Jump to content


Spartacus

Kellerman's testimony helps prove Purvis/Fetzer


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 26 January 2012 - 01:23 AM

Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.


Doesn’t this suggest shots well after 313 since we KNOW Hill does not reach the limo until z340, and JAckie is not on the trunk until much later..

Posted Image


The gif below is from z350-400... This would be the only time that Kellerman would see them both on the back of the limo...

"Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.

Is this how y'all see it?
DJ

#2 Kathleen Collins

Kathleen Collins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,818 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 02:25 AM

Is this how y'all see it?
DJ


If there were a flurry of shots after Z-313, who were they trying to kill? Kennedy can't be seen in the car. Jackie, in her pink suit, was atop the trunk and Agent Clint Hill is trying to get on the trunk to help her back into the car. It was really lucky that she didn't get hurt. Could the flurry have come from the overpass?

Kathy C

#3 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,954 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 26 January 2012 - 05:48 AM

See Kellerman testimony............How many shots could there have been ?

The SS called them a “flurry “ of shots..that came into the limo..
Roy H. Kellerman-'.''

#4 Thomas H. Purvis

Thomas H. Purvis

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5,055 posts

Posted 26 January 2012 - 07:34 PM

Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.


Doesn’t this suggest shots well after 313 since we KNOW Hill does not reach the limo until z340, and JAckie is not on the trunk until much later..

Posted Image


The gif below is from z350-400... This would be the only time that Kellerman would see them both on the back of the limo...

"Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.

Is this how y'all see it?
DJ



Unfortunately, it does not "prove" anything.

It does however serve to support the other testimonies as to when the third shot impact occurred.

In fact, if one will correlate the testimonies of Kellerman and Greer regarding transmission over the radio, with the testimonies of Agent Hill, they will find other testimonies which, when all placed into perspective, will serve to indicat that the third shot impact occurred just as James Altgens said it did.

Directly in front of where he was standing.

Tom

P.S. And of course Nellie as well as JBC have repeatedly stated that the third shot impact which blew cerebral tissue all over them, occurred AFTER JBC was leaned over in the seat with his head in Nellie's lap.

From this, and the survey plats and survey notes in my possession, it would now appear that the Warren Commission was severely lacking in their attempt at making one of the three shots (the third shot) disappear.

#5 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 26 January 2012 - 08:34 PM


Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.


Doesn’t this suggest shots well after 313 since we KNOW Hill does not reach the limo until z340, and JAckie is not on the trunk until much later..

Posted Image


The gif below is from z350-400... This would be the only time that Kellerman would see them both on the back of the limo...

"Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.

Is this how y'all see it?
DJ



Unfortunately, it does not "prove" anything.

It does however serve to support the other testimonies as to when the third shot impact occurred.

In fact, if one will correlate the testimonies of Kellerman and Greer regarding transmission over the radio, with the testimonies of Agent Hill, they will find other testimonies which, when all placed into perspective, will serve to indicat that the third shot impact occurred just as James Altgens said it did.

Directly in front of where he was standing.

Tom

P.S. And of course Nellie as well as JBC have repeatedly stated that the third shot impact which blew cerebral tissue all over them, occurred AFTER JBC was leaned over in the seat with his head in Nellie's lap.

From this, and the survey plats and survey notes in my possession, it would now appear that the Warren Commission was severely lacking in their attempt at making one of the three shots (the third shot) disappear.



Yes Tom... supports the other statements about the final shot location... but does not agree with your 3 shots 3 hits conclusion....

There was a frontal shot to his head from the front... whether this is the left or right temple entrance... who knows since we've never seen the actual authentic evidence...
Yet there are so many people supporting a GK shot... as opposed to any other spot in the entire Plaza...

Nobody runs to the south knoll, Dal Tex, or even the TSBD (Baker only goes cause he sees the pigeons fly off the roof)

Mr. BELIN - All right. Did you see or hear or do anything else after you heard the first noise?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. As I was looking up, all these pigeons began to fly up to the top of the buildings here and I saw those come up and start flying around.
Mr. BELIN - From what building, if you know, do you think those pigeons came from?
Mr. BAKER - I wasn't sure, but I am pretty sure they came from the building right on the northwest corner.

In building the case for z alteration, this is yet another brick...

#6 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 26 January 2012 - 10:00 PM

See Kellerman testimony............How many shots could there have been ?

The SS called them a “flurry “ of shots..that came into the limo..
Roy H. Kellerman-'.''



Mr. KELLERMAN. President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There have got to be more than three shots.

JFK
TWO IN THE HEAD
ONE IN THE SHOULDER
ONE IN THE NECK

JC
CHEST
WRIST
THIGH

Mr. KELLERMAN. Entry into this man's head was right below that wound, right here.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the bottom of the hairline immediately to the right of the ear about the lower third of the ear?

How is this anything but near the right temple? "TO THE RIGHT OF THE EAR"
How is it poossible to locate something to the right of the right ear and have it be in the BACK of the head?
and do we have any idea 2which photo he is referring to?

Where is this entrance wound?



Mr. KELLERMAN. Right. But it was in the hairline, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. In his hairline?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Near the end of his hairline?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. What was the size of that aperture?
Mr. KELLERMAN. The little finger.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the diameter of the little finger.

Posted Image

#7 Guest_James H. Fetzer_*

Guest_James H. Fetzer_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 January 2012 - 10:10 PM

David,

Excellent post! I think Thomas Purvis is not quite up-to-speed on the extensive debate over Clint Hill's testimony: that he rushed forward, pushed Jackie down, lay across their bodies and peered down into a fist-sized hole in the back of JFK's head! What you have found, of course, is confirmation that he was lying across their bodies--all before the limo reached the TUP. If Tom wants more on this, there is a detailed discussion at "Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?", http://www.veteranst...-zapruder-film/ In this context, the term "proof" refers to evidence that tends to establish a certain conclusion, which can receive additional support from other evidence.

Jim

Prof. Fetzer, a couple of questions if you please :

1. As Chaney 'motoring forwards' no doubt happened before the limo reached the triple underpass, according to yourself, then surely an abundance of witnesses, if not each and everyone who were in the Plaza watching the motorcade, should be able to testify to this as fact, wouldn't you agree? If so, i'd appreciate it if you could point me in the direction of any witnesses, EXCLUDING the lead car occupants, who have made any statements, or suchlike, regarding a motorcycle pulling ahead of the limo whilst still in Dealey Plaza?

Sure--and for every other important aspect of the case, we can EXCLUDE the best witnesses to those events! Pretty soon, we will discover that what was actually going on was a circus parade--except we will have to EXCLUDE the witnesses to those events, too! In this case, the witness list is simply unimpeachable, since it includes persons who may well have been involved themselves!

Why would Secret Service agents, motorcycle patrolmen, and the Chief of Police have been wrong about this? There is no good reason to suppose they would have been. Next you will ask me to prove what Clint Hill has reported saying over the past nearly 50 years--but EXCLUDING CLINT HILL! Too much was going on. There is no reason to suppose everyone there noticed everything.

Anyone who is serious about getting to the truth of these matters has to take to heart what Clint Hill has been telling us for nearly 50 years now. Not only is there unimpeachable testimony of Officer Chaney motoring forward, but Clint Hill's testimony confirms it. That Tink and now Calli SHOULD BE IN SOME STATE OF DENIAL ABOUT ALL OF THIS is utterly beyond belief!

"As I approached the vehicle there was a third shot. It hit the President in the head, upper right rear of the right ear, caused a gaping hole in his head, which caused brain matter, blood, and bone fragments to spew forth out over the car, over myself. At that point Mrs. Kennedy came up out of the back seat onto the trunk of the car. She was trying to retrieve something that had gone off to the right rear. She did not know I was there. At that point I grabbed Mrs. Kennedy, put her in the back seat. The President fell over into her lap, to his left.

"His right side of his head was exposed. I could see his eyes were fixed. There was a hole in the upper right rear portion of his head about the size of my palm. Most of the gray matter in that area had been removed, and was scattered throughout the entire car, including on Mrs. Kennedy. I turned and gave the follow-up car crew the thumbs-down, indicating that we were in a very dire situation. The driver accelerated; he got up to the lead car which was driven by Chief Curry, the Dallas Chief of Police . . .”.


Not only does Clint's description of the wound contradict your characterization, but his account is consistent with what Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry have told us about about Chaney, which refutes the film's authenticity.

Tink has repeatedly claimed this happened AFTER the limo had already passed the TUP and that we have simply not been thinking about the temporal relationship here. My three favorites are Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry:

(1) Forrest Sorrels: "A motorcycle pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer replied in the affirmative, and Chief Curry immediately broadcast to surround the building. By that time we had gotten just about under the underpass when the President’s car pulled up alongside, . . ."

(2) Bobby Hargis: "I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chaney put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he [the President] was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off . . . .”

(3) Chief Jesse Curry: "at that time I looked in my rear view mirror and I saw some commotion in the President’s caravan and realized that probably something was wrong, and it seemed to be speeding up, and about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there . . ."

James Chaney, Bobby Hargis, and Clint Hill WERE NOT OCCUPANTS OF THE LEAD CAR, in case you have not noticed. And citing other alleged reports and later interviews, whose authenticity is open to question, is not a very persuasive way to argue your case. In fact, such a case as you are attempting to contrive appears to be superfluous. WE ALREADY HAVE SUFFICIENT PROOF AT HAND.

Others can address your questions about how the films and photos were faked or altered, but the agency certainly has the ability to do that, where most of the evidence in this case has been fabricated. Since Chief Curry called for the building to be "surrounded" when Chaney told him JFK had been shot, which he did at the TUP, there really is NO POINT in fantasizing about the entrance to the freeway.

If this isn't enough proof for you on this point, I can't imagine what it would take to convince you. Since only Tom Robinson and Ed Reed watched Humes take a cranial saw to JFK's head, I suppose you want me to prove that but EXCLUDING TOM ROBINSON AND ED REED? And then it will be the limo stop but EXCLUDING ALL THE LIMO STOP WITNESSES? How dumb are we supposed to be?

We are doing what we can to solve the case and you are doing something else. But the fact that someone like you has shown up tells me that we are making progress and that Tink has been outgunned. So they needed to send in the cavalry, which is why you are here. We all have better things to do, however, than to construct proofs WITHOUT THE MOST IMPORTANT EVIDENCE THAT PROVES THEM.


Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.


Doesn’t this suggest shots well after 313 since we KNOW Hill does not reach the limo until z340, and JAckie is not on the trunk until much later..

Posted Image


The gif below is from z350-400... This would be the only time that Kellerman would see them both on the back of the limo...

"Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.

Is this how y'all see it?
DJ



Unfortunately, it does not "prove" anything.

It does however serve to support the other testimonies as to when the third shot impact occurred.

In fact, if one will correlate the testimonies of Kellerman and Greer regarding transmission over the radio, with the testimonies of Agent Hill, they will find other testimonies which, when all placed into perspective, will serve to indicat that the third shot impact occurred just as James Altgens said it did.

Directly in front of where he was standing.

Tom

P.S. And of course Nellie as well as JBC have repeatedly stated that the third shot impact which blew cerebral tissue all over them, occurred AFTER JBC was leaned over in the seat with his head in Nellie's lap.

From this, and the survey plats and survey notes in my possession, it would now appear that the Warren Commission was severely lacking in their attempt at making one of the three shots (the third shot) disappear.


Edited by James H. Fetzer, 26 January 2012 - 10:12 PM.


#8 Andric Perez

Andric Perez

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 January 2012 - 10:20 PM

Anyone talking about Kellerman's "flurry" should specify that this flurry meant two shots. When I see the word "flurry," I interpret it as many instances. I bet that every member here thought Kellerman meant more than 2 shots the first time they heard of this "flurry." but the fact is that Kellerman's flurry= 2:

"Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to say how many you heard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say two, and it was like a double bang--bang, bang.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean now two shots in addition to the first noise?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; yes, sir; at least."

If Kellerman had been confident about hearing a three-shot flurry or larger, he would have said "at least three," but he said at least two (after the first shot). Instead of "double bang, bang," he would have said, "triple bang, bang."

Kellerman's testimony is consistent with what Pat Speer found to be the most frequent shot sequence heard by witnesses: three audible shots, the last two being closely spaced and the first two being not so close (bang...........bang bang). The use of a silencer is plausible in Speer's analysis since there seem to have been shots at both frame 190 and 223 or so; but people only heard one of these (Kellerman is an example).

Edited by Andric Perez, 26 January 2012 - 10:28 PM.


#9 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:28 AM

David,

Excellent post! I think Thomas Purvis is not quite up-to-speed on the extensive debate over Clint Hill's testimony: that he rushed forward, pushed Jackie down, lay across their bodies and peered down into a fist-sized hole in the back of JFK's head! What you have found, of course, is confirmation that he was lying across their bodies--all before the limo reached the TUP. If Tom wants more on this, there is a detailed discussion at "Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?", http://www.veteranst...-zapruder-film/ In this context, the term "proof" refers to evidence that tends to establish a certain conclusion, which can receive additional support from other evidence.

Jim


Uh, thanks Jim... except I was not trying to justify other portions of Hill's testimony... just the contradiction between the testimony of Kellerman and the Zfilm

To state that Hill was already in the seat and across their bodies before the TUP, when we see full well that he hovers over them while hangin on for dear life.. is too far a leap for me. Add to this his own testimony and I believe you read to much into his statement.

This is obviously AFTER the TUP and he is still not "laying across their bodies" in the literal sense, but the figurative... as are most of the descriptions you like to use...
You promoting the literal meaning when it's obvious they were talking figuratively is misleading, imo.

So no Jim, my post - nor Kellerman or Hill's testimony does NOT confirm his performing these activities BEFORE TUP.
In fact, these images prove he did NOT "lay across their bodies"... in fact, if you search for the word "ACROSS" in his testimony you find out what he was really laying across.
..

Mr. SPECTER. What is your best estimate on the speed at which the President's car traveled from the point of the shooting to Parkland Hospital?
Mr. HILL. It is a little bit hard for me to judge, since I was lying across the rear portion of the automobile. I had no trouble staying in that particular position--until we approached the hospital, I recall, I believe it was a left-hand turn and I started slipping off to the right-hand portion of the car. So I would say that we went 60, maybe 65 at the most.
Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to secure a handhold or a leghold or any sort of a hold on the automobile as you moved forward?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir. I had my legs--I had my body above the rear seat, and my legs hooked down into the rear seat, one foot outside the car.


He may have said somehting about laying across theur bodies at some future point... but not for the WCR. In fact, if we are to take him at his word regarding the hole he sees, I think it only appropriate to take him at his word regarding his trip to Parkland

Yet most disturbing is this line of Q&A.... as Purvis has tried to prove, the SECOND SHOT was 313 in the z film... AND
he corroborates the idea that it is JFK's HAND we see in that photo and NOT his foot, (I think the small item in front of JFK's hand is Hill's foot)
...

Mr. SPECTER. When, in relationship to the second shot, did Mrs. Kennedy move out of the rear seat?
Mr. HILL. Just after it
.
Mr. SPECTER. You say that it appeared that she was reaching as if something was coming over to the rear portion of the car, back in the area where you were coming to?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Was there anything back there that you observed, that she might have been reaching for?
Mr. HILL. I thought I saw something come off the back, too, but I cannot say that there was. I do know that the next day we found the portion of the President's head.
Mr. SPECTER. Where did you find that portion of the President's head?
Mr. HILL. It was found in the street. It was turned in, I believe, by a medical student or somebody in Dallas.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have any difficulty maintaining your balance on the back of the car after you had come up on the top of it?
Mr. HILL. Not until we turned off to enter the Parkland Hospital.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, what action did you take specifically with respect to placing Mrs. Kennedy back in the rear seat?
Mr. HILL. I simply just pushed and she moved--somewhat voluntarily--right back into the same seat she was in. The President--when she had attempted to get out onto the trunk of the car, his body apparently did not move too much, because when she got back into the car he was at that time, when I got on top of the car, face up in her lap.
Mr. SPECTER. And that was, after she was back in the rear seat?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. And where were the President's legs at that time?
Mr. HILL. Inside the car
.


In fact, from the available evidence that we can actually believe is authentic...
the events you describe happened much later and well after the limo would EVER have been filmed by Zapruder....

Bell shows Hill still almost vertical as he is seen in
McIntyre and as he is seen later in
Moore?? (I forget who took the hand that becomes a foot photo - plus I tried to include here but it would not let me add a third image.. i will post it next.)


Posted Image

Posted Image

#10 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:41 AM

Anyone talking about Kellerman's "flurry" should specify that this flurry meant two shots. When I see the word "flurry," I interpret it as many instances. I bet that every member here thought Kellerman meant more than 2 shots the first time they heard of this "flurry." but the fact is that Kellerman's flurry= 2:

"Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to say how many you heard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say two, and it was like a double bang--bang, bang.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean now two shots in addition to the first noise?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; yes, sir; at least."

If Kellerman had been confident about hearing a three-shot flurry or larger, he would have said "at least three," but he said at least two (after the first shot). Instead of "double bang, bang," he would have said, "triple bang, bang."

Kellerman's testimony is consistent with what Pat Speer found to be the most frequent shot sequence heard by witnesses: three audible shots, the last two being closely spaced and the first two being not so close (bang...........bang bang). The use of a silencer is plausible in Speer's analysis since there seem to have been shots at both frame 190 and 223 or so; but people only heard one of these (Kellerman is an example).


Hi Andric...

I believe you must read Kellerman's testimony with an understanding of the extremempressures he may have been under to tow the company line.... 3 shots and only 3 shots...
and while he does eventually come around to that, he is very careful to speak of "opinions"



Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kellerman, you said earlier that there were at least two additional shots. Is there any area in your mind or possibility, as you recollect that situation, that there could have been more than two shots, or are you able to say with any certainty?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker report and the two other shots that I know, those were three shots. But, Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four wounds, Governor Connally three, there have got to be more than three shots, gentlemen.

Please notice here how all of a sudden they wake up and go on the offensive. Yes, his testimony does ultimately state he HEARD 3 shots... Does it also suggest that he believed there were more than 3 shots? maybe check out his comments in RED.... He goes as far as he can imo... as do many of the witnesses within the government/military...

That's the great thing about this case... there is more to read between the lines than what was ever actually said... for these witnesses... for the non-governmental witnesses... the WC simply ignored, changed etc.... to suit the purpose....


Senator COOPER. What is that answer? What did he say?
Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat that, Mr. Kellerman?
Mr. KELLERMAN. President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There have got to be more than three shots.
Representative FORD. Is that why you have described--
Mr. KELLERMAN. The flurry.
Representative FORD. The noise as a flurry?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Excuse me, do you have any independent recollection, Mr. Kellerman, of the number of shots, aside from the inference that you make as to how many points of wounds there were?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Could you rephrase that, please?
Mr. SPECTER. Yes. You have drawn a conclusion, in effect, by saying that there were four wounds for the President and three wounds for the Governor; and from that, you say there must have been more than three shots in your opinion or your view. But my question is: Do you have any current recollection of having heard more than three shots?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No. I don't. I will have to say "No."
Senator COOPER. Has that been your recollection from the very time of the shooting?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; it has been my opinion
.
Senator COOPER. Not your opinion, but from the time of the shooting you think then that you heard only three shots, or did you--
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes.
Senator COOPER. Or did you ever think that you heard more than three?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; I can't say that, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, you referred to four wounds, Mr. Kellerman, realizing, of course, your characterization is only lay opinion.
Mr. KELLERMAN. Very true.

#11 Guest_James H. Fetzer_*

Guest_James H. Fetzer_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:57 AM

My mistake, David. I thought you were actually thinking things through. With the testimony of Chief Curry, Forrest Sorrels, Bobby Hargis, Officer Chaney, and Clint Hill, I supposed you could appreciate the key point that Roy Kellerman is making in this quote:

Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.

Since what he is reporting obviously occurred BEFORE the limo took off and BEFORE it reached the TUP, I naively supposed that you could put Curry + Sorrels + Hargis + Chaney + Hill + Kellerman = the Zapruder film has been faked! Or do you see this in the film?

David,

Excellent post! I think Thomas Purvis is not quite up-to-speed on the extensive debate over Clint Hill's testimony: that he rushed forward, pushed Jackie down, lay across their bodies and peered down into a fist-sized hole in the back of JFK's head! What you have found, of course, is confirmation that he was lying across their bodies--all before the limo reached the TUP. If Tom wants more on this, there is a detailed discussion at "Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?", http://www.veteranst...-zapruder-film/ In this context, the term "proof" refers to evidence that tends to establish a certain conclusion, which can receive additional support from other evidence.

Jim


Uh, thanks Jim... except I was not trying to justify other portions of Hill's testimony... just the contradiction between the testimony of Kellerman and the Zfilm

To state that Hill was already in the seat and across their bodies before the TUP, when we see full well that he hovers over them while hangin on for dear life.. is too far a leap for me. Add to this his own testimony and I believe you read to much into his statement.

This is obviously AFTER the TUP and he is still not "laying across their bodies" in the literal sense, but the figurative... as are most of the descriptions you like to use...
You promoting the literal meaning when it's obvious they were talking figuratively is misleading, imo.

So no Jim, my post - nor Kellerman or Hill's testimony does NOT confirm his performing these activities BEFORE TUP.
In fact, these images prove he did NOT "lay across their bodies"... in fact, if you search for the word "ACROSS" in his testimony you find out what he was really laying across.
.


Edited by James H. Fetzer, 27 January 2012 - 01:58 AM.


#12 David Josephs

David Josephs

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,608 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Interests:History, Imagery, Music, the Ocean

Posted 27 January 2012 - 04:40 AM

I thought you were actually thinking things through


That's okay Jim... You have thoughts that are wrong quite often as I come to see...

The "testimony" of the men you list do not PROVE that these events occured before the TUP at all...
and what I am trying to point out ARE the Zfilm problems as they relate to the memories of these men...

for example...

Mr. STERN - But, you cannot now recall more than two shots?
Mr. HARGIS - That is all that I can recall remembering. Of course, everything was moving so fast at the time that there could have been 30 more shots that I probably never would have noticed them.
Mr. STERN - Did something happen to you, personally in connection with the shot you have Just described?
Mr. HARGIS - You mean about the blood hitting---
Mr. STERN - Yes.
Mr. HARGIS - Yes; when President Kennedy straightened back up in the car the bullet him in the head, the one that killed him and it seemed like his head exploded, and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water, It wasn't really blood. And at that time the Presidential car slowed down. I heard somebody say, "Get going," or "get going,"
Mr. STERN - Someone inside--
Mr. HARGIS - I don't know whether it was the Secret Service car, and I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chaney put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off, and I stopped and got off my motorcycle and ran to the right-hand side of the street, behind the light pole.
Mr. STERN - Just a minute. Do you recall your impression at the time regarding the source of the shots?
Mr. HARGIS - Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn't any way in the world I could tell where they were coming from, but at the time there was something in my head that said that they probably could have been coming from the railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered, with blood--I was Just a little back and left of--Just a little bit back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I didn't know. I had a feeling that it might have been from the Texas Book Depository, and these two places was the primary place that could have been shot from.




there could have been 30 more shots that I probably never would have noticed them. yet after this statement you are ok with his recollection?
not so much Jim.... seems to me he has a few problems with time and sound...


And at that time the Presidential car slowed down - so according to Hargis, the limo slows AFTER the headshot...
yet that contradicts Altgens and Brehm who both say the limo barely moved between z255 and z313... 10-15 feet during this period...
and then they slowed AFTER that?

to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he was coming through - how can Hargis possibly know this? Is "he" JFK or ??
and please address Bell and McIntyre... Didn't Chaney himself say in that interview he did not remember doing that... that he stopped and then raced to the rest of the cars AFTER?

Notice that EVEN CHANEY acknowledges that there were "at least between 60 and 75 people that day who claimed the car stopped". My inference would be that Chaney is unsure because, as John observed, Chaney was motoring forward and, given his relative motion, did not recognize that it had stopped.

A: I know.. I don’t know whether the lead car ever stopped or not. I know that.. I mean Kennedy’s car. The one behind them apparently did because an officer could run from the left hand side in front of me. I know I stopped. Whatever happened there. I know Hargis, one of the officers riding escort on the other side, run across in front of me.
Q: Yeah, Bobby. I just spoke to him a few minutes ago. There are, I think, at least between 60 and 75 people that day who claimed the car stopped. But even if it didn’t stop..
A: Whether or not the lead car stopped.. I don’t believe that it did. It slowed down though. What was this agent’s name? Clint Hill?
Q: Right.



Here is classic Fetz... the man asking the question states the 60-75 #... NOT Chaney
Chaney says he stopped... which the films show
He refers to the JFK limo as the "lead car" in the first sentence... and then again by mistake... He does NOT believe the lead car stopped...

YOU posted the comments on the statements. And it is misleading and simply false.

A(Chaney): I don’t recall myself stopping but as I stopped to think of it I must have come almost to a stop for Hargis to have got off his motor 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

The Nix film shows this plain as day...

More importantly is WHY you maintain this line of reasoning when there are so many other areas that do not work related to the Zfilm...

and why... when you are engaged with someone who agrees that the Zfilm is a real problem, do you treat them like you do?
Just your warm, charming and winning way?

:blink:




My mistake, David. I thought you were actually thinking things through. With the testimony of Chief Curry, Forrest Sorrels, Bobby Hargis, Officer Chaney, and Clint Hill, I supposed you could appreciate the key point that Roy Kellerman is making in this quote:

Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.

Since what he is reporting obviously occurred BEFORE the limo took off and BEFORE it reached the TUP, I naively supposed that you could put Curry + Sorrels + Hargis + Chaney + Hill + Kellerman = the Zapruder film has been faked! Or do you see this in the film?


David,

Excellent post! I think Thomas Purvis is not quite up-to-speed on the extensive debate over Clint Hill's testimony: that he rushed forward, pushed Jackie down, lay across their bodies and peered down into a fist-sized hole in the back of JFK's head! What you have found, of course, is confirmation that he was lying across their bodies--all before the limo reached the TUP. If Tom wants more on this, there is a detailed discussion at "Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?", http://www.veteranst...-zapruder-film/ In this context, the term "proof" refers to evidence that tends to establish a certain conclusion, which can receive additional support from other evidence.

Jim


Uh, thanks Jim... except I was not trying to justify other portions of Hill's testimony... just the contradiction between the testimony of Kellerman and the Zfilm

To state that Hill was already in the seat and across their bodies before the TUP, when we see full well that he hovers over them while hangin on for dear life.. is too far a leap for me. Add to this his own testimony and I believe you read to much into his statement.

This is obviously AFTER the TUP and he is still not "laying across their bodies" in the literal sense, but the figurative... as are most of the descriptions you like to use...
You promoting the literal meaning when it's obvious they were talking figuratively is misleading, imo.

So no Jim, my post - nor Kellerman or Hill's testimony does NOT confirm his performing these activities BEFORE TUP.
In fact, these images prove he did NOT "lay across their bodies"... in fact, if you search for the word "ACROSS" in his testimony you find out what he was really laying across.
.



#13 Andric Perez

Andric Perez

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2012 - 04:46 AM


Anyone talking about Kellerman's "flurry" should specify that this flurry meant two shots. When I see the word "flurry," I interpret it as many instances. I bet that every member here thought Kellerman meant more than 2 shots the first time they heard of this "flurry." but the fact is that Kellerman's flurry= 2:

"Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to say how many you heard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say two, and it was like a double bang--bang, bang.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean now two shots in addition to the first noise?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; yes, sir; at least."

If Kellerman had been confident about hearing a three-shot flurry or larger, he would have said "at least three," but he said at least two (after the first shot). Instead of "double bang, bang," he would have said, "triple bang, bang."

Kellerman's testimony is consistent with what Pat Speer found to be the most frequent shot sequence heard by witnesses: three audible shots, the last two being closely spaced and the first two being not so close (bang...........bang bang). The use of a silencer is plausible in Speer's analysis since there seem to have been shots at both frame 190 and 223 or so; but people only heard one of these (Kellerman is an example).


Hi Andric...

I believe you must read Kellerman's testimony with an understanding of the extremempressures he may have been under to tow the company line.... 3 shots and only 3 shots...
and while he does eventually come around to that, he is very careful to speak of "opinions"



Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kellerman, you said earlier that there were at least two additional shots. Is there any area in your mind or possibility, as you recollect that situation, that there could have been more than two shots, or are you able to say with any certainty?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker report and the two other shots that I know, those were three shots. But, Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four wounds, Governor Connally three, there have got to be more than three shots, gentlemen.

Please notice here how all of a sudden they wake up and go on the offensive. Yes, his testimony does ultimately state he HEARD 3 shots... Does it also suggest that he believed there were more than 3 shots? maybe check out his comments in RED.... He goes as far as he can imo... as do many of the witnesses within the government/military...

That's the great thing about this case... there is more to read between the lines than what was ever actually said... for these witnesses... for the non-governmental witnesses... the WC simply ignored, changed etc.... to suit the purpose....


Senator COOPER. What is that answer? What did he say?
Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat that, Mr. Kellerman?
Mr. KELLERMAN. President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There have got to be more than three shots.
Representative FORD. Is that why you have described--
Mr. KELLERMAN. The flurry.
Representative FORD. The noise as a flurry?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Excuse me, do you have any independent recollection, Mr. Kellerman, of the number of shots, aside from the inference that you make as to how many points of wounds there were?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Could you rephrase that, please?
Mr. SPECTER. Yes. You have drawn a conclusion, in effect, by saying that there were four wounds for the President and three wounds for the Governor; and from that, you say there must have been more than three shots in your opinion or your view. But my question is: Do you have any current recollection of having heard more than three shots?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No. I don't. I will have to say "No."
Senator COOPER. Has that been your recollection from the very time of the shooting?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; it has been my opinion
.
Senator COOPER. Not your opinion, but from the time of the shooting you think then that you heard only three shots, or did you--
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes.
Senator COOPER. Or did you ever think that you heard more than three?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; I can't say that, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, you referred to four wounds, Mr. Kellerman, realizing, of course, your characterization is only lay opinion.
Mr. KELLERMAN. Very true.


Your point is valid. Specter was the master of the leading question.

#14 Guest_James H. Fetzer_*

Guest_James H. Fetzer_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 January 2012 - 05:32 AM

David,

The earlier reports are almost always the more reliable. By the time they got certain witnesses before the commission, the
staff knew what they were going to say--by and large--where Kellerman has to have surprised them. You are pitting later Hargis
against earlier Hargis. But earlier Hargis is going to be more reliable: his memory was fresher, his candor less constrained, and his
testimony hangs together with that of Curry, Sorrels, Chaney, Hill, and (now) Kellerman. That powerful proof about what happened.

PERFECT ILLUSTRATION:

Mr. SPECTER. All right. Now, when the flurry occurred then, were you still facing forward talking into the microphone to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. All right. Then precisely what was your next movement after completing the delivery of that message to Lawson?
Mr. KELLERMAN. When I completed the delivery of those instructions to Lawson, I just hung up the receiver and looked back.
Mr. SPECTER. To your right this time--to your left; pardon me.
Mr. KELLERMAN. To my left; that is right. This is when I first viewed Mr. Hill, who was on the back of the--
Mr. SPECTER. Precisely where was he in that instant?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Lying right across the trunk of the car with Mrs. Kennedy on the left rear, Mr. Hill's head was right up in back of her.

Since what he is reporting obviously occurred BEFORE the limo took off and BEFORE it reached the TUP, I have supposed that you, like
me, would put Curry + Sorrels + Hargis + Chaney + Hill + Kellerman = the Zapruder film has been faked! We don't see all this in the film!
That under the pressure of testifying before the commission there would be variations from their original reports should not come as any
surprise. Their testimony was being massaged! What is important, from this point of view, is that Kellerman confirms what Hill reported.

Jim

Edited by James H. Fetzer, 27 January 2012 - 07:29 AM.


#15 Guest_James H. Fetzer_*

Guest_James H. Fetzer_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 January 2012 - 05:35 AM

Andric,

I think you are right. The term "flurry" would normally be construed to mean more than two. Notice that, at
the end, he adds "at least". The official account cannot stand TWO CLOSE SHOTS, much less even more.

Jim

Anyone talking about Kellerman's "flurry" should specify that this flurry meant two shots. When I see the word "flurry," I interpret it as many instances. I bet that every member here thought Kellerman meant more than 2 shots the first time they heard of this "flurry." but the fact is that Kellerman's flurry= 2:

"Mr. SPECTER. Are you able to say how many you heard?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say two, and it was like a double bang--bang, bang.
Mr. SPECTER. You mean now two shots in addition to the first noise?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir; yes, sir; at least."

If Kellerman had been confident about hearing a three-shot flurry or larger, he would have said "at least three," but he said at least two (after the first shot). Instead of "double bang, bang," he would have said, "triple bang, bang."

Kellerman's testimony is consistent with what Pat Speer found to be the most frequent shot sequence heard by witnesses: three audible shots, the last two being closely spaced and the first two being not so close (bang...........bang bang). The use of a silencer is plausible in Speer's analysis since there seem to have been shots at both frame 190 and 223 or so; but people only heard one of these (Kellerman is an example).


Edited by James H. Fetzer, 27 January 2012 - 05:36 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users