Badgeman Revisited

[John Beckham]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... ic=13856is an interesting thread about Badge Man i found interesting.

[ChristophMessner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:John, ... If you're going to knock other's opinions because you don't feel they're opinions are based on sound judgement, explain why. For example, I have to say that I seriously doubt the Badgeman idea too based on the measurements and also the fact that he's too far to the side of JFK to make the headshot with the exit wound in the back of the head. Of course, he could have shot and missed if he exists at all. I agree 100%. John, the link you sent is interesting. It's difficult to draw the line, where the feet of the badge-, etc-men stood. Let me add something from the book "Pictures of the Pain" by Richard Trusk. ... the shots ... " sounded like they came immediately behind us and over our heads." (p73) Mr. Hester is saying that. This is the man, who was standing and then lying down with his wife in the middle of the pergola at north knoll soon after the fatal shots, you see that on the Weigman-film and on an Altgens photo. This could mean, that some shot(s) could have come from through these holes of the concrete pergola as well and from that position it would have been closer to get away towards the TSBD, for example for the dark man we see in the up right corner on the Bothun photo, most probably Files. But this does not match to the trajectory of the headshots, so it only could have been a miss or maybe hitting Connally in the knee. Also this alleged black couple with children on the bench behind the white wall close to Zapruder and Sitzman: they would have definitely seen "badgeman" shooting from there. Sitzman said, the throwing of this coke bottle by the children soon after the fatal shot, would have been louder than the shot. I mean, crashing a bottle on the concrete, can be loud. But it did not crash. Or was the intact bottle shown on the Towner photo a second bottle? Anyway, if the shot was not louder than this to Sitzman, then it must have been a little farer away from Sitzman. And additionally, if you were parents to children sitting on a bench seeing a gunman operation close by, wouldn't you just run away immediately before he starts shooting? Why did they not go to Elm to see the president? Ok, witness hill is speaking about "three or four shots" after the first shot. If according to this, there were really more than one man behind the picket fence shooting, Sitzman, Hester and the man on the stairs, immediately running upstairs after the headshot (see Muchmore-film), MUST have seen these "badgemen"! Well it would be really sophisticated and most probably working to fool witnesses, if they would have been clothed as policemen. Another point: to me these 2 persons standing still on the right shelter of the north pergola were helpers for the shooters to get away, because it is suspiciously unnormal how they stood still, while everybody else is running towards the west side of the pergola, the stairs and the parking lot (see Rickerby photos).

[John Beckham]

"Let me add something from the book "Pictures of the Pain" by Richard Trusk. ... the shots ... " sounded like they came immediately behind us and over our heads." (p73) Mr. Hester is saying that. This is the man, who was standing and then lying down with his wife in the middle of the pergola at north knoll soon after the fatal shots, you see that on the Weigman-film and on an Altgens photo." Christophas far as someone shooting from the north pergola, Hester did NOT think that. his affidavit and FBI report he thought the shots came from the TSBD area. Kennedy had passed the Hesters and their backs were to the TSBD area. so, " sounded like they came immediately behind us and over our heads." is out of context as far as the pergola is concerned.http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimo ... ce1429.htm

[ChristophMessner]

Ok, John, "behind us" meant: from the TSBD or Daltex direction. The Files-picket-fence- and "badgeman"-position were to the right of the Hesters. But you see on Weigman- and Bell-film and some photos, how the Hesters first stood up and looked back through these holes of the pergola!

[Brian White]

Christoph, it was Gordon Arnold who told of being on the knollin an Army uniform with a camera. Steve Rivele was told byChristian David that Sarti was in a uniform (not specified whattype,but a Dallas police uniform certainly sounds logical) and it was Chauncey Holt who said "construction workers" were in the area.It would certainly have been possible for one to be in the spot in thephoto.As for the naysayers, no one has yet answered who faked the photoand why. DON'T tell me it's all shadows and leaves, either! P.S. - I checked my copy of "Four Days", copyright 1964, with ahumungous magnifying glass, and the Badgeman image is definitelythere. I'm fairly sure I can see Arnold, too. Hardhatman, not somuch. Brian.

[ChristophMessner]

Brian, nobody can really prove or disprove beyond any doubt, whether these are human figures or not in all these bushes and leaves which were there behind the picket fence on Moorman photo. The Cabluck and Stoughten photos show beyond any doubt, that there were standing several bushes close together. My strongest argument against a shooting "badgeman" there is that from there (that is behind the white wall AND the fence) he would only have hit the white wall, because this white wall lies in the trajectory from his muzzle to Kennedy's head. Gorden Arnold might have been there or not, he came pretty late with his story anyway and Zapruder, Sitzman, Hesters, Files, other men on stairs do not confirm his presence. Did he tell anything about the black couple on the bench, Mrs Sitzman was telling about? Any coke bottle falling on concrete? Chris

[Brian White]

Christoph,My main reason for believing that there is something to thebadgeman photo is that there is testimony relating to the images.Does that make sense? If we didn't have the stories of Arnold,Rivele, and Holt, I'd be more inclined to think that maybe it was only shadows,etc- but 3 images that are just shadows and leaves that just happen to conform to 3 separate stories is just outside the realm of coincidence, know what I'm saying? UNLESS they were faked-and I'll say again, by who, and why?As for Arnold's presence, Sen. Ralph Yarborough pretty well confirmedit when he said he saw someone "hit the dirt", and even describedhim as an infantryman- remember, Arnold was there in uniform.That bit of testimony can't be ignored.(Yarborough was riding in themotorcade and looked at the knoll as his car passed by.)You say Badgeman would have hit a wall with his shot- well, I'm notsure about that, guess I'll have to wait until my pilgrimage toDallas, where I plan to get in his position and take a picture fromhis viewpoint! I tend to doubt it though. Just remember,though,it's entirely possible that he missed! Maybe that explains why heappeared agitated to Arnold- he was frustrated! Stranger thingshave happened! Brian.

[John Beckham]

well, Badge Man, depends on the witnesses you belive. i looked at this subject pretty hard. i'm NOT convinced it's false. yes, i've looked at both sides, and am still on the fence about it.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

ChristophMessner wrote:Brian, nobody can really prove or disprove beyond any doubt, whether these are human figures or not in all these bushes and leaves which were there behind the picket fence on Moorman photo. The Cabluck and Stoughten photos show beyond any doubt, that there were standing several bushes close together. My strongest argument against a shooting "badgeman" there is that from there (that is behind the white wall AND the fence) he would only have hit the white wall, because this white wall lies in the trajectory from his muzzle to Kennedy's head. Gorden Arnold might have been there or not, he came pretty late with his story anyway and Zapruder, Sitzman, Hesters, Files, other men on stairs do not confirm his presence. Did he tell anything about the black couple on the bench, Mrs Sitzman was telling about? Any coke bottle falling on concrete? ChrisAlso, don't forget about the measurements regarding Badgeman. To me he seems like he'd be a very small person.http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/badgeman.htmI'll go one better for you. There's always talk about photos being doctored and such. Hmmmmm....could the Mooreman photo have been altered too to show the "badgeman" and the other man behind him? Just a thought.... It would seem to me that the "badgeman" idea would be a perfect distraction from researchers who were really trying to get at the truth...you know...a typical red herring technique.

[Brian White]

Good point,Pasquale- a red herring or a straw man argumentis the only sensible reason to put images in the photo- but itwould have to have been done very quickly- and again,what aboutthe testimony relating to the images?