The Lloyd England Situation

one of the things that stands out about Lloyde's old orange striped Capitol Cab is that the windshield seems to be lacking a weekly insurance sticker. I used to own a private cab in DC, and we were required to update (by paying money) the insurance sticker WEEKLY. If a cab driver was caught driving without one, they would automatically be suspended.

I cant say for certain if the stickers are still required currently for NON-private cabs, but i will try to get in to DC and get some pics of the sticker i am referring to.


p.s. - this is what lloyde's cab looks like today (9-21-06):

How did you get that pic paranoia?

i second that inquiry.

Wow!

Looks like old boy paranoia did a little field research in Lloyd's neighborhood of his own.



Did you just drive by or did you stop in and say hi?

Mr England's cab is No 677. If Mr England was somehow "used" in the scheme to cover up something at the Pentagon, it might be conjectured that either he, or the Capitol Cab Co, was 'incentivised' either with a reward, or perhaps a threat. "play ball on this one and we'll help you out" vs 'play ball or else'

Facing bankruptcy and poor business prospects can be a powerful motivator.


Mr Lloyd England remains a fascinating character study no matter what.

It may sound a bit cynical but having looked at all these pictures of the cab for a while I wouldnīt exclude that the windshield was destroyed by a hammer or alike. Look at the small impact points on the left side (driverīs side), they look like small spider nets. What caused that?

my take (no experience!) on the windshield damage is a heavey blow moving from left to right (if you look from front of car to glass)

note how windshield is pushed l to rt. a bit, like a bowling ball on a chain. or a swung mace.

or maybe a light pole!

Damn light pole wrecked the hell out of the windshield, and was kind enough not to scratch the hood.

as george said about 9/11 "it was an interesting day."

About the Pentagon eyewitnessess:

Imagine yourself sitting in freeway traffic. Suddenly you hear a loud noise. Within a few seconds a large passenger airliner passes over your head at 500 mph and crashes into the side of a very large building. First how does your brain have time to process any of that information? It seems that any or all of the eyewitnesses claiming to see exactly what happened are fooling themselves, or trying to fool us. I've been to a Nascar race and seen a crash at 200 mph, I couldn't have told you who caused it, now hit happened or what cars it involved. We're talking about a jet flying at 500 mph at ground level. Its amazing at anyone could have even realized it was a plane.

If you see the plane before you hear the noise of it you could actually pay attention, but who looks for low flying planes while driving on the freeway?

After looking at the map, judging the altitude and the speed of the plane how can an eyewitness identify individual lightposts being knocked out of the ground?

If the FDR and the Google map are accurate how does a plane flying at 137' knock a 35' lightpost out of the ground. I imagine the altimeter judges altitude at sea level? I have no idea how to determine the altitude of that section of freeway.

How the hell does both an airliner and lighpost stay completely intact in a 500 mph collision and then the airliner completely disentergrate on impact of a building? Surely the lightpost should have sheared, or the wing should have sheared but both to remain intact is an anomaly.

Mach 1 (speed of sound) at sea level on a standard day is 666 knots. The aircraft was traveling at 463 knots. Meaning that the sound of the aircraft was 200 knots ahead of the aircraft. 200 knots is 337 ft/sec. The aircraft speed was 781 ft/sec.

Which means the plane could be as close as 337 feet from you and you wouldnt hear it until it gets closer. By the time you turn to look at it after hearing the sound, it would already be past you. Unless you are able to hear something, turn to look at it, and focus on it all within 337 feet and one second. The closer it is, the less time you have to turn, look and focus. Less than 1 second.

These eyewitnesses saw a flash and a blur.. thats it.



However, the Citgo witness had a good vantage point from behind and was able to focus longer. The people on Route 27 had no idea what flew over or what it hit. Humanly impossible.


(disclaimer: above for illustration purposes only. Speed of sound changes with air density. The above is a rough estimate)

For more on Speed of Sound and the Doppler effect as compared to the observer. .go here.. (just a quick google search i did.. but it gives the right idea)
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/sound/U11L3b.html



This post has been edited by johndoeX on Oct 15 2006, 11:53 AM

Now that Russell has finally broken his silence on our interview with Lloyd I feel it is appropriate that the discussion is continued in this thread.

It boils down to this.....Russell agrees that Lloyd's account is impossible and that he had to be lying but he still believes that the light poles were knocked down by a 757.

Naturally that statement is rather contradictory so it will be interesting to hear Russell's explanation for what Lloyd's reason or motive is for lying about which piece of the pole went through his windshield.

Here is the interview we did with Lloyd that definitively confirms that Lloyd claims the large piece of the pole went through his windshield:

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/lc2/Lloyd1.WMA

And here is an illustration that Russell had him make showing the pole sticking out of the front windshield:




In our interview Lloyd's wife also chimes in that it was the long piece of the pole that went through the windshield.

Clearly Lloyd's story from day one was that it was the large piece of the pole and that Russell was simply incorrect when he deduced that it was the small piece.

Lloyd has never changed the crucial part of his story about what piece of the pole went through his windshield.

Naturally he would NOT be inclined to exaggerate about this on the day of 9/11 since he would have to assume that eyewitnesses saw the pole in his cab and one even allegedly helped him remove the pole.

Since even Russell agrees that his account is physically impossible......the only logical conclusion is that it was fabricated.

This post has been edited by Lyte Trip on Oct 16 2006, 04:54 AM

Russell suggests that Lloyd has "flip-flopped" on other less important aspects of his story.

Russell claims that in his original phone interview with Lloyd that he claims he didn't skid his tires but in our interview with him you can hear how he says that he did in fact skid the tires.

(this is notable because there are no visible skid marks on the road in any photos)

Other examples Russell gives of Lloyd's "flip-flops" are as follows:

I believe that Lloyd slipped when he said the guy that helped him take the pole out was a "friend".

He likely DID know the person as he was likely the agent that helped him stage the scene.

So yes......this is another fine example that Lloyd is lying about his account.

As far as the part about mentioning the cab was still in his "yard"..........they claimed it was except it was in the yard in the country. He even offered to drive us out there to see it but we declined because it was 90 miles away.

Although we were kind of hoping Russell would make the treck alone with him the next day!

Clearly Lloyd is lying and Russell acknowledges this.

There is zero motive or reason for Lloyd to lie about what piece of the pole hit his cab. His story is no more or less interesting or valuable either way.

Therefore the only logical conclusion is that his account is completely fabricated.

Bump for Russell.

Lyte,

I am dealing with a couple of other things right now. Here is a quick photo that was a screen capture from the LCFC preview. Merc pointed this out to me (some time ago) and it does have skid marks in it. You can ask him if what I just said is true for confirmation.



Russell

Yeah I suppose that looks like a single light skid mark.

Of course that holds no bearing on the fact that he is lying about the approximately 20 foot 200 lb pole going through his his windshield without ripping his seat or scratching his hood.


There is zero motive or reason for Lloyd to lie about what piece of the pole hit his cab for embellishment. His story is no more or less interesting or valuable either way.

Therefore the only logical conclusion is that his account is completely fabricated.

It's kind of hard to tell if that is a skid mark for sure though.

It is pretty light for "locking them up" sideways at 40 mph.