Yet Another Cop With No Hat?

[Royell Storing]

   OK. Let's stop messing around and just go straight into the Woody Woodpecker cartoon. 

[Dan O'meara]

   OK. Let's stop messing around and just go straight into the Woody Woodpecker cartoon.

It's as relevant as anything else that's been posted on this subject.
Pointing out totally blurred, indistinct images and asking "No Hat Cop?" is completely in keeping with everything else on this thread.

[Royell Storing]

It's as relevant as anything else that's been posted on this subject.
Pointing out totally blurred, indistinct images and asking "No Hat Cop?" is completely in keeping with everything else on this thread.

     This No Hat Cop being within only feet of where Gordon Arnold claimed he was assaulted by a cop with no hat is no coincidence. Arnold has been trashed for decades, and now he's being vindicated. The No Hat Cop has been on the Darnell Film since 11/22/63 and somehow the JFK Assassination Research Community missed it? And the No Hat Cop is not the only "reveal" that has been hiding in plain sight for close to 60yrs.  Hang onto your hat!       --------------------- TO BE CONTINUED .................................

[Dan O'meara]

     This No Hat Cop being within only feet of where Gordon Arnold claimed he was assaulted by a cop with no hat is no coincidence. Arnold has been trashed for decades, and now he's being vindicated. The No Hat Cop has been on the Darnell Film since 11/22/63 and somehow the JFK Assassination Research Community missed it? And the No Hat Cop is not the only "reveal" that has been hiding in plain sight for close to 60yrs.  Hang onto your hat!       --------------------- TO BE CONTINUED .................................

Everything you post is Tinfoil garbage.

This No Hat Cop being within only feet of where Gordon Arnold claimed he was assaulted by a cop with no hat is no coincidence.

You're right, it is "no coincidence" because the No Hat Cop isn't a cop.
It is also no coincidence that there isn't a single clear picture of this No Hat Cop in the film/photo record. Not a single one! Just blurry, indistinct images and that's all [the amusing thing being that in the image that got this  started , the person is wearing a hat/helmet].
It is a gullible mind that is swayed by so little.

Arnold has been trashed for decades, and now he's being vindicated.

  vindicated!!

Read all four pages of this article which completely demolishes Arnold's tall tale - https://www.jfk-assassination.net/arnold1.htm
In it we see that Arnold places himself almost next to the bench we see in Darnell, the one Sitzman saw the young black couple on. As we have seen elsewhere, Arnold's dirt mound does not exist:



In the Sitzman interview posted by Duncan, she emphasises how quiet and distant the gunshots were, yet here is Arnold, supposedly a few feet way, claiming multiple shots blasting over his head. Sitzman also notes that she is brought out of her shock by the sound of breaking glass, her attention being drawn to the young couple racing away. But no sign of Arnold in the same area.
Then there's the letter to his wife written shortly after the assassination where he fails to mention being in Dallas, let alone Dealey Plaza, seeing JFK or being mugged by two [or was it one] law enforcement officials.
Arnold's story is a crock, there is nothing to support it and plenty against it.

TO BE CONTINUED

Oh, brother 

[Robert Reeves]

Everything you post is Tinfoil garbage.

This No Hat Cop being within only feet of where Gordon Arnold claimed he was assaulted by a cop with no hat is no coincidence.

You're right, it is "no coincidence" because the No Hat Cop isn't a cop.
It is also no coincidence that there isn't a single clear picture of this No Hat Cop in the film/photo record. Not a single one! Just blurry, indistinct images and that's all

How comes Emmet Hudson saw cops up in the wall area? One of the few witnesses close to the wall that testified says there WAS cops up there. Plural ''The Policemen'' Mr.Hudson: ''Yes Sir''.

Now how comes Sitzman didn't also see them? Or maybe she was never questioned in such a way that she was give up any information she had to expand the situation behind the wall. Selective questioning - avoiding details that would go a long way to explain the truth on 'the knoll'.

Emmet Hudson's large wtf moment was never expanded upon. Researchers never got to ask precisely what he saw was going on around ''the grassy spot up there where you were standing''. We are no clearer what those Policemen were doing!

[Royell Storing]

How comes Emmet Hudson saw cops up in the wall area? One of the few witnesses close to the wall that testified says there WAS cops up there. Plural ''The Policemen'' Mr.Hudson: ''Yes Sir''.

Now how comes Sitzman didn't also see them? Or maybe she was never questioned in such a way that she was give up any information she had to expand the situation behind the wall. Selective questioning - avoiding details that would go a long way to explain the truth on 'the knoll'.

Emmet Hudson's large wtf moment was never expanded upon. Researchers never got to ask precisely what he saw was going on around ''the grassy spot up there where you were standing''. We are no clearer what those Policemen were doing!

    Sitzman is a very mixed bag. We see her on the Bell Film having just gotten down from the Zapruder Perch. Only feet to Sitzman's left is Mrs Hester down on the ground. Sitzman worked with Mrs Hester and only minutes before, Zapruder had filmed the 2 women as he tested his camera. Did Sitzman go over and check to see if Mrs Hester was hit or injured? Nope! Instead, Sitzman claims she immediately ran down the hill and chattered at a couple of G-Men. And as I said previously, the only reason Josiah Thompson interviewed Sitzman was because Zapruder "No-Show'd" him for their scheduled interview there at the Dal Tex Bld. Not only did Thompson get stiffed that day, he ended up with the booby prize.

[Dan O'meara]

How comes Emmet Hudson saw cops up in the wall area? One of the few witnesses close to the wall that testified says there WAS cops up there. Plural ''The Policemen'' Mr.Hudson: ''Yes Sir''.

Now how comes Sitzman didn't also see them? Or maybe she was never questioned in such a way that she was give up any information she had to expand the situation behind the wall. Selective questioning - avoiding details that would go a long way to explain the truth on 'the knoll'.

Emmet Hudson's large wtf moment was never expanded upon. Researchers never got to ask precisely what he saw was going on around ''the grassy spot up there where you were standing''. We are no clearer what those Policemen were doing!

Just to clarify:
Hudson is asked if he saw anyone with a rifle 1) up on the grassy spot near where he was standing 2) on the overpass 3) anywhere else.
Hudson replies that he didn't see anyone with a GUN except the patrols/policemen.
At no point does Hudson indicate when he saw the policemen with the guns.
From this you have managed to specify that Hudson saw policemen near the wall area at the time of the assassination.
Wow. There are yoga gurus who would be proud of that stretch.

In her interview with Thompson, Sitzman is specifically asked about what she saw in the area between the picket fence and the low wall:

Thompson: Darn right. I know. I've seen the films too. Now, to get to this area between the stockade fence and the cement abutment, or small mall: Did you turn after the shot to look in this general area?
Sitzman: Yes.
Thompson: And did you see anyone in this area?
Sitzman: No, just the two colored people running back.

So, she was "questioned in such a way" specifically relating to  "the situation behind the wall."
And she gave a specific answer - the only people between the low wall and the picket fence at the time of the shooting were the young couple fleeing the scene.
Selective questioning? More like selective researching.

The only mystery here is how you've managed to make a mystery out of Hudson's remark.

[Royell Storing]

  Sitzman was a nice lady. So was Edith Bunker.