JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Dan O'meara on May 15, 2021, 08:24:25 PM
-
In another thread concerning the shooting of J D Tippit I’ve had to deal with a 6 minute discrepancy between “real time“ and the time being called out on the tapes. It wasn’t something I readily accepted and have examined the tapes for such a discrepancy.
I start with this quote by James C. Bowles, the DPD Communications Supervisor at the time:
“There is no way to connect "police time" with "real time."
This may be true on a second-to-second basis but it is most certainly not true on a minute-to-minute basis, as I will demonstrate.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bwLKyc1L/Screenshot-165.png) (https://postimages.org/)
The above picture is taken seconds after the assassination. The hertz clock can be clearly seen showing 12:30.
In his WC testimony, SA Greer states that in the immediate aftermath of the shooting SA Kellerman stated the time as 12:30
In his WC testimony Dave Powers confirms it was 12:30
Here we have three (I’m sure there are more) independent sources confirming the time of the assassination was 12:30 PM. Arguments about coincidence can be filed under “Tinfoil”.
Three independent sources agree that “real time” was 12:30 PM
When we look at the DPD tape transcripts we see that the very first call after the 12:30 time call is Chief Curry stating:
“Go to the hospital - Parkland Hospital. Have them stand by.”
This is clearly a reference to the assassination.
Without doubt, this example confirms that “real time” can, indeed, be connected to “police time”. Channel 1 and Channel 2 cannot hear each other and are only connected by the Dispatcher. Once it has been established that “real time” and “police time” are in synch, it must now be established that Channel 1 and Channel 2 are in synch and this can only really be done by examining how the Dispatcher interacts with each channel.
This happens around 12:35 when Captain Souther orders - “have 283 cut the traffic at Hines and Industrial” on Channel 2. He immediately switches to Channel 1 and gives the same order.
Another clear example of such synchronisation between channels occurs at 12:45 PM. The Dispatcher broadcasts an almost identical message on each channel concerning a description of the potential assailant.
At this point (12:45 PM) I believe that the channels are synched with each other and with “real time” yet, within half an hour, there is supposed to be a 6 minute discrepancy. I didn’t believe such a discrepancy could occur gradually so looked for something more “catastrophic” in the transcripts...and found it.
At 12:54 PM Patrolman Chism asks for “a squad go to Community Blood Bank and pick up some blood and bring to Parkland, Code 3”. This is clearly a priority message. The Dispatcher asks if the Blood Bank has been notified and Chism confirms they have.
When we look to Channel 1 we should see the Dispatcher asking a squad to get to the Blood Bank, “Code 3” [sirens and lights]. Instead we see the Dispatcher having a joke with J D Tippit, asking him if he will be available for any emergency to which Tippit dryly answers “10-4”. It is Tippit’s last known message and it is quite well known this interaction is an in-joke between Tippit and Murray, the Dispatcher.
In fact, the request for a squad doesn’t occur for approximately 5 - 8 minutes:
Dispatcher - Code 3, the blood bank, 2000 Commerce. Take to Parkland
This message occurs in between the time calls 12:55 PM and 1:03 PM. It occurs a lot closer to the 1:03 time call and the gap of 5 - 8 minutes is given as an estimate.
Immediately after the “Blood Bank” message on Channel 2, Captain Souther, a senior officer, asks for the condition of JFK and whether Governor Connally has been hit. Again, this message is just after 12:54 PM. The response from the Dispatcher - “Have information that the governor was hit” - doesn’t come until 1:03 PM.
There is a nine minute section of radio silence on Channel 2 between this question and answer. There is something clearly wrong. So I looked for something that might account for this sudden, large discrepancy and noticed that on Channel 1, a few minutes before the Dispatcher calls for a squad to get to the Blood Bank, it states the “Tape spliced and duplicated at this point".
There is a similar splice just after 1:12 PM on Channel 1. I believe these splices have something to do with the large time discrepancy that occurs in the tapes. I’m hoping this thread will get to the bottom of it.
LATER EDIT =Just noticed another splice at 1:32
-
In another thread concerning the shooting of J D Tippit I’ve had to deal with a 6 minute discrepancy between “real time“ and the time being called out on the tapes. It wasn’t something I readily accepted and have examined the tapes for such a discrepancy.
I start with this quote by James C. Bowles, the DPD Communications Supervisor at the time:
“There is no way to connect "police time" with "real time."
This may be true on a second-to-second basis but it is most certainly not true on a minute-to-minute basis, as I will demonstrate.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bwLKyc1L/Screenshot-165.png) (https://postimages.org/)
The above picture is taken seconds after the assassination. The hertz clock can be clearly seen showing 12:30.
In his WC testimony, SA Greer states that in the immediate aftermath of the shooting SA Kellerman stated the time as 12:30
In his WC testimony Dave Powers confirms it was 12:30
Here we have three (I’m sure there are more) independent sources confirming the time of the assassination was 12:30 PM. Arguments about coincidence can be filed under “Tinfoil”.
Three independent sources agree that “real time” was 12:30 PM
When we look at the DPD tape transcripts we see that the very first call after the 12:30 time call is Chief Curry stating:
“Go to the hospital - Parkland Hospital. Have them stand by.”
This is clearly a reference to the assassination.
Without doubt, this example confirms that “real time” can, indeed, be connected to “police time”. Channel 1 and Channel 2 cannot hear each other and are only connected by the Dispatcher. Once it has been established that “real time” and “police time” are in synch, it must now be established that Channel 1 and Channel 2 are in synch and this can only really be done by examining how the Dispatcher interacts with each channel.
This happens around 12:35 when Captain Souther orders - “have 283 cut the traffic at Hines and Industrial” on Channel 2. He immediately switches to Channel 1 and gives the same order.
Another clear example of such synchronisation between channels occurs at 12:45 PM. The Dispatcher broadcasts an almost identical message on each channel concerning a description of the potential assailant.
At this point (12:45 PM) I believe that the channels are synched with each other and with “real time” yet, within half an hour, there is supposed to be a 6 minute discrepancy. I didn’t believe such a discrepancy could occur gradually so looked for something more “catastrophic” in the transcripts...and found it.
At 12:54 PM Patrolman Chism asks for “a squad go to Community Blood Bank and pick up some blood and bring to Parkland, Code 3”. This is clearly a priority message. The Dispatcher asks if the Blood Bank has been notified and Chism confirms they have.
When we look to Channel 1 we should see the Dispatcher asking a squad to get to the Blood Bank, “Code 3” [sirens and lights]. Instead we see the Dispatcher having a joke with J D Tippit, asking him if he will be available for any emergency to which Tippit dryly answers “10-4”. It is Tippit’s last known message and it is quite well known this interaction is an in-joke between Tippit and Murray, the Dispatcher.
In fact, the request for a squad doesn’t occur for approximately 5 - 8 minutes:
Dispatcher - Code 3, the blood bank, 2000 Commerce. Take to Parkland
This message occurs in between the time calls 12:55 PM and 1:03 PM. It occurs a lot closer to the 1:03 time call and the gap of 5 - 8 minutes is given as an estimate.
Immediately after the “Blood Bank” message on Channel 2, Captain Souther, a senior officer, asks for the condition of JFK and whether Governor Connally has been hit. Again, this message is just after 12:54 PM. The response from the Dispatcher - “Have information that the governor was hit” - doesn’t come until 1:03 PM.
There is a nine minute section of radio silence on Channel 2 between this question and answer. There is something clearly wrong. So I looked for something that might account for this sudden, large discrepancy and noticed that on Channel 1, a few minutes before the Dispatcher calls for a squad to get to the Blood Bank, it states the “Tape spliced and duplicated at this point".
There is a similar splice just after 1:12 PM on Channel 1. I believe these splices have something to do with the large time discrepancy that occurs in the tapes. I’m hoping this thread will get to the bottom of it.
Interesting theory. I don't have the time to look into it at the moment, but I most certainly will.
Having said that, the mere fact that the DPD recordings matched "real" time at 12:30 does not guarantee that this will stay that way. Bowles clearly explained how verbal time stamp calls by dispatchers could differ from real time in heavy traffic and the same goes for the clocks used by the dispatchers which might not be adjusted correctly when the dispatcher was busy.
Obviously, prior 12:30, there was a "normal" level of traffic (for a high profile visit) and after 12:30 the dispatchers were inundated by call sheets derived from incoming phone calls and a high level of radio traffic.
Two quotes from Bowles;
Telephone operators and radio operators were furnished "Simplex" clocks. Because the hands often worked loose, they indicated the incorrect time. However, their purpose was to stamp the time, day and date on incoming calls. While they were reliable at this, they were not synchronized as stated in the Committee report. Therefore, it was not uncommon for the time stamped on calls to be a minute to two ahead or behind the "official" time shown on the master clock. Accordingly, at "exactly" 10:10, various clocks could be stamping from 10:08 to 10:12, for example. When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments. During busy periods this was not readily done.
In addition to the times stamped on calls by telephone operators, the radio operators stamped the "time" as calls were dispatched, and the "time" that officers completed an assignment and returned to service. Radio operators were also furnished with 12-hour digital clocks to facilitate their time references when they were not using call sheets containing stamped time. These digital clocks were not synchronized with any time standard. Therefore, the time "actual" and time "broadcast" could easily be a minute or so apart.
-
Interesting theory. I don't have the time to look into it at the moment, but I most certainly will.
Having said that, the mere fact that the DPD recordings matched "real" time at 12:30 does not guarantee that this will stay that way. Bowles clearly explained how verbal time stamp calls by dispatchers could differ from real time in heavy traffic and the same goes for the clocks used by the dispatchers which might not be adjusted correctly when the dispatcher was busy.
Obviously, prior 12:30, there was a "normal" level of traffic (for a high profile visit) and after 12:30 the dispatchers were inundated by call sheets derived from incoming phone calls and a high level of radio traffic.
Two quotes from Bowles;
Telephone operators and radio operators were furnished "Simplex" clocks. Because the hands often worked loose, they indicated the incorrect time. However, their purpose was to stamp the time, day and date on incoming calls. While they were reliable at this, they were not synchronized as stated in the Committee report. Therefore, it was not uncommon for the time stamped on calls to be a minute to two ahead or behind the "official" time shown on the master clock. Accordingly, at "exactly" 10:10, various clocks could be stamping from 10:08 to 10:12, for example. When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments. During busy periods this was not readily done.
In addition to the times stamped on calls by telephone operators, the radio operators stamped the "time" as calls were dispatched, and the "time" that officers completed an assignment and returned to service. Radio operators were also furnished with 12-hour digital clocks to facilitate their time references when they were not using call sheets containing stamped time. These digital clocks were not synchronized with any time standard. Therefore, the time "actual" and time "broadcast" could easily be a minute or so apart.
I'm not disputing that but, once I'd established that "real time" and "police time" were in synch I wasn't convinced that such a discrepancy could be caused by the hands of a clock gradually working loose. I looked for something that could explain such a huge discrepancy in such a short time.
There is a long way to go with this but I'm convinced there is something seriously amiss and it is to do with the two splices in the Channel 1 tape.
-
Another inexplicable discrepancy:
Between time calls 1:40 and 1:43 on Channel 2 we find this exchange:
Hill - "A witness reports he was last seen in the Abundant Life Temple about the 400 block. We are fixing to go in and shake it down."
Dispatcher - "Is that the one who was involved in the shooting of the officer?"
Hill - "Yes"
Dispatcher - "They already have him."
At 1:44 PM Hill responds - No, that wasn't the right one.
This interaction is a reference to a suspect who was taken at the library but who, it turned out, was the wrong man. The problem is that this incident was reported on Channel 1 at 1:34 PM, about nine minutes before the exchange on Channel 2. The incident is reported as follows:
Dispatcher - "10-4. For your information, 221, they have the suspect cornered in the library at Marsalis and Jefferson."
221 - "This man can positively identify him if they need him."
Dispatcher - "10-4. They do have the suspect under arrest."
Owens - "19"
Dispatcher - "19"
Owens - "It was the wrong man."
Dispatcher - "10-4"
Dispatcher - "Disregard all information on the suspect arrested. It was the wrong man."
So we have the situation that on Channel 1 the Dispatcher is telling everyone they had the wrong man yet, nine minutes later on Channel 2, the Dispatcher is blissfully unaware that the suspect arrested was the wrong man!
-
Another strange discrepancy.
Channel 1 is in almost constant use for the duration of the transcripts.
That is, until around 1:28, where there is radio silence until 1:32.
This is a 3 to 4 minute gap of radio silence after which it goes back into constant use again.
Strangely, Channel 2 comes into use for the exact period of time Channel 1 is silent, with a period of radio silence before and after this sudden burst.
Seems weird.
-
I see the beginnings of a new book entitled:
“Six Minutes in Dallas”
;)
-
I'm not disputing that but, once I'd established that "real time" and "police time" were in synch I wasn't convinced that such a discrepancy could be caused by the hands of a clock gradually working loose. I looked for something that could explain such a huge discrepancy in such a short time.
There is a long way to go with this but I'm convinced there is something seriously amiss and it is to do with the two splices in the Channel 1 tape.
The first thing, I think, we need to do is establish which version of the transcripts is being used, as there are more than one version. I have a scan of a typed version, but I normally use this one; https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/index.htm
In the other thread (Lee Oswald The Cop Killer), on page 221, it has already been shown beyond doubt that the DPD recordings/transcripts do not match the interlocking sequence of events described by a number of witnesses.
Aother way to demonstrate that the DPD radio transcripts are unreliable is by demonstrating that they don't even match the actual recordings, as Bill Brown described hearing them at Dale Myers house.
The DPD transcripts have Bowley making his call at 1:17 and Callaway his call at 1:19. The WC puts the time of the shooting at around 1:16
According to Bill Brown, Dale Myers has the actual recording and has determined, by working backwards (from where exactly one can ask!) that the time of the shooting was likely 1:14:30 and that Bowley made his call at 1:17:40 (if I remember correctly!). According to Bill Brown, just after the shooting you can hear a sound on the tape that is Benavides keying the mic of the patrol car. Brown has given three different durations (1 minute, 1,5 minute and 2 minutes) so for the purpose of this exercise let's go with 1,5 minute.
So now let's make a comparision. If the DPD transcripts are correct and the shooting indeed happened at 1:16 as the WC said, then where has Benavides gone? He said he waited in his car until the killer was out of sight, which took about 45 seconds. Add to this 1,5 minutes of keying the mic (or even one minute) and you can never squeeze that between the WC shooting time of 1:16 and Bowley's call at 1:17.
Now, if the shooting happened at 1:14:30, as Myers claims, and Bowley indeed made his call at 1:17:40, there is three minutes and ten seconds to fit in the Benavides time of waiting 45 seconds and then keying the mic. However, even if you use Brown's longest estimate of 2 minutes for keying the mic, you still come up short by 25 seconds to fill the time gap between the shooting at 1:14:30 and Bowley's call at 1:17:40.
None of this makes any sense, because if the shooting happened at 1:14:30 and Callaway made his call at 1:19 (Brown sometimes speculates it could also have been 1:20) then you have Callaway making his call some 5 minutes after the shooting, when in fact he only needed (IMO) a little less than 3 minutes to get to scene after hearing the shots and those two extra minutes can not be accounted for, at least in a credible manner.
Also, according to Bill Brown three people phoned the police after the shooting, They are Mary Wright, Barbara Davis and L.J. Lewis. The dispatcher, Murray Jackson, would be notified about the call by way of a time stamped call sheet that was passed on to him by way of a conveyor belt. Still according to Brown, the dispatcher did not know about Tippit's shooting until he received Bowley's radio call at 1:17:40. Are we really to believe that it took the telephone operator at 3 minutes to pass a call sheet to the dispatcher?
All this justifies the conclusion that the transcript and the actual radio tapes (as decribed by Brown) do not match reality nor do they match eachother.
-
[...]
At 12:54 PM Patrolman Chism asks for “a squad go to Community Blood Bank and pick up some blood and bring to Parkland, Code 3”. This is clearly a priority message. The Dispatcher asks if the Blood Bank has been notified and Chism confirms they have.
When we look to Channel 1 we should see the Dispatcher asking a squad to get to the Blood Bank, “Code 3” [sirens and lights]. Instead we see the Dispatcher having a joke with J D Tippit, asking him if he will be available for any emergency to which Tippit dryly answers “10-4”. It is Tippit’s last known message and it is quite well known this interaction is an in-joke between Tippit and Murray, the Dispatcher.
In fact, the request for a squad doesn’t occur for approximately 5 - 8 minutes:
Dispatcher - Code 3, the blood bank, 2000 Commerce. Take to Parkland
This message occurs in between the time calls 12:55 PM and 1:03 PM. It occurs a lot closer to the 1:03 time call and the gap of 5 - 8 minutes is given as an estimate.
Immediately after the “Blood Bank” message on Channel 2, Captain Souther, a senior officer, asks for the condition of JFK and whether Governor Connally has been hit. Again, this message is just after 12:54 PM. The response from the Dispatcher - “Have information that the governor was hit” - doesn’t come until 1:03 PM.
There is a nine minute section of radio silence on Channel 2 between this question and answer. There is something clearly wrong. So I looked for something that might account for this sudden, large discrepancy and noticed that on Channel 1, a few minutes before the Dispatcher calls for a squad to get to the Blood Bank, it states the “Tape spliced and duplicated at this point".
There is a similar splice just after 1:12 PM on Channel 1. I believe these splices have something to do with the large time discrepancy that occurs in the tapes. I’m hoping this thread will get to the bottom of it.
LATER EDIT =Just noticed another splice at 1:32
You got hornswaggled by the formatting on McAdams' website.
There are no timestamps on either the Chism or Souter transmissions, so we don't know exactly when they were made. All we know is that they occurred sometime after the rope transmission at 12:54 and the before the channel 2 dispatcher responds to Souter at 1:03. They could very well be just before the 1:03 transmission, eliminating any discrepancy. Their positioning just after the rope transmission on McAdams' site is just an arbitrary decision by the person who put together the page.
-
You got hornswaggled by the formatting on McAdams' website.
There are no timestamps on either the Chism or Souter transmissions, so we don't know exactly when they were made. All we know is that they occurred sometime after the rope transmission at 12:54 and the before the channel 2 dispatcher responds to Souter at 1:03. They could very well be just before the 1:03 transmission, eliminating any discrepancy. Their positioning just after the rope transmission on McAdams' site is just an arbitrary decision by the person who put together the page.
I'll go for that.
If they were moved down that large gap they can make sense.
I have little idea how these transcripts were put together. Do you know if the continuous tape recording Russ Shearer used to fine-tune his re-drafting of the transcripts still exists?
The other thing I didn't realise was that there was a different dispatcher for each channel. This might account for the Dispatcher on Channel 2 not knowing the man in the library was the wrong man.
Time to abandon ship on my little theory I reckon.
-
I'll go for that.
If they were moved down that large gap they can make sense.
I have little idea how these transcripts were put together. Do you know if the continuous tape recording Russ Shearer used to fine-tune his re-drafting of the transcripts still exists?
The other thing I didn't realise was that there was a different dispatcher for each channel. This might account for the Dispatcher on Channel 2 not knowing the man in the library was the wrong man.
Time to abandon ship on my little theory I reckon.
Shearer's transcript for channel one was based on the Minneapolis library copy. There are other copies of channel one floating around in the hands of collectors, researchers, and maybe at the National Archives. Channel two is harder to come by. Because of issues with the rather cantankerous Audiograph system used to record them, there isn't a good single copy that isn't prone to repeats and skips. Mike Odell has created a useful, if synthetic, copy using bits and pieces culled from different versions but it only runs to about 12:50pm. You can find it here:
-
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,120.msg1503.html#msg1503
Hey, Dan - great name - and Martin, Todd, Charles etc. I'm glad you decided to scrutinize the radio relays that day
because I presented my own version of the events that may have taken place. Yes - the relays seemed to be tampered with. First of all, I firmly believe there was an arrest made that day at Redbird Airport and all suspects - including Oswald at the theater were captured. I also believe the two SS agents who were assigned to stay at Love Field (willingly or otherwise) who also went to lunch - helped the police capture the said subjects at Redbird. One example. After Craig notified what he thought was an SS agent (and he probably was) that suspects got into a station wagon and sped away. Shortly after, 67 - Officer Everett asked the Dispatcher - Should I head south - to which the Dispatcher said - Yes. If you now look at the relays Martin provided that now says. Do you want me to head south - Dispatcher - Yes. They - in the station wagon - South - where Redbird was located. There is also one misplaced page which just happens to state - Secret Service ... outer perimeter '... they are being brought back. Etc - if you want to read it just click the site.
Please note I don't want my post to be bumped as I want to keep the conversation here if I can.
Thanks.
"Yes - the relays seemed to be tampered with."
I'm not really familiar with how the recordings work and I'm working on the assumption of a single assassin at the moment.
I am interested about your view regarding the "relays" and how they were tampered with.
Agreed on the strong name. Apparently it means "Judgement".
-
Hey Dan. First of all I want to thank you for presenting this post which circles around the Radio Traffic Relays and the discrepancies therein. Secondly, there is the following. I'm not the kind of guy who likes bumping his own thread. I'm also not the kind of guy who likes presenting a topic in someone else's thread which becomes the main topic of his post. So with that being said I'm going to remove my post and let your post complete its run. After that I'll decide if I'm going to bump my own thread or let It stay in Limbo where it is now. It will probably be the latter. Thanks again for presenting your post.
-
Dan and Dan,
I've read this thread with interest, and while I honestly don't have time - or the necessary access to my files, which I've stored offsite - I will try to assist (from memory, so some errors are inevitable for which I apologize in advance!) in some way with the issues you raise.
First, with reference to transcripts, there are many, many versions of the DPD radio transcripts, and probably all of them contain errors, omissions, etc., of one kind or another. For example, the Secret Service, the Dallas Police, and the FBI all made transcripts, in addition to private transcripts made by Jim Bowles, Arch Kimbrough, Dave Dix, Russ Sheerer and many others. Some of these purport to be "complete" transcripts, while even more are only partial transcripts.
Add to this the fact that there are numerous copies of the radio recordings themselves, too. Again, many of these are only partial copies which, like some of the transcripts, focus on segments of the recordings of particular interest to the author/originator. All of these recordings are many, many generations removed from the original recordings - the Channel 1 recordings were voice-activated, made in "real time" onto flimsy blue polyester dictabelts by means of a stylus cutting a continuous grove onto a blank belt, capable of holding up to 30 minutes worth of sound recordings. In order to ensure that no break in recording, the radio messages were recorded such that there was an "overlap" of about 15-20 seconds at the end of each belt and the start of the next belt. Similarly, Channel 2 (an auxiliary channel used to handle additional radio traffic generated by special events) was also a voice-activated recording, recorded onto flexible green plastic discs. On the day of the assassination, there were two dispatchers working together on Channel 1 at any one time (Officers Hulse and Jackson at the time of the assassination, if I remember correctly), while another dispatcher (Sgt. Henslee) was working Channel 2 on his own, so it is not really surprising that there are discrepancies between what was said (and when it was said) by the dispatcher on either channel.
Over time, both the channel 1 and 2 recordings were copied onto a variety of media, including reel-to-reel tapes, cassette tapes, PC diskettes, hard drives, etc. The quality of these copies varied immensely, as did the recording speeds of the devices on which they were copied. In addition, the physical location of the original recordings over the years was not always the best in terms of protecting the recordings - in envelopes in boxes, in drawers in filing cabinets, and other such places, and certainly not in ideal storage conditions in terms of temperature and humidity-controlled environments, either.
So, when we take all these factors into consideration, it is not really surprising that discrepancies will arise from one transcript to another, and from one recording to another. However, the "nearest to the original" recordings that currently exist are held in the National Archives, from whom copies can be purchased. Copies of these recordings can be purchased from NARA, but to the best of my recollection, they are quite pricey! The recordings obtainable from NARA (again, from memory) cover the time periods from around 10:00 am to 2:00 pm on Channel 1, and 11:00 am to 10:00 pm on Channel 2.
I apologize for this lengthy post, but I hope it will be of some help to you in explaining how and why some of the many discrepancies between the recordings and the transcripts could - and did - arise.
-
Dan and Dan,
I've read this thread with interest, and while I honestly don't have time - or the necessary access to my files, which I've stored offsite - I will try to assist (from memory, so some errors are inevitable for which I apologize in advance!) in some way with the issues you raise.
First, with reference to transcripts, there are many, many versions of the DPD radio transcripts, and probably all of them contain errors, omissions, etc., of one kind or another. For example, the Secret Service, the Dallas Police, and the FBI all made transcripts, in addition to private transcripts made by Jim Bowles, Arch Kimbrough, Dave Dix, Russ Sheerer and many others. Some of these purport to be "complete" transcripts, while even more are only partial transcripts.
Add to this the fact that there are numerous copies of the radio recordings themselves, too. Again, many of these are only partial copies which, like some of the transcripts, focus on segments of the recordings of particular interest to the author/originator. All of these recordings are many, many generations removed from the original recordings - the Channel 1 recordings were voice-activated, made in "real time" onto flimsy blue polyester dictabelts by means of a stylus cutting a continuous grove onto a blank belt, capable of holding up to 30 minutes worth of sound recordings. In order to ensure that no break in recording, the radio messages were recorded such that there was an "overlap" of about 15-20 seconds at the end of each belt and the start of the next belt. Similarly, Channel 2 (an auxiliary channel used to handle additional radio traffic generated by special events) was also a voice-activated recording, recorded onto flexible green plastic discs. On the day of the assassination, there were two dispatchers working together on Channel 1 at any one time (Officers Hulse and Jackson at the time of the assassination, if I remember correctly), while another dispatcher (Sgt. Henslee) was working Channel 2 on his own, so it is not really surprising that there are discrepancies between what was said (and when it was said) by the dispatcher on either channel.
Over time, both the channel 1 and 2 recordings were copied onto a variety of media, including reel-to-reel tapes, cassette tapes, PC diskettes, hard drives, etc. The quality of these copies varied immensely, as did the recording speeds of the devices on which they were copied. In addition, the physical location of the original recordings over the years was not always the best in terms of protecting the recordings - in envelopes in boxes, in drawers in filing cabinets, and other such places, and certainly not in ideal storage conditions in terms of temperature and humidity-controlled environments, either.
So, when we take all these factors into consideration, it is not really surprising that discrepancies will arise from one transcript to another, and from one recording to another. However, the "nearest to the original" recordings that currently exist are held in the National Archives, from whom copies can be purchased. Copies of these recordings can be purchased from NARA, but to the best of my recollection, they are quite pricey! The recordings obtainable from NARA (again, from memory) cover the time periods from around 10:00 am to 2:00 pm on Channel 1, and 11:00 am to 10:00 pm on Channel 2.
I apologize for this lengthy post, but I hope it will be of some help to you in explaining how and why some of the many discrepancies between the recordings and the transcripts could - and did - arise.
Question: Were the dictabelts "voice activated" or "sound activated? I have read it was the latter.
For example, Bowles said in his piece cited earlier that there were instances on the recordings where a sound activated a dictabelt but no actual sound was recorded. Or could be heard.
-
Good question, Steve - I believe you are probably correct, in that they were "sound" rather than "voice"activated. I guess that would probably make more sense, wouldn't it?
Chris
[Typo corrected]
-
Good question, Steve - I believe you are probably correct, in that they were "sound" rather than "voice"activated. I guess that would probably make more sense, wouldn't it?
Chris
[Typo corrected]
Great post Chris.
I'd kind of given up on this thread as my early ideas only revealed my total ignorance of this aspect of the Kennedy case.
My situation is this - on another thread an alternative timeline has been put together regarding the Tippit murder.
In my opinion this timeline brings different key testimonies together in a way I find most satisfactory.
The problem is that this timeline, created through the testimonies, requires a discrepancy of 6 minutes between the Tapes and "real time" around the time of Tippit's murder.
In my OP I have established that "police time" and "real time" were pretty much in synch.
Is there any way, in your opinion, such a discrepancy might have occurred?
You seem quite clued up about it and I've fried my brain on this, getting nowhere.
-
Dan - you refer in your OP to a recording and transcript, and to notations about "splices" and material being "duplicated", or words to that effect. As I said, I'm working completely from memory here, as I've put most of my files into off-site storage, so could you tell me what transcript and copy of the recordings you are working from, please. Your answer might just help jog my memory, and if so, I'll do my best to help you out.
-
Question: Were the dictabelts "voice activated" or "sound activated? I have read it was the latter.
For example, Bowles said in his piece cited earlier that there were instances on the recordings where a sound activated a dictabelt but no actual sound was recorded. Or could be heard.
Hey Chris - second Dan here - if no one extended this tp you - Welcome to the Forum.
As for the different variations in the Radio Relays I came up with my theory way back in the 90's and I used the originals as released by SS Agent Warren Or Warner in Dec 1963. In other words they were the very first released or the first on record. I did notice the discrepancies Yes - there is a misplaced page and it does happen just before an arrest. Yes Everett 67 said - Did- they - head south - Yes - from the Dispatcher. In later versions - Do you want me to go south - Answer - Yes. This happened right after Craig stated to someone he thought was an SS man about suspects fleeing in a station wagon. Craig stated the SS man seemed more interested in the car than the discriptions of the suspects?
Etc ...
-
Dan - you refer in your OP to a recording and transcript, and to notations about "splices" and material being "duplicated", or words to that effect. As I said, I'm working completely from memory here, as I've put most of my files into off-site storage, so could you tell me what transcript and copy of the recordings you are working from, please. Your answer might just help jog my memory, and if so, I'll do my best to help you out.
Hi Chris,
I've been using this version on the McAdams site - https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/index.htm
The first splice is mentioned on page two, about half way down the section that has the time call 12:55 (obviously all splices on Channel 1)
The second splice occurs just after the 1:12 time call (page two). I find this splice odd as there is a relatively short time between splices.
The third splice occurs on page three, just after the 1:32 time call.
The fourth splice occurs on page three, just after the 1:44 time call.
Just using the time calls as an incredibly rough approximation
The first splice occurs after 27 minutes (12:28 to 12:55) but there is no way of knowing when the tape was spliced before 12:28
The second splice occurs after 17 minutes (12:55 to 1:12)
The third splice occurs after 20 minutes (1:12 to 1:32)
The fourth splice occurs after 12 minutes (1:32 to 1:44)
-
Hi Dan D'Alimonte -
OK, I recall the Secret Service transcript, made by SA Warner. Unfortunately, it is probably the worst, and most inaccurate, transcript that was produced. In fairness to the Secret Service, the transcript was made in Washington, and almost certainly by people who were totally unfamiliar with the geography of Dallas, and the terminology of the DPD. Also, we know that the first thing Agent Warner did was to copy the original dictabelts, after which he sent the copies (on an unknown medium) to Washington for transcription. Also, the transcript was produced in something of a hurry, so unfortunately the end result was what can only be described as chaotic, and very misleading.
Chris
-
Hi Dan D'Alimonte -
OK, I recall the Secret Service transcript, made by SA Warner. Unfortunately, it is probably the worst, and most inaccurate, transcript that was produced. In fairness to the Secret Service, the transcript was made in Washington, and almost certainly by people who were totally unfamiliar with the geography of Dallas, and the terminology of the DPD. Also, we know that the first thing Agent Warner did was to copy the original dictabelts, after which he sent the copies (on an unknown medium) to Washington for transcription. Also, the transcript was produced in something of a hurry, so unfortunately the end result was what can only be described as chaotic, and very misleading.
Chris
Hi Chris,
Just one question. I think you are familiar with what J.C. Bowles to the HSCA. With that in mind and what you have written here, what is your judgement about the reliability of the time stamp calls on the recordings/transcripts?
-
Hi Dan O'Meara:
From some notes I've uncovered here in my study tonight, I can tell you that the recordings used on that McAdams page are made from a cassette tape recording which was found in the Minneapolis Public Library many years ago by researcher Dave Dix. What I can tell you about it is that it almost certainly originated from a tape recording which originated from within the Dallas PD pre-1967. The tape recording was given to author Judy Bonner, who was at the time writing her book, “Investigation Of A Homicide”. In June 1969, Ms. Bonner’s tape was given to, or copied for, Dallas researcher Mary Ferrell, from whose tape most of those in the hands of early researchers until the early 1980's originated. Interestingly, examination of this version of the tape shows that it contains identical splice sounds (caused almost certainly, I believe, by shorter individual tapes being joined together in making the Bonner tape) to those on the recording found by Dave Dix - in other words, the Bonner/Ferrell tape unquestionably came from the same source as the one found by Dave Dix. As for the transcript, I know that Ms. Bonner included a transcript of the tape in her book, and the Channel 1 version attributed to Russ Shearer on the McAdams site appears to be a stripped-down version of the one in Judy Bonner's book. It is not, therefore, a verbatim transcript at all. The transcript in Ms. Bonner's book does not make any reference to the splices you mention, but the same splices are referenced in a different transcript of (presumably) the same recording which was subsequently made by Dallas researcher Arch Kimbrough around 1969.
You can therefore see from the foregoing just some of the difficulties that have been created over the years by transcripts - not all of which are verbatim - made by different people of what purports to be "the DPD radio recordings", but which are in fact copies - and usually copies that are many times removed - from the original Channel 1 dictabelt recordings. This cannot answer all of your questions, I'm afraid, but I hope it does explain why some very strange timing discrepancies can and do arise.
Sorry I cannot add much further at this time, but a detailed study of the recordings and transcripts is something to which I devoted a lot of time some years ago as I recovered from major heart surgery, but I'm essentially semi-retired at least from the research field now, and most of my old and rarely-accessed files are boxed up and stored off-site.
Chris.
-
Hi Martin -
As far as I can remember, Jim Bowles' transcripts reflects what he estimates the time to be in many places, so the only accurate times are those which are spoken by the dispatchers themselves in the actual recordings based on whichever clocks they were looking at in the Dispatch office.
-
Hi Dan O'Meara:
From some notes I've uncovered here in my study tonight, I can tell you that the recordings used on that McAdams page are made from a cassette tape recording which was found in the Minneapolis Public Library many years ago by researcher Dave Dix. What I can tell you about it is that it almost certainly originated from a tape recording which originated from within the Dallas PD pre-1967. The tape recording was given to author Judy Bonner, who was at the time writing her book, “Investigation Of A Homicide”. In June 1969, Ms. Bonner’s tape was given to, or copied for, Dallas researcher Mary Ferrell, from whose tape most of those in the hands of early researchers until the early 1980's originated. Interestingly, examination of this version of the tape shows that it contains identical splice sounds (caused almost certainly, I believe, by shorter individual tapes being joined together in making the Bonner tape) to those on the recording found by Dave Dix - in other words, the Bonner/Ferrell tape unquestionably came from the same source as the one found by Dave Dix. As for the transcript, I know that Ms. Bonner included a transcript of the tape in her book, and the Channel 1 version attributed to Russ Shearer on the McAdams site appears to be a stripped-down version of the one in Judy Bonner's book. It is not, therefore, a verbatim transcript at all. The transcript in Ms. Bonner's book does not make any reference to the splices you mention, but the same splices are referenced in a different transcript of (presumably) the same recording which was subsequently made by Dallas researcher Arch Kimbrough around 1969.
You can therefore see from the foregoing just some of the difficulties that have been created over the years by transcripts - not all of which are verbatim - made by different people of what purports to be "the DPD radio recordings", but which are in fact copies - and usually copies that are many times removed - from the original Channel 1 dictabelt recordings. This cannot answer all of your questions, I'm afraid, but I hope it does explain why some very strange timing discrepancies can and do arise.
Sorry I cannot add much further at this time, but a detailed study of the recordings and transcripts is something to which I devoted a lot of time some years ago as I recovered from major heart surgery, but I'm essentially semi-retired at least from the research field now, and most of my old and rarely-accessed files are boxed up and stored off-site.
Chris.
Genuinely amazing stuff Chris.
I got the impression, when I started looking into the tapes/transcripts, that I was staring into a very deep, dark hole and you seem to be confirming that.
From what you've said so far I'm coming away with the impression that the tapes and transcript are not as remotely solid as I thought they were and that serious discrepancies between "police time" and "real time" are more than a possibility. But I'm still struggling with something...
In the OP to this thread I believe I've made a convincing case for "police time" and "real time" being in synch around 12:30 PM. The discrepancy between the two "times" required to confirm the alternative timeline for the Tippit murder I mentioned, which interlocks a number of key witness testimonies, is around 6 minutes (maybe 5 at a pinch).
And this discrepancy has to be present 30 to 40 minutes after the synchronised point at 12:30 PM!
Is it realistic, in your opinion, that such a discrepancy could arise in such a short period of time? It seems to require something more substantial than a gradual divergence of the two "times".
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated and, once again, great stuff.
[PS: I love that you've got the word "Newbie" under your name. It's probably the most inappropriate thing on this forum ever!]
-
Hi Dan D'Alimonte -
OK, I recall the Secret Service transcript, made by SA Warner. Unfortunately, it is probably the worst, and most inaccurate, transcript that was produced. In fairness to the Secret Service, the transcript was made in Washington, and almost certainly by people who were totally unfamiliar with the geography of Dallas, and the terminology of the DPD. Also, we know that the first thing Agent Warner did was to copy the original dictabelts, after which he sent the copies (on an unknown medium) to Washington for transcription. Also, the transcript was produced in something of a hurry, so unfortunately the end result was what can only be described as chaotic, and very misleading.
Chris
Hey Chris thanks for responding but since I created this Dan 1 and Dan 2 situation I will be bumping my own thread
(hopefully tomprrow) and i'll respond there. I do appreciate your input. Thanks again.
-
In another thread concerning the shooting of J D Tippit I’ve had to deal with a 6 minute discrepancy between “real time“ and the time being called out on the tapes. It wasn’t something I readily accepted and have examined the tapes for such a discrepancy.
I start with this quote by James C. Bowles, the DPD Communications Supervisor at the time:
“There is no way to connect "police time" with "real time."
This may be true on a second-to-second basis but it is most certainly not true on a minute-to-minute basis, as I will demonstrate.
(https://i.postimg.cc/bwLKyc1L/Screenshot-165.png) (https://postimages.org/)
The above picture is taken seconds after the assassination. The hertz clock can be clearly seen showing 12:30.
In his WC testimony, SA Greer states that in the immediate aftermath of the shooting SA Kellerman stated the time as 12:30
In his WC testimony Dave Powers confirms it was 12:30
Here we have three (I’m sure there are more) independent sources confirming the time of the assassination was 12:30 PM. Arguments about coincidence can be filed under “Tinfoil”.
Three independent sources agree that “real time” was 12:30 PM
When we look at the DPD tape transcripts we see that the very first call after the 12:30 time call is Chief Curry stating:
“Go to the hospital - Parkland Hospital. Have them stand by.”
This is clearly a reference to the assassination.
Without doubt, this example confirms that “real time” can, indeed, be connected to “police time”. Channel 1 and Channel 2 cannot hear each other and are only connected by the Dispatcher. Once it has been established that “real time” and “police time” are in synch, it must now be established that Channel 1 and Channel 2 are in synch and this can only really be done by examining how the Dispatcher interacts with each channel.
This happens around 12:35 when Captain Souther orders - “have 283 cut the traffic at Hines and Industrial” on Channel 2. He immediately switches to Channel 1 and gives the same order.
Another clear example of such synchronisation between channels occurs at 12:45 PM. The Dispatcher broadcasts an almost identical message on each channel concerning a description of the potential assailant.
At this point (12:45 PM) I believe that the channels are synched with each other and with “real time” yet, within half an hour, there is supposed to be a 6 minute discrepancy. I didn’t believe such a discrepancy could occur gradually so looked for something more “catastrophic” in the transcripts...and found it.
At 12:54 PM Patrolman Chism asks for “a squad go to Community Blood Bank and pick up some blood and bring to Parkland, Code 3”. This is clearly a priority message. The Dispatcher asks if the Blood Bank has been notified and Chism confirms they have.
When we look to Channel 1 we should see the Dispatcher asking a squad to get to the Blood Bank, “Code 3” [sirens and lights]. Instead we see the Dispatcher having a joke with J D Tippit, asking him if he will be available for any emergency to which Tippit dryly answers “10-4”. It is Tippit’s last known message and it is quite well known this interaction is an in-joke between Tippit and Murray, the Dispatcher.
In fact, the request for a squad doesn’t occur for approximately 5 - 8 minutes:
Dispatcher - Code 3, the blood bank, 2000 Commerce. Take to Parkland
This message occurs in between the time calls 12:55 PM and 1:03 PM. It occurs a lot closer to the 1:03 time call and the gap of 5 - 8 minutes is given as an estimate.
Immediately after the “Blood Bank” message on Channel 2, Captain Souther, a senior officer, asks for the condition of JFK and whether Governor Connally has been hit. Again, this message is just after 12:54 PM. The response from the Dispatcher - “Have information that the governor was hit” - doesn’t come until 1:03 PM.
There is a nine minute section of radio silence on Channel 2 between this question and answer. There is something clearly wrong. So I looked for something that might account for this sudden, large discrepancy and noticed that on Channel 1, a few minutes before the Dispatcher calls for a squad to get to the Blood Bank, it states the “Tape spliced and duplicated at this point".
There is a similar splice just after 1:12 PM on Channel 1. I believe these splices have something to do with the large time discrepancy that occurs in the tapes. I’m hoping this thread will get to the bottom of it.
LATER EDIT =Just noticed another splice at 1:32
Jack Watson, the Dallas County Sheriff’s Office radio dispatcher, in his report to Sheriff Decker dated 11/22/63, states that immediately after he heard the shots:
“I looked at the time on the radio panel and it was about 40-seconds after 12:30 pm as I was calling the Dallas PD on the hot line...”
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Decker_Ex_5323.pdf (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Decker_Ex_5323.pdf)
Also, earlier In the Sheriff’s documentation he provides the following description:
There had been no incidents during the entire route of the motorcade and we arrived at Elm Street at approximately 12 :31 PM . Mr . Lawson had just looked at his watch, stating it *as 12:31 PM and remarking that we would be approximately 5 minutes late in arriving at Market Hall.
It does appear to me that at the time of the assassination, the real time was reasonably close to the verbal times recorded on the DPD tapes. And I think that your own apparent opinion that, without any apparent reason otherwise, these verbal times should also be reasonably close to the real time 45-minutes later during the Tippit murder time period. Does this not suggest to you that the discrepancies must be in the details of the testimonies that seem to point to a six minute time difference???
-
Jack Watson, the Dallas County Sheriff’s Office radio dispatcher, in his report to Sheriff Decker dated 11/22/63, states that immediately after he heard the shots:
“I looked at the time on the radio panel and it was about 40-seconds after 12:30 pm as I was calling the Dallas PD on the hot line...”
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Decker_Ex_5323.pdf (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Decker_Ex_5323.pdf)
Also, earlier In the Sheriff’s documentation he provides the following description:
There had been no incidents during the entire route of the motorcade and we arrived at Elm Street at approximately 12 :31 PM . Mr . Lawson had just looked at his watch, stating it *as 12:31 PM and remarking that we would be approximately 5 minutes late in arriving at Market Hall.
It does appear to me that at the time of the assassination, the real time was reasonably close to the verbal times recorded on the DPD tapes. And I think that your own apparent opinion that, without any apparent reason otherwise, these verbal times should also be reasonably close to the real time 45-minutes later during the Tippit murder time period. Does this not suggest to you that the discrepancies must be in the details of the testimonies that seem to point to a six minute time difference???
There is no way the timeline of the testimonies is worked out to the second but it's really tight as it is. The way the testimonies interlock don't leave much room for manoeuvre and certainly nothing like five or six minutes. The "official" timeline for the Tippit murder just doesn't work (IMO) without ignoring a lot of the key witness testimony.
I'd kind of given up on it as I know next to nothing about this aspect of the case. Then Chris came along and I get the impression this is the guy who could shed some light on this situation.
If he says it's a non-starter as far as the discrepancy is concerned it's back to the drawing board.
But I'm not at the point where I can dismiss any possibility.
-
There is no way the timeline of the testimonies is worked out to the second but it's really tight as it is. The way the testimonies interlock don't leave much room for manoeuvre and certainly nothing like five or six minutes. The "official" timeline for the Tippit murder just doesn't work (IMO) without ignoring a lot of the key witness testimony.
I'd kind of given up on it as I know next to nothing about this aspect of the case. Then Chris came along and I get the impression this is the guy who could shed some light on this situation.
If he says it's a non-starter as far as the discrepancy is concerned it's back to the drawing board.
But I'm not at the point where I can dismiss any possibility.
The "official" timeline for the Tippit murder just doesn't work (IMO) without ignoring a lot of the key witness testimony.
To me, it isn’t considered ignoring if it is in fact considered, and then decided that it must be in error.
-
Dan - I hope to get time over the coming weekend to spend a little more time on this timing issue. I agree that a 5-6 minute difference is worthy of further consideration, so hopefully I'll get a chance to listen to the tapes and compare them with the transcripts over the weekend.
-
The "official" timeline for the Tippit murder just doesn't work (IMO) without ignoring a lot of the key witness testimony.
To me, it isn’t considered ignoring if it is in fact considered, and then decided that it must be in error.
Agreed.
"Ignoring" was the incorrect word to use.
The situation, I suppose, is that on one hand there could be a single error (the DPD tapes) and on the other there could be a number of erroneous important details regarding the timing of events as related by various witnesses.
-
Dan - I hope to get time over the coming weekend to spend a little more time on this timing issue. I agree that a 5-6 minute difference is worthy of further consideration, so hopefully I'll get a chance to listen to the tapes and compare them with the transcripts over the weekend.
No worries Chris. This problem isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Have a good weekend
-
Jack Watson, the Dallas County Sheriff’s Office radio dispatcher, in his report to Sheriff Decker dated 11/22/63, states that immediately after he heard the shots:
“I looked at the time on the radio panel and it was about 40-seconds after 12:30 pm as I was calling the Dallas PD on the hot line...”
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Decker_Ex_5323.pdf (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Decker_Ex_5323.pdf)
Also, earlier In the Sheriff’s documentation he provides the following description:
There had been no incidents during the entire route of the motorcade and we arrived at Elm Street at approximately 12 :31 PM . Mr . Lawson had just looked at his watch, stating it *as 12:31 PM and remarking that we would be approximately 5 minutes late in arriving at Market Hall.
It does appear to me that at the time of the assassination, the real time was reasonably close to the verbal times recorded on the DPD tapes. And I think that your own apparent opinion that, without any apparent reason otherwise, these verbal times should also be reasonably close to the real time 45-minutes later during the Tippit murder time period. Does this not suggest to you that the discrepancies must be in the details of the testimonies that seem to point to a six minute time difference???
Why don't you give it a try and point out where these descrepancies could be in the time line?
Here it is;
Markham leaves her home at "a little after 1" and is en route to the bus stop on Jefferson by 1:06 or 1:07
She only needs to walk one block to get from 9th street to 10th street. The FBI determined that the distance of one block takes about 2,5 minutes to walk. This gets Markham to the corner of 10th and Patton by 1:09:30 at the latest, perfectly on time to reach the bus stop on Jefferson at 1:11 or 1:12.
1:09 Shooting
Bowley picked up his daugther at school at 12:55 and is en route to pick up his wife from work. The distance between the school and 10th street takes about 13 to 15 minutes to
drive. This gets him to 10th street at 1:10
Benavides stays in his car until the killer has disappeared on Patton. That takes about 45 seconds. He then runs to Tippit and then the car and grabs the mic
1:10 Benevides making his call and Bowley arrives
Bowley says (in the video "Hunting Oswald") that when he arrived he noticed something was going on, so he parked his car at a fair distance away so his 12 year old daughter would
not see it. He then walked towards the police car, checked on Tippit and then noticed Benavides who could not get the radio of the patrol car to work. It's a fair estimation that this
would have taken him around 45 seconds. During this time Benavides is keying the mic in vain. When Bowley arrived he looked at his watch and it said 1:10
1:11 Bowley makes his call, lasting 46 seconds
DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) wrote in their supplementary offense report that at approximently 1:10 they heard on the radio that a police officer was involved in a
shooting at East Tenth Street.
1:12 Callaway arrives at the scene. He has only one block to run after his interaction with the killer. The killer running towards Jefferson and Callaway then running to 10th street takes
about 3 minutes after the shots were fired
1:12:30 After checking on Tippit, Callaway makes his call and hears the ambulance's sirens in the background
Ambulance arrives. Callaway and Bowley help loading Tippit's body into the ambulance
1:12:45 DPD officer Croy is in his car at Zang and Colorado when he hears Bowley's radio call. It takes him no more than
1,5 to 2 minutes to arrive at 10th street. When he arrives he sees Tippit's body being loaded into the ambulance
1:13 The ambulance leaves. The distance to Methodist Hospital takes 2 minutes to drive in normal traffic. With sirens on
it takes less.
DPD officers Davenport and Bardin are in their car and see the ambulance pass by. They follow it and arrive at the
same time at as the ambulance at the hospital.
1:15 Ambulance arrives at Methodist Hospital and Tippit is declared DOA at 1:15
The DOA time is communicated to the Justice of the Peace who issues an Authorization for Autopsy which gives the
time of death as 1:15.
Davenport writes in his report that Tippit was declared dead at 1:15 and on the form he uses to deliver a bullet
taken from Tippit's body and a button from his uniform to the Identification Bureau he writes in his own handwriting that Tippit was declared
DOA at 1:15
For the DPD times to be correct, Markham needs to be wrong about the time she left home and she also does not get to the bus stop at 1:15, Bowley's watch must be off by 7 minutes which means he was 7 minutes late to pick up his daughter from school and did not notice it. DPD officers Poe and Jez have to be wrong about the time they heard the radio call. The clocks at Methodist Hospital must be wrong, or at least the one used by Dr. Liquori and Davenport and Bardin must have been mistaken about Tippit being declared dead at 1:15.
-
Why don't you give it a try and point out where these descrepancies could be in the time line?
Here it is;
Markham leaves her home at "a little after 1" and is en route to the bus stop on Jefferson by 1:06 or 1:07
She only needs to walk one block to get from 9th street to 10th street. The FBI determined that the distance of one block takes about 2,5 minutes to walk. This gets Markham to the corner of 10th and Patton by 1:09:30 at the latest, perfectly on time to reach the bus stop on Jefferson at 1:11 or 1:12.
1:09 Shooting
Bowley picked up his daugther at school at 12:55 and is en route to pick up his wife from work. The distance between the school and 10th street takes about 13 to 15 minutes to
drive. This gets him to 10th street at 1:10
Benavides stays in his car until the killer has disappeared on Patton. That takes about 45 seconds. He then runs to Tippit and then the car and grabs the mic
1:10 Benevides making his call and Bowley arrives
Bowley says (in the video "Hunting Oswald") that when he arrived he noticed something was going on, so he parked his car at a fair distance away so his 12 year old daughter would
not see it. He then walked towards the police car, checked on Tippit and then noticed Benavides who could not get the radio of the patrol car to work. It's a fair estimation that this
would have taken him around 45 seconds. During this time Benavides is keying the mic in vain. When Bowley arrived he looked at his watch and it said 1:10
1:11 Bowley makes his call, lasting 46 seconds
DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) wrote in their supplementary offense report that at approximently 1:10 they heard on the radio that a police officer was involved in a
shooting at East Tenth Street.
1:12 Callaway arrives at the scene. He has only one block to run after his interaction with the killer. The killer running towards Jefferson and Callaway then running to 10th street takes
about 3 minutes after the shots were fired
1:12:30 After checking on Tippit, Callaway makes his call and hears the ambulance's sirens in the background
Ambulance arrives. Callaway and Bowley help loading Tippit's body into the ambulance
1:12:45 DPD officer Croy is in his car at Zang and Colorado when he hears Bowley's radio call. It takes him no more than
1,5 to 2 minutes to arrive at 10th street. When he arrives he sees Tippit's body being loaded into the ambulance
1:13 The ambulance leaves. The distance to Methodist Hospital takes 2 minutes to drive in normal traffic. With sirens on
it takes less.
DPD officers Davenport and Bardin are in their car and see the ambulance pass by. They follow it and arrive at the
same time at as the ambulance at the hospital.
1:15 Ambulance arrives at Methodist Hospital and Tippit is declared DOA at 1:15
The DOA time is communicated to the Justice of the Peace who issues an Authorization for Autopsy which gives the
time of death as 1:15.
Davenport writes in his report that Tippit was declared dead at 1:15 and on the form he uses to deliver a bullet
taken from Tippit's body and a button from his uniform to the Identification Bureau he writes in his own handwriting that Tippit was declared
DOA at 1:15
For the DPD times to be correct, Markham needs to be wrong about the time she left home and she also does not get to the bus stop at 1:15, Bowley's watch must be off by 7 minutes which means he was 7 minutes late to pick up his daughter from school and did not notice it. DPD officers Poe and Jez have to be wrong about the time they heard the radio call. The clocks at Methodist Hospital must be wrong, or at least the one used by Dr. Liquori and Davenport and Bardin must have been mistaken about Tippit being declared dead at 1:15.
For the DPD times to be correct, Markham needs to be wrong about the time she left home and she also does not get to the bus stop at 1:15, Bowley's watch must be off by 7 minutes which means he was 7 minutes late to pick up his daughter from school and did not notice it. DPD officers Poe and Jez have to be wrong about the time they heard the radio call. The clocks at Methodist Hospital must be wrong, or at least the one used by Dr. Liquori and Davenport and Bardin must have been mistaken about Tippit being declared dead at 1:15.
Bingo! Thumb1:
-
For the DPD times to be correct, Markham needs to be wrong about the time she left home and she also does not get to the bus stop at 1:15, Bowley's watch must be off by 7 minutes which means he was 7 minutes late to pick up his daughter from school and did not notice it. DPD officers Poe and Jez have to be wrong about the time they heard the radio call. The clocks at Methodist Hospital must be wrong, or at least the one used by Dr. Liquori and Davenport and Bardin must have been mistaken about Tippit being declared dead at 1:15.
Bingo! Thumb1:
WOW... Impressive reply. Let me guess, you also believe that the world is flat, right?
-
WOW... Impressive reply. Let me guess, you also believe that the world is flat, right?
Not in this lifetime! ;)
-
Not in this lifetime! ;)
Instead of simply claiming that all clocks mentioned in the time line were wrong and all witnesses involved were mistaken, why not man up and show us exactly where you believe the time line is wrong?
Or alternatively, you can keep running away of course.
-
Instead of simply claiming that all clocks mentioned in the time line were wrong and all witnesses involved were mistaken, why not man up and show us exactly where you believe the time line is wrong?
Or alternatively, you can keep running away of course.
I prefer using your words. In fact they are so good, I will present them again:
For the DPD times to be correct, Markham needs to be wrong about the time she left home and she also does not get to the bus stop at 1:15, Bowley's watch must be off by 7 minutes which means he was 7 minutes late to pick up his daughter from school and did not notice it. DPD officers Poe and Jez have to be wrong about the time they heard the radio call. The clocks at Methodist Hospital must be wrong, or at least the one used by Dr. Liquori and Davenport and Bardin must have been mistaken about Tippit being declared dead at 1:15.
At first, I thought that you might have had an epiphany and realized the error of your ways. And even though I haven’t had any Bud in many, many years, I was reminded of their old commercial from the days of my youth:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGp_1MOeOjc)[/url]
And, whether you like it or not, you’ve already said it all.....
-
I prefer using your words. In fact they are so good, I will present them again:
For the DPD times to be correct, Markham needs to be wrong about the time she left home and she also does not get to the bus stop at 1:15, Bowley's watch must be off by 7 minutes which means he was 7 minutes late to pick up his daughter from school and did not notice it. DPD officers Poe and Jez have to be wrong about the time they heard the radio call. The clocks at Methodist Hospital must be wrong, or at least the one used by Dr. Liquori and Davenport and Bardin must have been mistaken about Tippit being declared dead at 1:15.
At first, I thought that you might have had an epiphany and realized the error of your ways. And even though I haven’t had any Bud in many, many years, I was reminded of their old commercial from the days of my youth:
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGp_1MOeOjc)[/url]
And, whether you like it or not, you’ve already said it all.....
So, you're running. Got it!
-
This excerpt from "The Tippit Case in the New Millennium" by James DiEugenio
"As if the witness censorship and the oddities with the ballistics evidence were not suspect enough, let us now turn to the radio transcripts. As most of us know, there were three versions of the radio messages that were eventually delivered to the Warren Commission. Sylvia Meagher pointed out that the first transcript the police turned over did not include what was perhaps the most important instruction given to Tippit that day. That was the order for him to move into central Oak Cliff at 12:45 PM. (Meagher, p. 260) This was about 15 minutes after President Kennedy was killed ... just prior to this message, the dispatcher had said, “Attention all squads, report to downtown area Code 3 to Elm and Houston with caution.” (WCE 705, p. 397) Which, of course, makes perfect sense. (The police tried to disguise this order in the first transcript, but the FBI actually listened to the tapes and this was their accurate transcription. Police Chief Jesse Curry confirmed this in a letter to the Warren Commission, see WCD 1259, p. 3)
...On the transcripts, there is no acknowledgement of this order, even though it was given to two men, Tippit and R. C. Nelson. (WCE 1974, p. 26)...
We now come to the message at 1:08. Between 12:45 and that time there were four messages involving Tippit. Three went from the dispatcher to the patrolman and one allegedly came in from Tippit; this was at 1:08. In one version of the messages, Tippit called the dispatcher twice and got no answer. In the FBI version, Tippit’s call number at that time, 78, is missing: the message is assigned to No. 488. The FBI notes the sound is garbled and No. 488 is not identified by his name, and there is no other message that is assigned to whoever this person is. Tippit researcher Bill Drenas, who wrote an interesting essay, “Car #10 Where are You?”, did a thorough examination of the tape and transcripts. He concluded that the voice is not Tippit’s either. But he disagrees with who the real caller is. He says it is call number 388. Which would be from the Criminal Investigative Division."
This suggests a deliberate attempt to alter the transcripts.
-
Another, obscure witness noted the time...
Both Michael Brownlow, who I do not trust, and Franklin Griffin promoted this witness, Doris Holan, at 409 East Tenth.
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25674-three-dallas-cops-who-probably-helped-frame-oswald-on-112263/?tab=comments#comment-398196
(https://content.invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2018_09/1942121872_10thStreetMap-TippitmurderwithHolanandWrightidentified-smaller-griffin.thumb.jpg.1295e3987e87e35ce244d54d8909d09f.jpg)
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2020/11/westbrook-croy-and-tippit-murder.html
Dale Myers
...
I’ve written about the time of the Tippit murder more than once – most recently in 2017 [53] – and have proven in spades that Tippit was murdered between 1:14 and 1:15 p.m.
But that hasn’t stopped conspiracy folks from abandoning logic, reason and a mountain of evidence to claim that Tippit was shot earlier.
In this instance, Armstrong claims that seventeen eyewitnesses to the murder or its aftermath support the 1:06 p.m. shooting time – Frank Cimino, Francis Kinneth, Elbert Austin, Domingo Benavides, Helen Markham, Margie Higgins, Mary Wright, Mrs. Ann McCravey, Doris Holan, Acquilla Clemons, Roger Craig, Barbara Jeanette Davis, Virginia Davis, William Scoggins, L.J. Lewis, T.F. Bowley, and J.C. Butler.
But Armstrong’s claim is demonstratively false! In just a few hours, I pulled together enough real, honest-to goodness evidence to deep-six Armstrong’s entire list forever. Here’s what Armstrong was unable to find (or unwilling to report):
Seventeen fabricated witnesses
.....
Virginia Davis is interpreted as testifying that Tippit lived at 410 East Tenth...
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/pdf/WH6_Davis.pdf
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197360845_e8fce39296_b.jpg)
A letter in the 1990s from Dave Perry to Weisberg...
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/W%20Disk/Witherspoon%20Johnnie%20Maxie/Item%2001.pdf
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197372250_69eed92dd7_b.jpg)
-
Dan and Dan,
I've read this thread with interest, and while I honestly don't have time - or the necessary access to my files, which I've stored offsite - I will try to assist (from memory, so some errors are inevitable for which I apologize in advance!) in some way with the issues you raise.
First, with reference to transcripts, there are many, many versions of the DPD radio transcripts, and probably all of them contain errors, omissions, etc., of one kind or another. For example, the Secret Service, the Dallas Police, and the FBI all made transcripts, in addition to private transcripts made by Jim Bowles, Arch Kimbrough, Dave Dix, Russ Sheerer and many others. Some of these purport to be "complete" transcripts, while even more are only partial transcripts.
Add to this the fact that there are numerous copies of the radio recordings themselves, too. Again, many of these are only partial copies which, like some of the transcripts, focus on segments of the recordings of particular interest to the author/originator. All of these recordings are many, many generations removed from the original recordings - the Channel 1 recordings were voice-activated, made in "real time" onto flimsy blue polyester dictabelts by means of a stylus cutting a continuous grove onto a blank belt, capable of holding up to 30 minutes worth of sound recordings. In order to ensure that no break in recording, the radio messages were recorded such that there was an "overlap" of about 15-20 seconds at the end of each belt and the start of the next belt. Similarly, Channel 2 (an auxiliary channel used to handle additional radio traffic generated by special events) was also a voice-activated recording, recorded onto flexible green plastic discs. On the day of the assassination, there were two dispatchers working together on Channel 1 at any one time (Officers Hulse and Jackson at the time of the assassination, if I remember correctly), while another dispatcher (Sgt. Henslee) was working Channel 2 on his own, so it is not really surprising that there are discrepancies between what was said (and when it was said) by the dispatcher on either channel.
Over time, both the channel 1 and 2 recordings were copied onto a variety of media, including reel-to-reel tapes, cassette tapes, PC diskettes, hard drives, etc. The quality of these copies varied immensely, as did the recording speeds of the devices on which they were copied. In addition, the physical location of the original recordings over the years was not always the best in terms of protecting the recordings - in envelopes in boxes, in drawers in filing cabinets, and other such places, and certainly not in ideal storage conditions in terms of temperature and humidity-controlled environments, either.
-SNIP-
Fruit of a poisoned tree?
DPD officer R.C. Nelson remains silent for 50 years despite having a younger brother who retired in 2018 after 49 years as a news reporter, including from 1992 to 2018 at "CBS 4" in Miami. And, when Nelson finally breaks his silence after 50 years, he gives the interview to the investigative reporter of his brother's TV station, and not to his brother.
Could it be that Nelson wanted to avoid imparting on his brother, the stench that DPD dispatcher Murray Jackson applied to the investigation, apparently with the support of his DPD superiors, while Rankin and his investigation and the SS and FBI cooperated?
Sylvia Meagher :
(Sylvia seems to have gotten a few things wrong, judging with the benefit of hindsight that did not exist in 1967, but probably did in 1987 when "Bush tool" and "CIA influenced "author" Henry Hurt presented Sylvia's post WC Report analysis as if it were current:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#msg111782 )
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197759609_8c6d478d45_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51196268962_6a75b2a61d_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197758649_90d2f13c67_h.jpg)
In the following page, Sylvia Meagher had no way to know of RC Nelson's claim he went to
the Texas Theatre, arriving in time for Oswald's arrest, because Nelson was never questioned in
any investigation and remained silent until 2013.:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197758629_db5be22fd3_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197758604_5e761516d5_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197192558_f911e34efa_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197192553_39f56958f7_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197189083_294fb64b30_b.jpg)
https://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/11/22/pine-crest-students-learn-about-jfk-from-his-close-advisor/
November 22, 2013
"....CBS4’s Gary Nelson recounted where he was the day JFK was shot. “I was in the seventh grade when JFK was assassinated. We listened, my classmates and I, to hours of Walter Cronkite’s coverage on the school’s loudspeaker. We cried. We were confused. We knew we had experienced profound loss.”.."
At bottom of following November 20, 2013, article:
(Disclosure: R.C. Nelson is the brother of CBS4 News’ Gary Nelson)
https://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/11/20/exclusive-jfk-assassination-witness-speaks-for-1st-time/
Exclusive: JFK Assassination Witness Speaks For 1st Time
CBS4 Investigative Reporter Jilda Unruh Contributed To This Report
November 20, 2013
DALLAS (CBSMiami) – When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was cut down by an assassin, a chain of events began that included the murder of a police officer, the capture of the alleged presidential assassin, and the murder of the assassin.
In the 50 years since the Kennedy assassination, one Dallas Police officer who was in the middle of the chaos that enveloped the city in the hours and days that followed the murder has never shared his story about what he saw, heard and did. Until now.
For the first time ever, R.C. Nelson, retired from the Dallas Police, talked exclusively to CBSMiami.com about the pandemonium that came after the assassin’s bullets rang out in Dallas. Nelson has never spoken about the events, even to the Warren Commission.
On November 22, 1963, Nelson was working out of the southwest substation in Dallas. He said that police were spread all over the city guarding multiple areas.
“Only two people were working the south district,” Nelson said, “my partner J.D. Tippit and me. Tippit was working the entire Oak Cliff section.”
On a normal day, Nelson estimated there would have been 10-12 squads covering the area.
Nelson said he was across the viaduct from the Texas Book Depository when he heard the shots ring out in the cold Dallas air. The police dispatch was almost immediately on the air with reports of shots fired.
What Nelson heard was the shots that would forever change American history. President Kennedy, riding through Dealey Plaza in Dallas was shot along with Texas Governor John Connolly. Kennedy was fatally wounded by a second shot after the initial shot appeared to go through his neck.
Nelson said he was on the scene within two minutes and when he arrived, people were still on the ground and screaming. Nelson asked a motorman when he got to the scene what had happened?
“Somebody shot and killed Kennedy,” Nelson recalled the “motor jockey” (motor patrolman) saying. “He was up there (pointing to book depository). I saw the rifle in the window when I looked up.” Nelson said the motorman then said, “I saw Kennedy’s head blown off.”
Nelson contacted an inspector to ask what to do and his superior told him to just be in the area.
It wasn’t long after the assassination of President Kennedy that a second call came across the Dallas Police dispatch radio, this time of an officer shot in Oak Cliff. The officer, J.D. Tippit, was Nelson’s partner on “night shifts and deep night shifts,” but the two were not paired together on November 22.
Officer Tippit was described by Nelson as a, “nice, east Texas guy who loved his family and worked hard and did what he was supposed to do, but wasn’t very curious. He liked to write his tickets and go home. He had a bad habit of not looking at you when he was talking to you.”
Nelson said he had actually talked to Officer Tippit before the fateful day in Dallas about his partner’s tendency toward avoiding eye contact with subjects.
Official reports said that Officer Tippit pulled over Lee Harvey Oswald based on a description that was broadcast over the Dallas Police radio. Oswald then murdered Tippit before leaving the scene of the murder.
Nelson said he believed that Oswald actually flagged Officer Tippit down because he “can’t imagine Tippit pulling him (Oswald) over and saying “come here.”
“I think he (Oswald) was amazed that he wasn’t arrested after the shooting,” Nelson recalled. “The book depository was covered with cops and he walks out! He didn’t appear to have a plan. He couldn’t go home. So he hails a cab and then gets on a bus.”
Another aspect of Nelson’s belief that Tippit didn’t seek out Oswald was that Tippit didn’t secure or guard his pistol and the first shot hit the officer in the temple, suggesting Tippitt was looking away.
Oswald shot Tippit on 10th Street in Dallas and Nelson and several others went to a library a block away.
“While we were preparing to go into the library, we heard someone had gone into the Texas (movie) theater without paying,” Nelson said. “It was about three blocks away and we converged on the Texas theater.”
A view of the interior of the Texas Theater October 8, 2013 in Dallas, Texas. (Source: AFP Photo/Brendan
Nelson said he first went to the back entrance, but then that went to the front of the theater and entered the lobby.
Three police officers, Nick McDonald, C.T. Walker, and Charles Harrison were bringing Oswald into the lobby.
“Apparently, Oswald hit McDonald, then pulled a gun on him and one of the other (cops) knocked the gun away,” Nelson recalled. “That’s when McDonald punched Oswald. Both of them had bumps on their heads. I watched as Oswald came out of the theater in handcuffs.”
But that’s not where Nelson’s brush with history, or the story of Oswald ended.
Two days after the assassination of Kennedy and with an entire nation in mourning, Nelson was assigned to the basement’s main door entrance from city hall. Oswald was scheduled to be moved from city hall to the county jail and he was being moved through the basement.
Nelson said all of the television cameras, which broadcast the transfer and what happened in the basement, entered through the door where he was standing guard.
As Oswald was moving through the basement, Nelson was approximately 20 feet away when he heard a shot ring out and then chaos. Chicago businessman Jack Ruby had gotten into the basement and shot Oswald with a .38 revolver.
Nelson said Ruby was bent over and he heard someone yell, “Get his gun.”
“I grabbed for his hands and didn’t find a gun,” Nelson said. “But I managed to manhandle him into the basement jail house office and handcuffed him.”
Ruby reportedly said, “It’s me, it’s Jack,” right after he fired the fatal shot at Oswald. Ruby knew several Dallas Police officers, but Nelson said he was not familiar with him.
What hasn’t been shared before is what Nelson said happened just before the shooting and then in the immediate aftermath.
According to Nelson, right before Oswald was brought to the basement, a Dallas Police decoy car was brought to the basement and plain clothes cops were put inside the car to distract the media from the real transfer vehicle.
The decoy car drove up the north ramp, which Nelson said was actually the entry ramp to the basement.
“They drove up the north ramp which was actually the entry ramp into the basement and drove around the block,” Nelson said.
Nelson said the lieutenant driving the decoy car came walking back through his area after parking in the basement again. Nelson said he was positive that Ruby had not passed him to get into the basement.
According to Nelson, Lieutenant Sam Pierce said Ruby walked right by the decoy car and walked down the north ramp into the basement. Shortly after the shooting, however, Nelson was told Dallas Chief of Police Jesse Curry wanted to see him.
When Nelson got to Chief Curry’s office, he saw Lieutenant Pierce was already in the office. The chief told Nelson, “R.C., this isn’t going to be held against you with all the TV cameras that were coming into the basement.”
Nelson thought Chief Curry was implying that Ruby had gotten past him. Nelson said he told the chief that, “You can tell them anything you want, but Ruby didn’t come by me!”
In the days that followed, Officer Tippit would be laid to rest and when Nelson saw his former partner’s wife to try to comfort her was hard.
“The first time I had contact with her; it was tough,” Nelson recalled. “You’ve got a
partner and you see his wife and kid at his funeral. (Choking up) It was pretty tough.”
Over the next year, the Warren Commission investigated the assassination of President Kennedy and the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. Despite his being right in the middle of the historical events, Nelson said he was never called to testify.
“I thought it was kind of strange, because all during the Warren Commission hearings, no one knew how Ruby got into the basement,” Nelson said.
As the decades have gone by, Nelson said he’s had a chance to talk about the events, but said he didn’t “feel like talking about it.”
“Several authors contacted me and I just didn’t feel like it,” Nelson said. “But lately, many of my family members have tried to get me to tell my story.”
R.C. also said that some authors have even alleged that he was “involved in the conspiracy.”
“I wasn’t,” Nelson said. “I want my family to have something recorded so my great-grand kids will know the real facts.”
-
Dan O'Meara:
As promised, I did the best I could in terms of answering the points you made in the OP over the weekend, and hope my answers are of some help to you in resolving your queries.
Before I go any further, I'd offer a few preliminary observations to give the matter some context:
(1) The dispatcher was not required to note the time after every transmission – it would have been very useful to us, but it didn’t happen in quite a number cases, particularly when there was heavy radio traffic
(2) Using transcripts alone to determine when things happened is fraught with danger. I did some study many years ago on the number of actual radio transmissions on the recordings, compared with those transcribed on probably the best publicly-available “verbatim” transcript of channel 1, and while I cannot now recall the details, I do remember that the transcript was woefully incomplete. While others may disagree, I honestly believe that listening to the actual recordings is the only way to get an accurate picture of what was going on, and how the messages between the dispatchers and the officers on the ground relate to one another in context.
(3) It is worth remembering that both DPD radio channels were voice-activated, so the recording devices did not record continuously
Now, to deal with the "5-8 minute" gap, and the “nine minute section of radio silence on Channel 2” mentioned in the OP, I have listened to the most complete copy of the DPD radio recordings that I have (which were obtained from NARA some years ago), and I have found the following:
The two radio channels were in sync at 12:45, when the “Attention all squads, attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting at Elm and Houston …” notification was broadcast simultaneously on both channels.
On Channel 1, the Dispatcher (Hulse or Jackson) tells 241 (Officer Hollingsworth) to collect some blood from the Blood Bank on Commerce Street and take it to Parkland Hospital. 241 apparently responds immediately, telling the dispatcher that he is “en route”. 18 transmissions/exchanges later, the dispatcher announces the time as 1:04 – this puts the call probably somewhere between 1:03 and 1:04, probably closer to the latter. Seven radio exchanges later, 241 reports that he is at the Blood Bank, and 6 transmissions later, Captain Souter advises the dispatcher that “241’s got it and gone” – namely, he has collected the blood, and has headed for Parkland.
Meanwhile, on Channel 2, the request from Patrolman Chism for a squad to go to the Blood Bank and pick up some blood and take it to Parkland occurs three transmissions after the dispatcher (Henslee) announced the time as being 1 PM, and before he announced the time as 1:03.
It was also noted in the OP that immediately after the “Blood Bank” message on Channel 2, Captain Souter asked for a status report on the well-being of the President and Governor Connolly. My interpretation of the recordings shows that the reply to Capt. Souter followed in the very next transmission, and also occurred before the time announcement of 1:03 on Channel 2.
In summary, then, I don't find any evidence of an unexplainable gap in the recordings, or a nine minute period of radio silence, in the 1 PM to 1:05 PM time frame on either channel.
As previously noted, my time is at a premium right now, and much of my old research is locked away (for reasons of space, primarily), but I hope that what I've posted here is on some value/help to you in your work.
Chris Scally.
-
Dan O'Meara:
As promised, I did the best I could in terms of answering the points you made in the OP over the weekend, and hope my answers are of some help to you in resolving your queries.
Before I go any further, I'd offer a few preliminary observations to give the matter some context:
(1) The dispatcher was not required to note the time after every transmission – it would have been very useful to us, but it didn’t happen in quite a number cases, particularly when there was heavy radio traffic
(2) Using transcripts alone to determine when things happened is fraught with danger. I did some study many years ago on the number of actual radio transmissions on the recordings, compared with those transcribed on probably the best publicly-available “verbatim” transcript of channel 1, and while I cannot now recall the details, I do remember that the transcript was woefully incomplete. While others may disagree, I honestly believe that listening to the actual recordings is the only way to get an accurate picture of what was going on, and how the messages between the dispatchers and the officers on the ground relate to one another in context.
(3) It is worth remembering that both DPD radio channels were voice-activated, so the recording devices did not record continuously
Now, to deal with the "5-8 minute" gap, and the “nine minute section of radio silence on Channel 2” mentioned in the OP, I have listened to the most complete copy of the DPD radio recordings that I have (which were obtained from NARA some years ago), and I have found the following:
The two radio channels were in sync at 12:45, when the “Attention all squads, attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting at Elm and Houston …” notification was broadcast simultaneously on both channels.
On Channel 1, the Dispatcher (Hulse or Jackson) tells 241 (Officer Hollingsworth) to collect some blood from the Blood Bank on Commerce Street and take it to Parkland Hospital. 241 apparently responds immediately, telling the dispatcher that he is “en route”. 18 transmissions/exchanges later, the dispatcher announces the time as 1:04 – this puts the call probably somewhere between 1:03 and 1:04, probably closer to the latter. Seven radio exchanges later, 241 reports that he is at the Blood Bank, and 6 transmissions later, Captain Souter advises the dispatcher that “241’s got it and gone” – namely, he has collected the blood, and has headed for Parkland.
Meanwhile, on Channel 2, the request from Patrolman Chism for a squad to go to the Blood Bank and pick up some blood and take it to Parkland occurs three transmissions after the dispatcher (Henslee) announced the time as being 1 PM, and before he announced the time as 1:03.
It was also noted in the OP that immediately after the “Blood Bank” message on Channel 2, Captain Souter asked for a status report on the well-being of the President and Governor Connolly. My interpretation of the recordings shows that the reply to Capt. Souter followed in the very next transmission, and also occurred before the time announcement of 1:03 on Channel 2.
In summary, then, I don't find any evidence of an unexplainable gap in the recordings, or a nine minute period of radio silence, in the 1 PM to 1:05 PM time frame on either channel.
As previously noted, my time is at a premium right now, and much of my old research is locked away (for reasons of space, primarily), but I hope that what I've posted here is on some value/help to you in your work.
Chris Scally.
Thanks so much for taking the time to look into it Chris.
It was always a long-shot of sorts as such a large discrepancy so soon after both Channels were in synch with each other and with "real time" would hint at a deliberate attempt to alter the tapes.
Although there are vague hints something like this may have happened there is nothing definitive.
Back to the drawing board.
But thanks again.
-
Thanks, Dan - you are very welcome, and I'll keep an eye on this thread going forward!
-
Thanks so much for taking the time to look into it Chris.
It was always a long-shot of sorts as such a large discrepancy so soon after both Channels were in synch with each other and with "real time" would hint at a deliberate attempt to alter the tapes.
Although there are vague hints something like this may have happened there is nothing definitive.
Back to the drawing board.
But thanks again.
Excerpt from Billy Joe Lord's March, 1977 letter to President Carter. "One of the parties" is Henry Hurt.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=9963#relPageId=269
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51198527733_fa19f08162_c.jpg)
Dan, as recently as in 1986 when Henry Hurt finally published his book, it appears "team Bush" (AKA the Establishment, CIA, PTB...) encouraged belief there was fraud, obstruction of justice associated with the tapes, unless Henry Hurt was not the meticulous sleuth supported since 1976 with generously financed, professional research and wide contacts.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#new
... The opposite of what would be expected of these "stalwarts", especially considering
Bush's eulogy at Gerry Ford's funeral.
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/washington/02cnd-ford-bush.html
"...And the conspiracy theorists can say what they will, but the Warren Commission report will always have the final definitive say on this tragic matter. Why? Because Jerry Ford put his name on it and Jerry Ford’s word was always good."
Is it random coincidence Bush, through his support of Henry Hurt which is obvious in Billy Joe Lord's letter to Jimmy Carter, that what Bush and Henry Hurt conveyed to the American people was as contradictory and nonsensical as what Garrison did? Isn't that the SOP of "outfits" like the CIA ... one big, "76 year old, former DCI takes fatal, pitch-black evening canoe ride after working hard all day, from dock adjacent to his home"?
http://www.pythiapress.com/wartales/colby.htm
Henry Hurt's son... a "career" of disinfo :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Hurt
Charles Hurt (born 1971)[1] is an American journalist and political commentator. He is currently the opinion editor of The Washington Times,[2][3][4] Fox News contributor,[5] Breitbart News contributor, and a Drudge Report editor.[2]
...
Hurt was The New York Post's D.C. Bureau Chief and news columnist covering the White House for five years.
From 2003 to 2007, Hurt covered the U.S. Congress as a reporter for The Washington Times[6] before leaving to join The New York Post. In 2011, he rejoined The Washington Times as a political columnist.[3] In December 2016, Hurt was named the opinion editor.[4]
National Review editor Rich Lowry described Hurt as, "an early adopter of Trumpite populism."[7] Hurt has written numerous opinion pieces lauding Trump since the 2016 election.[8]
Personal life
Hurt is a native of Chatham, Virginia.[9] Hurt is the son of investigative journalist and former Reader's Digest editor Henry C. Hurt and his wife, Margaret Nolting Williams.[10][11]
-
Tom - you make my brain hurt.
After going through the leads you've posted, the only thing I can find that is relevant to this thread (which is not to say it isn't fascinating stuff) is that it is suggested the order given to Tippit to move into Oak Cliff may have actually been overdubbed on the tapes and then put into the transcripts of the tapes.
There is also a clear discrepancy between the first DPD transcripts given to the WC and the McAdams transcripts concerning Nelson trying to call in just after the 12:47 time call.
It seems possible the tapes have been altered although I can't see anything definitive. Whatever the case, I'm not seeing anything that might account for a 5 -6 minute discrepancy between "police time" and "real time" within 40 minutes of the synchronisation outlined in the OP.
[The Lord stuff really is fascinating but I'm nowhere near that level of detail into the case. I've only recently just got out of Dealey Plaza in terms of trying to understand what's going on.]
-
Tom - you make my brain hurt.
After going through the leads you've posted, the only thing I can find that is relevant to this thread (which is not to say it isn't fascinating stuff) is that it is suggested the order given to Tippit to move into Oak Cliff may have actually been overdubbed on the tapes and then put into the transcripts of the tapes.
There is also a clear discrepancy between the first DPD transcripts given to the WC and the McAdams transcripts concerning Nelson trying to call in just after the 12:47 time call.
It seems possible the tapes have been altered although I can't see anything definitive. Whatever the case, I'm not seeing anything that might account for a 5 -6 minute discrepancy between "police time" and "real time" within 40 minutes of the synchronisation outlined in the OP.
[The Lord stuff really is fascinating but I'm nowhere near that level of detail into the case. I've only recently just got out of Dealey Plaza in terms of trying to understand what's going on.]
Dan, I began my posts on this page intending to show you that Henry Hurt backing Sylvia Meagher's presentation that supports the tapes being altered and untrustworthy must have had an ulterior motive. Instead, what I've found and posted here, today, ...author Henry Hurt would never mistakenly do what I present him doing about the 12:45 dubbing question, so he must have done this on purpose.:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#new
..strikes me as even more troubling. It seems as if the question of the reliability of the tapes and the transcripts based on them, is just one small slice of an establishment backed psy-op I think Garrison also participated in, just following orders, to reduce all JFK Assassination related controversies to Chaos... a never ending disinfo stream.
-
Dan, I began my posts on this page intending to show you that Henry Hurt backing Sylvia Meagher's presentation that supports the tapes being altered and untrustworthy must have had an ulterior motive. Instead, what I've found and posted here, today, ...author Henry Hurt would never mistakenly do what I present him doing about the 12:45 dubbing question, so he must have done this on purpose.:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#new
..strikes me as even more troubling. It seems as if the question of the reliability of the tapes and the transcripts based on them, is just one small slice of an establishment backed psy-op I think Garrison also participated in, just following orders, to reduce all JFK Assassination related controversies to Chaos... a never ending disinfo stream.
I've been at this about a year now and one thing I have noticed is that there is hardly a single eye-witness testimony or piece of evidence that isn't contradicted and/or dubious in some way. It's a really striking aspect of this case.
The truth should be a fairly straight-forward matter in my opinion, even taking into account witness unreliability or the incompetence/corruption that features in the investigation.
But this is something else and is at the heart of why so many people can hold so many different views of what happened.
I find it difficult not to draw the conclusion that the Chaos you mention signifies a deliberate (and very successful) attempt to obscure the truth of what really happened.
I'm still in the process of trying to pick my own path through this labyrinth, all I can do is follow my own interpretation of things but that may end up having little to do with the actual truth of the matter.
-
I've been at this about a year now and one thing I have noticed is that there is hardly a single eye-witness testimony or piece of evidence that isn't contradicted and/or dubious in some way. It's a really striking aspect of this case.
The truth should be a fairly straight-forward matter in my opinion, even taking into account witness unreliability or the incompetence/corruption that features in the investigation.
But this is something else and is at the heart of why so many people can hold so many different views of what happened.
I find it difficult not to draw the conclusion that the Chaos you mention signifies a deliberate (and very successful) attempt to obscure the truth of what really happened.
I'm still in the process of trying to pick my own path through this labyrinth, all I can do is follow my own interpretation of things but that may end up having little to do with the actual truth of the matter.
I've "only" been actively seeking to make sense of this for thirteen years, so I have more in common with you than the five and six decade veterans. I was a middle school student in 1963 and the assassinations of MLK and RFK five years later influenced me to avert my gaze, Vietnam, Kent State, Watergate and a couple of years of an unelected POTUS who picked his own vice president made me cynical. I didn't view "JFK, the movie" until 2013.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/03/30/who-killed-martin-luther-king-jr-his-family-believes-james-earl-ray-was-framed/
March 30, 2018
...“It pains my heart,” said Bernice King, 55, the youngest of Martin Luther King’s four children and the executive director of the King Center in Atlanta, “that James Earl Ray had to spend his life in prison paying for things he didn’t do.”..
(https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YA7N7GJG4AZR3D6VU6PRY52CRI.jpg)
Coretta Scott King and her daughter, Bernice, then 5 years old, at the April 9, 1968, funeral of Martin Luther King Jr. in Atlanta.
...Andrew Young, the former U.N. ambassador and Atlanta mayor who was at the Lorraine Motel with King when he was shot there, agrees. “I would not accept the fact that James Earl Ray pulled the trigger, and that’s all that matters,” said Young, who noted that King’s death came after the killings of John F. Kennedy and Malcolm X and just months before the slaying of Robert F. Kennedy.
"rope-a-dope" is used to describe strategies in which one contender draws non-injuring offensive punches to let the opponent tire themselves out.
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/washington/02cnd-ford-ghwb.html
Jan. 2, 2007
Following is the transcript of the eulogy for former President Gerald R. Ford delivered today by former President George H.W. Bush in Washington, as recorded by The New York Times.
And the conspiracy theorists can say what they will, but the Warren Commission report will always have the final definitive say on this tragic matter. Why? Because Jerry Ford put his name on it and Jerry Ford’s word was always good.
It's been hard to argue with this.:
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/G%20Disk/Garrison%20Jim/Garrison%20Jim%206-78ff/Item%2028.pdf
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51198554887_722649c9a2_b.jpg)
The WC Report and the news media and a number of book authors made Oswald out to be the lone assassin and DeMohrenschildt as his best friend in Dallas.
-
Most will be aware of the controversial instruction of dispatcher Murray Jackson to Tippit and Nelson to move from their assigned patrol districts to Oak Cliff around 12.45. This instruction was absent from the original police transcripts prepared for the WC (Sawyer Exhibits A&B) that were supposed to contain all relevant communications relating to the assassination and Tippit. After some months the call appeared in subsequent transcripts. This call allayed concerns of the WC about why Tippit would be so far outside his assigned district when shot. In order to get a clearer picture of whether Oak Cliff was indeed being drained of police presence following the call for all units to proceed down town I used the following documents. CE2645 -an FBI report dated June 1964 that outlined each patrol assignment for that day and what their response was. This report was prepared to determine if any patrol car could have been responsible for the sighting of a car at 1026 North Beckley around 1pm as claimed by Mrs Roberts. Interestingly the one officer excluded from this summary is Tippit! Putnam Exhibit 1 is a map of the patrol districts. The transcripts that appear at John McAdams site http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/index.htm From these I prepared the following map.
(https://i.ibb.co/yVv5G9m/290-D1314-3268-40-BC-AC1-A-480-F43-FB8-AF8.webp)
Those units who were reported to attend downtown in response to the call are indicated in red and are positioned in the district allocated prior to the shooting. Cars containing 2 officers are indicated by circles and those with one are squares. There were some cars instructed to stay in their district and some of them were instructed to set up road blocks. All roadblocks were to the North and north-east of the city. Officers instructed to stay in their areas are indicated in blue. There are some officers that further require attention. Parker, Nelson, Menzel and Tippit.
Officer Parker (56).
Parker was assigned districts 56 and 58. After making a call at 12.28 Parker disappears for a period "anyone know where 56 is?" However the transcripts indicate he radioed in his position to dispatch around 12.44 that he would be "out for five" and was on East Jefferson. This is within the Oak Cliff district and it appears he had not responded to the downtown call. In CE2645 it is stated he remained in his allocated district. This is clearly wrong and Jackson knew he was in Oak Cliff. His position at this time is indicated on the map. Parker does not broadcast again until 2.13! CE2645 incorrectly claimed he remained in his district, about 10 miles, away the whole time.
Officer Nelson (87)
Nelson was well north of his assigned district when he called his position to Jackson at 12.45. He was at RL Thornton and Marsalis, many miles North of district 87. He was much closer to Oak Cliff at this time than was Tippit. Apparently Nelson ignored the call from Jackson to move to Oak Cliff and continued to the TSBD. In CE2645 it simply states he proceeded downtown as instructed. No mention of the Jackson instruction to patrol Oak Cliff.
Officer Walker
He was instructed to remain in districts 85 and 86 south of Oak Cliff.
Officer Menzel (91)
Menzel assigned district 91 and 92, reports clear at 12.28. It appears he heads for lunch at a diner at 430 West Jefferson. It would seem strange he heard nothing on the radio about the shooting on the radio 2 minutes later. He seems to be the only officer who took a lunch break at this time. He did not report back until after 1pm and in CE 2645 it states he repeatedly tried to call by phone but couldn't get through. Obviously no news of the shooting had reached him in nearly 40 minutes. Believable? No attempt by dispatch to contact him in this time to help patrol Oak Cliff. Strange, given Jackson's concern about draining the area of resources.
Officer Tippit (78)
It might appear that he too was responding to the downtown call but certainly at a slower pace than Nelson. He reported he was at Keinst and Bonnie View at 12.45 and his position on the map reflects this. (However we know that there are 5 witnesses that put him at the Gloco station around this time).
So does it appear that Jackson's justification for ordering Tippit and Neslon to Oak Cliff is logical from the evidence? It certainly appears to me that there are large areas of Dallas devoid of police. In fact apart from those downtown at the TSBD, Oak Cliff is blessed with police.
Having trawled through the transcripts and listened to the calls some extra comments in chronological order.
1. There is a call of 78 (Tippit) at 12.29 one minute before the shots. it is not clear if this it Tippit or Dispatch.
2. At 12.30 91(Menzel) calls clear twice. The second time is just 5 seconds before sirens are clearly heard on the radio. Menzel does not get confirmation of clear from dispatch? Apparently he goes to lunch.
3.At 12.36 93 is called from dispatch and reports at 12.36 at Sylvan and Fort Worth? This appears to be way outside the assigned district. Assists an ambulance by blocking a road.
4. Who is 97 that called in at 12.41? Reports in at Westmoreland and Fort Worth less about 5 minutes from 1026 North Beckley. Dispatch seems surprised 97 is in service.
5. The 12.41 call for squads in down town area to code 3 elm and Houston. Note the call is for local units only.
6. Unit 43 already there at the jail. Unit 233 is already at Elm and Houston. Unit 61 is close by. Then 77 responds from the district west of Tippit. He does not get confirmed by dispatch for this. Then Unit 63, I have no idea who that is but district 63 is close to the scene. Then dispatch calls 76 in. Then 97, again no idea who 97 is but district 97 is west of Oak Cliff, is called by dispatch. Then 60, 80, and 100 are called by dispatch to attend (Sgts. Putnam, Davis and Jennings). 113 is enroute 113 is downtown close already. I could not find a listing for 113. Is it car 113 (Woods) in district 68 or Osburn as indicated on McAdams site. The position called, Gaston and Haskell is North of Fort worth? Strange. 66 calls enroute, again no idea who 66 is.
At 12.42 81 Calls he is at Corinth and 8th this is in northeastern oak cliff 56 reports East Jefferson again in Oak Cliff 12.45 suspect description is broadcast and 233 broadcasts the suspect is in the TSBD. 81 has moved north on industrial moving closer to the TSBD. Following this call 78 Tippit and 87 Nelson respond immediately. There is almost no gap between the 10-4 call from the previous call and the instruction to Tippit and Nelson to move. Why? Surely no drain of Oak Cliff has occurred. There is no indication that dispatch even knows that Menzel is at lunch. Also. there is no 10-4 call from Tippit or Nelson to this instruction, merely a call of their respective current positions. No 78 for Tippit is audible.
79 (Anglin) only called a position of 1400 Corinth after - so dispatch doesn't know he left his Oak Cliff district until now.
Then 93 calls asks where to go dispatch says TSBD he was also originally assigned to Oak Cliff
12.46 77 assigned to Oak Cliff asks where to report and is told the TSBD
12.48 81 arrives at the TSBD and calls out to dispatch
12.52 79 (Anglin) calls he will be out at underpass. Then 87 (Nelson) calls out down here (TSBD). This is when it would be apparent Oak Cliff is possibly needing backup. Could he have made a call at this point for Tippit to move there and it has been moved up?
Finally, Jackson's strange 12.55 call to confirm Tippit is in Oak Cliff and at to be at large for any emergency. It seemed to me the "78" on this recording sounds different to Jackson's previous 78. No so much pronounced Southern twang. When analyzed in sequence I find no evidence that a call should be made at 12.45 for Tippit to move to Oak Cliff. Possibly 10 minutes later. Initially only downtown squads were asked and reported to the scene. It was not until later that Units such as 81 responded or asked if they should attend. Who is car 97? Even dispatch is surprised by that call.
-
....
Officer Nelson (87)
Nelson was well north of his assigned district when he called his position to Jackson at 12.45. He was at RL Thornton and Marsalis, many miles North of district 87. He was much closer to Oak Cliff at this time than was Tippit. Apparently Nelson ignored the call from Jackson to move to Oak Cliff and continued to the TSBD. In CE2645 it simply states he proceeded downtown as instructed. No mention of the Jackson instruction to patrol Oak Cliff.
....
Uhhh... Henry Hurt, is that you? (Just teasing you, Colin. Please read this, if you haven't, and maybe you can explain why you agree or disagree that the cards were shuffled in this particular controversy, quite a few times.)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#new
Link above same as :
....
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/D%20Disk/Dallas%20Police%20Department/Dallas%20Police%20Department%20Records/Volume%2004/Item%2001.pdf
12:45 pm
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197130061_be129c6452_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51196512137_451717b66a_b.jpg)
Next page:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197216956_5a52007b62_c.jpg)
Posted just two weeks ago... I don't yet know how this researcher knows it is Nelson's instruction from Jackson, but
it makes sense, considering "87 Nelson" of the page before, is unaccounted for...
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/Co1hd2nf-Fw
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197451928_255e526f65_h.jpg)
I just found these.... but they address only the events on Sunday morning.
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340168/
[Report concerning the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald] - The ...
May 12, 2021 — Report to Chief J. E. Curry by Ronald C. Nelson concerning his assignment and the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. Nelson states that he was ...
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340170/
[Report from Ronald C. Nelson to Chief J. E. Curry, November ...
May 12, 2021 — Nelson, Ronald C. November 26, 1963. ContextBookmark this section. This report is part of the collection entitled: John F. Kennedy, Dallas Police ...
-
Uhhh... Henry Hurt, is that you? (Just teasing you, Colin. Please read this, if you haven't, and maybe you can explain why you agree or disagree that the cards were shuffled in this particular controversy, quite a few times.)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#new
Link above same as :
Yes Tom I have read. My work was done after reading "the Car 10 where are you" piece by Bill Drenas http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/car10.htm (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/car10.htm) some years back.
I also subsequently read an article by Duke Lane that came to similar conclusions. While one may argue Oak Cliff was "drained" closer to 1pm the call by Jackson and the responses by Tippit and Nelson are strange. I believe the likely answer was it was inserted to explain why Tippit was where he was.
-
Yes Tom I have read. My work was done after reading "the Car 10 where are you" piece by Bill Drenas http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/car10.htm (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/car10.htm) some years back.
I also subsequently read an article by Duke Lane that came to similar conclusions. While one may argue Oak Cliff was "drained" closer to 1pm the call by Jackson and the responses by Tippit and Nelson are strange. I believe the likely answer was it was inserted to explain why Tippit was where he was.
Henry Hurt originally had a big budget, "the Digest / Pam Butler, Epstein, and nearly ten years to get his book right. Why would he write what he did about Nelson except to further muddy the water while paying a cynical, backhanded compliment to Sylvia Meagher? Hurt's book was published in 1986, by Holt, not by R. D. Was there still a pressing need to make Oswald an convincing assassin via a Tippit frame?
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/O%20Disk/Ourslee%20Fulton%20Jr/Item%2002.pdf
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51202706945_213a3ddb2a_b.jpg)
I tend to believe the opposite of anything Henry Hurt embraced because he seemed to be Bush's eyes and ears, and why would Bush have a need for a personal representative, on the ground, at the dawn of the HSCA inquiry?
Nelson breaks his silence...for posterity, for the children, (LOL) in 2013 :
...On November 22, 1963, Nelson was working out of the southwest substation in Dallas. He said that police were spread all over the city guarding multiple areas.
Only two people were working the south district,” Nelson said, “my partner J.D. Tippit and me. Tippit was working the entire Oak Cliff section.”
...
On a normal day, Nelson estimated there would have been 10-12 squads covering the area.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#msg111782
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197152291_4ec7c7234b_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51202373349_ae15bc9a52_b.jpg)
-
In my OP I have established that "police time" and "real time" were pretty much in synch.
I think what you really showed (via the McIntyre photo) is that the Hertz clock and the channel 2 dispatcher's time check at 12:30 were pretty much in sync. Kellerman and Powers could have just looked at the Hertz clock, so they are not necessarily independent sources.
There is nothing I know of by which to assess the accuracy or calibration of the Hertz clock.
-
I think what you really showed (via the McIntyre photo) is that the Hertz clock and the channel 2 dispatcher's time check at 12:30 were pretty much in sync. Kellerman and Powers could have just looked at the Hertz clock, so they are not necessarily independent sources.
There is nothing I know of by which to assess the accuracy or calibration of the Hertz clock.
This is Powers:
"We then turned off of Main Street onto Houston and made the sharp swing to the left up Elm Street. At that time we were traveling very slowly, no more than 12 miles an hour. In accordance with my custom, I was very much concerned about our timing and at just about that point I looked at my watch and noted that it was almost exactly 12:30 p.m."
And this is Greer:
"[Kellerman] said '12:30.' He looked at his watch, he said "12:30," and we were in the underpass at the time"
There is also the testimony of Forrest Sorrels, who stated:
"As we came around Houston, yes, sir; came around on Houston, yes, because we had begun to pick up speed there. And I remember Mr. Lawson turned around and said, 'I wish he would come on, because we are late now,' or words to that effect. And I expressed to him, I said, 'Oh, we are not going to be very late.' And I looked at my watch, and it was just about 12:30"
-
This is Powers:
"We then turned off of Main Street onto Houston and made the sharp swing to the left up Elm Street. At that time we were traveling very slowly, no more than 12 miles an hour. In accordance with my custom, I was very much concerned about our timing and at just about that point I looked at my watch and noted that it was almost exactly 12:30 p.m."
And this is Greer:
"[Kellerman] said '12:30.' He looked at his watch, he said "12:30," and we were in the underpass at the time"
There is also the testimony of Forrest Sorrels, who stated:
"As we came around Houston, yes, sir; came around on Houston, yes, because we had begun to pick up speed there. And I remember Mr. Lawson turned around and said, 'I wish he would come on, because we are late now,' or words to that effect. And I expressed to him, I said, 'Oh, we are not going to be very late.' And I looked at my watch, and it was just about 12:30"
LN "logic"
I looked at my watch and noted that it was almost exactly 12:30 p.m."
He looked at his watch, he said "12:30,"
I looked at my watch, and it was just about 12:30"
They looked at their watch and it said....... and their watches were all correct
and then this beauty;
Bowley, when he arrived at the Tippit scene looked at his watch and it said 1:10 PM
LNr: Bowley's watch could not possibly be right because back in those days watches were highly unreliable
Amazing hypocrisy!
-
LN "logic"
I looked at my watch and noted that it was almost exactly 12:30 p.m."
He looked at his watch, he said "12:30,"
I looked at my watch, and it was just about 12:30"
They looked at their watch and it said....... and their watches were all correct
and then this beauty;
Bowley, when he arrived at the Tippit scene looked at his watch and it said 1:10 PM
LNr: Bowley's watch could not possibly be right because back in those days watches were highly unreliable
Amazing hypocrisy!
The point which you choose to miss is that 12:30 channel 2 time is 12:30 Hertz billboard time is 12:30 Powers time is 12:30 Kellerman time is 12:30 Sorrels time. Even if we assume that the Secret service agents explicitly synchronized their watches that day, we still wind up with the fact that 4 independent time sources put the time of the assassination at 12:30, including the channel 2 clock. I could go on and on about the origins of the term "regression towards the mean," and why it's important here, but you seem to have issues with long posts. The TL;DR version is that the agreement of these different clocks strongly imply that the DPD channel 2 clock is running pretty close to standard time. By contrast, what clock, watch, or other time piece can Bowley's watch be compared to? How can we determine the accuracy of his watch? I should mention that Bowley himself has been quoted (in Into the Nightmanre at least, IIRC) that his watch could have been 5 minutes off.
-
The point which you choose to miss is that 12:30 channel 2 time is 12:30 Hertz billboard time is 12:30 Powers time is 12:30 Kellerman time is 12:30 Sorrels time. Even if we assume that the Secret service agents explicitly synchronized their watches that day, we still wind up with the fact that 4 independent time sources put the time of the assassination at 12:30, including the channel 2 clock. I could go on and on about the origins of the term "regression towards the mean," and why it's important here, but you seem to have issues with long posts. The TL;DR version is that the agreement of these different clocks strongly imply that the DPD channel 2 clock is running pretty close to standard time. By contrast, what clock, watch, or other time piece can Bowley's watch be compared to? How can we determine the accuracy of his watch? I should mention that Bowley himself has been quoted (in Into the Nightmanre at least, IIRC) that his watch could have been 5 minutes off.
The point which you choose to miss is that 12:30 channel 2 time is 12:30 Hertz billboard time is 12:30 Powers time is 12:30 Kellerman time is 12:30 Sorrels time. Even if we assume that the Secret service agents explicitly synchronized their watches that day, we still wind up with the fact that 4 independent time sources put the time of the assassination at 12:30, including the channel 2 clock.
And what you seem to have chosen to miss is that Bowley's arrival is part of a sequence of events which started with Markham saying she was en route to her regular bus stop at 1:06 or 1:08 and which ended with Tippit being declared DOA at Methodist Hospital at 1:15 PM. The timeline I have provided earlier (which you most likely reject out of hand) shows by witness statements how the sequence of events is linked in such a way that you simply can not move one part without having to move all the other parts as well.
By contrast, what clock, watch, or other time piece can Bowley's watch be compared to? How can we determine the accuracy of his watch?
The sequence of events as provided by the timeline I have presented provides corroboration of Bowley's watch being correct.
Here is the time line again, in case you ignored missed it so far;
Markham leaves her home at "a little after 1" and is en route to the bus stop on Jefferson by 1:06 or 1:07
She only needs to walk one block to get from 9th street to 10th street. The FBI determined that the distance of one block takes about 2,5 minutes to walk. This gets Markham to the corner of 10th and Patton by 1:09:30 at the latest, perfectly on time to reach the bus stop on Jefferson at 1:11 or 1:12. [Note: if Tippit was killed anywhere between 1:14 and 1:16, Markham would have already been at her bus stop and would not have seen it]
1:09 Shooting
Bowley picked up his daugther at school at 12:55 (his words) and is en route to pick up his wife from work. The distance between the school and 10th street takes about 13 to 15 minutes to drive. This gets him to 10th street at 1:10
1:10 Benavides making his call and Bowley arrives
Bowley says (in the video "Hunting Oswald") that when he arrived he noticed something was going on, so he parked his car at a fair distance away so his 12 year old daughter would not see it. He then walked towards the police car, checked on Tippit and then noticed Benavides who could not get the radio of the patrol car to work. It's a fair estimation that this would have taken him around 45 seconds to one minute. During this time Benavides is keying the mic in vain.
1:11 Bowley makes his call, lasting 46 seconds
DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) wrote in their supplementary offense report that at approximently 1:10 they heard on the radio that a police officer was involved in a shooting at East Tenth Street.
1:12 Callaway arrives at the scene. He only had less than one block to run after hearing the shots, but apparently first
waited until the man with a revolver that came toward him has passed.
1:12:30 After checking on Tippit, Callaway makes his call and hears the ambulance's sirens in the background
Ambulance arrives. Callaway and Bowley help loading Tippit's body into the ambulance
1:12:45 DPD officer Croy is in his car at Zang and Colorado when he hears Bowley's radio call. It takes him no more than
1,5 to 2 minutes to arrive at 10th street. When he arrives he sees Tippit's body being loaded into the ambulance
1:13 The ambulance leaves. The distance to Methodist Hospital takes 2 minutes to drive in normal traffic. With sirens on
it takes less. Ambulance driver Clayton Butler told HSCA investigators in 1977 that "from the time we received the
call in our dispatch office until Officer Tippit was declared dead at Methodist Hospital was approximately four
minutes"
DPD officers Davenport and Bardin are in their car and see the ambulance pass by. They follow it and arrive at the
same time at as the ambulance at the hospital.
1:15 Ambulance arrives at Methodist Hospital and Tippit is declared DOA at 1:15
The DOA time is communicated to the Justice of the Peace who issues an Authorization for Autopsy which gives the
time of death as 1:15.
Davenport writes in his report that Tippit was declared dead at 1:15 and on the form he uses to deliver a bullet
taken from Tippit's body and a button from his uniform he writes in his own handwriting that Tippit was declared
DOA at 1:15
-
This is Powers:
"We then turned off of Main Street onto Houston and made the sharp swing to the left up Elm Street. At that time we were traveling very slowly, no more than 12 miles an hour. In accordance with my custom, I was very much concerned about our timing and at just about that point I looked at my watch and noted that it was almost exactly 12:30 p.m."
And this is Greer:
"[Kellerman] said '12:30.' He looked at his watch, he said "12:30," and we were in the underpass at the time"
There is also the testimony of Forrest Sorrels, who stated:
"As we came around Houston, yes, sir; came around on Houston, yes, because we had begun to pick up speed there. And I remember Mr. Lawson turned around and said, 'I wish he would come on, because we are late now,' or words to that effect. And I expressed to him, I said, 'Oh, we are not going to be very late.' And I looked at my watch, and it was just about 12:30"
This is SA Rufus Youngblood:
Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to fix the precise time of the assassination?
Mr. YOUNGBLOOD. I would say 12:30. I was to keep the times. The Vice President was asking me if we were running on time, and so forth. And so he asked me how much further, and I would call back to our followup car and ask them how many more miles and so forth.
So, for this reason, I was at that time keeping up with the time very closely.
-
This is SA Rufus Youngblood:
Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to fix the precise time of the assassination?
Mr. YOUNGBLOOD. I would say 12:30. I was to keep the times. The Vice President was asking me if we were running on time, and so forth. And so he asked me how much further, and I would call back to our followup car and ask them how many more miles and so forth.
So, for this reason, I was at that time keeping up with the time very closely.
So, a man like youngblood was keeping up with time, but somebody like Markham (who had a regular bus to catch) or Bowley (who had to pick up his daughter from school and his wife from work) were not keeping up with the time?
-
So, a man like youngblood was keeping up with time, but somebody like Markham (who had a regular bus to catch) or Bowley (who had to pick up his daughter from school and his wife from work) were not keeping up with the time?
Asked if his watch was reliable, Bowley laughed and said "Best I remember. I usually had pretty good watches." But he conceded that "it could have been five minutes off." From pages 246-251 (third part) of Joseph McBride's book, for what it's worth.
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t950p15-was-mary-ferrell-a-disinfo-agent
-
By contrast, what clock, watch, or other time piece can Bowley's watch be compared to?
Markham's washateria clock, Mrs. Higgins' clock, and the clock at Methodist Hostpital.
-
Asked if his watch was reliable, Bowley laughed and said "Best I remember. I usually had pretty good watches." But he conceded that "it could have been five minutes off." From pages 246-251 (third part) of Joseph McBride's book, for what it's worth.
And James Bowles conceded that the dispatchers' time checks did not reflect real time.
-
Markham's washateria clock, Mrs. Higgins' clock, and the clock at Methodist Hostpital.
Mrs. Higgins' clock?
-
Asked if his watch was reliable, Bowley laughed and said "Best I remember. I usually had pretty good watches." But he conceded that "it could have been five minutes off." From pages 246-251 (third part) of Joseph McBride's book, for what it's worth.
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t950p15-was-mary-ferrell-a-disinfo-agent
Sorry Tim. I don't read LN or CT books about the Kennedy murder. I want to make up my own mind and not rely on what others tell me.
Why don't you have a look at the time line I have put together based on witness testimony, official documents and local knowledge about distances and the time it takes to cover them. Maybe you can find a way for Bowley's watch to be wrong by 5 minutes and keep the rest of the time line intact.
-
Sorry Tim. I don't read LN or CT books about the Kennedy murder. I want to make up my own mind and not rely on what others tell me.
Why don't you have a look at the time line I have put together based on witness testimony, official documents and local knowledge about distances and the time it takes to cover them. Maybe you can find a way for Bowley's watch to be wrong by 5 minutes and keep the rest of the time line intact.
You talk-the-talk but testers who have, literally, walked-the-walk, place Oswald @Tippit in time to be observed ambushing the officer.
Let me tell-the-tell: Fact is, you are pitting the witnesses who ID'd Oswald @Tippit and nearby the ambush scene against a wristwatch.
You will have to call the 11-12 witnesses who attest to Oswald's presence on/near said ambush-scene liars/stupid/forgetful/involved in a conspiracy/dishonest/pathetic
You are fond of calling people liars/dishonest/pathetic aren't you..
-
You talk-the-talk but testers who have, literally, walked-the-walk, place Oswald @Tippit in time to be observed ambushing the officer.
Let me tell-the-tell: Fact is, you are pitting the witnesses who ID'd Oswald @Tippit and nearby the ambush scene against a wristwatch.
You will have to call the 11-12 witnesses who attest to Oswald's presence on/near said ambush-scene liars.
You are fond of calling people liars, aren't you..
You will have to call the 11-12 witnesses who attest to Oswald's presence on/near said ambush-scene liars.
No just "mistaken"... just like the double-standard boys who call themselves LNs do with every witness who says something they don't like.
If all the Parkland doctors can be mistaken and if all the witnesses who heard a shot from the grassy knoll can be mistaken, why should it not be possible that people who only saw Tippit's killer for a couple of seconds are misled by a highly prejudicial line up?
-
Henry Hurt originally had a big budget, "the Digest / Pam Butler, Epstein, and nearly ten years to get his book right. Why would he write what he did about Nelson except to further muddy the water while paying a cynical, backhanded compliment to Sylvia Meagher? Hurt's book was published in 1986, by Holt, not by R. D. Was there still a pressing need to make Oswald an convincing assassin via a Tippit frame?
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/O%20Disk/Ourslee%20Fulton%20Jr/Item%2002.pdf
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51202706945_213a3ddb2a_b.jpg)
I tend to believe the opposite of anything Henry Hurt embraced because he seemed to be Bush's eyes and ears, and why would Bush have a need for a personal representative, on the ground, at the dawn of the HSCA inquiry?
Nelson breaks his silence...for posterity, for the children, (LOL) in 2013 :
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2509.msg111782.html#msg111782
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51197152291_4ec7c7234b_h.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51202373349_ae15bc9a52_b.jpg)
Dang, this is like the threads of old, Tom !!! Discussion !! Discourse !! Continue !! Thanks to all who are sharing. Wish I had something to share+
-
You will have to call the 11-12 witnesses who attest to Oswald's presence on/near said ambush-scene liars.
No just "mistaken"... just like the double-standard boys who call themselves LNs do with every witness who says something they don't like.
If all the Parkland doctors can be mistaken and if all the witnesses who heard a shot from the grassy knoll can be mistaken, why should it not be possible that people who only saw Tippit's killer for a couple of seconds are misled by a highly prejudicial line up?
No just "mistaken"... just like the double-standard boys who call themselves LNs do with every witness who says something they don't like
Go ahead and segue to what other people do or don't do. In the meantime, point out those who only saw Oswald for 'a couple of seconds'. And suggesting that in the first place, in that offhanded way, suggests this is something you'd rather avoid. And you will have to prove that people were misled and prejudicial based on something other than your disdain for authority and your obvious predilection for arguing for the sake of argument .
Additionally, I think it was Bill (Boots-on-the-Ground) Brown who noted that there were a total of 15 (iirc) witnesses in or around the ambush area in a position to sight Oswald. Four-five (not sure if he's including Benavides) weren't sure the man was Oswald. Only 4-5 out of 15, or even 11-12, seems a reasonable percentage that would give the sworn witnesses a good deal of credibility.
If all the Parkland doctors can be mistaken and if all the witnesses who heard a shot from the grassy knoll can be mistaken, why should it not be possible that people who only saw Tippit's killer for a couple of seconds are misled by a highly prejudicial line up?
Kennedy was not turned over in the OR. And when exactly did the Parkland doctors perform an autopsy. The primary concern was totally focussed on trying to revive Kennedy.
-
No just "mistaken"... just like the double-standard boys who call themselves LNs do with every witness who says something they don't like
Go ahead and segue to what other people do or don't do. In the meantime, point out those who only saw Oswald for 'a couple of seconds'. And suggesting that in the first place, in that offhanded way, suggests this is something you'd rather avoid. And you will have to prove that people were misled and prejudicial based on something other than your disdain for authority and your obvious predilection for arguing for the sake of argument .
In the meantime, point out those who only saw Oswald for 'a couple of seconds'.
I don't know who saw Oswald for only a couple of seconds, but the Davis girls only saw Tippit's killer as he ran through their garden and passed their front door. They were resting with their kids when they heard the shots and had to make their way to the front door. It only took Tippit's killer no more than 30 seconds to get from the scene to the hedge he jumped over to get to Patton, so how long do you think they actually saw him as he ran by?
Scoggings said in his testimony that he didn't pay much attention to the man talking to the police officer. When he heard the shots he tried to get away, found out there was nowhere to go and returned to his taxi. He only really saw the killer as he was coming towards him on his way towards Patton and that's the only time he saw his face. It couldn't have been more than a few seconds. And Scoggins' observations were so poor that, one day after the line up, he failed to identify Oswald to the FBI as the man he had seen.
And you will have to prove that people were misled and prejudicial based on something other than your disdain for authority and your obvious predilection for arguing for the sake of argument .
This is rich coming from the guy who always says this is not a court and he needs to prove nothing. And btw, I have no disdain for authority, but I do have disdain for cops who do not follow correct procedures and idiots who cover for them.
Additionally, I think it was Bill (Boots-on-the-Ground) Brown who noted that there were a total of 15 (iirc) witnesses in or around the ambush area in a position to sight Oswald. Four-five (not sure if he's including Benavides) weren't sure the man was Oswald. Only 4-5 out of 15, or even 11-12, seems a reasonable percentage that would give the sworn witnesses a good deal of credibility.
If they all attended the line up, maybe, but they didn't. Out of those selected to attend the line up, all identified Oswald as the man they had seen. Such a pre-selection alone should tell you something! Stop misrepresenting the facts.
If all the Parkland doctors can be mistaken and if all the witnesses who heard a shot from the grassy knoll can be mistaken, why should it not be possible that people who only saw Tippit's killer for a couple of seconds are misled by a highly prejudicial line up?
Kennedy was not turned over in the OR. And when exactly did the Parkland doctors perform an autopsy. The primary concern was totally focussed on trying to revive Kennedy.
The same old LN propaganda crap. When they tried to resuscitate Kennedy the blood flooded out of the head wound, yet here you are suggesting they didn't even bother to look at that wound. And btw, the embalmer Tom Robinson, who actually had to fill the cavity with rubber, confirmed the location and size of the head wound as described by the Parkland doctors.
At the next LN meeting please see if you can get a better script to work with for next time.
-
Asked if his watch was reliable, Bowley laughed and said "Best I remember. I usually had pretty good watches." But he conceded that "it could have been five minutes off." From pages 246-251 (third part) of Joseph McBride's book, for what it's worth.
https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t950p15-was-mary-ferrell-a-disinfo-agent
Thanks Tim, the two key time witnesses that the CT's rely on are a "screwball" and a guy who obviously had no need to have a dead on accurate time piece and conceded that his watch may have been "five minutes off", Ouch!
The house of cards comes tumbling down.
JohnM
-
The point which you choose to miss is that 12:30 channel 2 time is 12:30 Hertz billboard time is 12:30 Powers time is 12:30 Kellerman time is 12:30 Sorrels time. Even if we assume that the Secret service agents explicitly synchronized their watches that day, we still wind up with the fact that 4 independent time sources put the time of the assassination at 12:30, including the channel 2 clock.
And what you seem to have chosen to miss is that Bowley's arrival is part of a sequence of events which started with Markham saying she was en route to her regular bus stop at 1:06 or 1:08 and which ended with Tippit being declared DOA at Methodist Hospital at 1:15 PM. The timeline I have provided earlier (which you most likely reject out of hand) shows by witness statements how the sequence of events is linked in such a way that you simply can not move one part without having to move all the other parts as well.
What you are saying is that Bowley's watch must be correct be cause it fits your timeline. That line of argument says more about your ego than it does about the accuracy of Bowley's watch. Sniping aside, you're really down to arguing that Bowley's watch must be correct because it fits your timeline ...after claiming that the timeline must be correct (in part) because it fits the time supplied by Bowley's watch. That's a blatant circular argument, and as such lacks any validity.
Your backup argument is that Bowley's watch must be correct because he says he picked up his daughter "at about 12:55 pm." This line of thinking makes no sense from the get go. If nothing else, how would Bowley know what the time time was at 12:55? Probably, he looked at his watch. But if the watch was off n minutes when it read "1:10" then it was also n minutes off at "12:55."
So how accurate was Bowley's watch?
The rest of your 'corroboration' is the same tangled heap of cherry-picking and unwarranted assumptions that I've come to associate with the use of the word "corroborate."
When you actually look at the data in the transcripts and the recordings themselves, you'll find that that Bowles and Cason were correct when they said that the DPD kept the dispatcher clocks within a minute of each other. Dan and I have already demonstrated that using the simulcast and semi-simulcast traffic just after the shooting demonstrate that the DPD clocks were within a minute of each other, just as Bowles said. We've also pointed out that the McIntyre photo, Greer's testimony, Sorrel's testimony, and Power's affidavit agree that the assassination happened at 12:30, which also agrees with the traffic on channel two. The data is there. You can't blow off the data because you think Bowles said something years after the fact. At some point, you have to reconcile what's in the DPD recordings with the rest of your timeline, if you want to be taken seriously. And you you need to account for the Dudley Hughes data as well.
-
Markham's washateria clock, Mrs. Higgins' clock, and the clock at Methodist Hostpital.
How accurate was Markham's washateria clock? And when was the last time that you saw someone go to a washateria to set their watch?
If you want to push Mrs Higgins' story, please show us the video where a television announcer reads "1:06" pm off of a clock on air. The various media organizations involved kept videotape of their coverage, so you should be able to find it if it really happened that way. I will caution you that people have tried. None have returned alive, from what I've gathered.
I'm sure you're already aware of the Methodist ER nurse who told Earl Golz that the DOA discrepancy was due to the clock in the Methodist ER being off by 15 minutes.
-
What you are saying is that Bowley's watch must be correct be cause it fits your timeline. That line of argument says more about your ego than it does about the accuracy of Bowley's watch. Sniping aside, you're really down to arguing that Bowley's watch must be correct because it fits your timeline ...after claiming that the timeline must be correct (in part) because it fits the time supplied by Bowley's watch. That's a blatant circular argument, and as such lacks any validity.
Your backup argument is that Bowley's watch must be correct because he says he picked up his daughter "at about 12:55 pm." This line of thinking makes no sense from the get go. If nothing else, how would Bowley know what the time time was at 12:55? Probably, he looked at his watch. But if the watch was off n minutes when it read "1:10" then it was also n minutes off at "12:55."
So how accurate was Bowley's watch?
The rest of your 'corroboration' is the same tangled heap of cherry-picking and unwarranted assumptions that I've come to associate with the use of the word "corroborate."
When you actually look at the data in the transcripts and the recordings themselves, you'll find that that Bowles and Cason were correct when they said that the DPD kept the dispatcher clocks within a minute of each other. Dan and I have already demonstrated that using the simulcast and semi-simulcast traffic just after the shooting demonstrate that the DPD clocks were within a minute of each other, just as Bowles said. We've also pointed out that the McIntyre photo, Greer's testimony, Sorrel's testimony, and Power's affidavit agree that the assassination happened at 12:30, which also agrees with the traffic on channel two. The data is there. You can't blow off the data because you think Bowles said something years after the fact. At some point, you have to reconcile what's in the DPD recordings with the rest of your timeline, if you want to be taken seriously. And you you need to account for the Dudley Hughes data as well.
What you are saying is that Bowley's watch must be correct be cause it fits your timeline. That line of argument says more about your ego than it does about the accuracy of Bowley's watch.
No, that's not what I am saying at all. It's a strawman you have made up. You've clearly not read the time line because if you had you would have understood there was a sequence of events in which each individual has a particular place irrespective of a clock being right or wrong. However, when you place an individual like Bowley in his correct place in the sequence of events and it turns out his watch must have been (nearly) correct that's no more than a bonus.
Markham came first, because she arrived just prior to the shooting,
Benavides is second as he got out of the car and tried to get on to the police radio within roughly 40 seconds after the shooting
Bowley is next as he took the radio from Benavides and made his 46 seconds call
And Callaway came after that. We know that Callaway was less than a block away (which would take about 2 minutes to walk)
He said he heard the shots and then saw a man with a revolver coming towards him. After his encounter with that man, he ran towards 10th street. As it would not have taken him more than 3 minutes, we can conclude that Bowley must have arrived at the scene within approx 90 to 120 seconds after the shooting, in order to make his 46 seconds long radio call before Callaway got there. The ambulance driver told the HSCA investigators that it took less than four minutes between receiving the call and Tippit being declared DOA at Methodist Hospital and we know that Callaway and Bowley both helped to load Tippit into the ambulance. And, finally, officer Croy heard Bowley's call (he was in his car at Zang/Colorado) and drove to 10th street. That drive only took 2 minutes and when he arrived he saw two civilians (Callaway and Bowley) load Tippit in the car.
This sequence of events is undisputed and proven by the testimony of the witnesses themselves. When you attach the time estimates of Markham and Bowley to it, as well as DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) report which says they heard Bowley's call at around 1:10 PM you have solid corroboration of the times.
To prove my time line wrong, all you need to do is try to remove or change one part of the time line and see what happens to the rest. It can not be done.
Sniping aside, you're really down to arguing that Bowley's watch must be correct because it fits your timeline ...after claiming that the timeline must be correct (in part) because it fits the time supplied by Bowley's watch. That's a blatant circular argument, and as such lacks any validity.
No that's not the argument. That's again your strawman. You clearly haven't studied the time line or otherwise you wouldn't say something this stupid.
Your backup argument is that Bowley's watch must be correct because he says he picked up his daughter "at about 12:55 pm." This line of thinking makes no sense from the get go. If nothing else, how would Bowley know what the time time was at 12:55? Probably, he looked at his watch. But if the watch was off n minutes when it read "1:10" then it was also n minutes off at "12:55."
Another misrepresentation of what I am actually saying. When you have to use misrepresentations to dismiss something you have already lost the argument. Your mispresentation is either confirmation of the fact that you haven't understood the time line or you just don't care.
But I'll play your little game. Yes, if Bowley's watch was off a number of minutes when it read 1:10 (to fit him into the official DPD time line, it would have to be off by some 7 minutes) it was indeed also off at 12:55. But just how likely is that? Have you ever picked up a 12 year old from school? Do you really think a parent can arrive 7 minutes late at school to pick up a teenager and not hear about it? Really?
So how accurate was Bowley's watch?
The other available evidence shows that Bowley's watch was pretty accurate. It's actually somewhat pathetic for you to concentrate solely on Bowley's watch. You clearly seem to think that's the weakest link in the entire time line. So, to show the error of your ways; forget about Bowley's watch and ignore he said he looked at it and it said 1:10. Now just look at the remainder of the time line and try to work out at roughly what time Bowley must have arrived at the scene, for DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) to hear his radio call at approximently 1:10?
Or, let me guess... Poe and Jez used a clock that was also off...... :D
The rest of your 'corroboration' is the same tangled heap of cherry-picking and unwarranted assumptions that I've come to associate with the use of the word "corroborate."
Yeah right.... OK then, I'll make you a deal. You tell me which parts are cherry picked and/or unwarranted assumptions and we'll take it from there. Go on then......
When you actually look at the data in the transcripts and the recordings themselves, you'll find that that Bowles and Cason were correct when they said that the DPD kept the dispatcher clocks within a minute of each other. Dan and I have already demonstrated that using the simulcast and semi-simulcast traffic just after the shooting demonstrate that the DPD clocks were within a minute of each other, just as Bowles said. We've also pointed out that the McIntyre photo, Greer's testimony, Sorrel's testimony, and Power's affidavit agree that the assassination happened at 12:30, which also agrees with the traffic on channel two. The data is there. You can't blow off the data because you think Bowles said something years after the fact.
Nobody is blowing off any data because of what Bowles said. You are misrepresenting what Bowles actually told the HSCA. He did say that dispatcher clocks were normally kept within a minute of each other, but you left out that he also said it didn't always happen when radio traffic was busy, as it obviously was after Kennedy was shot. What you also left out is that Bowles said that the dispatcher's clocks did not line up with the master clock as their main purpose was to document a sequence of events rather than provide an exact time. And you also left out that Bowles said that the master clock gave "official" time which was not the same as real time.
At some point, you have to reconcile what's in the DPD recordings with the rest of your timeline, if you want to be taken seriously. And you you need to account for the Dudley Hughes data as well.
No, you need to reconcile the DPD recordings with the actual sequence of events, and when you do you will find that the DPD recordings simply do not match those events.
Here's an example. Callaway was only less than a block away from the scene. It took him no more than 3 minutes to get to 10th street. When he arrived there, Bowley was already there and had already made his 46 seconds long call. According to Bill Brown the actual DPD recording (he heard at Dale Myers home) has Benavides tapping the mic for roughly two minutes before Bowley took it over, which simply does not match with Callaway being there within 3 minutes after the shots. Even less so when you add on the 40 seconds Benavides waited in his truck until the killer was out of sight.
The WC had Tippit being shot at 1:16, which in turn would mean that (if the 40 seconds waiting and 2 minutes mic tapping for Benavides is correct) Bowley did not arrive at the scene until 1:18 or 1:19 (which would mean his watch was 8 to 9 minutes off), which is impossible as the transcripts have Bowley placing his call at 1:17 and Callaway placing his call at 1:19. It just doesn't add up.
And btw there is no such thing as Dudley Hughes data. Based on an article written by Nash in 1964, LNs have claimed that a time stamp card showed the call for an ambulance came in at 1:18. The problem with that is that no such card exists and nobody has ever been able to produce it. Secondly, and equally important, even if there was such a card, there is no guarantee that the clock used by the dispatcher of the funeral house was accurate.
Now let me bounce the ball back to you. If you want to be taken seriously you need to address the entire time line and not just parts where you think you can score.
-
How accurate was Markham's washateria clock? And when was the last time that you saw someone go to a washateria to set their watch?
If you want to push Mrs Higgins' story, please show us the video where a television announcer reads "1:06" pm off of a clock on air. The various media organizations involved kept videotape of their coverage, so you should be able to find it if it really happened that way. I will caution you that people have tried. None have returned alive, from what I've gathered.
I'm sure you're already aware of the Methodist ER nurse who told Earl Golz that the DOA discrepancy was due to the clock in the Methodist ER being off by 15 minutes.
I'm sure you're already aware of the Methodist ER nurse who told Earl Golz that the DOA discrepancy was due to the clock in the Methodist ER being off by 15 minutes.
What a lame argument to make. Dr. Liguori informed the Justice of the Peace that Tippit was declared DOA at 1:15. DPD officer Davenport was present what Tippit was declared dead and wrote in his report the time was 1:15. He also wrote the same time on the form used to submit a bullet (taken from Tippit's body) and a uniform button to the DPD identification bureau. That's day 1 information.
But there is more, just to show how ridiculous your comment is. Let's assume for a second that Dudley Funeral home indeed receive the call for an ambulance at 1:18. Ambulance driver Clayton Butler told HSCA investigators in 1977 that it took him less than a minute to get to the scene and "from the time we received the call in our dispatch office until Officer Tippit was declared dead at Methodist Hospital was approximately four minutes" which (in this example) would mean that Tippit was declared dead at 1:22.
Or, alternatively, let's turn it around. Let's say the nurse was right and when the hospital clock said 1:15 it really was 1:30. Since we know that the ambulance only needed 4 minutes to get to the scene where Tippit was shot and then the hospital where Tippit was declared dead, it would mean, if the nurse was right, that Tippit was shot somewhere around 1:25.
Yet here you are clinging to an absurd story that some nurse told a reporter about the clock being off by 15 minutes. It does not even compute with the WC time line for crying out loud.
-
In the meantime, point out those who only saw Oswald for 'a couple of seconds'.
I don't know who saw Oswald for only a couple of seconds, but the Davis girls only saw Tippit's killer as he ran through their garden and passed their front door. They were resting with their kids when they heard the shots and had to make their way to the front door. It only took Tippit's killer no more than 30 seconds to get from the scene to the hedge he jumped over to get to Patton, so how long do you think they actually saw him as he ran by?
Scoggings said in his testimony that he didn't pay much attention to the man talking to the police officer. When he heard the shots he tried to get away, found out there was nowhere to go and returned to his taxi. He only really saw the killer as he was coming towards him on his way towards Patton and that's the only time he saw his face. It couldn't have been more than a few seconds. And Scoggins' observations were so poor that, one day after the line up, he failed to identify Oswald to the FBI as the man he had seen.
And you will have to prove that people were misled and prejudicial based on something other than your disdain for authority and your obvious predilection for arguing for the sake of argument .
This is rich coming from the guy who always says this is not a court and he needs to prove nothing. And btw, I have no disdain for authority, but I do have disdain for cops who do not follow correct procedures and idiots who cover for them.
If they all attended the line up, maybe, but they didn't. Out of those selected to attend the line up, all identified Oswald as the man they had seen. Such a pre-selection alone should tell you something! Stop misrepresenting the facts.
The same old LN propaganda crap. When they tried to resuscitate Kennedy the blood flooded out of the head wound, yet here you are suggesting they didn't even bother to look at that wound. And btw, the embalmer Tom Robinson, who actually had to fill the cavity with rubber, confirmed the location and size of the head wound as described by the Parkland doctors.
At the next LN meeting please see if you can get a better script to work with for next time.
You just can't avoid the ad-Homs, can you? It does suit you, though. And you're the one who keeps pressing for proof. No matter; it gives me more face-time to continue to use your head as a speed-bag. Better keep ducking, Rocky. And where did I suggest that no one looked at the head or attempted to look at the head. Hell, how could anyone not? And I do know that 3-4 Parkland doctors agreed that the autopsy photos matched what they saw in the OR.
And your suggestion that I meet with other LNs is preposterous given that no one I know gives a damn about this assassination. And you might want to notice that LNers are not the ones running around slapping each other on the back at the slightest bit of (perceived or otherwise) support.
Now tell us just how long it should take any given witness to register a person's looks. Apparently not long, since in a document posted by JohnM, both sisters made positive ID's of Oswald. Regarding Scoggins, he was given 4-5 pictures to look at, and he narrowed it down to 2. One was Oswald. He said they both looked older than what he saw... but added that he's not good at recognizing ppl from pictures.
-
You just can't avoid the ad-Homs, can you? It does suit you, though. And you're the one who keeps pressing for proof. No matter; it gives me more face-time to continue to use your head as a speed-bag. Better keep ducking, Rocky. And where did I suggest that no one looked at the head or attempted to look at the head. Hell, how could anyone not? And I do know that 3-4 Parkland doctors agreed that the autopsy photos matched what they saw in the OR.
And your suggestion that I meet with other LNs is preposterous given that no one I know gives a damn about this assassination. And you might want to notice that LNers are not the ones running around slapping each other on the back at the slightest bit of (perceived or otherwise) support.
Now tell us just how long it should take any given witness to register a person's looks. Apparently not long, since in a document posted by JohnM, both sisters made positive ID's of Oswald. Regarding Scoggins, he was given 4-5 pictures to look at, and he narrowed it down to 2. One was Oswald. He said they both looked older than what he saw... but added that he's not good at recognizing ppl from pictures.
You just can't avoid the ad-Homs, can you? It does suit you, though.
Said he in an ad hom kinda way.
And you're the one who keeps pressing for proof.
And you keep on not providing it or saying you don't need to provide it because it's not a court of law. You want to have your cake and eat it to.... Ain't gonna happen
And where did I suggest that no one looked at the head or attempted to look at the head. Hell, how could anyone not?
Exactly, which makes your previous argument completely bogus
And I do know that 3-4 Parkland doctors agreed that the autopsy photos matched what they saw in the OR.
Actually, no you don't know that. What you know is that some Parkland doctors were once taken into a room, where no camera or witness was allowed, and were shown photos that matched the wound they had seen. You can only believe that those photos were indeed those taken at the autopsy because there is no way you can know for sure.
And your suggestion that I meet with other LNs is preposterous given that no one I know gives a damn about this assassination.
Who said anything about a physical meeting?
And you might want to notice that LNers are not the ones running around slapping each other on the back at the slightest bit of (perceived or otherwise) support.
Really? Is this just denial or simply an outright lie? It happens all the time and mostly by posting gifs.
Now tell us just how long it should take any given witness to register a person's looks. Apparently not long, since in a document posted by JohnM, both sisters made positive ID's of Oswald.
And to you that means that they had a good enough look of this man running passed their front door. It would never ever tell you something might not be quite right with the line up, right?
Regarding Scoggins, he was given 4-5 pictures to look at, and he narrowed it down to 2. One was Oswald. He said they both looked older than what he saw... but added that he's not good at recognizing ppl from pictures.
You're so forgiving.... He had identified Oswald in a line up a day earlier and Oswald's picture was all over the media by then and he still couldn't pick him out.... It's pathetic!
-
(Boots-on-the-Ground)
Based on his latest performance, how about foot-in-mouth?
seems a reasonable percentage
Please clarify why this would be "resonable".
that would give the sworn witnesses a good deal of credibility.
Please clarify why your "reasonable percentage" would influence the credibility of a witness.
1) Go ahead, Sir Beckley: Continue to sit on your arse while Bill Brown legs it out, talking with people who were there; not stuck in the dead, cold text of conspiracy-monger books
2) Please clarify where I said "resonable"
3) Do the math
-
1) Go ahead, Sir Beckley: Continue to sit on your arse while Bill Brown legs it out, talking with people who were there; not stuck in the dead, cold text of conspiracy-monger books
2) Please clarify where I said "resonable"
3) Do the math
1) Go ahead, Sir Beckley: Continue to sit on your arse while Bill Brown legs it out, talking with people who were there; not stuck in the dead, cold text of conspiracy-monger books
Coming from a guy who has never been to Dallas and yet still claims to know all sorts of stuff about this case, this is completely hilarious.
-
What you are saying is that Bowley's watch must be correct be cause it fits your timeline. That line of argument says more about your ego than it does about the accuracy of Bowley's watch. Sniping aside, you're really down to arguing that Bowley's watch must be correct because it fits your timeline ...
Pretty hollow coming from one of the guys who assumes the time checks on the dictabelt recordings must be correct because it fits your timeline.
When you actually look at the data in the transcripts and the recordings themselves, you'll find that that Bowles and Cason were correct when they said that the DPD kept the dispatcher clocks within a minute of each other.
When did Bowles say that?
Dan and I have already demonstrated that using the simulcast and semi-simulcast traffic just after the shooting demonstrate that the DPD clocks were within a minute of each other
Irrelevant, even if that was demonstrable. Even if two clocks agree with each other that doesn't mean that either one is correct.
And you you need to account for the Dudley Hughes data as well.
What Dudley Hughes data?
-
How accurate was Markham's washateria clock? And when was the last time that you saw someone go to a washateria to set their watch?
When's the last time somebody set their watch to what time Dave Powers said months later that something happened?
If you want to push Mrs Higgins' story, please show us the video where a television announcer reads "1:06" pm off of a clock on air.
It's probably in the same box as the radio broadcast prior to 1:40 of a policeman having been shot in Oak Cliff.
I'm sure you're already aware of the Methodist ER nurse who told Earl Golz that the DOA discrepancy was due to the clock in the Methodist ER being off by 15 minutes.
You mean like one of those things you jeeringly referred to as something said "years after the fact" when you were talking about Bowles saying that the dispatcher time checks did not equate to real time?
-
Said he in an ad hom kinda way
You reap what you sow; especially you.
And you keep on not providing it or saying you don't need to provide it because it's not a court of law. You want to have your cake and eat it to.... Ain't gonna happen
No need to prove anything on my part. Or eat cake, for that matter:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wMktfFBT/A-VIEW-TO-A-KILL-SMALL.png)
Bill Chapman
Actually, no you don't know that. What you know is that some Parkland doctors were once taken into a room, where no camera or witness was allowed, and were shown photos that matched the wound they had seen. You can only believe that those photos were indeed those taken at the autopsy because there is no way you can know for sure.
Actually, I do know that you are assuming/suggesting that those doctors are liars.
ADDITIONALLY
https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/novadocs.htm
'In 1988, Public Broadcasting's NOVA got permission to show the Parkland doctors the original autopsy photos and x-rays in the National Archives. They were allowed as much time as they wished to view the materials, and then their reactions were filmed.'
Really? Is this just denial or simply an outright lie?
Really? Are suggesting that I'm a liar?
And to you that means that they had a good enough look of this man running passed their front door. It would never ever tell you something might not be quite right with the line up, right?
To me that means the sisters gave a positive ID regarding Oswald and that you are suggesting they are liars
You're so forgiving.... He had identified Oswald in a line up a day earlier and Oswald's picture was all over the media by then and he still couldn't pick him out.... It's pathetic!
He picked it out; it made the final two. Now tell us that the photograph of Oswald was taken at the exact same angle as Scoggins saw him, and under the exact same lighting conditions present near Scoggins. And tell us that you are not suggesting, hinting or otherwise calling him an outright liar.
Edits 4:20-ish re Nova insert
-
1) Go ahead, Sir Beckley: Continue to sit on your arse while Bill Brown legs it out, talking with people who were there; not stuck in the dead, cold text of conspiracy-monger books
Coming from a guy who has never been to Dallas and yet still claims to know all sorts of stuff about this case, this is completely hilarious.
I got a fine virtual tour by Bill (boots-on-the-ground) Brown while others can only kneel.
-
1) Go ahead, Sir Beckley: Continue to sit on your arse while Bill Brown legs it out, talking with people who were there; not stuck in the dead, cold text of conspiracy-monger books
Coming from a guy who has never been to Dallas and yet still claims to know all sorts of stuff about this case, this is completely hilarious.
Oh, by the way... I've never been to Detroit but I know a lot about Gordie Howe.
;)
-
Said he in an ad hom kinda way
You reap what you sow; especially you.
And you keep on not providing it or saying you don't need to provide it because it's not a court of law. You want to have your cake and eat it to.... Ain't gonna happen
No need to prove anything on my part. Or eat cake, for that matter:
(https://i.postimg.cc/wMktfFBT/A-VIEW-TO-A-KILL-SMALL.png)
Bill Chapman
Actually, no you don't know that. What you know is that some Parkland doctors were once taken into a room, where no camera or witness was allowed, and were shown photos that matched the wound they had seen. You can only believe that those photos were indeed those taken at the autopsy because there is no way you can know for sure.
Actually, I do know that you are assuming/suggesting that those doctors are liars.
And In 1988, Public Broadcasting's NOVA got permission to show the Parkland doctors the original autopsy photos and x-rays in the National Archives. They were allowed as much time as they wished to view the materials, and then their reactions were filmed.
https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/novadocs.htm
Really? Is this just denial or simply an outright lie?
Really? Are suggesting that I'm a liar?
And to you that means that they had a good enough look of this man running passed their front door. It would never ever tell you something might not be quite right with the line up, right?
To me that means the sisters gave a positive ID regarding Oswald and that you are suggesting they are liars
You're so forgiving.... He had identified Oswald in a line up a day earlier and Oswald's picture was all over the media by then and he still couldn't pick him out.... It's pathetic!
He picked it out it made the final two. Now tell us that the photograph of Oswald was taken at the exact same angle as Scoggins saw him, and under the exact same lighting conditions present near Scoggins. And tell us that you are not suggesting, hinting or otherwise calling him an outright liar.
Actually, I do know that you are assuming/suggesting that those doctors are liars.
Which only shows how shallow and narrowminded you are, because I assume nor suggest anything of the kind
And In 1988, Public Broadcasting's NOVA got permission to show the Parkland doctors the original autopsy photos and x-rays in the National Archives. They were allowed as much time as they wished to view the materials, and then their reactions were filmed.
And that's exactly what I was saying. They were taken into a separate room with no camera or witness present. Why the cloak and dagger stuff? Why not show them the photos and X-rays in the open and show us their reaction? Their reactions were filmed after they came back out of the room and I have no doubt that they were shown the photos and X-rays that showed the wound they had seen. What nobody knows, however, is if those were the same photos and X-rays that are now in the public domain. I have good reason to believe that they were not, but I have no intention to betray a confidence for somebody like you.
You are too easily fooled!
Really? Is this just denial or simply an outright lie?
Really? Are suggesting that I'm a liar?
What makes you think I am suggesting anything. Anybody who reads this forum knows that what you said simply isn't true. Does that make you a liar or just mere ignorant?
And to you that means that they had a good enough look of this man running passed their front door. It would never ever tell you something might not be quite right with the line up, right?
To me that means the sisters gave a positive ID regarding Oswald and that you are suggesting they are liars
If you want to qualify it that way, have at it. To me they are just two very young, and impressionable, women who believed they did the right thing. It's lucky for those girls that the case never went to trial because I am sure they would have been destroyed on the stand.
You're so forgiving.... He had identified Oswald in a line up a day earlier and Oswald's picture was all over the media by then and he still couldn't pick him out.... It's pathetic!
He picked it out it made the final two. Now tell us that the photograph of Oswald was taken at the exact same angle as Scoggins saw him, and under the exact same lighting conditions present near Scoggins. And tell us that you are not suggesting, hinting or otherwise calling him an outright liar.
Funny.... Just how long does it take a normal fit person to jump over a hedge and run down a street, his back turned to a witness? That's how long Scoggins saw the man, as he was ducked behind his taxi for most of the time. What I am saying os what I have always said; eye-witness accounts are the least reliable evidence and a bogus line up can persuade well willing but intimidated witnesses to turn into police pleasing facilitators.
If there was any part of the Kennedy case I wish could be done in a mock-trial version, it is a defense lawyer questioning the actual Tippit witnesses (those who identified Oswald) on re-direct. The outcome, I believe, would be utter devastation for the entire case!
-
I got a fine virtual tour by Bill (boots-on-the-ground) Brown while others can only kneel.
So all you know about this case comes from propagandist Bill Brown's videos? Got it!
-
If you want to qualify it that way, have at it. To me they are just two very young, and impressionable, women who believed they did the right thing. It's lucky for those girls that the case never went to trial because I am sure they would have been destroyed on the stand.
Virginia couldn't even tell the truth about how old she was.
-
Virginia couldn't even tell the truth about how old she was.
Sorry Johnny boy, but Virginia along with a stack of others positively identified Oswald, and all the character assassination in the World will never change the facts.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Dyk8M1k2/line-up-osw-ald.jpg)
JohnM
-
Sorry Johnny boy, but Virginia along with a stack of others positively identified Oswald, and all the character assassination in the World will never change the facts.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Dyk8M1k2/line-up-osw-ald.jpg)
JohnM
You calling any of this "facts" tells us all we need to know about you.
Your inability to communicate beyond telegram style exposes the lack of detailed knowledge to have a normal discussion.
-
Your inability to communicate beyond telegram style exposes the lack of detailed knowledge to have a normal discussion.
Just do what I do and ignore those who lack the "detailed knowledge to have a normal discussion" and it makes interaction here a lot easier but that's not your game is it!
JohnM
-
Just do what I do and ignore those who lack the "detailed knowledge to have a normal discussion" and it makes interaction here a lot easier but that's not your game is it!
JohnM
No it isn't. I am only interested in what really happened. That makes us as different as we can be.
Or, in your telegram style, NO!
You wouldn't last five minutes if you ever tried to attack the time line I have posted. Which is why you prefer to resort to hit and run regurgitations of a narrative that's already exposed as false.
-
Channel 1 at 12:36 briefly broadcast on both channels and Channel 2 made time calls before and after of 12:35 and 12:37 respectively, showing a very close correlation of within a minute between the two channels.
(https://i.postimg.cc/rFzg1NWq/12-35.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/mgHwqZ8q/12-36-both-channels.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/kXZsfRFK/12-37.jpg)
And the real world connection is the 12:30 time of the assassination is corroborated by the 12:30 Dallas Police time call.
(https://i.postimg.cc/nrq7WYgX/12-30-dispatch.jpg)
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/99/cd/07/99cd07ea1e2d16093a6fa9052ec6580b.jpg)
JohnM
-
Channel 1 at 12:36 briefly broadcast on both channels and Channel 2 made time calls before and after of 12:35 and 12:37 respectively, showing a very close correlation of within a minute between the two channels.
And the real world connection is the 12:30 time of the assassination is corroborated by the 12:30 Dallas Police time call.
JohnM
There is no way to connect "police time" with "real time." - J.C. Bowles (supervisor of the DPD dispatchers)
-
I am only interested in what really happened.
Nice, after your thousands of posts and countless hours spent glued to your screen surely by now you must have some sort of clue and can tell us what happened, well?
Or are you going to spend the rest of your, oh so interesting life telling us what didn't happen? Ho-hum!
JohnM
-
Nice, after your thousands of posts and countless hours spent glued to your screen surely by now you must have some sort of clue and can tell us what happened, well?
Or are you going to spend the rest of your, oh so interesting life telling us what didn't happen? Ho-hum!
JohnM
No, I'm just going to spend my time watching you making a fool of yourself time after time with your gifs, videos and telegram style posts.
after your thousands of posts
I will never get anywhere close to the number of posts you have created on this forum and elsewhere.
But if this comment is the best you can do, instead of actually have a debate, there isn't much point in discussing anything with you, really... is there now?
I know, and have known for a long time, that you are jealous about my life, but there is nothing much I can do about that. If you had a better education you might have had a similar life style, rather than living a routine suburban life. But it's what it is...
-
There is no way to connect "police time" with "real time." - J.C. Bowles (supervisor of the DPD dispatchers)
"Therefore, it was not uncommon for the time stamped on calls to be a minute or two ahead or behind the "official" time shown on the master clock. Accordingly, at "exactly" 10:10, various clocks could be stamping from 10:08 to 10:12, for example." J.C. Bowles (supervisor of the DPD dispatchers)
JohnM
-
No, I'm just going to spend my time watching you making a fool of yourself time after time with your gifs, videos and telegram style posts.
after your thousands of posts
I will never get anywhere close to the number of posts you have created on this forum and elsewhere.
But if this comment is the best you can do, instead of actually have a debate, there isn't much point in discussing anything with you, really... is there now?
I know, and have known for a long time, that you are jealous about my life, but there is nothing much I can do about that. If you had a better education you might have had a similar life style, rather than living a routine suburban life. But it's what it is...
Far out Bro, with your better "education" and non routine suburban lifestyle and you still accumulated 3 months of non stop trolling stuck in front of a computer screen, wow I should be so lucky but too bad I actually enjoy going outside.
(https://i.postimg.cc/7Zx4nN0t/90-fkn-days.jpg)
JohnM
-
Virginia couldn't even tell the truth about how old she was.
LOL. You've gotta get out more, Neil. What woman ever tells anyone her real age?
-
No, I'm just going to spend my time watching you making a fool of yourself time after time with your gifs, videos and telegram style posts.
after your thousands of posts
I will never get anywhere close to the number of posts you have created on this forum and elsewhere.
But if this comment is the best you can do, instead of actually have a debate, there isn't much point in discussing anything with you, really... is there now?
I know, and have known for a long time, that you are jealous about my life, but there is nothing much I can do about that. If you had a better education you might have had a similar life style, rather than living a routine suburban life. But it's what it is...
telegram style posts
Show us where JohnM has ever posted telegram style
That's me, you tipsy bugger.
(https://i.postimg.cc/446gPWYH/A-BRIEF-MOMENT-002.png)
BILL CHAPMAN
-
Mitch Todd: What you are saying is that Bowley's watch must be correct be cause it fits your timeline. That line of argument says more about your ego than it does about the accuracy of Bowley's watch. Sniping aside, you're really down to arguing that Bowley's watch must be correct because it fits your timeline ...
Pretty hollow coming from one of the guys who assumes the time checks on the dictabelt recordings must be correct because it fits your timeline.
I never "assume[d] the time checks on the dictabelt recordings must be correct." I've said that any clock in common use back in those days could generally be assumed to only be within five minutes of standard time. I amended that to -3/+1 minutes for DPD channel one, because you can reference it to channel two and channel two to other independently set clocks like the Hertz billboard, Kellerman's watch, Sorrels' watch, and Powers' watch. It's really more like -2/+0, but I'm feeling generous.
Really, you had to completely misrepresent what I said?
MT: When you actually look at the data in the transcripts and the recordings themselves, you'll find that that Bowles and Cason were correct when they said that the DPD kept the dispatcher clocks within a minute of each other.
When did Bowles say that?
When he said "When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments." Also see the testimony of Frances Cason, who worked as a telephone operator in the dispatch center: "And when we find these errors in these clocks this way, someone in the office usually adjusts them to where they all are stamping the same time. It doesn't happen very often that they get out of time, but sometimes they do."
Irrelevant, even if that was demonstrable. Even if two clocks agree with each other that doesn't mean that either one is correct.
Not two clocks. Five. I can spot you one if you want to believe that the SS agents kept their watches in sync. But that's still four independent clocks in agreement.
At some point, the regression towards the meaning far beyond being just some phrase that you don't understand.
What Dudley Hughes data?
The Dudley Hughes data as reported by the Nashes, as has already been discussed.
-
Before I continue, let me note that this particular assertion by Weidman caught my eye:
DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) wrote in their supplementary offense report that at approximently 1:10 they heard on the radio that a police officer was involved in a shooting at East Tenth Street.
I've been looking for Poe's and Jez's supplementary report as mentioned by Martin, but all I can find is this one where they hear the radio report at 1:18 PM. Is there another copy that says 1:10, or did Martin just make a mistake?
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338726/m1/1/high_res/)
-
Here's an example. Callaway was only less than a block away from the scene. It took him no more than 3 minutes to get to 10th street. When he arrived there, Bowley was already there and had already made his 46 seconds long call. According to Bill Brown the actual DPD recording (he heard at Dale Myers home) has Benavides tapping the mic for roughly two minutes before Bowley took it over...
I cleared this up with Myers a few days ago. It was much closer to ninety seconds.
-
(Boots-on-the-Ground)
Based on his latest performance, how about foot-in-mouth?
How so?
-
Use Profile | Show Posts if your memory fails you.
Okay. So I haven't stuck my foot in my mouth after all. Fair enough.
-
"Therefore, it was not uncommon for the time stamped on calls to be a minute or two ahead or behind the "official" time shown on the master clock. Accordingly, at "exactly" 10:10, various clocks could be stamping from 10:08 to 10:12, for example." J.C. Bowles (supervisor of the DPD dispatchers)
JohnM
You forgot the rest;
A master clock on the telephone room wall was connected to the City Hall system. This clock reported "official" time. Within the dispatcher's office there were numerous other time giving and time recording devices, both in the telephone room and in the radio room. Telephone operators and radio operators were furnished "Simplex" clocks. Because the hands often worked loose, they indicated the incorrect time. However, their purpose was to stamp the time, day and date on incoming calls. While they were reliable at this, they were not synchronized as stated in the Committee report. Therefore, it was not uncommon for the time stamped on calls to be a minute to two ahead or behind the "official" time shown on the master clock. Accordingly, at "exactly" 10:10, various clocks could be stamping from 10:08 to 10:12, for example. When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments. During busy periods this was not readily done.
and you also ignored overlooked this;
It is, however, important to remember that
1. No exact record of "time" exists;
2. The several clocks were not synchronized;
3. The radio operators were not exact with regard to "time statements" on either radio;
-
I never "assume[d] the time checks on the dictabelt recordings must be correct." I've said that any clock in common use back in those days could generally be assumed to only be within five minutes of standard time. I amended that to -3/+1 minutes for DPD channel one, because you can reference it to channel two and channel two to other independently set clocks like the Hertz billboard, Kellerman's watch, Sorrels' watch, and Powers' watch. It's really more like -2/+0, but I'm feeling generous.
Really, you had to completely misrepresent what I said?
When he said "When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments." Also see the testimony of Frances Cason, who worked as a telephone operator in the dispatch center: "And when we find these errors in these clocks this way, someone in the office usually adjusts them to where they all are stamping the same time. It doesn't happen very often that they get out of time, but sometimes they do."
Not two clocks. Five. I can spot you one if you want to believe that the SS agents kept their watches in sync. But that's still four independent clocks in agreement.
At some point, the regression towards the meaning far beyond being just some phrase that you don't understand.
The Dudley Hughes data as reported by the Nashes, as has already been discussed.
When he said "When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments."
Yes, but he also said that when it was busy that was not always done. When Kennedy was shot it was busy.
Besides, Bowles made it very clear that the clocks used by the dispatchers did not give real time to begin with.
They actually did not match the master clock (which gave "official" time), which in turn did not give real time either.
The Dudley Hughes data as reported by the Nashes, as has already been discussed.
All the Nashes said in their article was that the Dudley Hughes dispatcher had stamped a time card with 1:18 for the call. They did not see that card nor has that card ever surfaced. For all intent and purposes it only "exists" in the Nash article.
In other words, they tell us in their article something that's been told to them, which makes it double hearsay. And even worse, there is not a shred of evidence that confirms that the clock used by the dispatcher was accurate. This entire "time stamp card" business is nothing but hot air.
-
Before I continue, let me note that this particular assertion by Weidman caught my eye:
I've been looking for Poe's and Jez's supplementary report as mentioned by Martin, but all I can find is this one where they hear the radio report at 1:18 PM. Is there another copy that says 1:10, or did Martin just make a mistake?
The copy of the report you have posted is of far better quality than the one I have on file. In my copy the typing and the time is very faint, and I could have sworn it said 1:10. In fact, I still think it does, but your copy has me wondering nevertheless if I did indeed make a mistake. I'll check it out as soon as I can.
In the meantime, do you think you can make a credible comment about the sequence of events and the time line derrived from that which shows that the time line is not correct? You can leave the Poe & Jez report out of it, as it doesn't alter anything in the sequence of events.
-
I cleared this up with Myers a few days ago. It was much closer to ninety seconds.
Thanks for clearing that up. It makes no major difference to the time line, but it does establish that Bowley must have arrived at the Tippit scene roughly 2 minutes after the shooting (Benavides waited 40 seconds for the killer to leave and then took 90 seconds working the mic, before Bowley took it over.
Now, here's the obvious problem. Dale Myers has estimated that Tippit was shot at 1:14:30. Add 2 minutes and 10 seconds to that for Bowley to start making his call and you get 1:16:40, yet the DPD transcript has Bowley making his call after the 1:17 time stamp.
And then there is Callaway. He got to the scene within 3 minutes after the shooting. Bowley finished his radio call after 46 seconds, which means at around 1:17:26. Callaway must have arrived after that, because he did not know if anybody had called it in. The DPD transcripts have Callaway making his call at around 1:19 or even (closer to) 1:20. Two minutes is a long time, if you are just standing around. Are we really to believe that Callaway just stood there for 2 minutes or more before he decided to get on the radio?
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/13P79zsV/12-30-in-sync.jpg)
JohnM
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/13P79zsV/12-30-in-sync.jpg)
JohnM
Meaningless gif.
You know for a fact that the Hertz clock was 100% correct?
-
Thanks for clearing that up. It makes no major difference to the time line, but it does establish that Bowley must have arrived at the Tippit scene roughly 2 minutes after the shooting (Benavides waited 40 seconds for the killer to leave and then took 90 seconds working the mic, before Bowley took it over.
Now, here's the obvious problem. Dale Myers has estimated that Tippit was shot at 1:14:30. Add 2 minutes and 10 seconds to that for Bowley to start making his call and you get 1:16:40, yet the DPD transcript has Bowley making his call after the 1:17 time stamp.
And then there is Callaway. He got to the scene within 3 minutes after the shooting. Bowley finished his radio call after 46 seconds, which means at around 1:17:26. Callaway must have arrived after that, because he did not know if anybody had called it in. The DPD transcripts have Callaway making his call at around 1:19 or even (closer to) 1:20. Two minutes is a long time, if you are just standing around. Are we really to believe that Callaway just stood there for 2 minutes or more before he decided to get on the radio?
As I've already told you, Callaway helped load the body into the ambulance before he made his radio call.
-
Which only shows how shallow and narrowminded you are, because I assume nor suggest anything of the kind
Ah, again with the automatic character-assassination attempt.. which has the (unsuspected by you, apparently) immediate effect of revealing your shallowness and narrow-mindedness.
'because I assume nor suggest anything of the kind'
In reply #86 you certainly did 'assume' and 'suggest'
To wit: "Really? Is this just denial or simply an outright lie?"
Cloak & Dagger reference
The Kennedy family had no intention of allowing the assassination to be dragged through the mud by your knuckle-dragging forebearers. But you clowns managed to turn it into a circus anyway.
What I am saying is what I have always said; eye-witness accounts are the least reliable evidence [and a bogus line up can persuade well willing but intimidated witnesses to turn into police pleasing facilitators.]
Yeah, sure.. what you've 'always said' until a witness statement appears which you figure you can spin to make it appear to support you.
Edited through to 10:35pm-ish
-
Sorry Johnny boy, but Virginia along with a stack of others positively identified Oswald, and all the character assassination in the World will never change the facts.
... he says feigning confidence as if unfair, biased lineups mean a damn thing.
-
Channel 1 at 12:36 briefly broadcast on both channels and Channel 2 made time calls before and after of 12:35 and 12:37 respectively, showing a very close correlation of within a minute between the two channels.
What "correlation"? Just because similar words were used doesn't mean they were broadcast at nearly the same time.
And the real world connection is the 12:30 time of the assassination is corroborated by the 12:30 Dallas Police time call.
What makes you think the Hertz clock is actual time? Do you know when and how it was calibrated?
-
"Therefore, it was not uncommon for the time stamped on calls to be a minute or two ahead or behind the "official" time shown on the master clock. Accordingly, at "exactly" 10:10, various clocks could be stamping from 10:08 to 10:12, for example." J.C. Bowles (supervisor of the DPD dispatchers)
What's hilarious is that you think this somehow limits the possible discrepancy to exactly 2 minutes or less.
-
Really, you had to completely misrepresent what I said?
If I did, then you completely misrepresented what Martin said about Bowley's watch. And why is Dave Powers' watch automatically more precise than T.F. Bowley's?
When he said "When clocks were as much as a minute or so out of synchronization it was normal procedure to make the needed adjustments." Also see the testimony of Frances Cason, who worked as a telephone operator in the dispatch center: "And when we find these errors in these clocks this way, someone in the office usually adjusts them to where they all are stamping the same time. It doesn't happen very often that they get out of time, but sometimes they do."
Those vague statements about what they usually did don't help determine how accurate the clocks were on 11/22/63.
Not two clocks. Five. I can spot you one if you want to believe that the SS agents kept their watches in sync. But that's still four independent clocks in agreement.
The problem is, you don't know how independent they are unless you know what they were set to and when. I would argue that it's more likely that Powers and Kellerman set their watches to the same source than Bowley and the Methodist Hospital. Besides, you don't actually know what anybody's watch said because you're relying on their months old memories.
The Dudley Hughes data as reported by the Nashes, as has already been discussed.
Yes, and it's silly. Where's the timecard?
-
What Dudley Hughes data?
The Dudley Hughes data as reported by the Nashes, as has already been discussed.
Yes, and it's silly. Where's the timecard?
Why is it "silly"? Please explain.
-
All the Nashes said in their article was that the Dudley Hughes dispatcher had stamped a time card with 1:18 for the call. They did not see that card nor has that card ever surfaced. For all intent and purposes it only "exists" in the Nash article.
In other words, they tell us in their article something that's been told to them, which makes it double hearsay. And even worse, there is not a shred of evidence that confirms that the clock used by the dispatcher was accurate. This entire "time stamp card" business is nothing but hot air.
All the Nashes said in their article was that the Dudley Hughes dispatcher had stamped a time card with 1:18 for the call.
No.
They said much more than that.
They did not see that card nor has that card ever surfaced. For all intent and purposes it only "exists" in the Nash article.
How do you know they did not see the time card? What makes you state this as a fact?
In other words, they tell us in their article something that's been told to them, which makes it double hearsay.
You mean that it's hearsay, not double hearsay. Good grief, man.
Secondly, if they saw the time card, it's not hearsay at all.
-
Why is it "silly"? Please explain.
Where is the timecard?
-
Where is the timecard?
George and Patricia Nash saw it and they said the call was logged at 1:18.
Learn the case.
-
George and Patricia Nash saw it and they said the call was logged at 1:18.
Learn the case.
A lot of people said they saw a lot of things. Where's the card?
-
A lot of people said they saw a lot of things. Where's the card?
Are you going to join Weidmann and state as a fact that the Nashes did NOT see the time card?
-
Are you going to join Weidmann and state as a fact that the Nashes did NOT see the time card?
I don't know what the Nashes saw, but I do know anyone can claim that they saw anything.
-
I don't know what the Nashes saw, but I do know anyone can claim that they saw anything.
Bill Brown merely claims that the Nashes saw the time stamped card,
George and Patricia Nash saw it and they said the call was logged at 1:18.
Learn the case.
but he can not provide a shred of evidence for that claim, which is why he is now trying to shift the burden of proof by asking you that silly question.
This is what the Nashes actually said in their 1964 article "The other witnesses";
The Dudley M. Hughes Funeral Home is the central ambulance dispatching point for southern Dallas. It either handles calls directly or calls other funeral homes in the system that cover other areas. Dudley M. Hughes Jr., the dispatcher, took the call from the police. He filled out an ambulance call slip with the code “3-19” (which means emergency shooting) and the address, “501 East 10th Street.” He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”
Nowhere do they say that they saw the actual card, when they interviewed Dudley M. Hughes Jr.
I have asked Bill Brown in the past what makes him think the Nashes did actually see the card, but all I got as a "reply" is that - according to Brown - a lot more source material about George and Patricia Nash can be found on line. Yet, none of my searches found any other material and Brown – of course – failed to produce any links either.
A long time ago I asked Brown to produce the actual time card and he failed to do that also, so history seems to be repeating itself.
-
I don't know what the Nashes saw, but I do know anyone can claim that they saw anything.
By this standard, we shouldn't believe Markham, Bowley, Davenport, your mom, or just about
anyone else. You've come up with the most ridiculous argument I've seen all week.
-
Bill Brown merely claims that the Nashes saw the time stamped card,
but he can not provide a shred of evidence for that claim, which is why he is now trying to shift the burden of proof by asking you that silly question.
This is what the Nashes actually said in their 1964 article "The other witnesses";
The Dudley M. Hughes Funeral Home is the central ambulance dispatching point for southern Dallas. It either handles calls directly or calls other funeral homes in the system that cover other areas. Dudley M. Hughes Jr., the dispatcher, took the call from the police. He filled out an ambulance call slip with the code “3-19” (which means emergency shooting) and the address, “501 East 10th Street.” He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”
Nowhere do they say that they saw the actual card, when they interviewed Dudley M. Hughes Jr.
Consider the phrase 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”' Calling out a specific field on the card, to the point of putting that field's name in quotation marks, strongly implies that the Nashes saw the actual card and are describing what they saw on it. Ditto for the fact that they also explicitly quoted the location ("501 East 10th Street") and call code ("3-19").
Then there is this sentence in the next paragraph: "The record shows that Butler called in to the funeral home at 1:26 p.m. to say he had reached the hospital." "The record" indicates that the Nashes saw it written down. 1:26 ambulance arrival isn't anywhere in the DPD records that I know of. Nor does it appear in the Channel One recordings, so the only record left was what Dudley Hughes kept. And the obvious place that would appear in on the call sheet.
-
George and Patricia Nash saw it and they said the call was logged at 1:18.
Learn the case.
A lot of people said they saw a lot of things. Where's the card?
Are you going to join Weidmann and state as a fact that the Nashes did NOT see the time card?
I don't know what the Nashes saw, but I do know anyone can claim that they saw anything.
You're much wiser than Weidmann.
-
Consider the phrase 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”' Calling out a specific field on the card, to the point of putting that field's name in quotation marks, strongly implies that the Nashes saw the actual card and are describing what they saw on it. Ditto for the fact that they also explicitly quoted the location ("501 East 10th Street") and call code ("3-19").
Then there is this sentence in the next paragraph: "The record shows that Butler called in to the funeral home at 1:26 p.m. to say he had reached the hospital." "The record" indicates that the Nashes saw it written down. 1:26 ambulance arrival isn't anywhere in the DPD records that I know of. Nor does it appear in the Channel One recordings, so the only record left was what Dudley Hughes kept. And the obvious place that would appear in on the call sheet.
Consider the phrase 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”' Calling out a specific field on the card, to the point of putting that field's name in quotation marks, strongly implies that the Nashes saw the actual card and are describing what they saw on it.
It only implies that to you, because that's what you want it to imply.
Does this part: 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, also imply that they saw him put the slip in the time clock?
Whatever you think something implies does not provide credible evidence. At best it provides an opinion.
Then there is this sentence in the next paragraph: "The record shows that Butler called in to the funeral home at 1:26 p.m. to say he had reached the hospital." "The record" indicates that the Nashes saw it written down. 1:26 ambulance arrival isn't anywhere in the DPD records that I know of. Nor does it appear in the Channel One recordings, so the only record left was what Dudley Hughes kept. And the obvious place that would appear in on the call sheet.
Consider this; according to the DPD transcripts the ambulance was called at 1:18 and Butler, the driver, is on record saying that from the departure at the funeral home to the arrival at the ambulance took less than four minutes. So, even if the 1:18 call is correct (which it isn't) the ambulance would have arrived at the hospital at 1:22, which makes a time of 1:26 not only not correct but impossible.
All of this could have been resolved by the investigators by collecting the original time stamped card from the funeral home and put it into evidence. This never happened, despite the fact that FBI agents, were talking to staff of the hospital and funeral home and producing FD 302 reports (which were later altered again). The time card is gone. It was never produced and I bet it doesn't even exists.
But even if it does and even if it said the call was received at 1:18, how do you know the clock of the funeral home was correct, when at the same time LNs are claiming that just about every other time piece, involved in this case, was wrong?
-
Consider the phrase 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”' Calling out a specific field on the card, to the point of putting that field's name in quotation marks, strongly implies that the Nashes saw the actual card and are describing what they saw on it. Ditto for the fact that they also explicitly quoted the location ("501 East 10th Street") and call code ("3-19").
Then there is this sentence in the next paragraph: "The record shows that Butler called in to the funeral home at 1:26 p.m. to say he had reached the hospital." "The record" indicates that the Nashes saw it written down. 1:26 ambulance arrival isn't anywhere in the DPD records that I know of. Nor does it appear in the Channel One recordings, so the only record left was what Dudley Hughes kept. And the obvious place that would appear in on the call sheet.
Mitch, great post, but you're using way too much common sense for these guys to understand your point.
-
You're much wiser than Weidmann.
Still smoke and mirrors to divert attention away from your bogus claim that the Nashes saw the card.
Now produce the proof that the Nashes actually saw the card...... Oh wait, you can't.....
-
Mitch, great post, but you're using way too much common sense for these guys to understand your point.
Only the weak and feeble claim that their own argument is so strong that others can not understand it. Kinda sad, really...
An appeal to common sense is only used by people who can not produce the evidence to support their silly claims.
And, of course, there is still not a shred of evidence presented that the Nashes actually saw the time stamped card.
-
Now produce the proof that the Nashes actually saw the card...... Oh wait, you can't.....
Butler statement (HSCA, 1977). He made a copy of the trip ticket and it was given to George and Patricia Nash in 1964.
Sent to me from Dale Myers:
(https://i.imgur.com/yAi2Hsqh.jpg)
-
Butler statement (HSCA, 1977). He made a copy of the trip ticket and it was given to George and Patricia Nash in 1964.
Sent to me from Dale Myers:
(https://i.imgur.com/yAi2Hsqh.jpg)
Wow, that's solid evidence.....Hahahahahaha!
For crying out loud, you've got the ambulance driver allegedly giving a "trip ticket" (whatever that is) to some unknown people, when the Nashes, in their 1964 article, do not mention anything of this and simply write;
The Dudley M. Hughes Funeral Home is the central ambulance dispatching point for southern Dallas. It either handles calls directly or calls other funeral homes in the system that cover other areas. Dudley M. Hughes Jr., the dispatcher, took the call from the police. He filled out an ambulance call slip with the code “3-19” (which means emergency shooting) and the address, “501 East 10th Street.” He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”
But let's say, for the sake of argument, that Butler did give a copy of the time stamped slip to the Nashes. Where is it? Butler can't provide a copy, the Nashes never provided a copy and the Funeral Home hasn't produced the original or a copy either...
Just how far removed of reality do you need to be to attach any value to this crap?
Bottom line; the alleged time stamped slip is not part of the evidence and hasn't been produced for more than half a decade. Isn't it about time that you try to return to reality?
-
Wow, that's solid evidence.....Hahahahahaha!
For crying out loud, you've got the ambulance driver allegedly giving a "trip ticket" (whatever that is) to some unknown people, when the Nashes, in their 1964 article, do not mention anything of this and simply write;
The Dudley M. Hughes Funeral Home is the central ambulance dispatching point for southern Dallas. It either handles calls directly or calls other funeral homes in the system that cover other areas. Dudley M. Hughes Jr., the dispatcher, took the call from the police. He filled out an ambulance call slip with the code “3-19” (which means emergency shooting) and the address, “501 East 10th Street.” He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”
But let's say, for the sake of argument, that Butler did give a copy of the time stamped slip to the Nashes. Where is it? Butler can't provide a copy, the Nashes never provided a copy and the Funeral Home hasn't produced the original or a copy either...
Just how far removed of reality do you need to be to attach any value to this crap?
Bottom line; the alleged time stamped slip is not part of the evidence and hasn't been produced for more than half a decade. Isn't it about time that you try to return to reality?
You can deny the obvious. But, it's still the obvious.
-
You can deny the obvious. But, it's still the obvious.
No, it's only obvious to those who want to see it. Not to those who have a functional brain.
Where is the time stamped card? It's crucial evidence, isn't it? So where is the damned thing?
-
No, it's only obvious to those who want to see it. Not to those who have a functional brain.
Where is the time stamped card? It's crucial evidence, isn't it? So where is the damned thing?
Talk about moving the goal posts.
You asked for proof that the Nashes saw the "time card".
I post a statement from Butler where he says he made a copy of the trip ticket and passed it along to a man and wife team (obviously the Nashes) in 1964.
Now you're asking for the actual "time card". This is just more proof that you'll never be satisfied. Anything to get a cop-killer off the hook, right?
-
Talk about moving the goal posts.
You asked for proof that the Nashes saw the "time card".
I post a statement from Butler where he says he made a copy of the trip ticket and passed it along to a man and wife team (obviously the Nashes) in 1964.
Now you're asking for the actual "time card". This is just more proof that you'll never be satisfied. Anything to get a cop-killer off the hook, right?
No, the goal posts haven't moved. How does Butler's statement prove that the Nashes saw the time card?
I've always been asking for the actual time card. Some two years ago you said you were going to produce it. I'm still waiting and now I learn there are actually photo-copies in circulation as well. So where are they?
Anything to get a cop-killer off the hook, right?
Total BS, but a typical LN reply. If Oswald killed Tippit, he got what he deserved, I couldn't care less about Oswald one way or the other. I'm just saying that the guy has a right to a fair trial, as we all do, and you don't want to give him one because you can not produce the evidence of his guilt.
-
No, the goal posts haven't moved. How does Butler's statement prove that the Nashes saw the time card?
I've always been asking for the actual time card. Some two years ago you said you were going to produce it. I'm still waiting and now I learn there are actually photo-copies in circulation as well. So where are they?
Anything to get a cop-killer off the hook, right?
Total BS, but a typical LN reply. If Oswald killed Tippit, he got what he deserved, I couldn't care less about Oswald one way or the other. I'm just saying that the guy has a right to a fair trial, as we all do, and you don't want to give him one because you can not produce the evidence of his guilt.
Some two years ago you said you were going to produce it.
That's just a lie. This group's archives go back three and a half years. Quote me saying such a thing.
When you resort to lies to make a point, your point is entirely invalid. You've lied like this before.
-
"I did have occasion to reproduce that trip ticket and it was given to a man and wife reporting team from Life magazine in 1964" -- J.C. Butler
I suppose Weidmann believes there was another man and wife team running around interviewing Tippit witnesses in 1964 besides the Nashes.
-
That's just a lie. This group's archives go back three and a half years. Quote me saying such a thing.
When you resort to lies to make a point, your point is entirely invalid. You've lied like this before.
No, my memory is just better than yours. You denied having a conversation with me about Callaway as well when in fact you later "remembered" that the conversation did indeed take place.
-
"I did have occasion to reproduce that trip ticket and it was given to a man and wife reporting team from Life magazine in 1964" -- J.C. Butler
I suppose Weidmann believes there was another man and wife team running around interviewing Tippit witnesses in 1964 besides the Nashes.
And still not a shred of evidence that the Nashes actually saw the time stamped card. Just speculation and wishful thinking, based on a document that was written 14 years after the event.
-
No, my memory is just better than yours. You denied having a conversation with me about Callaway as well when in fact you later "remembered" that the conversation did indeed take place.
No.
I've never said I could produce the trip ticket just like I've never denied having a conversation with you about Callaway.
The truth is, you were saying something to me about Callaway and I replied that I couldn't remember exactly what it was that we discussed. That's not the same as denying that the conversation ever took place.
Why do you lie so much? Sincere question.
Never mind. I already know the answer.
-
By this standard, we shouldn't believe Markham, Bowley, Davenport, your mom, or just about
anyone else. You've come up with the most ridiculous argument I've seen all week.
There's nothing at all ridiculous about it. An unverifiable claim is just that.
-
I post a statement from Butler where he says he made a copy of the trip ticket and passed it along to a man and wife team (obviously the Nashes) in 1964.
Even if there was such a "trip ticket" in 1964, that doesn't demonstrate that it said what the Nashes claim it said. Why would anybody discard such an item?
Now you're asking for the actual "time card". This is just more proof that you'll never be satisfied. Anything to get a cop-killer off the hook, right?
It's proof that you are satisfied with anything that comports with your preferred narrative, no matter how tenuous. And you haven't gotten anybody ON the hook yet.
-
There's nothing at all ridiculous about it. An unverifiable claim is just that.
Let me put this statement back in context:
JI: I don't know what the Nashes saw, but I do know anyone can claim that they saw anything.
MT: By this standard, we shouldn't believe Markham, Bowley, Davenport, your mom, or just about
anyone else. You've come up with the most ridiculous argument I've seen all week.
JI: There's nothing at all ridiculous about it. An unverifiable claim is just that.
What you just said neither changes nor rebuts my point. If we can't absolutely verify
what the Nashes said they saw, we also cannot do so for Bowley, Davenport, Markham,
or --yes-- your mom. And if we should not believe the Nashes, then we should not
believe Bowley, Davenport, Markham, or your mom. My problem is, you apply this
in one direction only, against the Nash article. Had you really believed in the position
you now maintain, you wouldn't apply it so one-sidedly.
-
Consider the phrase 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, in the space marked “Time Called.”' Calling out a specific field on the card, to the point of putting that field's name in quotation marks, strongly implies that the Nashes saw the actual card and are describing what they saw on it.
It only implies that to you, because that's what you want it to imply.
Does this part: 'He put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22, also imply that they saw him put the slip in the time clock?
Whatever you think something implies does not provide credible evidence. At best it provides an opinion.
Quotation marks are used to denote that something was actually said and/or written. The Nashes wouldn't have used them unless it was something that they'd actually been told or had read. The real tipoff is the use of proper case in “Time Called.” Folks don't talk in proper case, so if the Nashes used it, then they had seen it written or printed that way. Of course, the HSCA/Butler interview page that Bill B posted ices the cake. You may not wan to believe that, but there it is.
That being said, let me answer your question with another: did the Nashes quote the phrase, ''[h]e put the slip into the time clock and stamped it 1:18 p.m., November 22"?
Then there is this sentence in the next paragraph: "The record shows that Butler called in to the funeral home at 1:26 p.m. to say he had reached the hospital." "The record" indicates that the Nashes saw it written down. 1:26 ambulance arrival isn't anywhere in the DPD records that I know of. Nor does it appear in the Channel One recordings, so the only record left was what Dudley Hughes kept. And the obvious place that would appear in on the call sheet.
Consider this; according to the DPD transcripts the ambulance was called at 1:18 and Butler, the driver, is on record saying that from the departure at the funeral home to the arrival at the ambulance took less than four minutes. So, even if the 1:18 call is correct (which it isn't) the ambulance would have arrived at the hospital at 1:22, which makes a time of 1:26 not only not correct but impossible.
All of this could have been resolved by the investigators by collecting the original time stamped card from the funeral home and put it into evidence. This never happened, despite the fact that FBI agents, were talking to staff of the hospital and funeral home and producing FD 302 reports (which were later altered again). The time card is gone. It was never produced and I bet it doesn't even exists.
But even if it does and even if it said the call was received at 1:18, how do you know the clock of the funeral home was correct, when at the same time LNs are claiming that just about every other time piece, involved in this case, was wrong?
I've never said that the Dudley Hughes clock was correct. In fact, I've said from the beginning that I expect none of clock to show the exact correct time, unless it can be shown otherwise. As far as I can determine, DH time is about a minute behind DPD channel one time which is within a minute of channel two time which is a within a minute of correct time. That is, channel one can be determined to be within two minutes of standard time, and DH is about a minute behind that. I've already laid out the reasons why the different time pieces sort out this way, and see no reason to repeat myself.
Butler's recollection of the Tippit ambulance run is something he fished out his memory 14 years after the fact. He may remember it that way, but just the 1.5 mile trip from 404 E Tenth to Methodist would have taken at least 3 minutes. Then you have to factor in the rest of the trip. Getting to the shooting site. Stopping not once, but twice (as Butler claimed). Getting out. Opening the back hatch. Hauling the gurney from the ambulance. Checking the status of the victim. Trying to radio the dispatcher that the victim is in fact a policeman. Lifting a limp, lifeless body up off the ground then arranging it properly on the gurney. Securing said limp lifeless body to said gurney so it the victim doesn't get thrown around the inside of the ambulance like a rag doll on the way to Methodist. Getting the gurney back into the the ambulance. Securing the gurney so that it doesn't become a rolling hazard inside the ambulance. Closing the back door. Getting back into the ambulance. Taking those few seconds to figure out the best way to get to Methodist. All of that has to happen before the ambulance crew even starts their journey to the ER. And then the ambulance has to back up to, get out, open the back door, get the gurney out, then explain the problem to the staff at the hospital. I'd say the ambulance action lasted more like 5 minutes stem to stern. Possibly even six. Maybe even seven.
You also haven't considered that the ambulance may have had a a separate radio channel for communications with their home base. Or, Butler may have just used a phone at the hospital. And did the ambulance call in their arrival before or after the body had been removed from the vehicle? There are too many unknowns to stake a position on 1:26 being impossible, as you have.
Finally, you're mad that the FBI or Warren Commission or whatever other investigative agency didn't sequester any documentation from Dudley Hughes and put it "into evidence" as you would prefer. Because those investigative agencies had nothing better to do in those days but figure out what some guys would be arguing about on the internet 60 years after the crime occurred, and failed to accede to your future demands for action.
Big whoop.
Has there really been a murder case in the modern world that was cracked by detailed examination of funeral home ambulance records?
-
What you just said neither changes nor rebuts my point. If we can't absolutely verify
what the Nashes said they saw, we also cannot do so for Bowley, Davenport, Markham,
or --yes-- your mom.
Agreed. So what?
-
I've never said that the Dudley Hughes clock was correct. In fact, I've said from the beginning that I expect none of clock to show the exact correct time, unless it can be shown otherwise. As far as I can determine, DH time is about a minute behind DPD channel one time which is within a minute of channel two time which is a within a minute of correct time.
Nope. You have no way of determining what "correct time" was.
-
Quotation marks are used to denote that something was actually said and/or written. The Nashes wouldn't have used them unless it was something that they'd actually been told or had read. The real tipoff is the use of proper case in “Time Called.” Folks don't talk in proper case, so if the Nashes used it, then they had seen it written or printed that way. Of course, the HSCA/Butler interview page that Bill B posted ices the cake. You may not wan to believe that, but there it is.
(https://i.imgur.com/IkJr1ZGs.jpg)
-
Agreed. So what?
The "so, what" was covered by what I wrote that you didn't quote in your reply:
"And we should not believe the Nashes, then we should not believe Bowley, Davenport, Markham, or your mom. My problem is, you apply this in one direction only, against the Nash article. Had you really believed in the position you now maintain, you wouldn't apply it so one-sidedly."
-
[MT :Has there really been a murder case in the modern world that was cracked by detailed examination of funeral home ambulance records?]
So what if there hasn't?
There's no way the FBI could have known in advance that the time card would not influence or even crack the case; that's why evidence is collected even if it may initially seem insignificant and they evidently had every opportunity to secure this piece of evidence, yet failed to do so.
Your argument is entirely moot but shows well how confused you are about evidence.
So, you're saying that FBI should have sequestered any items as evidence even if they wouldn't have known at the time that it would become significant at some later date. That's an awful lot of sequestering. I mean, Raiders-of-the-Lost-Ark-Warehouse level an awful lot. And a pretty dumb idea to boot, if you bother to think about it.
-
Nope. You have no way of determining what "correct time" was.
Not that would ever satisfy you. But then again, you don't want to be satisfied an any way or to any extent.
-
Not that would ever satisfy you. But then again, you don't want to be satisfied an any way or to any extent.
---------------------
CT WONDERLAND
BOOK OF OSWALD
---------------------
[EXCERPT]
BOOK I: LUNATIC FRINGE
Nothing is Knowable
Nothing is Provable
Nothing is Believable
-
I didn't say "any".
The time stated in several documents related to the shooting of Tippet was altered which shows there was a keen interest by somebody in the timeline. Anything to help establish a timeline would thus be of interest, especially considering the trouble the WC had getting Oswald to 10th & Patton on time!
Thanks for once again confirming you're clueless when it comes to evidence.
No, you didn't actually use the word "any". But look again at what you wrote:
"There's no way the FBI could have known in advance that the time card would not influence or even crack the case; that's why evidence is collected even if it may initially seem insignificant and they evidently had every opportunity to secure this piece of evidence, yet failed to do so."
If this is true for the time card, it's true for any other potential evidence.
-
I'm talking in the context of timeline, even you should have been able to figure that out.
I then clarified that to you but still you try to back-peddle.
A time stamped record isn't just any stuff that might turn in to evidence, capisce?
This is the story so far:
1.) you claimed something
2.) I pointed out that following the logic of the claim would lead directly to a ridiculous result...and a very full warehouse.
3.) You took offence to that I used the word "any"
4.) I pointed out that your claim effectively implies the "any"
So now you want to say that you contextualized it, but that doesn't really affect the point I made.
And you also claim I "back-peddle[d]." I hate to tell you this, but my position on this hasn't changed at all.
In reality, the idea that the FBI should have grabbed whatever, whether or not they knew it would be important as evidence, is simply your own invention. You've simply asserted that things work a certain way without supporting the assertion at all.
-
I didn't take "offence", I simply corrected your mistake.
I the given context, which is a possible timeline discrepancy (as per thread title), the "any" introduced by you solely to win an argument makes no sense.
But why don't you explain why the Nash couple showed any interest in the funeral home in the first place?
I made no mistake here.
Let's go back to what you wrote: "There's no way the FBI could have known in advance that the time card would not influence or even crack the case; that's why evidence is collected even if it may initially seem insignificant and they evidently had every opportunity to secure this piece of evidence, yet failed to do so."
The clause in italics universalizes your assertion. Again, even if you didn't use the word "any," it's clearly implied in that clause. Any appeal to context on your part is nothing more than silly dodge. You've wasted enough of our time, so no more.
-
The "so, what" was covered by what I wrote that you didn't quote in your reply:
"And we should not believe the Nashes, then we should not believe Bowley, Davenport, Markham, or your mom. My problem is, you apply this in one direction only, against the Nash article. Had you really believed in the position you now maintain, you wouldn't apply it so one-sidedly."
I don't know what you're talking about. When did I say that I apply a different standard to anybody else?
-
Not that would ever satisfy you. But then again, you don't want to be satisfied an any way or to any extent.
The problem is that it doesn't take a whole lot to satisfy you when it comes to accepting the narrative.
-
I don't know what you're talking about. When did I say that I apply a different standard to anybody else?
Where did I say that you said that you apply a different standard to anybody else? I said that you applied one standard to the Nash article, but don't extend the the same skepticism to, say, Markham, Bowley, Davenport. You've been doing it, whether or not you've admitted it.
At least you're right about one thing: you have no idea what I'm talking about. :P
-
Where did I say that you said that you apply a different standard to anybody else? I said that you applied one standard to the Nash article, but don't extend the the same skepticism to, say, Markham, Bowley, Davenport. You've been doing it, whether or not you've admitted it.
BS. I’ve never applied a different standard of skepticism to “say, Markham, Bowley, Davenport.”
You just completely made that up.
-
BS. I’ve never applied a different standard of skepticism to “say, Markham, Bowley, Davenport.”
You just completely made that up.
I've made nothing up. We see what you object to, and what you refrain from objecting to. Your double standard shines brightly through the crack between that Scylla and Charybdis.
-
I've made nothing up. We see what you object to, and what you refrain from objecting to. Your double standard shines brightly through the crack between that Scylla and Charybdis.
More like a light bulb that constantly flickers on-and-off due to not being tightly screwed in.
-
More like a light bulb that constantly flickers on-and-off due to not being tightly screwed in.
Every piece of evidence, every account, every piece of information that points to Oswald in any way shooting JFK or Tippit, in implicating Oswald in any crime, is attacked and dismissed. The person making the claim - Brennan or Brewer - is attacked as being dishonest (not wrong but deliberately dishonest). The evidence presented - the fingerprints on the rifle or the rifle purchase - is summarily dismissed as not being authentic, as not believable.
Meanwhile, all of Oswald's statements and acts are given the most innocent and innocuous of explanations. "Lots of people weren't interested in the assassination. Oswald was no different." As if nothing distinguished Oswald from these other people.
All of this occurring while insisting that he's not a conspiracy believer.
-
The problem is that it doesn't take a whole lot to satisfy you when it comes to accepting the narrative.
Actually, the "narrative" (I think Martin would prefer the word "timeline") on this particular topic that I haul to is one I created on my own, from the data available to me. So "the problem" isn't actually a problem.
-
Every piece of evidence, every account, every piece of information that points to Oswald in any way shooting JFK or Tippit, in implicating Oswald in any crime, is attacked and dismissed. The person making the claim - Brennan or Brewer - is attacked as being dishonest (not wrong but deliberately dishonest). The evidence presented - the fingerprints on the rifle or the rifle purchase - is summarily dismissed as not being authentic, as not believable.
Meanwhile, all of Oswald's statements and acts are given the most innocent and innocuous of explanations. "Lots of people weren't interested in the assassination. Oswald was no different." As if nothing distinguished Oswald from these other people.
All of this occurring while insisting that he's not a conspiracy believer.
Don't forget Mr McKneely's oft-used 'witnesses who did not see Oswald breaking any law' attempted witness put down...as if actually ID'ing @Tippit and nearby environs (handling the shells and revolver in some cases) would have no importance whatsoever in the case.
-
I've made nothing up. We see what you object to, and what you refrain from objecting to.
What I "refrain from objecting to" tells you nothing about what "standard" I'm applying to anything. You just made that up by making an assumption -- much like you do when citing "evidence" in this case.
-
Every piece of evidence, every account, every piece of information that points to Oswald in any way shooting JFK or Tippit, in implicating Oswald in any crime, is attacked and dismissed.
There is very little evidence, account, or piece of information that points to Oswald in any way in the first place. And what does is questionable or tainted in some way. It should be dismissed by anybody looking at the evidence critically rather than trying to confirm a pre-ordained narrative.
-
There is very little evidence, account, or piece of information that points to Oswald in any way in the first place. And what does is questionable or tainted in some way. It should be dismissed by anybody looking at the evidence critically rather than trying to confirm a pre-ordained narrative.
Not according to Bugliosi, you know the guy who successfully prosecuted 105 out of 106 felony jury trials.
JohnM
-
What I "refrain from objecting to" tells you nothing about what "standard" I'm applying to anything. You just made that up by making an assumption -- much like you do when citing "evidence" in this case.
I made an observation, not an assumption. Maybe you confuse those words.
Again, we see what you take issue with, and what you do not. Comparing the two gives us a great deal of insight into the standards you rely on, no matter what you might want to believe. The standards you actually use, rather than the ones you might think you use.
In light of this, accusing me of "making it up" changes nothing except for other people's opinions of you.
-
Not according to Bugliosi, you know the guy who successfully prosecuted 105 out of 106 felony jury trials.
False appeal to authority. Logical fallacy.
-
Again, we see what you take issue with, and what you do not. Comparing the two gives us a great deal of insight into the standards you rely on, no matter what you might want to believe. The standards you actually use, rather than the ones you might think you use.
Who's "us"?
On the other hand, you've demonstrated to "us" what your observations are worth.
-
Who's "us"?
It's "who's 'we'" not "who's 'us.'" You had one word to quote, only one, and you couldn't even get it right. Which leads straight into your next line:
Jabs aside, "we" are all the people who've noted over the years that your "I'm jes' an honest sceptic" act is belied by it's one-sided nature. My stated observation and Jeey 's and Mytton's quacks-like-a-duck cartoon takes are the latest examples.
On the other hand, you've demonstrated to 'us' what your observations are worth.
They're worth more than all the sour grapes in your arsenal.
-
It's "who's 'we'" not "who's 'us.'" You had one word to quote, only one, and you couldn't even get it right. Which leads straight into your next line:
Jabs aside, "we" are all the people who've noted over the years that your "I'm jes' an honest sceptic" act is belied by it's one-sided nature. My stated observation and Jeey 's and Mytton's quacks-like-a-duck cartoon takes are the latest examples.
They're worth more than all the sour grapes in your arsenal.
Iacoletti's, hey man I'm just a neutral observer and therefore I must be taken seriously schtick was undone with his very first post and thousands of posts later, for reasons known only to himself, he still persists with this delusion. As you have pointed out, the constant blatant contradictions of his accusations is absurd, for example the Police are all corrupt except when they're not?
And as for Iacoletti calling my Visual Educational Aids, a cartoon, or squiggly lines or coloured blobs or whatever without any scientific basis for his objection is equally absurd, but considering he believes that the Zapruder film "seemed" to be going backwards, well, I take any objection of his with a grain of salt.
It's also quite ironic that he splashes around "LOL" with such gay abandon when he actually comes across as a very bitter and disturbed man, but hey whatever, it's a free country and I'll defend his right to say whatever he likes because in the end every time he opens his mouth he's only shredding his own credibility and doing himself a massive disservice.
Btw, the way "Iacoletti's" attempts to discredit a poster by putting a members name's in "quotation marks" is also baffling, not one member here has ever proved that they are who they say they are, and especially not to Iacoletti's unrealistic high standard of proof but again it is what it is, but it does remind me of a time when he tried to convince me that CT members here used their real names but when I produced a post of Caprio's where he admitted to using an alias and I asked Weidmann who as predicted was supporting Iacoletti, to produce some ID, which I explained could have any personal info redacted, to prove Weidmann's name was actually Weidmann and lo and behold the usual chorus of crickets was his response and thereafter Iacoletti withdrew his argument, put his tail between his legs and we never heard squat again.
-
Iacoletti's, hey man I'm just a neutral observer and therefore I must be taken seriously schtick was undone with his very first post and thousands of posts later, for reasons known only to himself, he still persists with this delusion. As you have pointed out, the constant blatant contradictions of his accusations is absurd, for example the Police are all corrupt except when they're not?
And as for Iacoletti calling my Visual Educational Aids, a cartoon, or squiggly lines or coloured blobs or whatever without any scientific basis for his objection is equally absurd, but considering he believes that the Zapruder film "seemed" to be going backwards, well, I take any objection of his with a grain of salt.
It's also quite ironic that he splashes around "LOL" with such gay abandon when he actually comes across as a very bitter and disturbed man, but hey whatever, it's a free country and I'll defend his right to say whatever he likes because in the end every time he opens his mouth he's only shredding his own credibility and doing himself a massive disservice.
Btw, the way "Iacoletti's" attempts to discredit a poster by putting a members name's in "quotation marks" is also baffling, not one member here has ever proved that they are who they say they are, and especially not to Iacoletti's unrealistic high standard of proof but again it is what it is, but it does remind me of a time when he tried to convince me that CT members here used their real names but when I produced a post of Caprio's where he admitted to using an alias and I asked Weidmann who as predicted was supporting Iacoletti, to produce some ID, which I explained could have any personal info redacted, to prove Weidmann's name was actually Weidmann and lo and behold the usual chorus of crickets was his response and thereafter Iacoletti withdrew his argument, put his tail between his legs and we never heard squat again.
I asked Weidmann who as predicted was supporting Iacoletti, to produce some ID, which I explained could have any personal info redacted, to prove Weidmann's name was actually Weidmann and lo and behold the usual chorus of crickets was his response
You just can't help yourself, can't you? Lying is your first, second and third nature. You never asked me anything of the kind, and in fact when I contacted to you to set up a meeting, during my trip to Australia, a couple of years ago, you ran as fast as you could, Mr. "John Mytton".
-
I asked Weidmann who as predicted was supporting Iacoletti, to produce some ID, which I explained could have any personal info redacted, to prove Weidmann's name was actually Weidmann and lo and behold the usual chorus of crickets was his response
You just can't help yourself, can't you? Lying is your first, second and third nature. You never asked me anything of the kind, and in fact when I contacted to you to set up a meeting, during my trip to Australia, a couple of years ago, you ran as fast as you could, Mr. "John Mytton".
Awesome, it's no secret that Bill Brown and I busted you for changing your name from Roger Collins and I have patiently waited and repeatedly asked for you to prove that your name is Martin Weidmann and now's your chance to finally provide proof that your name is actually Martin Weidmann, well, what are you waiting for?
I found one of the threads where Iacoletti who's absolutely obsessed with the use of "aliases", claimed that some members including LNers used their real names and said that Rob used his real name and after I produced the following screenshot, Iacoletti tried to insert the word "and" in a desperate grammar defying attempt to support his dishonesty. I also asked Walt who added himself into one of the debates to provide ID using the same above criteria that I asked you, and he also didn't comply.
(https://i.postimg.cc/sgJrB4q2/dishonest_John.jpg)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1276.270.html
Btw I'm sure you've got proof to back your claim that you were even in Australia?
JohnM
-
Awesome, it's no secret that Bill Brown and I busted you for changing your name from Roger Collins and I have patiently waited and repeatedly asked for you to prove that your name is Martin Weidmann and now's your chance to finally provide proof that your name is actually Martin Weidmann, well, what are you waiting for?
I found one of the threads where Iacoletti who's absolutely obsessed with the use of "aliases", claimed that some members including LNers used their real names and said that Rob used his real name and after I produced the following screenshot, Iacoletti tried to insert the word "and" in a desperate grammar defying attempt to support his dishonesty. I also asked Walt who added himself into one of the debates to provide ID using the same above criteria that I asked you, and he also didn't comply.
(https://i.postimg.cc/sgJrB4q2/dishonest_John.jpg)
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1276.270.html
Btw I'm sure you've got proof to back your claim that you were even in Australia?
JohnM
The only one that seems to be obsessed with the use of aliases is you, and you have even admitted yourself that "John Mytton" isn't your real name. When you were asked about the fact that the forum did not allow fake names, you replied that the only requirement was that "a real name" was used, and that "John Mytton" is a real name. Says it all, really!
You and Bill Brown are constantly making all sorts of dubious claims. There is no need for me to respond to any of them. You never have asked me to produce some ID and the best evidence for that is that you do not show a screenshot to back up your pathetic claim, which would be the first thing you would do if you were not lying.
Your obsession with Roger Collins, who hasn't been a member for several years now, is hilarious and even more so since you seem to have never considered the possibility that that name was actually an alias.
I'm not one bit interested in your discussions with John Iacoletti or anybody else just as I am not interested in demands for proof of anything from a guy who lies about his own identity just as much as he does about the evidence in the JFK case.
-
and in fact when I contacted to you to set up a meeting, during my trip to Australia, a couple of years ago, you ran as fast as you could, Mr. "John Mytton".
The following exchange shows exactly how honest Weidmann is.
First of all Craig Lamson made the following observation which was collated from Weidmann's very own posts.
LAMSON: Wow, what a tangled mess. You own the company but need to ALLOW yourself time off and will take it even if you lose a client, but you don't really do much work because its the employees doing it all, but you like being at work, even though you don't do anything and are not needed and are just taking up space, but you don't have a real life so you just clutter up the office doing nothing. wow
And the lying Weidmann when confronted with the absurdity of his own claims, tried his best to slime his way out of it, but luckily a member named Mark Connors was there to stop yet another Weidmann false accusation! Hahahahaha!
(https://i.postimg.cc/Hkpm0Ncz/Ouch-Weidmann-zpsupioikgy.jpg)
So Weidmann, you've been exposed as a lying douchebag, and your accusation that I ran when you came to Australia, when I would find nothing better to meet your little lying Ass, is just another Weidmann lie. PATHETIC!
JohnM
-
The following exchange shows exactly how honest Weidmann is.
First of all Craig Lamson made the following observation which was collated from Weidmann's very own posts.
LAMSON: Wow, what a tangled mess. You own the company but need to ALLOW yourself time off and will take it even if you lose a client, but you don't really do much work because its the employees doing it all, but you like being at work, even though you don't do anything and are not needed and are just taking up space, but you don't have a real life so you just clutter up the office doing nothing. wow
And the lying Weidmann when confronted with the absurdity of his own claims, tried his best to slime his way out of it, but luckily a member named Mark Connors was there to stop yet another Weidmann false accusation! Hahahahaha!
(https://i.postimg.cc/Hkpm0Ncz/Ouch-Weidmann-zpsupioikgy.jpg)
So Weidmann, you've been exposed as a lying douchebag, and your accusation that I ran when you came to Australia, when I would find nothing better to meet your little lying Ass, is just another Weidmann lie. PATHETIC!
JohnM
Did I hit a nerve? What does any of this have to do with my trip to Australia? The answer is nothing, of course. You are just throwing anything you can out there hoping some of it will stick. A massive sign of desperation and weakness.
But as you brought it up, Lamson purposely misrepresented what I said in a pathetic attempt to ridicule me. Replying to it would require the disclosure of personal information which is none of his or your business. That he and you couldn't figure out what I was telling you is and was never my problem. The only one still obsessed with this bogus out of context crap from 2013is you. Says it all, really..... How sick is that?
And that "Mark Connors", wasn't/isn't that you? If memory serves, he never joined in any kind of discussion and only popped up once in a while to post an attack on non-LN member only to disappear as quickly as he appeared. Food for thought.....
As far as my trip to Australia goes, there are contemporary posts about it on the forum, that tell the story. Anybody who wants to, can look them up.
Now why don't you disappear for a while again, so we can see which LN suddenly pops up out of the blue only to disappear again when you return?
Btw, I won't be replying to your BS any further. There is no need for me to waste any more time talking to a loser like you, who has nothing of any value or significance to say.
-
Did I hit a nerve? What does any of this have to do with my trip to Australia? The answer is nothing, of course. You are just throwing anything you can out there hoping some of it will stick. A massive sign of desperation and weakness.
But as you brought it up, Lamson purposely misrepresented what I said in a pathetic attempt to ridicule me. Replying to it would require the disclosure of personal information which is none of his or your business. That he and you couldn't figure out what I was telling you is and was never my problem. The only one still obsessed with this bogus out of context crap from 2013is you. Says it all, really..... How sick is that?
And that "Mark Connors", wasn't/isn't that you? If memory serves, he never joined in any kind of discussion and only popped up once in a while to post an attack on non-LN member only to disappear as quickly as he appeared. Food for thought.....
As far as my trip to Australia goes, there are contemporary posts about it on the forum, that tell the story. Anybody who wants to, can look them up.
Now why don't you disappear for a while again, so we can see which LN suddenly pops up out of the blue only to disappear again when you return?
Btw, I won't be replying to your BS any further. There is no need for me to waste any more time talking to a loser like you, who has nothing of any value or significance to say.
Did I hit a nerve?
And there we have it in your very first sentence as you perfectly sum up the reason you're here, the JFK assassination is a distant second next to your main unwarranted joy of assaulting your innocent fellow members, you clearly lead a very sad, lie filled life.
What does any of this have to do with my trip to Australia?
You're the one who introduced "Australia" into the conversation" not me, in yet another misguided and irrelevant attempt to "hit a nerve", you really need help.
The answer is nothing, of course. You are just throwing anything you can out there hoping some of it will stick.
It stuck all right. *giggle*
But as you brought it up, Lamson purposely misrepresented what I said in a pathetic attempt to ridicule me.
Lamson only posted what you said.
Replying to it would require the disclosure of personal information which is none of his or your business.
Which is a total contradiction to you flouting your outside activities in the first place, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.
That he and you couldn't figure out what I was telling you is and was never my problem.
What it tells us is your have an eager imagination.
The only one still obsessed with this bogus out of context crap from 2013is you.
The JFK assassination occurred in 1963 and we are still discussing it, why should you be any different?
Says it all, really.....
Well actually "Martin", as I've just explained, it says nothing of the kind.....
How sick is that?
How sick is what?
And that "Mark Connors", wasn't/isn't that you? If memory serves, he never joined in any kind of discussion and only popped up once in a while to post an attack on non-LN member only to disappear as quickly as he appeared. Food for thought.....
Yep, I'm every LNer that has ever posted on this site. Muhahaha!
As far as my trip to Australia goes, there are contemporary posts about it on the forum, that tell the story. Anybody who wants to, can look them up.
Yeah, you're good at telling stories but that has very little to do with telling the truth.
Now why don't you disappear for a while again, so we can see which LN suddenly pops up out of the blue only to disappear again when you return?
I'm not going anywhere, but your continued paranoid delusions I do find amusing.
Btw, I won't be replying to your BS any further.
Is that a promise,... this time?
There is no need for me to waste any more time talking to a loser like you, who has nothing of any value or significance to say.
How ironic, half a day later and you are still wasting time adding as much vile and venom to your original post as your feeble little mind can conceive. Hilarious. You truly are the gift that keeps on giving, too bad you won't be replying to me anymore because I will sure miss pointing out your inability to construct an intelligent response.
JohnM
-
It's "who's 'we'" not "who's 'us.'"
"we" don't give a damn.
Jabs aside, "we" are all the people who've noted over the years that your "I'm jes' an honest sceptic" act is belied by it's one-sided nature.
"all the people". LOL. You've only been posting here for 3 years. You have no clue.
-
"we" don't give a damn.
Were this really true, you wouldn't have bothered to reply, much less edit out choice bits from the post you responded to.
"all the people". LOL. You've only been posting here for 3 years. You have no clue.
A large number of people read this forum without ever creating an account and having at it. I was one of the guest readers long before I started posting. Apparently you never considered that. And --like I said-- I'm not the only one to notice the pattern of your behavior