...
Officer Chaney, there's another good one. He says he rode up to Curry's car before they got to the underpass, and that activity appears nowhere in the Zapruder film. There's just too much of this stuff...
Hello Brian -- what's even MORE interesting, Chaney was within 15' of the president when he was assassinated, looking right at the president yet, he was never interviewed by the Warren Commission investigators. Go figure.
And here is Chaney looking directly at JFK as DH says
and then after the shots Chaney basically stops... and is not seen accelerating to the front - nor is he anywhere near the lead car in McIntyre or Bell
Mr. HARGIS - I don't know whether it was the Secret Service car, and I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chan[B]ey put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to[/B] tell them to get everything out of the way, that he was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off, and I stopped and got off my motorcycle and ran to the right-hand side of the street, behind the light pole.
Mr. CURRY - I said what was that, was that a firecracker, or someone said this, I don't recall whether it was me or someone else, and from the report I couldn't tell whether it was coming from the railroad yard or whether it was coming from behind but I said over the radio, I said, "Get someone up in the railroad yard and check."
And then about this time, I believe it was motorcycle Officer Chaney rode up beside of me and looking back in the rear view mirror I could see some commotion in the President's car and after this there had been two more reports, but these other two reports I could tell were coming behind instead of from the railroad yards.
Mr. SORRELS - I felt it was, because it was too sharp for a backfire of an automobile. And, to me, it appeared a little bit too loud for a firecracker.
I just said, "What's that?" And turned around to look up on this terrace part there, because the sound sounded like it came from the back and up in that direction.
At that time, I did not look back up to the building, because it was way back in the back.
Within about 3 seconds, there were two more similar reports. And I said, "Let's get out of here" and looked back, all the way back, then, to where the President's car was, and I saw some confusion, movement there, and the car just seemed to lunch forward. And, in the meantime, a motorcycle officer had run up on the right-hand side and the chief yelled to him, "Anybody hurt?"
He said, "Yes."
He said, "Lead us to the hospital."
Mr. LAWSON. The pilot car was up ahead of us, so appeared other things I recall noting a police officer pulled up in a motorcycle alongside of us, and mentioned that the President had been hit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgobHA9V2TM is the one of the only records of Chaney telling us first hand what he did and corroborates the men from the lead car... Curry, Lawson and Sorrels
Not only is this activity in Z but not in any film or photo offered as evidence. Not only did Chaney NOT testify, but the Dallas Evidence Archive has no reports written by Chaney.
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
David Josephs Wrote:and then after the shots Chaney basically stops... and is not seen accelerating to the front - nor is he anywhere near the lead car in McIntyre or Bell
Hi David, this is a great sequence here, you can see how unnatural the whole action seems right around the point where the motorcycles on the right pull back and the SS guy starts running for the limo. His first three steps are in rapid-mo and the next couple are in slo-mo, and the bikes are moving at an unnatural speed at that moment...What this shows me is that the alteration of the Z-film was considerably more sophisticated than just the removal of frames. It's also interesting that in the part where the limo "dips", there is a horizontal... "ledge" or something, that starts appearing at the bottom of the picture... it looks like a concrete structure (somewhat), but it's not, there was no such structure between Zapruder and the road.What becomes apparent from this and similar "adjustments" in the evidence, is that Hoover and the FBI sprung into action long before Johnson asked them too. In other words, the record has Johnson discussing with Hoover the logic around having a "communist conspiracy with foreign overtones", and they decided to quash that possibility. But Hoover had already at that point begun adjusting evidence, as if he already knew what the President was going to say and how he was going to look at the situation. One of the earliest corroborative pieces would be Earlene Roberts and both landlords swearing up and down that the Dallas police were at their place just after 1:30. That would be before Oswald's actual arrest. However the official record has Bill Alexander showing up with the warrant a little after 4pm. These photographic alterations we're looking at, are not simple - they take time, they have to be possibly repeated once or twice before they're gotten right... and to do that on an 8-mm film would have taken a bit of expertise and quite a bit of specialized equipment, back in 1963. Brugione is quite clear about the chain of custody in his interview, his job was apparently to make presentation boards but there was another team with perhaps a different purpose from which he was excluded. He talks specifically about seeing a "big chunk" of Kennedy's skull about three to four feet in the air above Kennedy's head, on the reel he worked on - which is of course missing from the public version.
Brian Castle Wrote:...What this shows me is that the alteration of the Z-film was considerably more sophisticated than just the removal of frames. .....One of the earliest corroborative pieces would be Earlene Roberts and both landlords swearing up and down that the Dallas police were at their place just after 1:30. That would be before Oswald's actual arrest. However the official record has Bill Alexander showing up with the warrant a little after 4pm. These photographic alterations we're looking at, are not simple - they take time, they have to be possibly repeated once or twice before they're gotten right... and to do that on an 8-mm film would have taken a bit of expertise and quite a bit of specialized equipment, back in 1963. Brugione is quite clear about the chain of custody in his interview, his job was apparently to make presentation boards but there was another team with perhaps a different purpose from which he was excluded. He talks specifically about seeing a "big chunk" of Kennedy's skull about three to four feet in the air above Kennedy's head, on the reel he worked on - which is of course missing from the public version.
Brian,
I wrote a detailed response to your post but this site logged me out before I clicked "submit reply", and I lost all of the text. I strongly disagree with everything I've quoted from your post, if my ability to support my protests will carry any weight with you.
When it comes to film and photo "evidence," I already told you I try not to go there. When I read the word, "alteration," all I can see is the word, "Fetzer". I post with my real name, so what I present matters to me as if I
was saying it face to face.
I did quite a bit on the troubling shortcomings of the "testimony" of Earline Roberts and her employers, Mr. and Mrs. A. C. Johnson. Unfortunately, what I shared was suddenly deleted by your buddy and mine, Duncan Hines.
Do you think the time observations of the witnesses you have criticized were any less credible than Gladys Johnson claiming she first talked to OH Lee about three weeks before she said she rented a room to him on 14 Oct., and that Lee told her during that first encounter that he wanted to be near his work? What work. (both Gladys and husband A.C. testified DPD detective arrived about 2:00 pm, they were a full hour off.....)
Or the 1:04 time fix of Earline [sic] Roberts who also stated in early December that police had arrived about thirty minutes after Oswald departed. DPD detective Potts established in his testimony that he and other officers arrived at 3:00 pm....Fritz said he first began to question LHO at @2:25 and then sent Potts and other detectives to 1026, and Potts telephoned him to say the register only showed H.O. Lee
I had highlighted all of the relevant testimony in the post I just attempted and lost when I was logged out.
IMO, the key to support what I am saying, aside from the solid testimony of Potts, is the time Oswald's image
was first broadcast on local television.:
Oct 5, 2013 - 877-936. Oswald's Interrogation Timeline ... 3:10 pm WFAA Dallas broadcasts first photo of Oswald and identifies him as a suspect. 3:15 pm ...
Quote:http://insidethearrb.livejournal.com/12109.html
......
The star of the video is former CIA employee Dino Brugioni, whom I interviewed at length in 2011 in HD video, thanks to Peter Janney, who paid for the film crew and arranged access to Dino.......
...........Although 91 years old at the time of the interview, I found Dino to be lucid and completely trustworthy. His memory was extremely sharp and he was "as honest as the day is long."
.........
Watch this video---examine the evidence, and assess Dino Brugioni's credibility yourself---and make up your own mind about what it means.
Doug Horne
My experience with Janney and Horne was that they behaved no better than carnival barkers. They seemed quite
resistant to research that is proven but contradicts their belief system.
I recall warning you to lightly weigh witness sourced "facts" and more so for single source witnesses recalling fifty year old events with 90 year old brains. My father is close to Dino's age and his faculties are intact. This summer, he recalled the last name of his neighbor next door when he was 11 years old and details of the family that I then verified via ancestry.com. He presents no signs of dementia, but my memories of events I have knowledge of are often different than his when we compare them.
Pick your shots carefully, Brian, and I'd be happy to debate you, re: the assumptions you posted, or to answer any questions prompted by your reading this post.
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.
Quote:When I read the word, "alteration," all I can see is the word, "Fetzer".
Tom - this is your problem not ours... Jim was correct about an awful lot before jumping the shark... that you simply do not accept alteration, regardless of the evidence, is once again YOUR PROBLEM, not ours until you come here telling us what to think, post and discuss so YOU can join in.
When a film is in 7 pieces and adds up to more film than the original can possible have - the film was altered... not "Fetzered"
As for HOW... consider that Z filmed most if not all at 48fps...creating a 18.3fps altered fim removing that which needed to be is really not so hard given a 8mm film was in DC in the hand of the SS chief by 2am Friday night.
Dino sees one film, while Homer sees another.... 0184 is gone to history, Philips tells Rowley there is a 4th copy - only not in so many words
If you'd remove the tinfoil hat and stop acting like your afraid to look at the evidence instead of veering off into some tangent so you can post another 50 links to information that helps you speculate better yet offers nothing relevant to the subject discussed, MAYBE we'll be willing to have a discussion WITH you rather than you grace us with your presence and then talk down to us.
Maybe consider not insulting the intelligence of those here who have different thoughts than yours... and then go out of our way to support them with evidence so you have something with which to work.
Your highly disjointed and unconnected blasts of data are fun and all, yet you never come to a point supported by actual fact - only supposition based on who knew who and who married who/s 4th cousin.
PROVE something Tom...
Warning others to be "more careful" accomplishes little other than distancing you and your work from anyone who might be interested.
----------------
Let's look at your rebuttal... Roberts says in an affidavit that the police arrived "about 30 minutes later" - she was mistaken about the time frame
Mr. BALL. After he left the house and at s[B]ometime later in the afternoon,[/B] these police officers came out, did they?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, yes.
Regarding the 1:04 time where you like to her testimony - she says:
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me what time it was approximately that Oswald came in?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Now, it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say because
Mr. BALL.. How long did he stay in the room ?
Mr. ROBERTS. Oh, maybe not over 3 or 4 minutes-just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it.
They didn't have Oswald on TV until a bit later in the afternoon - AFTER he was captured so AFTER 2pm... Are you simply trying to say that witnesses and their timings can be off? What does that have to do with the alteration of the Zfilm?
Mr. BALL. After he left the house and at sometime later in the afternoon, these police officers came out, did they?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, yes.
Mr. BALL. And they asked you if there was a man named Lee Oswald there?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL And you told them "No"?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Then what happened after that?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, he was trying to make us understand that-I had two new men and they told me--Mrs. Johnson told me, "Go get your keys and let them see in" I had gone to the back and they still had the TV on, and they was broadcasting about Kennedy.
Just as I unlocked the doors Fritz' men, two of them had walked in and she come running in and said, "Oh, Roberts, come here quick. This is this fellow Lee in this little room next to yours," and they flashed him on television, is how come us to know.
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Quote:When I read the word, "alteration," all I can see is the word, "Fetzer".
Tom - this is your problem not ours... Jim was correct about an awful lot before jumping the shark... that you simply do not accept alteration, regardless of the evidence, is once again YOUR PROBLEM, not ours until you come here telling us what to think, post and discuss so YOU can join in.
When a film is in 7 pieces and adds up to more film than the original can possible have - the film was altered... not "Fetzered"
As for HOW... consider that Z filmed most if not all at 48fps...creating a 18.3fps altered fim removing that which needed to be is really not so hard given a 8mm film was in DC in the hand of the SS chief by 2am Friday night.
Dino sees one film, while Homer sees another.... 0184 is gone to history, Philips tells Rowley there is a 4th copy - only not in so many words
If you'd remove the tinfoil hat and stop acting like your afraid to look at the evidence instead of veering off into some tangent so you can post another 50 links to information that helps you speculate better yet offers nothing relevant to the subject discussed, MAYBE we'll be willing to have a discussion WITH you rather than you grace us with your presence and then talk down to us.
Maybe consider not insulting the intelligence of those here who have different thoughts than yours... and then go out of our way to support them with evidence so you have something with which to work.
Your highly disjointed and unconnected blasts of data are fun and all, yet you never come to a point supported by actual fact - only supposition based on who knew who and who married who/s 4th cousin.
PROVE something Tom...
Warning others to be "more careful" accomplishes little other than distancing you and your work from anyone who might be interested.
----------------
Let's look at your rebuttal... Roberts says in an affidavit that the police arrived "about 30 minutes later" - she was mistaken about the time frame
Mr. BALL. After he left the house and at s[B]ometime later in the afternoon,[/B] these police officers came out, did they?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, yes.
Regarding the 1:04 time where you like to her testimony - she says:
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me what time it was approximately that Oswald came in?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Now, it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say because
Mr. BALL.. How long did he stay in the room ?
Mr. ROBERTS. Oh, maybe not over 3 or 4 minutes-just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it.
They didn't have Oswald on TV until a bit later in the afternoon - AFTER he was captured so AFTER 2pm... Are you simply trying to say that witnesses and their timings can be off? What does that have to do with the alteration of the Zfilm?
Mr. BALL. After he left the house and at sometime later in the afternoon, these police officers came out, did they?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, yes.
Mr. BALL. And they asked you if there was a man named Lee Oswald there?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL And you told them "No"?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Then what happened after that?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, he was trying to make us understand that-I had two new men and they told me--Mrs. Johnson told me, "Go get your keys and let them see in" I had gone to the back and they still had the TV on, and they was broadcasting about Kennedy.
Just as I unlocked the doors Fritz' men, two of them had walked in and she come running in and said, "Oh, Roberts, come here quick. This is this fellow Lee in this little room next to yours," and they flashed him on television, is how come us to know.
Fonzie 'jumped the shark' way before Fetzer, but Fetzer always swam with the sharks. Not a compliment. Again, i see pareidolia in full bloom, including the late Jack White's. Just my opinion, though. Don't want to disrespect the dead, right?
23-10-2015, 10:02 PM (This post was last modified: 23-10-2015, 10:45 PM by Tom Scully.)
David Josephs Wrote:
Quote:When I read the word, "alteration," all I can see is the word, "Fetzer".
Tom - this is your problem not ours... Jim was correct about an awful lot before jumping the shark... that you simply do not accept alteration, regardless of the evidence, is once again YOUR PROBLEM, not ours until you come here telling us what to think, post and discuss so YOU can join in. .......
.......
Let's look at your rebuttal... Roberts says in an affidavit that the police arrived "about 30 minutes later" - she was mistaken about the time frame
Mr. BALL. After he left the house and at s[B]ometime later in the afternoon,[/B] these police officers came out, did they?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, yes.
Regarding the 1:04 time where you like to her testimony - she says:
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me what time it was approximately that Oswald came in?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Now, it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say because
Mr. BALL.. How long did he stay in the room ?
Mr. ROBERTS. Oh, maybe not over 3 or 4 minutes-just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it.
They didn't have Oswald on TV until a bit later in the afternoon - AFTER he was captured so AFTER 2pm... Are you simply trying to say that witnesses and their timings can be off? What does that have to do with the alteration of the Zfilm?
Mr. BALL. After he left the house and at sometime later in the afternoon, these police officers came out, did they?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, yes.
Mr. BALL. And they asked you if there was a man named Lee Oswald there?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL And you told them "No"?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Then what happened after that?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, he was trying to make us understand that-I had two new men and they told me--Mrs. Johnson told me, "Go get your keys and let them see in" I had gone to the back and they still had the TV on, and they was broadcasting about Kennedy.
Just as I unlocked the doors Fritz' men, two of them had walked in and she come running in and said, "Oh, Roberts, come here quick. This is this fellow Lee in this little room next to yours," and they flashed him on television, is how come us to know.
Brian Castle Wrote:....One of the earliest corroborative pieces would be Earlene Roberts and both landlords swearing up and down that the Dallas police were at their place just after 1:30. That would be before Oswald's actual arrest. However the official record has Bill Alexander showing up with the warrant a little after 4pm. ......
David,
Who is "us"? I was not replying to you. I thought it worth my time to attempt to persuade Brian not to engage in a
double standard I cannot avoid regarding as hypocritical. I try to keep on myself a burden of proof I demand of the DPD, FBI, CIA, and the WC. I cannot fathom what burden of proof you constrain yourself to. You assume a lot, as far as what is or is not compelling evidence supporting your own conclusions, or am I mistaking "style" for conclusions. If you conclude, instead of embracing a strong suspicion that the Z-film has been altered, or the BYP, for that matter, I have to part ways with you if I am to maintain a standard of proof I do hold the government agencies I mentioned above, to.
The WC made ridiculous claims, GHW Bush made ridiculous claims in his 2007 eulogy to Gerry Ford. They got there
by making extraordinary but poorly supported claims. I see not upside to behaving similarly.
BTW, Mrs. Roberts and the Johnson were ridiculous witnesses, where it mattered most. Your "until a bit later," is laughable. I was correcting Brian's observations about the quality and reliability of the timing claimed in the testimony/statements of those three witnesses. Earline Roberts was off by almost 90 minutes, in the 5 Dec., 1963 FBI 302 attributed to her, with regard to the time DPD plain clothes officers first appeared at the Johnson's front door, just after 3:00 pm.
Perhaps you missed this, I did provide a link to it in my last post. Do you weigh witness provided details of two weeks after they happened much differently than you weigh them if they are first stated fifty years after they were experienced?
[URL="http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/pdf/WH7_Roberts_aff.pdf"]http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/pdf/WH7_Roberts_aff.pdf
[/URL]
Are you saying you think Det. Potts arrived at 1026 closer to 2:00 than 3:00 and hung around doing nothing until shortly after 3:00 when Oswald's image was first broadcast on television, or that Oswald's image was first broadcast sometime earlier? I'd enjoy seeing you post links to primary sources supporting an earlier broadcast timeline or an actual earlier than 3:00 arrival by Det. Potts or any other LE at 1026 N. Beckley.
I also provided a link to these in my last post.:
Quote:TESTIMONY OF WALTER EUGENE POTTS
Mr. BALL. And did you hear on the radio the President had been shot?
Mr. POTTS. ........
We went on back home and I called the office immediately and talked to Detective Baker, he's a lieutenant now, and he said he was calling all the men back and I started to get dressed--get ready, and I told him I would be there as soon as I could, and I got dressed and got there within the hour, which was around 2 or before.
Mr. BALL. What did you do when you first got there?
Mr. POTTS. When I was walking across the street there, I parked my car over at the Scottish Rite parking lot there and it's the Masonic lot and when I come across the street there at Commerce and Harwood this officer on the corner there said, "Did you hear about Tippit getting killed?" I said, "No; I didn't hear about that." He said, "Yes; I understand he got killed on a disturbance call over in Oak Cliff." That's the first I had heard about Tippit and when I got to the office, I walked in and Baker told me, "We have some people here from the Texas School Book Depository--there are four or five of them back there," and he said, "Would you go back there and take some affidavits from them?" And I said, "Sure," and I went back there and took one from this Arce, and I was in the process of taking one from this Jack Dougherty when I heard some officers coming in the door there, and I heard one of them say, "We've got the man that killed Tippit."
So, they brought him on back in while we were sitting back in the squadroom and I was sitting back there with Dougherty and Arce, and they came by and put him in the side interrogation room back there. As you walk in the door, there is an interrogation room right straight ahead and then you turn right to
196
go back in the squadroom and you go on back in the squadroom, and this Mr. Dougherty looked at me and he said, "I know that man."
He said, "He works down there in that building--the Texas School Book Depository Building." He said, "I don't know his name, but I know him." So did Arce he said, "Yes, he works down there."
So, I went ahead and took those affidavits from them--from those people and we got them notarized.
Mr. BALL. You mean Arce and Dougherty?
Mr. POTTS. Arce and Dougherty. There were some more officers back there taking affidavits from some of the others--some of those other people I don't know--you know, time and all the confusion around there, you don't exactly know what time, but my partner, Bill Senkel, and F. M. Turner--we work a three-man squad, and Bill came around and he talked to Captain Fritz, and he said "Come on, let's go. We are going out to 1026 North Beckley."
He came around and told me, he said--he asked me if I had finished taking the affidavits, and I told him, "Yes," and he said, "Captain Fritz wants you and I to go out to Oswald's or Hidell's or Oswald's room."
On his person--he must have had--he did have identification with the name Alex Hidell and Oswald---Lee Harvey Oswald, but Lt. E. L. Cunningham of the forgery bureau, who used to be a member of the homicide and robbery bureau before he made lieutenant, he went with us and we went out there.
Mr. BALL. Before you went out there, did you get a search warrant?
Mr. POTTS. No; we didn't--we didn't get a search warrant at that time. We went to the location and talked to the people there. ...
......Mr. BALL. Did you check their registration books?
Mr. POTTS. Yes, sir; we looked at the registration book--Senkel, I think, or Cunningham--well, we all looked through the registration book and there wasn't anyone by that name, and the television was on in the living room. There's an area there where the roomers sit, I guess it's the living quarters--it flashed Oswald's picture on there and one of the women, either Mrs. Roberts or Mrs. Johnson said, "That's the man that lives here. That's Mr. Lee---O.H. Lee." She said, "His room is right here right off of the living room."
Senkel or Cunningham, one of them, called the office and they said that Turner was en route with a search warrant and we waited there until 4:30 or 5 that afternoon. We got out there about 3.
Mr. BALL. You waited there in the home?
Mr. POTTS. We waited there in the living quarters.
Mr. BALL. You did not go into the small room that had been rented by Lee?
Mr. POTTS. No; we didn't--we didn't search the room at all until we got the warrant. ......
Quote: Testimony Of J. W. Fritz
.......
Mr. BALL. All right.
Now, Captain, about what time did you first bring him to your office?
Mr. FRITZ. Let's see, I have it right here. Oswald was arrested at 1:40 and I think he was taken to the city hall about 2:15 and I started talking to him probably a little bit after that.
Mr. BALL. About what time?
Don't you have a time marked in your report there?
Mr. FRITZ. I think so.
Mr. BALL. Of 2:25.
Mr. FRITZ. 2:25?
Mr. BALL. On page 237 of your report, your report of Sims and Boyd refers to a time that he was brought to your room, and I believe 165.
Mr. FRITZ. My report, my report should have a report right there that should show it. This shows here 2:15 and I don't think that is right.
Mr. BALL. Mr. Baker's report on 165 gives the time also.
Mr. FRITZ. The nearest that I have here then would be shortly after 2:15 p.m.
Mr. BALL. You will notice that Sims and Boyd make it, state they brought him from the conference room to your office at about 2:20.
Mr. FRITZ. That might be all right because I have 2:15 here but I think 2:15 may be 5 or 10 minutes too early.
Mr. BALL. It was soon after you got there?
Mr. FRITZ. Soon after I got there. .....
.......Mr. BALL. Did you ask him anything about his address or did he volunteer the address?
Mr. FRITZ. He volunteered the address at Beckley?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mr. FRITZ. Well, I will tell you, whether we asked him or told him one, he never did deny it, he never did deny the Beckley Street address at all. The only thing was he didn't know whether it was north or south.
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him whether it was north or south?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, but he didn't know. But from the description of surroundings we could tell it was North Beckley. Mr. BALL. Up to that time you hadn't sent any men out to North Beckley, had you?
Mr. FRITZ. Well, I sent them out there real soon and Officer Potts called me back from out there and talked to me on the telephone and gave me a report from out there on the telephone, and I am sure that that is the time that he told me about the way he was registered, and I asked Oswald about why he was registered under this other name.
Mr. BALL. What other name?
Mr. FRITZ. Of O. L. Lee.
Mr. BALL. O. H. Lee?
Mr. FRITZ. O. H. Lee. He said, well, the lady didn't understand him, she put it down there and he just left it that way.
Mr. BALL. Did you ask him whether he had signed his name O. H. Lee?
Mr. FRITZ. No, I hadn't asked him.......
.......Mr. BALL. Now, in this first conversation he told you that he had lived at 1026 Beckley, didn't he?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. He didn't know whether it was north or south.
Mr. BALL. And you sent a group of officers out there to search that address?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; that is right.
Mr. BALL. Before you talked to him the second time you had talked to Ports on the telephone, had you not?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I had.
Mr. BALL. He told you what he had done?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir. I should have remembered that when I talked to you this morning.....
Can you consider how Det. Potts's testimony is supported by known events? At 12:30 pm he was enjoying his day off and he and his wife returned home after hearing the news. He arrived at DPD at approx. 2:00 pm. He expended time with Arce and Dougherty. There are supporting details in the relevant portion of Fritz's testimony. I linked in my last post to Bill Kelly's timeline indicating when Oswald's image was first broadcast locally and the 3:13 pm time matches what I observed reviewing youtube footage and it aligns with Det. Potts' testimony, but not with the testimony of Mrs. Roberts or of the Johnsons.
Again, David, I was replying in my last post to what I had read in Brian's post. That reply addressed what Brian observed about the
Roberts and Johnson testimony or statements.
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.
Quote:If you conclude, instead of embracing a strong suspicion that the Z-film has been altered, or the BYP, for that matter, I have to part ways with you if I am to maintain a standard of proof I do hold the government agencies I mentioned above, to.
Does any of your rambling connect Roberts being quoted in an affidavit on Dec 5th which conflicts with what she says months later... and the alteration of the Zfilm or BYPs?
An unaltered original 0183 film out of Zaps camera would be about 30 feet of CONNECTED FILM without splices, WITH the 0183 imprint, WITH the reverse side either connected (making 60 feet of film) or still attached as a 16mm film.
What we have in the archives cannot be considered an UNALTERED FILM.
Then, when we address the anomolies seen in 1/18th of a second from frame to frame we are futher convinced with a study in reality and physics that people do not move like that in the real world.
Using the Zfilm to come to any conclusions related to what happened in DP that day is the real joke....
What I'm saying is your posts and question have nothing to do with the issue being discussed other than for you to show off all the links you have and all the speculation you offer about how these connections IMPLY something is going on.... You still never PROVE anything.
That you don't like Horne or Dino's statement is again, your problem Tom... you offer nothing to refute the statements or the Film map or anything else posted which relates to the issue.
Quote: When it comes to film and photo "evidence," I already told you I try not to go there.
then by all means Tom, please DON'T GO THERE as it appears you have little if any feel of understanding of what is going on in these images and EVIDENCE...
As I've asked in the past with your posts - can you take a single post and actually say what you think - directly.
What you regard as this or that is not the point yet again.. we are not hear trying to mee the Scully standard for evidence...
YOU on the other hand never connect the dots - all you do is splatter a while bunch of these dots against the wall and say "See, it's all connected" without saying or proving a thing.
Where do you stand Tom?
Oswald - Lone Nut or set up Patsy?
The Evidence collected - pure and pristine or altered to implicate Oswald at any and all costs?
Your point related to Roberts - I never posted that I concluded foreknowledge due to Roberts' stating the DPD was at her door before Oswald was arrested... so what difference does it make whterh it was a 2pm or 3pm?
Can you please just get to a single identifyable POINT of all your references and links rather than play evidence cop and/or post nazi in order that WE meet some arbitrary standard of evidence that only exists in your mind?
Brian was replying to my post Tom, not yours. You stepped in trying to correct him by fostering your evidence expectations on him in areas that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
Quote:Are you saying you think Det. Potts arrived at 1026 closer to 2:00 than 3:00 and hung around doing nothing until shortly after 3:00 when Oswald's image was first broadcast on television, or that Oswald's image was first broadcast sometime earlier? I'd enjoy seeing you post links to primary sources supporting an earlier broadcast timeline or an actual earlier than 3:00 arrival by Det. Potts or any other LE at 1026 N. Beckley.
This is a tactic Tom. We are talking about the zfilm yet since your understanding of the films and photos is not your thing you push the conversation into the areas you WANT to discuss.
Start anew thread and have at it Tom... bring up all the witness conflicts that you feel make a difference in the outcome of an analysis.
Brehm said the limo moved barely 10-12 feet between the 1st and last shots, numerous others say the limo slowed to a crawl or even stopped... those two concepts are corroborative not mutually exclusive.
Then we add in what the FBI and SS did to move the evidence of the shots around making it virtually impossible to reconstruct the scene using the evidence offered...
when the physical evidence is such crap, corroborated witness statements take a front seat.
In the end Tom, your posts are disjointed ramblings of someone with a vast knowledge of the connections but little practical application of your non-existent conclusions.
Say what you mean Tom and then support it with something that makes sense... the DPD, FBI, CIA, SS et al couldn't do it - their evidence invariably comes up inauthentic, or corroborated by other evidence which cannot be authenticated.
Is being direct and on topic even possible for you?
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Tom Scully Wrote:I wrote a detailed response... but this site logged me out before I clicked "submit reply", and I lost all of the text.
There is a God after all
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
:
: