Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send these  to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Mike Rago

How did Zapruder know of Single Bullet Theory at time of testimony?

Recommended Posts

On 9/10/2012 at 5:42 AM, Bernice Moore said:

sorry first try did not work..all take care...b

Thanks B... kinda shows that JFK should have a nice hole in the center of his right pectoral muscle... and NOTHING at his throat...

While the Spector image works since he is resting the pointer on the man's shoulder... and JC is sitting next to the door... Spector blows his own theory out of the water with this photo alone.



Edited by David Josephs

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a few days before leaving for Berlin, Robert Kennedy discusses Poland with Lyndon Johnson: http://books.google.... krakow&f=false

Also keep in mind (with RFK calling Johnson "Mr. President"). . this was (I believe) when RFK was still hoping that LBJ would select him as his veep.


Yes, according to Beschloss: http://books.google....eturned&f=false

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spector blows his own theory out of the water with this photo alone.


The image you have shown is not the official CE 903. What you are showing is the alternate view. The official CE 903 is this one.


It just show underhand Spector could be. He knew exactly what the real entry point was, indeed he had marked it on the model. However from this angle it was hidden from view.

From this view it suggested the SBT might be a logical solution.

That is why this was the official version of CE 903, and yours ( the real view ) was not used.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks James...

And a very good observation about the use of photos to convey lies....

The JC stand-in sure is close to that door.... how far over must he REALLY have been for that trajectory to work.. you know, the one OVER JFK's SHOULDER and directly into JC's armpit...

Hey, wait a minute... a shot over the shoulder from behind and to his right COULD hit JC in just the right way...

too bad there weren't any extra shots heard by anyone... or any bullets picked up in places where there shouldn't be...


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

How did Zapruder know of the Single Bullet Theory at the time of his testimony?

This is from the testimony of Abraham Zapruder. I believe Mr. Zapruder starts to describe the second shot (which occurred immediately after the shot which passed through the presidents neck), but he stops himself, and goes into the single bullet theory.

He gave his testimony on July 22 1964. When was the "Single Bullet Thoery" first announced to the public?

The Warren Commission report release ...

The 888-page final report was presented to President Johnson on September 24, 1964,[2] and made public three days later.[3

Mr. LIEBELER - Did you form any opinion about the direction from which the shots came by the sound, or were you just upset by the thing you had seen?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - No, there was too much reverberation. There was an echo which gave me a sound all over. In other words that square is kind of--it had a sound all over.

Mr. LIEBELER - And with the buildings around there, too?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes, the reverberation was such that a sound--as it would vibrate--it didn't vibrate so much but as to whether it was a backfire--in other words, I didn't from the first sound, from him leaning over--I couldn't think it was a shot, but of course, the second--I think it was the second shot. I don't know whether they proved anything--they claim he was hit--that the first bullet went through him and hit Connally or something like that--I don't know how that is.

Mr. LIEBELER - Well, there are many different theories about that. One thing I would like you to do now--we have a series-- a little book here that is Commission Exhibit No. 885 and it consists of a number of frames from motion pictures and I want to show you certain numbers of them which are important to our work and ask you if those look like they were taken from your film and if in fact you could recognize it as you look through this book that these are individual frame-by-frame pictures of the pictures that you took



Note that the lawyer, Mr. Liebeler, completely changes the subject after...

"How did Zapruder know of the Single Bullet Theory at the time of his testimony?"

"Note that the lawyer, Mr. Liebeler, completely changes the subject after..."

Because they were Jooooz.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2012 at 11:13 AM, James R Gordon said:

If your question is suggesting something sinister, I think you will find it not so.

Well, my view on JFK studies is never assume anything.

Zapruder worked with de  Mohrenschildts wife(fwiw).

Also, my father filmed us all with an 8mm camera which he first acquired in the 1940's. If he was standing in an enclosed space, and bullets starting flying, he would have ducked. He was a husband and father, not a war photographer. The last thing he would have done, would  have been to keep filming. Bruce Adamson first brought this up and my own instincts agree. I've filmed a fair amount with an 8mm camera; I can't believe I wouldn't have ducked for self preservation. Unless, of course, I knew I wouldn't be hit.

Zapruder first said he "gave the money to Tippet's widow" but you find out later he gave her 25 of the 150 thousand dollars Luce & Company paid him (about 1.2 million in 2017 $). He was once employed by Luce.  Zapruder, de Mohrenschildt, and Bush all have connections with Dresser Industries. The Dallas Council of World Affairs was an organization founded by Bush  pal Neil Mellon; members included Allen Dulles, de Mohrenschildt, the Judge who swore in LBJ, and the Mayor of Dallas, recently exposed as a CIA asset. Later the family received 16 million for the "original film" and yet Doug Horne's You Tube presentation of a blow-up from an "original" negative shows a splash of black painted clearly on JFK's head. The number of copies made; the presentation boards made at the CIA, the withholding of an obviously touched-up film for 12 years, all make me wonder how much Abraham knew and saw.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Few other questionable Zapruder  facts. He testified to the warren Commission in July 1964 about money:

Mr. ZAPRUDER - I received $25,000, as you know, and I have given that to the Firemen's and Policemen's Benevolence with a suggestion for Mrs. Tippit. You know that?
Mr. LIEBELER - I don't know that--you received $25,000?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - $25,000 was paid and I have given it to the Firemen's and Policemen's Fund.
Mr. LIEBELER - You gave the whole $25,000?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes. This was all over the world. I got letters from all over the world and newspapers---I mean letters from all over the world. It was all over the world--I am surprised--that you don't know it--I don't like to talk about it too much.

However, Life reporter Richard Stolley told a different story (:http://time.com/3878268/kennedy-assassination-how-life-brought-the-zapruder-film-to-light/) Stolley says that by the 25th of November, 1963, he walked out with the original film and had a contract signed with Zapruder for the Life print rights and the motion picture rights for a total of $150,000. Why did Zapruder lie in July?

Stolley also claims that when he called Zapruder ( got # from a phone book) he was told to arrive the next morning at 9am with other reporters who wanted to see what he had. Stolley arrived at 8am and--it just so happens, right at that time, two Secret Service agents arrived--and Zapruder showed those 3 the film and Stolley walked out with it after making the initial $50,000 deal. Stolley complained that the other reporters were "banging on the door"  to try and get in on this information, as if that were a bad thing.

Also, Zapruder testified that:  "In fact, I didn't have my camera but my secretary asked me why I don't have it and I told her I wouldn't have a chance even to see the President and somehow she urged me and I went home and got my camera and came back..." Doesn't that have a slight echo of the Western Union telegram that Jack Ruby had to send? Makes it seem like a "last minute" sort of thing to film it. And he just happens to be in the best position since the press corps has been placed - inexplicably - in the back of the motorcade.

Also, when I visited Dealey Plaza I was unable to boost myself up onto the ledge Zapruder stood on; I was able to lift my wife up to a sitting position, but getting up there is not easy. When you work across the street, how do you go home, and " at the last minute"  get a camera and end up back in such a place?

I think Zapruder had "some 'splaining to do."


Edited by Robert Harper
added a "0" corrected spelling

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

These earlier comments on Mr. Zapruder, prompted some research. In his WC testimony, he suggested that at about 11:30, his secretary encouraged him to go home and get his camera. He gave his address;  I googled it. It was about 7 miles north of Elm and Houston.

This on the day of a motorcade with packed crowds on the street, at lunchtime. One must assume that roads were blocked off; some traffic  re-directed. There was certainly a traffic jam, since James Tague got out of his car because of it.

I have lived in New York, Washington DC and Los Angeles ; I have been around the traffic control of such motorcades.  Analogous to Mr. Zapruder’s narrative would be a NYC presidential  motorcade heading towards the UN, and someone working across the street on First Avenue, decided to go to Washington Heights AND back - for the possibility he might get to film, versus the definite chance to view from where he worked – on such a day.

Not only does he get there and back, he ends up on a raised pedestal—not easy to get up on – at the exact spot JFK is killed. A spot where few professional photographers were allowed to be. He does so - through whatever traffic controls are in place, has to park, retrieve camera, and return downtown, navigating  busy city streets, park, etc. and get up on this pedestal, all in about 45 minutes. It’s a version of  LHO walking and killing and ending up in a theater in about 30 minutes.

 Analogous versions in either LA or Washington would pose similar obstacles. In addition, as stated in other threads, his film was not “confiscated” like others were; he had  a record of a felony but took it home with him. When bullets flew, he kept filming. He reaped enormous financial gain from his few seconds of filming horror.

It was  Russ Baker’s book Family of Secrets  - 30 years  after the killing – that first brought George Bush into the frame for me. After reading Adamson’s research 50 years after the killing, about “Oswald’s best friend”—George deMorenschield ,  Mr Zapruder enters  my frame.

I wonder if it was suggested to him—by anyone among the Dallas World Affairs Group - that being there,  would be beneficial to him. Like Walton Moore telling the Baron that LHO might be someone to see. Maybe that’s why he lied to the WC about the money.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Interesting idea

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/7/2018 at 4:48 PM, Paul Brancato said:

Interesting idea

Not much has changed since  Joseph Scovitch wrote in the year 2000 in The "Fourth Decade": We wonder why there is such a paucity of concern and a paucity of articulate historical research on this locational minutiae surrounding the genesis of the 1963 Zapruder film.

... on the Mary Farrell site:



Edited by Robert Harper

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now