Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Umbrella Man: Suspicious  (Read 33641 times)

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #112 on: August 04, 2022, 07:23:10 PM »
Advertisement
What's the evidence again for these multiple sniper teams?

So the idea - again - is that these powerful groups secretly (somehow; nobody said no?) conspired to shoot JFK in broad daylight in the middle of a crowded street/location with many people carrying cameras and recording the event. And the followup cars in the motorcade had numerous reporters - several with cameras also recording the conspiracy. These reporters and spectators were all over the scene of the crime. Filming things, watching things. Things such as multiple sniper teams roaming about the Plaza (?).

Is this how you pull off the crime of the American century? Really? Like this? Do you want to get caught? Make it as complex as possible?

Vincent Salandria and Jim Garrison argued that this overt plan was done on purpose: it was sending a message to the public that "we" are in charge here and we'll do what we damned want to do. So the absurdity of killing JFK this way - and risking exposure - is really evidence not that it wasn't done but evidence that it was done.

Nuts, just nuts.

There is el zippo evidence of multiple shooters or any shooter other than Oswald.  But even if there was a Wild West shootout going on in Dealey Plaza, there was no need for some guy to wave an umbrella around.  It is just an oddity of life that at the particular historic moment one guy happened to be there with his umbrella to protest.  It does not have greater significance for that reason alone as CTers suggest.  If JFK wasn't assassinated at the moment, no one would have ever known about it.   Random events happen all the time in life, and no one takes much notice.  If someone examined every single detail that occurs on any given day with pedantic enthusiasm, you would find many unlikely things occur in the ordinary course of events.  That doesn't mean there is some guiding hand behind it.  Just the opposite.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #112 on: August 04, 2022, 07:23:10 PM »


Offline Paul J Cummings

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 138
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #113 on: August 04, 2022, 10:26:30 PM »
There is el zippo evidence of multiple shooters or any shooter other than Oswald.  But even if there was a Wild West shootout going on in Dealey Plaza, there was no need for some guy to wave an umbrella around.  It is just an oddity of life that at the particular historic moment one guy happened to be there with his umbrella to protest.  It does not have greater significance for that reason alone as CTers suggest.  If JFK wasn't assassinated at the moment, no one would have ever known about it.   Random events happen all the time in life, and no one takes much notice.  If someone examined every single detail that occurs on any given day with pedantic enthusiasm, you would find many unlikely things occur in the ordinary course of events.  That doesn't mean there is some guiding hand behind it.  Just the opposite.

Yeah all those people running to or heading for the grassy knoll were just in big rush to get out of the parking lot and beat the traffic.

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #114 on: August 04, 2022, 11:26:22 PM »
Yeah all those people running to or heading for the grassy knoll were just in big rush to get out of the parking lot and beat the traffic.

The actions of those folks make perfect sense.  From the Elm St. perspective, the "grassy knoll" area is in close proximity to the location where JFK was shot AND appears to offer the most likely place for seclusion for an assassin.  We know, however, from our knowledge of that area, that the backside of the grassy knoll tree line and fence is open to half of Dallas.  No assassin could possibly stand there out in the open, commit the act, and escape unnoticed.  It is absurd.  Have you been there?  That area is wide open. 

The witnesses who headed toward the GK had no clue where the shots originated due to the sound distortions.  They didn't see a shooter there.  Visually the grassy knoll area was the most likely place for the reasons noted.  Someone headed there and others followed like sheep.  A perfectly reasonable act under the circumstances even with no shooter from that location.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #114 on: August 04, 2022, 11:26:22 PM »


Online Sean Kneringer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #115 on: August 05, 2022, 03:13:14 AM »
Yes, it was windy that day.


Offline Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3160
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #116 on: August 05, 2022, 10:38:20 AM »
A review will show (Reply #98) that your claim about Bretzner and Willis was directly addressed. Still pictures won't show if the umbrella is being buffeted by the wind. The Zapruder film, however, does show exactly that.

 

The buffeting and movement of the umbrella is continuous and is first seen on the film at Z206, about 1/4 sec after Willis05 still slide. The wind raises up the umbrella, rotates it back-and-forth on its shaft and rocks the canopy towards the limousine and away from it.

Witt says he saw "the motorcade" approach. To me, that means he saw Kennedy. Do you think Witt was looking at the X-100's grille and not Kennedy?

    "Well, as I recall, the motorcade had already made the turn and was coming
     down Elm Street going west on Elm before I became aware it was there,
     and it would have been from a straightline position off to my left about like
     this [indicating] when I saw it."

    "The next thing I saw after I saw the car [the Presidential limousine] coming
     down the street, down the hill to my left ..."

    "Well, after I became aware of its presence [the Presidential limousine],
     I got up and took the umbrella and started walking toward the street and
     opening the umbrella at the same time."

    "I saw it  [the Presidential limousine] coming down on my left traveling west ..."

I mean, if Witt didn't see Kennedy coming down Elm, how would he know that was the moment to open the umbrella?

The point where Kennedy was shot in the neck I place in the low-Z220s. You know, where the Zapruder film shows the umbrella being buffeted by the wind.

Witt never said he didn't hear the cheering as the motorcade was on Houston. But he might have been like Zapruder, who thought the lead motorcycles meant the limousine was just behind. Zapruder then stopped filming until he actually saw the limousine. All Witt is saying is that the limousine was on Elm before he saw it ("it was traveling west at the time I saw it"). Witt couldn't see over to Houston Street because of the Elm Street slope.

So you hold your umbrella behind your back to release the catch and raise it? Must be quite a trick. Of course, Witt would have to hold the umbrella in front of him before he even raised it. You look down to release the catch and slide the umbrella up along the shaft.

As I told you, Witt mentions several times he saw the "motorcade" or "car" (meaning the Presidential limousine) come down Elm before he decided to open his umbrella. The Betzner and Willis photos can't speak to whether Witt is caught off-guard by the wind filling his umbrella and that he has to maintain control of it.

Kennedy is pass Witt's position, so why does Witt think Kennedy would see his umbrella? Witt could be looking towards the cars that followed the limousine to see if the local Texas politicians get the message. Or maybe his umbrella is being buffeted again. He looks towards the limousine in time to see Clint Hill make it to the rear bumper, which was post-headshot.

Witt might not have seen Hill "jump off" but assumed he did; where else would an agent had come from to be racing towards the limo's rear bumper if not from the Queen Mary followup car that Witt said was close to the limousine? Witnesses have been known to add little embellishments based on sound assumptions.

I'm sure you smell BS a lot where you're at.

Witt must have seen the President if he decided to walk towards some particular "car" and open his umbrella. Witt has to spell that out for you? And the Zapruder film shows the wind buffeting the umbrella just as Kennedy goes pass, so Witt could have been distracted. Witt didn't like Kennedy, he had seen enough of him to know he was approaching; maybe Witt felt self-conscious and at the last moment didn't want to stare down Kennedy.

You can't even keep track of the posts that address your points in this Topic thread.

PROBLEMS WITH THE "ORGAN BUFFETING THEORY"

In his HSCA testimony, Witt is crystal clear - when he first became aware of the motorcade coming down Elm he was sat on the grass. He stood up, began to move forward whilst opening his umbrella. As he was trying to open the umbrella it was in front of him obscuring his view.
Witt testifies that, as the umbrella was obscuring his view whilst he was opening it, at least three shots were fired. Because his view was obscured by the umbrella, Witt never saw JFK get shot. The very first thing he was aware of once the umbrella was up, was the limo slowing down and Clint Hill jumping from one vehicle to the next.
The problem with this testimony is that it is completely refuted by the film/photo record.
Witt states that the first thing he saw was the limo slowing down and Hill jumping off one vehicle and onto the other. This is the moment of the headshot at z312. However, in Willis5 (z202), we see the umbrella in the raised position, and UM has a clear LoS to the limo. This is 6 seconds before the headshot.



Betzner3 shows the umbrella was in the raised position even earlier,at z186:



This is 7 seconds before the headshot!


There is something seriously wrong with Witt's HSCA testimony.
And because of this massive discrepancy between Witt's testimony and the film/photo record, Jerry has felt compelled to introduce the "Organ Buffeting Theory". In this delightful fairy-tale the reason Witt's view is obscured is not due to him raising the umbrella but because the umbrella was buffeted by the wind.

I'll let that sink in for a minute.

Although Jerry has disingenuously insisted on a number of occasions that Witt mentioned the umbrella being buffeted by the wind - this is not true. Nowhere in his testimony does Witt mention the wind or buffeting or anything of that nature. This is purely Jerry's invention.
Witt is absolutely clear - his view is obscured as he puts the umbrella up. That's that.

In his post Jerry provides this helpful gif to demonstrate the perils of buffeting:



Please note that although the umbrella is being buffeted at no point is the lady's vision obscured.

The UM had an unobscured LoS to the limo at least seven seconds before Witt claims to have become aware of the action.
The umbrella was up before a single shot had been fired - in contrast with Witt's testimony where all three shots are fired while he is messing with the umbrella.
How can Witt's testimony be so different from the film/photo evidence?
It really is suspicious.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #116 on: August 05, 2022, 10:38:20 AM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #117 on: August 05, 2022, 12:25:48 PM »
Wind Factor Dealey Plaza

NCDC - National Climatic Data Center
US Department of Commerce - Weather Bureau
Surface Weather Observations
Dallas, Texas (Dallas Love Field) NOV 22 1963
Time Temp Direction Knots MPH

1055 57 SW 10

1130 WSW 12 14

1155 63 WSW 13 15

1230 W 13 15

1255 67 WNW 17 20

1330 WNW 17+25

1355 69 WNW 19+26

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #118 on: August 05, 2022, 03:04:23 PM »
Yes, it was windy that day.



Marion Baker noted that the wind almost blew him over on his motorcycle:

Mr. BELIN - You said you were going down Main Street at around Record at from 5 to 10 miles an hour?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - All right.
Will you take up your trip from there, please?
Mr. BAKER - As we approached the corner there of Main and Houston we were making a right turn, and as I came out behind that building there, which is the county courthouse, the sheriff building, well, there was a strong wind hit me and I almost lost my balance.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3778
Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #119 on: August 05, 2022, 03:18:13 PM »
Marion Baker noted that the wind almost blew him over on his motorcycle:

Mr. BELIN - You said you were going down Main Street at around Record at from 5 to 10 miles an hour?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - All right.
Will you take up your trip from there, please?
Mr. BAKER - As we approached the corner there of Main and Houston we were making a right turn, and as I came out behind that building there, which is the county courthouse, the sheriff building, well, there was a strong wind hit me and I almost lost my balance.

The wind currents around buildings, trees, etc can sometimes increase in velocity as it is squeezed between structures. A wind from the west at 10 to 13 mph might have been substantially higher in velocity as it entered Dealey Plaza and the structures there.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Umbrella Man: Suspicious
« Reply #119 on: August 05, 2022, 03:18:13 PM »