Baker didn't run through them, he ran behind them.

   The timestamp for these images of Officer Baker running across the Island and into the street is :20 seconds after the Kill Shot. Yet, as we can see, Officer Baker is Not having to plow through a throng of people that stretched from the corner of the TSBD to the traffic light on the Island. Why is that? That is because these images of Officer Baker are Not :20 seconds after the Kill Shot. These images are closer to :50 seconds to 1 Minute after the Kill Shot, and the throng of people stretching from the corner of the building to the traffic light on the island has dispersed. This is why the driver of Camera Car #2 is standing flat footed outside of his car on the opening frames of the Darnell Film. His camera car was sitting stock still for close to a minute before he decided to get out of the car and look around as to what the holdup was. This :50 second to 1 Minute timeline of Officer Baker running across the Island and into the street, also resets when Wiegman filmed the JFK Limo going under the Triple Underpass. This then extends the amount of time the JFK Limo was on Elm St before being filmed by Wiegman going under the Triple Underpass. 

I wonder if that is Stanton waving in the Prayer Man spot in Towner...

This is what the Prayer Man people do...They deliberately avoid scanning and enhancing evidence and then they use wording to portray themselves as researching honestly...They are quite capable of enhancing Towner to see if that is Stanton waving but they don't...They don't because they hijack the entire internet and then deliberately not investigate evidence that disproves them...Where is Iler outlining the site rules on that intentional dishonesty?

Before the Luna Task Force Larry Schnapf made public statements saying they would review all evidence that decided one way or the other who Prayer Man was...Schnapf lied and when it came time to get Luna to easily obtain the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy of Darnell he made a statement detailing why he was not going to obtain that copy...He was clearly acting in favor of the Prayer Man people in an effort to conceal evidence that Prayer Man was Stanton...He lied...And now they are backing it up by censoring and ignoring those who demand they research honestly...The Education Forum is a bad faith forum - which is the playing field Jim D prefers...

I joined the Education forum in 2005
My post count is 3,987 posts so i know who those guy are.

I have opened dozens of so called "Prayer Man" threads. I spent years on the Education Forum researching Prayer Man.

I am 73yo and i basically walked away from JFK Research about 8-years ago

...to your satisfaction. You have a really goofy idea as to what constitutes proof.

Hint: proof isn't repeating the same nonsense over and over again.

'Proof' is photographic evidence demonstrating beyond the slightest doubt that you are full of sh!t.
And it's faintly amusing that you would accuse someone else of repeating the same nonsense over and over again. All you do is spew the Warren Commission's findings, which you've clearly learned in full, over and over again.
The moment you step outside this narrow field of knowledge you make an instant buffoon of yourself.

But let's not get distracted by your incompetence.
You were asked a couple of questions about JBC which are a chance for you to show off your expert knowledge of how JBC's recollection of the shooting is corroborated by the Z-film.
Just for general amusement let's see what pearls of wisdom you have to offer:

JBC is also unequivocal that the gap between him hearing the first shot and being hit is "a split second", literally less than a second. He knows his rifles and he is convinced at first that there are multiple people firing or that someone is using an automatic rifle. He is saying that the gap was so small it could not have been done by a single person using a bolt action rifle, it had to be multiple people or a automatic. How do you explain that?

JBC studies the Z-film and chooses z234 (or z232) as the frame he is shot. How do you explain that?

Corbett is pretending the media isn't corrupted and doing the government's bidding on the Kennedy Assassination...


Jim DiEugenio is the ultimate hypocrite because he criticizes the government to no end on their ignoring of the evidence but then turns around and practices the same thing on Wanda Daniel...And he uses the research community and their dirty censorship to do so...

Do you really think no one in the media would be interested if you had really proof of a conspiracy to kill JFK. There are plenty of well know people who are CTs. Jesse Watters for one. He has his own prime time show on Fox and he has often talked of his belief that that CIA killed JFK. Joey Jones, one of Fox's roving commentators has expressed similar sentiments. Geraldo Rivera is a longtime critic of the WCR. Surely, he would be interested. Just don't call him Shirley.

I documented in a previous reply that Boswell told journalist Richard Levine in an extensive interview in November 1966 that at the time of the autopsy the pathologists had already been told "what had been done by the physicians in Dallas," in addition to the "probable extent of the injuries" ("Pathologist Who Made Examination Defends Commission's Version," Baltimore Sun, November 25, 1966, p. 3; see also Harold Weisberg, Post Mortem, Skyhorse Publishing, 2007, reprint of 1975 edition, p. 37; and Weisberg, Never Again, Skyhorse Publishing, 2007, reprint of 1995 edition, p. 217).

I should add that Boswell also revealed the additional crucial information that Humes's phone conversations with the Dallas doctors the next day, 11/23/1963, "confirmed what was already a certainty to the pathologists -- that there was a bullet wound in the President's neck at the point of the tracheotomy incision" (Ibid., p. 4; see also Weisberg, Post Mortem, p. 37).

The official lie that emerged soon after the autopsy was that the autopsy doctors had no idea there was a throat wound until the day after the autopsy. Historian William Manchester was the first to expose this falsehood in his 1967 book The Death of a President, but his discovery was ignored by the major news outlets. Even most WC critics failed to take advantage of Manchester's discovery because they viewed Manchester as a tool of the Establishment, as a sort of "court historian," and thus didn't bother to read his book.

Dr. John Ebersole, the autopsy radiologist, was the next person to expose the official tale when he was interviewed by the HSCA in March 1978, as I also documented in a previous reply. Among other key disclosures, Ebersole informed the HSCA that Humes spoke with the Dallas doctors by no later 10:30 during the autopsy. This was at least half an hour before the end of the exam phase of the autopsy, and at least two hours before the end of the consultation phase of the autopsy.

Ebersole also revealed that "further probing" determined that "the distance traveled by this missile [the back-wound bullet] was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger." This is one of several disclosures that confirm what we learned with the release of the transcript of the WC's 1/27/1964 executive session, namely, that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound and that, not surprisingly, the back wound had no exit point. Mind you, this was late January 1964, and the transcript shows that Rankin was referring to documents from the autopsy.

As I also documented in a previous reply, military aide Richard Lipsey witnessed the consultation phase of the autopsy and reported to the HSCA that the pathologists were certain the back wound had no exit point. Crucially, Lipsey added that the doctors concluded that the rear-headshot bullet had exited the throat. This is a revealing datum because we know from the 1/27/1964 WC executive session transcript that one of the first drafts of the autopsy report said a fragment from the headshot exited the throat, that the throat wound was the exit point for a headshot fragment. This is also further proof that the pathologists knew about the throat wound during the autopsy.   

What the hell difference does it make when the autopsy team figured out there had been an exit wound in the throat. They eventually got there. I suspect it was a gradual process. At first they were confused because they had an entrance wound with no apparent exit and no bullet in the body. That fostered the preposterous hypothesis that the bullet had only gone a few inches into the back and then somehow worked its way out. It is completely absurd to think that a bullet would only penetrate a short distance into soft tissue, but they apparently were groping for an answer early on in the process. As they continued to examine the body, they discovered further tissue damage, the contusion of the pleura, the perforation of the strap muscles, and the damage to the rings of the trachea, there must have been a moment when the thought hit them that, "Holy crap, this leads us right to the tracheostomy incision". That discovery would naturally lead them to at least consider the possibility that the exit wound had been used to perform the tracheostomy. Naturally, they would want to confirm that with the ER team at Parkland. There were several phone calls from Bethesda to Dr. Perry that night and the next morning. Who knows during which conversation Perry confirmed to Humes that the tracheostomy had been performed over the exit wound. Again, what the hell difference does it make when that confirmation was given. The Bethesda team arrived at the correct answer.

It defies credulity that both the back wound and throat wound were entrance wounds in which a bullet penetrated only a short distance into soft tissue so that it could work its way out or be dug out of JFK's body. Only really silly people would believe such a thing was remotely possible.