JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Matt Grantham on May 14, 2018, 03:52:34 AM
-
Here is a link to the story of Dallas Highway patrolman Bobby Nolan, who was given of sealed envelope of what he was told was a bullet, at Parkland Hospital, and was instructed to give it to Captain Fritz Which he did. There are a couple of You Tube videos of him as well
http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm
-
Here is a link to the story of Dallas Highway patrolman Bobby Nolan, who was given of sealed envelope of what he was told was a bullet, at Parkland Hospital, and was instructed to give it to Captain Fritz Which he did. There are a couple of You Tube videos of him as well
http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm
Matt, Bobby M Nolan received from Nurse Audrey Bell the bullet fragments that had been removed from Connally's wrist. Nolan's initial are on the envelope. There's also a receipt of the transfer from Audrey Bell to Nolan that both of them signed.
-
Matt, Bobby M Nolan received from Nurse Audrey Bell the bullet fragments that had been removed from Connally's wrist. Nolan's initial are on the envelope. There's also a receipt of the transfer from Audrey Bell to Nolan that both of them signed.
According to Nolan the nurse said a bullet It is my understanding no receipt exists
-
According to Nolan the nurse said a bullet and he estimated it to be two by three inches It is my understanding no receipt exists
He estimated what to be two by three inches? The envelope?
The receipt exists? Or at least a copy of it does.
-
The quote does not specify that so I did edit it out of my post seems like he kept pretty quiet about estimating its size or weight
-
He estimated what to be two by three inches? The envelope?
The receipt exists? Or at least a copy of it does.
Quote from Nolan
I was talking to a man who was one of governor Connally's aides. His name was - I think it was either Stinton or Stimmons (Bill Stinson). And he was an aide to the Governor. And she came up and told him that she had the bullet that came off of the gurney. Now I don't know what gurney. I think they meant Governor Connally's gurney. And she said, "What do you want me to do with it?" He and I were just sitting there in the hallway talking to me and said, "Give it to him"
The nurse who spoke to district attorney Wade and gave an envelope to Nolan could not have been Audrey Bell. Three men, Governor Connally, DA Henry Wade, and officer Bobby Nolan, all confirmed that this nurse recovered a bullet from Connally's gurney and then showed it to Wade, before turning it over to officer Nolan. The envelope Bell processed, was given to an FBI agent, which is why it was never delivered to the Dallas police department, or at least, why there is no surviving record that it was.
-
Quote from Nolan
I was talking to a man who was one of governor Connally's aides. His name was - I think it was either Stinton or Stimmons (Bill Stinson). And he was an aide to the Governor. And she came up and told him that she had the bullet that came off of the gurney. Now I don't know what gurney. I think they meant Governor Connally's gurney. And she said, "What do you want me to do with it?" He and I were just sitting there in the hallway talking to me and said, "Give it to him"
Nolan had a poor memory, as is evidenced in the YouTube interview.
(https://i.imgur.com/GwCpAGK.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/H9NI4Fd.jpg)
-
The nurse who spoke to district attorney Wade and gave an envelope to Nolan could not have been Audrey Bell. Three men, Governor Connally, DA Henry Wade, and officer Bobby Nolan, all confirmed that this nurse recovered a bullet from Connally's gurney and then showed it to Wade, before turning it over to officer Nolan.
Nope, it wasn't recovered from Connally's gurney and I'm not willing to give the LNers a mulligan for this. The MB is the smoking gun of the coup. It's preposterous to think the MB just showed up on the wrong gurney in pristine condition. And if another LNer tells me the MB wasn't in pristine condition when it magically showed up, I'm gonna wretch. The fortuitous path of the MB stretches our credulity to biblical proportions. Especially when the FMJ bullet for the head shot inexplicably exploded.
-
Nope, it wasn't recovered from Connally's gurney and I'm not willing to give the LNers a mulligan for this. The MB is the smoking gun of the coup. It's preposterous to think the MB just showed up on the wrong gurney in pristine condition. And if another LNer tells me the MB wasn't in pristine condition when it magically showed up, I'm gonna wretch. The fortuitous path of the MB stretches our credulity to biblical proportions. Especially when the FMJ bullet for the head shot inexplicably exploded.
Not really sure what your point is other than the MB,
-
Nolan had a poor memory, as is evidenced in the YouTube interview.
(https://i.imgur.com/GwCpAGK.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/H9NI4Fd.jpg)
There are lots of inconsistencies and I would suggest they do not all just magically fall on Nolan
When shown an FBI FD-302 dated November 23,1963 (Agency File Number 000919, Record # 180-l 0090-10270), she felt it was inaccurate in two respects: it quotes her as turning over ?the metal fragment (singular),? whereas she is positive it was multiple fragments - it says she turned over the fragment to a Texas State Trooper, whereas she recalls turning it over to plainclothes Federal agents who were either FBI or Secret Service.
To corroborate her denial, Bell suggested that they look at the receipt she was required to fill out, which she had passed on to Parkland administrator, Jack Price. Of course, that receipt had to have been confiscated by the FBI, since it was critical to confirming the chain of custody. This is more from MD184,
She independently recalled filling out a receipt on 1l/22/63 for the fragments, on half-page sized paper with red lettering in the letterhead, which was signed for by one of two men in civilian clothes (whom she thought were Federal agents) who accepted the fragments. She said she personally delivered the original of this receipt to Parkland Hospital Administrator Jack Price. (ARRB staff promised to try to locate this document, and promised that if located, we would mail her a photocopy for verification purposes.)
But according to the National Archives, there is no record of the ARRB ever finding that receipt and the Archives were not able to find it either. So Bell's receipt, which would have confirmed the name of at least one of the men she gave the envelope to, and which had to have been taken by the FBI, seems to have evaporated.
So there is your missing receipt
-
There are lots of inconsistencies and I would suggest they do not all just magically fall on Nolan
When shown an FBI FD-302 dated November 23,1963 (Agency File Number 000919, Record # 180-l 0090-10270), she felt it was inaccurate in two respects: it quotes her as turning over ?the metal fragment (singular),? whereas she is positive it was multiple fragments - it says she turned over the fragment to a Texas State Trooper, whereas she recalls turning it over to plainclothes Federal agents who were either FBI or Secret Service.
To corroborate her denial, Bell suggested that they look at the receipt she was required to fill out, which she had passed on to Parkland administrator, Jack Price. Of course, that receipt had to have been confiscated by the FBI, since it was critical to confirming the chain of custody. This is more from MD184,
She independently recalled filling out a receipt on 1l/22/63 for the fragments, on half-page sized paper with red lettering in the letterhead, which was signed for by one of two men in civilian clothes (whom she thought were Federal agents) who accepted the fragments. She said she personally delivered the original of this receipt to Parkland Hospital Administrator Jack Price. (ARRB staff promised to try to locate this document, and promised that if located, we would mail her a photocopy for verification purposes.)
But according to the National Archives, there is no record of the ARRB ever finding that receipt and the Archives were not able to find it either. So Bell's receipt, which would have confirmed the name of at least one of the men she gave the envelope to, and which had to have been taken by the FBI, seems to have evaporated.
So there is your missing receipt
Bell acknowledged that the envelope is filled out in her hand. Bobby Nolan has likewise acknowledged that the "B.M.N." on the envelope is his doing. Both Nolan and Bell testified to one exchange: Nolan never claimed that he was twice visited by a nurse bearing gifts, nor did Bell claim that she gave out two different sets of evidence.
As the movie poster said, there can only be one. And that one is marked by both Bell and Nolan.
BTW, if you listen to the ARRB interview with Bell, at one point, either Gunn or Horne mention that an ARRB staffer wrote in a memo that he found the receipt in the archives at Parkland. I'm not sure how, or if, it panned out.
-
Bell acknowledged that the envelope is filled out in her hand. Bobby Nolan has likewise acknowledged that the "B.M.N." on the envelope is his doing. Both Nolan and Bell testified to one exchange: Nolan never claimed that he was twice visited by a nurse bearing gifts, nor did Bell claim that she gave out two different sets of evidence.
As the movie poster said, there can only be one. And that one is marked by both Bell and Nolan.
BTW, if you listen to the ARRB interview with Bell, at one point, either Gunn or Horne mention that an ARRB staffer wrote in a memo that he found the receipt in the archives at Parkland. I'm not sure how, or if, it panned out.
The record overall is not to good on lost evidence, but hey you stuck with facts on this post
Sorry Mitch I saw that profile picture and my mind just plugged in Richard Smith No wonder it didn't sound like him So please disregard the last part of the previous sentence
-
Bell acknowledged that the envelope is filled out in her hand. Bobby Nolan has likewise acknowledged that the "B.M.N." on the envelope is his doing. Both Nolan and Bell testified to one exchange: Nolan never claimed that he was twice visited by a nurse bearing gifts, nor did Bell claim that she gave out two different sets of evidence.
As the movie poster said, there can only be one. And that one is marked by both Bell and Nolan.
BTW, if you listen to the ARRB interview with Bell, at one point, either Gunn or Horne mention that an ARRB staffer wrote in a memo that he found the receipt in the archives at Parkland. I'm not sure how, or if, it panned out.
Mitch, It was Joe Freeman who wrote that memo. He was no longer with the ARRB and Gunn said in the interview that they would try to track down the copy of the receipt that the memo referred to. I don't know if they found it but Gary Murr did. Freeman's memo noted that the handwriting on the receipt appeared to be the same as that on the envelope.
-
The record overall is not to good on lost evidence, but hey you stuck with facts on this post
How much of that problem is actually due to lost evidence, and how much is just lost memories?
-
How much of that problem is actually due to lost evidence, and how much is just lost memories?
Ah! yes! thanks to Gary for finding it and to you for bringing it to my attention!
I went over to the thread on the Ed Forum and found that the thread in question had been infested by Bob Harris. At least I now know where he'd R-U-N-N-O-F-T to.
-
How much of that problem is actually due to lost evidence, and how much is just lost memories?
It's called accountability
-
It's called accountability
The question was, 'How much of that problem is actually due to lost evidence, and how much is just lost memories?' Care to try another answer without resorting to a non-sequitur?
-
The question was, 'How much of that problem is actually due to lost evidence, and how much is just lost memories?' Care to try another answer without resorting to a non-sequitur?
By the way your question makes no sense Lost memories? They don't remember where they put it? That implies s chain of custody is not a responsibility of the authorizes. Thus memory is not part of the equation Your question is a non sequitir
Even though I think I now understand your question in a different light I am letting the previous paragraph stand If you had wanted to say that perhaps it was the case that Bell had a false memory fine But it is this tactic of placing such questions seems like a tactic of LN to somehow put the onus on the opposing side to be responsible for answering questions impossible questions Pleas do not treat this as some capitulation since it is certainly not
-
It's called accountability
What exactly do you mean? Should Bobby Nolan , and others like him, be held accountable for faulty memory of something that they were involved in fifty years ago? Please clarify what you mean.
-
What exactly do you mean? Should Bobby Nolan , and others like him, be held accountable for faulty memory of something that they were involved in fifty years ago? Please clarify what you mean.
My understanding is that law enforcement is tasked with certain protocols in terms of the chain of custody of evidence and the protection evidence. They are accountable to do so
-
How much of that problem is actually due to lost evidence, and how much is just lost memories?
Maybe this question is supposed to mean that the memories our false and no such document ever existed? Not very well spelled out if that is what you meant IMO. If there wasn't the incredible record of lost evidence and outright deception it might be worth considering a witness It is not a matter of forgetting but rather a delusional memory of something that according to your theory never happened
-
My understanding is that law enforcement is tasked with certain protocols in terms of the chain of custody of evidence and the protection evidence. They are accountable to do so
Ok, who is to say that the protocols were not followed at the time? Nolan took possession of the fragments and signed a receipt for them as well as initialed the envelope that contained them.. That more than satisfies his link in any chain of custody that might be required. Those four fragments were "Bobby Nolan's Bullet".
-
Ok, who is to say that the protocols were not followed at the time? Nolan took possession of the fragments and signed a receipt for them as well as initialed the envelope that contained them.. That more than satisfies his link in any chain of custody that might be required. Those four fragments were "Bobby Nolan's Bullet".
I am by no means convinced that something sinister took place in regard to these fragments, but there is according to Bell a paper she signed that is seemingly missing Then I made as statement that missing evidence tens to be a bit more suspicious that usual given the fact of the generally tendency for things to go missing in this case It certainly it is not evidence of anything
-
Maybe this question is supposed to mean that the memories our false and no such document ever existed? Not very well spelled out if that is what you meant IMO. If there wasn't the incredible record of lost evidence and outright deception it might be worth considering a witness It is not a matter of forgetting but rather a delusional memory of something that according to your theory never happened
Go back to what I've said about the envelope. Nolan and Bell both identified their writing on the CE842 envelope. She said that she only handed out bullet fragments once. He said that he was visited by the copper n' lead fairy only once. Given the envelope, the writing on the envelope and Bell and Nolan's accounts of participating in exactly one exchange, the only conclusion is that Bell filled out CE842 and handed it to Nolan. Their handwriting is what ties them together that day, no matter how they may have remembered it 15-50 years later.
-
I am by no means convinced that something sinister took place in regard to these fragments, but there is according to Bell a paper she signed that is seemingly missing Then I made as statement that missing evidence tens to be a bit more suspicious that usual given the fact of the generally tendency for things to go missing in this case It certainly it is not evidence of anything
Consider for a second the purpose of a receipt. It's a slip of paper given to someone as a token in exchange for something else as proof that the transaction took place. In this case, Bell (as agent of Parkland Hospital) gave someone an envelope with fragments. Since Bell gave up the bullet/fragments, she should have been given a receipt in return as a token acknowledging and proving that she handed over the fragments. It would have been the other party's job to generate a receipt and give it to her. In other words, it doesn't really make sense that she would have written out a receipt in this case.
-
Tim correct me if I am wrong but the Dallas County Hospital Memorandum you have p[rovided says bullet fragment
It seems this envelope has now been destroyed?
Quoting Audrey Bell
?She independently recalled filling out a receipt on 11/22/63 for the fragments on half-page sized paper with red lettering in the letterhead, which was signed for by one of two men in civilian clothes (whom she thought were Federal agents) who accepted the fragments. She said she personally delivered the original of this receipt to Parkland Hospital Administrator, Jack Price. (ARRB staff promised to try to locate this document, and promised that if located, we would mail her a photocopy for verification purposes.)?
Dr Shires also is quoted that a single bullet or fragment was in the envelope
The FBI reported that the envelope contained a single fragment
http://jfkhistory.com/fbistinson.png
I totally agree with Robert Harris. He proved that Exhibit #399 (the infamous magic bullet) CANNOT be the TRUE bullet that stroke Gov. John Connally. It was Connally himself who totally debunked this hypothesis, when he wrote in his book ?In History Shadow? (1994)? black on white ? ?the most curious discovery of all took place when they rolled me off the stretcher, and onto the examining table. A metal object fell to the floor, with a click no louder than a wedding band. The nurse picked it up and slipped it into her pocket. It was the bullet from my body, the one that passed through my back, chest and wrist and worked itself loose from my thigh.?
I will say that the stories of those involved are pretty much completely at odds with the story the receipts supposedly tell Initials are kind of borderline in terms of the last word on anything I mist say I am changing my tune on where the preponderance of evidence leads us here
-
Maybe if I have time I will look at some more of this, but is the quote attributed as being in Connally's book in there or isn't it?
-
Maybe if I have time I will look at some more of this, but is the quote attributed as being in Connally's book in there or isn't it?
This is Connally on his memories of that day:
"It is no longer possible to say with certitude how much of the race to Parkland Memorial Hospital I remember, and how much I have been told by Nellie, or picked up from watching the news films or reading the official reports" [In History's Shadow, p12]
"Many of my memories are secondhand. I am missing the most historic minutes of my life." [Ibid, p15]
"This is what I missed, what I would put together from the accounts of those who survived that day in Dallas." [Ibid]
It would be worth quote another part of the book as an example:
"The federal agents, who had been assigned to their own car (called the 'Queen Mary') , jumped out and headed for the front entrance even as some in the crowd were still waving to the President"
We all know that didn't happen. As I told Harris a while back in another forum, Connally's "auto"biography recounts a number of other things in his book that he could not have seen. The question becomes, how can we filter what Connally directly remembers from what he divined from other sources? The comb to do this is simple enough, as it turns out. In the book, the bits that can be corroborated against Connally's earlier testimony and interviews are stated in first-person active: "I saw...", "I heard...", "I felt....", "I thought", "I knew....". The bits that we know that he could not have experienced himself, like the agents abandoning the Queen Mary for the TSBD front door, are stated in third-person. I doubt that it's a perfect test, but it correlates very well, if you look. So, the first thing to do would be to take the quote that Harris dotes on and apply the comb to it:
"The most curious discovery of all took place when they rolled me off the stretcher, and onto the examining table. A metal object fell to the floor, with a click no louder than a wedding band. The nurse picked it up and slipped it into her pocket. It was the bullet from my body, the one that passed through my back, chest and wrist and worked itself loose from my thigh.? [that's on page 18, BTW]
Looks like the it's stated in the third person, does it not?
-
"The most curious discovery of all took place when they rolled me off the stretcher, and onto the examining table. A metal object fell to the floor, with a click no louder than a wedding band. The nurse picked it up and slipped it into her pocket. It was the bullet from my body, the one that passed through my back, chest and wrist and worked itself loose from my thigh.? [that's on page 18, BTW]
Looks like the it's stated in the third person, does it not?
[/quote
Maybe It still lends credibility that the event happened ]
-
It was Connally himself who totally debunked this hypothesis, when he wrote in his book ?In History Shadow? (1994)? black on white ? ?
Connally died in 1993.
-
Maybe if I have time I will look at some more of this, but is the quote attributed as being in Connally's book in there or isn't it?
It is in there. Again, I encourage you to read Gary Murr's take on that.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23826-who-was-the-nurse-collecting-the-true-bullet-falling-from-connallys-thigh/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-353255
Matt, are you aware that it is written in Nellie's book ?From Love Field? that a nurse handed her a metal object that had fallen from Connally?
-
It is in there. Again, I encourage you to read Gary Murr's take on that.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23826-who-was-the-nurse-collecting-the-true-bullet-falling-from-connallys-thigh/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-353255
Matt, are you aware that it is written in Nellie's book ?From Love Field? that a nurse handed her a metal object that had fallen from Connally?
I read it and for me, it didn't seem to add anything I had not already heard Unless it is reference to the idea to the book in question It sounds like there was a posthumous editor?
-
"The most curious discovery of all took place when they rolled me off the stretcher, and onto the examining table. A metal object fell to the floor, with a click no louder than a wedding band. The nurse picked it up and slipped it into her pocket. It was the bullet from my body, the one that passed through my back, chest and wrist and worked itself loose from my thigh.? [that's on page 18, BTW]
Looks like the it's stated in the third person, does it not?
[/quote
Maybe It still lends credibility that the event happened
Well, if the best credibility you can ascribe to it comes loaded with "maybe" and "lend," then there's not that much credibility to it in the first place.
-
Well, if the best credibility you can ascribe to it comes loaded with "maybe" and "lend," then there's not that much credibility to it in the first place.
It is true that I phrase certain types of claims, especially those regarding witness testimony, with less than absolute certainty however in the example you gave I do agree I went to far in being hedgy It would have been better to have said it without the maybe Thus it should have read
It still lends credibility that the event happened
I have ;little doubt if I wrote in terms of a greater level of certainty that would be worthy of criticism as well
No it is not stated in the third person It does not state another person told him these facts
-
It is true that I phrase certain types of claims, especially those regarding witness testimony, with less than absolute certainty however in the example you gave I do agree I went to far in being hedgy It would have been better to have said it without the maybe Thus it should have read
It still lends credibility that the event happened
I have little doubt if I wrote in terms of a greater level of certainty that would be worthy of criticism as well
No it is not stated in the third person It does not state another person told him these facts
Here's the quote again:
"The most curious discovery of all took place when they rolled me off the stretcher, and onto the examining table. A metal object fell to the floor, with a click no louder than a wedding band. The nurse picked it up and slipped it into her pocket. It was the bullet from my body, the one that passed through my back, chest and wrist and worked itself loose from my thigh.?
How is it not stated in the third person active? The only time "me" or "I'" appears is as part of an adverbial phrase of a sentence who's subject is "discovery." Compare that to all the times he says things like "I see...", "I felt...", "I heard..." etc.
With that out of the way, you are correct if you meant that Connally didn't specifically say that someone else told him the bullet falling story. But that's not important. He also didn't say that someone told him about the SS agents jumping from the Queen Mary and heading right for the TSBD, but we know that he didn't see that himself. The important thing is, you can compare his earlier testimony to the different passages in the book. What he'd previously testified to is stated in the first person, while the things that are completely wrong, like the aforementioned SS assault on the TSBD front door, are stated in third person.
-
The question becomes, how can we filter what Connally directly remembers from what he divined from other sources?
And therein lies the problem with witness testimony. You can ask the same question about any witness in the case.
-
I just watched the interview Bobby Nolan gave about the bullet (fragments) he was given by nurse Bell and which he passed on to Captain Fritz's office, despite several requests from FBI agents to hand it to them.
At around 17.48 in the interview (available on You tube) Nolan remarks that his initials are on the evidence envelope but they are upside down. Earlier he commented that he initialed the envelope when he left it on a desk in Captain Fritz's office.
What I find puzzling is Nolan's remark that he does not recall there being any kind of writing on the envelope when he initialed it. If true, it means that the information about the content was added later and thus could differ from the real content.
-
I just watched the interview Bobby Nolan gave about the bullet (fragments) he was given by nurse Bell and which he passed on to Captain Fritz's office, despite several requests from FBI agents to hand it to them.
At around 17.48 in the interview (available on You tube) Nolan remarks that his initials are on the evidence envelope but they are upside down. Earlier he commented that he initialed the envelope when he left it on a desk in Captain Fritz's office.
What I find puzzling is Nolan's remark that he does not recall there being any kind of writing on the envelope when he initialed it. If true, it means that the information about the content was added later and thus could differ from the real content.
https://www.maryferrell.org/audio/ARRB/ARRB_Bell_S1.mp3
Beginning at 43:28.
"Oh I know I filled it out. I can tell it's my writing." --Audrey Bell
-
https://www.maryferrell.org/audio/ARRB/ARRB_Bell_S1.mp3
Beginning at 43:28.
"Oh I know I filled it out. I can tell it's my writing." --Audrey Bell
Thanks, Tim
Still not completely convinced?..
43:56
Perhaps a bit less sure; "It looks like, it really looks like my writing" -- Audrey Bell
44:29
"I didn't see my initial on that" -- Audrey Bell
-
Thanks, Tim
Still not completely convinced?..
43:56
Perhaps a bit less sure; "It looks like, it really looks like my writing" -- Audrey Bell
44:29
"I didn't see my initial on that" -- Audrey Bell
She didn't see her initials on it because she hadn't initialed it.
-
She didn't see her initials on it because she hadn't initialed it.
She sure sounded surprised when she learned her initials were not on it. Why would that be if she hadn't initialed it?
-
She sure sounded surprised when she learned her initials were not on it. Why would that be if she hadn't initialed it?
Did she sound surprised? I can't tell.