion Gerda Dunkel You Tube blow-ups...For some reason Shelley changed talking to Karan Hicks at the concrete island to Gloria Calvery...That swap may have been an honest mistake due to memory or a deliberate muddying of evidence to avoid any witnessing of the conspiracy...
I think I did a bugaboo and called Calvery "Westbrook" in other posts...(Ooops)
Above, you say, "... the exact time that THEY were said to head up to the knoll to check out what Gloria Calvery told them.." Who claimed this is the "exact time" that Shelley/Lovelady went "Up to the knoll". And by "up to the knoll", are you referring to the Island Corner across from the TSBD? Crossing the Elm St Ext and possibly STANDING on/near that Island is Not where we see the "2 Guys" on the Couch/Darnell films. Those "2 Guys" are in the middle of the Elm St Ext, on the driver's side of the car and IN MOTION moving down the Elm St Ext toward the train yard.
-
Oh, dear, this is not going the way Royell had hoped. Let's see, if Royell's and Dan's Fake Shelley and Lovelady are in fact Real Shelley and Lovelady, as they of course are, then where are the conspirators who just exited the Getaway Car in Royell's exotic scenario? Readers await your next move, Royell and Fake Dan, with eager anticipation.
We must, of course, also write Fake Email Bogus Imposter Kamp out of the scenario as well. Oh, dear, how embarrassing.
Bart Kamp has been, of course, the leading proponent of Prayer Man. Notwithstanding this, he has done an amazing amount of valuable research and has assembled one of the truly great JFKA resources, which I have consulted at least a hundred times (just as I have done with the John Armstrong Collection). I find it beyond ludicrous that he would be accused of manipulating an image to generate a Fake Shelley and Lovelady for no conceivable purpose. That this is silly thread has gone on as long as it has tells you WAY more about his accusers than about Bart.
-
Oh, dear, this is not going the way Royell had hoped. Let's see, if Royell's and Dan's Fake Shelley and Lovelady are in fact Real Shelley and Lovelady, as they of course are, then where are the conspirators who just exited the Getaway Car in Royell's exotic scenario? Readers await your next move, Royell and Fake Dan, with eager anticipation.
We must, of course, also write Fake Email Bogus Imposter Kamp out of the scenario as well. Oh, dear, how embarrassing.
Bart Kamp has been, of course, the leading proponent of Prayer Man. Notwithstanding this, he has done an amazing amount of valuable research and has assembled one of the truly great JFKA resources, which I have consulted at least a hundred times (just as I have done with the John Armstrong Collection). I find it beyond ludicrous that he would be accused of manipulating an image to generate a Fake Shelley and Lovelady for no conceivable purpose. That this is silly thread has gone on as long as it has tells you WAY more about his accusers than about Bart.
The Couch/Darnell images show: (1) Shelley/Lovelady still in front of the TSBD , (2) Officer Baker having almost reached the TSBD, and, (3) "2 Guys" behind Officer Baker walking alongside the car. ALL of this is happening simultaneously. It is physically impossible for the "2 Guys" to be Shelley/Lovelady. Shelley/Lovelady can Not be in 2 different places simultaneously.
-
Oh, dear, this is not going the way Royell had hoped. Let's see, if Royell's and Dan's Fake Shelley and Lovelady are in fact Real Shelley and Lovelady, as they of course are, then where are the conspirators who just exited the Getaway Car in Royell's exotic scenario? Readers await your next move, Royell and Fake Dan, with eager anticipation.
We must, of course, also write Fake Email Bogus Imposter Kamp out of the scenario as well. Oh, dear, how embarrassing.
Bart Kamp has been, of course, the leading proponent of Prayer Man. Notwithstanding this, he has done an amazing amount of valuable research and has assembled one of the truly great JFKA resources, which I have consulted at least a hundred times (just as I have done with the John Armstrong Collection). I find it beyond ludicrous that he would be accused of manipulating an image to generate a Fake Shelley and Lovelady for no conceivable purpose. That this is silly thread has gone on as long as it has tells you WAY more about his accusers than about Bart.
John Armstrong, and his cultish online reps, I know you know first hand, because you inspired me by your discovery and interpretation of new, in 1963 postal money order File Locator Numbers enabling a new storage and retrieval scheme of cashed PMOs and the renumbering of the Dallas PO blank money order inventory, is incapable of changing anything new research renders his conclusions and theories obsolete. He just does not want to know any new discovery or analysis because it tends to be much less nefarious than what he thought and presented.
Then, months later, Armstrong and DiEugenio attempted to credit Armstrong with our research results!
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/u-s-postal-money-orders
Friday, 12 February 2016 14:27
U.S. Postal Money Orders
Written by John Armstrong
Print
John Armstrong reveals the details of how money orders were processed in 1963 by the United States Postal Service in order to furnish a backdrop for demonstrating the alleged ordering of the Mannlicher Carcano by Oswald could not have occurred as the Warren Commission and FBI claim.
...
What a sleazy move, a sign of such deep insecurity!
-
John Armstrong, and his cultish online reps, I know you know first hand, because you inspired me by your discovery and interpretation of new, in 1963 postal money order File Locator Numbers enabling a new storage and retrieval scheme of cashed PMOs and the renumbering of the Dallas PO blank money order inventory, is incapable of changing anything new research renders his conclusions and theories obsolete. He just does not want to know any new discovery or analysis because it tends to be much less nefarious than what he thought and presented.
Then, months later, Armstrong and DiEugenio attempted to credit Armstrong with our research results!
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/u-s-postal-money-orders
But that's my point: Bart Kamp and John Armstrong can both be off on what I regard as CT wild goose chases, but they still did am amazing amount of work that is a valuable resource even for a dedicated LNer. That was what Walt Brown said when he recommended Harvey and Lee (the book) - it's a heck of a resource even if the theory (and some of the research) is wrong.
-
But that's my point: Bart Kamp and John Armstrong can both be off on what I regard as CT wild goose chases,
Aren't they all?
-
BUMP - Several excellent points made by Dan O'meara above. And Not a single peep in response. None!
Au contraire, Mr. Completely Insane Huge Gates Getaway Car Bogus Imposter Haygood Guy, I "peeped" repeatedly. Once the thread reached the 57th time of Blustering Buffoon calling everyone else stupid, pinko, jerkoff, etc., etc., I think most sane people bowed out. I said on another thread that conspiracy theorizing makes strange bedfellows, but you and Blustering Buffoon really do deserve each other. Blustering Buffoon's contributions to this thread never advanced beyond "I know nothing about photographic enhancement, but I don't see how Bart could have done this and I don't think he did" - making my "peeps" rather relevant, it seems to me. These were all after you claimed "And Not a single peep in response! None!" - oh, the shame, Mr. Completely Insane Huge Gates Getaway Car Bogus Imposter Haygood Guy.
I quote Bart:
"The bald patch is a total giveaway.
I used 4 different sharpening techniques in photoshop."
Whatever, carry on.
(It is kind of a total giveaway.)
In case everyone has forgotten, somewhere up above I report on my exchange with Bart Kamp in which he explains what he did. I don't know him well at all, but he's always seemed gentlemanly and approachable. I just used the contact form at the Prayer Man site and heard back by email a couple of days later. If you folks think Bart "faking" the images is an actual possibiliy - which I'm betting you don't - WHY DON'T YOU FOLLOW UP WITH BART? (We know why you don't: You know full-well this is nonsense, but you're having too much fun to let it go. That, and the fact that you're afraid to take your accusatons directly to Bart.) Prove me wrong and CONTACT BART!
Contact form: http://www.prayer-man.com/misc/contact/.
I bumped the last one at least twice more.
-
You don't realize that you're regarded as the Forum's "Wizard Of Oz". Lotta noise, but nobody pays any attention to You.
-
But apparently you just did! :D :D :D
You ain't gonna win any battles of wits with this puppy, Mr. Completely Insane Huge Gates Getaway Car Bogus Imposter Haygood Guy.
Just tweaking you, Royell, because I'm convinced that, deep down, you aren't serious. It is impossible that you're serious. Please, tell us you aren't serious.
-
I've tried as much as I can, blindly messing about with sharpening, contrast, etc., to bring out the pattern in the shirt but to no avail:
(https://i.postimg.cc/26KZdGvm/Lovelady-Royellextreme.png)
The more I look at it, the more mystified I am by the Sprague picture that Kamp used to create his 'Lovelady' image.
Compared to the image I cropped from the incredibly high quality Crouch footage that Royell steered me too, the Sprague image is totally inferior.
Yet, out of nowhere, there is this unbelievable amount of detail in the Sprague image - but only in Lovelady's shirt!
This level of detail is not to be seen anywhere in the larger image.
What am I missing?
Where are you at Bart Kamp? All you gotta do is answer the O'meara question above. Or, you can use an intermediary to answer the question like Gary Mack used to do. Your "work" product is being questioned. Your extended silence is akin to "taking the 5th".
-
Where are you at Bart Kamp? All you gotta do is answer the O'meara question above. Or, you can use an intermediary to answer the question like Gary Mack used to do. Your "work" product is being questioned. Your extended silence is akin to "taking the 5th".
He's over on the "Jacks" website where Tony Krome is protecting him with censorship and banning...
-
Where are you at Bart Kamp? All you gotta do is answer the O'meara question above. Or, you can use an intermediary to answer the question like Gary Mack used to do. Your "work" product is being questioned. Your extended silence is akin to "taking the 5th".
Perfect! It's Royell Logic, where everything is upside down and bassackwards. Two complete loons profess to be mystified by Bart's enhancement; the Voice of Reason (moi) asks Bart about this at his site where he invites contact; Bart is kind enough to respond by email; the VOR (moi) posts Bart's response; the two loons persist with their dark suspicions; the VOR (moi) suggests the two loons contact Bart themselves, posts his contact informatiion, and repeatedly bumps that suggestion; the two loons do not contact Bart because (1) hey, what would Bart know about how Bart enhanced the image anyway and (2) such contact would carry great risk of spoiling the two loons' loonish fun; BUT NOW that one loon's claim of "not a peep" has been exposed as ludicrous, said loon insists it is BART'S OBLIGATION to appear here and defend himself.
I tried to toss said loon a bone by saying I was just tweaking him, but let's be honest: he really is COMPLETELY INSANE Huge Gates Getaway Car One Glove Bogus Imposter Haygood Bart Faked Shelley and Lovelady Guy. Despite my decades of activity on weirdness forums where I thought I'd pretty much seen it all, the JFKA does seem to attract a unique species of nutcase. Why is that, I wonder?
-
The two men are obviously Lovelady & Shelley fast walking up the Elm St extension and were gotten by valid photo enhancement means...
When you point out that Shelley's white button down shirt collar is visible above his black suit collar you get no answer...Shelley's body shape and Duck's Bahookie hair doo are also visible...Lovelady's plaid shirt is plainly visible...You cannot ignore this evidence and retain credibility...We need to establish that those men are confirmed as Lovelady & Shelley...Unfortunately, the research world is so screwed-up that John Armstrong joins those who deny that the men are definitely Lovelady & Shelley...
-
Wait a minute! As crazy people sometimes do, it seems to me that the resident loon may have inadvertently hit upon an excellent idea. If forum members simply had subpoena power - you know, sort of like a JFKA grand jury - wouldn't that move these discussions along? Bart Kamp, get your butt over here! Anyone NOT think this is a good idea as a new Term of Service?
Subpoena Power
Forum members are authorized to subpoena any person, living or dead, to appear and give testimony, under oath and penalty of perjuy or something like that, regarding any matter that at least two forum members believe (1) is or might somehow be related to the assassination of JFK and/or (2) would be kind of fun and interesting to hear about. Failure to appear shall be deemed an admission that anything the forum members may have to say about the individual, now or in the future, is true.
-
The two men are obviously Lovelady & Shelley fast walking up the Elm St extension and were gotten by valid photo enhancement means...
When you point out that Shelley's white button down shirt collar is visible above his black suit collar you get no answer...Shelley's body shape and Duck's Bahookie hair doo are also visible...Lovelady's plaid shirt is plainly visible...You cannot ignore this evidence and retain credibility...We need to establish that those men are confirmed as Lovelady & Shelley...Unfortunately, the research world is so screwed-up that John Armstrong joins those who deny that the men are definitely Lovelady & Shelley...
The Couch and Darnell films show the "2 Guys" already walking alongside the "getaway" car as Officer Baker runs across the Island. There are images of Shelley and Lovelady standing on the TSBD front steps as Officer Baker runs toward them. This being AFTER Officer Baker has already run across the Island. Shelley and Lovelady can Not be in 2 places at the same time. It is physically impossible for the "2 Guys" walking next to the "getaway" to be Shelley and Lovelady.
-
He's over on the "Jacks" website where Tony Krome is protecting him with censorship and banning...
I don't chase these characters around. Anybody worth their JFK Assassination Research salt comes here. This place is Not a sleepover/pillow fight. You're gonna be put through a "Meat Grinder. You either got the goods and become better for having been run through the grinder, or you are reduced to the cheapest hamburger. It's very simple, but at the same time extremely educational.
-
I don't chase these characters around. Anybody worth their JFK Assassination Research salt comes here. This place is Not a sleepover/pillow fight. You're gonna be put through a "Meat Grinder. You either got the goods and become better for having been run through the grinder, or you are reduced to the cheapest hamburger. It's very simple, but at the same time extremely educational.
The white shirt collar rising above the black suit jacket collar, Duck's Bahookie hair doo, and body shape as well as the clearly-seen plaid pattern on Lovelady's shirt are reasonable proof...
-
The white shirt collar rising above the black suit jacket collar, Duck's Bahookie hair doo, and body shape as well as the clearly-seen plaid pattern on Lovelady's shirt are reasonable proof...
Here we go again. Around here, there is no such thing as "REASONABLE Proof". You either have "PROOF" or You don't. Currently, You don't! You need to raise your standards. The bar is Higher here.
-
Au contraire, Mr. Completely Insane Huge Gates Getaway Car Bogus Imposter Haygood Guy, I "peeped" repeatedly. Once the thread reached the 57th time of Blustering Buffoon calling everyone else stupid, pinko, jerkoff, etc., etc., I think most sane people bowed out. I said on another thread that conspiracy theorizing makes strange bedfellows, but you and Blustering Buffoon really do deserve each other. Blustering Buffoon's contributions to this thread never advanced beyond "I know nothing about photographic enhancement, but I don't see how Bart could have done this and I don't think he did" - making my "peeps" rather relevant, it seems to me. These were all after you claimed "And Not a single peep in response! None!" - oh, the shame, Mr. Completely Insane Huge Gates Getaway Car Bogus Imposter Haygood Guy.
I bumped the last one at least twice more.
I "peeped" repeatedly.
This is a lie.
Not once have you made the slightest attempt to answer the questions raised in this thread.
But here's your big chance.
In front of the forum.
And don't bother with your usual disappearing routine.
Answer, or attempt to answer, these two very simple questions:
How did Bart Kamp come up with the extraordinarily detailed picture of 'Lovelady' from a degraded image?
Why can't this detail be recreated from a far superior image?
Rather than your constant lies and bluster, why not actually do what you constantly claim to do.
-
So many researchers have swallowed down the 'sharpened' image supposedly identifying Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street Extension approximately 20-25 seconds after the shooting.
What these researchers reach for is the WC testimonies of these men in which they state they wandered along the extension after the shooting.
However, what these same researchers are willing to ignore in the same testimonies boggles the mind:
Both men state they remained on the steps after the shooting until Gloria Calvery came up to the steps.
Both men testified that it was at least 3 minutes until Gloria came running up.
Both men testified that they only left the steps after listening to Gloria talk about the shooting.
Both men testified that they then moved out to the "little old island" after interacting with Gloria.
Both men testified that it was AFTER they left the steps that they turned around and saw Truly and Baker still outside the building.
The WC testimony of both men is a tissue of easily disprovable lies. Lies disproven by the Darnell/Couch footage. Disproven by the Truly/Baker time trials. Disproven by the testimony of Victoria Adams who saw both men on the first floor approximately 60 seconds after the shooting. Disproven by their own same-day affidavits, which make no mention of this fictitious trip along the extension.
Below is a still from the Darnell footage taken approximately 20 seconds after the shooting. This is the same moment the "fake" Shelley and Lovelady are walking along the extension. It shows the moment Gloria reaches the steps and is telling everyone about the shooting. Lovelady is directly in front of her listening to what she is saying. Shelley is near the bottom of the steps after returning from the "little old island" where he met Gloria running the other way.
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
It is physically impossible for Shelley and Lovelady to be walking along the extension in the Darnell/Couch footage if they have to wait for Gloria to arrive.
-
Of course I remember, Pinko.
This is the lie...sorry, fabrication... I'm talking about, so obviously I remember.
I've argued all along that Shelley immediately ran from the steps and met Gloria coming the other way. He states this in his affidavit. (People such as yourself have to ignore the fact that, during his WC testimony, Shelley completely changes his story, stating that he stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria ran up).
The 'fabrication' I have to keep calling you out on is the part where Shelley calls Lovelady to join him. You've invented that. It's your fabrication. It is not based on any testimonial evidence whatsoever. It's a lie you have to tell because you can't find any other way of getting Lovelady and Shelley on to the Elm Street Ext. within 25 seconds.
You have swallowed down Kamp's 'Lovelady' image without question even though it has been demonstrated that this image is dubious, to say the least, and now it's been pointed out that it's physically impossible for Shelley and Lovelady to do what they attested to in their WC testimonies AND be on Elm St within 25 seconds, you've had to invent this lie. If it's any comfort, Lance "I think I've Had An Accident" Payette did exactly the same thing.
On the other hand, my own identification of Lovelady in Darnell does not require me to lie my way through an explanation and makes perfect sense with the known timings:
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
DAN - Excellent work above. As always.
-
DAN - Excellent work above. As always.
Just asking some genuine questions that, I believe, point to something incredibly suspicious that happened that day.
Shelley and Lovelady lied about their movements in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. This is not difficult to demonstrate.
Why would they do that?
And why would the Warren Commission do everything in it's power to uphold these easily demonstrable lies?
It's supposed to be such a simple story - one lunatic assassin and everyone else innocently going about their business.
The endless lies and deception point to a different story.
-
Just asking some genuine questions that, I believe, point to something incredibly suspicious that happened that day.
Shelley and Lovelady lied about their movements in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. This is not difficult to demonstrate.
Why would they do that?
And why would the Warren Commission do everything in it's power to uphold these easily demonstrable lies?
It's supposed to be such a simple story - one lunatic assassin and everyone else innocently going about their business.
The endless lies and deception point to a different story.
Shelley and Lovelady walking through the TSBD Front door and then back to the 1st Floor Freight Elevator is an extremely interesting possibility. I have never heard anyone else ever pitch that. I hope that you do more threads such as this in the future. Your wide ranging thought process and the evidence used to support it is very uncommon around here.
-
I "peeped" repeatedly.
This is a lie.
Not once have you made the slightest attempt to answer the questions raised in this thread.
But here's your big chance.
In front of the forum.
And don't bother with your usual disappearing routine.
Answer, or attempt to answer, these two very simple questions:
How did Bart Kamp come up with the extraordinarily detailed picture of 'Lovelady' from a degraded image?
Why can't this detail be recreated from a far superior image?
Rather than your constant lies and bluster, why not actually do what you constantly claim to do.
WHAT? No, wait:
WHAT???
Now I am supposed to explain Bart's enhancement?
I have no reason to doubt, and have never doubted, long before I had ever seen Bart's enhancement, that the two figures are Shelley and Lovelady. Moreover, I don't have a cockamamie theory that requires them not to be. I don't think Bart even has a theory that requires them to be or not to be (Shakespeare!); I believe he merely determined that they clearly are.
I don't care how Bart enhanced the image. I don't know or care why you, who admitted you know nothing about image enhancement, can't seem to duplicate it. You folks raised the issue, I contacted Bart because I had previously exchanged emails with him and that seemed rather a logical thing to do, and I then challenged you folks to take it up directly with him.
My "constant lies"? What would those be?
Only in Conspiracy World can reality be turned on its head like this.
-
Here we go again. Around here, there is no such thing as "REASONABLE Proof". You either have "PROOF" or You don't. Currently, You don't! You need to raise your standards. The bar is Higher here.
Watch a lot of Rodney Dangerfield videos do you, Royell?
-
Just in case anyone actually cares about this silliness, here is what Bart actually said in 2016-2018, http://www.prayer-man.com/billy-nolan-lovelady-and-bill-shellly-did-leave-the-steps-almost-immediately-after-the-shots-were-fired/.
Look at Bart's page and decide for yourself if he is "faking" for some reason or if perhaps our two resident loons are off in the conspiracy ozone as they so often are.
I am not Bart's spokesman. I have no dog in the fight. It wouldn't change my JFKA theology if he did fake the image. I simply have no reason whatsoever to think he did, while having plenty of reason to think the resident loons are once again off in the conspiracy ozone.
And that, truly, is all I have to say about that.
I am going to put an end to this debate whether Lovelady and Shelley stayed on the steps as they claimed in their Warren Commission testimonies and to which certain people subscribe to for some obscure reason, there is just plenty to refute this rubbish assertion.
Photo evidence.
For starters, take a look at the Gerda Dunckel gifs below and check Lovelady’s shirt in the very first few frames and also check out the large still I snagged from PBS Breaking The News, click to enlarge, yes that shirt is checkered, compare it to other garments of a lighter colour or the polka dot coat which do not smudge due to motion and quality loss. Then look at Shelley, with his black suit and his facial and hair features. For reference of who we are talking about I suggest you check out Billy Lovelady’s and Bill Shelley’s pages I have made which contain plenty of photographs of these two individuals. Both pages are still under construction but there is plenty to see from a visual point of view.
Upon looking at the image by Couch we see that Shelley wears a black jacket and that Lovelady’s shirt has black horizontal stripes in it. I will place a close-up below. This is not the end result of sharpening and cannot be construed as a digital artifact. Click to enlarge the shot above and you will see that these stripes are nowhere else to be seen on this image. The polka dot coat stays as is, the camouflage/dot coat as well. And even in the light toned skirts/coats there are no such markings to be seen.
Here is a collage of Lovelady’s shirt in many settings.
Add on photographs Oct 14th 2016.
This ROKC Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives.
I applied various ways of sharpening with overall decent results to be absolutely positive that these two are Shelley and Lovelady. Lovelady’s shirt is a dead give away and so is the shape of Shelley, compare that with the collage below.
...
These statements and the Warren Commission testimonies by Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady show plenty that they did leave the steps almost immediately after the shooting and that they cannot be accounted on the steps for in the Jimmy Darnell film, besides walking westwards and being seen doing so in a better capture in the Malcolm Couch film.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
The man marked "Lovelady" is Molina...
The best resolution enlargements show Molina's bald pate on this man...
Molina's testimony said he wandered over from his position on the east side of the top platform towards the west side after the shots and then exited down the steps on his way to the Knoll...
Lovelady is fast walking up to the Knoll on the extension at the time of this image...
The woman marked "Hicks" might be Carol Reed...
-
The man marked "Lovelady" is Molina...
The best resolution enlargements show Molina's bald pate on this man...
Molina's testimony said he wandered over from his position on the east side of the top platform towards the west side after the shots and then exited down the steps on his way to the Knoll...
Lovelady is fast walking up to the Knoll on the extension at the time of this image...
Disagree. Above is very close to where Lovelady was standing on Altgens 6. Also, I believe there are images of Molina being loaded into a DPD Cop Car. Molina looks nothing like the Lovelady figure above.
-
High Tech enhancement of the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy of Darnell will clearly reveal the man is Molina...
We know this is true because Lovelady is fast walking up the Elm St extension at this time...
The man marked Shelley in this image obviously has too thick a body shape to be the tall and thin Shelley...Besides, we know Shelley is fast walking up the extension at this time...
-
The man marked "Lovelady" is Molina...
The best resolution enlargements show Molina's bald pate on this man...
Lovelady also has a bald head.
I assume you agree that the woman this man is talking to is Gloria Calvery. If that is the case your identification is clearly in error.
Molina states that he interacted with Gloria and her companion inside the lobby.
Lovelady states he interacted with Gloria while he was still on the steps.
Frazier also recalls a lady, who can only be Gloria, coming up to the steps and telling everyone about the shooting in a distraught manner.
This is what we are seeing here.
You've also skipped over this part of my post:
So many researchers have swallowed down the 'sharpened' image supposedly identifying Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street Extension approximately 20-25 seconds after the shooting.
What these researchers reach for is the WC testimonies of these men in which they state they wandered along the extension after the shooting.
However, what these same researchers are willing to ignore in the same testimonies boggles the mind:
Both men state they remained on the steps after the shooting until Gloria Calvery came up to the steps.
Both men testified that it was at least 3 minutes until Gloria came running up.
Both men testified that they only left the steps after listening to Gloria talk about the shooting.
Both men testified that they then moved out to the "little old island" after interacting with Gloria.
Both men testified that it was AFTER they left the steps that they turned around and saw Truly and Baker still outside the building.
The WC testimony of both men is a tissue of easily disprovable lies. Lies disproven by the Darnell/Couch footage. Disproven by the Truly/Baker time trials. Disproven by the testimony of Victoria Adams who saw both men on the first floor approximately 60 seconds after the shooting. Disproven by their own same-day affidavits, which make no mention of this fictitious trip along the extension.
How do you reconcile the WC testimonies of Shelley and Lovelady with this image?
Also, the man in the image is not wearing the pure white shirt of Molina.
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
PS: I identify the woman in white as Hicks because I have a vague memory that a researcher talked to Carol Reed who said she had no memory of accompanying Gloria back to the steps. I also have the vague memory that researcher was you.
-
Lovelady also has a bald head.
You're bucking against reality because the man fast-walking up the extension is provably Lovelady because of the unmistakable plaid pattern seen on his shirt...The only other alternative then becomes Molina...Not only can you see the shape of Molina's head on this man, in the best resolution copies, but you can also see Molina's distinct bald pattern that is different than Lovelady's...This man who is facing Calvery is in the exact position Molina said he was in when he said he walked across the top platform from the east side to the west and then went down the front steps...
I assume you agree that the woman this man is talking to is Gloria Calvery. If that is the case your identification is clearly in error.
Molina states that he interacted with Gloria and her companion inside the lobby.
Lovelady states he interacted with Gloria while he was still on the steps.
Frazier also recalls a lady, who can only be Gloria, coming up to the steps and telling everyone about the shooting in a distraught manner.
This is what we are seeing here.
Molina did interact with Calvery and the other woman in the Lobby when he returned...The fact he interacted with them in the Lobby when he returned does not preclude him from being the man facing Calvery in Darnell...
Frazier said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps before they took off up the extension...The Couch/Darnell clip shows the period after this exchange while Lovelady & Shelley have already taken off up the extension...Calvery telling Lovelady & Shelley that Kennedy had been shot at the Knoll is what caused the pair to want to run up there and check it out...
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
PS: I identify the woman in white as Hicks because I have a vague memory that a researcher talked to Carol Reed who said she had no memory of accompanying Gloria back to the steps. I also have the vague memory that researcher was you.
The reason I assumed it was Reed is because she told me that all she remembered was panicking and running back to the Depository...Reed told me she remembers being in such a panicked state that she had to hurdle over motorcade spectators who had laid down on the ground trying to avoid bullets...Logic makes me assume the woman in all white next to Calvery is Reed simply because of that panic getting her there ahead of Hicks, who is probably the woman in the white blouse and black skirt who followed-up Calvery and Reed from their position in the spectators...
Because of a certain martinet moderator on The EF, because this exclusive interview with Reed came from me, it was met with wicked disinterest...The idea is that anything that comes from me, no matter how significant and unprecedented, is to be wickedly ignored with intent and denied...A purposeful destruction of the source no matter how important the content...A violation of commonly understood research standards as a preferred organized method...Anti-intellectualism in its most satanically directed form...Banning on that forum is a call to the mob for personal destruction of that researcher and his research...Savages pretending to be gentlemen...
-
High Tech enhancement of the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy of Darnell will clearly reveal the man is Molina...
We know this is true because Lovelady is fast walking up the Elm St extension at this time...
The man marked Shelley in this image obviously has too thick a body shape to be the tall and thin Shelley...Besides, we know Shelley is fast walking up the extension at this time...
The very clear images of Molina being loaded into a DPD Cop Car reveal he bears NO Resemblance to this figure on the TSBD Steps. Molina has slicked back Black Hair. The guy standing on the TSBD Steps has a forehead extending well back onto the top of his head. He's 1/2 Bald.
-
Lovelady also has a bald head.
I assume you agree that the woman this man is talking to is Gloria Calvery. If that is the case your identification is clearly in error.
Molina states that he interacted with Gloria and her companion inside the lobby.
Lovelady states he interacted with Gloria while he was still on the steps.
Frazier also recalls a lady, who can only be Gloria, coming up to the steps and telling everyone about the shooting in a distraught manner.
This is what we are seeing here.
You've also skipped over this part of my post:
So many researchers have swallowed down the 'sharpened' image supposedly identifying Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street Extension approximately 20-25 seconds after the shooting.
What these researchers reach for is the WC testimonies of these men in which they state they wandered along the extension after the shooting.
However, what these same researchers are willing to ignore in the same testimonies boggles the mind:
Both men state they remained on the steps after the shooting until Gloria Calvery came up to the steps.
Both men testified that it was at least 3 minutes until Gloria came running up.
Both men testified that they only left the steps after listening to Gloria talk about the shooting.
Both men testified that they then moved out to the "little old island" after interacting with Gloria.
Both men testified that it was AFTER they left the steps that they turned around and saw Truly and Baker still outside the building.
The WC testimony of both men is a tissue of easily disprovable lies. Lies disproven by the Darnell/Couch footage. Disproven by the Truly/Baker time trials. Disproven by the testimony of Victoria Adams who saw both men on the first floor approximately 60 seconds after the shooting. Disproven by their own same-day affidavits, which make no mention of this fictitious trip along the extension.
How do you reconcile the WC testimonies of Shelley and Lovelady with this image?
Also, the man in the image is not wearing the pure white shirt of Molina.
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
PS: I identify the woman in white as Hicks because I have a vague memory that a researcher talked to Carol Reed who said she had no memory of accompanying Gloria back to the steps. I also have the vague memory that researcher was you.
Excellent still frame that drives your Lovelady ID home. I also believe that still frame also strengthens the other guy being Shelley.
-
You're bucking against reality because the man fast-walking up the extension is provably Lovelady because of the unmistakable plaid pattern seen on his shirt...
The only other alternative then becomes Molina...Not only can you see the shape of Molina's head on this man, in the best resolution copies, but you can also see Molina's distinct bald pattern that is different than Lovelady's...This man who is facing Calvery is in the exact position Molina said he was in when he said he walked across the top platform from the east side to the west and then went down the front steps...
Molina did interact with Calvery and the other woman in the Lobby when he returned...The fact he interacted with them in the Lobby when he returned does not preclude him from being the man facing Calvery in Darnell...
1] You're clearly unaware what the topic of this thread is. Read the OP at least.
2] The man in the image I posted is also wearing a plaid shirt and, most definitely, not the white shirt Molina was wearing.
3] During his WC testimony Molina is specifically asked if a girl had come up while he was on the steps and mentioned the President being shot, to which he said "no". This alone proves it wasn't Molina. When asked about Gloria he mentioned nothing about being on the steps. He specifically states he was in the lobby when he interacted with her. Molina's WC testimony does preclude him from being the man on the steps. As does the lack of white shirt:
Mr. BALL. Had somebody come up and said the President was shot before you saw Truly go in?
Mr. MOLINA. No.
Mr. BALL. Do you know a girl named Gloria Calvary?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Did Gloria come up?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, she came. I was in the lobby standing there and she came in with this other girl.
Frazier said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps before they took off up the extension...The Couch/Darnell clip shows the period after this exchange while Lovelady & Shelley have already taken off up the extension...Calvery telling Lovelady & Shelley that Kennedy had been shot at the Knoll is what caused the pair to want to run up there and check it out...
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
When did Frazier say this?
During his WC testimony he seems to be just guessing what Shelley and Lovelady did. He doesn't seem to really know.
The reason I assumed it was Reed is because she told me that all she remembered was panicking and running back to the Depository...Reed told me she remembers being in such a panicked state that she had to hurdle over motorcade spectators who had laid down on the ground trying to avoid bullets...Logic makes me assume the woman in all white next to Calvery is Reed simply because of that panic getting her there ahead of Hicks, who is probably the woman in the white blouse and black skirt who followed-up Calvery and Reed from their position in the spectators...
Because of a certain martinet moderator on The EF, because this exclusive interview with Reed came from me, it was met with wicked disinterest...The idea is that anything that comes from me, no matter how significant and unprecedented, is to be wickedly ignored with intent and denied...A purposeful destruction of the source no matter how important the content...A violation of commonly understood research standards as a preferred organized method...Anti-intellectualism in its most satanically directed form...Banning on that forum is a call to the mob for personal destruction of that researcher and his research...Savages pretending to be gentlemen...
Reed or Hicks. It doesn't really matter but if you feel from your interview of Reed that it might have been her that's good enough for me.
I'm still pretty sure you said something else but it's not a hill I'm willing to die on.
For what it's worth, you had left this forum not long after I was getting involved. I thought the Prayer Man cult was pure nonsense and it seemed to me the only real candidate was Sarah Stanton. When I expressed this I was surprised by how vehement the opposition was to this notion. There were a lot of insults but the main one was the 'new Brian Doyle'. I get the impression I was supposed to be really offended by this.
LATER EDIT: How do you reconcile the WC testimonies of Shelley and Lovelady with the identification of the men on the extension. This is what really disproves the identification so I would like to hear how you navigate it.
-
I've tried as much as I can, blindly messing about with sharpening, contrast, etc., to bring out the pattern in the shirt but to no avail:
(https://i.postimg.cc/26KZdGvm/Lovelady-Royellextreme.png)
The more I look at it, the more mystified I am by the Sprague picture that Kamp used to create his 'Lovelady' image.
Compared to the image I cropped from the incredibly high quality Crouch footage that Royell steered me too, the Sprague image is totally inferior.
Yet, out of nowhere, there is this unbelievable amount of detail in the Sprague image - but only in Lovelady's shirt!
This level of detail is not to be seen anywhere in the larger image.
What am I missing?
KAMP where are you? You've been called out!
-
2] The man in the image I posted is also wearing a plaid shirt and, most definitely, not the white shirt Molina was wearing.
3] During his WC testimony Molina is specifically asked if a girl had come up while he was on the steps and mentioned the President being shot, to which he said "no". This alone proves it wasn't Molina. When asked about Gloria he mentioned nothing about being on the steps. He specifically states he was in the lobby when he interacted with her. Molina's WC testimony does preclude him from being the man on the steps. As does the lack of white shirt:
Mr. BALL. Had somebody come up and said the President was shot before you saw Truly go in?
Mr. MOLINA. No.
Mr. BALL. Do you know a girl named Gloria Calvary?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Did Gloria come up?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, she came. I was in the lobby standing there and she came in with this other girl.
The two men fast-walking up the Elm Street extension are Lovelady & Shelley...
The man in front of Calvery can be further examined by obtaining the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell and applying high tech digital enhancement...
The Couch/Darnell clip is a 4 second long series of frames...Your image here denies us the best frame of Molina and his bald pate...Frankly I don't trust your image and I'm not sure photo shop games haven't been played with it in order to merge Lovelady in with it...The JFK research community is dysfunctional and corrupted...It operates in a way that prevents evidence being examined instead of honestly pursued...I need that 1st generation copy in order to look at the highest resolution examples of this man...I assure you he is Molina...
When did Frazier say this?
During his WC testimony he seems to be just guessing what Shelley and Lovelady did. He doesn't seem to really know.
Frazier said it in one of his interviews or statements...He said that Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps...Calvery had told the pair what she had seen at the Knoll and that inspired them to head up to the Knoll to see for themselves...They then went back inside the Depository through the west side doors to the 1st Floor...Adams & Styles had gotten out the rear before they came back in...I think you are well aware the timing for that little talk at the base of the stairs is shown perfectly in Couch/Darnell where Calvery is climbing the stairs at just the right distance from that talk as are Lovelady & Shelley going up the extension at just the right distance from that talk...
Reed or Hicks. It doesn't really matter but if you feel from your interview of Reed that it might have been her that's good enough for me.
I'm still pretty sure you said something else but it's not a hill I'm willing to die on.
For what it's worth, you had left this forum not long after I was getting involved. I thought the Prayer Man cult was pure nonsense and it seemed to me the only real candidate was Sarah Stanton. When I expressed this I was surprised by how vehement the opposition was to this notion. There were a lot of insults but the main one was the 'new Brian Doyle'. I get the impression I was supposed to be really offended by this.
I don't know what you are talking about...My emphasis on this board has always been that the Davidson Enhancement clearly showed Stanton's face on Prayer Man...It is out of my control if people want to play games with that obvious conclusion...Reed told me when she got to the passenger elevator the electricity for it was off and it didn't work...Very important evidence that none of the so-called serious researchers were even interested in...As long as it comes from me, no matter how important, the clique demands it be ignored...Not very credible...
LATER EDIT: How do you reconcile the WC testimonies of Shelley and Lovelady with the identification of the men on the extension. This is what really disproves the identification so I would like to hear how you navigate it.
Barry Ernest explains it best...The authorities got Lovelady & Shelley to lie and change their departure from the front steps to 3 minutes after the shots in order to scuttle Victoria Adams' witnessing...Adams & Styles clattered by on the 2nd Floor staircase landing on their way down and out...Oswald heard that noise and got up from his seat in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and went to the Vestibule door window for that Lunch Room...Oswald was standing there stationary watching the stairs when he saw a police officer emerge on to the staircase landing...He was startled by this and flinched back from the Vestibule window and retreated in to the Lunch Room...This triggered Baker's cop instincts and he pursued Oswald in to the Lunch Room...Both Baker & Truly saw Oswald's lunch on the table and knew he was in there the whole time - which is why Baker broke off without saying anything and started up the stairs...Baker hems and haws in his Commission testimony on how exactly he saw Oswald because he knows he can't tell this true version because it exonerates Oswald...Proof this is correct is the fact the Warren Commission never asked either Truly or Baker "Do you think Oswald was in the Lunch Room the whole time during the assassination?"...This cracking of the conspiracy is desperately kept off The Education Forum...I'm not sure that forum isn't a den of spooks trying to look like researchers...
-
The two men fast-walking up the Elm Street extension are Lovelady & Shelley...
The man in front of Calvery can be further examined by obtaining the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell and applying high tech digital enhancement...
The Couch/Darnell clip is a 4 second long series of frames...Your image here denies us the best frame of Molina and his bald pate...Frankly I don't trust your image and I'm not sure photo shop games haven't been played with it in order to merge Lovelady in with it...The JFK research community is dysfunctional and corrupted...It operates in a way that prevents evidence being examined instead of honestly pursued...I need that 1st generation copy in order to look at the highest resolution examples of this man...I assure you he is Molina...
Frazier said it in one of his interviews or statements...He said that Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps...Calvery had told the pair what she had seen at the Knoll and that inspired them to head up to the Knoll to see for themselves...They then went back inside the Depository through the west side doors to the 1st Floor...Adams & Styles had gotten out the rear before they came back in...I think you are well aware the timing for that little talk at the base of the stairs is shown perfectly in Couch/Darnell where Calvery is climbing the stairs at just the right distance from that talk as are Lovelady & Shelley going up the extension at just the right distance from that talk...
I don't know what you are talking about...My emphasis on this board has always been that the Davidson Enhancement clearly showed Stanton's face on Prayer Man...It is out of my control if people want to play games with that obvious conclusion...Reed told me when she got to the passenger elevator the electricity for it was off and it didn't work...Very important evidence that none of the so-called serious researchers were even interested in...As long as it comes from me, no matter how important, the clique demands it be ignored...Not very credible...
Barry Ernest explains it best...The authorities got Lovelady & Shelley to lie and change their departure from the front steps to 3 minutes after the shots in order to scuttle Victoria Adams' witnessing...Adams & Styles clattered by on the 2nd Floor staircase landing on their way down and out...Oswald heard that noise and got up from his seat in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and went to the Vestibule door window for that Lunch Room...Oswald was standing there stationary watching the stairs when he saw a police officer emerge on to the staircase landing...He was startled by this and flinched back from the Vestibule window and retreated in to the Lunch Room...This triggered Baker's cop instincts and he pursued Oswald in to the Lunch Room...Both Baker & Truly saw Oswald's lunch on the table and knew he was in there the whole time - which is why Baker broke off without saying anything and started up the stairs...Baker hems and haws in his Commission testimony on how exactly he saw Oswald because he knows he can't tell this true version because it exonerates Oswald...Proof this is correct is the fact the Warren Commission never asked either Truly or Baker "Do you think Oswald was in the Lunch Room the whole time during the assassination?"...This cracking of the conspiracy is desperately kept off The Education Forum...I'm not sure that forum isn't a den of spooks trying to look like researchers...
You claim that Shelley and Lovelady were inspired by Calvery to, "...head up the knoll to see for themselves". Walking down the Elm St Extension toward the train yard is NOT "..head up the KNOLL". Just what do you define as the "KNOLL"? It is definitely Not the Elm St Extension and Not the Train Yard.
-
The two men fast-walking up the Elm Street extension are Lovelady & Shelley...
What evidence do you have for this.
I have plenty to demonstrate, beyond any doubt, that these two men are not Shelley and Lovelady.
If it's a case of "well, it looks like that to me", that's fair enough.
The man in front of Calvery can be further examined by obtaining the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell and applying high tech digital enhancement...
Why can't you examine the image I posted.
The Couch/Darnell clip is a 4 second long series of frames...Your image here denies us the best frame of Molina and his bald pate...Frankly I don't trust your image and I'm not sure photo shop games haven't been played with it in order to merge Lovelady in with it...The JFK research community is dysfunctional and corrupted...It operates in a way that prevents evidence being examined instead of honestly pursued...I need that 1st generation copy in order to look at the highest resolution examples of this man...I assure you he is Molina...
So, what makes you think the image you rely on for your identification hasn't been tampered with AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD IS SUGGESTING?
Frazier said it in one of his interviews or statements...He said that Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps...Calvery had told the pair what she had seen at the Knoll and that inspired them to head up to the Knoll to see for themselves...They then went back inside the Depository through the west side doors to the 1st Floor...Adams & Styles had gotten out the rear before they came back in...I think you are well aware the timing for that little talk at the base of the stairs is shown perfectly in Couch/Darnell where Calvery is climbing the stairs at just the right distance from that talk as are Lovelady & Shelley going up the extension at just the right distance from that talk...
Obviously, Brian, you are not one for debate.
You have a very LN vibe in that you believe your pronouncements are enough on the matter and that everyone else should fall into line.
You offer no evidence or arguments that emanate from that evidence.
You are wrong regarding almost every single pronouncement you have made on this matter.
I think we'll just agree to disagree.
Barry Ernest explains it best...The authorities got Lovelady & Shelley to lie and change their departure from the front steps to 3 minutes after the shots in order to scuttle Victoria Adams' witnessing...Adams & Styles clattered by on the 2nd Floor staircase landing on their way down and out...Oswald heard that noise and got up from his seat in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room and went to the Vestibule door window for that Lunch Room...Oswald was standing there stationary watching the stairs when he saw a police officer emerge on to the staircase landing...He was startled by this and flinched back from the Vestibule window and retreated in to the Lunch Room...This triggered Baker's cop instincts and he pursued Oswald in to the Lunch Room...Both Baker & Truly saw Oswald's lunch on the table and knew he was in there the whole time - which is why Baker broke off without saying anything and started up the stairs...Baker hems and haws in his Commission testimony on how exactly he saw Oswald because he knows he can't tell this true version because it exonerates Oswald...Proof this is correct is the fact the Warren Commission never asked either Truly or Baker "Do you think Oswald was in the Lunch Room the whole time during the assassination?"...This cracking of the conspiracy is desperately kept off The Education Forum...I'm not sure that forum isn't a den of spooks trying to look like researchers...
I agree Lovelady and Shelley lied in their WC testimonies. I started a thread called "The 3 Minute Lie".
Adams was on the first floor within 60 seconds of the shooting where she saw Shelley and Lovelady. This is why they lied in their WC testimonies. I started a thread about this too - "Lovelady In Darnell And It's Ramifications".
-
What evidence do you have for this.
I have plenty to demonstrate, beyond any doubt, that these two men are not Shelley and Lovelady.
If it's a case of "well, it looks like that to me", that's fair enough.
I'm wondering what part of the man having Shelley's white shirt collar, black jacket, hair doo, and body shape you don't understand?...Or the other man having Lovelady's plaid pattern and bald spot...Or the pair being exactly where Lovelady & Shelley would be according to the other testimonies...Or Shelley pulling up and talking to Hicks as she ran by...The pair fast-walking up the extension just so happens to be where Lovelady & Shelley would be if they were going up the extension according to the witnessing...I consider doubting this to be research-damaging silly-ness...
So, what makes you think the image you rely on for your identification hasn't been tampered with AS THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD IS SUGGESTING?
When I first analyzed this with Thomas Graves 8 years ago the image I saw looked different and you could clearly see Molina's signature bald pate...Obviously the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy should provide the best imagery once enhanced...Do you realize that copy has not been digitally enhanced?...It should yield impressive results...The JFK research community is uncredibly against obtaining that copy without any legitimate excuse...
Frazier was there, witnessed it, and said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps...The Couch/Darnell clip backs this by showing that Calvery and Lovelady & Shelley are all at the correct distances for that meeting to have happened...There are strange characters in the research community who just like to cause trouble and muddy the waters...
I agree Lovelady and Shelley lied in their WC testimonies. I started a thread called "The 3 Minute Lie".
Adams was on the first floor within 60 seconds of the shooting where she saw Shelley and Lovelady. This is why they lied in their WC testimonies. I started a thread about this too - "Lovelady In Darnell And It's Ramifications".
If you time going up the extension and around the west side of the Depository, Lovelady & Shelley had too much distance to travel to get back in to the 1st Floor in time to meet Adams & Styles...Adams and Styles had a shorter route and most-likely got out the rear exit before Lovelady & Shelley got back in...
But, if you think about it, by conceding this you are admitting the men going up the extension are indeed Lovelady & Shelley (touche)...
-
DOYLE - You must have no idea what Molina looks like.
-
Easily found on Google Images...
-
Joe Molina is easily found on Google Images...
Just curious: As Credit Manager at the TSBD, did he wear a suit to work every day?
-
Easily found on Google Images...
You now have a Trifecta of Mis ID's to your credit. (1) Shelley, (2) Lovelady, and (3) Molina. All I can say is you are very consistent. Consistently WRONG.
-
All I can say is you are very consistent. Consistently WRONG.
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
You really should stop talking about yourself like that.
-- Tom
-
I assume the 6th Floor Museum copy is a 1st generation film copy that can have all the scanning and digital enhancement planned for the original film done to it that can bring out Molina in better detail in front of Calvery on the steps...
-
I assume the 6th Floor Museum copy is a 1st generation film copy that can have all the scanning and digital enhancement planned for the original film done to it that can bring out Molina in better detail in front of Calvery on the steps...
"ASSUME"? That don't cut it around here.
-
The Education Forum calls itself a research forum but right now it is dedicated to NOT obtaining the best known copy of Darnell at the 6th Floor Museum...
It is avoiding obtaining and enhancing the Hughes Film in order to show Stanton up behind Lovelady in the Prayer Man spot...
-
I'm wondering what part of the man having Shelley's white shirt collar, black jacket, hair doo, and body shape you don't understand?...Or the other man having Lovelady's plaid pattern and bald spot...Or the pair being exactly where Lovelady & Shelley would be according to the other testimonies...Or Shelley pulling up and talking to Hicks as she ran by...The pair fast-walking up the extension just so happens to be where Lovelady & Shelley would be if they were going up the extension according to the witnessing...I consider doubting this to be research-damaging silly-ness...
When I first analyzed this with Thomas Graves 8 years ago the image I saw looked different and you could clearly see Molina's signature bald pate...Obviously the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy should provide the best imagery once enhanced...Do you realize that copy has not been digitally enhanced?...It should yield impressive results...The JFK research community is uncredibly against obtaining that copy without any legitimate excuse...
Frazier was there, witnessed it, and said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps...The Couch/Darnell clip backs this by showing that Calvery and Lovelady & Shelley are all at the correct distances for that meeting to have happened...There are strange characters in the research community who just like to cause trouble and muddy the waters...
If you time going up the extension and around the west side of the Depository, Lovelady & Shelley had too much distance to travel to get back in to the 1st Floor in time to meet Adams & Styles...Adams and Styles had a shorter route and most-likely got out the rear exit before Lovelady & Shelley got back in...
But, if you think about it, by conceding this you are admitting the men going up the extension are indeed Lovelady & Shelley (touche)...
You've been asked a very simple question - other than "it looks like that to me", what evidence do you have that the two men on the extension are Shelley and Lovelady?
It's a simple question.
What evidence do you have?
-
Bumped for newcomers like Brian
This is the 'Lovelady' image Bart Kamp produced from a large print obtained for him from the collection of Richard Sprague.
(https://i.postimg.cc/50yCK1V1/shelleyloveladyelm.png)
This image seems to include an incredible amount of detail, particularly on the shirt of 'Lovelady'.
However, the print from which Kamp got this 'Lovelady' image is of such poor quality that is very hard to understand how this amount of detail could be present when far superior pictures show no such detail.
Kamp alludes to this contradiction in his description of how he came across the Sprague print:
"This...Scan of a Couch film still at first looks very harsh and doesn’t overall have much information, but it does happen to show a lot regarding our illustrious duo. This print comes from the Richard E. Sprague Collection from the National Archives."
How can it be that the Sprague print "doesn't overall have much information", yet the part of it showing Lovelady's shirt does?
This is a copy of the Sprague print that Kamp used to get his image of Lovelady from:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wTD6GGhq/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
Look at the poor quality of this image in general. How washed out it is and how there is a lack of fine detail. As Kamp points out, there is not much overall information in this print, as it is of such poor quality.
In contrast, here is an image from the Couch footage taken from "Four Days In November":
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPLNtZDq/Couch-Royell.png)
Look at how superior this image is in quality, look at how much more detail is present in this image, how much more information is present overall.
One would have thought that the more detailed picture of 'Lovelady' would come from this superior image.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE CASE.
The picture of 'Lovelady' that has the very fine detail (of the distinctive check pattern of his shirt) comes from the inferior image.
How can that be?
This is a crop of 'Lovelady' from the Sprague print and 4 Days.
(https://i.postimg.cc/mrqqFMCw/Lovelady-Sprague4Days.png)
How was Kamp able to obtain such fine detail from the inferior Sprague print when no such detail is present in the far superior copy from 4 Days?
-
Which is the superior image?
Which contains the more detail?
[u(https://i.postimg.cc/Wb4bPD2Q/Couch-Royell-Spraguecombined.png)
-
Which is the superior image?
Which contains the more detail?
(https://i.postimg.cc/Wb4bPD2Q/Couch-Royell-Spraguecombined.png)
Also, Shelley and Lovelady are standing on the TSBD front steps at this same point in time. They can Not be in 2 places at the same time. The above is not Shelley and Lovelady
-
I don't think Dan is dealing in correct terms here...Dan is calling the "Four Days In November" copy the superior copy when it clearly is not...The 'Four Days In November' copy was probably transferred to video at some point and obviously suffered serious degrading in quality, yet somehow Dan gets that this obviously highly-degraded copy is "superior"...I would guess that the Sprague Collection copy is washed out by high end brightness and contrast because the photo enhancement technology of the time showed detail the best at that setting...Dan has it backwards and, although the Sprague copy is washed out badly at one level, it is actually the better copy for identifying detail, which is why it shows the finer features on Shelley and Lovelady better...
And since we now have a valid technical explanation for what we are seeing in these two examples of Couch therefore Dan has come up short in explaining exactly what problem he is having understanding that Shelley's white shirt collar and black jacket...His Duck's Bahookie hair doo and body shape...His pulling up to talk to Hicks as she ran by...As well as Lovelady's clearly-seen plaid pattern and bald spot are all freely visible in the Sprague copy and therefore confirm the pair are Lovelady & Shelley exactly where they were supposed to be fast-walking up the extension...Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
-
I don't think Dan is dealing in correct terms here...Dan is calling the "Four Days In November" copy the superior copy when it clearly is not...The 'Four Days In November' copy was probably transferred to video at some point and obviously suffered serious degrading in quality, yet somehow Dan gets that this obviously highly-degraded copy is "superior"...I would guess that the Sprague Collection copy is washed out by high end brightness and contrast because the photo enhancement technology of the time showed detail the best at that setting...Dan has it backwards and, although the Sprague copy is washed out badly at one level, it is actually the better copy for identifying detail, which is why it shows the finer features on Shelley and Lovelady better...
And since we now have a valid technical explanation for what we are seeing in these two examples of Couch therefore Dan has come up short in explaining exactly what problem he is having understanding that Shelley's white shirt collar and black jacket...His Duck's Bahookie hair doo and body shape...His pulling up to talk to Hicks as she ran by...As well as Lovelady's clearly-seen plaid pattern and bald spot are all freely visible in the Sprague copy and therefore confirm the pair are Lovelady & Shelley exactly where they were supposed to be fast-walking up the extension...Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
The moment that you use "PROBABLY", gets you an immediate DQ. That don't cut it around here.
-
I don't think Dan is dealing in correct terms here...Dan is calling the "Four Days In November" copy the superior copy when it clearly is not...The 'Four Days In November' copy was probably transferred to video at some point and obviously suffered serious degrading in quality, yet somehow Dan gets that this obviously highly-degraded copy is "superior"...I would guess that the Sprague Collection copy is washed out by high end brightness and contrast because the photo enhancement technology of the time showed detail the best at that setting...Dan has it backwards and, although the Sprague copy is washed out badly at one level, it is actually the better copy for identifying detail, which is why it shows the finer features on Shelley and Lovelady better...
And since we now have a valid technical explanation for what we are seeing in these two examples of Couch therefore Dan has come up short in explaining exactly what problem he is having understanding that Shelley's white shirt collar and black jacket...His Duck's Bahookie hair doo and body shape...His pulling up to talk to Hicks as she ran by...As well as Lovelady's clearly-seen plaid pattern and bald spot are all freely visible in the Sprague copy and therefore confirm the pair are Lovelady & Shelley exactly where they were supposed to be fast-walking up the extension...Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
There's no point getting bogged down with everything that is wrong with this post but this last observation needs addressing.
Apparently it's me, ands not Brian, who is ignoring the WC testimony of Shelley and Lovelady.
Let's start with the fact that BOTH MEN testify that they didn't leave the steps for at least three minutes!!
How can they be on the extension seconds after the shooting??
I would really like to hear what Brian is going to make up off the top of his head to account for this.
BOTH MEN testify that, after three minutes, Gloria comes up to the steps, tells them about the shooting after which both of them make their way across the Elm Street extension to the "little, old island" (both men use exactly the same phrase to describe the concrete spur separating the Elm Streets), where they stopped "for a minute".
So, the image of the two men walking down the extension is taken 20 - 25 seconds after the shooting.
In this short span of time, according to Brian, Gloria has made her way back to the TSBD steps, told everyone about the shooting, both men have made their way across to the little old island, hung around there for a while, then made it half way down the extension before being caught on film.
Let's do him a favour and ignore the three minutes it takes Gloria to reach the steps and the time spent on the little, old island.
Even if we ignore all the testimony that Brian seems so willing to do, is it still physically possible for the two men to be so far down the extension, after the sequence of events described, in such a short span of time?
Let's be ultra kind to Brian and make it like some mad kind of tag race being run at top speed:
1] Gloria sprints full tilt and makes it back to the steps within 15 seconds
2] She spits out a rapid-fire account of the shooting in 5 seconds
3] Shelley and Lovelady sprint across to the little old island - 3 seconds.
4] They stay there for 5 seconds
5] They then sprint to their positions on the Elm Street extension - another 3 seconds.
They still don't make it in time.
Even if we follow Brian's lead and ignore nearly every statement they made in their WC testimonies, Shelley and Lovelady still don't make it.
The reason for this is obvious - it's not Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension.
In reality, what happens is this
Shelley and Lovelady are on the steps at the time of the shooting.
Immediately after the shots Shelley runs out to the concrete spur where he encounters a distraught Gloria Calvery running the other way.
Both return to the front steps where Gloria tells everyone there about the shooting after which both Shelley and Lovelady make their way into the building through the front door.
Gloria reaches the steps in a matter seconds - not 3 minutes.
Both men do not then go across to the little, old island.
Both men do not wander along the extension.
Both men do not hang around the railroad yards.
Both men do not enter the building through the west door.
These are all lies told to hide their actual movements after the shooting.
Both men immediately enter the building and make their way towards the back of the first floor where they are seen by Vickie Adams about 60 seconds after the shooting.
Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive at the elevators where Baker notices two white men just hanging around. Clearly this is Shelley and Lovelady.
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
The image above shows the moment Gloria has reached the steps and is telling everyone about the shooting.
The man in front of her is Billy Lovelady.
Shelley, wearing his baggy black suit, is near the bottom of the steps after returning from the concrete spur.
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg)
-
Makes sense to me Dan Thumb1: Lovelady and Shelley there at the elevators by 60 secs post shots. That’s the only point in time that it makes sense that Truly would have told Lovelady to guard the elevators.
But if that’s the case then Jack Dougherty didn’t take the west elevator all the way down to the 2nd floor, otherwise Lovelady would have seen him and Jack would have referenced seeing Lovelady in WC testimony. Jack only claims to speak to Piper. But that can’t be true either if Lovelady is there by the elevator. Eddie Piper never said he saw Dougherty.
When Mooney gets to TSBD he found the west elevator was stuck on the 2nd floor and Victoria Adams was there too ( this is like about 4 minutes post shots).
That west elevator I think was taken down by the 6th floor shooter and he stopped it in on 2nd floor so he could go out the west side window by the staircase onto the roof top of the adjacent garage. At that NW side of TSBD it’s only a few ft across that roof and he could have dropped from there to the ground.
-
Makes sense to me Dan Thumb1: Lovelady and Shelley there at the elevators by 60 secs post shots. That’s the only point in time that it makes sense that Truly would have told Lovelady to guard the elevators.
But if that’s the case then Jack Dougherty didn’t take the west elevator all the way down to the 2nd floor, otherwise Lovelady would have seen him and Jack would have referenced seeing Lovelady in WC testimony. Jack only claims to speak to Piper. But that can’t be true either if Lovelady is there by the elevator. Eddie Piper never said he saw Dougherty.
When Mooney gets to TSBD he found the west elevator was stuck on the 2nd floor and Victoria Adams was there too ( this is like about 4 minutes post shots).
That west elevator I think was taken down by the 6th floor shooter and he stopped it in on 2nd floor so he could go out the west side window by the staircase onto the roof top of the adjacent garage. At that NW side of TSBD it’s only a few ft across that roof and he could have dropped from there to the ground.
A lot of these issues are resolved if Dougherty is the actual shooter.
As Baker ascends the stairs he has a quick check of each floor. The only floor he doesn't check is the 6th floor. At no point does he see Dougherty.
Dougerty claims he was on the 5th floor until he went down to the first floor to have his made-up interaction with Piper, but when Baker reaches the 5th floor he is nowhere to be seen.
Dougherty is on the 6th floor as Baker ascends the stairs.
As Baker and Truly move up the building Dougherty calls the west elevator up to the 6th floor.
When Baker and Truly reach the 5th floor the west elevator is missing so they take the east elevator up to the 7th floor (missing Dougherty on the 6th floor).
By the time Baker and Truly come down from the roof, Dougherty is now on the 5th floor going about his business (even though it's still lunch time).
-
Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
There's no point getting bogged down with everything that is wrong with this post but this last observation needs addressing.
Apparently it's me, ands not Brian, who is ignoring the WC testimony of Shelley and Lovelady.
Let's start with the fact that BOTH MEN testify that they didn't leave the steps for at least three minutes!!
How can they be on the extension seconds after the shooting??
I would really like to hear what Brian is going to make up off the top of his head to account for this.
Shelley was later found out by Dallas reporter Dean Glaze to be CIA...The conspirators needed Victoria Adams' claim discredited so they got Lovelady & Shelley to lie and say they left the steps 3 minutes after the shots...The Couch/Darnell Film is the reality and it shows Lovelady & Shelley leaving the steps in synchronicity with the testimonies of the other witnesses who said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps and then went up to the Knoll...Couch/Darnell shows the reality of what happened and Lovelady & Shelley took off from the steps at around 20 seconds after the shots...The men are definitely Lovelady & Shelley because you can see their clothing on those men in the best resolution images...The two men are also exactly where Lovelady & Shelley would be according to the testimonies of others...
Adams & Styles bolted from the 4th Floor window and bolted down the NW staircase...They squeaked out the rear exit ahead of everyone and were not seen...
If Dougherty did go up to the 6th Floor right before the shooting he did so in a way where he saw Oswald in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room, just like Carolyn Arnold did, on his way...Truly defamed Dougherty as being retarded in order to undermine his witnessing...
-
Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
There's no point getting bogged down with everything that is wrong with this post but this last observation needs addressing.
Apparently it's me, ands not Brian, who is ignoring the WC testimony of Shelley and Lovelady.
Let's start with the fact that BOTH MEN testify that they didn't leave the steps for at least three minutes!!
How can they be on the extension seconds after the shooting??
I would really like to hear what Brian is going to make up off the top of his head to account for this.
BOTH MEN testify that, after three minutes, Gloria comes up to the steps, tells them about the shooting after which both of them make their way across the Elm Street extension to the "little, old island" (both men use exactly the same phrase to describe the concrete spur separating the Elm Streets), where they stopped "for a minute".
So, the image of the two men walking down the extension is taken 20 - 25 seconds after the shooting.
In this short span of time, according to Brian, Gloria has made her way back to the TSBD steps, told everyone about the shooting, both men have made their way across to the little old island, hung around there for a while, then made it half way down the extension before being caught on film.
Let's do him a favour and ignore the three minutes it takes Gloria to reach the steps and the time spent on the little, old island.
Even if we ignore all the testimony that Brian seems so willing to do, is it still physically possible for the two men to be so far down the extension, after the sequence of events described, in such a short span of time?
Let's be ultra kind to Brian and make it like some mad kind of tag race being run at top speed:
1] Gloria sprints full tilt and makes it back to the steps within 15 seconds
2] She spits out a rapid-fire account of the shooting in 5 seconds
3] Shelley and Lovelady sprint across to the little old island - 3 seconds.
4] They stay there for 5 seconds
5] They then sprint to their positions on the Elm Street extension - another 3 seconds.
They still don't make it in time.
Even if we follow Brian's lead and ignore nearly every statement they made in their WC testimonies, Shelley and Lovelady still don't make it.
The reason for this is obvious - it's not Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension.
In reality, what happens is this
Shelley and Lovelady are on the steps at the time of the shooting.
Immediately after the shots Shelley runs out to the concrete spur where he encounters a distraught Gloria Calvery running the other way.
Both return to the front steps where Gloria tells everyone there about the shooting after which both Shelley and Lovelady make their way into the building through the front door.
Gloria reaches the steps in a matter seconds - not 3 minutes.
Both men do not then go across to the little, old island.
Both men do not wander along the extension.
Both men do not hang around the railroad yards.
Both men do not enter the building through the west door.
These are all lies told to hide their actual movements after the shooting.
Both men immediately enter the building and make their way towards the back of the first floor where they are seen by Vickie Adams about 60 seconds after the shooting.
Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive at the elevators where Baker notices two white men just hanging around. Clearly this is Shelley and Lovelady.
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
The image above shows the moment Gloria has reached the steps and is telling everyone about the shooting.
The man in front of her is Billy Lovelady.
Shelley, wearing his baggy black suit, is near the bottom of the steps after returning from the concrete spur.
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg)
DOYLE - You continue to avoid addressing the images above. Shelley and Lovelady are right there on the TSBD Steps as Officer Baker runs toward the building. They can Not be the "2 Guys" moving down the Elm St Extension. It is physically impossible.
-
DOYLE - You continue to avoid addressing the images above. Shelley and Lovelady are right there on the TSBD Steps as Officer Baker runs toward the building. They can Not be the "2 Guys" moving down the Elm St Extension. It is physically impossible.
The man you are calling Shelley has a much stockier body shape than the real Shelley who can be seen fast-walking up the extension with the correct body shape and Duck's Bahookie hair doo...
If we can get the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell we can see Molina in front of Calvery in better resolution...
-
The man you are calling Shelley has a much stockier body shape than the real Shelley who can be seen fast-walking up the extension with the correct body shape and Duck's Bahookie hair doo...
If we can get the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell we can see Molina in front of Calvery in better resolution...
And why do You completely avoid mentioning Lovelady being on the TSBD front steps? That is because Lovelady is standing in almost the exact same position that we see him in the Altgens 6 photo. It is supposed to be both Shelley AND LOVELADY walking down the Elm St Extension. You simply can Not get around Lovelady being on the image above.
-
I assume the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell is the best extant copy...It should therefore be obtained, scanned, and analyzed...It will show Joe Molina as being the man in front of Calvery on the steps...Molina said in testimony that after the shots he drifted in the direction of the Knoll on the top platform of the front steps and then descended the steps and headed to the Knoll...You are seeing him in that process in Couch/Darnell...Since their clothing indicates that the pair fast-walking up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley the man on the steps has to be Molina...We can see that most sources on both Greg Parker's site and The Education Forum claim the man on the steps is Lovelady...They are wrong...It is Molina...Throw in Stanton as Prayer Man and I am being disallowed membership by people who don't know how to do basic photo identification analysis...Parker and Kamp have seriously damaged good research...
-
I assume the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell is the best extant copy...It should therefore be obtained, scanned, and analyzed...It will show Joe Molina as being the man in front of Calvery on the steps...Molina said in testimony that after the shots he drifted in the direction of the Knoll on the top platform of the front steps and then descended the steps and headed to the Knoll...You are seeing him in that process in Couch/Darnell...Since their clothing indicates that the pair fast-walking up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley the man on the steps has to be Molina...We can see that most sources on both Greg Parker's site and The Education Forum claim the man on the steps is Lovelady...They are wrong...It is Molina...Throw in Stanton as Prayer Man and I am being disallowed membership by people who don't know how to do basic photo identification analysis...Parker and Kamp have seriously damaged good research...
So you wanna claim that is Lovelady and Shelley walking down the Elm St Ext based on the clothing they wear? Yet, the figure you are claiming to be Molina is actually wearing a Lovelady plaid shirt. The Double Standard that you are employing signals how jammed up You and Kamp are.
-
More the reason to do high tech digital analysis of the 6th Floor Museum's copy...
-
More the reason to do high tech digital analysis of the 6th Floor Museum's copy...
You're dodging my pointing out that You use the alleged attire of the 2 Guys walking down the Elm St Extension to ID them, but you run away from the plaid shirt worn by the Lovelady figure standing on the TSBD front steps. You can Not have it both ways.
-
The worst evasion here is you avoiding answering how the man you are labeling Shelley has an obviously too stocky body to be Shelley...
-
The worst evasion here is you avoiding answering how the man you are labeling Shelley has an obviously too stocky body to be Shelley...
They go TOGETHER. You have to place Lovelady walking down the Elm St Ext too. You can't do it. Putting those 2 Guys in that position on the Elm St Extension, only 20 seconds after the kill shot, means they came from 1 spot. They came from inside that "getaway" car and are distancing themselves from it.
-
Shelley was later found out by Dallas reporter Dean Glaze to be CIA...The conspirators needed Victoria Adams' claim discredited so they got Lovelady & Shelley to lie and say they left the steps 3 minutes after the shots...The Couch/Darnell Film is the reality and it shows Lovelady & Shelley leaving the steps in synchronicity with the testimonies of the other witnesses who said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps and then went up to the Knoll...Couch/Darnell shows the reality of what happened and Lovelady & Shelley took off from the steps at around 20 seconds after the shots...The men are definitely Lovelady & Shelley because you can see their clothing on those men in the best resolution images...The two men are also exactly where Lovelady & Shelley would be according to the testimonies of others...
Adams & Styles bolted from the 4th Floor window and bolted down the NW staircase...They squeaked out the rear exit ahead of everyone and were not seen...
If Dougherty did go up to the 6th Floor right before the shooting he did so in a way where he saw Oswald in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room, just like Carolyn Arnold did, on his way...Truly defamed Dougherty as being retarded in order to undermine his witnessing...
Adams & Styles bolted from the 4th Floor window and bolted down the NW staircase...They squeaked out the rear exit ahead of everyone and were not seen...
I agree that Shelley and Lovelady lied about their movements after the shooting.
Adams hit the first floor around 60 seconds after the shooting, if not quicker, and saw Shelley and Lovelady approaching the area near the elevators.
Shelley and Lovelady could not have made it to that position in time if they wandered down the Elm Street extension.
In their affidavits, given on the day of the shooting, there is no mention of wandering along the extension. Immediately after the shooting, Shelley runs across the extension, meets Gloria racing back to the front steps, returns to the front steps and re-enters the building. Lovelady never leaves the steps, and simply re-enters the building.
Shelley lied in his WC testimony when he says he waited on the steps until Gloria arrived.
Lovelady lied when he said he left the steps.
Both men lied about waiting there for 3 minutes.
Both men lied about wandering along the extension.
Both men lied about hanging around the railroad yard.
Both men lied about re-entering the building by the west door.
They didn't lie because the conspirators made them.
They lied because they are the conspirators (at least Shelley is)
-
I assume the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell is the best extant copy...It should therefore be obtained, scanned, and analyzed...It will show Joe Molina as being the man in front of Calvery on the steps...Molina said in testimony that after the shots he drifted in the direction of the Knoll on the top platform of the front steps and then descended the steps and headed to the Knoll...You are seeing him in that process in Couch/Darnell...Since their clothing indicates that the pair fast-walking up the extension are Lovelady & Shelley the man on the steps has to be Molina...We can see that most sources on both Greg Parker's site and The Education Forum claim the man on the steps is Lovelady...They are wrong...It is Molina...Throw in Stanton as Prayer Man and I am being disallowed membership by people who don't know how to do basic photo identification analysis...Parker and Kamp have seriously damaged good research...
.Parker and Kamp have seriously damaged good research...
??
You are basing your identification of Shelley and Lovelady on Kamp's work!!
-
The worst evasion here is you avoiding answering how the man you are labeling Shelley has an obviously too stocky body to be Shelley...
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg)
He has the same body shape as Shelley and is wearing the same clothing - a baggy black suit with the trousers tight towards the bottom of the leg.
He even appears to have the same kind of hairstyle.
And the guy on the steps is wearing a plaid shirt. Molina was wearing a white shirt.
Molina specifically stated in his WC testimony that he never talked to a female on the steps (d'oh)
Molina testified that he spoke to Gloria in the lobby.
-
He has the same body shape as Shelley and is wearing the same clothing - a baggy black suit with the trousers tight towards the bottom of the leg.
He even appears to have the same kind of hairstyle.
He doesn't...You are just saying that in order to confuse...Meanwhile the man fast-walking up the extension is a dead match on Shelley's features, hair doo, and clothes...We both know that you are just labeling a random man in front of the steps as Shelley in order to have somebody other than the man on the extension to call Shelley...
And the guy on the steps is wearing a plaid shirt. Molina was wearing a white shirt.
Molina specifically stated in his WC testimony that he never talked to a female on the steps (d'oh)
Molina testified that he spoke to Gloria in the lobby.
I don't trust your image...Frankly it looks like a photoshop image somebody tinkered with and fused Lovelady in with that man...The reason I say that is because I have seen other enlargements of that man that do not look at all like what you are showing here and clearly look like Molina...The current research community at The Education Forum talks like a serious research group but then when it comes time to act like a serious research group they do just the opposite and work to NOT get the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell...They avoid accountability for this with bastardly banning and censorship...Then they post a set of self-serving overbearing rules as if they were designed to enhance good research instead of prohibit it like they do...
If Lovelady is on the extension (which he is) then that man has to be Molina...
This is all part of a process to force the JFK research world under the stifling domain of corrupted moderators and moderation at The Education Forum whose sole design is to prevent credible discussion of the evidence that Sarah Stanton is Prayer Man...
-
(https://i0.wp.com/www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Molina-in-Darnell.jpg)
-
He doesn't...You are just saying that in order to confuse...Meanwhile the man fast-walking up the extension is a dead match on Shelley's features, hair doo, and clothes...We both know that you are just labeling a random man in front of the steps as Shelley in order to have somebody other than the man on the extension to call Shelley...
I don't trust your image...Frankly it looks like a photoshop image somebody tinkered with and fused Lovelady in with that man...The reason I say that is because I have seen other enlargements of that man that do not look at all like what you are showing here and clearly look like Molina...The current research community at The Education Forum talks like a serious research group but then when it comes time to act like a serious research group they do just the opposite and work to NOT get the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell...They avoid accountability for this with bastardly banning and censorship...Then they post a set of self-serving overbearing rules as if they were designed to enhance good research instead of prohibit it like they do...
If Lovelady is on the extension (which he is) then that man has to be Molina...
This is all part of a process to force the JFK research world under the stifling domain of corrupted moderators and moderation at The Education Forum whose sole design is to prevent credible discussion of the evidence that Sarah Stanton is Prayer Man...
"If Lovelady is on the extension (which he is) then that man HAS TO BE Molina".
NO, that man does NOT, "...has to be Molina". If you have Proof the man is Molina please post it. This is NOT THE Ed FORUM. Here, nothing simply, "has to be". Claims require evidence/proof on this forum. Otherwise, said claim is Opinion. Please keep in mind that you are Not posting on the Ed Forum. The bar is higher here.
-
You can see Molina's bald pate in the Prayer Man website image above...Lovelady has hair where you can see brightness coming from Molina's bald pate in this image...And the shape of his head...The better the copy the more you can see it...
We are not looking at the clearest images...
-
You can see Molina's bald pate in the Prayer Man website image above...Lovelady has hair where you can see brightness coming from Molina's bald pate in this image...And the shape of his head...The better the copy the more you can see it...
We are not looking at the clearest images...
The "bald" ID method is why we have had so many incorrect ID's of Ruby. You're drifting into Cinque territory.
-
It can be easily seen by juxtaposing Molina and Lovelady...The lack of hair resembles Molina...
We have not accessed the best resolution images...
-
Could be Danny Arce but he never identified who he was walking with when he left the steps.
-
Check out Danny Arce WC testimony. He could the guy walking beside the Lovelady lookalike dude.
Remember that the timestamp for the "2 Guys" walking down the Elm St Extension is 20 seconds after the kill shot. The people standing on the TSBD front steps did Not immediately know that JFK had been shot. So what would be the reason for any of the people standing on the front steps to then be walking down the Elm St Extension ONLY 20 seconds after the kill shot? There is No Reason. Those 2 Guys are Not connected to the people standing on the TSBD Front Steps. Those 2 Guys are not connected to the TSBD. So where did these 2 Guys come from? They came from inside the car that they are now walking away from.
-
You can Not get around that :20 second time stamp applied to those 2 Guys already walking down the Elm St Ext. You wanna change that time stamp, go for it. There are absolutely NO IMAGES showing, "Calvery and Reed BOLTING ON ADRENALINE, in reaction to seeing Kennedy's brains blown out....".
You need to remember that Wiegman was filming as he exited Camera Car #1 at the corner and then moved down Elm St. Shots had just been fired and he filmed the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass. Wiegman would have caught at least one of these women "....BOLTING ON ADRNALINE..." as they went down the Elm St sidewalk toward the TSBD. What you are claiming Never happened. The Wiegman film all by itself kills your fictional story line.
Thomas Graves and Sandy Larsen researched this and found Calvery and Reed standing in the motorcade spectators on Elm St down by the Stemmons sign...They are seen in the Newsweek color frames of Zapruder...Graves & Larsen matched the green plaid skirt Calvery was wearing, and all-white outfit Reed was wearing, to both the women in the spectators and women climbing the steps...They are the same people and Calvery's son even confirmed it...So you are provably wrong since credible film evidence showing Calvery & Reed in the spectators in Zapruder, and then on the steps in Couch/Darnell, proves the pair ran between those two locations in the time between...Not to mention Carol Reed told me she bolted like that...
-
Thomas Graves and Sandy Larsen researched this and found Calvery and Reed standing in the motorcade spectators on Elm St down by the Stemmons sign...They are seen in the Newsweek color frames of Zapruder...Graves & Larsen matched the green plaid skirt Calvery was wearing, and all-white outfit Reed was wearing, to the women in the spectators and women climbing the steps...They are the same people and Calvery's son even confirmed it...So you are provably wrong since credible film evidence showing Calvery & Reed in the spectators in Zapruder, and then on the steps in Couch/Darnell, proves the pair ran between those two locations in the time between...Not to mention Carol Reed told me she bolted like that...
You obviously are unable to explain how these 2 women, "...bolting on adrenaline..", somehow are Not on the Wiegman film running down the Elm St sidewalk. Again, you want to stick with that story you have put together, you Must change the currently accepted timestamping.
"Graves & Larsen researched this....". Who the heck are Graves & Larsen? You can Not just throw names out there and expect this Forum to accept whatever conclusion these people came to. This "Graves & Larsen" might be like "Gary Mack and Jack White" and their "Badge Man" creation. Again, this is NOT THE ED Forum. The bar is higher here. Please provide the bona fides of "Graves & Larsen".
How about getting your email buddy, Bart Kamp, on this Forum to explain his images? Those Kamp "images" are the foundation for your "story".
-
You are obviously reality-challenged like with Lovelady & Shelley...
The films show the reality and reality dictates that Calvery & Reed had to go from the motorcade spectators to the steps...
You are using a bogus argument to argue against already-proven evidence...
The research community, right on schedule, leaves me alone flapping out in the wind on this...
-
You are obviously reality-challenged like with Lovelady & Shelley...
The films show the reality and reality dictates that Calvery & Reed had to go from the motorcade spectators to the steps...
You are using a bogus argument to argue against already-proven evidence...
The research community, right on schedule, leaves me alone flapping out in the wind on this...
You claim that I am "reality challenged" with respect to Lovelady and Shelley. Their WC Testimony is in conflict with your speculated Calvery & Reed timeline/Mad Dash. Your made up Calvery/Reed timeline vs the WC Lovelady/Shelley timeline is off by roughly 2.5 minutes.
-
Who are you going to believe?...
Lovelady & CIA Shelley or your own lying eyes?...
-
Who are you going to believe?...
Lovelady & CIA Shelley or your own lying eyes?...
You're both brainwashed-by-KGB-disinfo kooks in my book.
-
Who are you going to believe?...
Lovelady & CIA Shelley or your own lying eyes?...
You can NOT: (1) Put Shelley and Lovelady alongside that car only :20 seconds after the kill shot, and (2) Show Calvery & Reed on the Wiegman Film, "bolting on Adrenaline", as they run down the Elm St sidewalk. You are unable to do this which completely destroys your theory.
-
You can NOT: (1) Put Shelley and Lovelady alongside that car only :20 seconds after the kill shot, and (2) Show Calvery & Reed on the Wiegman Film, "bolting on Adrenaline", as they run down the Elm St sidewalk. You are unable to do this which completely destroys your theory.
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
I love it when two tinfoil-hat CTs like you and Doyle argue with each other!
-- Tom
-
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
I love it when two tinfoil-hat CTs like you and Doyle argue with each other!
-- Tom
What is obvious is the much higher "Burden Of Proof" required on this Forum.
-
What is obvious is the much higher "Burden Of Proof" required on this Forum.
That statement is contradicted by the fact that you and your CT ilk spew virtual diarrhea here several times a day.
-
The point is being avoided that if Calvery & Reed are seen in the Newsweek enlargements of Zapruder in the motorcade spectators and then end up on the front steps in Couch/Darnell that they ran there in between...
Graves...You forgot to credit me for Molina facing Calvery on the steps...
-
If big-tall, black-blouse-and-black-headscarf-wearing Gloria Calvery and her all-in-white colleague, Carol Reed, are seen standing about fifty yards down Elm Street in Zapruder and end up on the TSBD steps in Couch/Darnell, they must have run to the steps after the fatal headshot.
Correct.
Graves, you forgot to credit me for identifying Joe Molina as the man who's facing Calvery on the steps.
Just curious:
As Credit Manager at the TSBD, didn't Joe wear a suit every day?
-
Dear Mr Graves...You have quoted me saying something I never said above...
By the way, Calvery was wearing a short-length sweater that was noticeable in the motorcade spectators and on the steps as the same short-length sweater and proves the woman was Calvery...Royell seems to be having trouble computing the basic logic that if Calvery is seen in the motorcade spectators on Elm in Zapruder, and is then seen climbing the steps in Couch/Darnell, that she had to have run between those two points in the interim...Karan Hicks is almost certainly the running woman in the Black Skirt and White Blouse whom Shelley pulls up and talks to as she runs by in the slow motion Gerda Dunkel clip...Hicks was standing with Calvery and Reed and followed their adrenaline-fueled dash to the Depository...The timing of all this forces the two men fast-walking up the extension to be Lovelady & Shelley, which in turn forces the man facing Calvery on the steps to be Molina...
The 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell needs to be obtained and professionally enhanced...Not only will it show all the above more clearly but it will also show Sarah Stanton's dress neckline on Prayer Man more clearly...The Hughes Film also needs to be obtained and professionally enhanced in order to show big fat Sarah Stanton standing up behind Lovelady in the Prayer Man spot right where Lovelady put her...THIS is intelligent, on-point, skilled research that goes right to solving the issue...The instruction on how to put people on ignore is Bush League, Mickey Mouse clique gangsterism designed to fan-boy for DiEugenio and rig the forum in his favor with Iler serving as his sycophantic servant...Not only is Iler not correcting the moderator corruption he promised to correct but he is making it worse while flagrantly teaming up with DiEugenio under the guise of moderation...I'm particularly impressed by DiEugenio's coming in and asking that moderators don't skew the JFK internet for his sake...It is little things like that that make all the difference...
-
Dear Mr Graves...You have quoted me saying something I never said above...
By the way, Calvery was wearing a short-length sweater that was noticeable in the motorcade spectators and on the steps as the same short-length sweater and proves the woman was Calvery...Royell seems to be having trouble computing the basic logic that if Calvery is seen in the motorcade spectators on Elm in Zapruder, and is then seen climbing the steps in Couch/Darnell, that she had to have run between those two points in the interim...Karan Hicks is almost certainly the running woman in the Black Skirt and White Blouse whom Shelley pulls up and talks to as she runs by in the slow motion Gerda Dunkel clip...Hicks was standing with Calvery and Reed and followed their adrenaline-fueled dash to the Depository...The timing of all this forces the two men fast-walking up the extension to be Lovelady & Shelley, which in turn forces the man facing Calvery on the steps to be Molina...
The 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell needs to be obtained and professionally enhanced...Not only will it show all the above more clearly but it will also show Sarah Stanton's dress neckline on Prayer Man more clearly...The Hughes Film also needs to be obtained and professionally enhanced in order to show big fat Sarah Stanton standing up behind Lovelady in the Prayer Man spot right where Lovelady put her...THIS is intelligent, on-point, skilled research that goes right to solving the issue...The instruction on how to put people on ignore is Bush League, Mickey Mouse clique gangsterism designed to fan-boy for DiEugenio and rig the forum in his favor with Iler serving as his sycophantic servant...Not only is Iler not correcting the moderator corruption he promised to correct but he is making it worse while flagrantly teaming up with DiEugenio under the guise of moderation...
You continue making a case for changing the :20 seconds after the kill shot timestamp. You basically are claiming that these 2 women were ahead of Officer Baker as Baker also ran up the sidewalk toward the TSBD. If you do Not have the stones to do change this :20 second timestamp, you should drop your entire case. There is absolutely No Way those 2 women could go running up the Elm St Sidewalk, to the TSBD, and Not appear on the Wiegman Film. Wiegman jumped out of camera car #1 as it was turning onto Elm St. His camera was rolling this entire time. You are changing the timelines of many people.
-
1) I don't need to show Calvery & Reed in Wiegman because the logic of locating both of them in Zapruder and Couch/Darnell trumps any other excuse-making claims...Film evidence that you can see with your own eyes trumps all other disingenuous, inferior claims and dispenses with the need to regress to them...Those making such regressive arguments can be legitimately dismissed and considered as losing their arguments and not answering to the better evidence...They are not to be taken seriously...
2) Wiegman, as he runs down to the motorcade spectators, is a blurry mess with the camera being swung back and forth...It is not really honest to contend the running women could be seen in that clip...
-
1) I don't need to show Calvery & Reed in Wiegman because the logic of locating both of them in Zapruder and Couch/Darnell trumps any other excuse-making claims...Film evidence that you can see with your own eyes trumps all other disingenuous, inferior claims and dispenses with the need to regress to them...Those making such regressive arguments can be legitimately dismissed and considered as losing their arguments and not answering to the better evidence...They are not to be taken seriously...
2) Wiegman, as he runs down to the motorcade spectators, is a blurry mess with the camera being swung back and forth...It is not really honest to contend the running women could be seen in that clip...
So are you NOW claiming that these 2 women sprinting up the sidewalk are in the Wiegman Film? That we just can Not see them? Is that your new wrinkle? This is what happens when you Fail to thoroughly think through your claim. It requires patching. Again, you need to CHANGE THE TIMELINES.
-
So are you NOW claiming that these 2 women sprinting up the sidewalk are in the Wiegman Film? That we just can Not see them? Is that your new wrinkle? This is what happens when you Fail to thoroughly think through your claim. It requires patching. Again, you need to CHANGE THE TIMELINES.
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
That's not what Doyle's saying.
He's saying that from their locations on the north side of Elm Street during the motorcade, Calvery and Reed were close enough to the TSBD steps to be able to get them about five seconds before Darnell "captured" them on film there. In other words, if Darnell had started filming the steps about five seconds earlier, he would have "captured" Calvery's telling Shelley and Lovelady that JFK had been hit.
-- Tom
-
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
That's not what Doyle's saying.
He's saying that from their locations on the north side of Elm Street during the motorcade, Calvery and Reed were close enough to the TSBD steps to be able to get them about five seconds before Darnell "captured" them on film there. In other words, if Darnell had started filming the steps about five seconds earlier, he would have "captured" Calvery's telling Shelley and Lovelady that JFK had been hit.
-- Tom
How is that possible if Both Lovelady and Shelley stated they waited on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria arrived?
Are they lying about that?
Are they lying about running over to the little, old island and staying there for "a minute or two"?
Or are you saying that, immediately after the shots, both men ran out to the little old island, met Gloria there, then made their way along the extension?
What are you saying exactly?
-
How is that possible if Both Lovelady and Shelley stated they waited on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria arrived?
If that's what they said, they were wrong, because we see Gloria Calvery, with her back to the camera, on the steps in Darnell about thirty seconds after the final shot.
Are they lying about running over to the little, old island and staying there for awhile?
If that's what they did, they didn't stay there very long.
Or, are you saying that immediately after the shots, both men ran out to the little old island, met Gloria there, then made their way along the Extension?
Of the three scenarios you've given us, that one makes the most sense.
-
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
That's not what Doyle's saying.
He's saying that from their locations on the north side of Elm Street during the motorcade, Calvery and Reed were close enough to the TSBD steps to be able to get there about five seconds before Darnell "captured" them there. In other words, if Darnell had started filming the steps about five seconds earlier, he would have "captured" Calvery's telling Shelley and Lovelady that JFK had been hit.
-- Tom
I understand what he is saying. He's claiming that Calvery/Reed were at the TSBD steps and talking to Shelley/Lovelady only :15 seconds after the kill shot. Darnell was riding in Camera Car #3. He filmed the TSBD steps from the ground on the corner of Houston/Elm. Darnell had to of climbed out of that car prior to filming Officer Baker running across the Island. (Tick/Tock). Wiegman jumped out of the (R) side of Camera Car #1 as it was turning onto Elm St. This allegedly puts Wiegman running right past these 2 women as they were running toward the TSBD. There is Zero Evidence of these ships having, "passed in the night". Bearing in mind that Darnell also filmed the driver of Camera Car #2 standing outside of the car BEFORE he filmed Officer Baker (allegedly :20 seconds after the kill shot), and then filmed the TSBD front steps, we have a serious 62+ yr old time stamping issue. What driver of any car gets out of that car when it has only been sitting bumper-to-bumper for max 15 seconds? *Ans- No Driver!
-
If that's what they said, they were wrong, because we see Gloria Calvery, with her back to the camera, on the steps in Darnell about thirty seconds after the final shot.
If that's what they did, they didn't stay there very long.
Of the three scenarios you've given us, that one makes the most sense.
It's not about scenarios I'm giving you ::)
I'm giving you testimonial evidence that you seem to be completely unaware of, even though it's JFKA 101.
Yes, both Shelley and Lovelady testified that they stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria arrived there. Why would BOTH MEN do that? What is the reason BOTH MEN testified to this?
Shelley testified that they stayed on the little old island for "a minute or two".
How do you explain this?
Three minutes waiting for Gloria??
A minute or two on the concrete spur??
Now that you've been made aware of it, how can you incorporate this testimonial evidence into your understanding of this issue?
And as far as the third scenario I offered...this was your own sad attempt to dig yourself out of this conundrum.
Until it was pointed out to you that never...NEVER...in any testimony or statement by anyone was it suggested that Lovelady ran across to the concrete spur where he ran into Gloria.
This was a sad little lie both you and Lance concocted rather than honestly review the evidence.
Shelley's affidavit and his WC testimony completely contradict each other.
The sequence of events described in his affidavit is as follows:
1] On front steps when he hears shots
2] Heads to the concrete spur (on his own) where he meets Gloria.
3] Returns to the TSBD
4] Re-enters the building
The sequence of events described in his WC testimony is as follows:
1] On front steps when he hears shots
2] Waits on steps for about 3 minutes before Gloria arrives at steps
3] Both he and Lovelady then head over to the concrete spur for "a minute or two".
4] He turns and sees Baker and Truly still outside the building.
5] Heads down Elm Street extension to the railroad yard, hangs around there for a while, re-enters building through west door (none of which is mentioned in his affidavit).
3 minutes on the steps waiting for Gloria to arrive!
A minute or two on the concrete spur!
It is impossible for the two figures on Elm Street to be Shelley and Lovelady if this is the case.
There is simply no time as Gloria had just arrived at the steps in Darnell.
There is no way around this.
However, if we accept the affidavits of Shelley and Lovelady, and that Lovelady was still on the steps when Gloria came up and told him about the shooting, it is clear that Darnell is showing the moment Gloria arrives at the steps. The man she is talking to on the steps is Lovelady (who is stood in exactly the same position on the steps he was as the motorcade passed by).
There is nothing contradicting this identification.
It cannot be Molina, who was wearing a white shirt and who specifically testified that he hadn't talked to a woman on the steps.
(https://i.postimg.cc/hGjmp3VK/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
-
Doyle's claiming that Calvery/Reed were at the TSBD steps and talking to Shelley/Lovelady only :15 seconds after the kill shot.
Maybe 25 seconds after "the kill shot."
Who knows?
Darnell was riding in Camera Car #3. He filmed the TSBD steps from the ground on the corner of Houston/Elm. Darnell had to of [sic] climbed out of that car prior to filming Officer Baker running across the Island.
So?
Wiegman jumped out of the (R) side of Camera Car #1 as it was turning onto Elm St. This allegedly puts Wiegman running right past these 2 women as they were running toward the TSBD. There is Zero Evidence of these ships having, "passed in the night."
Wiegman's camera was pointed down at the pavement for a couple of seconds as he was getting out of the car, and much of the footage he took while running is blurry, to say the least.
No wonder he didn't 'catch" Calvery and Reed as they were running up the sidewalk towards the TSBD steps.
Bearing in mind that Darnell also filmed the driver of Camera Car #2 standing outside of the car before he filmed Officer Baker (allegedly 20 seconds after the kill shot), and then filmed the TSBD front steps, we have a serious 62+ year-old time stamping issue -- What driver of any car gets out of that car when it has only been sitting bumper-to-bumper for at most 15 seconds?
Answer: No one.
Did the driver of that camera car know how long the cars around him would be there?
Don't you think he might have gotten out to have a better view of what was going on?
-
It's not about scenarios I'm giving you ::)
I'm giving you testimonial evidence that you seem to be completely unaware of, even though it's JFKA 101.
Yes, both Shelley and Lovelady testified that they stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria arrived there. Why would BOTH MEN do that? What is the reason BOTH MEN testified to this?
Shelley testified that they stayed on the little old island for "a minute or two".
How do you explain this?
Three minutes waiting for Gloria??
A minute or two on the concrete spur??
Now that you've been made aware of it, how can you incorporate this testimonial evidence into your understanding of this issue?
And as far as the third scenario I offered...this was your own sad attempt to dig yourself out of this conundrum.
Until it was pointed out to you that never...NEVER...in any testimony or statement by anyone was it suggested that Lovelady ran across to the concrete spur where he ran into Gloria.
This was a sad little lie both you and Lance concocted rather than honestly review the evidence.
Shelley's affidavit and his WC testimony completely contradict each other.
The sequence of events described in his affidavit is as follows:
1] On front steps when he hears shots
2] Heads to the concrete spur (on his own) where he meets Gloria.
3] Returns to the TSBD
4] Re-enters the building
The sequence of events described in his WC testimony is as follows:
1] On front steps when he hears shots
2] Waits on steps for about 3 minutes before Gloria arrives at steps
3] Both he and Lovelady then head over to the concrete spur for "a minute or two".
4] He turns and sees Baker and Truly still outside the building.
5] Heads down Elm Street extension to the railroad yard, hangs around there for a while, re-enters building through west door (none of which is mentioned in his affidavit).
3 minutes on the steps waiting for Gloria to arrive!
A minute or two on the concrete spur!
It is impossible for the two figures on Elm Street to be Shelley and Lovelady if this is the case.
There is simply no time as Gloria had just arrived at the steps in Darnell.
There is no way around this.
However, if we accept the affidavits of Shelley and Lovelady, and that Lovelady was still on the steps when Gloria came up and told him about the shooting, it is clear that Darnell is showing the moment Gloria arrives at the steps. The man she is talking to on the steps is Lovelady (who is stood in exactly the same position on the steps he was as the motorcade passed by).
There is nothing contradicting this identification.
It cannot be Molina, who was wearing a white shirt and who specifically testified that he hadn't talked to a woman on the steps.
(https://i.postimg.cc/hGjmp3VK/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Knock yourself out.
Either that or go self-publish a book.
-- Tom
-
Dear danny BOY o'meara,
Knock yourself out.
Either that or go self-publish a book.
-- Tom
:D :D :D
Could your response be any weaker?
Come on lil Tommy, just review the evidence honestly. What have you got to lose?
How can you be taken seriously as a researcher if you aren't even aware of such basic facts about the case and then so dismissive of this evidence when it's pointed out to you?
-
It's not about scenarios I'm giving you ::)
I'm giving you testimonial evidence that you seem to be completely unaware of, even though it's JFKA 101.
Yes, both Shelley and Lovelady testified that they stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before Gloria arrived there. Why would BOTH MEN do that? What is the reason BOTH MEN testified to this?
Shelley testified that they stayed on the little old island for "a minute or two".
How do you explain this?
Three minutes waiting for Gloria??
A minute or two on the concrete spur??
Now that you've been made aware of it, how can you incorporate this testimonial evidence into your understanding of this issue?
And as far as the third scenario I offered...this was your own sad attempt to dig yourself out of this conundrum.
Until it was pointed out to you that never...NEVER...in any testimony or statement by anyone was it suggested that Lovelady ran across to the concrete spur where he ran into Gloria.
This was a sad little lie both you and Lance concocted rather than honestly review the evidence.
Shelley's affidavit and his WC testimony completely contradict each other.
The sequence of events described in his affidavit is as follows:
1] On front steps when he hears shots
2] Heads to the concrete spur (on his own) where he meets Gloria.
3] Returns to the TSBD
4] Re-enters the building
The sequence of events described in his WC testimony is as follows:
1] On front steps when he hears shots
2] Waits on steps for about 3 minutes before Gloria arrives at steps
3] Both he and Lovelady then head over to the concrete spur for "a minute or two".
4] He turns and sees Baker and Truly still outside the building.
5] Heads down Elm Street extension to the railroad yard, hangs around there for a while, re-enters building through west door (none of which is mentioned in his affidavit).
3 minutes on the steps waiting for Gloria to arrive!
A minute or two on the concrete spur!
It is impossible for the two figures on Elm Street to be Shelley and Lovelady if this is the case.
There is simply no time as Gloria had just arrived at the steps in Darnell.
There is no way around this.
However, if we accept the affidavits of Shelley and Lovelady, and that Lovelady was still on the steps when Gloria came up and told him about the shooting, it is clear that Darnell is showing the moment Gloria arrives at the steps. The man she is talking to on the steps is Lovelady (who is stood in exactly the same position on the steps he was as the motorcade passed by).
There is nothing contradicting this identification.
It cannot be Molina, who was wearing a white shirt and who specifically testified that he hadn't talked to a woman on the steps.
(https://i.postimg.cc/hGjmp3VK/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
DAN- You're way ahead of Graves. His foundational JFK Assassination knowledge is exceptionally shallow.
-
DAN- You're way ahead of Graves. His foundational JFK Assassination knowledge is exceptionally shallow.
To be honest, I'm really surprised by how little he knows about the basics, yet how strong his opinions are considering how little he knows.
-
To be honest, I'm really surprised by how little he knows about the basics, yet how strong his opinions are considering how little he knows.
These kinda guys like to babble, even though it reveals how little they know about the JFK Assassination.
-
These kinda guys like to babble, even though it reveals how little they know about the JFK Assassination.
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
It's ironic that you say that, given the fact that you didn't realize that Wiegman's camera was pointed down at the pavement while he was getting out of his camera car, and that he captured very few clear images as he ran down the street.
-- Tom
-
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
It's ironic that you say that, given the fact that you didn't realize that Wiegman's camera was pointed down at the pavement while he was getting out of his camera car, and that he captured very few clear images as he ran down the street.
-- Tom
Take a good look at the opening frames of the Sixth Floor Darnell film. Emmitt Hudson is already sitting down on The Steps. Only :15 seconds after the Kill Shot? Not per his WC Testimony.
-
Take a good look at the opening frames of the Sixth Floor Darnell film. Emmitt Hudson is already sitting down on The Steps. Only :15 seconds after the Kill Shot? Not per his WC Testimony.
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
Lots of witnesses were way off in their recollections of that chaotic and traumatic afternoon.
-- Tom
-
It is generally understood that the plotters of the conspiracy went to Lovelady & Shelley and got them to lie and say they left the front steps 3 minutes after the shots because they were trying to doctor Victoria Adams' testimony in order to push it back 3 minutes in order to give Oswald time to make it down the steps...Adams was a problem because she and Styles did not see Oswald running down the NW steps...The plotters knew this so they went to Lovelady & Shelley and got them to push their times back in order to make Adams look stupid...They hadn't considered anyone closely examining Couch/Darnell at that time and seeing Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension revealing the true time...In 1974 Dallas reporter Dean Glaze got Shelley to admit that he was CIA...The rest is academic...Shelley was a major part of the conspiracy in the Lobby and guided Armstrong's "Harvey" out the back after being stopped at the front door by a cop...That is why Shelley was mentioned in Fritz's notes - but only in the context of being out front in the Lobby with Shelley 4 or 5 minutes after the shots...Kamp misrepresents that as being out front with Shelley during the shots...Kamp is a liar...
Couch/Darnell is film evidence anyone can see with their own eyes...Lovelady & Shelley's 3 minute lie is no valid substitute for what is more than obviously shown in Couch/Darnell...Stubbornly repeating it over and over while ignoring the plainly-visible evidence is not a credible research practice...Once you've proven Lovelady & Shelley are the men on the extension then the man in front of Calvery on the steps automatically becomes Molina...
-
It is generally understood that the plotters of the conspiracy went to Lovelady & Shelley and got them to lie and say they left the front steps 3 minutes after the shots because they were trying to doctor Victoria Adams' testimony in order to push it back 3 minutes in order to give Oswald time to make it down the steps...Adams was a problem because she and Styles did not see Oswald running down the NW steps...The plotters knew this so they went to Lovelady & Shelley and got them to push their times back in order to make Adams look stupid...They hadn't considered anyone closely examining Couch/Darnell at that time and seeing Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension revealing the true time...In 1974 Dallas reporter Dean Glaze got Shelley to admit that he was CIA...The rest is academic...Shelley was a major part of the conspiracy in the Lobby and guided Armstrong's "Harvey" out the back after being stopped at the front door by a cop...That is why Shelley was mentioned in Fritz's notes - but only in the context of being out front in the Lobby with Shelley 4 or 5 minutes after the shots...Kamp misrepresents that as being out front with Shelley during the shots...Kamp is a liar...
Couch/Darnell is film evidence anyone can see with their own eyes...Lovelady & Shelley's 3 minute lie is no valid substitute for what is more than obviously shown in Couch/Darnell...Stubbornly repeating it over and over while ignoring the plainly-visible evidence is not a credible research practice...Once you've proven Lovelady & Shelley are the men on the extension then the man in front of Calvery on the steps automatically becomes Molina...
"Generally Understood..............." ?? STOP with the Ed Forum clap trap. Present your Evidence. We'll let you know.
-
"Generally Understood..............." ?? STOP with the Ed Forum clap trap. Present your Evidence. We'll let you know.
The film evidence has the final say (along with Graves lol)...
-
The film evidence has the final say (along with Graves lol)...
"Film evidence has the FINAL say" ?? You're the guy claiming the "Film Evidence" was altered. Now you wanna claim that the film evidence has the "FINAL Say"? You're all over the place.
-
It is generally understood that the plotters of the conspiracy went to Lovelady & Shelley and got them to lie and say they left the front steps 3 minutes after the shots because they were trying to doctor Victoria Adams' testimony in order to push it back 3 minutes in order to give Oswald time to make it down the steps...Adams was a problem because she and Styles did not see Oswald running down the NW steps...The plotters knew this so they went to Lovelady & Shelley and got them to push their times back in order to make Adams look stupid...They hadn't considered anyone closely examining Couch/Darnell at that time and seeing Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension revealing the true time...In 1974 Dallas reporter Dean Glaze got Shelley to admit that he was CIA...The rest is academic...Shelley was a major part of the conspiracy in the Lobby and guided Armstrong's "Harvey" out the back after being stopped at the front door by a cop...That is why Shelley was mentioned in Fritz's notes - but only in the context of being out front in the Lobby with Shelley 4 or 5 minutes after the shots...Kamp misrepresents that as being out front with Shelley during the shots...Kamp is a liar...
Couch/Darnell is film evidence anyone can see with their own eyes...Lovelady & Shelley's 3 minute lie is no valid substitute for what is more than obviously shown in Couch/Darnell...Stubbornly repeating it over and over while ignoring the plainly-visible evidence is not a credible research practice...Once you've proven Lovelady & Shelley are the men on the extension then the man in front of Calvery on the steps automatically becomes Molina...
.Kamp is a liar...
As Royell correctly points out, you really are all over the place.
You constantly discredit Kamp yet your identification of Lovelady in Darnell is based solely on his work.
One minute you're saying that conspirators made Shelley lie then you're saying Shelley is one of the conspirators!
You constantly insist the man on the steps is Molina, when the man isn't wearing a white shirt and Molina specifically testifies that he had no interaction with anyone on the steps.
Take a deep breath and have a little think about the evidence.
-
.Kamp is a liar...
As Royell correctly points out, you really are all over the place.
You constantly discredit Kamp yet your identification of Lovelady in Darnell is based solely on his work.
One minute you're saying that conspirators made Shelley lie then you're saying Shelley is one of the conspirators!
You constantly insist the man on the steps is Molina, when the man isn't wearing a white shirt and Molina specifically testifies that he had no interaction with anyone on the steps.
Take a deep breath and have a little think about the evidence.
I continue looking forward to your fleshing out your theory that Shelley/Lovelady entered the TSBD through the front door. That's an original concept and does answer many timeline issues.
-
Front entry doesn't make sense because it doesn't line up with Adams & Styles' descent of the steps or Truly & Bakers' entry in to the First Floor...
As can be seen in Couch/Darnell, Lovelady & Shelley are headed up to the Train Yard where they went back in to the Depository through the west entry doors...
Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in and were on the stairs just ahead of where Oswald needed to be in his alleged run down from the 6th Floor...It was actually Mrs Garner who was the one who should have seen and heard Oswald but didn't from her spot on the 4th Floor landing...
-
Front entry doesn't make sense because it doesn't line up with Adams & Styles' descent of the steps or Truly & Bakers' entry in to the First Floor...
As can be seen in Couch/Darnell, Lovelady & Shelley are headed up to the Train Yard where they went back in to the Depository through the west entry doors...
Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in and were on the stairs just ahead of where Oswald needed to be in his alleged run down from the 6th Floor...It was actually Mrs Garner who was the one who should have seen and heard Oswald but didn't from her spot on the 4th Floor landing...
Give O'meara the opportunity to present his case. It is Compelling and New. There is seldom anything New presented in the JFK Assassination. His Shelley/Lovelady "front door" scenario merits serious consideration.
-
Give O'meara the opportunity to present his case. It is Compelling and New. There is seldom anything New presented in the JFK Assassination. His Shelley/Lovelady "front door" scenario merits serious consideration.
You would probably find the work of Ralph Cinque entertaining then...
Meanwhile the two men crank researcher Bart Kamp shows going up the extension are obviously Lovelady & Shelley...
The names shown in your image are misleading and don't help establish a credible understanding of the assassination...
-
You would probably find the work of Ralph Cinque entertaining then...
Meanwhile the two men crank researcher Bart Kamp shows going up the extension are obviously Lovelady & Shelley...
The names shown in your image are misleading and don't help establish a credible understanding of the assassination...
You obviously are Not familiar with the work of O'meara. Otherwise, you would Not be comparing it to Cinque. O'meara posts the above still frame and what image evidence do You post in retort? Zippo! There are several posters on this Forum I frequently disagree with. Still, I do respect the work they do and the research time they put into it. You proffer nothing physically or of mental substance to this unsolved murder case. You're ALL noise. Stop your whining about whatever might have happened to you over on the Ed Forum :'( and submit a solid contribution here.
-
You have a man whose body type obviously isn't Shelley labeled Shelley...That's bad research...It shows a lack of competency I'm afraid...That man's body type is obviously too Endomorphic to be Shelley...
Shelley is the man going up the extension with Lovelady...
-
You have a man whose body type obviously isn't Shelley labeled Shelley...That's bad research...It shows a lack of competency I'm afraid...That man's body type is obviously too Endomorphic to be Shelley...
Shelley is the man going up the extension with Lovelady...
This conversation reminds me of something my old football coach used to tell us when we were screwing up at practice. He said, "You guys look like a bunch of monkeys trying to f*** a football".
-
The research community uses false issues to hide the fact it isn't pursuing the best evidence...If you think that it is an innocent coincidence that the research community isn't pursuing the best Prayer Man images then you don't have a good sense of how things are run...Andrew Iler talks a strong talk but he doesn't answer how the people he favors are holding back on pursuing the best Prayer Man imagery...There are plenty of people who are capable of accessing the best images of Molina on the steps in front of Calvery but they are not doing a thing and they are being protected by persons like Iler who talk a strong talk on such dishonest practices but then help them along without skipping a beat...Andrew is a big man but a credible research site allows true free speech and makes him answer things like this instead of beating up on the low hanging fruit from the easy position of moderator...Bart Kamp is the worst offender in this regard and, because of this biased protection, the public doesn't detect how much evidence has been dishonestly held back by Kamp...Kamp is well capable of producing those clearer, best images but offers blurry images instead because he can conceal his deception within that planned obscurity...There is no protest from Iler about this and no threats from the newly reformed administrative position...This trainwreck of corruption has led to The Education Forum itself that succeeds at the illusion of having offered the best research when in fact this dishonest curve of corruption and omission is directly responsible for preventing a solving of the conspiracy...The research community is moribund with the same few researchers that have way too much power...The best and brightest are muted and we are forced to listen to those who benefit the most from the corruption and their hypocritical complaints...
-
The research community uses false issues to hide the fact it isn't pursuing the best evidence...If you think that it is an innocent coincidence that the research community isn't pursuing the best Prayer Man images then you don't have a good sense of how things are run...Andrew Iler talks a strong talk but he doesn't answer how the people he favors are holding back on pursuing the best Prayer Man imagery...There are plenty of people who are capable of accessing the best images of Molina on the steps in front of Calvery but they are not doing a thing and they are being protected by persons like Iler who talk a strong talk on such dishonest practices but then help them along without skipping a beat...Andrew is a big man but a credible research site allows true free speech and makes him answer things like this instead of beating up on the low hanging fruit from the easy position of moderator...Bart Kamp is the worst offender in this regard and, because of this biased protection, the public doesn't detect how much evidence has been dishonestly held back by Kamp...Kamp is well capable of producing those clearer, best images but offers blurry images instead because he can conceal his deception within that planned obscurity...There is no protest from Iler about this and no threats from the newly reformed administrative position...This trainwreck of corruption has led to The Education Forum itself that succeeds at the illusion of having offered the best research when in fact this dishonest curve of corruption and omission is directly responsible for preventing a solving of the conspiracy...The research community is moribund with the same few researchers that have way too much power...The best and brightest are muted and we are forced to listen to those who benefit the most from the corruption and their hypocritical complaints...
People having better images than the images available to the general public has been going on for 62+ years. Stop with your never ending :'( :'(
-
You have a man whose body type obviously isn't Shelley labeled Shelley...That's bad research...It shows a lack of competency I'm afraid...That man's body type is obviously too Endomorphic to be Shelley...
Shelley is the man going up the extension with Lovelady...
You continue running away from the Lovelady Image. The still frame above shows him still standing on the TSBD steps in almost the same exact position we see him on Altgens 6. And the image above is only just over :20 seconds after the kill shot. Either grow some stones and propose changing the accepted time stamping or drop your disproven position.
-
Front entry doesn't make sense because it doesn't line up with Adams & Styles' descent of the steps or Truly & Bakers' entry in to the First Floor...
As can be seen in Couch/Darnell, Lovelady & Shelley are headed up to the Train Yard where they went back in to the Depository through the west entry doors...
Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in and were on the stairs just ahead of where Oswald needed to be in his alleged run down from the 6th Floor...It was actually Mrs Garner who was the one who should have seen and heard Oswald but didn't from her spot on the 4th Floor landing...
Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in...
This is really bizarre.
I completely agree that Adams and Styles "squeaked out the rear exit" just before Truly and Baker arrived at the area near the freight elevators on the first floor.
The Dillard picture proves Adams had left her position by the fourth floor window within 15 seconds of the final shot.
She stated that before the limo had even reached the underpass she had decided to get down there.
She consistently insisted that she ran all the way down, placing her on the first floor within 60 seconds of the shot, if not sooner.
The thing I don't understand is this, Brian, and maybe you can invent something else to account for this:
When Adams hit the first floor within 60 seconds of the shooting she saw Shelley and Lovelady not far from the elevators as she raced by. She even tried to interact with them but they didn't respond.
Truly and Baker arrived at the same location seconds later where Baker reported two white men (who can only be Shelley and Lovelady) hanging around that area.
How is it possible for the two men you claim to be Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension, get to the area near the elevators on the first floor where they were observed by Adams and Baker, within 60 seconds of the shooting?
Do you even realise how you are contradicting yourself?
-
Obviously, Adams & Styles squeaked out the rear exit just before Truly & Baker ran in...
This is really bizarre.
I completely agree that Adams and Styles "squeaked out the rear exit" just before Truly and Baker arrived at the area near the freight elevators on the first floor.
The Dillard picture proves Adams had left her position by the fourth floor window within 15 seconds of the final shot.
She stated that before the limo had even reached the underpass she had decided to get down there.
She consistently insisted that she ran all the way down, placing her on the first floor within 60 seconds of the shot, if not sooner.
The thing I don't understand is this, Brian, and maybe you can invent something else to account for this:
When Adams hit the first floor within 60 seconds of the shooting she saw Shelley and Lovelady not far from the elevators as she raced by. She even tried to interact with them but they didn't respond.
Truly and Baker arrived at the same location seconds later where Baker reported two white men (who can only be Shelley and Lovelady) hanging around that area.
How is it possible for the two men you claim to be Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension, get to the area near the elevators on the first floor where they were observed by Adams and Baker, within 60 seconds of the shooting?
Do you even realise how you are contradicting yourself?
The Darnell/Couch film images that show Officer Baker running across the Island, have been given a time stamp of ":20 seconds after the kill shot". Do you agree with that :20 second time stamp?
That :20 time stamp jams up Shelley and Lovelady being at the TSBD 1st floor freight elevator at Under 1:00 after the kill shot. This "under 1:00 minute" is when they allegedly were seen by Adams when she reached the TSBD 1st floor. The faster You have Adams reaching the TSBD 1st floor, you then are placing Shelley and Lovelady at that same 1st floor location even quicker. And Adams makes no mention of Shelley and Lovelady being in motion, as if Shelley and Lovelady were just arriving when she saw them. They were in position on the 1st floor when she saw them. The still frame you have posted shows Shelley being on the ground in front of the TSBD. This would be at :25 seconds after the kill shot, leaving LESS than :35 seconds for Shelley to go from the ground: (1) up through the very crowded TSBD front steps, (2) through the crowded TSBD Lobby, (3) unlocking the Closed Gate at the desk, (4) traveling across the TSBD 1st Floor, (5) arriving at the freight elevator. Again, ALL of this in Under :35 seconds. And, ALL of this is if Shelley IMMEDIATELY left his position on the still frame you posted. To me, this is far to fast for Shelley to do ALL of this largely due to his NOT being in motion on the still frame you have posted. The Shelley figure is at a Dead Stop and does Not look to be in any kind of a hurry. The same goes for Lovelady. The Tick/Tock here does does fit if you buy into the :20 seconds after the kill shot being tied to Officer Baker running across the Island. That :20 second timestamp is when the Shelley and Lovelady clock begins running.
This is why I continue to encourage you to do a thread on the subject of Shelley and Lovelady going through the TSBD front door. This is your very own unique idea, but it does have time stamping issues that You need to iron out.
-
The Darnell/Couch film images that show Officer Baker running across the Island, have been given a time stamp of ":20 seconds after the kill shot". Do you agree with that :20 second time stamp?
That :20 time stamp jams up Shelley and Lovelady being at the TSBD 1st floor freight elevator at Under 1:00 after the kill shot. This "under 1:00 minute" is when they allegedly were seen by Adams when she reached the TSBD 1st floor. The faster You have Adams reaching the TSBD 1st floor, you then are placing Shelley and Lovelady at that same 1st floor location even quicker. And Adams makes no mention of Shelley and Lovelady being in motion, as if Shelley and Lovelady were just arriving when she saw them. They were in position on the 1st floor when she saw them. The still frame you have posted shows Shelley being on the ground in front of the TSBD. This would be at :25 seconds after the kill shot, leaving LESS than :35 seconds for Shelley to go from the ground: (1) up through the very crowded TSBD front steps, (2) through the crowded TSBD Lobby, (3) unlocking the Closed Gate at the desk, (4) traveling across the TSBD 1st Floor, (5) arriving at the freight elevator. Again, ALL of this in Under :35 seconds. And, ALL of this is if Shelley IMMEDIATELY left his position on the still frame you posted. To me, this is far to fast for Shelley to do ALL of this largely due to his NOT being in motion on the still frame you have posted. The Shelley figure is at a Dead Stop and does Not look to be in any kind of a hurry. The same goes for Lovelady. The Tick/Tock here does does fit if you buy into the :20 seconds after the kill shot being tied to Officer Baker running across the Island. That :20 second timestamp is when the Shelley and Lovelady clock begins running.
This is why I continue to encourage you to do a thread on the subject of Shelley and Lovelady going through the TSBD front door. This is your very own unique idea, but it does have time stamping issues that You need to iron out.
Let's do something very few people ever think to actually do - let's take the WC testimony of Vicki Adams at face value.
She comes across as an intelligent and articulate woman in the transcript of her testimony, which is confirmed by the "lost Interview" she did with Mark Lane and someone else, where we hear Vicki in her own words (and she again confirms she did inded see Shelley and Lovelady as she raced out of the building).
Mr. BELIN - How long do you think it took you. to get from the window to the bottom of the stairs on the first floor?
Miss ADAMS - I would say no longer than a minute at the most.
Mr. BELIN - When you got to the bottom of the first floor, did you see anyone there as you entered the first floor from the stairway?
Miss ADAMS - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Who did you see?
Miss ADAMS - Mr. Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady.
She is saying it took her no longer than 60 seconds to get to the first floor (this seems to be a maximum estimation) and when she got there she saw Shelley and Lovelady.
How did Shelley and Lovelady get there within that time?
Remember, even if it's just as a thought experiment, that we are taking Adams' testimony at face value - how did Shelley and Lovelady get there within that time?
-
How did Shelley and Lovelady get there within that time, you ask? By walking back into the building from the front steps where they were watching the motorcade?
-
How did Shelley and Lovelady get there within that time, you ask? By walking back into the building from the front steps where they were watching the motorcade?
How obvious is that!
They walked from the front steps, through the lobby, and towards the back of the first floor.
A distance of approximately 80 feet.
Strolling along at 3mph for 20 seconds covers 88 feet.
So, let's reverse engineer that.
Time after shots
(seconds)
60 Adams hits first floor where she sees Shelley and Lovelady as she races to the back door.
40 Shelley and Lovelady enter front lobby door
25 In Darnell we see Lovelady on the steps and Shelley stood at the bottom of the steps
That leaves Shelley and Lovelady 15 seconds to get from their positions in Darnell to the front door of the building.
There is plenty of time for Shelley and Lovelady to make it to the location Adams saw them within 60 seconds of the shooting.
However, how can those who have mistakenly identified Shelley and Lovelady as the men on the extension make this work?
-
While one is always entitled to engage in thought experiments, a thought experiment taking Vicki Adams' story at face value seems a stretch to me in light of the fact that Sandra Styles, her companion, always said she thought Vicki's time estimate was at least somewhat off and, more importantly, was adamant that Shelley and Lovelady were not there. Occam (or Ockham, if you prefer) tells me a more plausible thought experiment has Vicki conflating her and Styles' trip down the stairs with a slightly later encounter by her with Shelley and Lovelady when they reentered the TSBD. But, hey, that's just my and Occam's little thought experiment.
Bart Kamp summarizes what Styles repeatedly told Barry Ernest here: http://www.prayer-man.com/tsbd/sandra-styles/. Sean Murphy also followed up with her after Ernest's book came out. I also found a long discussion at Greg Parker's forum where the sentiment seemed to be that the "Shelley and Lovelady" question and answer had been fiendishly inserted into Vicki's actual WC testimony precisely to make it seem that she and Styles must have left the fourth floor window later than she thiought. Greg seemed to find this unlikely, and my thought experiment doesn't require any such shenanigans by the WC; in mine, the two cuties can have come down the stairs however quickly you like, with Vicki simply being a bit off as to when she saw Shelley and Lovelady.
(Lots of Sandra Styles' stuff for sale on eBay. Don't miss your chance: https://www.ebay.com/itm/175838680679. I may have got burnt on $1200 worth of Bogus Imposter Haygood autographs, but this Styles stuff is the real deal.)
-
While one is always entitled to engage in thought experiments, a thought experiment taking Vicki Adams' story at face value seems a stretch to me in light of the fact that Sandra Styles, her companion, always said she thought Vicki's time estimate was at least somewhat off and, more importantly, was adamant that Shelley and Lovelady were not there. Occam (or Ockham, if you prefer) tells me a more plausible thought experiment has Vicki conflating her and Styles' trip down the stairs with a slightly later encounter by her with Shelley and Lovelady when they reentered the TSBD. But, hey, that's just my and Occam's little thought experiment.
Bart Kamp summarizes what Styles repeatedly told Barry Ernest here: http://www.prayer-man.com/tsbd/sandra-styles/. Sean Murphy also followed up with her after Ernest's book came out. I also found a long discussion at Greg Parker's forum where the sentiment seemed to be that the "Shelley and Lovelady" question and answer had been fiendishly inserted into Vicki's actual WC testimony precisely to make it seem that she and Styles must have left the fourth floor window later than she thiought. Greg seemed to find this unlikely, and my thought experiment doesn't require any such shenanigans by the WC; in mine, the two cuties can have come down the stairs however quickly you like, with Vicki simply being a bit off as to when she saw Shelley and Lovelady.
(Lots of Sandra Styles' stuff for sale on eBay. Don't miss your chance: https://www.ebay.com/itm/175838680679. I may have got burnt on $1200 worth of Bogus Imposter Haygood autographs, but this Styles stuff is the real deal.)
Adams' version of events is supported by the Tom Dillard pic, the Stroud document, the fact she never encountered Truly and Baker (and vice versa) and Baker's observation of two white men hanging around the area Adams said Shelley and Lovelady were and at the same time, roughly 60 seconds after the shooting.
She is a totally credible witness of impeccable character.
Just for argument's sake though...
Let's say you do have some intelligence and can manage this rudimentary thought experiment, you must agree that the only way for Shelley and Lovelady to reach the area near the freight elevators within 60 seconds is to enter the building through the front entrance moments after the shooting.
You must agree, as part of the thought experiment of course, that taking Adams' testimony at face value would disprove your identification of Shelley and Lovelady in Darnell.
-
Adams' version of events is supported by the Tom Dillard pic, the Stroud document, the fact she never encountered Truly and Baker (and vice versa) and Baker's observation of two white men hanging around the area Adams said Shelley and Lovelady were and at the same time, roughly 60 seconds after the shooting.
She is a totally credible witness of impeccable character.
Just for argument's sake though...
Let's say you do have some intelligence and can manage this rudimentary thought experiment, you must agree that the only way for Shelley and Lovelady to reach the area near the freight elevators within 60 seconds is to enter the building through the front entrance moments after the shooting.
You must agree, as part of the thought experiment of course, that taking Adams' testimony at face value would disprove your identification of Shelley and Lovelady in Darnell.
Just for the sake of argument, let's say I have vastly more intelligence than you and see where that goes :D :D :D ...
Sure, I can agree to anything in the context of a thought experiment. If Shelley and Lovelady were on the TSBD steps when the shooting occurred and at the freight elevators seconds later, logic would dictate that they were teleported by aliens - no, strike that, that they walked back there through the front entrance.
The value of a thought experiment hinges to a large extent on its plausibility. Otherwise, of what use is it? This was the problem with your LBJ-Byrd-Cason-Shelley-Dougherty thought experiment. When you acknowledged that it couldn't account for Oswald, I think most folks sensed the thought air going out of your thought balloon. Poof.
I will admit I haven't read The Girl On the Stairs. However, is it correct that Vicki herself in that book disavows saying she saw Shelley and Lovelady and claiming that the relevant portion of her WC testimony doesn't even sound like her, as Roger Odisio states in this thread at the Ed Forum? https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30023-vickie-adams-interview/. If that weren't sufficient, the thread opens by linking to a 1966 interview in which Vicki apparently claimed that she did see Shelley! Is Vicki's credibility hanging by a thread, or is that my imagination?
The plausibiity of your thought experiment also hinges on (1) Styles, who was there, either being flat wrong or lying for no apparent reason, and (2) the photo that clearly shows Shelley and Lovelady walking down the Elm Street extension not being Shelley and Lovelady, with fellow gung-ho CTer Bart Kamp having faked said photo for no apparent reason. All of this to prop up some elaborate conspiracy scenario that apparently requires two TSBD clucks like Shelley and Lovelady as well as the WC staff to be at least after-the-fact participants.
Pretty thin thought experiment gruel, it seems to me. Occam and I continue to prefer our version whereby Vicki actually does see Shelley and Lovelady a wee bit later than she recalled, which has the beauty of still allowing CTers to argue that the two cuties were teleported from the fourth floor by aliens and should have heard or encountered Oswald if he'd been coming down the stairs.
-
Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...
There's no point getting bogged down with everything that is wrong with this post but this last observation needs addressing.
Apparently it's me, ands not Brian, who is ignoring the WC testimony of Shelley and Lovelady.
Let's start with the fact that BOTH MEN testify that they didn't leave the steps for at least three minutes!!
How can they be on the extension seconds after the shooting??
I would really like to hear what Brian is going to make up off the top of his head to account for this.
BOTH MEN testify that, after three minutes, Gloria comes up to the steps, tells them about the shooting after which both of them make their way across the Elm Street extension to the "little, old island" (both men use exactly the same phrase to describe the concrete spur separating the Elm Streets), where they stopped "for a minute".
So, the image of the two men walking down the extension is taken 20 - 25 seconds after the shooting.
In this short span of time, according to Brian, Gloria has made her way back to the TSBD steps, told everyone about the shooting, both men have made their way across to the little old island, hung around there for a while, then made it half way down the extension before being caught on film.
Let's do him a favour and ignore the three minutes it takes Gloria to reach the steps and the time spent on the little, old island.
Even if we ignore all the testimony that Brian seems so willing to do, is it still physically possible for the two men to be so far down the extension, after the sequence of events described, in such a short span of time?
Let's be ultra kind to Brian and make it like some mad kind of tag race being run at top speed:
1] Gloria sprints full tilt and makes it back to the steps within 15 seconds
2] She spits out a rapid-fire account of the shooting in 5 seconds
3] Shelley and Lovelady sprint across to the little old island - 3 seconds.
4] They stay there for 5 seconds
5] They then sprint to their positions on the Elm Street extension - another 3 seconds.
They still don't make it in time.
Even if we follow Brian's lead and ignore nearly every statement they made in their WC testimonies, Shelley and Lovelady still don't make it.
The reason for this is obvious - it's not Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension.
In reality, what happens is this
Shelley and Lovelady are on the steps at the time of the shooting.
Immediately after the shots Shelley runs out to the concrete spur where he encounters a distraught Gloria Calvery running the other way.
Both return to the front steps where Gloria tells everyone there about the shooting after which both Shelley and Lovelady make their way into the building through the front door.
Gloria reaches the steps in a matter seconds - not 3 minutes.
Both men do not then go across to the little, old island.
Both men do not wander along the extension.
Both men do not hang around the railroad yards.
Both men do not enter the building through the west door.
These are all lies told to hide their actual movements after the shooting.
Both men immediately enter the building and make their way towards the back of the first floor where they are seen by Vickie Adams about 60 seconds after the shooting.
Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive at the elevators where Baker notices two white men just hanging around. Clearly this is Shelley and Lovelady.
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QzxBwPJ/Darnellstepsnamed.jpg)
The image above shows the moment Gloria has reached the steps and is telling everyone about the shooting.
The man in front of her is Billy Lovelady.
Shelley, wearing his baggy black suit, is near the bottom of the steps after returning from the concrete spur.
(https://i.postimg.cc/pTGxHVvG/Calvery-at-steps-close1.jpg)
Based on the timeline of Office Baker above, Shelley/Lovelady have 35 seconds at this point to arrive at the TSBD 1st Floor Loading Dock. And, as the above still frame makes clear, Shelley/Lovelady are Not even moving toward the TSBD front door. PLus, the steps leading up to the landing/front door are Jammed Packed with people. Whenever they do start toward the TSBD front door, Shelley/Lovelady would Not be moving toward the front door in a straight line. Their advancing toward the front door would be obstructed. The same goes for their advancing through the TSBD Lobby. The 1 Minute Tick/Tock does Not permit Shelley/Lovelady to reach the freight elevator. Adams claiming that it took her 1 Minute MAX to go from the window to the 1st floor, has to be wrong for her to see Shelley and Lovelady at the freight elevator.
-
Based on the timeline of Office Baker above, Shelley/Lovelady have 35 seconds at this point to arrive at the TSBD 1st Floor Loading Dock. And, as the above still frame makes clear, Shelley/Lovelady are Not even moving toward the TSBD front door. PLus, the steps leading up to the landing/front door are Jammed Packed with people. Whenever they do start toward the TSBD front door, Shelley/Lovelady would Not be moving toward the front door in a straight line. Their advancing toward the front door would be obstructed. The same goes for their advancing through the TSBD Lobby. The 1 Minute Tick/Tock does Not permit Shelley/Lovelady to reach the freight elevator. Adams claiming that it took her 1 Minute MAX to go from the window to the 1st floor, has to be wrong for her to see Shelley and Lovelady at the freight elevator.
Look at Truly's starting position.
Does it look like he's moving toward the TSBD front door?
How do you reconcile this?
-
Look at Truly's starting position.
Does it look like he's moving toward the TSBD front door?
How do you reconcile this?
This is why I continue to question these accepted timelines. If you look at the Sixth Floor/Darnell Film opening frames, the driver for camera car #2 is already standing outside of the car. Not in the process of getting out of the car, but standing flatfooted on the ground. Those cars were stopped for an extended period of time. The WC did all they could to quickly get Officer Baker inside the TSBD in order for him to quickly confront Oswald inside the 2ND floor lunchroom. The longer it might take for Baker to confront Oswald, the more it would look like Oswald was casually sitting inside the Lunchroom drinking a soda pop, etc. Also, Wiegman filmed the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass. And Wiegman was inside Camera Car #1. Wiegman jumped out of that car because it was moving far too slow. The longer it takes for the JFK Limo to go under the Triple Underpass, the more it looks like there was a JFK Limo STOP. I believe the :20 second time stamp applied to Officer Baker crossing the Island and then his :30 second time stamp of entering the TSBD, was orchestrated with the possible JFK Limo STOP and the Oswald/Baker 2nd Floor confrontation in mind.
-
[Truly's not moving towards the steps in Darnell] is why I continue to question these accepted timelines. If you look at the Sixth Floor/Darnell Film opening frames, the driver for camera car #2 is already standing outside of the car. Not in the process of getting out of the car but standing flatfooted on the ground. Those cars were stopped for an extended period of time. The WC did all they could to quickly get Officer Baker inside the TSBD in order for him to quickly confront Oswald inside the 2ND floor lunchroom. The longer it might take for Baker to confront Oswald, the more it would look like Oswald was casually sitting inside the Lunchroom drinking a soda pop, etc. Also, Wiegman filmed the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass. And Wiegman was inside Camera Car #1. Wiegman jumped out of that car because it was moving far too slow. The longer it takes for the JFK Limo to go under the Triple Underpass, the more it looks like there was a JFK Limo STOP. I believe the :20 second time stamp applied to Officer Baker crossing the Island and then his :30 second time stamp of entering the TSBD, was orchestrated with the possible JFK Limo STOP and the Oswald/Baker 2nd Floor confrontation in mind.
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
Paranoiac much?
-- Tom
-
Dear Stormtrooper Storing,
Paranoiac much?
-- Tom
How often have You been in bumper-to-bumper traffic, and jumped out of your car after sitting for Under :20 seconds? Does Not happen.
-
How often have You been in bumper-to-bumper traffic, and jumped out of your car after sitting for Under :20 seconds? Does Not happen.
Boy oh boy oh boy, those CIA/FBI/DPD film alterationists must have been very busy, huh?
-
Boy oh boy oh boy, those CIA/FBI/DPD film alterationists must have been very busy, huh?
I asked you how often when sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic have you jumped out of your car after only :15 seconds? Applying a False Timeline to a JFK Assassination Image has absolutely nothing to do with "film alteration".
The Sixth Floor releasing their opening segment of the Darnell Film screwed the pooch. They Failed to recognize the importance of this Camera Car Driver standing outside of his car BEFORE Officer Baker runs across the Island at the currently accepted :20 seconds after the kill shot. The current Officer Baker :20 second timeline don't fly and this also impacts the timeline of the Officer Baker/Oswald 2nd Floor Lunchroom encounter.
-
Just for the sake of argument, let's say I have vastly more intelligence than you and see where that goes :D :D :D ...
Hmmm...this superior intelligence you often like to boast about...I've never seen it or anything even remotely like it.
In nearly every interaction we have I make an obvious point and you fall to pieces, often running away.
Sometimes even quitting the forum.
I see you've started with the 'aliens' thing already. I imagine you think this is really clever or something... ::)
Sure, I can agree to anything in the context of a thought experiment. If Shelley and Lovelady were on the TSBD steps when the shooting occurred and at the freight elevators seconds later, logic would dictate that they were teleported by aliens - no, strike that, that they walked back there through the front entrance.
The value of a thought experiment hinges to a large extent on its plausibility. Otherwise, of what use is it? This was the problem with your LBJ-Byrd-Cason-Shelley-Dougherty thought experiment. When you acknowledged that it couldn't account for Oswald, I think most folks sensed the thought air going out of your thought balloon. Poof.
I will admit I haven't read The Girl On the Stairs. However, is it correct that Vicki herself in that book disavows saying she saw Shelley and Lovelady and claiming that the relevant portion of her WC testimony doesn't even sound like her, as Roger Odisio states in this thread at the Ed Forum? https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30023-vickie-adams-interview/. If that weren't sufficient, the thread opens by linking to a 1966 interview in which Vicki apparently claimed that she did see Shelley! Is Vicki's credibility hanging by a thread, or is that my imagination?
The plausibiity of your thought experiment also hinges on (1) Styles, who was there, either being flat wrong or lying for no apparent reason, and (2) the photo that clearly shows Shelley and Lovelady walking down the Elm Street extension not being Shelley and Lovelady, with fellow gung-ho CTer Bart Kamp having faked said photo for no apparent reason. All of this to prop up some elaborate conspiracy scenario that apparently requires two TSBD clucks like Shelley and Lovelady as well as the WC staff to be at least after-the-fact participants.
Pretty thin thought experiment gruel, it seems to me. Occam and I continue to prefer our version whereby Vicki actually does see Shelley and Lovelady a wee bit later than she recalled, which has the beauty of still allowing CTers to argue that the two cuties were teleported from the fourth floor by aliens and should have heard or encountered Oswald if he'd been coming down the stairs.
Is Vicki's credibility hanging by a thread, or is that my imagination?
There's so many ways to make a fool of you but I can't let the audacity of you, of all people, bringing up 'credibility'.
Let's have a quick look at the credibility of Lovelady regarding his movements after the shooting:
In his affidavit, taken hours after the shooting, he doesn't leave the steps and re-enters the building with Shelley. Is that the truth?
In his FBI statements, he states that he and Shelley ran to where the limo had sped off and hung around there for 5 minutes. Is that the truth?
In his FBI statement, Shelley stated he and Lovelady escorted police officers along the extension and stayed in the railroad yards for 10 minutes. True?
In his WC testimony, Lovelady waited on the steps for at least 3 minutes before heading along the extension. Is that true?
In his HSCA interview he stated that he didn't re-enter the building for 15 - 20 minutes. Is that the truth?
How 'credible' is convicted gun-runner Lovelady? Which of his lies do you choose to opt for?
Incredibly, the answer to that question is that you don't accept any of his lies.
Instead, you made up your own lie in order to account for how Lovelady could have an interaction with Gloria and be seen walking along the extension seconds after the shooting.
The lie you made up was that, immediately after the shooting, Lovelady ran across to the little, old island where he met Gloria before heading along the extension.
How intelligent is that?
Literally make up a scenario that isn't covered in any of the pack of lies Lovelady told about his movements after the shooting. Maybe it's your own credibility that should be examined.
-
Shelley on the first floor:
"And after the third shot, following that, the third shot, I went to the back of the building down the back stairs, and encountered Bill Shelley and Bill Lovelady on the first floor on the way out to the Houston Street dock."
What evidence exists supporting her constant insistence that she left the window she was looking out of within seconds of the shots?
Below is a plan of the fourth floor of the TSBD building. Adams worked in the office of Scott Foresman Co., where she watched the motorcade pass with Sandra Styles, Dorothy Garner and Elsie Dorman. The red box indicates the 5 double sets of windows for that office. The red "A" indicates Adams' location as the Presidential limo passed by. Her colleagues crowded around that double set of windows with Elsie Dorman filming the approaching limo.
(https://i.postimg.cc/ZRSTLYJc/tsbd-4th-floor-planredbox.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Below is a photo taken by Tom Dillard. The red box indicates the same windows. Adams was stood at the open window marked with a red "A".
(https://i.postimg.cc/J7dzfLx1/dillard-just-after-fullredbox.jpg)
When we take a closer look at the window we notice that there is no-one stood where there should be four women watching the motorcade. We can see the figure of one woman standing in the window to the left of that. It appears Vicki had left her position by the window by the time this pic was taken.
(https://i.postimg.cc/fybjJNSz/Dillardclosecrop-Adams.png)
The question is - how long after the assassination was this photo taken?
This is what Dillard has to say about the picture (quotes taken from Pat Speer's website):
"Bob Jackson, a photographer in my car, said, There's the rifle in that open window. In the three or four seconds it took me to locate the particular open window and make a picture, the rifle had been withdrawn."
"Bob Jackson said, “There’s a guy with a rifle up in that window.” I said, “Where?” I had both cameras around my neck, loaded, focused, cocked…Bob says, “In that window up on that building right there, it’s that top window.” I shot a picture with the wide-angle camera. I said, “Which window?” He said, “It’s the one on the right, second from the top.” By that time, I had the 100mm camera up, shot a picture of that window…."
Clearly this is literally a few seconds after the shooting has occurred as he just missed the rifle being drawn back into the window. On Mark Tyler's Motorcade Mapping website the Dillard pic is taken 11 seconds after the headshot. The limo has barely got out of the Triple Underpass
The Dillard picture is incredibly strong evidence that Adams took off running about 10 seconds after the last shot. This decision was made before the limo even reached the Underpass.
"As the car came back into view I saw that something was wrong and watched as Mrs. Kennedy appeared to be trying to climb out of the car. I saw a Secret Service man jump in and the car began speeding toward the triple underpass. Before it reached that [the triple underpass] I turned to Sandra and I said, 'I want to see what is going on.' We ran to the back of the office and down the stairs."
How long would it take a young women running full tilt in high heels to get down 3 flights of stairs - 30 seconds? 40 seconds?
Let's say her estimate of reaching the first floor one minute after the shooting is conservative, the question remains, what were Lovelady and Shelley doing there?
It must be noted, this mention of Lovelady and Shelley did not first come about during Adams' WC testimony:
"When the President got in front of us I heard someone call him and he turned. That is when I heard the first shot. I thought it was a firecracker. Then the second shot I saw the Secret Service man run to the back of the President's car. After the third shot I went out the back door. I said, 'I think someone has been shot.' The elevator was not running and there was no one on the stairs. I went down to the first floor. I saw Mr. Shelly and another employee named Bill. The freight elevator had not moved, and I still did not see anyone on the stairs. I ran out the back door of the depository..."
(2-17-64 statement to the Dallas Police Department, box 3 folder 19 file 3 of the Dallas JFK Archive)[Speer]
What is the importance of Shelley and Lovelady lying about their movements after the assassination?
What compelled them to race towards the back of the first floor?
-
Hmmm...this superior intelligence you often like to boast about...I've never seen it or anything even remotely like it.
In nearly every interaction we have I make an obvious point and you fall to pieces, often running away.
Sometimes even quitting the forum.
I see you've started with the 'aliens' thing already. I imagine you think this is really clever or something... ::)
Oh, dear, Dan is imbibing his 100-proof angry juice again.
YOU began the post to which I was responding by saying "Just for argument's sake though... Let's say you do have some intelligence and can manage this rudimentary thought experiment ..."
I was good-naturedly tweaking you, as opposed to haughtily pointing out that I have a measured IQ in the 99.7th percentile, scored above the 99th percentile of the Law School Admissions Test, graduated magna cum laude from both college and law school, and, well, whatnot.
There ain't nobody EVER, bub, who has thought they were dealing with a dummy when dealing with me. My posts on this forum speak for themselves. If you want to keep playing this goofy game, be my guest - you're just making yourself look silly, and surely you have sufficient intelligence to understand that. What you think you're accomplishing is beyond me. Do you perhaps actually hate yourself?
Is Vicki's credibility hanging by a thread, or is that my imagination?
There's so many ways to make a fool of you but I can't let the audacity of you, of all people, bringing up 'credibility'.
That sentence makes no sense. Diagram it and you'll see. Perhaps something like "There are many different ways to make a fool of you, but the sheer audacity of a hopeless cluck like you, of all people, bringing up 'credibility' presents me with an opportunity that simply cannot be resisted." Not great and kind of wordy, but at least it's grammatical.
The rest of your response, including my supposed "lies," has nothing to do with the points I raised about Vicki's credibility or lack thereof, or with the vastly more plausible thought experiment that Occam and I tend to favor.
I believe if you'll check with the local Safeway you'll find that angry juice is available in a 40-proof variety rather than the 100-proof stuff you seem to be imbibing. Just a suggestion.
-
Oh, dear, Dan is imbibing his 100-proof angry juice again.
YOU began the post to which I was responding by saying "Just for argument's sake though... Let's say you do have some intelligence and can manage this rudimentary thought experiment ..."
I was good-naturedly tweaking you, as opposed to haughtily pointing out that I have a measured IQ in the 99.7th percentile, scored above the 99th percentile of the Law School Admissions Test, graduated magna cum laude from both college and law school, and, well, whatnot.
There ain't nobody EVER, bub, who has thought they were dealing with a dummy when dealing with me. My posts on this forum speak for themselves. If you want to keep playing this goofy game, be my guest - you're just making yourself look silly, and surely you have sufficient intelligence to understand that. What you think you're accomplishing is beyond me. Do you perhaps actually hate yourself?
My posts on this forum speak for themselves.
That is exactly the point I was making.
Your silly pretence at being some kind of open-minded free thinker, willing to explore any avenue of research...it's embarrassing.
You're an out-and-out, fully fledged Nutter.
Like all Nutters you believe you have a superior intelligence and that anything you think is a fact - just because you think it!!
#delusional
;D I love the way you were only "good naturedly" insinuating your superior intelligence but then can't function without stressing how intelligent you believe you are.
Aren't you smart enough to get that joke?
That sentence makes no sense. Diagram it and you'll see. Perhaps something like "There are many different ways to make a fool of you, but the sheer audacity of a hopeless cluck like you, of all people, bringing up 'credibility' presents me with an opportunity that simply cannot be resisted." Not great and kind of wordy, but at least it's grammatical.
The rest of your response, including my supposed "lies," has nothing to do with the points I raised about Vicki's credibility or lack thereof, or with the vastly more plausible thought experiment that Occam and I tend to favor.
I believe if you'll check with the local Safeway you'll find that angry juice is available in a 40-proof variety rather than the 100-proof stuff you seem to be imbibing. Just a suggestion.
What a shock.
Yet again, side-stepped the mass of evidence demonstrating how Occam's Razor would have carved up Lovelady's credibility.
Side-stepped your own desperate invention of testimony that never existed.
As I have already pointed out - "make an obvious point and you fall to pieces".
If my watch is correct it's almost time for you to run away Thumb1:
-
I have a measured IQ in the 99.7th percentile, scored above the 99th percentile of the Law School Admissions Test, [and] graduated magna cum laude from both college and law school.
You must be very proud of yourself, Macho Genius Fancy Pants Rants!
-
You must be very proud of yourself, Macho Genius Fancy Pants Rants!
Your infatuation with Payette is nauseating.
-
Your infatuation with Payette is nauseating.
Your mental flatulence is shocking.
-
You must be very proud of yourself, Macho Genius Fancy Pants Rants!
Considering where I came from and what I had to overcome ... well, yes, kind of proud. I think that's why I get under the skin of some folks here: I don't hate myself - quite the opposite, in fact. I have no false humilty about the abilities with which I've been blessed. I have no false humility about what I've achieved solely through my own efforts despite pretty long odds. I am by no means arrogant; I am simply content with myself and my life, which drives people like you and Dan crazy. At 76, I have no reason to humor nutcases like you or angry buffoons like Dan. I know nothing about either one of you, but my guess would be that life hasn't turned out the way you'd hoped. If someone wants to deal with me on reasonable and reasonably normal terms, that's what they'll get back from me. If they want to play silly games, they'll get their silly games shoved back up their asses because I'm really, really good at it.
You're at least borderline insane - of this I'm convinced. There is something very, very wrong with Dan; I have no idea what it is, but he's consumed by anger and bile completely out of proportion to whatever is consuming him is worth. You both need help - badly - and a JFKA forum is probably not the place to find it. This place is little more than an outlet for your insanity and anger. I wish you well, but your problems aren't my problems and I assure you I will never again respond to anything either of you says. Rant on, but shove it up your Bahookie as far as I'm concerned.
-
Considering where I came from and what I had to overcome ... well, yes, kind of proud. I think that's why I get under the skin of some folks here: I don't hate myself - quite the opposite, in fact. I have no false humility about the abilities with which I've been blessed. I have no false humility about what I've achieved solely through my own efforts despite pretty long odds. I am by no means arrogant; I am simply content with myself and my life, which drives people like you and Dan crazy. At 76, I have no reason to humor nutcases like you or angry buffoons like Dan. I know nothing about either one of you, but my guess would be that life hasn't turned out the way you'd hoped. If someone wants to deal with me on reasonable and reasonably normal terms, that's what they'll get back from me. If they want to play silly games, they'll get their silly games shoved back up their asses because I'm really, really good at it.
You're at least borderline insane - of this I'm convinced. There is something very, very wrong with Dan; I have no idea what it is, but he's consumed by anger and bile completely out of proportion to whatever is consuming him is worth. You both need help - badly - and a JFKA forum is probably not the place to find it. This place is little more than an outlet for your insanity and anger. I wish you well, but your problems aren't my problems and I assure you I will never again respond to anything either of you says. Rant on but shove it up your Bahookie as far as I'm concerned.
Dear MGFPP,
It's sad to see a grown man like you come across as a thirteen-year-old macho genius fancy pants prancer.
-- Tom
-
Considering where I came from and what I had to overcome ... well, yes, kind of proud. I think that's why I get under the skin of some folks here: I don't hate myself - quite the opposite, in fact. I have no false humilty about the abilities with which I've been blessed. I have no false humility about what I've achieved solely through my own efforts despite pretty long odds. I am by no means arrogant; I am simply content with myself and my life, which drives people like you and Dan crazy. At 76, I have no reason to humor nutcases like you or angry buffoons like Dan. I know nothing about either one of you, but my guess would be that life hasn't turned out the way you'd hoped. If someone wants to deal with me on reasonable and reasonably normal terms, that's what they'll get back from me. If they want to play silly games, they'll get their silly games shoved back up their asses because I'm really, really good at it.
You're at least borderline insane - of this I'm convinced. There is something very, very wrong with Dan; I have no idea what it is, but he's consumed by anger and bile completely out of proportion to whatever is consuming him is worth. You both need help - badly - and a JFKA forum is probably not the place to find it. This place is little more than an outlet for your insanity and anger. I wish you well, but your problems aren't my problems and I assure you I will never again respond to anything either of you says. Rant on, but shove it up your Bahookie as far as I'm concerned.
I will never again respond to anything either of you says.
:D :D :D
What did I post but a couple of hours ago - "If my watch is correct it's almost time for you to run away"
Right on cue, the delusional Payette beats his hasty retreat.
And as I have posted every time he disappears - your absence will be sorely unmissed.
The trick with Nutters like Payette, Smith, Corbett etc. is to introduce the most simple facts that undermine their spoon-fed beliefs. And there are so many such facts in this case.
Goodbye Lance. Walk:
-
Andrew Iler has posted Bart Kamp's Prayer Man lecture at the 2023 Lancer Conference under the title "Best Content In the New JFK Media"...
He has done so while locking the thread from replies and creating new site rules that disallow any questioning of the administration's judgment...
This is the reforming of The Education Forum...
The Prayer Man theory is, of course, the biggest hoax theory to ever get legs in the JFK research community...This seals the hijacking of the JFK internet by the Prayer Man clique...
-
Andrew Iler has posted Bart Kamp's Prayer Man lecture at the 2023 Lancer Conference under the title "Best Content In the New JFK Media"...
He has done so while locking the thread from replies and creating new site rules that disallow any questioning of the administration's judgment...
This is the reforming of The Education Forum...
The Prayer Man theory is, of course, the biggest hoax theory to ever get legs in the JFK research community...This seals the hijacking of the JFK internet by the Prayer Man clique...
This "reforming of The Education Forum", sounds a lot like the Socialist's/Nazi's seizing control of the Democrat Party.
-
While one is always entitled to engage in thought experiments, a thought experiment taking Vicki Adams' story at face value seems a stretch to me in light of the fact that Sandra Styles, her companion, always said she thought Vicki's time estimate was at least somewhat off and, more importantly, was adamant that Shelley and Lovelady were not there. Occam (or Ockham, if you prefer) tells me a more plausible thought experiment has Vicki conflating her and Styles' trip down the stairs with a slightly later encounter by her with Shelley and Lovelady when they reentered the TSBD. But, hey, that's just my and Occam's little thought experiment.
Bart Kamp summarizes what Styles repeatedly told Barry Ernest here: http://www.prayer-man.com/tsbd/sandra-styles/. Sean Murphy also followed up with her after Ernest's book came out. I also found a long discussion at Greg Parker's forum where the sentiment seemed to be that the "Shelley and Lovelady" question and answer had been fiendishly inserted into Vicki's actual WC testimony precisely to make it seem that she and Styles must have left the fourth floor window later than she thiought. Greg seemed to find this unlikely, and my thought experiment doesn't require any such shenanigans by the WC; in mine, the two cuties can have come down the stairs however quickly you like, with Vicki simply being a bit off as to when she saw Shelley and Lovelady.
(Lots of Sandra Styles' stuff for sale on eBay. Don't miss your chance: https://www.ebay.com/itm/175838680679. I may have got burnt on $1200 worth of Bogus Imposter Haygood autographs, but this Styles stuff is the real deal.)
The "superior intellect" was duped into buying $1200 of "Bogus Imposter Haygood Autographs"? WOWSER!
-
If someone could get the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy we could take a better look at Molina in front of Calvery on the steps...
-
If someone could get the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy we could take a better look at Molina in front of Calvery on the steps...
You need to be clear as to which figure you are referring to, "in front of Calvery". If that is the figure labeled "Lovelady", you got some explaining to do. That "Lovelady" figure is standing almost Exactly where Lovelady is standing on Altgens 6. Plus, I think Molina had a full length coat on. The figure labeled "Lovelady" appears to have a Shirt on. I also believe we are seeing (R) arm flesh tones on this "Lovelady" figure.
-
The subject must be oriented to the fact that the person seen fast-walking up the extension in the plaid shirt is provably Lovelady...
Since Lovelady is shown on the extension then the only person the man in front of Calvery can be is Molina...When podcasters say in front of Bart Kamp that the man facing Calvery is Lovelady he doesn't correct them...When you go to point this out in the comments you find that your posts don't go through...
We need someone to obtain the 1st generation Darnell copy from the 6th Floor Museum and digitally enhance it...This will show the man facing Calvery to be Molina...The clique doesn't want this to happen because the clique guards its lies and then brags how it has the best group of "academic" researchers...
-
The subject must be oriented to the fact that the person seen fast-walking up the extension in the plaid shirt is provably Lovelady...
Since Lovelady is shown on the extension then the only person the man in front of Calvery can be is Molina...When podcasters say in front of Bart Kamp that the man facing Calvery is Lovelady he doesn't correct them...When you go to point this out in the comments you find that your posts don't go through...
We need someone to obtain the 1st generation Darnell copy from the 6th Floor Museum and digitally enhance it...This will show the man facing Calvery to be Molina...The clique doesn't want this to happen because the clique guards its lies and then brags how it has the best group of "academic" researchers...
You have Not responded to Molina wearing a full length coat that day. The figure we are discussing is wearing a shirt and standing where we see Lovelady on Altgens 6.
-
The subject must be oriented to the fact that the person seen fast-walking up the extension in the plaid shirt is provably Lovelady...
Since Lovelady is shown on the extension then the only person the man in front of Calvery can be is Molina...When podcasters say in front of Bart Kamp that the man facing Calvery is Lovelady he doesn't correct them...When you go to point this out in the comments you find that your posts don't go through...
We need someone to obtain the 1st generation Darnell copy from the 6th Floor Museum and digitally enhance it...This will show the man facing Calvery to be Molina...The clique doesn't want this to happen because the clique guards its lies and then brags how it has the best group of "academic" researchers...
the person seen fast-walking up the extension in the plaid shirt is provably Lovelady...
Explain to the forum how it is "provably" Lovelady.
What proof do you have that this person is Lovelady?
Your own opinion?
Do you believe your own opinion is proof?
What proof do you have?
-
There's no credible reason to doubt that the two men seen fast-walking up the extension in the Gerda Dunkel zoomed slow-motion Couch/Darnell clip are Lovelady & Shelley...The men are right where they were supposed to be according to testimony...Lovelady has the same dimension geometric plaid pattern as he is seen wearing in other photos and same bald spot...And Shelley has his body shape, black suit jacket, white shirt collar, and Duck's Bahookie hair doo...And he pulls up and talks to Karan Hicks as she goes by...
Anything less strikes me as deliberate misinformation designed to confuse...
This is evidence enough for persons truly seeking correct identification...
I believe the obtaining and enhancement of the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell will show Molina as the man being called Lovelady on the steps...
-
There's no credible reason to doubt that the two men seen fast-walking up the extension in the Gerda Dunkel zoomed slow-motion Couch/Darnell clip are Lovelady & Shelley...The men are right where they were supposed to be according to testimony...Lovelady has the same dimension geometric plaid pattern as he is seen wearing in other photos and same bald spot...And Shelley has his body shape, black suit jacket, white shirt collar, and Duck's Bahookie hair doo...And he pulls up and talks to Karan Hicks as she goes by...
Anything less strikes me as deliberate misinformation designed to confuse...
This is evidence enough for persons truly seeking correct identification...
I believe the obtaining and enhancement of the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell will show Molina as the man being called Lovelady on the steps...
"The men are right where they were supposed to be according to testimony" ?
The WC Testimony of both Shelley and Lovelady places them on the Elm St Extension at roughly 3 MINUTES after the kill shot.We are seeing the 2 Guys walking down the Elm St Extension on the Couch/Darnell films at :20 SECONDS after the kill shot.
This is Not the Ed Forum. Stop polluting this Forum with BS:
-
Rational researchers realize the Couch/Darnell clip shows Lovelady & Shelley were gotten to lie and push their departure time from the front steps back to 3 minutes after the shots in order to screw up Victoria Adams' timing on descending the NW stairs...Couch/Darnell shows the reality and shows that Lovelady & Shelley are on their way up the extension at 25 to 30 seconds after the shots...
-
Rational researchers realize the Couch/Darnell clip shows Lovelady & Shelley were gotten to lie and push their departure time from the front steps back to 3 minutes after the shots in order to screw up Victoria Adams' timing on descending the NW stairs...Couch/Darnell shows the reality and shows that Lovelady & Shelley are on their way up the extension at 25 to 30 seconds after the shots...
Trying to pass your "opinion" off as being a Fact is Not cool on this Forum. Attempting to do so only gives rise to creating more JFK Assassination Urban Legends. You obviously got away with this at the Ed Forum. Your poisoning of This Well is Not going to happen.
-
Lovelady & Shelley are shown leaving the steps 20 seconds after the shots right there in front of you in Couch/Darnell...
That is not opinion...It is visible, proven fact...
-
Lovelady & Shelley are shown leaving the steps 20 seconds after the shots right there in front of you in Couch/Darnell...
That is not opinion...It is visible, proven fact...
"Lovelady and Shelley are shown LEAVING the steps....................."
THAT is your "opinion". The Couch/Darnell films do Not show Lovelady & Shelley to be in Motion in any direction and therefore certainly Not "leaving the steps" as You claim. I have tried to be nice about this, but since you just can Not help yourself, how about simply shutting the Pie Hole? You're contributing nothing but BS: to this thread. Up until your "contributions" were added to it, this was an exceptionally informative and interesting thread.
-
Clique-favored Bart Kamp has been allowed readmission to The Education Forum...
Like DiEugenio, Kamp shows ability in deep research and extensive digging in to assassination information...Since I am honest I have to admit I use Kamp as a source on some assassination matters and his research is helpful at times...My pique with Kamp is that he tends to use that extensive research to reach quack conclusions and misses what his research is really leading to and insists on gang-like conduct in forcing through wrong claims...So the correct explanation of Kamp and his research is it is useful in learning about certain assassination subjects but then needs final correction away from the false conclusions he almost always draws...Kamp is a practice-er of Greg Parker crank research...The average JFK internet member gets impressed by extensive research but then fails to xxxx (See 'Ciphered Past')...
The reason Kamp has been allowed back on The Education Forum is because the Prayer Man people have hijacked the JFK internet and they have taken final control of the JFK internet through DiEugenio proxy Andrew Iler...The "reformation" of The Education Forum is carefully allowing all those who support the Prayer Man theory back on the board and it is corruptedly not allowing the best and brightest who are capable of refuting it..."The Moderation Team" is bullying those people and censoring them with false moderation...
If you are smart you will realize that the reason Kamp opened his re-admission to The Education Forum with a paper on Oswald in Finland and not his eponymous Prayer Man theory is because he knows I have refuted that notorious theory and he doesn't believe in it himself...It stands true that the Prayer Man theory only exists in places where corruption censors those who can refute it...I owe gratitude to Kamp because if he hadn't provoked me to refute that bogus theory then I would not have discovered the conspiracy break-through of our generation...
-
Clique-favored Bart Kamp has been allowed readmission to The Education Forum...
Like DiEugenio, Kamp shows ability in deep research and extensive digging in to assassination information...Since I am honest I have to admit I use Kamp as a source on some assassination matters and his research is helpful at times...My pique with Kamp is that he tends to use that extensive research to reach quack conclusions and misses what his research is really leading to and insists on gang-like conduct in forcing through wrong claims...So the correct explanation of Kamp and his research is it is useful in learning about certain assassination subjects but then needs final correction away from the false conclusions he almost always draws...Kamp is a practice-er of Greg Parker crank research...The average JFK internet member gets impressed by extensive research but then fails to xxxx (See 'Ciphered Past')...
The reason Kamp has been allowed back on The Education Forum is because the Prayer Man people have hijacked the JFK internet and they have taken final control of the JFK internet through DiEugenio proxy Andrew Iler...The "reformation" of The Education Forum is carefully allowing all those who support the Prayer Man theory back on the board and it is corruptedly not allowing the best and brightest who are capable of refuting it..."The Moderation Team" is bullying those people and censoring them with false moderation...
If you are smart you will realize that the reason Kamp opened his re-admission to The Education Forum with a paper on Oswald in Finland and not his eponymous Prayer Man theory is because he knows I have refuted that notorious theory and he doesn't believe in it himself...It stands true that the Prayer Man theory only exists in places where corruption censors those who can refute it...I owe gratitude to Kamp because if he hadn't provoked me to refute that bogus theory then I would not have discovered the conspiracy break-through of our generation...
If you ever had a real breakthrough, it would quickly become national news. In reality it is just another one of hundreds, if not thousands of kook theories that have been proposed over he tlast six decades that combined don't amount ot a hill of beans.
Sorry. Just being honest.
-
No, that makes sense because you know how honest The Education Forum and Mainstream Media have been on the subject up to now...
James Hosty told Nigel Turner that "Oswald told us he was alone in the Lunch Room during the assassination"...
I have yet to get an answer from Bart Kamp why Hosty left such an important statement out of his notes?...
And I have yet to get an answer how that relates to Buell Frazier saying a Depository employee told him a partly-eaten cheese sandwich and apple were seen on the 2nd Floor Lunch Room table after the assassination...
And why couldn't Frazier name that employee?...
-
No, that makes sense because you know how honest The Education Forum and Mainstream Media have been on the subject up to now...
James Hosty told Nigel Turner that "Oswald told us he was alone in the Lunch Room during the assassination"...
I have yet to get an answer from Bart Kamp why Hosty left such an important statement out of his notes?...
And I have yet to get an answer how that relates to Buell Frazier saying a Depository employee told him a partly-eaten cheese sandwich and apple were seen on the 2nd Floor Lunch Room table after the assassination...
And why couldn't Frazier name that employee?...
Has any handwriting "expert" ever verified that the notes on the back of the DPD Affidavit Form were those of Agent Hosty? All of the Kamp "Prayer Man" stuff traces back to that affidavit and Oswald allegedly claiming he was Outside watching the, "Pre Parade". Those alleged "notes" are the foundation for the Kamp Claim of Oswald being Prayer Man.
-
Has any handwriting "expert" ever verified that the notes on the back of the DPD Affidavit Form were those of Agent Hosty? All of the Kamp "Prayer Man" stuff traces back to that affidavit and Oswald allegedly claiming he was Outside watching the, "Pre Parade". Those alleged "notes" are the foundation for the Kamp Claim of Oswald being Prayer Man.
Not that I know of...I have been telling Kamp for 10 years that he is misrepresenting the context of Hosty's notes that he is showing...Kamp dishonestly insists that the notes show that Oswald was out on the front steps during the assassination as Prayer Man and he is presenting this as conclusive proof...If you observe Fritz and Bookhout's notes Fritz's inclusion of "When Officer Came In" calibrates the notes to 90 seconds after the shots when Baker confronted Oswald in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room...Once a dubious researcher like Kamp makes such a complex false claim it is difficult to undo it because it takes so much correction...However it is easy to see that all 3 sets of notes from the 3pm Interrogation all start at 90 seconds after the shots at the Lunch Room Encounter...All 3 go downstairs to eat lunch, and all 3 then go out with Shelley on the front steps...Therefore the part of Hosty's notes quoted by Kamp occurs 4 minutes after the shots and cannot be used as evidence for Oswald being Prayer Man...Kamp is quite aware of this but he dishonestly ignores it and in doing so has tied up the entire research community in a BS theory fully endorsed by the fool Jim DiEugenio...When Hosty writes "Went out to watch Presidential Parade" he is talking about 4 minutes after the shots...Kamp is clearly committing a false reference there and refuses to listen to the correct interpretation...He has a whole internet of supporters who help him with this deliberate deception...
The true interpretation is seen in Fritz's testimony to the Commission where he told Ball that Oswald told them he was eating a cheese sandwich and apple in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the assassination...Obviously, Oswald told this to the 3pm Interrogation and this is why the notes were torn up and the lie was formulated that they took no notes Texas style...Oswald told the 3pm Interrogation that he was eating lunch in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the assassination and that caused a major problem that was solved by the present notes that conspicuously omit this admission like an obvious glaring donut hole exactly in the right place in the existing notes...Fritz, Bookhout, and Hosty solved this problem by starting their notes 90 seconds after the shots at the Lunch Room Encounter and therefore omitting Oswald being in the in the Lunch Room during the assassination right before it...When you look at the existing notes you can't unsee this...Fritz, Bookhout, and Hosty all clumsily excised this admission from their notes and it stands out like a sore thumb...It is this correct explanation that Kamp refuses to allow and in doing so, and sticking to his bogus Prayer Man theory, both he and DiEugenio, and the sycophants who support them, are holding up a final solving of the conspiracy...
All 3 sets of notes wrote about being with Shelley out front in vague terms because Oswald was covering up the fact Shelley helped him around the cop at the front door who told Oswald to step aside and stay put...Shelley saw Oswald was in trouble and helped him around the police detainment at the front door and out the back...So the 3pm Interrogation notes had two major problems they needed to bury and what you see is how they did it...They simply removed Oswald telling them he was eating lunch in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the shots...And they blurred Shelley helping Oswald out the rear exit after a cop told him to step aside at the front door...Kamp helps muddy all this and serves to inhibit the solving of the case because he can't break off his juvenile attachment to this Prayer Man BS...
-
Not that I know of...I have been telling Kamp for 10 years that he is misrepresenting the context of Hosty's notes that he is showing...Kamp dishonestly insists that the notes show that Oswald was out on the front steps during the assassination as Prayer Man and he is presenting this as conclusive proof...If you observe Fritz and Bookhout's notes Fritz's inclusion of "When Officer Came In" calibrates the notes to 90 seconds after the shots when Baker confronted Oswald in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room...Once a dubious researcher like Kamp makes such a complex false claim it is difficult to undo it because it takes so much correction...However it is easy to see that all 3 sets of notes from the 3pm Interrogation all start at 90 seconds after the shots at the Lunch Room Encounter...All 3 go downstairs to eat lunch, and all 3 then go out with Shelley on the front steps...Therefore the part of Hosty's notes quoted by Kamp occurs 4 minutes after the shots and cannot be used as evidence for Oswald being Prayer Man...Kamp is quite aware of this but he dishonestly ignores it and in doing so has tied up the entire research community in a BS theory fully endorsed by the fool Jim DiEugenio...When Hosty writes "Went out to watch Presidential Parade" he is talking about 4 minutes after the shots...Kamp is clearly committing a false reference there and refuses to listen to the correct interpretation...He has a whole internet of supporters who help him with this deliberate deception...
The true interpretation is seen in Fritz's testimony to the Commission where he told Ball that Oswald told them he was eating a cheese sandwich and apple in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the assassination...Obviously, Oswald told this to the 3pm Interrogation and this is why the notes were torn up and the lie was formulated that they took no notes Texas style...Oswald told the 3pm Interrogation that he was eating lunch in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the assassination and that caused a major problem that was solved by the present notes that conspicuously omit this admission like an obvious glaring donut hole exactly in the right place in the existing notes...Fritz, Bookhout, and Hosty solved this problem by starting their notes 90 seconds after the shots at the Lunch Room Encounter and therefore omitting Oswald being in the in the Lunch Room during the assassination right before it...When you look at the existing notes you can't unsee this...Fritz, Bookhout, and Hosty all clumsily excised this admission from their notes and it stands out like a sore thumb...It is this correct explanation that Kamp refuses to allow and in doing so, and sticking to his bogus Prayer Man theory, both he and DiEugenio, and the sycophants who support them, are holding up a final solving of the conspiracy...
All 3 sets of notes wrote about being with Shelley out front in vague terms because Oswald was covering up the fact Shelley helped him around the cop at the front door who told Oswald to step aside and stay put...Shelley saw Oswald was in trouble and helped him around the police detainment at the front door and out the back...So the 3pm Interrogation notes had two major problems they needed to bury and what you see is how they did it...They simply removed Oswald telling them he was eating lunch in the 2nd Floor Lunch Room during the shots...And they blurred Shelley helping Oswald out the rear exit after a cop told him to step aside at the front door...Kamp helps muddy all this and serves to inhibit the solving of the case because he can't break off his juvenile attachment to this Prayer Man BS...
Why were the alleged "Hosty Notes" NOT verified? This should have been Step 1 after the Notes were allegedly discovered by Kamp. Once again, the JFK Assassination Research Community has fallen on its' Bahookie.
-
You can go to Bart Kamp's Prayer Man website and read his Hosty Notes section and see the notes passed muster with Pat Speer and Malcolm Blunt...The notes were posted in Hosty's book 'Assignment Oswald' and compare to other examples of Hosty's handwriting...I don't think anyone has ever challenged the authenticity of the notes being Hosty's...
This fraud has been assisted by individuals like Rob Clark, Robbie Robertson, Eli Frame, Tim Gardner, and Len Osanic...The aforementioned are persons, who although they have a modicum of assassination knowledge, all host Kamp in a fan-like manner and never question his offerings...They always host Kamp in an unquestioning way where there is no adversarial opposition to keep Kamp honest...They are persons who have the skill to put together a podcast but then host Kamp is a sycophantic manner where his claims are supported without any critical cross examination...I have been mocked and ridiculed by all the previously mentioned podcast hosts (Osanic put me on mute) because I refuted Kamp's Prayer Man theory...The reason for this is those podcast hosts rely on gang-like grouping up and favoritism in order to compensate for their lack of research skill that led to them backing the hoax researcher Kamp and his bogus Prayer Man theory...They operate like a pack of school yard bullies who use Kamp as a leg up in the research world...They don't care if the evidence shows Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...Again, the clique serves to prevent good research more than encourage it no matter how much they flatter themselves on censorship protected sites...
Pat Speer used the fact I can't defend myself to mock my not being allowed back on The Education Forum...He humiliated me and made me look like an idiot who didn't pass muster who was justly denied...A "sorry Charlie" kind of thing that he took pleasure in doing while defending the clique...He then lied and said I stole my Prayer Man stuff from him and falsely used it as reasoning why I wasn't fit for membership on The Education Forum...The Prayer Man people are fully aware my Prayer Man material is quite my own and many orders of magnitude better than Speer's weak offerings...In fact my material is subject-leading and quite conclusive...The Prayer Man clique is dirty and won't correct Speer on his slanderous false accusation...These are the site's preferred members and methods...
When I Private Messaged Ciphered Past to request fair air time to defend myself I was threatened with legal action for harassment and stalking...And this was for a simple fair playing field reply request on my first contact on a public podcast that always includes the invitation for the public to contact them and add information they think would be helpful on each episode...They request correcting information that would help the show and then when you reach out to them, after being unfairly slandered and ridiculed on the air, their first response is to threaten you with legal action...Bush league hacks and clique boys running a bully club...
-
You can go to Bart Kamp's Prayer Man website and read his Hosty Notes section and see the notes passed muster with Pat Speer and Malcolm Blunt...The notes were posted in Hosty's book 'Assignment Oswald' and compare to other examples of Hosty's handwriting...I don't think anyone has ever challenged the authenticity of the notes being Hosty's...
This fraud has been assisted by individuals like Rob Clark, Robbie Robertson, Eli Frame, Tim Gardner, and Len Osanic...The aforementioned are persons, who although they have a modicum of assassination knowledge, all host Kamp in a fan-like manner and never question his offerings...They always host Kamp in an unquestioning way where there is no adversarial opposition to keep Kamp honest...They are persons who have the skill to put together a podcast but then host Kamp is a sycophantic manner where his claims are supported without any critical cross examination...I have been mocked and ridiculed by all the previously mentioned podcast hosts (Osanic put me on mute) because I refuted Kamp's Prayer Man theory...The reason for this is those podcast hosts rely on gang-like grouping up and favoritism in order to compensate for their lack of research skill that led to them backing the hoax researcher Kamp and his bogus Prayer Man theory...They operate like a pack of school yard bullies who use Kamp as a leg up in the research world...They don't care if the evidence shows Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...Again, the clique serves to prevent good research more than encourage it no matter how much they flatter themselves on censorship protected sites...
Pat Speer used the fact I can't defend myself to mock my not being allowed back on The Education Forum...He humiliated me and made me look like an idiot who didn't pass muster who was justly denied...A "sorry Charlie" kind of thing that he took pleasure in doing while defending the clique...He then lied and said I stole my Prayer Man stuff from him and falsely used it as reasoning why I wasn't fit for membership on The Education Forum...The Prayer Man people are fully aware my Prayer Man material is quite my own and many orders of magnitude better than Speer's weak offerings...In fact my material is subject-leading and quite conclusive...The Prayer Man clique is dirty and won't correct Speer on his slanderous false accusation...These are the site's preferred members and methods...
When I Private Messaged Ciphered Past to request fair air time to defend myself I was threatened with legal action for harassment and stalking...And this was for a simple fair playing field reply request on my first contact on a public podcast that always includes the invitation for the public to contact them and add information they think would be helpful on each episode...They request correcting information that would help the show and then when you reach out to them, after being unfairly slandered and ridiculed on the air, their first response is to threaten you with legal action...Bush league hacks and clique boys running a bully club...
So because, "nobody has ever challenged the authenticity of the Note's being Hosty's.." they are automatically deemed as being Hosty's? That's absolutely laughable.
-
There's no credible reason to doubt that the two men seen fast-walking up the extension in the Gerda Dunkel zoomed slow-motion Couch/Darnell clip are Lovelady & Shelley...The men are right where they were supposed to be according to testimony...Lovelady has the same dimension geometric plaid pattern as he is seen wearing in other photos and same bald spot...And Shelley has his body shape, black suit jacket, white shirt collar, and Duck's Bahookie hair doo.....And he pulls up and talks to Karan Hicks as she goes by...Anything less strikes me as deliberate misinformation designed to confuse...
This is evidence enough for persons truly seeking correct identification...
I believe the obtaining and enhancement of the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell will show Molina as the man being called Lovelady on the steps...
Honestly Brian, you are such a massive disappointment.
I was hailed as the "new Brian Doyle" for my belief that Prayer Man was Sarah Stanton. I took it as a badge of honour and that you were some renegade researcher fighting against mass hysteria.
But it turns out you're just a dick.
You have exactly the same mentality as the worst Nutters - Corbett, "Smith" and Payette. It's something I should start a thread about - people who believe that just because they think a thing means its a fact.
I would like you to stop posting on this thread as it is a genuine attempt to get to the bottom of a specific issue and you have nothing to offer other than your own, unsupported opinion.
It's funny that you think you are hounded because you are on the right trail...that's not it...it's because you are a know-nothing blowhard who believes his opinion trumps any facts.
If you have the balls for a genuine debate that involves citing sources and actually providing evidence for your claims then let's go.
"There's no credible reason to doubt that the two men seen fast-walking up the extension in the Gerda Dunkel zoomed slow-motion Couch/Darnell clip are Lovelady & Shelley"
ALL EVIDENCE relating to this issue disputes this identification of Shelley and Lovelady.
There is ZERO EVIDENCE supporting this claim.
NONE.
There is nothing in Dunkel's Couch/Darnell clip that suggests the intricate shirt detail and bald patch of Lovelady - this is a lie
"The men are right where they were supposed to be according to testimony"
Another ridiculous lie.
You say "according to testimony", Royell points out that they testified that they didn't move from the steps for at least 3 minutes and you start waffling about how they were made to lie. If they were made to lie how can it be "according to testimony"? Are you aware of the sh!t you post?
Lovelady has the same dimension geometric plaid pattern as he is seen wearing in other photos and same bald spot.
What "other photos"?
Provide these photos.
Cite these photos.
Post these photos.
Somehow support the nonsense you are posting.
.And he pulls up and talks to Karan Hicks as she goes by
I literally can't believe you keep posting this lie over and over again.
-
You can go to Bart Kamp's Prayer Man website and read his Hosty Notes section and see the notes passed muster with Pat Speer and Malcolm Blunt...The notes were posted in Hosty's book 'Assignment Oswald' and compare to other examples of Hosty's handwriting...I don't think anyone has ever challenged the authenticity of the notes being Hosty's...
This fraud has been assisted by individuals like Rob Clark, Robbie Robertson, Eli Frame, Tim Gardner, and Len Osanic...The aforementioned are persons, who although they have a modicum of assassination knowledge, all host Kamp in a fan-like manner and never question his offerings...They always host Kamp in an unquestioning way where there is no adversarial opposition to keep Kamp honest...They are persons who have the skill to put together a podcast but then host Kamp is a sycophantic manner where his claims are supported without any critical cross examination...I have been mocked and ridiculed by all the previously mentioned podcast hosts (Osanic put me on mute) because I refuted Kamp's Prayer Man theory...The reason for this is those podcast hosts rely on gang-like grouping up and favoritism in order to compensate for their lack of research skill that led to them backing the hoax researcher Kamp and his bogus Prayer Man theory...They operate like a pack of school yard bullies who use Kamp as a leg up in the research world...They don't care if the evidence shows Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...Again, the clique serves to prevent good research more than encourage it no matter how much they flatter themselves on censorship protected sites...
Pat Speer used the fact I can't defend myself to mock my not being allowed back on The Education Forum...He humiliated me and made me look like an idiot who didn't pass muster who was justly denied...A "sorry Charlie" kind of thing that he took pleasure in doing while defending the clique...He then lied and said I stole my Prayer Man stuff from him and falsely used it as reasoning why I wasn't fit for membership on The Education Forum...The Prayer Man people are fully aware my Prayer Man material is quite my own and many orders of magnitude better than Speer's weak offerings...In fact my material is subject-leading and quite conclusive...The Prayer Man clique is dirty and won't correct Speer on his slanderous false accusation...These are the site's preferred members and methods...
When I Private Messaged Ciphered Past to request fair air time to defend myself I was threatened with legal action for harassment and stalking...And this was for a simple fair playing field reply request on my first contact on a public podcast that always includes the invitation for the public to contact them and add information they think would be helpful on each episode...They request correcting information that would help the show and then when you reach out to them, after being unfairly slandered and ridiculed on the air, their first response is to threaten you with legal action...Bush league hacks and clique boys running a bully club...
You need a "Kamp Intervention". The above proves this is imperative.
-
Dan:
It is understood amongst credible researchers that Lovelady & Shelley were gotten to lie and push back their departure time from the front steps to 3 minutes after the shots in order to make Victoria Adams look silly and to destroy her witnessing of Oswald not being on the Northwest steps when the official story needed him to be...There's some basic rules of evidence you are violating here...We can see Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension in Couch/Darnell so therefore visual film evidence trumps testimony and shows that Lovelady & Shelley left the steps around 20 seconds after the shots when they were inspired by Calvery to go up to the Knoll and see for themselves...You are violating the rules of evidence as well as rational thought because we can see Lovelady & Shelley going up the extension in Couch/Darnell and it tells us what the true version is...
The version Bart Kamp used was the Sprague copy...Obviously Sprague used the best enhancement technology of his day which was probably limited to brightness and zoom...One thing is clear though, Sprague used the original celluloid films as his source, as is evidenced by the fact Kamp was able to get the best detail in his enhancements...That best source that Kamp accessed was able to produce the visible details seen on Lovelady & Shelley as well as Lovelady's bald spot...Lovelady's plaid pattern is a geometric match and matches his plaid shirt pattern precisely...That is a dead-lock that makes the sincerity of what you offer suspect...No serious researcher would doubt the men being Lovelady & Shelley at that point...
This was all in the hands of Larry Schnapf who could have gotten the 1st generation 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell simply by asking...Schnapf went on the Education Forum and explained why he wasn't going to request the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy...The words Schnapf spoke to describe his reasoning were words that came directly from the Prayer Man gang and their shameless suborning of perjury before Congress...Because the Task Force was not able to obtain the original Wiegman and Darnell films the 6th Floor Museum copy then became the best available copy of Darnell...This was proven by the fact you can see Sarah Stanton's dress neckline on Prayer Man in that copy...So no credible researcher would ever make a case for not obtaining the best copy...Obtaining the best copy is an unspoken thing amongst credible researchers...It is only the Prayer Man-hijacked JFK internet that would make a case for NOT obtaining that copy...And the way they achieve that is by banning, ostracize-ing, and censoring those researchers who question it...The Education Forum is a fraudulent website, as are its administrators...The effort to NOT obtain the 6th Floor Museum copy is a disingenuous one whose sole purpose is to avoid producing evidence that Jim DiEugenio is a fool who promotes already-disproven theories before Congress...Iler is a greasy fixer who makes grandiose rules designed to bail out his partner DiEugenio and avoid the correct evidence...It is this copy that will better show Lovelady, Shelley, and Molina...
The mark is already set and we await the obtaining and scanning of the 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
-
Dan:
It is understood amongst credible researchers that Lovelady & Shelley were gotten to lie and push back their departure time from the front steps to 3 minutes after the shots in order to make Victoria Adams look silly and to destroy her witnessing of Oswald not being on the Northwest steps when the official story needed him to be...There's some basic rules of evidence you are violating here...We can see Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension in Couch/Darnell so therefore visual film evidence trumps testimony and shows that Lovelady & Shelley left the steps around 20 seconds after the shots when they were inspired by Calvery to go up to the Knoll and see for themselves...You are violating the rules of evidence as well as rational thought because we can see Lovelady & Shelley going up the extension in Couch/Darnell and it tells us what the true version is...
The version Bart Kamp used was the Sprague copy...Obviously Sprague used the best enhancement technology of his day which was probably limited to brightness and zoom...One thing is clear though, Sprague used the original celluloid films as his source, as is evidenced by the fact Kamp was able to get the best detail in his enhancements...That best source that Kamp accessed was able to produce the visible details seen on Lovelady & Shelley as well as Lovelady's bald spot...Lovelady's plaid pattern is a geometric match and matches his plaid shirt pattern precisely...That is a dead-lock that makes the sincerity of what you offer suspect...No serious researcher would doubt the men being Lovelady & Shelley at that point...
This was all in the hands of Larry Schnapf who could have gotten the 1st generation 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell simply by asking...Schnapf went on the Education Forum and explained why he wasn't going to request the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy...The words Schnapf spoke to describe his reasoning were words that came directly from the Prayer Man gang and their shameless suborning of perjury before Congress...Because the Task Force was not able to obtain the original Wiegman and Darnell films the 6th Floor Museum copy then became the best available copy of Darnell...This was proven by the fact you can see Sarah Stanton's dress neckline on Prayer Man in that copy...So no credible researcher would ever make a case for not obtaining the best copy...Obtaining the best copy is an unspoken thing amongst credible researchers...It is only the Prayer Man-hijacked JFK internet that would make a case for NOT obtaining that copy...And the way they achieve that is by banning, ostracize-ing, and censoring those researchers who question it...The Education Forum is a fraudulent website, as are its administrators...The effort to NOT obtain the 6th Floor Museum copy is a disingenuous one whose sole purpose is to avoid producing evidence that Jim DiEugenio is a fool who promotes already-disproven theories before Congress...Iler is a greasy fixer who makes grandiose rules designed to bail out his partner DiEugenio and avoid the correct evidence...It is this copy that will better show Lovelady, Shelley, and Molina...
The mark is already set and we await the obtaining and scanning of the 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
"It is Understood..............".
NOTHING is cavalierly "understood" here. Proffer your EVIDENCE and this Forum will let you know where you stand. Right now, you're circling the drain.
-
There's obviously a bridge-over between Lone Nutter nay-sayers and the Prayer Man gang in avoiding the 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
-
There's obviously a bridge-over between Lone Nutter nay-sayers and the Prayer Man gang in avoiding the 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
Yeah, I too am waiting on the Sixth Floor Museum to release the last half of their NBC 1st Generation Copy of the Darnell Film. That HD final half of the Darnell Film will corroborate what I have found. That is a Bogus DPD Motocycle Cop walking across the train yard and then Toward, Down, the Elm St Extension immediately after the kill shot. It has been 2 yrs since the Sixth Floor Museum released their 1st half/1st Generation Darnell Film copy. And that revealed ALL 3 Camera Cars being at a DEAD STOP at the corner of Houston and Elm St. They screwed the pooch there. This Camera Car STOPPAGE then goes to a possible JFK Limo STOP.
I believe there will be No More New Releases via the Sixth Floor Museum. I believe for the extended future, the Sixth Floor Museum has now joined John Wick in being declared, "Excommunicado"
-
Don't worry Royell...We have the pro-active Jim DiEugenio who will use his access to the Task Force to convince them the 6th Floor Museum version is the best existing version and needs to be obtained using the Task Force's power...
We've got The Education Forum on it...
And, no, Jim D isn't a skunk who is avoiding it because he knows the 6th Floor Museum copy proves Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...
-
Don't worry Royell...We have the pro-active Jim DiEugenio who will use his access to the Task Force to convince them the 6th Floor Museum version is the best existing version and needs to be obtained using the Task Force's power...
We've got The Education Forum on it...
And, no, Jim D isn't a skunk who is avoiding it because he knows the 6th Floor Museum copy proves Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...
"Task Force"? I am beginning to understand why the Ed Forum collapsed. Just when is this Task Force gonna "Storm The Bastille"?
-
Dan:
It is understood amongst credible researchers that Lovelady & Shelley were gotten to lie and push back their departure time from the front steps to 3 minutes after the shots in order to make Victoria Adams look silly and to destroy her witnessing of Oswald not being on the Northwest steps when the official story needed him to be...There's some basic rules of evidence you are violating here...We can see Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension in Couch/Darnell so therefore visual film evidence trumps testimony and shows that Lovelady & Shelley left the steps around 20 seconds after the shots when they were inspired by Calvery to go up to the Knoll and see for themselves...You are violating the rules of evidence as well as rational thought because we can see Lovelady & Shelley going up the extension in Couch/Darnell and it tells us what the true version is...
Brian,
It is not understood amongst credible researchers that Shelley and Lovelady were made to lie about departure time from the steps.
Your notion that it was done to discredit Adams' testimony is truly ridiculous for a number of very basic, common sense reasons.
Your insistence that couch/Darnell shows Shelley and Lovelady is based on a single, doctored image.
There is no version of Couch or Darnell from which Shelley and Lovelady can be identified. If you believe there is then post it or cite it.
Show some actual evidence to back up your claims. That is all you are being asked to do.
Your credibility as a researcher hangs on the quality of the evidence you provide to support your claims.
You seem to imagine that you can just keep stating a thing and that makes it valid. This is clearly not the case.
Other than the doctored Sprague image, post another image from which we can identify Shelley and Lovelady.
OTHERWISE, JUST ADMIT THAT YOUR OPINION IS BASED SOLELY ON THE SPRAGUE IMAGE.
The version Bart Kamp used was the Sprague copy...Obviously Sprague used the best enhancement technology of his day which was probably limited to brightness and zoom...One thing is clear though, Sprague used the original celluloid films as his source, as is evidenced by the fact Kamp was able to get the best detail in his enhancements...That best source that Kamp accessed was able to produce the visible details seen on Lovelady & Shelley as well as Lovelady's bald spot...Lovelady's plaid pattern is a geometric match and matches his plaid shirt pattern precisely...That is a dead-lock that makes the sincerity of what you offer suspect...No serious researcher would doubt the men being Lovelady & Shelley at that point...
This thread is about the validity of the single image you base your incorrect opinion on.
ALL EVIDENCE relating to this issue, other than the doctored Sprague image, refutes the identification of Shelley and Lovelady on the extension..
Where does that leave your credibility as a researcher?
The Sprague image is incredibly dubious.
Kamp himself admits that the image contains very little information (it is an incredibly poor image) apart from the incredible detail of Lovelady's shirt and bald patch!!
How is that possible
The Prayer Man cult was founded on the dubious manipulation of photographic images and if you have a look at what Kamp is doing with AI recently...
It is physically impossible for Shelley and Lovelady to have been that far down the extension within 20 seconds if they had an interaction with Gloria on the steps.
To suggest otherwise lacks credibility and requires a heavy dose of gullibility.
-
10 years ago Sandy Larsen managed to enhance and enlarge Lovelady on the extension and juxtapose the plaid pattern on his shirt with the plaid pattern seen in other photos of Lovelady that day...When enhanced and enlarged in this manner the white, black, and red stripes and patches in Lovelady's plaid shirt matched identically therefore proving a scientific match beyond doubt and ending the issue...I was banned from The Education Forum at the time so I could not participate in this discovery...The only visible Assassination discussion site I could post on at that time was this one so I posted that Larsen's confirmation that the man was Lovelady served to establish the chronology and time stamp of Couch/Darnell proving that it was at the exact time that Frazier said Sarah Stanton turned to him to tell him what Calvery had shouted (actually it is the time period just following that)...I posted that therefore it was required of Larsen, as a person who thrust himself forward on the subject as an expert, to recognize this and respond that his identification of Lovelady therefore logically led to an identification of the time that Frazier said he was talking to Stanton and that Couch/Darnell and that time were exactly the same...Larsen had also photographically identified Calvery on the steps, doubly confirming this time stamp...
Larsen must have been reading because soon after, that post on The Education Forum, that did the excellent skilled photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern in Couch/Darnell, disappeared from the board...I protested but it was ignored...The same Prayer Man hijacker majority that tolerated my wrongful banning from The Education Forum for disproving Prayer Man was the same dishonest membership that tolerated Larsen cheating and taking back what could not be taken back...The true purpose of the moderation on that forum is not enforcing strict academic rules in order to improve rigor...The purpose for Gordon's rogue moderation was to make sure a disliked researcher didn't wade in and hand the Prayer Man people their butts on the Prayer Man issue and show how uncredible the forum was...To add insult to injury, a few years later I saw Larsen post that the man on the steps facing Calvery was Lovelady...The only reason I couldn't make Larsen answer for his amnesia was due to my being censored...The membership didn't even notice and didn't say a word...The reason Larsen called the man on the steps Lovelady was so he could preserve his Prayer Man nonsense and avoid admitting the time...This is the playing field that exists on the JFK internet...One where Andrew Iler, instead of correcting this rogue injustice, posts how to put people on ignore and then locks the thread...
What happens when the 6th Floor Museum copy replicates Larsen's matching of the plaid in Lovelady's shirt?...
Or shows Molina facing Calvery on the steps?...
Photo alteration claims?...
-
10 years ago Sandy Larsen managed to enhance and enlarge Lovelady on the extension and juxtapose the plaid pattern on his shirt with the plaid pattern seen in other photos of Lovelady that day...When enhanced and enlarged in this manner the white, black, and red stripes and patches in Lovelady's plaid shirt matched identically therefore proving a scientific match beyond doubt and ending the issue...I was banned from The Education Forum at the time so I could not participate in this discovery...The only visible Assassination discussion site I could post on at that time was this one so I posted that Larsen's confirmation that the man was Lovelady served to establish the chronology and time stamp of Couch/Darnell proving that it was at the exact time that Frazier said Sarah Stanton turned to him to tell him what Calvery had shouted (actually it is the time period just following that)...I posted that therefore it was required of Larsen, as a person who thrust himself forward on the subject as an expert, to recognize this and respond that his identification of Lovelady therefore logically led to an identification of the time that Frazier said he was talking to Stanton and that Couch/Darnell and that time were exactly the same...Larsen had also photographically identified Calvery on the steps, doubly confirming this time stamp...
Larsen must have been reading because soon after, that post on The Education Forum, that did the excellent skilled photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern in Couch/Darnell, disappeared from the board...I protested but it was ignored...The same Prayer Man hijacker majority that tolerated my wrongful banning from The Education Forum for disproving Prayer Man was the same dishonest membership that tolerated Larsen cheating and taking back what could not be taken back...The true purpose of the moderation on that forum is not enforcing strict academic rules in order to improve rigor...The purpose for Gordon's rogue moderation was to make sure a disliked researcher didn't wade in and hand the Prayer Man people their butts on the Prayer Man issue and show how uncredible the forum was...To add insult to injury, a few years later I saw Larsen post that the man on the steps facing Calvery was Lovelady...The only reason I couldn't make Larsen answer for his amnesia was due to my being censored...The membership didn't even notice and didn't say a word...The reason Larsen called the man on the steps Lovelady was so he could preserve his Prayer Man nonsense and avoid admitting the time...This is the playing field that exists on the JFK internet...One where Andrew Iler, instead of correcting this rogue injustice, posts how to put people on ignore and then locks the thread...
What happens when the 6th Floor Museum copy replicates Larsen's matching of the plaid in Lovelady's shirt?...
Or shows Molina facing Calvery on the steps?...
Photo alteration claims?...
ALL of this baloney traces back to the Ed Forum. Now known as "The Nut House". An obviously well earned moniker.
-
10 years ago Sandy Larsen managed to enhance and enlarge Lovelady on the extension and juxtapose the plaid pattern on his shirt with the plaid pattern seen in other photos of Lovelady that day...When enhanced and enlarged in this manner the white, black, and red stripes and patches in Lovelady's plaid shirt matched identically therefore proving a scientific match beyond doubt and ending the issue...I was banned from The Education Forum at the time so I could not participate in this discovery...The only visible Assassination discussion site I could post on at that time was this one so I posted that Larsen's confirmation that the man was Lovelady served to establish the chronology and time stamp of Couch/Darnell proving that it was at the exact time that Frazier said Sarah Stanton turned to him to tell him what Calvery had shouted (actually it is the time period just following that)...I posted that therefore it was required of Larsen, as a person who thrust himself forward on the subject as an expert, to recognize this and respond that his identification of Lovelady therefore logically led to an identification of the time that Frazier said he was talking to Stanton and that Couch/Darnell and that time were exactly the same...Larsen had also photographically identified Calvery on the steps, doubly confirming this time stamp...
Larsen must have been reading because soon after, that post on The Education Forum, that did the excellent skilled photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern in Couch/Darnell, disappeared from the board...I protested but it was ignored...The same Prayer Man hijacker majority that tolerated my wrongful banning from The Education Forum for disproving Prayer Man was the same dishonest membership that tolerated Larsen cheating and taking back what could not be taken back...The true purpose of the moderation on that forum is not enforcing strict academic rules in order to improve rigor...The purpose for Gordon's rogue moderation was to make sure a disliked researcher didn't wade in and hand the Prayer Man people their butts on the Prayer Man issue and show how uncredible the forum was...To add insult to injury, a few years later I saw Larsen post that the man on the steps facing Calvery was Lovelady...The only reason I couldn't make Larsen answer for his amnesia was due to my being censored...The membership didn't even notice and didn't say a word...The reason Larsen called the man on the steps Lovelady was so he could preserve his Prayer Man nonsense and avoid admitting the time...This is the playing field that exists on the JFK internet...One where Andrew Iler, instead of correcting this rogue injustice, posts how to put people on ignore and then locks the thread...
What happens when the 6th Floor Museum copy replicates Larsen's matching of the plaid in Lovelady's shirt?...
Or shows Molina facing Calvery on the steps?...
Photo alteration claims?...
I'm sorry Brian, but you clearly live in some kind of dream world where you believe you can just spin your yarns and that's enough...everyone else has to fall in line.
PROVIDE EVIDENCE.
Provide the image you are referring to.
Cite the thread you are talking about.
Provide a link to this thread.
Do something!
Do something that demonstrates you are a credible researcher and not just some dreamer talking nonsense.
I will gladly accept any genuine evidence that is contrary to what I currently believe because that brings me closer to truly understanding.
Please provide some kind of evidence.
Your recollections are not evidence.
For all I know, you could be talking complete sh!t.
How can I know otherwise if you don't actually provide any evidence.
Start with this very simple question - what was the origin of the image Sandy Larsen enhanced?
And provide some kind of link to this thread.
-
I'm sorry Brian, but you clearly live in some kind of dream world where you believe you can just spin your yarns and that's enough...everyone else has to fall in line.
PROVIDE EVIDENCE.
Provide the image you are referring to.
Cite the thread you are talking about.
Provide a link to this thread.
Do something!
Do something that demonstrates you are a credible researcher and not just some dreamer talking nonsense.
I will gladly accept any genuine evidence that is contrary to what I currently believe because that brings me closer to truly understanding.
Please provide some kind of evidence.
Your recollections are not evidence.
For all I know, you could be talking complete sh!t.
How can I know otherwise if you don't actually provide any evidence.
Start with this very simple question - what was the origin of the image Sandy Larsen enhanced?
And provide some kind of link to this thread.
He thinks this is the Ed Forum. The "Nut House" had an extremely low bar. Just claim something and then glom a recognizable name to the discussion. Total BS:
-
The majority of internet posters represent an impairing of conspiracy evidence rather than promotion...
Larsen's photo analysis was very good...It showed the distinct plaid pattern close up and matched it perfectly with its black and white stripes...So good, in fact, that when Larsen realized he had proven the timing for when Frazier was looking at Stanton he went back and deleted it with no protest from the members of The Education Forum...This, apparently, was OK with James Gordon's pinned "Site Behaviour" rules...Calling Larsen out on it was not...Even though that was Gordon's job...The new rules make it simpler: "Thread is now closed to replies"...
-
The majority of internet posters represent an impairing of conspiracy evidence rather than promotion...
Larsen's photo analysis was very good...It showed the distinct plaid pattern close up and matched it perfectly with its black and white stripes...So good, in fact, that when Larsen realized he had proven the timing for when Frazier was looking at Stanton he went back and deleted it with no protest from the members of The Education Forum...This, apparently, was OK with James Gordon's pinned "Site Behaviour" rules...Calling Larsen out on it was not...Even though that was Gordon's job...The new rules make it simpler: "Thread is now closed to replies"...
If You are gonna name drop, present the bona fides of said individual(s). You guys from the "Nut House" just do Not understand how to present a solid position. We require Evidence here. Not BS:
-
Royell:
Why don't some of the members here who are allowed to post on The Education Forum ask Schnapf to get Luna to obtain the 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell?
All Luna has to do is order it and it is done...
-
The majority of internet posters represent an impairing of conspiracy evidence rather than promotion...
Larsen's photo analysis was very good...It showed the distinct plaid pattern close up and matched it perfectly with its black and white stripes...So good, in fact, that when Larsen realized he had proven the timing for when Frazier was looking at Stanton he went back and deleted it with no protest from the members of The Education Forum...This, apparently, was OK with James Gordon's pinned "Site Behaviour" rules...Calling Larsen out on it was not...Even though that was Gordon's job...The new rules make it simpler: "Thread is now closed to replies"...
Provide a link to Larsen's photo analysis.
Provide proof that this analysis even exists.
-
Provide a link to Larsen's photo analysis.
Provide proof that this analysis even exists.
These Ed Forum alums provide absolutely No Proof of anything they claim. They got away with this crappola over there. NOT HERE!
-
It would be even better if she obtained the original fro the NBC.
Fred
-
I gave the people looking for the original films instruction on how to use Oliver Stone's technical producer Rob Wilson to better trace the films...They should have traced the copying of those original films on to digital files and the names associated with it and asked those people...
They ignored it...
The reason they aren't really trying is because they know Prayer Man is BS...
They aren't really looking...
-
I gave the people looking for the original films instruction on how to use Oliver Stone's technical producer Rob Wilson to better trace the films...They should have traced the copying of those original films on to digital files and the names associated with it and asked those people...
They ignored it...
The reason they aren't really trying is because they know Prayer Man is BS...
They aren't really looking...
This has nothing to do with, "Prayer Man is BS...". Present whatever Evidence you have, and let that Evidence speak for itself. You currently have no legit standing within the JFK Assassination Research Community. Your telling respected JFK Assassination connected people what-to-do, would be like Me giving Einstein advice on how to split the Atom.
-
This has nothing to do with, "Prayer Man is BS...". Present whatever Evidence you have, and let that Evidence speak for itself. You currently have no legit standing within the JFK Assassination Research Community. Your telling respected JFK Assassination connected people what-to-do, would be like Me giving Einstein advice on how to split the Atom.
Who exactly are those "respected JFK Assassination-connected people"?...The Prayer Man people who got DiEugenio and Stone to promote Prayer Man to Congress?...
You are avoiding the point Royell...NBC made digital files out of the original Wiegman and Darnell films...The people who did that have to be on record and it is delinquent to not inquire and find out who those people were and ask them what happened to the originals since they were the last NBC people to handle them...
-
Who exactly are those "respected JFK Assassination-connected people"?...The Prayer Man people who got DiEugenio and Stone to promote Prayer Man to Congress?...
You are avoiding the point Royell...NBC made digital files out of the original Wiegman and Darnell films...The people who did that have to be on record and it is delinquent to not inquire and find out who those people were and ask them what happened to the originals since they were the last NBC people to handle them...
(1) Are you familiar with the NDA's that anyone connected to the govt/military were "convinced" to sign after the JFK Assassination? (2) Do you know what a "Pension" is? (3) Have you recently watched FAUCI "take the 5th" 111 times? This same STONEWALL also exists within ALL of the News Media Outlets.
-
(1) Are you familiar with the NDA's that anyone connected to the govt/military were "convinced" to sign after the JFK Assassination? (2) Do you know what a "Pension" is? (3) Have you recently watched FAUCI "take the 5th" 111 times? This same STONEWALL also exists within ALL of the News Media Outlets.
You're just blowing smoke...
It is delinquent to not pursue this line of inquiry and, once again, the agenda of The Education Forum and research community is to prevent and suppress evidence rather than seek it...
The Education Forum is doing this fake pursuit of the original Prayer Man films because it knows the Prayer Man theory is BS and they don't want to disprove themselves...This is the effect Jim DiEugenio has on credible JFK research...
The Education Forum is using censorship to avoid, at all costs, publicly confronting Kamp on the board about the 6th Floor Museum copy and how it shows Sarah Stanton's female dress neckline on Prayer Man...The Education Forum is a fake, rigged forum run by a clique of DiEugenio sycophant bullies...
-
You're just blowing smoke...
It is delinquent to not pursue this line of inquiry and, once again, the agenda of The Education Forum and research community is to prevent and suppress evidence rather than seek it...
The Education Forum is doing this fake pursuit of the original Prayer Man films because it knows the Prayer Man theory is BS and they don't want to disprove themselves...This is the effect Jim DiEugenio has on credible JFK research...
The Education Forum is using censorship to avoid, at all costs, publicly confronting Kamp on the board about the 6th Floor Museum copy and how it shows Sarah Stanton's female dress neckline on Prayer Man...The Education Forum is a fake, rigged forum run by a clique of DiEugenio sycophant bullies...
I have no use for the Ed Forum. They got some Shinny Pennies over there that sporadically contribute absolutely nothing of substance. You don't know it, but you're obsessed with these same people. Here, you are unable to submit a single post without dropping at least one of their names. You've basically gone Glenn Close in "Fatal Attraction".
-
The point stands unanswered that finding out who transferred the films to digital files at NBC will trace who last had knowledge of their where-abouts...
The current internet research community is more interested in suppressing evidence than doing the simple follow-throughs necessary to find it...
They prefers cliques to good research...
Watch what I'm doing here Royell and learn some highly skilled research techniques from a skilled expert...
The unspoken message on The Education Forum from Iler and DiEugenio to Kamp is that we will protect you and your highly damaging Prayer Man efforts and we will use wicked censorship of innocent researchers with good evidence to do it...
-
The point stands unanswered that finding out who transferred the films to digital files at NBC will trace who last had knowledge of their where-abouts...
The current internet research community is more interested in suppressing evidence than doing the simple follow-throughs necessary to find it...
They prefers cliques to good research...
Watch what I'm doing here Royell and learn some highly skilled research techniques from a skilled expert...
The unspoken message on The Education Forum from Iler and DiEugenio to Kamp is that we will protect you and your highly damaging Prayer Man efforts and we will use wicked censorship of innocent researchers with good evidence to do it...
Yeah Brian, for about the third or fourth time you are being asked to provide evidence for your claims regarding the identification/photo analysis of the men on the extension.
Your credibility is on the line here.
You seem to think you can just slide through this forum making grandiose claims that you don't have to back up with evidence/citation/ links.
You are wrong.
I get the impression you believe you are a key JFKA researcher whose pronouncements should be swallowed down without question.
You are wrong.
If you don't have evidence to back up your claims then shut up.
Go away.
If you think you are going to be unchallenged...you are wrong.
Show one scrap of evidence demonstrating that the men on the Elm Street extension are Shelley and Lovelady, other than the single disputed Sprague image that is the focus of this thread.
Post your evidence/citation/links.
If all you have is your unfounded pronouncements then just go away, you have nothing to contribute.
-
You're just asking for proof of what's already been proven...
When the two men seen fast-walking up the extension are seen wearing the same clothes as Lovelady & Shelley, have the same plaid pattern, bald spot, body type, black jacket, white shirt collar, duck's Bahookie hair doo, and are where they are supposed to be according to testimony, that's usually good enough for proof with credible researchers...I have no interest in obnoxious moot court silly games...
I see no evidence that the Sprague copy has been altered...
The 6th Floor Museum copy will show the same thing as Sprague...
-
You're just asking for proof of what's already been proven...
When the two men seen fast-walking up the extension are seen wearing the same clothes as Lovelady & Shelley, have the same plaid pattern, bald spot, body type, black jacket, white shirt collar, duck's Bahookie hair doo, and are where they are supposed to be according to testimony, that's usually good enough for proof with credible researchers...I have no interest in obnoxious moot court silly games...
I see no evidence that the Sprague copy has been altered...
The 6th Floor Museum copy will show the same thing as Sprague...
Brian, you obviously need some representation with an agent, say, Regnery Press, where I shopped around Leo Damore’s uh, vault back in ‘95. Al wisely turned me down, but I think he might take you on. Give it a go, tell him I sent you. What have you got to lose? Bring lots of AI printouts on Junior Jarman, might help a bit.
-
You're just asking for proof of what's already been proven...
When the two men seen fast-walking up the extension are seen wearing the same clothes as Lovelady & Shelley, have the same plaid pattern, bald spot, body type, black jacket, white shirt collar, duck's Bahookie hair doo, and are where they are supposed to be according to testimony, that's usually good enough for proof with credible researchers...I have no interest in obnoxious moot court silly games...
I see no evidence that the Sprague copy has been altered...
The 6th Floor Museum copy will show the same thing as Sprague...
Listen Brian, you're clearly not a stupid person but there is something a little unsavoury about your approach to this issue.
You constantly repeat that Shelley and Lovelady "are where they are supposed to be according to testimony" but this is a bare-faced lie. It's really not on, to keep repeating this ludicrous claim over and over. You have been challenged on this a number of times but you offer nothing but childish daydreams. The testimony you are referring to is their WC testimony. When it's pointed out to you that, according to their WC testimony, BOTH MEN stayed on the steps for at least 3 minutes before they left the steps you cry that the conspirators made them lie. But if that's the case how can they be where they are supposed to be "according to testimony"? I would like you to answer this question, but you won't, because you are not credible. You are a blowhard who refuses to back up his claims with any kind of evidence.
You also conveniently forget that, according to their WC testimonies, BOTH MEN ran across to the "little, old island" where they stayed for "a minute or two" before heading along the extension. How does that fit into your made-up nonsense?
You waffle on about Sandy Larsen's photo analysis but never provide a link or any kind of hint as to where anyone might find this. It wouldn't surprise me if all this analysis has somehow mysteriously disappeared and, by some miracle, you are the only one who remembers it.
Your opinion is based on a single image.
It is the Sprague image...the image being disputed in this thread.
There is no other image that supports the Sprague image even though there are many versions of the Couch footage. There is no other image that shows the detail in 'Lovelady's' shirt or his bald spot.
I believe you are lying when you suggest their are other images.
I find you lack any kind of credibility.
And that is truly disappointing.
I see no evidence that the Sprague copy has been altered...
This is the Sprague image below.
Do you notice the light square around the two men?
What do you think that is?
(https://i.postimg.cc/JzWQPSR5/Lovelady-Kemp2.png)
How is it that such a poor quality image can provide such amazing detail?
-
O'Meara wrote:
"This is the Sprague image below.
Do you notice the light square around the two men?
What do you think that is?"
I think it is a technical lightening feature Kamp inserted to emphasize who was being looked at...It has nothing to do with the photographic quality of the Sprague copy...
I believe the plaid pattern could be replicated in either the original Couch Film or 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
Larsen proved the plaid pattern in Lovelady's shirt in Sprague matched the plaid pattern on his shirt in other photos exactly...Larsen, after I told him that proved the timing of when Frazier said he was talking to Stanton on the steps, then went back and deleted his post on The Education Forum showing that match...This is a prime example of the playing field that currently exists on the JFK internet...
-
O'Meara wrote:
"This is the Sprague image below.
Do you notice the light square around the two men?
What do you think that is?"
I think it is a technical lightening feature Kamp inserted to emphasize who was being looked at...It has nothing to do with the photographic quality of the Sprague copy...
I believe the plaid pattern could be replicated in either the original Couch Film or 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
Larsen proved the plaid pattern in Lovelady's shirt in Sprague matched the plaid pattern on his shirt in other photos exactly...Larsen, after I told him that proved the timing of when Frazier said he was talking to Stanton on the steps, then went back and deleted his post on The Education Forum showing that match...This is a prime example of the playing field that currently exists on the JFK internet...
Can you please STOP with the name dropping? These people have NO IDEA who you are.
-
Kamp is being re-introduced to The Education Forum in a full Andrew Iler-endorsed glittering Cinderella carriage...The other ROKC knuckleheads are piling out of that glorified clown car and on to the forum...DiEugenio is his sponsoring Lord straight back from selling the Prayer Man hoax to Congress...
-
O'Meara wrote:
"This is the Sprague image below.
Do you notice the light square around the two men?
What do you think that is?"
I think it is a technical lightening feature Kamp inserted to emphasize who was being looked at...It has nothing to do with the photographic quality of the Sprague copy...
I believe the plaid pattern could be replicated in either the original Couch Film or 6th Floor Museum copy of Darnell...
Larsen proved the plaid pattern in Lovelady's shirt in Sprague matched the plaid pattern on his shirt in other photos exactly...Larsen, after I told him that proved the timing of when Frazier said he was talking to Stanton on the steps, then went back and deleted his post on The Education Forum showing that match...This is a prime example of the playing field that currently exists on the JFK internet...
" I THINK it is a technical lightening feature Kamp inserted to emphasize who was being looked at................."
If you are going to swear by that Sprague Image, YOU need to KNOW what exactly has been done to the image. Obviously you do Not. This is the problem with you Ed Forum Guys. You "blow off" without knowing what you are talking about.
-
Which is just saying something strongly without really saying anything...
I'm sure if we rose to your bait and investigated the lighter box around Lovelady & Shelley it would just be a simple highlighting box and not change anything...
-
Which is just saying something strongly without really saying anything...
I'm sure if we rose to your bait and investigated the lighter box around Lovelady & Shelley it would just be a simple highlighting box and not change anything...
If YOU are going to base your case on the Sprague Image, YOU should have already, ".....investigated the lighter box around Lovelady & Shelley". This is Not the Ed Forum.
-
If YOU are going to base your case on the Sprague Image, YOU should have already, ".....investigated the lighter box around Lovelady & Shelley". This is Not the Ed Forum.
Holding up a hoop and hurdle for others to jump through does not sound research make...
The person who lacks here the most is the one who has violated his own so-called standards and failed to show the highlight box was anything other than a highlight box...
-
Holding up a hoop and hurdle for others to jump through does not sound research make...
The person who lacks here the most is the one who has violated his own so-called standards and failed to show the highlight box was anything other than a highlight box...
Do you know what the title of this thread is?
-
I am at a loss because the research community is geared towards dishonesty and hiding of evidence...
Sandy Larsen decided to delete his excellent photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern because I told him it proved the timing of when Frazier was talking to Stanton...Larsen took one look at Couch/Darnell and realized Frazier was talking to Prayer Man at that moment and that he had refuted himself...So instead of admitting I was correct Larsen took the low route and deleted his analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern...
This is the research community Iler now enforces and no one said a word when Larsen deleted his own proof...
-
I am at a loss because the research community is geared towards dishonesty and hiding of evidence...
Sandy Larsen decided to delete his excellent photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern because I told him it proved the timing of when Frazier was talking to Stanton...Larsen took one look at Couch/Darnell and realized Frazier was talking to Prayer Man at that moment and that he had refuted himself...So instead of admitting I was correct Larsen took the low route and deleted his analysis of Lovelady's plaid pattern...
This is the research community Iler now enforces and no one said a word when Larsen deleted his own proof...
This ain't the Ed. Forum. You consistently "name drop" people most of us here have No Idea who you are talking about. Just admit all you got is diddly squat.
-
Says the guy who points to a man with an obviously more squat body over by the steps and calls him Shelley...
That's Kamp territory...
-
Says the guy who points to a man with an obviously more squat body over by the steps and calls him Shelley...
That's Kamp territory...
We have the Lovelady ID cold. That's ALL that is needed. He's standing almost exactly where we see him on Altgens 6. This is why You run away from the Lovelady ID and harp on Shelley. Lovelady can Not be standing on those front steps and walking down the Elm St Extension at the same time.
And keep in mind that Shelley is middle aged.
-
When you tell the Education Forum that we need the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell they do their best to not get it...
-
When you tell the Education Forum that we need the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy of Darnell they do their best to not get it...
NBC NOW Knows they screwed the pooch when they gave the OK to release that Darnell 1st Generation :20 Copy. That revealed the driver of Camera Car #2 standing outside of the car BEFORE Officer Baker ran across the Island. Those few frames destroyed a 62+ yr old timeline that was made up to hide the JFK Limo STOP/ROLLING STOP and the Officer Baker/Oswald lunchroom confrontation. Oswald was calmly sitting inside that lunchroom well after the kill shot.
This is exactly why O'Meara is digging into this timeline. That driver standing outside of Camera Car #2 reveals that those cars were Stopped for an extended time period. THEN came Officer Baker running across the Island toward the TSBD. Those that Mickey Moused this timeline have passed. The newbees over at NBC have no idea what was done before them. Or why.
-
Gloria Calvery was the main meter...
She and Carol Reed reacted in an adrenaline rush of panic after seeing Kennedy's brains blown out in front of them and they ran back to the steps...
Don't imagine that took more than 17 seconds...
Couch/Darnell has generally been accepted as being 25 to 30 seconds after the shots...
Kamp believes Couch/Darnell is 17-20 seconds after the shots...
-
Gloria Calvery was the main meter...
She and Carol Reed reacted in an adrenaline rush of panic after seeing Kennedy's brains blown out in front of them and they ran back to the steps...
Don't imagine that took more than 17 seconds...
Couch/Darnell has generally been accepted as being 25 to 30 seconds after the shots...
Kamp believes Couch/Darnell is 17-20 seconds after the shots...
Stop putting words in your "imaginary buddy"/Kamp's mouth. If you look at a good copy of the Wiegman Film, those women are still standing along Elm St like ducks-inna-row. There is No Break in that "picket line" they had going along the sidewalk. Do some research and Stop your never ending name dropping.
-
Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension and Baker are also other meters...
-
Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension and Baker are also other meters...
Whoever those 2 Guys are, they are definitely Not "fast walking". How many facts can you screw up?
-
Jim DiEugenio's man Bart Kamp is on The Education Forum quoting FBI defamation against conspiracy witness Shirley Martin- just to show you who Kamp is...
Next thing you know he'll be quoting Von Pein...
-
Jim DiEugenio's man Bart Kamp is on The Education Forum quoting FBI defamation against conspiracy witness Shirley Martin- just to show you who Kamp is...
Next thing you know he'll be quoting Von Pein...
Name Drop, Name Drop, Name Drop. Give it a rest. Nobody needs to "quote" Von Pein. He posts here and responds to messages sent via this Forum.
-
Not the first time Kamp has used FBI records to defame a key conspiracy witness...
He did the same thing with Carolyn Arnold...
-
Kamp has free access to The Education Forum...
Kamp libeled me on the "Ciphered Past" podcast, ridiculing me and saying I offered no evidence...That is completely untrue and the truth is I offered the most and best evidence on the Prayer Man subject than anyone...
This is how the clique operates...They self-describe themselves as practicing the best research practices...They lie about and ignore evidence...And Kamp never appears in a place where there is an opposition that makes him answer that evidence...
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png[/img]
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
(http://h[img)
DAN - Have you looked at the Gerda Dunckel Gif of the 2 guys in question?
It is on YOU TUBE. The title is - "Gerda Dunckel Gif" By Prayer Man (:13)
I believe this Dunckel Gif gives us a better look at the hair of the alleged Lovelady figure. To me, the hair does Not match the hair and the style of Lovelady.
-
The two men are plainly Shelley and Lovelady...
-
The two men are plainly Shelley and Lovelady...
Egad, Albert………… you don’t think those two could possibly be……………
HARVEY & LEE ???
……..to be continued next post
-
The two men are plainly Shelley and Lovelady...
You base this 'conclusion' on the single, doctored image that is the subject of this thread. You have been asked to present a shred of any other evidence to support your 'conclusion' and have failed to do so.
It is physically impossible for the two men to be Shelley and Lovelady if they waited for Gloria, listened to her story, went across to the concrete spur dividing the two Elm Streets and then made their way along the Elm Street extension where they were supposedly filmed.
It's physically impossible.
It must be noted that the subject of this thread can be summed up by this question - how could the washed out, inferior Sprague image contain such a wealth of amazing detail on 'Lovelady's' shirt?
The answer is...it can't.
Far superior images, containing far more information, show none of this detail or the famous bald spot. This is proof the Sprague image has been faked to give the impression it is Lovelady walking along the extension.
This faked image, and this alone, is the source of Brian's identification.
-
I have advised Albert on more than one occasion to team up with another ‘doorwayman’ expert, Ralph Sink. Ralph would bankroll the film, Doyle writes the screenplay, who knows what might happen? a may-December romance perhaps? we’ll see, huh?
-
Graves is in omission by not chiming-in and confirming that we have proven the woman on the steps in Couch/Darnell is Gloria Calvery...
You are entering a falsehood when you say Shelley stopped and talked to Clavery on the concrete divider...He did not do so...He spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps and then took off up the extension with Lovelady...
If you watch the zoomed Gerda Dunckel slow motion clip Shelley pulls up and talks to Karen Hicks as she ran by...THAT is what got morphed in to talking to Calvery at the concrete divider...
You are just repeating the same disproven falsehoods...
The pattern match in Lovelady's shirt was enough for any credible, serious researcher...
-
Graves is in omission by not chiming-in and confirming that we have proven the woman on the steps in Couch/Darnell is Gloria Calvery...
That identification has been discussed in detail on this thread and elsewhere.
You are entering a falsehood when you say Shelley stopped and talked to Clavery on the concrete divider...He did not do so...He spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps and then took off up the extension with Lovelady...
There is so much wrong with this it's hard to believe.
1] I have never said Shelley stopped and talked with Calvery on the concrete divider.
2] I have only repeated the information in his affidavit, given a couple of hours after the assassination. After the shots he ran across to the concrete divider and ran into Gloria who was coming the other way
3] He did not speak with Gloria at the base of the steps
4] After interacting with Gloria they did not go up the extension. They went across to the concrete divider, THEN up the extension..
So much wrong in so few words.
Every time you wander into actual evidence or testimony you end up looking like someone who doesn't have a clue what's going on. You should stick to just inventing fantasies and insisting they are facts. You're really goo at that.
Speaking of which...
If you watch the zoomed Gerda Dunckel slow motion clip Shelley pulls up and talks to Karen Hicks as she ran by...THAT is what got morphed in to talking to Calvery at the concrete divider...
Utter nonsense. Made up, fantastical nonsense. This really is your strong point
You are just repeating the same disproven falsehoods...
The pattern match in Lovelady's shirt was enough for any credible, serious researcher...
So you admit that you've based your conclusion on this single, faked image.
How credible are you? :D
-
That YOU TUBE "Gerda Dunckel Gif" also clearly shows: (1) The "Getaway Car" parked alongside the Island, and, (2) The (L) "Tail Light" of a car parked on the TSBD SIDE of the Elm St Extension. That "Tail Light" is clearly Not connected to this Getaway Car as has been previously claimed.
-
The JFK internet is so corrupted that no one asks Malcolm Blunt what he thinks of Bart Kamp's Prayer Man garbage and no one even mentions it...This subject is protected by the bias of the research community while Andrew Iler passes himself off as credible...
-
There's nothing stopping Kamp from posting here...
He doesn't do it because he can't defend his BS with censorship here like he does everywhere else...
-
There's nothing stopping Kamp from posting here...
He doesn't do it because he can't defend his BS with censorship here like he does everywhere else...
Steve Barber and Alex Harris/"The JFK Theorist" grace this forum with their JFK Assassination opinions from time-to-time. Other than that, anyone else of standing in the JFK Assassination Research Community that has posted here was immediately dog piled. And this dates all the way back to Gary Mack.
-
It pains me to see the punk hoaxer researcher Bart Kamp referred to as "Of Standing"...
These people ridicule you on their podcasts and then when you ask for equal airtime to defend yourself threaten you with legal action just for asking...
-
It pains me to see the punk hoaxer researcher Bart Kamp referred to as "Of Standing"...
These people ridicule you on their podcasts and then when you ask for equal airtime to defend yourself threaten you with legal action just for asking...
It's amazing how much you denigrate Kamp and his work, yet it forms the basis for the totality of your opinion regarding the subject of this thread.
You refer to him as the "punk hoaxer" yet accept his Lovelady identification as gospel.
#doublestandards
#credibility
-
It's amazing how much you denigrate Kamp and his work, yet it forms the basis for the totality of your opinion regarding the subject of this thread.
You refer to him as the "punk hoaxer" yet accept his Lovelady identification as gospel.
#doublestandards
#credibility
He wants Kamp to acknowledge him. In reality, he's a Kamp Groupie.
-
Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton and they know it...
That's why Kamp hasn't mentioned it once since his return to the forum...
But being a dirty clique they still keep you banned...
It is not very honest of them...
'Ciphered Past' mocks and ridicules you but then denies you air-time at the threat of legal action to show your evidence...
Iler has posted a new rule...Garbage evidence that is used to destroy the research community's reputation is now encouraged and protected...Brilliant refutation of that evidence that leads to the discovery of our generation gets life banning on made-up non existent rules...Favoritism of punk researchers OK...Serious evidence argument never tolerated...
Yet this ugly business doesn't stop the apostate researcher Jim DiEugenio from taking it to Congress...
-
Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton and they know it...
That's why Kamp hasn't mentioned it once since his return to the forum...
But being a dirty clique they still keep you banned...
It is not very honest of them...
'Ciphered Past' mocks and ridicules you but then denies you air-time at the threat of legal action to show your evidence...
Iler has posted a new rule...Garbage evidence that is used to destroy the research community's reputation is now encouraged and protected...Brilliant refutation of that evidence that leads to the discovery of our generation gets life banning on made-up non existent rules...Favoritism of punk researchers OK...Serious evidence argument never tolerated...
Yet this ugly business doesn't stop the apostate researcher Jim DiEugenio from taking it to Congress...
Yet you still swallow down Kamp's work as gospel.
Go figure.
-
Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt...When I explained to Larsen that he himself had just proven the timing of when Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton Larsen responded by going back to his photo analysis of the plaid bars and deleting it...When I confronted Larsen for that in an e-mail he responded by saying "You and I will never agree"...But that wasn't what I asked him...I didn't ask him if we would ever agree, I asked him if he had proven the timing of when Frazier was facing Sarah Stanton by proving when Lovelady was fast-walking up the extension...The membership of The Education Forum not only allowed Larsen to get away with that rank dishonesty but they also didn't even notice or care when told...That means Sandy was the kind of person who, like DiEugenio, knowingly, with intent, allows an innocent researcher to be unfairly banned for good evidence and doesn't care as long as he prevails...They have Mark Knight always on reserve to make sure the victim is punished and the real issue is ignored...Andrew Iler then role plays being a strict enforcer of highly principled standards - but all he really is is a DiEugenio shill...The Education Forum is a dirty board where the Prayer Man people are always going to be assisted out of their malicious misconduct by dirty moderation...Commit rogue moral violations against good research and good researchers and the clique will praise you right on cue...
-
Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt...When I explained to Larsen that he himself had just proven the timing of when Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton Larsen responded by going back to his photo analysis of the plaid bars and deleting it...When I confronted Larsen for that in an e-mail he responded by saying "You and I will never agree"...But that wasn't what I asked him...I didn't ask him if we would ever agree, I asked him if he had proven the timing of when Frazier was facing Sarah Stanton by proving when Lovelady was fast-walking up the extension...The membership of The Education Forum not only allowed Larsen to get away with that rank dishonesty but they also didn't even notice or care when told...That means Sandy was the kind of person who, like DiEugenio, knowingly, with intent, allows an innocent researcher to be unfairly banned for good evidence and doesn't care as long as he prevails...They have Mark Knight always on reserve to make sure the victim is punished and the real issue is ignored...Andrew Iler then role plays being a strict enforcer of highly principled standards - but all he really is is a DiEugenio shill...The Education Forum is a dirty board where the Prayer Man people are always going to be assisted out of their malicious misconduct by dirty moderation...Commit rogue moral violations against good research and good researchers and the clique will praise you right on cue...
There were many plaid shirts floating around Dealey Plaza that day. We just had someone on another thread post a photo of people inside the railroad yard immediately after the assassination. There's a guy on the periphery of this photo wearing a plaid shirt very similar to the Lovelady shirt. Personally, I believe if you look at the "Gerda Dunckel Gif" of those 2 Guys walking down the Elm St Extension, the alleged Lovelady figure has a different hairline, (maybe haircut), around his (L) ear than Lovelady had. A physical characteristic carries far more weight than an ID based on a cheap plaid shirt.
-
Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt...When I explained to Larsen that he himself had just proven the timing of when Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton Larsen responded by going back to his photo analysis of the plaid bars and deleting it...When I confronted Larsen for that in an e-mail he responded by saying "You and I will never agree"...But that wasn't what I asked him...I didn't ask him if we would ever agree, I asked him if he had proven the timing of when Frazier was facing Sarah Stanton by proving when Lovelady was fast-walking up the extension...The membership of The Education Forum not only allowed Larsen to get away with that rank dishonesty but they also didn't even notice or care when told...That means Sandy was the kind of person who, like DiEugenio, knowingly, with intent, allows an innocent researcher to be unfairly banned for good evidence and doesn't care as long as he prevails...They have Mark Knight always on reserve to make sure the victim is punished and the real issue is ignored...Andrew Iler then role plays being a strict enforcer of highly principled standards - but all he really is is a DiEugenio shill...The Education Forum is a dirty board where the Prayer Man people are always going to be assisted out of their malicious misconduct by dirty moderation...Commit rogue moral violations against good research and good researchers and the clique will praise you right on cue...
Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt..
I find this very difficult to believe.
If this were true you would have pointed us to this evidence.
It would not surprise me if this turned out to be another of your fantasies but I'm open to being proven wrong.
If you can really provide another clear piece of analysis that shows Lovelady's shirt and that is nothing to do with the Sprague print I will concede that it is Lovelady and Shelley on the Elm Street extension, even though it flies in the face of all other available evidence and appears to be a physical impossibility.
Where can I find Larsen's analysis?
-
I find this very difficult to believe.
If this were true you would have pointed us to this evidence.
It would not surprise me if this turned out to be another of your fantasies but I'm open to being proven wrong.
If you can really provide another clear piece of analysis that shows Lovelady's shirt and that is nothing to do with the Sprague print I will concede that it is Lovelady and Shelley on the Elm Street extension, even though it flies in the face of all other available evidence and appears to be a physical impossibility.
Where can I find Larsen's analysis?
Sandy deleted it about 7 years ago...
Surely there has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers that analysis...
Clique membership requires the members to pretend they don't remember it...
Sandy then doubled down by saying the woman's dress neckline in the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy of Darnell was a CIA forgery designed to conceal Oswald work shirt collar...They let Larsen get away with that and Iler is preventing any honest discussion of Sandy's pathetic move...
-
Sandy Larsen matched the plaid bars on Lovelady's shirt to those on the shirt of the man going up the extension beyond any reasonable doubt..
I find this very difficult to believe.
If this were true you would have pointed us to this evidence.
It would not surprise me if this turned out to be another of your fantasies but I'm open to being proven wrong.
If you can really provide another clear piece of analysis that shows Lovelady's shirt and that is nothing to do with the Sprague print I will concede that it is Lovelady and Shelley on the Elm Street extension, even though it flies in the face of all other available evidence and appears to be a physical impossibility.
Where can I find Larsen's analysis?
It's to the point now that anyone that does Not agree with you is producing a "fantasy". That's tired and plain weak. You're better than this. I've seen it.
-
It's to the point now that anyone that does Not agree with you is producing a "fantasy". That's tired and plain weak. You're better than this. I've seen it.
Anyone who makes up things that aren't true and insists they are true is a fantasist.
That's you Royell.
It's got nothing to do with agreeing or not agreeing with me.
You don't agree with reality. That's the problem.
Your constant insistence that Weigman can be seen running across the knoll in the Bell film is utterly bizarre. It's delusional. It has nothing to do with agreeing with me.
This forum is littered with the nonsense you have made up out of thin air and that you insist must be treated seriously.
Making up fantasies has got nothing to do with agreeing with me.
So you can stop crying about that, grow up and join the real world.
PS: I had a funny feeling Brian wasn't going to able to back up his claim about Sandy Larsen and it appears to be the case. But I stated that I would be willing to concede the point if he did so and that is still the case. That's called being reasonable, Royell. Give it a try some time.
-
Anyone who makes up things that aren't true and insists they are true is a fantasist.
That's you Royell.
It's got nothing to do with agreeing or not agreeing with me.
You don't agree with reality. That's the problem.
Your constant insistence that Weigman can be seen running across the knoll in the Bell film is utterly bizarre. It's delusional. It has nothing to do with agreeing with me.
This forum is littered with the nonsense you have made up out of thin air and that you insist must be treated seriously.
Making up fantasies has got nothing to do with agreeing with me.
So you can stop crying about that, grow up and join the real world.
PS: I had a funny feeling Brian wasn't going to able to back up his claim about Sandy Larsen and it appears to be the case. But I stated that I would be willing to concede the point if he did so and that is still the case. That's called being reasonable, Royell. Give it a try some time.
SEARCH "YOU TUBE"
I've helped you with sourcing numerous times. Going way back to the better def Lovelady images. You wouldn't even be aware of "The JFK Theorist" if it weren't for me. And now I am encouraging You to familiarize yourself with a Hi Def copy of the Couch Film. The Couch Film shows Wiegman running down the Knoll. The Couch Film shows Wiegman (W) of where we see him on the Bell Film. And this is only seconds later. You gotta have a broad based knowledge of the image evidence in order to connect the dots. Same goes for your currently attempting to time stamp the Darnell film footage. Like I said, you are very good with the main players in front of the TSBD. You get outside of that and you are hurting. I also believe, to date, the assassination film copies you have eyeballed are Old and definition challenged. This is why you and others for decades believed Wiegman was laying across the steps. The clearer Bell Film images show Wiegman is NOT on the steps, and he is Not facing Mrs Hester above him. Wiegman is on the grass. Just look below the Bench on the (R). This will show you where the steps End and the ground begins.
-
PS: I had a funny feeling Brian wasn't going to able to back up his claim about Sandy Larsen and it appears to be the case.
That is why such corruption is so wrong...It punishes the victim and establishes a dishonest norm...
There has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers Larsen's photo analysis of the plaid bars...
-
That is why such corruption is so wrong...It punishes the victim and establishes a dishonest norm...
There has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers Larsen's photo analysis of the plaid bars...
Was Larsen's analysis of the same doctored image you base your own identification on?
-
The image isn't doctored...This will be proven by obtaining the original Darnell film and showing the exact same plaid pattern on the original film...People who claim alteration where there was no alteration (Sandy Larsen) condemn themselves to Cinque land...
Larsen's image was better than Kamp's and I assume Larsen somehow got the original or accessed technology that was better able to resolve the current copy...The image Larsen used for his analysis zoomed closer in to the plaid and managed to capture the exact alternating red, black, white, and brown plaid bars and their uniqueness and then perfectly match them to the bars seen on Lovelady's plaid in other photos...The match was perfect and was proof beyond a doubt...Proof that shows you and Royell are full of it...When I told Larsen that he had therefore indirectly proven the time that Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton by locating Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension Larsen went back and deleted his Education Forum thread containing the photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid bars...There is nothing too low for the clique on The Education Forum and they always get to rule on themselves and their own rank dishonesty...Iler is now enforcing that corruption and has the nerve to do it under a so-called strict set of rules...Jim DiEugenio is the Trump-like leader of that clique who managed to parlay that sordid corruption all the way to the point of presenting a knowingly-false Prayer Man theory before Congress...
Just to show how dishonest The Education Forum is the clique doesn't speak up and admit Larsen's original photo analysis or his dishonest deletion of it...And those people are judging ME!...You'll never see the rank hypocrite Mark Knight comment on this business or its significance in regard to The Education Forum's so-called purpose and rules...Knight is too busy banning for life the researcher who discovered the conspiracy evidence discovery of our generation on false rules violation charges...And the clique doesn't mind...
-
I totally agree with you, Albert. And furthermore, that reopenkennedycase place never did you no favours, either. And furtherevenMORE, that deep politics forum
writing about ‘The Albert Doyle Operation’ (it’s right on top of the search engine! even above ‘Sherlock Holmes’ aka Conan Doyle-lol) really sunk pretty low, with Drago, Burnham & Co. leading the charge. I mean, the nerve of some people.
-
The image isn't doctored...This will be proven by obtaining the original Darnell film and showing the exact same plaid pattern on the original film...People who claim alteration where there was no alteration (Sandy Larsen) condemn themselves to Cinque land...
Larsen's image was better than Kamp's and I assume Larsen somehow got the original or accessed technology that was better able to resolve the current copy...The image Larsen used for his analysis zoomed closer in to the plaid and managed to capture the exact alternating red, black, white, and brown plaid bars and their uniqueness and then perfectly match them to the bars seen on Lovelady's plaid in other photos...The match was perfect and was proof beyond a doubt...Proof that shows you and Royell are full of it...When I told Larsen that he had therefore indirectly proven the time that Frazier said he was standing and staring in shock at Sarah Stanton by locating Lovelady & Shelley fast-walking up the extension Larsen went back and deleted his Education Forum thread containing the photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid bars...There is nothing too low for the clique on The Education Forum and they always get to rule on themselves and their own rank dishonesty...Iler is now enforcing that corruption and has the nerve to do it under a so-called strict set of rules...Jim DiEugenio is the Trump-like leader of that clique who managed to parlay that sordid corruption all the way to the point of presenting a knowingly-false Prayer Man theory before Congress...
Just to show how dishonest The Education Forum is the clique doesn't speak up and admit Larsen's original photo analysis or his dishonest deletion of it...And those people are judging ME!...You'll never see the rank hypocrite Mark Knight comment on this business or its significance in regard to The Education Forum's so-called purpose and rules...Knight is too busy banning for life the researcher who discovered the conspiracy evidence discovery of our generation on false rules violation charges...And the clique doesn't mind...
You are the one who is full of it.
Do you really think you can claim evidence you can't provide and probably doesn't exist?
What if everything you are saying is a lie? How do we know it isn't?
You've already lost all credibility regarding this topic and this claim about Larsen seems desperate and far-fetched.
And just to clarify, the image IS doctored. That's not in dispute. You have based your identification on this single, doctored image. That's not in dispute either.
What is in dispute is your dubious claim about Larsen's work.
Please provide evidence. Your word counts for nothing.
-
The plaid bars and Lovelady's visible bald spot are not doctored...Neither is Shelley's Duck's Bahookie hair doo, black jacket, and white shirt collar...This is why the corruption on The Education Forum is so wickedly evil...Because it poisons and harms the phony academic standard that website pretends to uphold...Mark Knight is like a dirty small town sheriff who always does the job he's expected to do with his rulings and avoids recognizing the dishonest corruption of the people he's ruling in favor of...The membership pretends to avoid it as well...Simkin then puts on that phony Oxford/Cambridge above it all intellectual act and skates past the issue that he is fully responsible for as if he doesn't notice...The current Couch/Darnell film is good enough for any credible researcher to realize the pair fast-walking up the extension are already long proven to be Shelley and Lovelady and that anyone doubting it is basically trolling and marring good progress of research...The Education Forum refuses to answer for the correct evidence on Prayer Man that proves Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...This one thing alone discredits all the self-platitudes they assign themselves as far as credibility...
The Education Forum gets away with the murder of switching the issue from the rotten dishonesty of Sandy Larsen and his deletion of evidence that disproved himself to a witch-hunt against the researcher who single-handedly out-argued the board on its favorite pet theory...The dishonest scoundrel who pushed that theory (Bart Kamp) is now safely a member while he still hasn't admitted the obvious evidence that refuted him...Mark Knight has been allowed to disappear the entire issue by means of bullying and vindictive moderation disguised as high-minded academic moderation and ban the person with the correct evidence for life on trumped-up BS designed to protect the wrong-doers...Knight is not made to answer for how his wrongful moderation has prevented exposure of the most important evidence discovery of our generation nor is that very important discovery ever shown on the forum...Jim DiEugenio is shilled and pampered by a membership that honors his taking a theory that he already admitted to me was false and bringing it to Congress...This dubious process endangers the credibility of JFK Assassination research - but that doesn't bother Jim D because he is an entity that always manages to get bailed out by his own wordsmithing and the corrupt sycophants who always endorse it...This is all capped-off by the ultimate insult to injury of Andrew Iler having total power and pretending he has addressed all this with a dignified set of rules, when all he is is just another Jim DiEugenio butt-******...There has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers Larsen's photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid bars...The main thrust of that forum is not good research...It is organized dishonesty and may they be damned for it...
-
The plaid bars and Lovelady's visible bald spot are not doctored...Neither is Shelley's Duck's Bahookie hair doo, black jacket, and white shirt collar...This is why the corruption on The Education Forum is so wickedly evil...Because it poisons and harms the phony academic standard that website pretends to uphold...Mark Knight is like a dirty small town sheriff who always does the job he's expected to do with his rulings and avoids recognizing the dishonest corruption of the people he's ruling in favor of...The membership pretends to avoid it as well...Simkin then puts on that phony Oxford/Cambridge above it all intellectual act and skates past the issue that he is fully responsible for as if he doesn't notice...The current Couch/Darnell film is good enough for any credible researcher to realize the pair fast-walking up the extension are already long proven to be Shelley and Lovelady and that anyone doubting it is basically trolling and marring good progress of research...The Education Forum refuses to answer for the correct evidence on Prayer Man that proves Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...This one thing alone discredits all the self-platitudes they assign themselves as far as credibility...
The Education Forum gets away with the murder of switching the issue from the rotten dishonesty of Sandy Larsen and his deletion of evidence that disproved himself to a witch-hunt against the researcher who single-handedly out-argued the board on its favorite pet theory...The dishonest scoundrel who pushed that theory (Bart Kamp) is now safely a member while he still hasn't admitted the obvious evidence that refuted him...Mark Knight has been allowed to disappear the entire issue by means of bullying and vindictive moderation disguised as high-minded academic moderation and ban the person with the correct evidence for life on trumped-up BS designed to protect the wrong-doers...Knight is not made to answer for how his wrongful moderation has prevented exposure of the most important evidence discovery of our generation nor is that very important discovery ever shown on the forum...Jim DiEugenio is shilled and pampered by a membership that honors his taking a theory that he already admitted to me was false and bringing it to Congress...This dubious process endangers the credibility of JFK Assassination research - but that doesn't bother Jim D because he is an entity that always manages to get bailed out by his own wordsmithing and the corrupt sycophants who always endorse it...This is all capped-off by the ultimate insult to injury of Andrew Iler having total power and pretending he has addressed all this with a dignified set of rules, when all he is is just another Jim DiEugenio butt-******...There has to be someone on The Education Forum who remembers Larsen's photo analysis of Lovelady's plaid bars...The main thrust of that forum is not good research...It is organized dishonesty and may they be damned for it...
You have just been confronted with being a Liar. And what do you do? YOU refuse to take the stand. "GUILTY" as charged.
-
I totally agree with you, Albert. And furthermore, that reopenkennedycase place never did you no favours, either. And furtherevenMORE, that deep politics forum
writing about ‘The Albert Doyle Operation’ (it’s right on top of the search engine! even above ‘Sherlock Holmes’ aka Conan Doyle-lol) really sunk pretty low, with Drago, Burnham & Co. leading the charge. I mean, the nerve of some people.
ROKC still exists under the new "Jacks" website...Tony Chrome runs it..."Jacks" is on a private setting and does not reach the public...The reason the ex-Greg Parker gang hides on Jacks is because they know their content is rubbish and they don't want to answer for it by showing it to the public...I was allowed to post there for several years...I was banned a few months ago when Kamp posted a demand that I be removed and Chrome dutifully obeyed it as Kamp's docile servant...Kamp barks orders and Chrome goes on his knees and does Kamp's bidding...The reason Kamp demanded my banning is because they thought the Luna Committee was close to obtaining the original films and they didn't want me present on the board to take credit...Greg Parker retired his ROKC website because he's fully aware he's a crazy evidence hacker and troll...He was never serious and therefore he quit...Banning is how those cowards operate...Kamp has no problem with his membership on The Education Forum...
Peter Lemkin sent me a Private Message saying no more posting about The Education Forum or I would be banned...This is the same Lemkin who erased The Deep Politics Forum rules that protected members...Those rules were written precisely to keep Lemkin and the DPF moderators from abusing members with their moderator power...Lemkin oversaw their removal and there are no more member- protecting rules...So Lemkin is no different than Donald Trump...Lemkin never apologized to me or admitted I was right on Prayer Man...I think Magda is the only reason I am allowed to post there but she has an annoying habit of not being present in matters like the above...Lemkin now moderates because he has a moderator avatar and what he says goes simply because he says so...I think they are delusional that they haven't destroyed the Deep Politics Forum because of that and even DiEugenio prefers The Education Forum and doesn't post there...It used to be a moderation issue if you posted over on the EF but now Lemkin has knuckled under and conceded to the EF and fraternizers who prefer to post there instead of the DPF...Lemkin prefers to bash a scapegoat while not answering to any rules instead...Or answering to the actual issues upon which that persecution was based...These people would rather destroy an entire website than admit they were wrong on Prayer Man...The Deep Politics Website was formed in opposition to The Education Forum...Lemkin has now reversed that with no accountability while attacking the guy who did what DPF was designed to do from its inception...
-
Ya know what I think ? Well I’m gonna tell you anyhow. I think there ought to be some kind of award for the best living conspiracy buff/kook/theorist that’s still alive. The Dead List is too long. So what would be the criteria in order to be “nominated”?
Let’s call it The Tony Marsh Award, since we don’t know if he’s dead or not. Which hero should we nominate ? Should I start ? No, you first, hero ! maybe a poll ?
-
Below are two cropped images designed to emphasise that the Sprague image, from which Kemp got his incredibly detailed Lovelady image, has been tampered with.
The top image is a crop from the Sprague image (note the light square around the two figures on the Elm Street extension. This alone should have alarm bells ringing).
The bottom image is a crop of a screen grab from "4 Days in November".
It is beyond question that the 4 Days image is far superior in quality and the amount of information it contains than the Sprague image. Look at the lattice pattern on the TSBD building wall. It is not visible in the Sprague image. There is a car parked next to the building which is barely visible it's so washed out in the Sprague image but is clearly visible in the 4 Days image.
Yet it is from the washed out Sprague image that the super-fine detail of 'Lovelady's' shirt emerges when none of this detail is present in the far superior 4 Days image.
This is proof the Sprague image has been faked.
(https://i.postimg.cc/tTRvmjfS/Kemp4Days-Combo.png)
-
The Sprague enhancement is better for bringing out Lovelady's plaid pattern and Shelley's white shirt collar...(And Lovelady's bald spot)...None of these have been doctored and they will appear exactly the same on the original film...
I'm sure this issue would be more solved than it already has been if the original celluloid were gotten and scanned...
The Prayer Man people are cheaters because they hold back and don't participate in further examining the evidence...Instead they ban and censor in order to protect their dirty clique...The Education Forum is all a group of sycophants and friends so when they cheat and with-hold evidence they get encouraged and rewarded on the forum...Being internet hacks, they make it a personal school yard contest that they take a little too much pleasure in but that doesn't stop them from selling themselves as serious researchers...Somehow Larsen managed to enhance Lovelady's plaid bars better than Kamp did and their irregular pattern matched perfectly beyond a doubt ending the issue...When I managed to get a message past the censorship filters the clique sets up for people who disprove them and told Larsen he had just proven the time Frazier was staring in shock at Sarah Stanton instead of admitting this evidence he went back and deleted his photo analysis of the plaid bars...
The two men are obviously Shelley & Lovelady...
-
Below are two cropped images designed to emphasise that the Sprague image, from which Kemp got his incredibly detailed Lovelady image, has been tampered with.
The top image is a crop from the Sprague image (note the light square around the two figures on the Elm Street extension. This alone should have alarm bells ringing).
The bottom image is a crop of a screen grab from "4 Days in November".
It is beyond question that the 4 Days image is far superior in quality and the amount of information it contains than the Sprague image. Look at the lattice pattern on the TSBD building wall. It is not visible in the Sprague image. There is a car parked next to the building which is barely visible it's so washed out in the Sprague image but is clearly visible in the 4 Days image.
Yet it is from the washed out Sprague image that the super-fine detail of 'Lovelady's' shirt emerges when none of this detail is present in the far superior 4 Days image.
This is proof the Sprague image has been faked.
(https://i.postimg.cc/tTRvmjfS/Kemp4Days-Combo.png)
Have you examined the Gerda Dunckel Gifs over on You Tube? I prefer the "Gerda Dunckel Gif 2".
I believe her Gifs show both figures are Not Lovelady and Shelley. The images provide better defined views of both guys hairlines and (L) ears. These gifs do not directly address the Lovelady shirt issue, but if that is Not Lovelady, that is Not his plaid shirt.
-
The Sprague enhancement is better for bringing out Lovelady's plaid pattern and Shelley's white shirt collar...(And Lovelady's bald spot)...None of these have been doctored and they will appear exactly the same on the original film...
I'm sure this issue would be more solved than it already has been if the original celluloid were gotten and scanned...
The Prayer Man people are cheaters because they hold back and don't participate in further examining the evidence...Instead they ban and censor in order to protect their dirty clique...The Education Forum is all a group of sycophants and friends so when they cheat and with-hold evidence they get encouraged and rewarded on the forum...Being internet hacks, they make it a personal school yard contest that they take a little too much pleasure in but that doesn't stop them from selling themselves as serious researchers...Somehow Larsen managed to enhance Lovelady's plaid bars better than Kamp did and their irregular pattern matched perfectly beyond a doubt ending the issue...When I managed to get a message past the censorship filters the clique sets up for people who disprove them and told Larsen he had just proven the time Frazier was staring in shock at Sarah Stanton instead of admitting this evidence he went back and deleted his photo analysis of the plaid bars...
The two men are obviously Shelley & Lovelady...
The Sprague enhancement is better for bringing out Lovelady's plaid pattern and Shelley's white shirt collar
How is it better?
How is the more washed out image, that has far less detail, better for bringing out fine detail?
How is that better than the far clearer image that has far more detail in it?
What you're saying makes zero sense.
There is hardly any fine detail in the Sprague image except inside the suspicious lighter square that contains the two men.
Why is it none of this fine detail present in the superior 4 Days image or any other version I can find?
No fine detail on the shirt.
No bald spot.
This is clear proof the Sprague image has been doctored.
-
You can see the plaid pattern in Sprague...You can't in the other image...
You are asking diversionary questions...
The original will show the plaid pattern exactly as Larsen showed it...
-
You can see the plaid pattern in Sprague...You can't in the other image...
You are asking diversionary questions...
The original will show the plaid pattern exactly as Larsen showed it...
You can see the plaid pattern in Sprague...You can't in the other image...
:D :D :D
So, just in case I'm not understanding your reply...
...when I ask, how can there be more detail in the washed out and less detail in the clearer image, your reply is that we can see the detail in the washed out image and we can't see the detail in the clearer image... ;D
You are clearly struggling to understand what is happening here.
It is impossible for the washed out image that has far less detail to show more detail than the clear image that has more detail.
The only way this is possible is for the washed out image to be manipulated/doctored/faked.
It's the only way.
Do you understand this very simple principle?
-
What you are saying isn't accurate...
The Sprague copy shows the plaid pattern better...
You are conspicuously avoiding discussing the fact that the scanned original would really show Lovelady's plaid pattern...
-
It’s a shame a stereoscopic camera wasn’t used here, that would solve everything. I still say it’s Harvey and Lee discussing where to have a bite to eat later on.
-
Once you clear out the time-wasting noise and faux debate and recognize that the men are Lovelady & Shelley then you can orient the timing of Couch/Darnell and match it to Frazier's statements that he was facing Sarah Stanton at that moment as seen in Darnell...
Internet JFK researchers are a bunch of nuts and egotists who are more interested in avoiding the evidence than responsibly recognizing it...
-
Once you clear out the time-wasting noise and faux debate and recognize that the men are Lovelady & Shelley then you can orient the timing of Couch/Darnell and match it to Frazier's statements that he was facing Sarah Stanton at that moment as seen in Darnell...
Internet JFK researchers are a bunch of nuts and egotists who are more interested in avoiding the evidence than responsibly recognizing it...
The variable here that is Never addressed, would be DPD Officer Smith also being filmed well down the Elm St Extension at the same time that these 2 Guys were filmed. Officer Smith was positioned on Houston St, had to be told about shots being fired through the bushes on the Elm St Extension, at which point Smith then ran around the corner and started checking the bushes along the Elm St Extension. The timestamp of :20 seconds after the kill that is attached to those 2 Guys and Officer Smith is just not physically possible for Officer Smith.
-
Once you clear out the time-wasting noise and faux debate and recognize that the men are Lovelady & Shelley then you can orient the timing of Couch/Darnell and match it to Frazier's statements that he was facing Sarah Stanton at that moment as seen in Darnell...
Internet JFK researchers are a bunch of nuts and egotists who are more interested in avoiding the evidence than responsibly recognizing it...
There has been no kind of debate, let alone a "faux debate".
You were asked as simple question and gave an answer that defied any kind of logic or reason.
And it was really a rhetorical question because anyone with any kind of credibility would have instantly conceded that there can't be more detail in the image that has less detail.
But not you.
How can there be any kind of debate, faux or otherwise, with such a person?
-
Royell steered me to a Couch clip which is the best quality I've come across:
(https://i.postimg.cc/mDC9zN5v/Couch-Royell.png)
I cropped and blew up the two men:
(https://i.postimg.cc/65mQK4HZ/Lovelady-Royell2.png)
There is a hint of something on the shirt in this image that may be a pattern but I wouldn't have an idea how to get it to stand out.
Maybe someone who knows what they're doing can have a go.
- PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE -
(1) :20 Seconds after the kill shot, Lovelady and Shelley are in the position of these 2 Guys?
(2) :20 Seconds after the kill shot, DPD Officer Smith, (left of center), is well down the Elm St Extension?