Then went outside to watch P. parade ( Parts 1 & 2 )

[John Iacoletti]

When you loudly proclaim that this hulk is Mr Bill Shelley------------

------------you make a fool of yourself.

Dan is certainly entitled to think this blobs are whoever he wants them to be.  But he shouldn't pretend that his arrogance constitutes a "sound identification".

[Royell Storing]

  If people are simply going to accept that "Blob" on the (R) Rear of JFK's head after Z313 is actually his Intact Skull, this hooey then makes every other "Blob" Fair Game.

[Thomas Graves]

Bull. I told you in great detail what was wrong with this "sound" argument.  It is based entirely upon Graves imagining that he sees "stripes" on black-blob on the steps in the Darnell frame and a whole bunch of handwaving.

Iacoletti,

At least you're finally conceding that the black-blouse-and-black-headscarf-wearing gal at issue in Darnell is a candidate for big, tall, (glasses-wearing) Calvery, and you're implying that if only some broad, dark (but admittedly very fuzzy) horizontal "bands" could be discerned in the sliver of her subtlety-patterned, "plaid" skirt ...

... (speaking of which, scroll down to the Zapruder frame in Linda's fine Find-A-Grave post and enlarge it to see what I'm talking about) ... https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/149407954/gloria-jean-calvery

... that's visible in Darnell, you'd be convinced it's her.

That's fantastic! You've made some real progress, John (traumatic for you though it must have been)!

Perhaps someone more technologically gifted than I am can find a clear version of those few Darnell frames, and enlarge them ...

 ... but not too much, as you always seem to intentionally do, John ...

... (lol -- remember your "She's Wearing Glasses/Nope, I Was Wrong -- She's Not Wearing Glasses" (Calvery) in the Betzner-3 photo we spent so much time arguing about, about a year ago? Remember -- you enlarged a crop of that untill her glasses "disappeared," didn't you) ...

... and post one or two of them here.

--  MWT 

PS  Clearer Zapruder frames (i.e.., showing much better the dark horizontal bands in Calvery's dress) can be found, but unfortunately they all seem to be posted at the Duncan-proscribed Eeek-A-Freak Disinformation Forum website.

PPPS 

Wait! 

Doesn't our very own Robin Unger have some in the Forum's "JFK PHOTOGRAPHS GALLERY" section???

Edit:

Yep!  Here's one!  https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?album=6&pos=0

[Alan Ford]

Well! I asked a question a while back and no one did offer an answer. So-----------I'll ask it again........

In Mr Dom Bonafede's 24 May 1964 article on Mr Billy Lovelady in the New York Herald Tribune, we get the following re. the Altgens photograph:

"Lovelady maintains it is he standing in the doorway at the moment of the assassination. 'I was standing on the first step,' he told me when I interviewed him in Dallas two weeks ago. 'Several people saw me. That lady shielding her eyes works here on the second floor.'"

Here is Commission Exhibit 203---------------------



Which female employee from the second floor, shielding her eyes in the photograph, is Mr Lovelady pointing to as he confidently makes the statement quoted above?

Can't be Ms Maddie Reese (GREEN arrow) (----------------->does NOT work on second floor!)

Can't be Ms Ruth Dean (PINK arrow) (---------------->does NOT work on second floor!)



So---------------who does Mr Lovelady mean----------------and: where in the Altgens photograph is she??

 

[Alan Ford]

Perhaps not wholly unrelated question!

Mr Ronald Fischer states this in his 11/22/63 affidavit------------

"I do remember one peculiar thing happened just at the time I saw the man up there (-------> i.e. just before the motorcade turned the corner onto Houston Street, A.F.). There was a girl walked in the Texas School Book Depository Building, a rather tall girl, and looked to me like she might be an employee of that building. She was walking in while everyone else had been coming out."

Assuming Mr Fischer didn't hallucinate this "girl"--------------and why should we think he did?----------------who might she have been?

 

[Alan Ford]

Mr Oswald told Captain Fritz a man with a crewcut came in the front door, waved his credentials and asked him for the nearest telephone. Do you believe Mr Oswald made this incident up?

Bumped for Mr O'Meara! 

[Alan J. Ford]

Mr. Ford at his optimal best, what an uncanny knack he has for honing in on pertinent details amid his keenly discerning research methodology. 

That said, good morning gentlemen. In briefly to expound upon the notes I left earlier this week:

*For years it was common knowledge within the research community that Gloria Jean Calvery was "Running Woman".  Given the actual physique of Running-Woman, many researchers over time--with good reason--begin to question the notion that Running-Woman was the noticeably more pudgy Calvery (G-d bless her anyway as her physique doesn't define her inner-beauty as a valued member of the human race).

A couple of years ago, while reading through the statements within Commission-Exhibit 1381, I came across a more likely candidate for Running-Woman: Miss Georgia Ruth Hendrix.  Unlike anyone else interviewed, she actually shares how she fled back into the building (her first-hand account is on page 18 on the right column) ---->

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf

In respect to my other notes,  specifically a reminder to compare Gloria Calvery's (RIP) wedding photograph and now the images we have courtesy of the SFM, I am not convinced she is the MUCH taller amazon woman in plaid captured in the respective photos of Mr. Zapruder & Mr. Betzner . In the SFM photo within this thread she is the third tallest female, yet somehow she suddenly dwarfs both her two taller coworkers and even the men standing there alongside her on lower Elm Street?

In her wedding photo her husband is much taller than she is (even standing there in her high-heels). So, when did this sudden growth spurt occur?

This inquiry & these questions are merely an observation. It is not to serve as an attack upon the good-faith research of others contrary to my views. It is merely done in the spirit of avoiding the possibility of another long-term instance where the research community needs to update, reset and start all over again as was the experience with the initial identification of "Running-Woman".

[Alan Ford]

Mr. Ford at his optimal best, what an uncanny knack he has for honing in on pertinent details amid his keenly discerning research methodology. 

That said, good morning gentlemen. In briefly to expound upon the notes I left earlier this week:

*For years it was common knowledge within the research community that Gloria Jean Calvery was "Running Woman".  Given the actual physique of Running-Woman, many researchers over time--with good reason--begin to question the notion that Running-Woman was the noticeably more pudgy Calvery (G-d bless her anyway as her physique doesn't define her inner-beauty as a valued member of the human race).

A couple of years ago, while reading through the statements within Commission-Exhibit 1381, I came across a more likely candidate for Running-Woman: Miss Georgia Ruth Hendrix.  Unlike anyone else interviewed, she actually shares how she fled back into the building (her first-hand account is on page 18 on the right column) ---->

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf

In respect to my other notes,  specifically a reminder to compare Gloria Calvery's (RIP) wedding photograph and now the images we have courtesy of the SFM, I am not convinced she is the MUCH taller amazon woman in plaid captured in the respective photos of Mr. Zapruder & Mr. Betzner . In the SFM photo within this thread she is the third tallest female, yet somehow she suddenly dwarfs both her two taller coworkers and even the men standing there alongside her on lower Elm Street?

In her wedding photo her husband is much taller than she is (even standing there in her high-heels). So, when did this sudden growth spurt occur?

This inquiry & these questions are merely an observation. It is not to serve as an attack upon the good-faith research of others contrary to my views. It is merely done in the spirit of avoiding the possibility of another long-term instance where the research community needs to update, reset and start all over again as was the experience with the initial identification of "Running-Woman".

Thanking you kindly, sir! Several fascinating lines of inquiry being pursued here, all converging on those all-important front steps that hold the key to Mr Oswald's alibi