What is accomplished by moving Shot #1 up Elm over 10 feet?

[David Josephs]

As I've been developing my article which traces the alteration of the Zfilm to the ultimate alteration of ce585 with the offering of the fraudulent ce884, the first thing that jumps out at me are the results of the first 3 surveys regarding shot #1 and how this was changed for the WC's version.

On ce535 - a version which is readable directly from WEST - we see the location marked for Shot #1 as the same as was found in Dec for the SS and Feb for the FBI: 3+81.3 @ elevation 423.07.   When the shamefully admitted ce884 was finally uncovered, this changes to 3+71.1 at elevation 423.75.    a Difference of 10.2 feet

(note: Elm has an 18.3':1' run:rise, for every 18.3' horizontal Elm drops 1' vertically.)

Elevation 423.07' - 423.75' = .68'   .68' x 18.3' = 12.44'  = the distance between these two spots is 12.44' - 10.2' = 2.24 feet further than ce884 suggests.
2.24' is the distance between 207-208 on the first ce884 (yellow).  This equated to the limo moving at almost 30mph for those 2 frames then slowing down to around 11mph in the next frame.  In the white version, 208 is changed to 210 slowing that speed from 30mph to just under 10mph - much more acceptable and realistic... but moving the same physical location to a different frame means we lose the 2.24' and wind up with a 423.75' elevation @ station 3+81.3.

To move from 3+71.1 to 3+81.3 the elevation would no longer be 423.07 but is 10.2'/18.3' = .56' vertically lower than 3+81.3
Elev 423.75' - .56' = Elev 423.19 = 10.2 feet down Elm from 3+71.1 = 3+81.3

So where is 423.07 since the opnly fixed frame in this game was z207 @ 423.75 @ 3+71.1?  
Elev 423.19' - Elev 423.07' = .12' * 18.3' = 2.196' further down Elm.  3+81.3 + 2.196 = 3+83.496 or 3+83.5

208 and 210 cannot both be 2.24' from 207.  Shaneyfelt and Frazier placed the maximum of 3 shots where they made the most sense since the only accurate frame # we have for a shot is 313.  ce884 also occurs after Tague comes forward.  The "Shot that Missed" becomes a shot which was never officially acknowledged in the WCR other than on ce535.   The last image is an overlay of ce585 and the clear plat showing that shot notations are still showing a 3rd shot 35-40 feet past z313... and is why ce884 ends at z313

 The infamous WCD298 which was the result of the Dec survey also shows shot #3 down by Altgens at the foot of the stairs.  Whether this was a real shot supported by real evidence is hard to tell.  3 surveys, the surveyor's notes and a number of witnesses state a shot was fired after z313 in the area by the foot of the Knoll stairs.  

WCD1, the FBI report, concludes 3 shots = 3 hits.  The surveys need to match this conclusion.  Rather than place a shot at the top of Elm during the turn onto Elm and the creation of the amazing Position A, it was decided to put the shot near station 5+00 some 35 feet further down Elm than Z313.  

The final piece of the puzzle related to the WCR survey plat is the difference between the actual route of the limo, and the frame number dots created by Shaneyfelt and documented in West's notes.

So, other than not wanting to show all the shots fired, but only 3 until May 1964, then 2 after that...  do the conflicts in the evidence for shot #1 point to something else other than hiding 2 real shots too close together to be possible from one shooter?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2017 by David Josephs
space

[Brad Milch]

Hi, David:

One can thank the likes of Max Holland, Gerald Posner, Vince Bugliosi, Dale Meyers, Dan Rather & countless other 'Oswald did it' town criers for butchering the truth about where shot #1 really occurred to a point where it's probably the most misunderstood, contestable, debatable & opinionated topic in the entire JFK assassination story; making much worse the hatchet job the original WC investigators & final Report writers made.

Today, Education Forum readers that get the opportunity to visit Dealey plaza will hear a multitude of opinions as to where shot #1 occurred on Elm Street from visitors & on-site marketers (ranging from 'tour guides' to sellers of books, DVD's, print  & visuals media) when they tour the site. It's probably the most basic, misunderstood aspect of the assassination itself.

A salute to you, Good Sir, for attempting to make sense out what has been served to the public over the years as disguised garbage.

Sincerely,

Brad Milch 

[Michael Walton]

Respectfully, I disagree with the Zfilm alteration.  I think the one we've been seeing for years is the one that came out of Abe's camera. I also believe that not everything is a conspiracy in the case. Months ago I made a combo video that pretty closely synched up the FBI reenactment film with the Zfilm. I wish I had kept it but I got rid of it because I was so pXXXed off because of all of the batXXt crazy stuff I was reading on this forum.  I said to myself you know what? Fxxxk it.

But anyway, the clearest shot at the earliest possible moment was right when you see Kennedy appear from behind the sign in the Zfilm and I say "clear" because in the reenactment film, the large oak tree obstructed a clear shot from the 6th floor until that moment.

Sure enough, this is when he first reacts to the shot and then from there it lasts from first to 313 for about 6 seconds or so.  No wonder Josh Thompson called his book way back in the late 1960's Six Seconds in Dallas.  He got it right then.

The Bad Guys were not stupid - they had to know that in order to frame Oswald, they had to make his fake shooting somewhat plausible in the eyes of police and investigators.  Why in the world would they have taken a first shot way up earlier on Elm Street? It doesn't make sense and flies against plausibility and common sense. To take this even further, if it had really been Oswald shooting, alone, why in the world didn't he just shoot Kennedy as he was coming toward the building on Houston? There's a very good reason for that - the Bad Guys planned it out to have the crossfire start down on Elm because that's where they felt they could have the most coverage, most hidden places, and most accessibility to get away with it.  And that's pretty much what happened.

***

Brad - I hate to say it but from the garbage I've read elsewhere and on this forum, CTers do NOT always help the case by seeking the truth.  As a matter of fact, they do the opposite.  Their idea of the truth is truly crazy s##t and off the reservation, kooky stuff. Unfortunately, these same people played right into the hands of people like Posner et al. Mention a CT to him and his ilk, and all they have to do is smirk and roll their eyes.  Then people come here and elsewhere and read the crazy s##t and they can't help but go along with Posner. Sad but true.

[David Von Pein]

 

Edited January 12, 2017 by David Von Pein

[Brad Milch]

@Michael:

I was listening to the latest Abraham Bolden radio interview last night (posted at the 'Tube') & Bolden believes the suspected would-be assassins that escaped law enforcement in Chicago a few weeks before Dallas were the same bad guys that took JFK out in Dallas. He firmly believes this. 4 shooters.

Does an assassination team always work smoothly & in harmony with each other? In the ambush of Bonnie & Clyde in May 1934, one of the posse members jumped the gun & his trigger finger went to work ahead of the initial plan, instantly killing Clyde & possibly Bonnie. The former Marine sharpshooter got off two fast rounds before any of the remaining posse members could fire any shots. The rest of the ambush was overkill.

Some murderers (people & animals) get anxious & blow their ambush plans, others don't.

The spectators that were present during JFK's ambush will always have an advantage over the rest of us in attempting to understand what happened to JFK & entourage, yet many of them cannot agree with each other.

When asked in a fairly recent online interview if the Zapruder film accurately depicts what Mary Moorman (Kramer) saw, she replied 'not really'.

For many, David Lifton & Doug Horne have settled the issue of if the Z-film was monkeyed with by 1963 government operatives or not. They both believe & have presented evidence & witnesses that it was.

Brad Milch

Edited January 12, 2017 by Brad Milch

[David Josephs]

Thanks for the kind words Mitch...

If the Zfilm was an original representation of what occurred, why bother with 4 recreations?  

Why use 161 or 171 as the "first" frame of the sequence when we have the entire film?

Why?

April 27, 1964, after 3 surveys finding arriving at the same results:

"We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine
whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to
frame 190.  We could locate the position on the ground which
corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish
by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the
President prior to this point.  Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy,
but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin."

Why?

There are 6 different frames on which shots are located and the experts questioning how LIFE knew the frame #'s for the 1st and 2nd shots...

Now let me take it a step further....  Shaneyfelt took the established frames locations along WEST's surveyed route (along the "+" signs) and moved the limo in a southerly direction by 1.1 feet which resulted in a change in JFK's position at that frame by also moving down Elm by .9 foot.  

.9 foot is the plug figure used in ce884 for the distance between 161 and 166, which originally was 168 and 171.  The information provided in WCD298 and all the ce885=ce895 exhibits is painfully incorrect by a HUGE factor.

An example...  there is a 10 inch vertical difference between the recreation JFK and the actual JFK.  Hitting a mark on the back of the stand-in winds up being 15.25' short of where JFK would actually be.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the adjusted frame for the first view that the marksman had of the President's stand-in coming out from under the tree? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is frame 210 and has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 893 and represents the 10-inch adjustment for the difference in the height of the car as compared with frame 207. 

Attached is CE893 as mentioned showing frame 210 and claiming this represents the 10" vertical movement from frame 207.  Again, moving 10" vertically moves the limo forward 15.25'  (10"/12" = .833 x 18.3' = 15.25' horiztonally for a 10" vertical movement)

As Chris D. helped me understand, the line of sight for 166 and 171 after Shaneyfelt's movement, is the same.  Yet when you compare where the limo is when JFK is at 166 to where Shaneyfelt put him for 171 we find 171 is further up Elm than 166...  ooops, not possible.  The inset is frame z168, still before 171 and not yet reaching the lane stripe.  If the limo was actually where Shaneyfelt put it for 171, the limo would be 3-4 feet short of that stripe.

This is the primae facia evidence for FBI alteration of the evidence in order to make it virtually impossible to piece back together - I believe Tom Wilson came to the same conclusion.  ce884 represents the breadcrumbs left over from the alteration of information.  

If you can contend that the 132-133, 156-157, 207-212, 302-303 and 315-316 evidence of splicing, tearing and/or removal of frames does not equate to alteration, fine.  That the 6 plus feet of film at the archive, supposedly 0183, does not have 0183 printed on it without a splice attaching that piece is in reality the camera original.

I'm not going to get into a discussion over "whether or not"...  I am going to continue to present the evidence of what the FBI did, starting with WCD298 up thru ce884 and how these two findings are in direct conflict with each other

Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by
the first bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President
by the third and fatal bullet.  The report will also conclude that the
bullets were fired by one person located in the sixth floor southeast
corner window of the TSBD building.

    As our investigation now stands, however, we have not shown
that these events could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested
above.  All we have is a reasonable hypothesis which appears to be
supported by the medical testimony but which has not been checked out
against the physical facts at the scene of the assassination.

---
I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession,
submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service,
are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will present a
completely misleading picture.
 

At this point, April 27, 1964, the primary reports offered related to the Dealey activity are the FBI's WCD298, The SS's ce875, FBI's ce884, and WCR's ce585.
The conclusion still at this point, was 3 shots = 3 hits at z220, z313, z350 yet LIFE is telling the WC the shot was at z190.

That's an awful lot of confusion for a situation where you have a filmed record of the event which supposedly is THE ACCURATE ACCOUNT of what occurred.

 

 

 

Edited September 11, 2017 by David Josephs

[Chris Newton]

13 hours ago, Brad Milch said:

Does an assassination team always work smoothly & in harmony with each other? In the ambush of Bonnie & Clyde in May 1934, one of the posse members jumped the gun & his trigger finger went to work ahead of the initial plan, instantly killing Clyde & possibly Bonnie. The former Marine sharpshooter got off two fast rounds before any of the remaining posse members could fire any shots. The rest of the ambush was overkill.

The tactical plan for snipers carrying out an ambush is different than a hasty infantry ambush in the military parlance. Military snipers normally work in 2 x 2 man teams (sniper and spotter) with a security element (usually a squad or platoon of reg. infantry). A regular infantry platoon hasty ambush normally has more elements, such as a SAW gunner and maybe a mortar team. There are old US Army training films online that go into great detail about infantry and sniper tactics and they haven't changed much in the last 60 years. If you do research it, go look at the classic "L" ambush because I think that may be enlightening.

[Brad Milch]

@Chris & David:

In the spirit of aiding those Education Forum readers following this thread with interest, allow me to present some questions for those non-members to aid in their personal analysis & conclusions about this cold case:

From what you know of this case in your studies, does the ambush of JFK & entourage on Elm Street suggest a sophisticated military type ambush or (as 'Oswald did it' preachers like EF's own David Von Pein's well publicized take on the case)  a happenstance situation where an amateur, solely by himself, chose a spot in a building that happened to be free of internal witnesses, cleared JFK's security & other outside obstacles & created the damage that resulted after his/her gunfire in Dealey Plaza over 53 years ago?

To Z-film alteration believers or skeptics, wasn't the first indication that something was wrong with the Z-film introduced to the world by Life magazine (purchasers & owners of the film), who told us JFK looked back to the TSBD from his parade car traversing Elm Street & was shot in the neck by Oswald (supposedly stationed there in the 'sniper's nest' with his weapon)? Did this actually happen, was it ever in the Z-film & was it's absence merely a big lie; the first of many to follow by early investigators & MSM supporting them? Was the early stages of the 'single bullet theory' supposed to be the reverse of what it became in 1964, namely, was JFK supposed to have been shot in the throat (while facing his TSBD assailant) & that shot exiting JFK's back, going on to strike Gov Connally, the chrome windshield strip, the parade car's windshield and/or James Tague? Was the apparent editing imposed on the Z-film evidence of 1963-1964 government CYA?

Interested persons today that recognize the Zapruder film as a CIA MSM deception tool ask hard questions never asked by a society blindly trusting US institutions & agencies in 1963: questions like what the heck was Life Magazine doing telling Hoover's 1963 FBI how JFK's ambush supposedly occurred & why wasn't Hoover protesting & retaliating against the corporation?

It may seem to some that David is presenting early stages of government investigators trying to CYA & explain an ambush away as the work of a solo, lucky shooter in a building behind the doomed President.

People enter all sorts of ambushes every day, all over the globe. Not all of them are sophisticated military tactics. Not all ambushes terminate in death of the victim. Some victims suffer monetary & personal possessions loss. Some never realize they've been victimized in an ambush: for example: the grocery store cashier that charges someone for groceries not bagged & pockets the money spent later when the customer fails to notice the loss & return to the store for a refund. That rip off, like the person enticed to meet someone for an amorous escapade that ends up beaten & robbed are both examples of common, every day ambushes executed on innocent victims globally. Sometimes amateur perpetrators are the culprits. Sometimes it's smooth, professional criminals.

Ambushes are an unfortunate part of our world. Not all ambushes are recognized or avoidable.

Brad Milch

PS: What do the concerned researchers in this thread have to say to former Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden's well publicized belief that JFK killers in Dallas escaped Chicago & Federal law enforcement in Chicago a few weeks before the slaughter in Dallas in a planned ambush of JFK in Chicago that was thwarted & subsequently covered up by Chicago & Federal law enforcement agencies (namely: U.S. Secret Service)?

Mr. Bolden describes an agenda driven mindset that is evidenced by Life Magazine's description of the JFK ambush they presented globally a week following JFK's, Officer Tippit's & Lee Oswald's violent deaths in Dallas, namely: deceive the global public as opposed to reporting the truth to them.

Tie this research into Bolden's comments & you just might convince Mr. Von Pein's many confused followers to follow the path to the light.

 

 

Edited January 14, 2017 by Brad Milch

[Chris Newton]

7 hours ago, Brad Milch said:

From what you know of this case in your studies, does the ambush of JFK & entourage on Elm Street suggest a sophisticated military type ambush or (as 'Oswald did it' preachers like EF's own David Von Pein's well publicized take on the case)  a happenstance situation where an amateur, solely by himself, chose a spot in a building that happened to be free of internal witnesses, cleared JFK's security & other outside obstacles & created the damage that resulted after his/her gunfire in Dealey Plaza over 53 years ago?

I was never a military sniper. I grew up in a family of sportsmen and was given my first real gun at age 10. I was an M1 armor crewman solely because I wanted to fire the baddest direct fire weapon on the planet. Later I served as an Infantry Squad Leader.

I agree, (along with many other veterans), that the assassination has, to steal a term, "all the fingerprints" of a well planned military operation.

I think the myth of the "extant" snipers nest, weapon, shot sequence, etc.  is sheer folly.

[Chris Davidson]

On 1/11/2017 at 3:32 PM, David Josephs said:

On ce535 - a version which is readable directly from WEST - we see the location marked for Shot #1 as the same as was found in Dec for the SS and Feb for the FBI: 3+81.3 @ elevation 423.07.   When the shamefully admitted ce884 was finally uncovered, this changes to 3+71.1 at elevation 423.75.    a Difference of 10.2 feet

Elevation 423.07' - 423.75' = .68'   .68' x 18.3' = 12.44'  = the distance between these two spots is 12.44' - 10.2' = 2.24 feet further than ce884 suggests.
2.24' is the distance between 207-208 on the first ce884 (yellow).  This equated to the limo moving at almost 30mph for those 2 frames then slowing down to around 11mph in the next frame.  In the white version, 208 is changed to 210 slowing that speed from 30mph to just under 10mph - much more acceptable and realistic... but moving the same physical location to a different frame means we lose the 2.24' and wind up with a 423.75' elevation @ station 3+81.3.

To move from 3+71.1 to 3+81.3 the elevation would no longer be 423.07 but is 10.2'/18.3' = .56' vertically lower than 3+81.3
Elev 423.75' - .56' = Elev 423.19 = 10.2 feet down Elm from 3+71.1 = 3+81.3

So, other than not wanting to show all the shots fired, but only 3 until May 1964, then 2 after that...  do the conflicts in the evidence for shot #1 point to something else other than hiding 2 real shots too close together to be possible from one shooter?

 

 

It's always a pleasure to provide supporting documentation from the WC that has them stepping on their collective -------s.

[George Sawtelle]

Thank you David for your excellent analysis. You seem to have a good grip on the survey data. 

Is it possible to determine the elevation and station of frame Z212? If it is possible then we would have a point on the Zap film that can be related to an exact spot on the Zap film to a ground location. Apparently Z212 is the last frame before the limo goes behind the sign from Zapruder´s perspective.

[Chris Davidson]

9 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

It's always a pleasure to provide supporting documentation from the WC that has them stepping on their collective -------s.

Still stepping.

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/207 ballistics.jp

[Chris Davidson]

52.78"- 39.24"=13.54"-10"= 3.54"/12"= .295ft x 18.3ft = 5.3985ft - .9ft = 4.4985ft / 5 frames = .8997ft per frame x 18.3fps = 16.46451ft per sec / 1.47ft (1mph) = 11.200 mph

Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to ascertain the speed of the Presidential limousine at the time of the assassination? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313. 
This was found to run elapsed time from the film standpoint which runs at 18.3 frames a second, runs for a total of 8.3 seconds. 
This distance is 136.1 feet, and this can be calculated then to 11.2 miles per hour. 
Mr. SPECTER. Is that a constant average speed or does that speed reflect any variations in the movement of the car? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is the overall average from 161 to 313. It does not mean that it was traveling constantly at 11.2, because it was more than likely going faster in some areas and slightly slower in some areas. It is only an average speed over the entire run.

Shaneyfelt uses a different method of determining averages than I do.

[Chris Davidson]

btw David,

 

Extant z plotted between z161-z168 = 13.44mph average = 1.08ft per frame

 

Since the plotting of Station# 3+29.2 = z161 and z168 in two separate CE884’s supplied, I think it would be reasonable to look for another area on CE884 where a six/seven frame spread at approx. the same speed would provide a total elevation change result.

 

For instance:

 

Z249-z255 = 6frames with an elevation change of .33ft and 6.4ft traveled = 13.28mph, close to 13.44.

 

.33ft x 12” = 3.96inches

 

Or, just refer back to the previous posting equation of .295ft and add the elev of .05ft from z161-z166 = .345ft = 4.14inches

 

TREASURY DEPARTMENT

UNlTED STATES SECRET SERVICE

FIELD FORCE

Protective Assignment of S/A Bennett on 11122/63

at Dallas, Texas

Air Force Two landed at Love Field, Dallas, Texas at 11:35 A.M. Upon deplaning, I covered the fence and press areas. The President's plane arrived at approximately 11 :38 A.M. I stayed with the President and First Lady during the time they greeted the crowd on the apron and along the fence. The greeting lasted for about 10 minutes and the President/First Lady entered their car and the motorcade planned to depart. I asked while moving towards the follow-up car what position I should take, Mr. Roberts informed me that I should take the right rear seat of the follow-up. I took this position and held it during the entire motorcade. I left this rear seat position at one point in the trip to assist in getting well-wishers away from the President's auto. About thirty minutes after leaving Love Field about 12:25 P.M., the Motorcade entered an intersection and then proceeded down a grade. At this point the well-wishers numbered but a few; the motorcade continued down this grade enroute to the Trade Mart. At this point I heard what_sounded like a fire-cracker. I immediately looked from the right/crowd/physical area/and looked towards the President who was seated in the right rear seat of his limousine open convertible. At the moment I looked at the back of the President I heard another fire-cracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder. A second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the President's head. I immediately hollered "he's hit'' and reached for the AR-15 located on the floor of the rear seat. Special Agent Hickey had already picked-up the AR-I5. We peered towards the rear and particularly the right side of the area. I had drawn my revolver when I saw S/A Hickey had the AR15. I was unable to see anything or one that could have fired the shots. The President's car immediately kicked into high gear and the follow-up car followed.

The President's auto and the follow-up proceeded to the Parkland Hospital. Upon arriving at the hospital's parking lot, I was instructed by ASAIC Roberts to stay with the Vice-President who had followed us into the parking lot. I immediately went to the Vice-President's auto and accompanied him to a room on the ground floor of the hospital. I then continued with the Vice-President back to Washington, D.C. where I was relieved.

[signature]

Glen A. Bennett

Special Agent

11-23-63

 

[Tom Neal]

Bennett's testimony is frequently dismissed by several long-term EF members because he is "looking in the wrong direction" when the shot was fired. My response has been; when exactly did this shot occur on the Z-film? None have responded. When asked exactly when still photos were taken of Bennett looking "right" and not at JFK no one responded.

Bennett himself states that he was looking "right" when he heard a shot. He was seated on the right hand side of the car and per SS procedure SHOULD have been looking right. He further states that upon hearing the shot he immediately looked at the President, saw the impact of a second shot which struck his back, and turned back to the right looking for the source of the shot.

Unless a still photo was taken during the second or two Bennett was looking at JFK he would be seen looking to the right. Considering the lack of a consensus, as to the precise time of the shot, can we determine the direction Bennett was looking on every Z-frame when that shot might have occurred? Not in my opinion...

There is a paragraph or two in one of Hill's books where Paul Landis states that at the time he boarded AF-1 after the assassination he was essentially a mental basket case and was not pleased with himself for falling apart like this. He compares his state of mind to the professional manner in which Glenn Bennett sat with notebook in hand writing down his observations of the shooting.

Bennett stated the time and location as to when he made these notes which are on record. Many members here dismiss this fact, and state that he 'made the notes the next day' to buttress the autopsy conclusions AFTER the autopsy had revealed the back wound.

The fact that Landis not only provides evidence as to when and where Bennett wrote these notes, the circumstances he describes most definitely would remain in his memory. If Landis made up this statement, WHY would he admit to behavior that he himself was ashamed of? He could simply have stated that he was impressed with Bennett's professional behavior when every one else was bouncing off the walls. That would be a perfectly credible statement.

IMO, Bennett saw what he says he saw.