Just the opposite...I had recently finished Michael Collins Piper's book 'Final Judgment' when Tappy Wright came out with his claim that Jimi manager Michael Jeffery confessed to murdering Jimi...It was the Bahamian dirty money laundry offshore banks that made me realize the same pattern between Jimi's assassination and Kennedy's...When you follow the money those banks were of prime interest to the same CIA dirty money interests that influenced the Kennedy assassination...The fact Michael Jeffery was British Intelligence led to his knowledge of those banks and I suspect Jeffery wasn't stealing Jimi's money for himself but was following orders, instead, as part of an anti-communist black ops funding program...This would explain Jeffery's strange death in a mid-air plane collision where French Air Traffic Control was conveniently on strike...BCCI, Permindex - it is highly possible Jeffery was funneling Jimi's money in to those covert programs which explains the urgency to murder Jimi as well as Jeffery...

I'm the only person who realized the forensic evidence at Jimi's autopsy proved homicide when the correct timeline was inputted...I met Wecht and interviewed him on this...I'm also friends with the doctor who tried to save Jimi...This, of course, earns me elevated banning at The Education Forum - even though its is prime material and leads in the field...It strains credulity that CIA didn't know exactly what happened to Jimi and why...

Your only counter-argument is that Baker should have seen Shelley and Lovelady ahead of him??
You seem to imagine that the first floor is a wide open, empty space.
It's nothing of the sort.
You also seem to imagine that everyone travelled in the same straight, diagonal line that led directly from the entrance of the first floor to the elevators. (What makes you think they travelled in a diagonal line anyway?)
I can't help it if you have no idea how cluttered this space was.
At least you've grasped the concept that Shelley and Lovelady could just move into this space while Baker and Truly were interacting in the lobby.
As I said, it's not a difficult concept to grasp.
Your counter-argument is really weak which is very telling.
You are having a problem visualising what is happening because you imagine the first floor to be empty. Once you grasp how cluttered it was it might become clear why Baker didn't see Shelley and Lovelady near the back of the first floor.



So, that's your main counter-argument dealt with.
What else do you have?

Also, why would Lovelady/Shelley want to go to the freight elevators and then just lay around there?


Lay around there?
What are you talking about?
What are you imagining?
That the first floor is this wide open, empty space with a few hammocks in it?
It's hard to discuss these issues with someone who can't grasp the basic realities of the situation.
What makes it even harder is that you never pay attention to what anyone else is posting.
Look back a few Replies and you'll see I posted this:

The question is - what were they up to?

What were they covering up?

What is there, towards the back of the first floor, that could be so important?

It has been demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that Shelley and Lovelady lied about their movements.
The lied to cover up their real movements.
They lied to cover up the fact that they immediately made their way towards the back of the first floor where they were seen by Adams and Baker.
That they lied is not up for debate.

My opinion is that Adams/Styles got their timeline screwed up.

The reason your opinion is wrong is because it is based solely on the lies of Shelley and Lovelady.

They literally have no reason to be there at that point in time. None.

You literally have no idea if that is true.
Just because you can't imagine what they are up to doesn't mean anything.
They were witnessed in that area approximately 50 - 60 seconds after the shooting. Just because it's not clear what they were doing there doesn't mean they weren't witnessed there. That would be a crazy way to look at things.

Not at all.


That's exactly what I'm in the process of trying to do, Dumb Ass.


Correct.  Pizza with him back in November and, well, pizza again with him last month, which is when Frank and I presented him with the Ripley's affidavits, Sideline Critic.


That you believe that is "all you need to do" tells me all I really need to know about your (lack of) level of research.

We did indeed ask Frazier.  Since then, we've verified the notary, i.e. his full name, where he lived, where he worked, how long he as a notary, etc... We need to be sure he actually was a notary versus a fake name.  We're subjecting the Frazier signature on the affidavit to handwriting analysis.  Of course, it would be better to have the actual document as opposed to a copy.  But still, we're trying it, nevertheless.

This is real research.  It takes time, unfortunately.  And we do indeed plan on coming forth with ALL findings, good, bad or indifferent.  But wait.  You already know about real research.  You made a phone call.