Chris Scally

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chris Scally

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    The search for the original Nix film; Zapruder film history; DPD radio / acoustics evidence

Recent Profile Visitors

7,284 profile views
  1. Hmmm ... very interesting. Why would they now admit that they have the "original footage", when it was supposedly "missing" for so long? And an e-mail from an account manager, quoting "the powers that be" is certainly a most unorthodox and unusual mechanism by which to eventually come clean, and admit they have such footage. Also, does the e-mail specify exactly what "original footage" he is talking about? Darnell and Weigman? Or just Weigman? Or just Darnell? Are NBC playing word games? The HSCA doesn't appear to have been able to get anything out of them, either. The only specific references I can find to either film are to "movie stills" from Weigman's film, and "Sprague copies of Weizman (sic) film". Very interesting indeed.
  2. According to your website (, Gary Mack wrote in March 2015 - "NBC owns the original Wiegman film but when producers of JFK: Death in Dealey Plaza asked them for it 12 years ago (at my request), NBC could only locate a 1960s-era video tape of it. We wound up using, I think, a 1963/1964 theatrical newsreel version held by UCLA. NBC took the original Wiegman and Darnell films from the Dallas NBC affiliate to New York following the assassination weekend. Whether the network still has the original Darnell film is unknown, but as a former employee I know the affiliate does not have it or a copy. Nor does Jimmy Darnell. Fortunately, a first-generation 16mm copy print was made in Dallas over that weekend and it is in the Museum’s collection; however, the Museum cannot do anything with it until copyright issues are resolved." The foregoing clearly suggests that NBC legally owns, but cannot find, the original Wiegman film, and nobody knows where the original Darnell film is, either. Is this new statement, that "NBC has acknowledged they have them but the powers that be will not allow anything done with them", an update on the position as of March last year? If so, who exactly in NBC has "acknowledged" that they currently have the camera-original Darnell and Wiegman films? And who are "the powers that be" in NBC who will not allow anything to be done with the films?
  3. I second David's comments - Thank You, James, for all your efforts. Chris
  4. Joseph: Thanks for taking the time to reply - it is appreciated. If I can for one moment speak in general terms about your views on the book, as summarized in your Amazon review, I don't think the book was ever meant to address all the various issues raised by the film, and the multiplicity of complex and at times very acrimonious debates it has engendered over the years. My reading of the book was very much in the context of the title - "Twenty-Six Seconds: A Personal History of the Zapruder Film", the "moving, untold family story behind Abraham Zapruder's film footage of the Kennedy assassination and its lasting impact on our world". In that context, I think it is an excellent book, easy to read, and provides a perspective that has never before been revealed by a very private family. With reference to your specific question about the Doug Horne/Dino Brugioni interview, I have indeed watched it, and on more than one or two occasions ! I don't for one moment doubt Mr. Brugioni's sincerity, but I simply believe he is wrong - as was Homer McMahon in his "NPIC event" account. Late in the evening/night of November 23, 1963, Brugioni was dealing with a Secret Service-provided 8mm print of the film, at a time when Life were in possession of the original. So, irrespective of where it came from, it had already been slit from its camera-original format, and was a copy of undetermined provenance and generation. I have had the very unique opportunity of examining a copy of one of the 16mm black-and-white copies of the film made in Chicago during the afternoon of November 23. The film is in unslit camera-original format (so you can see both sides of the film simultaneously as it is projected, one side 'right-way-up', while the other side is upside-down), and it was made before the original was slit or was damaged in any way. From my own examination of that film, I am absolutely convinced that the film I viewed is genuine, and complete and intact in every way. So, while Doug Horne's account may well be "detailed and convincing" to some, I find neither his nor Dino Brugioni's accounts to be credible. Chris.
  5. I totally disagree that Alexandra Zapruder's book is "deplorable" - it is a fascinating insight into the impact of the film on her family, and gives us a never-before seen or understood look behind much of the film's history. What I do find sadly "deplorable" is that you cite Doug Horne, Homer McMahon and Dino Brugioni as "proof" - or even "evidence" - that the film has been altered. Chris
  6. Thanks, James - hope the upgrade goes through smoothly. Chris.
  7. Hi, John: Many thanks indeed for your response. On the basis of the Harper-related memo that you posted, the initials are not those of Henry B. Heiberger - however, you list of Lab Staff has given me a few more leads, which I will hopefully follow-up tomorrow. Chris.
  8. Hi, Gary: Many thanks indeed for your response. Attached is a copy of his initials on a memo which was sent to the FBI Photo Lab. Do you have a copy of Henry Heiberger's initials to compare it with? Many thanks for your help, as always. Chris
  9. Does anyone here have any idea who in the FBI Photo Lab in Washington in November / December 1963 might have had the initials "HHB"? All or any information would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks, Chris.
  10. Thanks, James. Best to all who are involved in this very worthwhile endeavor, and keep us posted ... ! Chris.
  11. Hi David: Quick question, if I may - "Phil's recap letter" ? Can you tell me anything further, please? Is it in Zavada's Report, or somewhere else where I can find it? Thanks in anticipation, Chris. Posted in error - please ignore / delete
  12. Just on a point of accuracy - this is not Sawyer's HSCA testimony, but an interview report, based on a November 1977 interview of Sawyer carried out by HSCA investigator Harold Rose.
  13. Thanks, Chris. I will e-mail the agent, and see what we get ...! Will update this thread accordingly, if/when I get a response. Chris.
  14. Thanks, Larry. I've looked for contact info for Keith Reddin, but without any success yet. "Frame 312" is a "dramatization of a conspiracy theory", which was also produced in book form in 2002, so I don't know if it is anything other than a good fiction story - I suspect not. However, if anyone can get any further information about the real story behind the book/play, I do have a contact who might be able to tell me if the woman on whom the "Lynette Porter" figure is based was ever an "assistant editor" (or even a very senior secretary) at Life back then.