The Education Forum

# Splice in Tina Towner Film

## Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

With speeds of only 16 and 48 on the "Sears Tower Varizoom 8 mm color motion picture camera"... how do they get to 24fps?

Who or what are you referring to in the context of 24fps?   Myers with Towner?  WC with the extant zfilm?

Residual 24fps is just a variation of a 48fps slow-motion origin, cut in half.

Myers uses 22.8fps as it accommodates his 1.8 sec jump to z133 and then a 5.49ft per sec slow down syncing with a 18.3fps final rate.

After all is said and done, the overlapping part of the zfilm with Towner will never see the light of day, therefore, the frame rate of Towner becomes inconsequential to the powers that be. Myers just does us a big favor by providing enough data to reveal the farce.

Keeping in mind the splitting of the limo path which we discussed previously.

##### Share on other sites
On 6/4/2017 at 3:35 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Another easy way to prove the 18.3 fps frame rate is bogus would be to plot JFK's position from z133-z166.

Use the LOS from the Z pedestal to the background lamp-post (frame z166) along Robert West's path.

35.90ft / 1.803 sec (33frames@18.3fps) = 13.54mph

If you want to see how the difference in distances would basically align, just subtract 5.49ft from the above distance of 35.9ft = 30.41ft.

Then take a look at the distance Myers has it traveling from Towner end to Z150 = 24.96ft and add that 5.49ft back = 30.45ft

Close enough!!!

##### Share on other sites

Chris, when you get through with all the computations, I think it would be wise to start a chronology of the Z-film, noting WHERE in the film the frames were deleted and how many at each deletion, as well as you can possibly ascertain.  Then tie these frame deletions to the corresponding flim-flammery of the data blocks as surveyed vs. data blocks as entered in the WC report.

I think a well-written version of what you believed happened, and where/when/why, would make a good narrative to explain how Spector & Co. got from 3 shots/3 hits to the magic bullet/SBT, and would explain why the problems exist in, for example, explaining Clint Hill's superhuman speed if the motorcade didn't slow to nearly a stop.

You have outlined things well. Perhaps My Josephs might collaborate with you and write the narrative, because your work seems to come off at this point as staccato bursts, rather than as a flowing tale of deceit that this truly is.

IMHO, the information you have uncovered here neither convicts nor exonerates LHO... but it certainly convicts Shaneyfelt and Spector of evidence tampering, IMHO.

##### Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark Knight said:

Chris, when you get through with all the computations, I think it would be wise to start a chronology of the Z-film, noting WHERE in the film the frames were deleted and how many at each deletion, as well as you can possibly ascertain.  Then tie these frame deletions to the corresponding flim-flammery of the data blocks as surveyed vs. data blocks as entered in the WC report.

Mark, a film shot at 48fps slo-mo with sequential removal of 1/2 the frames and then a sequential removal of 1/4 of those remaining frames yields this result:

Did they extract all the frames exactly sequentially? Who knows! We don't have the true original.

The final (whole frame) ratio of 18/48 = .375 = the combination of sequential removal of 1/2 the frames and then a sequential removal of 1/4.

I would suggest viewing my version which is representative of the above frame removal sequence, then viewing MPI's version for comparison purposes.

I think a well-written version of what you believed happened, and where/when/why, would make a good narrative to explain how Spector & Co. got from 3 shots/3 hits to the magic bullet/SBT, and would explain why the problems exist in, for example, explaining Clint Hill's superhuman speed if the motorcade didn't slow to nearly a stop.

A version of what I believed happened is speculation.

For every frame seen in the extant film, a 48fps version would yield 1.622 extra frames per existing frame. Remove those 1.622 per every frame and I'm sure you could hide what was necessary.

Something superhuman on film would equate to excess frame removal (even moreso than 1.622) unless something along the lines of David Healy's (optical printer primer) input was used also.

You have outlined things well. Perhaps My Josephs might collaborate with you and write the narrative, because your work seems to come off at this point as staccato bursts, rather than as a flowing tale of deceit that this truly is.

Maybe.

I'm sure David J. would like to exhaust most, if not all other alternatives before a narrative is written. Imo

Staccato bursts?    Fair enough.

Easier for me to implement TMI initially, and then reconstruct in a somewhat more chronological manner.

Unfortunately, this is the way I have discovered it.

IMHO, the information you have uncovered here neither convicts nor exonerates LHO... but it certainly convicts Shaneyfelt and Spector of evidence tampering, IMHO.

Agreed. Never was my intention to either convict or exonerate LHO.

If you believe it indeed convicts Shaneyfelt, Spector and the like, thank you for the support.

My analogy being:

If the Police, DA, and Judge among others are caught tampering with evidence, sometimes the convicted (regardless of guilt or innocence) are set free.

If you watch the version I created, notice the frame number count and the ghost numbers within, which are just an indicator of the extra 1.622 frames that were there originally.

Edited by Chris Davidson

##### Share on other sites

Staccato burst - I like that...

As Chris eludes, any narrative would involve so much guesswork.... and be hard struck to account for Position A, # of frames between 132 & 133, the actual starting and stopping number of frames, etc.

What we are doing here in reality is unraveling what Shaneyfelt, Gauthier, Frazier, and a few others were doing in Apr/May 1964 when the conclusive plats were changed.
We also have to accept wherever Shaneyfelt placed Surveyor WEST and then equated that spot to a frame #... even in the early surveys.

CE884 is the result of that effort and literally JUMPS out at us trying to explain what the FBI boys did.

We have CREATED legends, CREATED surveys, WCD298, CE585, CE875 and the entire CE885-CE902 run which uses the stand-in for measurements.
And none of them work in concert with the others... except for the shot down by 5+00 which was simply removed to create the 2 shot results.

Is it a coincidence that 1.8 seconds of Towner is missing and the limo stop was judged to be just under 2 seconds.
--- that the wide Elm turn and Position A match exactly yet is specifically called out as NOT being seen in the extant film - was it ever there?
--- when the 16 to 48 fps switch(es) occur.... All that needed 48fps was what we see as Z150-Z400.  That's 250 frames / .25  /  .50 = 667 starting frames

50% of 667 = 333    25% of 333 = 83 .   333 - 83 = 250    /   667   = .625 = 5/8.  Therefore, 250 18fps frames started out as 667 48fps frames.
The extra .3 foot per frame gives them a fudge factor as well as allows for easier measurement on the Elm incline.
These .3 fps over 486 frames also allows for .443 seconds of removed film  - and at 48fps that equates to 21-22 frames.

By removing those extra 22 frames, the speed of the film increases from 18 to 18.3 fps for no other reason that the math works with the Elm incline.
486 frames needed to go thru the projector in the same time 508 at 18fps did.

Related to Towner and her splice... her camera did not run at 24fps but at 16 and 48 like all the other cheap cameras of the day.
Playing the Towner frames at 22-24fps looks ridiculous.  (what speed did you do your FLV files of the Towner turn?)

Here's another reason for the change in lane stripes from plat drawing to drawing... the limo at zframe 166 becomes altered CE884's first 171 by artificially moving the limo south from the red to the green line.  Then, on the green line, the limo is in line with red-z 161 at the new green-z 171.  The Green path extends down to 313 where it meets up again with its red original...  all paths converge at 313...  problem being 313 was the 2nd, not 3rd shot in all the other surveys.

So the film contradicts CE884 which in turn was altered from a different legend original which was created to explain the images seen in the film.
CE884 does not even consider WCD298's conclusions and conflicts with them greatly - both versions.

So finally, we are left with a simple question:

Do things occur in the film which appear impossible?

Body movements that are too fast?
Stop/Start which does not look as it should?
Choppiness that appears to slow down and speed up
Both fore- and back- grounds in focus while panning

Since we also see these items, it becomes more and more obvious the film MUST have been altered - otherwise it would have been used without recreations from day one.

Mark - let's start with a few questions for you...  do you see that frames are missing ?

from between or within 157-158

302-303

Chaney not seen

and before this there's 316-317 Greer Turn, the shot at 5+00, the terrible difference between the final Altgens image and all the others

So in the end, the MATH follows the hypothesis that IF the film was altered... a methodology would have been employed...

Chris' thoughts on this methodology are spot on and take a difficult process and makes it very simple...

DJ

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Playing the Towner frames at 22-24fps looks ridiculous.  (what speed did you do your FLV files of the Towner turn?)

You'll have to show me which one in particular, I've created quite a few.

So in the end, the MATH follows the hypothesis that IF the film was altered... a methodology would have been employed...

Well spoken.

Chris' thoughts on this methodology are spot on and take a difficult process and makes it very simple...

Fortunately for a few, but not for the majority.

Thanks David.

Next, I'll introduce what I believe the pre z133 total frame breakdown would consist of.

##### Share on other sites

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 486 = 1274.75 frames

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 133 =   348.85 frames

Difference =                         925.9 frames

1/2 frame removal =            462.95frames

Total frames from z133 =     353

Difference =                         109.95

Remove 109.95/462.95 =   .23749           + .7625 (18.3/24) = 1

##### Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 486 = 1274.75 frames

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 133 =   348.85 frames

Difference =                         925.9 frames

1/2 frame removal =            462.95frames

Total frames from z133 =     353

Difference =                         109.95

Remove 109.95/462.95 =   .23749           + .7625 (18.3/24) = 1

And to bring this full circle... the reason for the splice there - imo - is to hide the wide Elm turn...  by using the earlier motorcycle as a guide we can see how many frames it takes when disappearing into that corner...  Since the cycle is not stopping, nor slowing much... the 81 frame count is low compared to the 109 removed...  we are also to remember that the motorcycle is already within the turn at frame 20-40 while the limo had not yet entered the picture by frame 132.

now we take Position A and compare it to where the cycle is in frame 121...  yet somehow, the limo is in the middle of the road at 133...  I know I posted this before, this approximates that turn, the divergence of paths, Pos A and then back to 133...

(note:  For reference, Roy Truly testified to the limo almost hitting the Elm extension curb and having to turn sharply left to get back to the middle of the street
Mr. BELIN. The street leading to the expressway, that diagonal street?
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb?
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here.

Edited by David Josephs

##### Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 486 = 1274.75 frames

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 133 =   348.85 frames

Difference =                         925.9 frames

1/2 frame removal =            462.95frames

Total frames from z133 =     353

Difference =                         109.95

Remove 109.95/462.95 =   .23749           + .7625 (18.3/24) = 1

109.95 / 18.3 = 6.008sec

Six Missing Seconds in Dallas.

##### Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

And to bring this full circle... the reason for the splice there - imo - is to hide the wide Elm turn...  by using the earlier motorcycle as a guide we can see how many frames it takes when disappearing into that corner...  Since the cycle is not stopping, nor slowing much... the 81 frame count is low compared to the 109 removed...  we are also to remember that the motorcycle is already within the turn at frame 20-40 while the limo had not yet entered the picture by frame 132.

now we take Position A and compare it to where the cycle is in frame 121...  yet somehow, the limo is in the middle of the road at 133...  I know I posted this before, this approximates that turn, the divergence of paths, Pos A and then back to 133...

(note:  For reference, Roy Truly testified to the limo almost hitting the Elm extension curb and having to turn sharply left to get back to the middle of the street
Mr. BELIN. The street leading to the expressway, that diagonal street?
Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn.
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb?
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here.

Beginning of z through z133

48/18.3 = 2.622... x 133 =   348.85 frames all removed

1/2 removed = 174.425

1/4  =  87.21 snipped

1/4 remaining = 87.21 snipped                      87.21/48 = 1.81sec           Myers 33/18.3 = 1.803sec

Towner 48/22.8(Myers FPS) = 2.1 x 7 Myers missing frames span  = 14.7 total frames - 7 = 7.7 added to Towner existing total = 167 + 7.7 =174.7 = 1/2 removed from first pass.

##### Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

109.95 / 18.3 = 6.008sec

Six Missing Seconds in Dallas.

btw, the conversion/difference of 109.95 frames at 48fps = 2.29 sec x 18.3 fps = 41.91 frames

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; we have established that the Zapruder motion picture camera operates at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second. And we have been advised that the minimum time for firing the rifle in successive shots is approximately two and a quarter seconds. So this gives us then a figure of two and a quarter seconds of frames; at 18.3, this gives us this figure of 41 to 42 frames.
Representative FORD. Would you repeat that again, please?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. The camera operates at a speed of 18.3 frames per second. So that in two and a quarter seconds it would run through about 42--41 to 42 frames.
Representative FORD. Then the firing of the rifle, repeat that again?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. As to the firing of the rifle we have been advised that the minimum time for getting off two successive well-aimed shots on the rifle is approximately two and a quarter seconds. That is the basis for using this 41 to 42 frames to establish two points in the film where two successive quick shots could have been fired.

##### Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

109.95 / 18.3 = 6.008sec

Six Missing Seconds in Dallas.

Two distances based on whole frames:

18.3/18 = 1.01666...

(3.74mph) 5.49ft per sec / 1.01666... = 5.4ft per sec whole frames

5.4ft per sec x 6.008 sec = 32.44ft per whole frames

5.49ft per sec x 6 sec = 32.94ft

##### Share on other sites

The public CE884 gives us this result for the first two entries.

5frames @ .9ft traveled = 18.3/5 = 3.66 x .9 = 3.294ft sec /1.47 = 2.24mph

Missing six seconds in Dallas x 3.294ft per sec = 19.764ft