Wiegman in Progress

[Bill Miller]

....She was taller than Zapruder, and it is said she had on high heels, no woman is going to wear high heels and climb on that pedestal, ask one,

and none are going to run down the grassy slope after and across the street as she says, after,when she looked around and saw that she was alone,

and left standing on the pedestal alone and Zapruder had gone, disappeared.....these are things she says, not me...

with heels on, they would stick into the grass, and she would

any woman, go flying and break her ruddy neck, just ask ask one....

I am not going to waste too much time on this for one's interpretation of the evidence is only as reliable as one's ability to follow it. However, Sitzman did wear her high heels and is caught in several photos or flim captures wearing them. Going from memory here ... open the first few pages of Groden's book "TKOAP" and he shows a small crop of Sitzman wearing those high heels, so to take the position that no woman wears them on slopes or pedestals is simply not accurate. In fact, there are post assassination photos showing women all over the knoll in high heels.

The Paschall film shows Zapruder hopping off the pedestal after Sitzman dismounted it. Altgens 8 shows both of them together at that moment and Sitzman is taller because of her wearing those heels. The Bell film as I recall shows Zapruder walking away from Sitzman as she is standing at the pedestal. If Sitzman said that Abe walked away as she tood on the pedestal, then she misspoke or the interviewer heard it incorrectly.

Edited January 23, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Bill, what is in this photo, please describe what you see, as this is what I regard as one of the better posted copies/enhancements

from Betzner.

Remember too, your the one that saw Jesus without any input from me, so sometimes we do see the same thing.

Yes, the Jesus remark was to get the point across that one can look at a blurry B&W image to the point that they can see something almost everywhere. The severely limited color tones are a big factor in this as well. I tried to show that even b y taking the Betzner photo and adding motion blur to the image that known objects disappear. At the same time the blurring shifts the image and causes new shapes to appear. Then when people see these new shapes, then they don't stop and consider their location in relation to the distance from the camera to even see if the shape is even realistic in its alleged size.

The best images of the pedestal from the Willis and Betzner photos are from Groden's book "TKOAP". Those images are raw and without pixels or computer enhancements. The Betzner crop of the Zapruder and Sitzman in Bernice's post #42 is cleaner than your enhancement.

[David G. Healy]

Bill Miller' wrote:

....She was taller than Zapruder, and it is said she had on high heels, no woman is going to wear high heels and climb on that pedestal, ask one,

and none are going to run down the grassy slope after and across the street as she says, after,when she looked around and saw that she was alone,

and left standing on the pedestal alone and Zapruder had gone, disappeared.....these are things she says, not me...

with heels on, they would stick into the grass, and she would

any woman, go flying and break her ruddy neck, just ask ask one....

[...]

The Paschall film shows Zapruder hopping off the pedestal after Sitzman dismounted it. Altgens 8 shows both of them together at that moment and Sitzman is taller because of her wearing those heels. The Bell film as I recall shows Zapruder walking away from Sitzman as she is standing at the pedestal. If Sitzman said that Abe walked away as she tood on the pedestal, then she misspoke or the interviewer heard it incorrectly.

dgh: uh-huh "...she misspoke or the interviewer heard it incorrectly." when you go off on a tangent, you need to do better than that!

Also, has Sitzman ever spoke of wearing high-heels on the pedestal? Consider the fact she was on the pedestal insuring Zapruder was comfy-cozy and ABLE to shoot some film -- seems kinda dumb to be up there with highheels on. If she was, I doubt Abe knew that! Little common sense goes a long way here, eh!

Edited January 23, 2007 by David G. Healy

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

I can see a BDM type figure in the frame below but this time behind the hedge/bushes.

He seems to be in the same bent/slouched position as in the the Willis image.

I think this new material bears closer inspection.

EBC

Edited January 24, 2007 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Chris Davidson]

....She was taller than Zapruder, and it is said she had on high heels, no woman is going to wear high heels and climb on that pedestal, ask one,

and none are going to run down the grassy slope after and across the street as she says, after,when she looked around and saw that she was alone,

and left standing on the pedestal alone and Zapruder had gone, disappeared.....these are things she says, not me...

with heels on, they would stick into the grass, and she would

any woman, go flying and break her ruddy neck, just ask ask one....

I am not going to waste too much time on this for one's interpretation of the evidence is only as reliable as one's ability to follow it. However, Sitzman did wear her high heels and is caught in several photos or flim captures wearing them. Going from memory here ... open the first few pages of Groden's book "TKOAP" and he shows a small crop of Sitzman wearing those high heels, so to take the position that no woman wears them on slopes or pedestals is simply not accurate. In fact, there are post assassination photos showing women all over the knoll in high heels.

The Paschall film shows Zapruder hopping off the pedestal after Sitzman dismounted it. Altgens 8 shows both of them together at that moment and Sitzman is taller because of her wearing those heels. The Bell film as I recall shows Zapruder walking away from Sitzman as she is standing at the pedestal. If Sitzman said that Abe walked away as she tood on the pedestal, then she misspoke or the interviewer heard it incorrectly.

Created by Jack White:

Thanks Jack. I will post some supporting material in awhile.

chris

[Bill Miller]

Jack is simply wrong. Zapruder does not have his left hand on his hip. This is about as silly as someone posting that Clint Hill had three legs in an earlier thread. If one follows the Bronson film and /or the Nix film ... they will see that Zapruder has both hands on his camera as he turns his body so to track the President. Zapruder has the same posture in Moorman's photo.

Zapruder cast a shadow onto Sitzman's dress and if one lightens the photo - they will see that what looks like a dark arm belonging to Zapruder in a heavily contrasted Betzner image - is now gone with only Sitzman's dress to be seen. I know that Jack understands these things because when I did the same thing to show that Badge Man's image separated from the overhanging tree foliage - Jack understood the process I used to check his work.

The Zapruder camera is a somewhat heavy instrument to have to hold to film with. I personally wouldn't try getting a good smooth pan by only holding the camera with one hand. I certainly would think it to be impossible to do with one hand if you were someone who had vertigo to the point of feeling dizzy when standing on a pedestal.

If one would simply apply a little logic when looking at these images - lighten them - cross reference them - then not so much time would be wasted on foolishness. How many joints does a person have between their shoulder and wrist? The answer is "one" at the elbow. There are two separate bends between Zapruder's shoulder and wrist if we accept the shading of Sitzman's dress to be Zapruder with his left hand on his hip. Furthermore, if you measure the distance of the shadow and apply it to Zapruder's height and then apply that measurement in a straight vertical line starting from Zapruder's shoulder, you will see if that was Zapruder's left arm, then Abe's left hand would be practically on the ground. (See image #2 from an earlier post)

]

Edited January 24, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Chris Davidson]

Let's try a little enhancement from a 1967 Life Magazine I possess.

Bernice, I think this will help with the dress problem.

Maybe he should turn toward the limo as he films, and not down Elm toward the underpass.

It's not who you think it is.

Please view at full size.

thanks

chris

Chris, with all due rspect, but you have got to be one of the worst at interpreting what is in this photos. Where is your hippie in the Willis photo? How about the Bronson slide? How about Moorman's photo? How would this alleged person's size play out if you go by his assumed outline versus the distance he would be from the camera? All these things should be considered when getting onto something that you may think is a person in a photo.

Bill

Let me create another illusion.

This time we'll compete against the clock.

Picture is from the Wiegman film. Notice time designation.

Animation is another Wiegman frame layered over Betzner.

Betzner is for size/registration.

Once again,notice the time in the animation.

Wall and pergola, sized to fit.

The 2 Wiegman frames are less than 2 seconds apart, even less, if you get rid of the interlaced frames.

By coincidence,when we line up the pergola and wall, the people/blur in Wiegman,

align perfectly with Z/Sitzman in Betzner.

Are you telling this juror:

1. They got off the wall in less than 2 seconds.

2. They are not the same people.

3.They are the same people, his dark suit turned white.

3.They are an illusion.

4.That's not a white shirt.

5.They changed position's while filming.

7.Blurring and bad lighting/photography created the placement of this illusion.

If it walks/talks like a duck.

chris

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Not sure what you're getting at here, Chris. Zapruder is still filming, they're both still on the pedestal. What is your point?

[Bill Miller]

Not sure what you're getting at here, Chris. Zapruder is still filming, they're both still on the pedestal. What is your point?

I think Chris is unable to understand the effects of motion blur. I invite him to go to the 6th floor Museum and see their superior copy of the Wiegman film and he will find that some of the less blurry frames do show signs of Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal. One such frame that I have seen - shows Sitzman's legs, while streaked on film, hanging over the pedestal as she is sitting on it preparing to dismount. But until then, by all means keep playing around with the poorer degraded images and trying to figure out why things happen the way that they do.

Bill

Edited January 24, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Chris Davidson]

Not sure what you're getting at here, Chris. Zapruder is still filming, they're both still on the pedestal. What is your point?

I think Chris is unable to understand the effects of motion blur. I invite him to go to the 6th floor Museum and see their superior copy of the Wiegman film and he will find that some of the less blurry frames do show signs of Zapruder and Sitzman on the pedestal. One such frame that I have seen - shows Sitzman's legs, while streaked on film, hanging over the pedestal as she is sitting on it preparing to dismount. But until then, by all means keep playing around with the poorer degraded images and trying to figure out why things happen the way that they do.

Bill

The Wiegman frames are from "Murder in Dealy Plaza" in which Gary Mack from the 6th floor museum was directly involved.

Are you telling me they used a different version?

It's not from Groden there are no transistion frames.

Mark, in the Wiegman frame, which one is Zapruder and which is Sitzman?

Remember, Zapruder is in a dark suit with a dark hat, and Sitzman is in a tan dress with

high heels.

Bill, maybe Gary can supply us with a copy from the one in the museum.

In other words, who's in front/back in Wiegman?

Sure would like to see Sitzman's legs.

chris

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Mark, in the Wiegman frame, which one is Zapruder and which is Sitzman?

Remember, Zapruder is in a dark suit with a dark hat, and Sitzman is in a tan dress with

high heels.

Bill, maybe Gary can supply us with a copy from the one in the museum.

In other words, who's in front/back in Wiegman?

Sure would like to see Sitzman's legs.

chris

Chris, it looks to me like Zapruder's in front throughout -- the darkness of his coat seems to lighten as you swapped out a lighter print, but in all cases the photos show him standing in front.

The images are so poor it's impossible to make out features but to my eyes he never leaves his position.

[Bill Miller]

Bill, maybe Gary can supply us with a copy from the one in the museum.

In other words, who's in front/back in Wiegman?

Sure would like to see Sitzman's legs.

chris

Chris - The original Wiegman film will not show the kind of detail you are seeking because it is a film of very limited color tones so the eye will not separate shapes as well as a color film .... and it is severaly blurred to the point that distant objects all but disappear. What the film will do is allow someone to make out that there is someone on the pedestal in some of the better frames. I think that I may have the frame showing Sitzman's legs over the pedestal ... they are really blurred and her feet are not visible because of it, but her two light colored legs are there nevertheless. If I can find it - I will post it.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Chris, it looks to me like Zapruder's in front throughout -- the darkness of his coat seems to lighten as you swapped out a lighter print, but in all cases the photos show him standing in front.

The images are so poor it's impossible to make out features but to my eyes he never leaves his position.

Mark is correct ... look at the Bronson slide and note where Sitzman's hand is seen on Zapruder's back. The only way she could achieve that is to be to the side and possibly slightly behind Zapruder. That is also why much of her dress is covered in shadow - for if she was in front of Zapruder, then the sun would have illuminated her dress all across the front of it. Notice how Zapruder's clothing doesn't stop the sun from illuminating Sitzman's legs, but it does shade her body from the knees - up.

Edited January 24, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

Gary Mack has said, "The Wiegman film frame grabs I showed Bill Miller a few years ago came from my personal tape of the film, obtained from the local NBC affiliate where I used to work.

Sitzman's legs can be seen hanging over the side of the pedestal seconds after Zapruder stopped filming. She got down first, then Zapruder followed.

I don't know where the Discovery Channel version came from, but I suspect it originated with a National Archives copy from the old Universal Newsreel series. That version isn't very good, but it was adequate for the program.

Sorry, I'm not able to provide copies from my source, but I can show it to anyone."

Edited January 24, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Chris Davidson]

Bill, maybe Gary can supply us with a copy from the one in the museum.

In other words, who's in front/back in Wiegman?

Sure would like to see Sitzman's legs.

chris

Chris - The original Wiegman film will not show the kind of detail you are seeking because it is a film of very limited color tones so the eye will not separate shapes as well as a color film .... and it is severaly blurred to the point that distant objects all but disappear. What the film will do is allow someone to make out that there is someone on the pedestal in some of the better frames. I think that I may have the frame showing Sitzman's legs over the pedestal ... they are really blurred and her feet are not visible because of it, but her two light colored legs are there nevertheless. If I can find it - I will post it.

Bill

Please post some of the better frames.

Bill/Mark, whose LIGHT COLORED LEGS are in front, in this photo.

It doesn't matter if it's a B/W or color photo.

Black is Black / White is White

In this particular frame, not another frame, the person showing leg and wearing a dress, is in front.

The person with a white shirt and black bottom is in back.

Black and white create a very nice contrast break, as shown in this frame.

Is it your view you can't distinguish people in this frame, I'm a little confused.

chris