A Couple of Things I Just Don't Believe

[Dealey Joe]

taking the chance of showing my ignorance.would someone please tell me what makes any real difference who the tramps actually are.if one of them is not Holt then we have no idea what they were even there for?Chauncy didn't seem to know for sure why they were there

[Pennyworth]

Dealey Joe wrote:taking the chance of showing my ignorance.would someone please tell me what makes any real difference who the tramps actually are.if one of them is not Holt then we have no idea what they were even there for?Chauncy didn't seem to know for sure why they were there....Under this theory, Hunt and Sturgis were allegedly in Dallas on November 22, 1963, and were taken into custody by the police, but were mysteriously released without being booked, photographed or fingerprinted by the police-although they were allegedly photographed by press photographers while they were being accompanied to the Dallas County Sheriff's office. McAdams Report...Rockefeller Commission Conclusion http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/hunt_sturgis.htm

[Pennyworth]

Dealey Joe wrote:taking the chance of showing my ignorance.would someone please tell me what makes any real difference who the tramps actually are.if one of them is not Holt then we have no idea what they were even there for?Chauncy didn't seem to know for sure why they were thereHello Joe I just read that 100 people were hauled in from the grassy knoll and questioned.They were under suspicion of being involved in the crime.

[Dealey Joe]

I have Roger Craigs draft of his book here that I got hold of.I am going to look it over to see if he has anything to say about that.I aasumed most of those paraded in front of the cameras were just for show.'If they had already decided that Oswald had done it amd aprehended him in less than an hourwhat would be the purpose?

[Pennyworth]

Bob wrote:I still say the three tramps were Holt, Rogers and Harrelson. I would put major money on Harrelson DEFINITELY being one of the three. I also believe Rogers and Holt were as well. I posted the photo of who I believe was Hunt earlier in this thread. Remember the fake identifications of the Secret Service agents near the knoll? Guess who supplied them? Chauncey Holt. Lois Gibson has an excellent track record in terms of her expertise.its not harrelsonits not holt either its not rogers neither did holt actually say that he was one of the three tramps in the specific photo in question?I confer to agree with Kirk about holt v.s. hunt .he spotted it and I picked up where he took off...

[Pennyworth]

the person or persons who created this website got two out of three right..they are right on the money with hunt.They are right on the money with sturgis.BUT they say that Harrelson was the forefront (first tramp) ..lol!I say it it Doylehttp://surftofind.com/nixon

[JDThomas]

Lois Gibson's article on Wim's site shows that biometrically, the tramp cannot be Doyle.That's not to say that Doyle was not a tramp in Dallas that day who got arrested in the dragnet ... just not the man in these photos

[NickMarinich]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHvsbz0SJqsFound this news segment about Charles Rogers. Does the picture they show of him look much like the short tramp?

[Pennyworth]

JDThomas wrote:Lois Gibson's article on Wim's site shows that biometrically, the tramp cannot be Doyle.That's not to say that Doyle was not a tramp in Dallas that day who got arrested in the dragnet ... just not the man in these photos Anyone can twist things around especially in this computer age. She did NOT take into consideration the angle of the face when she conducted her 'measurements.'And, like I said previously, who is she working for?

[Pennyworth]

Pennyworth wrote:JDThomas wrote:Lois Gibson's article on Wim's site shows that biometrically, the tramp cannot be Doyle.That's not to say that Doyle was not a tramp in Dallas that day who got arrested in the dragnet ... just not the man in these photos Anyone can twist things around especially in this computer age. She did NOT take into consideration the angle of the face when she conducted her 'measurements.'And, like I said previously, who is she working for?We should be wise as serpents and gentle as doves. Please, lets not be duped. I can easily draw two parellel lines through his eyes and his mouth, respectively where she says that there is a slant. She is just a part ofthe payoff dis-info machine IMO