Lee Bowers : No shot from the knoll !
cdddraftsman
1966, Dallas, Texas) was a key witness to the assassination of John F.
Kennedy in Dallas, Texas in 1963. At the moment of the assassination
he was operating the Union Terminal Company's two-story interlocking
tower, overlooking the parking lot just north of the grassy knoll and
west of the Texas School Book Depository. He had an unobstructed view
of the rear of the concrete pergola and the stockade fence atop the
knoll. He described hearing three shots that came from either the
Depository on his left or near the mouth of the Triple Underpass
railroad bridge on his right; he was unsure because of the
reverberation from the shots.
When asked by the Warren Commission, "Now, were there any people
standing on the high side -- high ground between your tower and where
Elm Street goes down under the underpass toward the mouth of the
underpass?" Bowers testified that at the time the motorcade went by on
Elm Street, four men were in the area: one or two uniformed parking
lot attendants, one of whom Bowers knew; and two men standing 10 to 15
feet (3 to 5 m) apart near the Triple Underpass, who did not appear to
know each other. One was "middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-
set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers" and the other was
"younger man, about midtwenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat
or jacket." One or both were still there when the first police officer
arrived "immediately" after the shooting. Many assumed that Bowers
meant that these men were standing behind the stockade fence at the
top of the grassy knoll.
However, two years later when Bowers was interviewed by assassination
researchers Mark Lane and Emile de Antonio for their documentary film
Rush to Judgment, he clarified that these two men were on the opposite
side of the fence from Bowers, and that no one was behind the fence
when the shots were fired.[1] Bowers said,
These two men were standing back from the street somewhat at the top
of the incline and were very near two trees which were in the area.
And one of them, from time to time as he walked back and forth,
disappeared behind a wooden fence which is also slightly to the west
of that. These two men to the best of my knowledge were standing there
at the time of the shooting.
Photographs of the grassy knoll during the assassination show heavy-
set, middle-aged Dealey Plaza groundskeeper Emmett Hudson and a
younger man, whom Hudson estimated was in his late twenties,[2]
standing on the stairway leading from Elm Street up to the stockade
fence (a third man stands a few steps below them).[3] Bowers was not
sure if he could see the older man after the shootings, and a
photograph show Hudson sitting down on the steps at that time.[4]
Bowers served in the U.S. Navy from ages 17 to 21. He attended Hardin-
Simmons University for two years then Southern Methodist University
for two years, majoring in religion. He worked for the Union Terminal
Co. railyard for 15 years, also working as a self-employed builder. In
1964 he began working as business manager for a hospital and
convalescent home.
He was killed in 1966 when his car left an empty road and struck a
concrete abutment. It has often been claimed that his death was a
murder, but investigator David Perry concludes that there is no basis
for this belief.[5]
Bowers was played by Pruitt Taylor Vince in the 1991 film JFK.
References
[1] ^ Rush to Judgment, which advocated a multi-shooter conspiracy,
did not use that portion of Bowers' interview. Dale K. Myers, Secrets
of a Homicide: Badge Man -- The Testimony of Lee Bowers, Jr.
[2] ^ Warren Commission Hearings, Testimony of Emmett J. Hudson.
[3] ^ Moorman photograph of the grassy knoll during the assassination.
Emmett Hudson is the middle of the three men on the stairs.
[4] ^ Towner photograph of Emmett Hudson sitting on the stairway on
the grassy knoll after the shootings.
[5] ^ David Perry, Now It Can Be Told: The Lee Bowers Story.
External links
Biography of Lee Bowers
Bowers' testimony and Oliver Stone's Film
Lee Bowers' Warren Commission Testimony
Up by the Triple Underpass
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Bowers"
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/todd_vaughan.htm
"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:225ad43e-c414-448c...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Gil Jesus
Looks like Lowry cut-and-pasted again.
But what did Lee Bowers REALLY say ?
Should we believe what they said he said, or should we see and hear
from Lee Bowers in his OWN words ?
See and hear him here:
Lone
Yeah...but you, know: LNutters like to talk instead of eyewitness.
David Von Pein
SOME MORE ABOUT LEE BOWERS:
===================================
(DVP re-post from 2006/2007):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5134c7856e820d92
The more one looks over the Warren Commission testimony of
assassination witness Lee Bowers (plus his 11/22/63 affidavit), the
less and less "pro-CT"/"pro-multiple shooters" Mr. Bowers becomes
(despite the fact that CTers for years have loved to prop Bowers up as
a sterling and rock-solid "Conspiracy" witness).
Lee Bowers' testimony is quite interesting in the "Where Did The Shots
Come From?" regard. Upon looking at his April 2, 1964, Warren
Commission testimony, we can certainly see how, indeed, the "CT" side
has gently turned Mr. Bowers into a "Conspiracy" witness, when he
actually doesn't really belong in that category at all. .....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
Bowers is one of the many, many witnesses who heard exactly three
shots fired on 11/22/63, and he said the shots came from either the
area of the Depository OR the Triple Underpass area. But not from BOTH
of these locations. It was one or the other, but not both.
But conspiracy theorists have turned Mr. Bowers into a conspiracy-
favoring witness who (to hear the CTers tell it) positively saw PROOF
of a second gunman on the Knoll. But when you look more deeply at his
testimony, it can be seen that he's not actually a witness with which
to promote conspiracy or a Knoll shooter.
He didn't see a "gunman" on the Grassy Knoll or behind the picket
fence behind the Knoll. He didn't see any rifle or other weapons. He
merely saw some "milling around". Let's look at Mr. Bowers' exact
words to the Warren Commission:
"I just am unable to describe rather than it was something out of the
ordinary, a sort of milling around, but something occurred in this
particular spot which was out of the ordinary, which attracted my eye
for some reason, which I could not identify." -- Lee E. Bowers, Jr.;
04/02/64
The conspiracy buffs, in true-to-form "Make Mountains Out Of
Molehills" style, have thus turned Mr. Bowers' "out of the ordinary",
"milling around", "I just am unable to describe", and "I could not
identify" remarks into apparent "proof" that a killer had just shot
JFK from behind a fence atop the Grassy Knoll....even though Bowers
saw NO WEAPONS OF ANY KIND in the hands of anyone he observed that
day. And he specifically said he "could not identify" what it was that
caught his eye in the area of the fence.
The testimony of Bowers also provides some idea as to the type of
reverberating sounds that can be produced in Dealey Plaza. And while
earwitness testimony is useful to a degree, it is at the same time, as
my cohort in LN-ism, Vincent Bugliosi, has said repeatedly throughout
his career, "notoriously problematic". .....
=====================
"With respect to whether or not any shots were fired from the Grassy
Knoll, I want to make the following observations -- firstly, it is
perfectly understandable that the witnesses were confused as to the
origin of fire. Not only does Dealey Plaza resound with echoes, but
here you have a situation of completely-unexpected shots over just a
matter of a few moments.
"When you compound all of that with the fact that the witnesses were
focusing their attention on the President of the United States driving
by, a mesmerizing event for many of them....and the chaos, the
hysteria, the bedlam that engulfed the assassination scene....it's
remarkable that there was any coherence at all to what they thought
they saw and heard.
"Human observation, notoriously unreliable under even the most optimum
situation, HAS to give way to hard, scientific evidence. And we do
have indisputable, scientific evidence in this case that the bullets
which struck President Kennedy came from his rear, not his front." --
VINCE BUGLIOSI; 1986
=====================
MORE ABOUT BOWERS & BUGLIOSI:
"There's a strong reason to believe that what {witness Lee E.}
Bowers said is not credible. .... {In Bowers' sworn 11/22/63
affidavit} he said absolutely nothing at all about the commotion and
unusual activity behind the picket fence that attracted his
attention." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 898 of "Reclaiming History" (c.
2007)
"If Bowers hadn't died...in August of 1966, it probably would
have been just a matter of time before he had Jack Ruby with a machine
gun on the grassy knoll." -- VB; Page 899 of "RH"
~~~~~~
The above comment VB makes about Bowers' affidavit is a very good
point. Upon checking out Bowers' original 11/22 affidavit, just as
Vince said, that document doesn't mention a single word about Bowers
having seen any men near the picket fence.
In fact, practically the entire affidavit contains Bowers'
observations about the three cars that circled the parking lot just
before the shooting, with the shooting itself seemingly being a mere
afterthought in Mr. Bowers' mind. The only reference to the actual
shooting comes in the last two sentences of Bowers' affidavit, when he
says:
"About 8 or 10 minutes after he left {i.e., the last of the three cars
that toured the lot} I heard at least 3 shots very close together.
Just after the shots the area became crowded with people coming from
Elm Street and the slope just north of Elm." .....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers1.htm
But even if we were to fully believe Mr. Bowers with respect to what
he told the Warren Commission in 1964 and Mark Lane in 1966, the sum
total of Bowers' comments really makes him a pretty decent "lone
assassin" type of witness.
Lone
> SOME MORE ABOUT LEE BOWERS:
>
> ===================================
>
> (DVP re-post from 2006/2007):
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5134c7856e820d92
>
> The more one looks over the Warren Commission testimony of
> assassination witness Lee Bowers (plus his 11/22/63 affidavit), the
> less and less "pro-CT"/"pro-multiple shooters" Mr. Bowers becomes
> (despite the fact that CTers for years have loved to prop Bowers up as
> a sterling and rock-solid "Conspiracy" witness).
>
> Lee Bowers' testimony is quite interesting in the "Where Did The Shots
> Come From?" regard. Upon looking at his April 2, 1964, Warren
> Commission testimony, we can certainly see how, indeed, the "CT" side
> has gently turned Mr. Bowers into a "Conspiracy" witness, when he
> actually doesn't really belong in that category at all. .....
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
>
> shots fired on 11/22/63, and he said the shots came from either the
> area of the Depository OR the Triple Underpass area
...thats right: But he also said: That those shots couldnt be fired by
ONE rifle...you better read Bowers lips when watching Gils video!
Thats the problem with you LNutters. You aint listen when a eyewitness
talks. You just hear what you wonna hear to feed the old government
lie. (Buy a deaf- aid)
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bowers didn't say much at all about the men standing behind the
fence..... He was sure that "something" had occurred there that was an
instantaneous event, like a single flash of light or a puff of
smoke. I thought the most interesting thing he said on the tape was
he that he was sure about the spacing of the shots, and he
demonstrated the spacing by tapping a glass on the table. He KNEW
that shots 3 and 4 could NOT have been fired from one rifle. I think
he meant that the shots couldn't have been fired from a single bolt
action rifle, but he didn't say that. I wonder if he intended to
exclude a semi automatic rifle in that statement. He told the FBI
and the DPD that the shots could NOT have been fired by the same rifle
and they told him he didn't know what he was talking about. I'm not
surprised that he had an "accident" a
couple of years later.
Walt
Walt
> SOME MORE ABOUT LEE BOWERS:
>
> ===================================
>
> (DVP re-post from 2006/2007):
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5134c7856e820d92
>
> The more one looks over the Warren Commission testimony of
> assassination witness Lee Bowers (plus his 11/22/63 affidavit), the
> less and less "pro-CT"/"pro-multiple shooters" Mr. Bowers becomes
> (despite the fact that CTers for years have loved to prop Bowers up as
> a sterling and rock-solid "Conspiracy" witness).
>
> Lee Bowers' testimony is quite interesting in the "Where Did The Shots
> Come From?" regard. Upon looking at his April 2, 1964, Warren
> Commission testimony, we can certainly see how, indeed, the "CT" side
> has gently turned Mr. Bowers into a "Conspiracy" witness, when he
> actually doesn't really belong in that category at all. .....
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
>
> Bowers is one of the many, many witnesses who heard exactly three
> shots fired on 11/22/63, and he said the shots came from either the
> area of the Depository OR the Triple Underpass area. But not from BOTH
> of these locations. It was one or the other, but not both.
Duh... He mentioned TWO different locations for the source of the
shots. WHY do you suppose he did that?
He did not exclude either location as the source of the shots.... as a
matter of acoustics, he could NOT have pinpointed the source of any
shot that was detonated on Elm or Houston streets east of the GK. Any
shot that would have been fired from the area east of the gk and south
of the TSBD would have been ib a acoustically shaded area from Bowers
location. He could have heard the shot(S) but he would not have been
able to pinpoint where they had come from. Therefore his statement
that he thought they came from the TSBD is nothing but speculation
probably based on the fact that his thinking had been influenced by
the news reports that said Oswald had fired from the TSBD.
> But conspiracy theorists have turned Mr. Bowers into a conspiracy-
> favoring witness who (to hear the CTers tell it) positively saw PROOF
> of a second gunman on the Knoll. But when you look more deeply at his
> testimony, it can be seen that he's not actually a witness with which
> to promote conspiracy or a Knoll shooter.
>
> He didn't see a "gunman" on the Grassy Knoll or behind the picket
> fence behind the Knoll.
He did see some men....
He didn't see any rifle or other weapons.
But he DID see "something" that is created when a gun is fired...A
flash of fire, and a puff of smoke.
He
> merely saw some "milling around". Let's look at Mr. Bowers' exact
> words to the Warren Commission:
>
> "I just am unable to describe rather than it was something out of the
> ordinary, a sort of milling around, but something occurred in this
> particular spot which was out of the ordinary, which attracted my eye
> for some reason, which I could not identify." -- Lee E. Bowers, Jr.;
> 04/02/64
>
> The conspiracy buffs, in true-to-form "Make Mountains Out Of
> Molehills" style, have thus turned Mr. Bowers' "out of the ordinary",
> "milling around", "I just am unable to describe", and "I could not
> identify" remarks into apparent "proof" that a killer had just shot
> JFK from behind a fence atop the Grassy Knoll....even though Bowers
> saw NO WEAPONS OF ANY KIND in the hands of anyone he observed that
> day. And he specifically said he "could not identify" what it was that
> caught his eye in the area of the fence.
He said it was "something" he could not identify...perhaps a muzzle
flash or a puff of smoke from the muzzle.
I notice that you have carefully avoided that Bowers said that he was
absolutely certain about the SPACING of the three shots he heard. He
said it sound like.... Bang .................Bang..Bang..... And he
was sure the shots two and three could NOT have been fired from the
same gun, because they were too close together.
Walt
Ben Holmes
Walt says...>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>
>> "With respect to whether or not any shots were fired from the Grassy
>> Knoll, I want to make the following observations -- firstly, it is
>> perfectly understandable that the witnesses were confused as to the
>> origin of fire. Not only does Dealey Plaza resound with echoes, but
>> here you have a situation of completely-unexpected shots over just a
>> matter of a few moments.
>>
>> "When you compound all of that with the fact that the witnesses were
>> focusing their attention on the President of the United States driving
>> by, a mesmerizing event for many of them....and the chaos, the
>> hysteria, the bedlam that engulfed the assassination scene....it's
>> remarkable that there was any coherence at all to what they thought
>> they saw and heard.
>>
>> "Human observation, notoriously unreliable under even the most optimum
>> situation, HAS to give way to hard, scientific evidence. And we do
>> have indisputable, scientific evidence in this case that the bullets
>> which struck President Kennedy came from his rear, not his front." --
>> VINCE BUGLIOSI; 1986
>>
>>
>> MORE ABOUT BOWERS & BUGLIOSI:
>>
>
>> Bowers said is not credible. .... {In Bowers' sworn 11/22/63
>> affidavit} he said absolutely nothing at all about the commotion and
>> unusual activity behind the picket fence that attracted his
>> attention." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 898 of "Reclaiming History" (c.
>> 2007)
>>
>> have been just a matter of time before he had Jack Ruby with a machine
>> gun on the grassy knoll." -- VB; Page 899 of "RH"
>>
>> ~~~~~~
>>
>> The above comment VB makes about Bowers' affidavit is a very good
>> point. Upon checking out Bowers' original 11/22 affidavit, just as
>> Vince said, that document doesn't mention a single word about Bowers
>> having seen any men near the picket fence.
>>
>> In fact, practically the entire affidavit contains Bowers'
>> observations about the three cars that circled the parking lot just
>> before the shooting, with the shooting itself seemingly being a mere
>> afterthought in Mr. Bowers' mind. The only reference to the actual
>> shooting comes in the last two sentences of Bowers' affidavit, when he
>> says:
>>
>> "About 8 or 10 minutes after he left {i.e., the last of the three cars
>> that toured the lot} I heard at least 3 shots very close together.
>> Just after the shots the area became crowded with people coming from
>> Elm Street and the slope just north of Elm." .....
>>
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers1.htm
>>
>> But even if we were to fully believe Mr. Bowers with respect to what
>> he told the Warren Commission in 1964 and Mark Lane in 1966, the sum
>> total of Bowers' comments really makes him a pretty decent "lone
>> assassin" type of witness.
That *is* the problem, its not possible to produce the name of an eyewitness
WHOM LNT'ERS 'FULLY BELIEVE'.
I've asked several times, and got just one answer - which was easily refuted.
You *CAN'T* believe *any* eyewitness...
At least, no eyewitness you're willing to name.
Why is this, one wonders?
Walt
> In article <68366c33-37e3-4f38-95d9-8a8602740...@w11g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
Don't they hang on every word uttered by Howard Brennan? I know they
believe much of what Brennan said, I can't say if they believe his
every word.... But I think Von Pea Brain does believe that Brennan
told no lies at all.
Walt
>
> Why is this, one wonders?- Hide quoted text -
Ben Holmes
>com>,
>> Walt says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 4 Jan, 03:59, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> SOME MORE ABOUT LEE BOWERS:
>>
>=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D
>> >=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D
>>
>> >> (DVP re-post from 2006/2007):
>>
>> >>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5134c7856e820d92
>>
>> >> The more one looks over the Warren Commission testimony of
>> >> assassination witness Lee Bowers (plus his 11/22/63 affidavit), the
>> >> less and less "pro-CT"/"pro-multiple shooters" Mr. Bowers becomes
>> >> (despite the fact that CTers for years have loved to prop Bowers up as
>> >> a sterling and rock-solid "Conspiracy" witness).
>>
>> >> Lee Bowers' testimony is quite interesting in the "Where Did The Shots
>> >> Come From?" regard. Upon looking at his April 2, 1964, Warren
>> >> Commission testimony, we can certainly see how, indeed, the "CT" side
>> >> has gently turned Mr. Bowers into a "Conspiracy" witness, when he
>> >> actually doesn't really belong in that category at all. .....
>>
>> >>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
>>
>> >> Bowers is one of the many, many witnesses who heard exactly three
>> >> shots fired on 11/22/63, and he said the shots came from either the
>> >> area of the Depository OR the Triple Underpass area. But not from BOTH
>> >> of these locations. It was one or the other, but not both.
>>
>> >Duh... He mentioned TWO different locations for the source of the
>>
>> >He did not exclude either location as the source of the shots.... as a
>> >matter of acoustics, he could NOT have pinpointed the source of any
>> >shot that would have been fired from the area east of the gk and south
>> >of the TSBD would have been ib a acoustically shaded area from Bowers
>> >location. He could have heard the shot(S) but he would not have been
>=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D
>>
>> >> "With respect to whether or not any shots were fired from the Grassy
>> >> Knoll, I want to make the following observations -- firstly, it is
>> >> perfectly understandable that the witnesses were confused as to the
>> >> origin of fire. Not only does Dealey Plaza resound with echoes, but
>> >> here you have a situation of completely-unexpected shots over just a
>> >> matter of a few moments.
>>
>> >> "When you compound all of that with the fact that the witnesses were
>> >> focusing their attention on the President of the United States driving
>> >> by, a mesmerizing event for many of them....and the chaos, the
>> >> hysteria, the bedlam that engulfed the assassination scene....it's
>> >> remarkable that there was any coherence at all to what they thought
>> >> they saw and heard.
>>
>> >> "Human observation, notoriously unreliable under even the most optimum
>> >> situation, HAS to give way to hard, scientific evidence. And we do
>> >> have indisputable, scientific evidence in this case that the bullets
>> >> which struck President Kennedy came from his rear, not his front." --
>> >> VINCE BUGLIOSI; 1986
>>
>=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D=3D3D
>>
>> >> MORE ABOUT BOWERS & BUGLIOSI:
>>
>s Lee E.}=3D
>>
>> >> Bowers said is not credible. .... {In Bowers' sworn 11/22/63
>> >> affidavit} he said absolutely nothing at all about the commotion and
>> >> unusual activity behind the picket fence that attracted his
>> >> attention." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 898 of "Reclaiming History" (c.
>> >> 2007)
>>
>ly would
>> >> have been just a matter of time before he had Jack Ruby with a machine
>> >> gun on the grassy knoll." -- VB; Page 899 of "RH"
>>
>> >> ~~~~~~
>>
>> >> The above comment VB makes about Bowers' affidavit is a very good
>> >> point. Upon checking out Bowers' original 11/22 affidavit, just as
>> >> Vince said, that document doesn't mention a single word about Bowers
>> >> having seen any men near the picket fence.
>>
>> >> In fact, practically the entire affidavit contains Bowers'
>> >> observations about the three cars that circled the parking lot just
>> >> before the shooting, with the shooting itself seemingly being a mere
>> >> afterthought in Mr. Bowers' mind. The only reference to the actual
>> >> shooting comes in the last two sentences of Bowers' affidavit, when he
>> >> says:
>>
>> >> "About 8 or 10 minutes after he left {i.e., the last of the three cars
>> >> that toured the lot} I heard at least 3 shots very close together.
>> >> Just after the shots the area became crowded with people coming from
>> >> Elm Street and the slope just north of Elm." .....
>>
>> >>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers1.htm
>>
>> >> But even if we were to fully believe Mr. Bowers with respect to what
>> >> he told the Warren Commission in 1964 and Mark Lane in 1966, the sum
>> >> total of Bowers' comments really makes him a pretty decent "lone
>> >> assassin" type of witness.
>>
>ss
>> WHOM LNT'ERS 'FULLY BELIEVE'.
>>
>ed.
>> You *CAN'T* believe *any* eyewitness...
>>
>> At least, no eyewitness you're willing to name.
>
>Don't they hang on every word uttered by Howard Brennan? I know they
>believe much of what Brennan said, I can't say if they believe his
>every word.... But I think Von Pea Brain does believe that Brennan
>told no lies at all.
>
>Walt
You know, and I know, that LNT'ers can't believe what Brennan said, as you've so
eloquently pointed out on numerous occasions.
The clothing description alone eliminates Oswald as the person who was seen.
robcap...@netscape.com
> SOME MORE ABOUT LEE BOWERS:
>
> ===================================
>
"(DVP re-post from 2006/2007):"
Great, like once wasn't enough!
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5134c7856e820d92
"The more one looks over the Warren Commission testimony of
assassination witness Lee Bowers (plus his 11/22/63 affidavit), the
less and less "pro-CT"/"pro-multiple shooters" Mr. Bowers becomes
(despite the fact that CTers for years have loved to prop Bowers up as
a sterling and rock-solid "Conspiracy" witness)."
Davey really read all of his testimony, that is why he skips the part
where he viewed three cars come into the parking lot in the 30 minutes
preceeding the assassination, right? The first one was 1959
Oldsmobile, blue and white with an out-of-state license plate. (VI,
286) It bore a Goldwater-for-President sticker on it, thus it was not
a federal or local police car. (Ibid, XXIV, 201) The second car was a
1957 black Ford and the driver seemed to be holding a microphone
according to Bowers. (VI, 286) The third car to enter the parking
area on the knoll was a Chevrolet, and it also bore a Goldwater
sticker like the first one with a out-of-state license plate. (VI,
286, XXIV, 201) The thing that Bowers noticed about it was that it was
'covered up to the windows" in the same kind of red mud as the first
car. (XXIV, 201) NO mention of this stuff, huh Davey?
"Lee Bowers' testimony is quite interesting in the "Where Did The
Shots Come From?" regard. Upon looking at his April 2, 1964, Warren
Commission testimony, we can certainly see how, indeed, the "CT" side
has gently turned Mr. Bowers into a "Conspiracy" witness, when he
actually doesn't really belong in that category at all. ....."
It is interesting and I recommend reading ALL of it. Sure, he just
saw things that had nothing to do with shooters or planning on escape
routes, right? Explain the 3 cars he saw so near the assassination
then.
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
"Bowers is one of the many, many witnesses who heard exactly three
shots fired on 11/22/63, and he said the shots came from either the
area of the Depository OR the Triple Underpass area. But not from BOTH
of these locations. It was one or the other, but not both."
No mention of the two men Bowers saw near the fence right before the
shots were fired Davey? How come? (VI, 287) Bowers said one was
'middle-aged' and 'fairly heay-set', remember? (VI, 287) The other was
'about mid-twentiesin either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or
jacket.' (Ibid) This description is not unlike the description given
by Julia Ann Mercer who saw a man remove a gun case from a truck and
head to the fence area. The men were 'within 10 or 15 feet of each
other' behind the fence and were looking out towards the presidential
motocade. (Ibid) Boy, all this must NOT have convinced Bowers shots
came from the knoll area, huh Davey? This is a fib, as Bowers never
mentioned shots coming from the TSBD area, he always stated that he
believed the shots came from the knoll area.
"But conspiracy theorists have turned Mr. Bowers into a conspiracy-
favoring witness who (to hear the CTers tell it) positively saw PROOF
of a second gunman on the Knoll. But when you look more deeply at his
testimony, it can be seen that he's not actually a witness with which
to promote conspiracy or a Knoll shooter."
Well he saw something on the knoll, see above. Bowers told the
Commission counsel 'that something occured in this particular spot
which was out of the ordinary, which attracted my eye for some reason,
which I could not identify.' (VI, 288) Before Bowers could give more
details he was interrupted by the counsel with an unrelated question,
go figure. He was excused with never being asked to explain what
caught his eye behind the fence at the time of the President's
assassination. Good way to alleviate any additional problems, huh?
"He didn't see a "gunman" on the Grassy Knoll or behind the picket
fence behind the Knoll. He didn't see any rifle or other weapons. He
merely saw some "milling around". Let's look at Mr. Bowers' exact
words to the Warren Commission:
"I just am unable to describe rather than it was something out of the
ordinary, a sort of milling around, but something occurred in this
particular spot which was out of the ordinary, which attracted my eye
for some reason, which I could not identify." -- Lee E. Bowers, Jr.;
04/02/64"
Of course he didn't as he was interrupted by the counsel as he was
ready to describe what attracted his attention and they never went
back to it. It is easy to say he "never said" when you don't give him
a chance to.
"The conspiracy buffs, in true-to-form "Make Mountains Out Of
Molehills" style, have thus turned Mr. Bowers' "out of the ordinary",
"milling around", "I just am unable to describe", and "I could not
identify" remarks into apparent "proof" that a killer had just shot
JFK from behind a fence atop the Grassy Knoll....even though Bowers
saw NO WEAPONS OF ANY KIND in the hands of anyone he observed that
day. And he specifically said he "could not identify" what it was that
caught his eye in the area of the fence."
Making a mountain out of a molehill? Then why did they interrupt him,
here it is:
Q: You couldn't describe it? (meaning what drew his attention to the
fence area)
Bowers: Nothing that I could pinpoint as having happened that -- (VI,
288)
He would go on to tell Mark Lane it was a flash of light or something
he could not identify near where the two men had been standing behind
the fence that caught his eye. The WC had no interest in this part of
the story though, I wonder why?
"The testimony of Bowers also provides some idea as to the type of
reverberating sounds that can be produced in Dealey Plaza. And while
earwitness testimony is useful to a degree, it is at the same time, as
my cohort in LN-ism, Vincent Bugliosi, has said repeatedly throughout
his career, "notoriously problematic". ....."
NO dispute there, as DP is an echo chamber, but he was primarily
benficial to the CT cause for what he SAW not what he HEARD.
> =====================
"With respect to whether or not any shots were fired from the Grassy
Knoll, I want to make the following observations -- firstly, it is
perfectly understandable that the witnesses were confused as to the
origin of fire. Not only does Dealey Plaza resound with echoes, but
There you have a situation of completely-unexpected shots over just a
matter of a few moments."
They are never confused when they say the TSBD was the source though
are they?
"When you compound all of that with the fact that the witnesses were
focusing their attention on the President of the United States driving
by, a mesmerizing event for many of them....and the chaos, the
hysteria, the bedlam that engulfed the assassination scene....it's
remarkable that there was any coherence at all to what they thought
they saw and heard."
Yet, two-thirds of the witnesses asked the question of where they
thought the shots came from (90) said the knoll. All confused I
guess. No wonder they didn't ask the other 176 witnesses where they
thought the shots came from.
"Human observation, notoriously unreliable under even the most optimum
situation, HAS to give way to hard, scientific evidence. And we do
have indisputable, scientific evidence in this case that the bullets
which struck President Kennedy came from his rear, not his front." --
VINCE BUGLIOSI; 1986"
Sure, yet the 1/3 who said the TSBD was the source of the shots was
accepted like it was the Gospel, go figure.
> =====================
"MORE ABOUT BOWERS & BUGLIOSI:"
Goodie, more Bugisms.
"There's a strong reason to believe that what {witness Lee E.} Bowers
said is not credible. .... {In Bowers' sworn 11/22/63 affidavit} he
said absolutely nothing at all about the commotion and unusual
activity behind the picket fence that attracted his
attention." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 898 of "Reclaiming History" (c.
2007)"
Why? Prove it is not credible, sounds so to me. This is a classic
example of how something becomes fact to many without the whole story
being known. Most Americans will not read the 26 volumes or conspiracy
books so they won't know that Bowers was PREVENTED from saying what
attracted his attention to the fence area of the knoll, yet they state
with a certain quality of fact "that he said nothing."
"If Bowers hadn't died...in August of 1966, it probably would have
been just a matter of time before he had Jack Ruby with a machine gun
on the grassy knoll." -- VB; Page 899 of "RH"
Sure, like this has anything to do with anything. What a loser!
Whatever he was paid to do this book was way to much, he isn't even
good at this stuff.
> ~~~~~~
"The above comment VB makes about Bowers' affidavit is a very good
point. Upon checking out Bowers' original 11/22 affidavit, just as
Vince said, that document doesn't mention a single word about Bowers
having seen any men near the picket fence."
You are as ignorant (and that is being nice, as the only other option
is you are a liar too) as VB about this, of course it doesn't say
anything about the men behind the fence since they never asked him the
source of the shots! Here are his affadavits:
Dallas Police Affadavit, 24H201
"I head at least 3 shots very close together. Just after the shots the
area became crowded with people coming from Elm Street and the slope
just north of Elm. [Not asked source of shots.]"
Dallas Sheriff Affadavit, 19H510
"Not asked source of shots."
FBI Report
"[Report does not reveal if Bowers was asked the source of the
shots.]"
Also, Bowers said "up against the TSBD" not from the TSBD, big
difference. It is the WC counsel who keeps saying FROM the TSBD, here
is the exchange:
Mr. BALL. And were you able to form an opinion as to the source of the
sound or what direction it came from, I mean?
Mr. BOWERS. The sounds came either from *up against the School
Depository Building* or near the mouth of the triple underpass.
"In fact, practically the entire affidavit contains Bowers'
observations about the three cars that circled the parking lot just
before the shooting, with the shooting itself seemingly being a mere
afterthought in Mr. Bowers' mind. The only reference to the actual
shooting comes in the last two sentences of Bowers' affidavit, when he
says:
"About 8 or 10 minutes after he left {i.e., the last of the three cars
that toured the lot} I heard at least 3 shots very close together.
Just after the shots the area became crowded with people coming from
Elm Street and the slope just north of Elm." ....."
Davey is distorting again, he never thinks thinks can be left out
because they weren't asked. I have shown his viewing of two men
behind the fence shortly before the shooting. Also, the cars were not
innocent when you consider two of them had out-of-state license plates
and red mud on them. The other car had a man speaking into a
microphone or a radio.
"But even if we were to fully believe Mr. Bowers with respect to what
he told the Warren Commission in 1964 and Mark Lane in 1966, the sum
total of Bowers' comments really makes him a pretty decent "lone
assassin" type of witness."
In your dreams. This shows how delusional you are.
Walt
Excellent post Gill..... Thanks for the link. Von Pea Brain Can't
HONESTLY refute the words of Lee Bowers himself on the video ( of
course the fool will try, and make an ass outta himself in the
process)
Walt
David Von Pein
But Bowers is definitely NOT a "2 Direction" witness. He said that ALL
the shots he heard came from EITHER the area of the Book Depository OR
"near the mouth of the triple underpass". But not BOTH
locations. .....
==================================
LEE BOWERS -- "The sounds came either from up against the School
Depository Building or near the mouth of the triple underpass."
JOE BALL -- "Were you able to tell which?"
BOWERS -- "No, I could not."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
==================================
Plus, even if some CTers want to believe that Bowers heard some shots
from the latter location mentioned (the "mouth of the Triple
Underpass", per Bowers), that certainly doesn't equate to hearing
shots FROM THE PICKET FENCE ATOP THE GRASSY KNOLL...now does it?
You kooks need to now find a way to incorporate Bowers' testimony
about possibly hearing some shots from the TRIPLE UNDERPASS area into
a workable theory that has at least one assassin firing a rifle from
behind the PICKET FENCE ATOP THE KNOLL.
Work on that, will you please? I need some new CT Kookshit to
ridicule.
David Von Pein
Bowers' November 22nd Affidavit:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers1.htm
~Big ol' LOL here~
Rob The Idiot seems to think that Bowers was under some kind of give-&-
take INTERROGATION when he wrote out and signed the above-linked
affidavit on Nov. 22nd.
That affidavit was a voluntary STATEMENT made by Lee E. Bowers Jr. on
the day he witnessed the events in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63. He wasn't
"asked" ANYTHING with respect to that affidavit. He was merely writing
down what happened in his own words. It wasn't a question-and-answer
session, you goofball.
And it's important to remember that Bowers, in that above affidavit,
on the day the shooting occurred (when things were certainly FRESHER
in his mind than they were at any other time after the assassination,
including his little talk with Mark Lane in 1966), said ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING about seeing any men behind any picket fence in the area.
In other words -- If some men were there on 11/22, they were so
UNIMPORTANT to Lee Bowers that whatever they were doing near the fence
wasn't even important enough to jot down in his voluntary statement
that was written within hours of seeing any such men near the Knoll's
picket fence.
But Bowers did spend ample time explaining all about the three cars
that circled the parking lot before the shooting. Obviously, THAT
activity re. the vehicles was much more important and significant to
Mr. Bowers when it came to relating any pertinent details about the
events of that day than were any of the men whom he might have seen
hanging around the picket fence.
CTers might be wise to ask themselves why, in Lee Bowers' mind (and in
his November 22 affidavit) the information about CARS CIRCLING THE
PARKING LOT trumped and superceded (in importance) A MAN SHOOTING AT
THE PRESIDENT WITH A GUN NEAR THE PICKET FENCE?
Food for (Bowers) thought anyway.
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/tramps.htm
AND,
http://whokilledjfk.net/todd_vaughan.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:11da618d-433c-439e...@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "Of course it {Bowers' 11/22/63 affidavit; linked below} doesn't say
>>>> anything about the men behind the fence since they never asked him the
>>>> source of the shots!" <<<
>
Gil Jesus
McAdams is only going to fall. Here's why :
Walt
> >>> "He {Lee Bowers} mentioned TWO different locations for the source of the shots." <<<
>
> But Bowers is definitely NOT a "2 Direction" witness. He said that ALL
> the shots he heard came from EITHER the area of the Book Depository OR
> "near the mouth of the triple underpass". But not BOTH
> locations. .....
It seems to me you're mis-intepreting what Bowers said......
>
> ==================================
>
> LEE BOWERS -- "The sounds came either from up against the School
> Depository Building or near the mouth of the triple underpass."
Notice that Bowers says "up against" the TSBD. Sound is no different
than a fluid .... It will riccochet off a solid surface like a basket
ball off a backboard. A shot fired from near the triple underpass,
with the rifle aimed east would produce a bang that would bounce off
the TSBD building and travel toward Lee Bowers position.
>
> JOE BALL -- "Were you able to tell which?"
>
> BOWERS -- "No, I could not."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
>
> ==================================
>
> Plus, even if some CTers want to believe that Bowers heard some shots
> from the latter location mentioned (the "mouth of the Triple
> Underpass", per Bowers), that certainly doesn't equate to hearing
> shots FROM THE PICKET FENCE ATOP THE GRASSY KNOLL...now does it?
No it doesn't..... but was Bowers in a position to accurately
determine where the shots emanated from?
>
> You kooks need to now find a way to incorporate Bowers' testimony
> about possibly hearing some shots from the TRIPLE UNDERPASS area into
> a workable theory that has at least one assassin firing a rifle from
> behind the PICKET FENCE ATOP THE KNOLL.
Not necessary...... his testimony fits very well with a theory I've
held for a long time.
But I think you're mis-interpreting Bowers......
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "He {Lee Bowers} mentioned TWO different locations for the source of the shots." <<<
"But Bowers is definitely NOT a "2 Direction" witness. He said that
ALL the shots he heard came from EITHER the area of the Book
Depository OR "near the mouth of the triple underpass". But not BOTH
locations. ....."
This is NOT what he said, he said either the mouth of the triple
underpass or "up to the TSBD" which could encompass the cement
embankment area. He never said FROM the TSBD as he was not in the
right postition to know that (he was in the railyards) as the entire
knoll was in front of him and could not see the front of the TSBD
building know if shots originated there or not.
> ==================================
>LEE BOWERS -- "The sounds came either from up against the School
> Depository Building or near the mouth of the triple underpass."
>
> JOE BALL -- "Were you able to tell which?"
>
> BOWERS -- "No, I could not."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers.htm
Note the "up against" and if you look at a map of where he was you'll
see he meant up to the side of the TSBD. He had NO clear vision of the
front of the TSBD, especially the far eastern side.
> ==================================
"Plus, even if some CTers want to believe that Bowers heard some shots
from the latter location mentioned (the "mouth of the Triple
Underpass", per Bowers), that certainly doesn't equate to hearing
shots FROM THE PICKET FENCE ATOP THE GRASSY KNOLL...now does it?"
Why? Again, if you look at a map and see where the men where standing
according to Bowers they are no more than 15-20 yards from the triple
underpass, and in the echo chamber of Dealey Plaza that is close. It
is much closer than believing he heard shots from the eastern window
of the TSBD when he couldn't even see the front of the building.
"You kooks need to now find a way to incorporate Bowers' testimony
about possibly hearing some shots from the TRIPLE UNDERPASS area into
a workable theory that has at least one assassin firing a rifle from
behind the PICKET FENCE ATOP THE KNOLL."
Yeah, it so far-fetched that he would think a shot 20 yards away is
not right, yet believe a shot way across the plaza from a window in a
building he can't even see and is NOT facing is where he thinks the
shots originated from.
"Work on that, will you please? I need some new CT Kookshit to
ridicule."
Please do as it is like everything else in your case - it makes no
sense.
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "Of course it {Bowers' 11/22/63 affidavit; linked below} doesn't say anything about the men behind the fence since they never asked him the source of the shots!" <<<
>
> Bowers' November 22nd Affidavit:http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bowers1.htm
"~Big ol' LOL here~
Rob The Idiot seems to think that Bowers was under some kind of give-&-
take INTERROGATION when he wrote out and signed the above-linked
affidavit on Nov. 22nd."
You have obviously not read accounts of some witnesses who were
bullied when they tried to tell what they saw. Am I missing something?
The affadavit DOESN'T mention the two men behind the fence does it?
"That affidavit was a voluntary STATEMENT made by Lee E. Bowers Jr. on
the day he witnessed the events in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63. He wasn't
"asked" ANYTHING with respect to that affidavit. He was merely writing
down what happened in his own words. It wasn't a question-and-answer
session, you goofball."
Sure, and the swampland in Florida is perfect for a house too. Where
is the mention of the two men he SAW behind the fence? I know what an
affadavit is, my question is why does it NOT deal with all the things
he SAW that day?
"And it's important to remember that Bowers, in that above affidavit,
on the day the shooting occurred (when things were certainly FRESHER
in his mind than they were at any other time after the assassination,
including his little talk with Mark Lane in 1966), said ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING about seeing any men behind any picket fence in the area."
Absolutely, that is why to say it is a true representation of what he
saw is not true. Why lie to Mark Lane? What did he get for lying to
a man defending LHO? With all the deaths IF he did not see men, why
not keep his mouth shut? The affadavit is NOT a full representation
of what he saw.
"In other words -- If some men were there on 11/22, they were so
UNIMPORTANT to Lee Bowers that whatever they were doing near the fence
wasn't even important enough to jot down in his voluntary statement
that was written within hours of seeing any such men near the Knoll's
picket fence."
They weren't UNIMPORTANT to Lee Bowers, but were so to the
authorities. They told him it was not important and they KNEW THE
SHOTS came from the TSBD, Bowers, like most Americans in 1963, did not
think the authorities would lie to him so he figured he must be wrong
I guess.
"But Bowers did spend ample time explaining all about the three cars
that circled the parking lot before the shooting. Obviously, THAT
activity re. the vehicles was much more important and significant to
Mr. Bowers when it came to relating any pertinent details about the
events of that day than were any of the men whom he might have seen
hanging around the picket fence."
No, it was what they accepted. Remember Roger Craig's comment that
they would type up things and expect you to sign it, or in many cases
they got your signature and then added in things. How do we know
Bowers sat down and wrote this himself, or how do we know EVERYTHING
he did write down was included? Was there any follow-up on the three
cars? Not that I'm aware of. Why?
"CTers might be wise to ask themselves why, in Lee Bowers' mind (and
in his November 22 affidavit) the information about CARS CIRCLING THE
PARKING LOT trumped and superceded (in importance) A MAN SHOOTING AT
THE PRESIDENT WITH A GUN NEAR THE PICKET FENCE?
Food for (Bowers) thought anyway.
Who said it did? You are assuming everything he wrote was included,
and this has been shown by numerous witnesses NOT to be the case.
Wake up.
David Von Pein
Reality Break (and a reminder for those uninformed on this
issue)......
Robcap is an idiot.
(Thanks. And ten-four.)
robcap...@netscape.com
I'll take an IQ test against you anyday to see who the real idiot is.
You can't hang so you resort to the tired old personal attack. Sad.
tomnln
"robcap...@netscape.com" <robc...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:c8799c14-7185-462b...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case of LN's, "IQ" stands for "I Quit".
Because they ever address their own evidence/testimony>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Ossofee
Brehm, Price, Altgens, Murphy, Dodd,MaCkinnon, Foster,Willis's,
Millican, Simmons, Sitzman, Chaney,- the closest witnesses to JFK at 313
first impressions are of a GK shooter, so don't give us any of this
horseshit there's no evidence of a shot from the Grassy Knoll. Phil D.
curtjester1
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z190.jpg
Look at all the people lined up at the Stemmons sign on the curb on
the north side of Elm. I looked at one pic that was clearer, and
there were twelve women and two men all scrunched together, side by
side, and I bet most weren't called. Of course they were almost on a
direct line from where a GK shooter would have been.
CJ
curtjester1
At the bottom Don Roberdeux has most of the witnessed ID'd....and
there is a piece of June Dishong with her daughter saying that June
heard a couple of shots behind at the GK.
http://hometown.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/DISHONGobservations112263.html
CJ