The Law of Unintended Consequences

[Josiah Thompson]

Thanks David. If you come up with anything, please let me know. As far as I can discern, Chaney was interviewed by the FBI in November/December 1963. However, the FBI's only interest was Chaney's chance encounter with Jack Ruby in Dealey Plaza on November 23rd. He was never even asked about what he observed on November 23rd. Nor did he ever submit a report to DPD.

That's the way things stood until August 1975 when one of the Dallas FBI agents encountered Lt. Jack Revell on a streetcorner in downtown Dallas. Revell told the agent that Chief Curry had always thought that more than one person was shooting at Kennedy because of the blood and brain debris that had hit one of motorcyclists. Revell also told the agent that Officer Chaney and Officer Douglas Jackson had never been interviewed about what they observed on November 22nd. The agant's report made its way up to Washington and a directive came down to interview Jackson and Chaney. Both were interviewed about November 22nd. Jackson got blood on his pants when he climbed into the limousine at Parkland to help remove Kennedy and Connally from the back seat. But he was not splattered with blood or brain matter at the time JFK was hit in the head. Oddly enough, Chaney is quizzed about November 22nd but never asked by the FBI whether he was splattered with blood. This is curious given the fact that the inquiry by the Bureau began when it learned that Chief Curry was saying two guys were shooting at the President because Hargis got hit with blood and brain debris and he was riding to the left rear.

Very soon, I will be getting access to the out-takes from the Lord interview of Chaney on the evening of November 22nd. When that's done, I figure I will have touched every base. Can you think of anything else I might have missed? Once again, please alert me if you find anything. Right now I have no evidence that Chaney himself ever said he was hit with debris to anyone.

JT

As we watch Zfilm the limo speeds off and no motorcycles follow them... NONE.

the rest of Chaney also makes sense...

Mr. STERN - You were clear that the sounds were sounds of shots?

Mr. HARGIS - Yes. sir: I knew they were shots.

Mr. STERN - All right, what did you do then? You say you parked your motorcycle?

Mr. HARGIS - Yes, uh-huh----

Mr. STERN - Where?

Mr. HARGIS - It was to the left-hand side of the street from---south side of Elm Street.

Mr. STERN - And then what did you---

Mr. HARGIS - I ran across the street looking over towards the railroad overpass and I remembered seeing people scattering and running and then I looked.

Jim F....

rather than attacking JT, can you offer anything other than CHANEY's own words that he went up ahead to the lead car?

Does anyone in the car corroborate the story?

Are any of the three motocycle men in McIntyre CHANEY?

and finally... in SUPPORT of the frontal shot... I offer this look at CHANEY and his mate as the shots are fired...

WHERE ARE THEY LOOKING?

(Note: FWIW, Chaney, the man closest to JFK outside the vehicle is NOT on the WCR witness list or is listed as the author of ANYTHING in the dallas archive.... but I'll keep looking)

Jim, where did CHANEY say he motored forward to the lead car? Sorry if I missed the reference - an interview with you?

DJ

Edited January 6, 2012 by Josiah Thompson

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

David,

As I am not the only one to observe, Gil Toft sent Chaney a copy of the extant Zapruder film, which (I am quite certain) must have shaken him up, since it does not represent what happened while he was there. Not to fault you, specifically, but why have you not followed the link I provided about Cheney specifically in post #4. It was originally published on February 5, 2008.

This is very bad. Typical Thompson, he doesn't even dare identify the source of the story. It originated John Costella and was published in my "New Proof of JFK film fakery", hhttp://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jim_fetz_080205_new_proof_of_jfk_fil.htm Do any of you think Chaney motoring forward is seen in the film? Here is a summary:

The evidence emerged as an unexpected outcome of the collation of eyewitness reports in Dealey Plaza conducted by John P. Costella, Ph.D., who co-edits assassinationresearch.com with Fetzer. Costella earned his Ph.D. in physics with a specialty in electromagnetism, including the physics of light and of moving objects. What he discovered were multiple, consistent and reinforcing reports that James Chaney, a motorcycle patrolman who was to the right rear of the presidential limousine, rode forward to tell Jesse Curry, Dallas Chief of Police—who was in the lead car with the head of the Secret Service in Dallas, Agent Forrest Sorrels, and a second Secret Service Agent, Winston Lawson—that the President had been shot. This led Chief Curry to issue instructions for the limousine to be escorted to Parkland Hospital, where the President would be pronounced dead 30 minutes later. Bobby Hargis, a motorcycle patrolman riding on the left rear, confirmed Chaney’s report. But this sequence is in neither the Zapruder film nor the Nix film.

This is just what I have come to expect from Josiah Thompson. Offer an atrophied and simplistic account of the evidence for Chaney's having motored forward, act as though I don't know what I am talking about, cite Chaney's response after having received a copy of the extant film--and then pretend that's all there is too it! He plays all of you for saps and you fall for it.

Jim

As we watch Zfilm the limo speeds off and no motorcycles follow them... NONE.

the rest of Chaney also makes sense...

Mr. STERN - You were clear that the sounds were sounds of shots?

Mr. HARGIS - Yes. sir: I knew they were shots.

Mr. STERN - All right, what did you do then? You say you parked your motorcycle?

Mr. HARGIS - Yes, uh-huh----

Mr. STERN - Where?

Mr. HARGIS - It was to the left-hand side of the street from---south side of Elm Street.

Mr. STERN - And then what did you---

Mr. HARGIS - I ran across the street looking over towards the railroad overpass and I remembered seeing people scattering and running and then I looked.

Jim F....

rather than attacking JT, can you offer anything other than CHANEY's own words that he went up ahead to the lead car?

Does anyone in the car corroborate the story?

Are any of the three motocycle men in McIntyre CHANEY?

and finally... in SUPPORT of the frontal shot... I offer this look at CHANEY and his mate as the shots are fired...

WHERE ARE THEY LOOKING?

(Note: FWIW, Chaney, the man closest to JFK outside the vehicle is NOT on the WCR witness list or is listed as the author of ANYTHING in the dallas archive.... but I'll keep looking)

Jim, where did CHANEY say he motored forward to the lead car? Sorry if I missed the reference - an interview with you?

DJ

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

The point here is incredibly simple and Professor Fetzer, Ph.D., is obstinately missing it. Chaney is saying in the simplest terms that he did not motor forward as Fetzer believes. Read his lips: "I recall it was Officer Hargis jumped off his motor and run across in front of me... I don't recall myself stopping but as I stopped to think of it it, I must have come almost to a stop for Hargis to have got off his motorcycle over on the left-hand side and run between those two cars and run in front of me. Apparently, I did too. I don't recall stopping but I must have."

Instead of dealing with what Chaney is actually saying, Fetzer continues to repeat his mantra: "Chaney rode forward." Okay, perhaps Professor Fetzer, Ph.D., teacher of many courses in logic and critical thinking for a long, long, very long time, perhaps Professor Fetzer can explain how Chaney rode forward and, at the same time, has a memory of coming "almost to a stop" so that he could see Officer Hargis get off his cycle near the south curb of Elm Street and run across the street in front of Chaney. What Chaney recalls is completely consistent with exactly what we seen in all the films and photos of these moments. The photo scenario painted by the Zapruder, Nix, Bell and Daniels films ends with Chaney trailing the limousine by several hundred feet as the limousine pulls alongside the lead car under the triple underpass.

So given the various films, given what Chaney is actually saying, given what Chief Curry and the others are actually saying, what is the evidence that supports the mantra, "Chaney rode forward?"

JT

To cite only part of the evidence while suppressing the rest is called the "special pleading fallacy". It could equally well be described as the technique of "selection and elimination" by selecting the evidence that supports a predetermined conclusion and eliminating the rest. Either Tink knows what he's talking about or he does not. Since he is citing Chaney from a new interview after having been contaminated by being sent the extant Zapruder film, what he has to say now has to be taken with extreme caution. Since I have no doubt that he read this back in February of 2008, when it was first published, he must have given considerable thought to how to devise a means to defeat yet one more proof of conspiracy and of Zapruder film fakery. What dumbfounds me is that he gets away with it, time after time, on this forum. He does his thing and you fall for it, again and again.

OpEdNews

Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jim_fetz_080205_new_proof_of_jfk_fil.htm

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Associate Member, or higher).

February 5, 2008

New Proof of JFK Film Fakery: "Conclusive Evidence," Experts Claim

By James Fetzer

A new study of eyewitness reports in assassinationresearch.com has revealed a major discrepancy between the sequence of events as these witnesses observed it and the sequence presented in home movies of the assassination known as the Zapruder film and the Nix film. The witnesses reported that a motorcycle patrolman rode forward to the lead car to advise the Chief of Police the President had been shot. Neither film shows it.

::::::::

Madison, WI (OpEdNews) February 5, 2008 — The editor of Assassination Research, James H. Fetzer, Ph.D., has announced the discovery of new proof that the home movies of the assassination of JFK known as the Zapruder film and a second known as the Nix film are fakes. (The Nix film was taken from the opposite side looking toward “the grassy knoll.”) Both were subject to extensive alteration to fabricate evidence of the crime and keep the truth about the sequence of events in Dealey Plaza from the American people. Fetzer, McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota, observed that the films are authentic only if the visible events they record correspond to the actual sequence of events at the time. “This proof is based upon the convergent testimony of motorcycle patrolmen, members of the Secret Service, and the Dallas Chief of Police. That it contradicts the official account of the assassination recorded in the films qualifies as a major breakthrough.”

The evidence emerged as an unexpected outcome of the collation of eyewitness reports in Dealey Plaza conducted by John P. Costella, Ph.D., who co-edits assassinationresearch.com with Fetzer. Costella earned his Ph.D. in physics with a specialty in electromagnetism, including the physics of light and of moving objects. What he discovered were multiple, consistent and reinforcing reports that James Chaney, a motorcycle patrolman who was to the right rear of the presidential limousine, rode forward to tell Jesse Curry, Dallas Chief of Police—who was in the lead car with the head of the Secret Service in Dallas, Agent Forrest Sorrels, and a second Secret Service Agent, Winston Lawson—that the President had been shot. This led Chief Curry to issue instructions for the limousine to be escorted to Parkland Hospital, where the President would be pronounced dead 30 minutes later. Bobby Hargis, a motorcycle patrolman riding on the left rear, confirmed Chaney’s report. But this sequence is in neither the Zapruder film nor the Nix film.

During the past dozen years, substantial evidence of the Zapruder film’s alteration has accumulated in a research effort that became serious in 1996 during a symposium at the JFK Lancer Conference in November. Fetzer brought together numerous experts on the film, including Jack White, David W. Mantik, and Noel Twyman, the author of Bloody Treason (1997), which includes scientific studies of the film’s authenticity. Twyman, a retired engineer, had noticed that the driver of the President’s limousine, SSA William Greer, had turned to look at JFK and then turned back with preternatural speed. He hired a professional tennis player to study how fast human head turns could be made and determined that Greer’s head turns were approximately twice as fast as humanly possible. That might not sound like much initially, but it would be like converting a 4 minute mile into a 2 minute mile. Based upon this research, Twyman had discovered objective evidence of the removal of frames from the film.

Studies published in The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003), provide overwhelming additional proof of alteration, including technical studies by Costella. For example, Frame 232, which had previously been published in LIFE magazine, turned out to have optically impossible features. He also discovered that, in recreating the film, which had to have its frames re-shot using sophisticated techniques of optical printing and special effects—in order to avoid disclosing the deception via “ghost images” in the sprocket area, which cannot be reproduced—the conspirators had made mistakes during their reinsertion of images of the Stemmons Freeway sign and of a lamppost. Moreover, Erwin Schwartz, an associate of Abraham Zapruder, reported seeing JFK’s brains blown outward to the left and to the rear, while several agents of the Secret Service had reported being nauseated by the blood and the brains splattered across the trunk of the car. Neither is visible today in “the Zapruder film”. A visual seminar of Costella’s research is archived at assasssinationscience.com.

Part of the power of Costella’s new findings is that they can be appraised by anyone with access to the film, which is archived at the same site, and his collation of reports at Assassination Research 5/1 (2007), assassinationresearch/v5n1/v5n1costella.pdf . As illustrations of what he has uncovered, here are some of the reports from the officials who were involved:

* James Chaney (motorcycle patrolman on right rear of the Presidential limousine): “I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital and that Parkland was standing by.”

* Bobby Hargis (motorcycle patrolman on left rear of the Presidential limousine): “The motorcycle officer on the right side of the car was Jim Chaney. He immediately went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.”

* Winston Lawson (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle escort officer pulled along side our Lead Car and said the President had been shot. Chief Curry gave a signal over the radio for police to converge on the area of the incident.”

* Forrest Sorrels (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle patrolman pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled, ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer responded in the affirmative.”

* Chief Jesse Curry (in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “. . . about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney, rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there and he said, ‘Yes,’ and I said ‘Has somebody been shot?” And he said, ‘I think so.’”

There are multiple sources for their testimony, which is corroborated by that of others, including, for example, Marrion Baker, a Dallas Police Officer, who immediately thereafter entered the Book Depository and confronted Lee Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom. Costella’s study provides additional citations.

This stunning new proof of the fabrication of the two most important films of the assassination focuses attention on the agency in immediate control of the most important evidence in the assassination, which was the Secret Service. Indeed, there are more than 15 indications of Secret Service complicity in setting up JFK for the hit, including leaving two Secret Service agents at Love Field; ordering the vehicles in the wrong sequence, with the President’s first instead of in the middle of the motorcade; not welding manhole covers; not covering the open windows; allowing the crowd to spill out into the street; ordering the 112th Military Intelligence unit to “stand down”; directing the accompanying motorcycle officers to not ride forward beyond the rear wheels; taking an improper motorcade route; not responding when shots began to be fired; pulling the limo to the left and to a halt to insure he would be killed; using a bucket of water and sponge to clean blood and brains from the back seat at Parkland Hospital; sending the limo back to Ford Motor Company to be dismantled and rebuilt; and removing autopsy photos and X-rays from Bethesda, making them unavailable during preparation of the autopsy report. The fabrication and distortion of the photographic record is the final missing piece of the complex puzzle of the cover-up in the assassination.

These are not the only indications of Secret Service complicity, Fetzer said. In the wake of the enormous resurgence of interest in the assassination following the release of Oliver Stone’s “JFK”, Congress passed a JFK Records Act creating a five-member civilian board entrusted with the responsibility of declassifying documents and records held by the CIA, the FBI, the Secret Service, and other government organizations, where the panel’s decisions could only be overridden by the President himself, who was then Bill Clinton. Although Clinton never intervened to stop the release of evidence, when the Secret Service learned that the panel wanted copies of Presidential Protection Records for other motorcades involving President Kennedy, instead of releasing them it destroyed them. “I can’t imagine a more telling indication of consciousness of guilt,” said Fetzer, who has edited three books and chaired or co-chaired four conferences on the death of JFK.

Among the most important proofs of film alteration have been those provided by Doug Horne, who became Senior Analyst for Military Affairs for the civilian board (technically, the Assassination Records Review Board or the “ARRB”), and by Rich DellaRosa, who reports having viewed the unaltered film on three occasions. Horne interviewed Homer McMahon, who was then in charge of the color photo section of the National Photo Interpretation Center, who told him that an agent identifying himself as “William Smith” brought him a copy of the film the night of the assassination, asking him to prepare a briefing board for an unidentified official. He said he had viewed the film at least ten times and determined that there had been six to eight impacts from at least three different directions. Horne’s report appears in Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000) along with studies of the medical evidence demonstrating that JFK was hit four times: once in the throat (from in front), once in the back (from behind), and twice in the head (from behind and from in front). So if Connally was hit as many as three times (from the side), there were as many as seven impacts from three directions.

Another fascinating source of information has come from Rich DellaRosa, who today moderates a research site at JFKresearch.com. He reports having seen what appears to be the original film on three occasions. He observed the limo driver steer to the left. The stop was so sudden that it jostled the occupants. This observation is confirmed by close study of the Zapruder film itself, where frames show passengers being thrown forward immediately after the head shot at Frame 313. This indicates that the sequence of events has been reversed. There were actually two head shots before the vehicle resumed its forward movement. DellaRosa’s report can be found as Appendix E of The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003), which includes a color photo section that reveals the massive blow-out to the President’s head, which is visible in Frame 374. It corresponds closely to diagrams from physicians and Mantik’s study of the alteration of the cranial X-rays. These fabrications were used to discount witness reports (at least 40, including at Parkland and at Bethsda) of such a blowout.

That Greer pulled the limo to the left and stopped was such powerful proof of Secret Service complicity that it had to be taken out. Jack White, a legendary photo-analyst, has detected dozens and dozens of anomalies in the photos and films from the assassination and has been the most consistent critic of the presumption of authenticity of the film in the history of its study. “The Zapruder film was a necessary part of the plot so the conspirators could control the official story,” White observed. “The motorcade stopping and anything associated with that sequence had to be removed. The lead car pulled to the curb, along with the other cars, and Chaney rode forward to advise Curry. Any actual film of the motorcade at that moment would show chaos—conflicting with the needs of the official story. It had to be massively edited to keep control.”

Earlier studies of the film’s authenticity have included disagreements between eyewitnesses and the film; disagreements between early viewers of the film in November 1963 versus what is currently available; disagreements between the film and other photographs and movies; disagreements between the film and the first two reenactments; and internal inconsistencies in the film. In Assassination Science (1998), David W. Mantik, Ph.D., M.D., laid out a summary of the evidence then available of Zapruder alteration. He observed that Milicent Cranor, an independent investigator, had noticed reports that Chaney had traveled to the lead car, which is not present in the Nix film in PROBE (November-December 1997). Costella's independent research thus substantiates and corroborates earlier studies by Mantik and Cranor, which were not fully appreciated at the time.

In The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003), Mantik, who earned a Ph.D. in physics from Wisconsin and an M.D. from Michigan, demonstrated that an early study by Luis Alvarez, a Nobel Prize winner in physics, often cited in support of the film’s authenticity, involved the selective use of evidence, and that an analysis of the Muchmore film­—another of perhaps a half-dozen most important films covering various parts of the assassination—showed that it, too, had been subjected to alteration and could not be taken to be authentic. Those who attempt to defend the authenticity of the Zapruder film by contending that its alteration would have required alterations to these other films have lost their presumption that the other films have not been altered. Costella’s proof not only demonstrates the alteration of the Zapruder film in a fashion that even non-experts can see with their own eyes, but also adds the Nix film to the list of those whose authenticity has been impeached.

“The official account presented in The Warren Report (1964) and in Gerald Posner’s Case Closed (1992),” Fetzer said, “is predicated upon the ‘magic bullet’ theory and the authenticity of the films and photographs." The "magic bullet" theory, however, is not only provably false but not even anatomically possible as his study, “Reasoning about Assassinations” (2005), assassinationscience.com/ReasoningAboutAssassinations.pdf , explains. "I have been stunned by the lengths to which some have gone in their attempts to defend the Zapruder film from criticism. Josiah Thompson, author of Six Seconds in Dallas (1967), an analysis based on the film, recently appeared in ‘Oswald’s Ghost,’ an obvious work of disinformation, and asserted, ‘The Zapruder film is the basic evidence in this case’! That is not only an abuse of language—since, as David Lifton, author of Best Evidence (1980), has emphasized, the body is the best evidence—but we have conclusive evidence that the film has been faked.”

Fetzer also expressed disillusionment with Noam Chomsky, who has dismissed the very idea that JFK was taken out by a conspiracy. “Major policy issues were involved here, including withdrawing our advisors from Vietnam, reforming or abolishing the Fed, cracking down on organized crime, and cutting the oil depletion allowance. LBJ wanted to be ‘President of all the people’ and his chance was slipping through his fingers. Even Nixon was quoted in the Dallas paper that morning speculating that he would not be on the ticket in 1964. Discoveries like these indicate high-level complicity by elements of various agencies, including the Secret Service and the FBI. I hope that skeptics like Chomsky and zealots like Thompson finally come to their senses. Not only is the Zapruder film a fake but other films and photographs, such as the Nix and Muchmore, have been altered to conform to it.”

Submitters Website: www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/

Submitters Bio:

McKnight Professor Emeritus,

University of Minnesota, Duluth;

Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth;

Editor, Assassination Research.

Back

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Josiah Thompson]

Once again you miss the point entirely. Gil Toft and friends apparently sent copies of the Zapruder film and Altgens photo to numerous motorcyclists. Apparently, they were hoping the officers would look at the film and say: "That wasn't the way it happened. I was there and I know what happened. The Zapruder film has been doctored." If Chaney had ridden ahead in front of the limousine to deliver his message to Chief Curry, he could have told Toft just that. He could have said: "This film is fake. I took off like a bare-assed ape after the lead car and ran right by the limousine and nothing like this shows in the Zapruder film." This would have made Toft's and your day. But Chaney didn't do that. On the contrary, he remembered coming almost to a stop and watching Hargis run across the street in front of him. So now you don't believe what Chaney says. Priceless!!

By the way, in Murder from Within Newcomb and Adams back another wacky idea you were enthusiastic about in the 90s... the notion that Bill Greer turned around and shot Kennedy in the head with a chrome handgun!

JT

David,

As I am not the only one to observe, this guy sent Chenay a copy of the extant Zapruder film, which (I am quite certain) must have shaken him up, since it does not represent what happened while he was there. Not to fault you, specifically, but why have you not followed the link I provided about Cheney specifically in post #4. It was originally published on February 5, 2008.

This is very bad. Typical Thompson, he doesn't even dare identify the source of the story. It originated John Costella and was published in my "New Proof of JFK film fakery", hhttp://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jim_fetz_080205_new_proof_of_jfk_fil.htm Do any of you think Chaney motoring forward is seen in the film? Here is a summary:

The evidence emerged as an unexpected outcome of the collation of eyewitness reports in Dealey Plaza conducted by John P. Costella, Ph.D., who co-edits assassinationresearch.com with Fetzer. Costella earned his Ph.D. in physics with a specialty in electromagnetism, including the physics of light and of moving objects. What he discovered were multiple, consistent and reinforcing reports that James Chaney, a motorcycle patrolman who was to the right rear of the presidential limousine, rode forward to tell Jesse Curry, Dallas Chief of Police—who was in the lead car with the head of the Secret Service in Dallas, Agent Forrest Sorrels, and a second Secret Service Agent, Winston Lawson—that the President had been shot. This led Chief Curry to issue instructions for the limousine to be escorted to Parkland Hospital, where the President would be pronounced dead 30 minutes later. Bobby Hargis, a motorcycle patrolman riding on the left rear, confirmed Chaney’s report. But this sequence is in neither the Zapruder film nor the Nix film.

This is just what I have come to expect from Josiah Thompson. Offer an atrophied and simplistic account of the evidence for Chaney's having motored forward, act as though I don't know what I am talking about, cite Chaney's response after having received a copy of the extant film--and then pretends that's all there is too it! He plays all of you for saps and you fall for it.

Jim

As we watch Zfilm the limo speeds off and no motorcycles follow them... NONE.

the rest of Chaney also makes sense...

Mr. STERN - You were clear that the sounds were sounds of shots?

Mr. HARGIS - Yes. sir: I knew they were shots.

Mr. STERN - All right, what did you do then? You say you parked your motorcycle?

Mr. HARGIS - Yes, uh-huh----

Mr. STERN - Where?

Mr. HARGIS - It was to the left-hand side of the street from---south side of Elm Street.

Mr. STERN - And then what did you---

Mr. HARGIS - I ran across the street looking over towards the railroad overpass and I remembered seeing people scattering and running and then I looked.

Jim F....

rather than attacking JT, can you offer anything other than CHANEY's own words that he went up ahead to the lead car?

Does anyone in the car corroborate the story?

Are any of the three motocycle men in McIntyre CHANEY?

and finally... in SUPPORT of the frontal shot... I offer this look at CHANEY and his mate as the shots are fired...

WHERE ARE THEY LOOKING?

(Note: FWIW, Chaney, the man closest to JFK outside the vehicle is NOT on the WCR witness list or is listed as the author of ANYTHING in the dallas archive.... but I'll keep looking)

Jim, where did CHANEY say he motored forward to the lead car? Sorry if I missed the reference - an interview with you?

DJ

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jim,

Why would anyone pay any attention to a guy who has contradicted himself again and again, as I have shown?

He has no special expertise. He is not a physician. He is not a ballistic expert. He is not a photographic or a

expert. In fact, in each of these areas of research, he has demonstrated his incompetence by his inconsistency.

Nothing Tink ever argues could SETTLE ANYTHING. Egad! When Mantik demonstrated that the X-rays were altered,

IT WAS OVER. When Bob explained that a brain had been substituted, IT WAS OVER. When we proved the film was

fake--as I have done here, repeatedly--IT WAS OVER. So I really cannot understand this infatuation with Tink.

When I presented "Reasoning about Assassinations" at Cambridge and published it in an international journal, IT

WAS OVER. All you have to know to prove conspiracy is properly locate where JFK was hit in the back. Then you

know that the wounds to his throat and to Connally required separate shots and separate shooters. IT'S OVER!

Jim

JF: (1) He has abandoned his "double-hit" analysis, which was the most important contribution of his book.

Indeed, given that analysis alone, how could he conclude it by claiming nothing in it proves conspiracy?

The double-hit BY ITSELF established there were at least two shooters in Dealey Plaza. So unless he has

lost all capacity to reason, his book PROVED A CONSPIRACY, yet he disavowed having proven conspiracy.

Jim, you are forgetting something.

If Tink's new position is correct, its over for the other side.

The fatal shot came from the front. Period.

No jet effect BS. Not neuromuscular reaction BS.

The shot came from the front.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Once again you miss the point entirely. Gil Toft and friends apparently sent copies of the Zapruder film and Altgens photo to numerous motorcyclists. Apparently, they were hoping the officers would look at the film and say: "That wasn't the way it happened. I was there and I know what happened. The Zapruder film has been doctored." If Chaney had ridden ahead in front of the limousine to deliver his message to Chief Curry, he could have told Toft just that. He could have said: "This film is fake. I took off like a bare-assed ape after the lead car and ran right by the limousine and nothing like this shows in the Zapruder film." This would have made Toft's and your day. But Chaney didn't do that. On the contrary, he remembered coming almost to a stop and watching Hargis run across the street in front of him. So now you don't believe what Chaney says. Priceless!!

By the way, in Murder from Within Newcomb and Adams back another wacky idea you were enthusiastic about in the 90s... the notion that Bill Greer turned around and shot Kennedy in the head with a chrome handgun!

JT

Part of the power of Costella’s new findings is that they can be appraised by anyone with access to the film, which is archived at the same site, and his collation of reports at Assassination Research 5/1 (2007), assassinationresearch/v5n1/v5n1costella.pdf . As illustrations of what he has uncovered, here are some of the reports from the officials who were involved:

* James Chaney (motorcycle patrolman on right rear of the Presidential limousine): “I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital and that Parkland was standing by.”

* Bobby Hargis (motorcycle patrolman on left rear of the Presidential limousine): “The motorcycle officer on the right side of the car was Jim Chaney. He immediately went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.”

* Winston Lawson (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle escort officer pulled along side our Lead Car and said the President had been shot. Chief Curry gave a signal over the radio for police to converge on the area of the incident.”

* Forrest Sorrels (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle patrolman pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled, ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer responded in the affirmative.”

* Chief Jesse Curry (in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “. . . about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney, rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there and he said, ‘Yes,’ and I said ‘Has somebody been shot?” And he said, ‘I think so.’”

There are multiple sources for their testimony, which is corroborated by that of others, including, for example, Marrion Baker, a Dallas Police Officer, who immediately thereafter entered the Book Depository and confronted Lee Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom. Costella’s study provides additional citations.

So what is there here that you do not understand? And simply because I once asked you about Greer--because a friend had shown me a photo with Kellerman sticking his finger into his left ear--you have been making the false claim that I ENDORSED the idea that Greer shot JFK, which I have addressed from time to time and have refuted many times.

In a 4.5 hour documentary, "JFK: The Assassination, the Cover-Up, and Beyond", which I produced in 1994, I explain the evidence on both sides, because it exists and deserves discussion. When logic and evidence are not on your side, alas, you resort to prevarication and fabrication, for which you shall be long remembered. That will be your enduring legacy.

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Josiah Thompson]

Professor Fetzer conveniently fails to mention two important facts that came to light when this issue was discussed three years ago on this Forum as “New Proof of JFK Film Fakery” (February 10, 2008). That’s where Fetzer used the quotes from Chaney, Hargis, Lawson, Sorrels and Chief Jesse Curry that he repeats now.

The first was the discussion of the Mel McIntire still photo that shows the lead car pulled far to the left under the Triple Underpass as the limousine passes it. Officer Chaney can be seen several hundred feet back as this happens.

The second is the report that Chief Curry later explained that Chaney rode up and told him what happened but this occurred “shortly before they drove onto Stemmons.” This location is west of the underpass on the entrance ramp to the Stemmons Freeway. Hence, it seems very likely that Chaney did just as he reported. He almost stopped in his tracks and watched Hargis run across Elm Street in front of him. Then, he trailed the limousine and finally caught up with Chief Curry in the lead car west of the Triple Underpass and told Curry what had happened. This is perfectly consistent with what we see in the Zapruder, Nix, Bell, and Daniels film and the Altgens 6 and Mel McIntire still photos. It is also completely consistent with what Winston Lawson, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry said happened.

This means that all witnesses except Bobby Hargis are scratched from the list of witnesses backing Professor Fetzer’s claim. And Hargis? He was right when he said Chaney “went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.” It just didn’t happen “immediately.”

JT

Once again you miss the point entirely. Gil Toft and friends apparently sent copies of the Zapruder film and Altgens photo to numerous motorcyclists. Apparently, they were hoping the officers would look at the film and say: "That wasn't the way it happened. I was there and I know what happened. The Zapruder film has been doctored." If Chaney had ridden ahead in front of the limousine to deliver his message to Chief Curry, he could have told Toft just that. He could have said: "This film is fake. I took off like a bare-assed ape after the lead car and ran right by the limousine and nothing like this shows in the Zapruder film." This would have made Toft's and your day. But Chaney didn't do that. On the contrary, he remembered coming almost to a stop and watching Hargis run across the street in front of him. So now you don't believe what Chaney says. Priceless!!

By the way, in Murder from Within Newcomb and Adams back another wacky idea you were enthusiastic about in the 90s... the notion that Bill Greer turned around and shot Kennedy in the head with a chrome handgun!

JT

Part of the power of Costella’s new findings is that they can be appraised by anyone with access to the film, which is archived at the same site, and his collation of reports at Assassination Research 5/1 (2007), assassinationresearch/v5n1/v5n1costella.pdf . As illustrations of what he has uncovered, here are some of the reports from the officials who were involved:

* James Chaney (motorcycle patrolman on right rear of the Presidential limousine): “I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital and that Parkland was standing by.”

* Bobby Hargis (motorcycle patrolman on left rear of the Presidential limousine): “The motorcycle officer on the right side of the car was Jim Chaney. He immediately went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.”

* Winston Lawson (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle escort officer pulled along side our Lead Car and said the President had been shot. Chief Curry gave a signal over the radio for police to converge on the area of the incident.”

* Forrest Sorrels (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle patrolman pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled, ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer responded in the affirmative.”

* Chief Jesse Curry (in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “. . . about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney, rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there and he said, ‘Yes,’ and I said ‘Has somebody been shot?” And he said, ‘I think so.’”

There are multiple sources for their testimony, which is corroborated by that of others, including, for example, Marrion Baker, a Dallas Police Officer, who immediately thereafter entered the Book Depository and confronted Lee Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom. Costella’s study provides additional citations.

So what is there here that you do not understand? And simply because I once asked you about Greer--because a friend had shown me a photo with Kellerman sticking his finger into his left ear--you have been making the false claim that I ENDORSED the idea that Greer shot JFK, which I have addressed from time to time and have refuted many times.

In a 4.5 hour documentary, "JFK: The Assassination, the Cover-Up, and Beyond", which I produced in 1994, I explain the evidence on both sides, because it exists and deserves discussion. When logic and evidence are not on your side, alas, you resort to prevarication and fabrication, for which you shall be long remembered. That will be your enduring legacy.

[Don Jeffries]

Jim,

Again, I simply thanked Josiah Thompson for posting an interview I hadn't seen before. I also suggested that Chaney's failure to contradict the inferences that the Zapruder film had been altered might also be referred to as an "unintended consequence."

Nothing I said should indicate that I feel this interview proves Chaney didn't ride forward, as the other evidence you've cited many times before suggests.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Martin, He did it right on this forum. Do some search around and you'll find it. Why not simply ask him?

Notice, by the way, that he has not responded to my list of inconsistencies, which further confirms them.

And his abandoning it is all the more suspect when Richard Feynman, a Nobel-prize winning physicist at

CalTech, had independently discovered the motion forward/motion back during a conversation with Lifton.

But I am very glad you cited this article about "Bedrock Evidence", which I had not seen before, but which

I shall address, since it demonstrates Tink's propensity for fallacious arguments and suppression of proof.

On page 3, for example, he claims that there was no through-and-through bullet hole in the windshield,

but he offers (as I explained in MURDER) a substitute windshield that was adduced by the Secret Service.

Discern the hole in the windshield, which I have circled and identified as "1". The hole is right where JFK's

left ear would be if his left ear were visible. Now compare the following close-ups (Tink's on the right):

where Tink claims the windshield on the right is the original, which is seen in the Altgens. What do you think?

The substitute has a spider-like configuration, the original a white spiral-nebula with a dark hole at the center.

Since I explain this in MURDER and reiterate it in THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX, who is he fooling?

Everyone who does not know the case well enough to not be taken in. That is his practice. That is who he is.

Josiah Thompson's position is not even coherent. He is on both sides of every issue. Consider the following:

(1) He has abandoned his "double-hit" analysis, which was the most important contribution of his book.

Indeed, given that analysis alone, how could he conclude it by claiming nothing in it proves conspiracy?

The double-hit BY ITSELF established there were at least two shooters in Dealey Plaza. So unless he has

lost all capacity to reason, his book PROVED A CONSPIRACY, yet he disavowed having proven conspiracy.

Jim,

As far as I know, Tink has not abandoned the "double-hit" scenario. Obviously I could be wrong but the last thing he wrote on the subject (as far as I know) was in his essay Bedrock Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination:

"If the President was struck in the head by a bullet from the rear, when did this happen? As we see, there is no longer any evidence that it happened between Z312 and Z313. Did it happen before Z312? The film indicates "No." Did it happen after Z313? By Z333 Kennedy's body is so low in the limousine that his head could not have been hit by a bullet from the rear. Hence, if Kennedy's head was hit by a bullet from the rear it must have occurred in the twenty frames that succeeded Z313. Once again, the Zapruder film may help us answer the question. By a close study of the film, Keith Fitzgerald has observed a number of clues in the sequence of frames following Z327 that a second hit to the head occurred here. It is too early to say that this has been confirmed but this may well be the case.

The observational studies mentioned above show what still can be learned from a careful examination of the films and photos from Dealey Plaza. A shot at Z313 from the right front and a second shot from the north end of Elm Street at Z328 would match exactly what the acoustics evidence tells us. By combining the acoustics evidence with the self-authenticating record of the films and photos taken in Dealey Plaza, we may be on our way to laying down a time-line for the event."

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Pat Speer]

My two cents. The primary motion of the head after the impact at 312.5 was not forward, nor backward, but down. This suggests the bullet impacted towards the top of the head, at the supposed exit, and not low on the head, at the small entrance noted at autopsy.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

This guy has a lot of nerve, I have to grant him that. He pulls the wool over this forum again and again. His job is to revise history and to distort evidence. How could Chaney have only motored forward at the entrance to the Stemmons Freeway? Egad! Chief Curry gave the order to move to the hospital at the Triple Underpass AFTER Chaney had told him the president had been shot! The evidence that John discovered and that I have quoted here makes Thompson's interpretation preposterous:

* James Chaney (motorcycle patrolman on right rear of the Presidential limousine): “I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital and that Parkland was standing by.”

* Bobby Hargis (motorcycle patrolman on left rear of the Presidential limousine): “The motorcycle officer on the right side of the car was Jim Chaney. He immediately went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.”

* Winston Lawson (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle escort officer pulled along side our Lead Car and said the President had been shot. Chief Curry gave a signal over the radio for police to converge on the area of the incident.”

* Forrest Sorrels (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle patrolman pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled, ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer responded in the affirmative.”

* Chief Jesse Curry (in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “. . . about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney, rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there and he said, ‘Yes,’ and I said ‘Has somebody been shot?” And he said, ‘I think so.’”

Moreover, he deliberately commits the methodological blunder--actually, it is the mechanism he employs to discount or suppress the evidence here--by implying that Chaney's recent response when shown the extant Zapruder film--which had to have come as a shock, since it must have been highly discrepant with his memories--has MORE PROBATIVE FORCE than the earlier and contemporaneous reports of Chief Curry, Bobby Hargis, Winston Lawson, Forrest Sorrels AND JAMES CHANEY.

Let me suggest that, having seen a film that was discrepant with his own personal experience, the enormity of the deception that has been perpetrated by the government--with a little help from its friends--would have stunned and overwhelmed him. Under those conditions, it would hardly be surprising that what he would say in that state of semi-shock would be vague and ambiguous. The very idea that he should have said, "That film is fake!", as Tink suggests, is simply absurd.

Once the limo had taken off, it left Chief Curry and the rest of the motorcade far behind, as we know from the photo showing bystanders waving at the Lincoln while Curry's car is still under the Triple Underpass. I have asked John to take a look at this thread to see if I have anything wrong, but this guy (Thompson) is pulling one of his patented intellectual stunts by attempting to discredit evidence that the film, which he repeatedly cites as "bedrock evidence", has been faked.

Professor Fetzer conveniently fails to mention two important facts that came to light when this issue was discussed three years ago on this Forum as “New Proof of JFK Film Fakery” (February 10, 2008). That’s where Fetzer used the quotes from Chaney, Hargis, Lawson, Sorrels and Chief Jesse Curry that he repeats now.

The first was the discussion of the Mel McIntire still photo that shows the lead car pulled far to the left under the Triple Underpass as the limousine passes it. Officer Chaney can be seen several hundred feet back as this happens.

The second is the report that Chief Curry later explained that Chaney rode up and told him what happened but this occurred “shortly before they drove onto Stemmons.” This location is west of the underpass on the entrance ramp to the Stemmons Freeway. Hence, it seems very likely that Chaney did just as he reported. He almost stopped in his tracks and watched Hargis run across Elm Street in front of him. Then, he trailed the limousine and finally caught up with Chief Curry in the lead car west of the Triple Underpass and told Curry what had happened. This is perfectly consistent with what we see in the Zapruder, Nix, Bell, and Daniels film and the Altgens 6 and Mel McIntire still photos. It is also completely consistent with what Winston Lawson, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry said happened.

This means that all witnesses except Bobby Hargis are scratched from the list of witnesses backing Professor Fetzer’s claim. And Hargis? He was right when he said Chaney “went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.” It just didn’t happen “immediately.”

JT

Once again you miss the point entirely. Gil Toft and friends apparently sent copies of the Zapruder film and Altgens photo to numerous motorcyclists. Apparently, they were hoping the officers would look at the film and say: "That wasn't the way it happened. I was there and I know what happened. The Zapruder film has been doctored." If Chaney had ridden ahead in front of the limousine to deliver his message to Chief Curry, he could have told Toft just that. He could have said: "This film is fake. I took off like a bare-assed ape after the lead car and ran right by the limousine and nothing like this shows in the Zapruder film." This would have made Toft's and your day. But Chaney didn't do that. On the contrary, he remembered coming almost to a stop and watching Hargis run across the street in front of him. So now you don't believe what Chaney says. Priceless!!

By the way, in Murder from Within Newcomb and Adams back another wacky idea you were enthusiastic about in the 90s... the notion that Bill Greer turned around and shot Kennedy in the head with a chrome handgun!

JT

Part of the power of Costella’s new findings is that they can be appraised by anyone with access to the film, which is archived at the same site, and his collation of reports at Assassination Research 5/1 (2007), assassinationresearch/v5n1/v5n1costella.pdf . As illustrations of what he has uncovered, here are some of the reports from the officials who were involved:

* James Chaney (motorcycle patrolman on right rear of the Presidential limousine): “I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital and that Parkland was standing by.”

* Bobby Hargis (motorcycle patrolman on left rear of the Presidential limousine): “The motorcycle officer on the right side of the car was Jim Chaney. He immediately went forward and announced to the Chief that the President had been shot.”

* Winston Lawson (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle escort officer pulled along side our Lead Car and said the President had been shot. Chief Curry gave a signal over the radio for police to converge on the area of the incident.”

* Forrest Sorrels (Secret Service Agent in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “A motorcycle patrolman pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled, ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer responded in the affirmative.”

* Chief Jesse Curry (in the lead car in front of the Presidential limousine): “. . . about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney, rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there and he said, ‘Yes,’ and I said ‘Has somebody been shot?” And he said, ‘I think so.’”

There are multiple sources for their testimony, which is corroborated by that of others, including, for example, Marrion Baker, a Dallas Police Officer, who immediately thereafter entered the Book Depository and confronted Lee Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom. Costella’s study provides additional citations.

So what is there here that you do not understand? And simply because I once asked you about Greer--because a friend had shown me a photo with Kellerman sticking his finger into his left ear--you have been making the false claim that I ENDORSED the idea that Greer shot JFK, which I have addressed from time to time and have refuted many times.

In a 4.5 hour documentary, "JFK: The Assassination, the Cover-Up, and Beyond", which I produced in 1994, I explain the evidence on both sides, because it exists and deserves discussion. When logic and evidence are not on your side, alas, you resort to prevarication and fabrication, for which you shall be long remembered. That will be your enduring legacy.

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Pat,

Your subjective impressions are no substitute for the objective studies of this, first, in SIX SECONDS,

pages 86 through 95, which Tink has now disavowed, and, second, by Richard Feynman, who explained

to David Lifton that the head first moves forward, then back.

Take a good look at what is by far the most impressive aspect of SIX SECONDS, which establishes all

by itself the existence of at least two shooters and therefore of a conspiracy. Then contrast that with the

author's denial that his book "proves conspiracy" on page 246!

Jim

My two cents. The primary motion of the head after the impact at 312.5 was not forward, nor backward,

but down. This suggests the bullet impacted towards the top of the head, at the supposed exit, and not

low on the head, at the small entrance noted at autopsy.

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jim,

You must have posted this on another thread, because I am looking for the response I put up and cannot

find it here. There are so many proofs that have made it "over for the other side" that I am profoundly

troubled that you are still holding out for something from an inconsistent and unreliable source like Tink.

All that is necessary to know that "it's over" for the other side is to locate the wound to JFK's back, which

was about 5.5" below the collar and to the right of the spinal column, which, as I explain in "Reasoning

about Assassinations", presented at Cambridge and published in an international peer-reviewed journal.

It was "over" for the other side when David Mantik determined that the blow-out to the back of the skull

had been "patched" by using some material that was far too dense to be human bone, where the outline of

the patched area "P" closely corresponds to the wound as described my dozens and dozens of witnesses.

And it was "over" when I discovered that you can actually see the blow out in a later frame of Zapruder,

374, which those who were editing and revising it apparently overlooked in their efforts to conceal the

true causes of his death from the American people, which BY ITSELF refutes authenticity of the film:

Since Mantik's discovery was published in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998) and blew the cover-up out of

the water, what was Tink's response? He referred to the book as "ASSASSINATED SCIENCE", even though

it was presenting the most important developments in the history of the study of the JFK medical evidence.

And what is there not to understand about the blow-out WHEN YOU CAN SEE IT IN FRAME 374? Don't

you understand that this frame, BY ITSELF, proves that the film is a fabrication? How you can continue

to have any lingering faith in Tink Thompson is simply beyond me. You need to give this more thought.

Jim

JF: (1) He has abandoned his "double-hit" analysis, which was the most important contribution of his book.

Indeed, given that analysis alone, how could he conclude it by claiming nothing in it proves conspiracy?

The double-hit BY ITSELF established there were at least two shooters in Dealey Plaza. So unless he has

lost all capacity to reason, his book PROVED A CONSPIRACY, yet he disavowed having proven conspiracy.

Jim, you are forgetting something.

If Tink's new position is correct, its over for the other side.

The fatal shot came from the front. Period.

No jet effect BS. Not neuromuscular reaction BS.

The shot came from the front.

Edited January 6, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Pat Speer]

Jim, the forum has had a series of nasty knock 'em down, drag 'em outs lately, with the net result being that, while the moderators themselves prefer that members police themselves, many forum members are hoping for more moderation. I have proposed a compromise, which may or may not have a positive impact. My compromise is that, when MEMBERS note that another member is in violation of Rule iv of the Forum rules, which reads

(iv) Members should not make personal attacks on other members. Nor should references be made to their abilities as researchers. Most importantly, the motivations of the poster should not be questioned. At all times members should concentrate on what is being said, rather than who is saying it. It is up to the reader to look at the biography submitted by the poster, to judge whether they are telling the truth or not. The word “xxxx” is banned from use on the forum.

they should bring it to the member in violation's attention, so that he or she can correct their post, without the involvement of a moderator. As a MEMBER, not a moderator, I am alerting you that you are in violation of Rule iv on several of your posts in this thread, and am asking you to correct these posts. (In essence, you can question Thompson's conclusions, but not his motivation. This makes references to his "pulling the wool" over people's eyes, etc. a violation.) As a MEMBER, you are equally free to invoke Rule iv should you note a violation. Please do so. By invoking Rule iv whenever it is violated, we can restore some level of decorum to the forum, and foster more discussion of the evidence, and less of each other.

This, admittedly, is an experiment. I hope all members will start invoking Rule iv when violated, as opposed to responding tit for tat, or waiting for a moderator to jump in.

Thanks, Pat

Edited January 6, 2012 by Pat Speer

[Josiah Thompson]

Thanks Martin for catching this. How long has this article been sitting out there? Years. Yep, this still seems to me the most reasonable explanation of the evidence we have.

JT

Josiah Thompson's position is not even coherent. He is on both sides of every issue. Consider the following:

(1) He has abandoned his "double-hit" analysis, which was the most important contribution of his book.

Indeed, given that analysis alone, how could he conclude it by claiming nothing in it proves conspiracy?

The double-hit BY ITSELF established there were at least two shooters in Dealey Plaza. So unless he has

lost all capacity to reason, his book PROVED A CONSPIRACY, yet he disavowed having proven conspiracy.

Jim,

As far as I know, Tink has not abandoned the "double-hit" scenario. Obviously I could be wrong but the last thing he wrote on the subject (as far as I know) was in his essay Bedrock Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination:

"If the President was struck in the head by a bullet from the rear, when did this happen? As we see, there is no longer any evidence that it happened between Z312 and Z313. Did it happen before Z312? The film indicates "No." Did it happen after Z313? By Z333 Kennedy's body is so low in the limousine that his head could not have been hit by a bullet from the rear. Hence, if Kennedy's head was hit by a bullet from the rear it must have occurred in the twenty frames that succeeded Z313. Once again, the Zapruder film may help us answer the question. By a close study of the film, Keith Fitzgerald has observed a number of clues in the sequence of frames following Z327 that a second hit to the head occurred here. It is too early to say that this has been confirmed but this may well be the case.

The observational studies mentioned above show what still can be learned from a careful examination of the films and photos from Dealey Plaza. A shot at Z313 from the right front and a second shot from the north end of Elm Street at Z328 would match exactly what the acoustics evidence tells us. By combining the acoustics evidence with the self-authenticating record of the films and photos taken in Dealey Plaza, we may be on our way to laying down a time-line for the event."