Chris Scally

Members
  • Content count

    128
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chris Scally

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Profile Information

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

Recent Profile Visitors

7,342 profile views
  1. Michael, As far as I can recall, and I'm reasonably certain of this, there was such a timing analysis done a number of years ago. I don't have it to hand right now, but I know I've seen such a document (and it wasn't Myers' study). Sorry I can't be more specific right now, but I will try to get more details for you in the next week, if that helps. Chris
  2. George: If the camera-original film was at Life in Chicago well into the Saturday evening, as the evidence clearly suggests, then how could Dino Brugioni have been looking at a slit, 8mm film at NPIC around 10pm that same evening, and believe it to be the original? In addition, it is worth looking at exactly what Brugioni said in his interviews with Peter Janney in May 2009 and Doug Horne in July 2011: Peter Janney (PJ): There’s a paper trail a mile long of the film having been processed in Dallas (on Friday) … that’s where it gets confusing. Because your testimony is that the original arrived at NPIC the next day (Saturday), at 10 pm, and that there was no doubt about it, that it was an 8mm film, and that you were working with the original. Dino Brugioni (DB): I know it was an original because we all put on white gloves. PJ: But you don’t remember the Secret Service saying that they had come from Chicago, or Dallas, or Rochester? DB: No, no, no. ....... Doug Horne (DH): Dino, do you think you had an original home movie, or a copy? Dino Brugioni (DB): No doubt in my mind we had the original. DH: And why do you say that? DB: Because two reasons. One, the – the, eh, the fact that the Secret Service was bringing it in, and the second thing is when I looked at it – it, it was not processed in, in a typical commercial fashion. It [unclear, but sounds like “wasn’t”] in a box, a little box, or anything like, like that. It was very well controlled all the time. That film was controlled by the Secret Service all the time it was there. [Some discussion skipped] DH: Do you recall any image bleed-over … DB: No. DH: … between the sprocket holes? DB: No. DH: … OK. So, Dino Brugioni "knew it was an original because we all put on white gloves", the film was not in typical commercial packing, and because the Secret Service brought it to NPIC and were very protective of the film. It is also important to remember that he said he did not see any inter-sprocket imagery on the film he studied, which should have been the case if it were the original film. I am not suggesting for a single moment any dishonesty on the part of Mr. Brugioni, and I fully respect him as an expert in his field. However, I would suggest that his memory might be slightly at fault on this issue. Given that he was being asked about the detail of something that had happened over 40 years earlier, and that he was well advanced in years when he was first asked about the film, he may well have mis-remembered part of the details - it happens to all of us, I'm afraid. That is my take on the situation, however, but I do not claim to have a monopoly on the truth, so - while I firmly believe I'm correct - I accept that I could be wrong !!!
  3. Hi, George: There is no evidence to show that the original film was at NPIC over the weekend of the assassination, and much evidence to indicate that it was not there. Zapruder had the original from Friday evening until Saturday morning, at which time he gave it to Life. It was then flown to Chicago, where three B&W copies were made as a first step. The frames they wanted to use in the November 29 issue were then identified, and prints were made in preparation for the magazine. The film was then damaged by a lab technician in Chicago, and it was send to Life headquarters in New York on the Sunday morning. My research into the history of the film indicated that the first copy that NPIC got was probably (almost certainly) one of the two copied that Zapruder delivered to the Secret Service office in Dallas late on the Friday night, and which they sent later that night to Headquarters - the second copy that went to NPIC was probably the second Secret Service copy, which the Dallas office had loaned to the FBI on Saturday morning, and which was then forwarded to FBI HQ by the FBI in Dallas on a commercial flight on Saturday afternoon. Chris
  4. Jeff: Excellent article, very fair and balanced, as are your later comments in this post. Personally, I find it very frustrating to listen to this debate about how the film could have been "manipulated" by the CIA/FBI/Hawkeye on the night of the assassination, or early the next day. Zapruder didn't give the original film to Richard Stolley of Life until mid-Saturday morning, and Stolley sent it directly to Life in Chicago. Three black-and-white copies were made off the then-still-unslit camera-original film in Chicago that evening during the preparation for Life's November 29 issue, which actually appeared on the following Tuesday/Wednesday, as I recall, and in which some of those B&W frames appeared. It was not until after those three B&W copies were made that the well-known damage to the film was done by a Life lab technician in Chicago that same evening. In July 2011 I had the very great fortune to view and study one of those three copies, and I will happily go to meet my maker in the certain and unshakable belief that the film had not been altered or manipulated in any way at that time. Karl, you are absolutely correct - the ARRB failed/refused to conduct proper or effective tests suggested by Zavada on both the original film and on Zapruder's actual camera. Chris.
  5. Robin: I wouldn't bother waiting for that apology - I suspect that we won't be hearing further from "Mr. Butler".
  6. John: I am fully aware that I used a frame which was not the same as the frame you used. My point is (and was) that the officer at the corner of Main and Houston was "real", and not a "cut apart policeman", and was actually DPD Sgt. Harkness. The unstated basis for your claim that "my" frame was an edit and yours was not is, to say the very least, difficult to understand. There is an abundance of evidence (photographic and audio) to support the presence of Harkness at that corner at the relevant time. He was told by the radio dispatcher to set up his traffic control position a few minutes before the motorcade arrived; when the official cars had passed through the intersection, the Hughes film shows him crossing to street to his motorcycle, which was parked on the west side of Houston and is also visible in a few frames from the Hughes film; and he is then seen travelling down Main towards the Underpass in (IIRC) the Paschal film, and again in the Daniels film as the limo exits the west side of the underpass. Confirmation that he is indeed a Sergeant is found in the Hughes frame below, where his shoulder stripes are clearly visible. I have tried to be helpful to you and your research, but as you wish to persist in claiming that many/most of the assassination films have been altered, and ignoring all/any evidence which is contrary to that view, then I believe my efforts are and would continue to be in vain. Accordingly, I wish you well in your endeavours, but will not be responding or commenting further in this thread. Chris.
  7. John, I think this high-quality Hughes frame, showing DPD Sgt. Harkness at the Main/Houston intersection, and reproduced here from Robin Unger's JFK Assassination Photo Gallery, clearly shows that that there is no "cut apart" policeman as you suggest.
  8. John: If - for any reason - you include me among those who tried to "hijack" your thread or was being critical in any way, then I regret that you think so, and apologize for any misunderstanding. However, as far as I'm concerned, I simply shared with you some information about the duration of the "stop" in the Zapruder film, as researched by me some years ago. My finding of a stop of between 18.43 and 22.75 seconds was double-checked against a careful analysis of the movements of DPD motorcycle escort Leon Gray, by reference to the Weaver still photo, the Hughes film, Dale Myers' "Epipolar Analysis", and the Zapruder film. I believe that that analysis confirmed my initial figures of 18-23 seconds for the stop.
  9. John, In 2014, I carried out some fairly detailed research into the elapsed time between Z-132 and Z-133. In summary, I established that the gap between those two frames was a minimum of 18.43 seconds, and a maximum of 22.75 seconds. This, as I recall, would require the removal of about 4 feet of film if it is being suggested that the 'frames' between Z132 and 133 were removed from the film. However, a far more reasonably explanation, to my mind, is that when he realized that the limo was not immediately behind the leading motorcycle escorts, Zapruder stopped filming, rewound his camera, and started filming again when the limo appears around the corner onto Elm. It should be remembered that Zapruder's camera would, when fully wound, record for approximately 75 seconds on a 'full wind' - he had already been filming (a few frames of setup footage, followed by footage of Marilyn Sitzman with Beatrice Hester and her husband) for just over 18 seconds when he exposed Z-001, so I think it possible if not indeed likely that he used the time between the arrival of the lead escorts and the appearance of the limo to rewind his camera to 'full' again. Using my own B&H 414PD Director Series camera, I checked how long it would take to rewind the B&H camera - having first filmed for 18 seconds - from stopping the camera, rewinding it to full, focusing on a subject and starting to film again, and in a series of repeated tests, I averaged between 19 and 21 seconds - almost exactly the duration of what I believe was Zapruder's stop in filming. Hope this helps ... Chris.
  10. Thanks, Doug. Chris.
  11. Do you have any further details about this, please, Douglas? Chris
  12. 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.
  13. According to your website (http://www.prayer-man.com/the-search-for-the-weigman-darnell-films/), 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?