The “Umbrella Man,” seen in the Zapruder film raising and lowering a black umbrella near Dealey Plaza during the JFK assassination, remains one of the most enduring enigmas of the event. After years of speculation, evidence strongly suggests the man was Louie Steven Witt, who came forward in 1978 and explained his act as a protest against President Kennedy’s appeasement of the Munich Agreement during World War II, arguing his umbrella was meant to mock Chamberlain’s appeasement umbrella.
Identifying the Umbrella Man
The identification of the Umbrella Man is crucial to understanding the multitude of theories surrounding the assassination. While initially viewed with suspicion, Witt’s explanation, despite its seemingly eccentric nature, has largely been accepted by researchers due to corroborating evidence and lack of concrete alternative explanations.
Witt’s Account and Verification
Witt, upon seeing photos of the “Umbrella Man,” voluntarily came forward. He identified himself and explained his intentions were to protest Kennedy’s father, Joseph P. Kennedy’s, support of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s policies of appeasement towards Nazi Germany before World War II. Chamberlain was famously photographed carrying an umbrella, which became a symbol of that policy.
Investigators were initially skeptical, but Witt produced an umbrella identical to the one seen in the film, which he claimed had been purchased before the war. Further, analysis of Witt’s statements and background didn’t reveal any connection to Oswald or any evidence of his involvement in a conspiracy. Crucially, his explanation, while unusual, fit the historical context of the Kennedy family and their association with controversial pre-war policies.
Where Exactly is the Umbrella Man in the Zapruder Film?
The Umbrella Man is visible in frame 202 through frame 255 of the Zapruder film. He’s positioned near the Stemmons Freeway sign, close to the triple underpass. He can be seen opening his umbrella just moments before the motorcade approaches, and raising it significantly as Kennedy’s limousine passes by. After the shots are fired, he briefly closes the umbrella. The location of the Umbrella Man near the railroad tracks made some believe he was a signalman for other shooters, however, Witt’s testimony dispels that.
Addressing the Conspiracy Theories
Despite Witt’s explanation and the corroborating evidence, conspiracy theories surrounding the Umbrella Man persist. These theories generally posit that the umbrella was a signal to assassins, a triggering device, or a distraction technique.
The Signal Theory
One of the most popular theories suggests the umbrella was a visual cue for assassins positioned in nearby locations. The theory argues that the timing of the umbrella’s opening and closing corresponded to the shots fired. However, this theory is flawed. Witt’s explanation predates many of the more elaborate conspiracy theories, and no concrete evidence has ever surfaced to link him to any known conspiratorial groups. Furthermore, the timing of the umbrella’s actions doesn’t perfectly align with the documented timeline of the shots.
Dismissing Other Explanations
Other speculative explanations for the Umbrella Man’s presence have included the umbrella as a weapon, a projectile launcher, or a tool for jamming radio frequencies. These claims lack any factual support. There is no evidence to suggest the umbrella was anything other than a normal umbrella, and there is no evidence of Witt possessing any specialized skills or equipment that would have allowed him to carry out any of these actions.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Umbrella Man
1. Why was the Umbrella Man holding an umbrella on a clear day?
Louie Steven Witt claimed he brought the umbrella as a protest against the Kennedy family’s association with appeasement policies of Neville Chamberlain. He intentionally chose an umbrella as a symbol of that appeasement. The day was partly cloudy, and he stated he wanted to make his point regardless of the weather.
2. What proof is there that Louie Steven Witt was the Umbrella Man?
Witt voluntarily came forward, identifying himself after seeing photographs. He provided a matching umbrella, explained his motivation, and his background was thoroughly investigated with no links to conspiratorial groups being found. Furthermore, eyewitness accounts corroborated his presence in the area.
3. If Witt was the Umbrella Man, why did he wait so long to come forward?
Witt stated he was unaware of the significance the “Umbrella Man” was taking on and felt no need to come forward until his picture was published in the 1970s as part of a Congressional investigation. He then felt obligated to explain his actions and remove any suspicion that may be attributed to him.
4. Could the umbrella have been used to fire a dart or projectile?
No credible evidence supports the claim that the umbrella was weaponized. The umbrella appears to be a standard, non-modified umbrella, and there is no evidence Witt possessed the skills or equipment required to modify it for such a purpose.
5. Is there any connection between the Umbrella Man and Lee Harvey Oswald?
No evidence connects the Umbrella Man to Lee Harvey Oswald. Witt’s background and motivations have been thoroughly investigated, and no links to Oswald or any other individuals associated with the assassination have been found.
6. Why is the Umbrella Man considered such a significant figure in the JFK assassination narrative?
The Umbrella Man captured public imagination because his presence seemed incongruous and suspicious. On a relatively clear day, an individual was holding up an open umbrella as the President’s motorcade went by. His presence sparked numerous conspiracy theories.
7. Was the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) satisfied with Witt’s explanation?
Yes, the HSCA largely accepted Witt’s explanation. After interviewing him and reviewing the evidence, they found his story to be plausible and lacking any indication of involvement in a conspiracy.
8. What is the ‘Babushka Lady’ and how does she relate to the Umbrella Man?
The Babushka Lady is another unidentified figure seen in photographs and films of the assassination. She is distinct from the Umbrella Man, and there is no known connection between the two. The Babushka Lady is only mentioned in the context of other conspiracy theories surrounding the JFK assassination.
9. Is it possible that the Umbrella Man’s actions were misinterpreted due to the chaos and confusion of the moment?
Absolutely. The assassination unfolded rapidly, and witnesses experienced varying levels of shock and confusion. This can explain why some may have interpreted the Umbrella Man’s actions differently than intended.
10. Has any new evidence emerged in recent years that sheds light on the Umbrella Man?
No significant new evidence has emerged. While interest in the JFK assassination remains high, the core facts surrounding the Umbrella Man remain largely unchanged since Witt came forward in 1978.
11. How can I access the Zapruder film to see the Umbrella Man for myself?
The Zapruder film is readily available online through various sources, including the National Archives and YouTube. When viewing, focus on frames 202-255 to see the Umbrella Man clearly.
12. What are some good resources for further research on the Umbrella Man and the JFK assassination?
Several resources are available, including the National Archives, the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, and various books and documentaries focusing on the JFK assassination. Be sure to critically evaluate the source and consider potential biases.
Conclusion
While the figure of the Umbrella Man initially fueled countless conspiracy theories, the evidence strongly suggests that Louie Steven Witt was the individual responsible for the peculiar sight. His explanation, however unusual, remains the most plausible and well-supported account. While the mystery of the Umbrella Man may have been solved, it underscores the enduring fascination with the JFK assassination and the power of speculation in the face of incomplete information. The importance of critical thinking and evidence-based analysis is paramount when dissecting such historical events, ensuring that facts, not conjecture, guide our understanding.