Bill Miller

Ray ... can you offer me more than "no it doesn't" ? Let us see if we are on the same page at any point and then maybe we can find where one of us has moved off of it. First this - is Baker's shadow ever paralleling the blue line .... let us start where the top of his shadow starts to pass the woman carrying the purse ------>

Alistair, Watch Bakers shadow as it nears the red line ... just as its about to make contact with it - it turns to the left and away from it in the last two steps. The shadow tells the careful observer that Patrolman Baker also changed his path so to head up the steps. There can be no argument about this for if Baker had not turned, then the shadow would have had no choice by to cross the red line had it stayed on course. All is left now for Sandy to say that someone removed the original shadow in those last couple of steps and painted in a new one to make it appear that Baker turned towards the stairs. " In my world ... "The laws of nature cannot be violated - the laws of nature cannot be changed - the laws of nature require no enforcement "

Michael, I think Sandy doesn't want to get it in a way that goes beyond a beautiful mind. He wrote, " Conclusion - Therefore, anybody with a high IQ should be suspected of developing crazy conspiracy theories. Yeah.... right. " I am not a genius and I could clearly see that what he said was not what you were implying at all. He just doesn't care to admit he was wrong! His reasons for thinking the bone plate was painted onto the Zapruder film have been clearly debunked and he seemingly couldn't even admit that at least one of the pieces of evidence has changed his mind pertaining to the bone-flap. That leaves me with the impression that he may believe that Mary Moorman had a Polaroid altering operation inside her coat pocket and somehow used it to remove the top of the President's head from her photo while not having even seen the Zapruder film ... or any other films and photos of the head wound. If I remember correctly, Mary's Polaroid was shown on television around 3:20PM/CST on the afternoon of the shooting.

You have several errors in your thinking IMO. 1) The red line runs parallel with the woman's shadow on the ground which for some odd reason is starting from some guys rump. To know the true direction she is walking - you should have placed the line between two recognized reference points known to be directly across the street from one another and watch how she progresses in relation to that line. In other words if the man that has the red line starting on his rump was to start walking towards the stairs from his location, then his shadow would also remain parallel with red line while his feet would eventually make contact with the red line. That very thing is what is happening with the woman in the coat that the gif references as she isn't walking in the same direction as the red line is pointed, but more towards the stairs. This is supported when in the long version in the previous post ... the bottom of her coat in that clip starts out on the red line (if not slightly below it) and rises away from that line as she steps along. 2) Patrolman Baker's shadow can be seen crossing over the curb just to the right of the hand-rail going up the middle of the steps. His shadow which is cast to the north east is to the left of the red line when it reaches the curb. That puts Baker in front of the people on the right side of the hand-rail to which would allow him to run up that side of the stairs. Baker's starting location was west of the woman walking near the red line, which means his path to get to the curb in front of the steps will be different angle than the woman's walking along the red line even if they were to be meeting at the same spot.

I saw Sandy's post, as well. I only copied a line from it because the rest was not worth repeating in my view. I understood what you meant, Michael. I took what you said to mean that some people are Conspiracy crazy .... that they find it where there is none go find. John Nash was a great example. Despite an extremely high IQ - he couldn't stop his imagining things that wasn't really there. I mention Mary Moorman's Polaroid as it was self developing and within 2.5 hrs after the assassination ... before ever being out of her possession and even before Zapruder's film had been processed - Moorman's #5 picture was shown on television, thus not leaving there being a chance to have been tampered with.

A high IQ is only helpful if one is informed on the topic he or she is talking about. Not a high IQ, but a keen eye and thorough study of Moorman's Polaroid so to be informed would have shown beyond any doubt that the top of JFK's head was missing when viewed from Moorman's side of the street, which in turn supported what was seen in the Zapruder film concerning that particular wound. Not a high IQ, but being informed that Jackie said she had held the top of her husbands head on during the ride to the hospital. And not a high IQ, but rather being informed as to what Dr, Jenkins said about examining the bone plate after the President was dead would explain how the wound looked on the Zapruder film. So if a high IQ was key to problem solving, then where was it when studying Moorman's photo and not noticing the top of Kennedy's head missing - or seeing the problem with painting over film grain. And because someone like myself did notice those things - does that mean I must have a higher IQ than those who didn't? I don't think it does and that the whole mentioning of a person's IQ was a meaningless distraction.

How about comparing Moorman's photo to the Zapruder film instead so to see if the skull cap actually became dislodged .... just one more reason to believe Jackie put the bone plate back in place to hold the top of the head on and why with all that blood soaked hair and the doctors at Parkland working so feverishly to get the President's condition stabilized that they didn't have time to sort through his hair so to see a fracture line. I may not always be right, but I prefer to make as complete study of the photographic evidence before declaring something has been altered.

I wonder if Connally had heard all the shots so to know the timing sequence if he had felt that way. How did he put it ... his initial thoughts was that it was more than one person or one person using an automatic rifle. I also wonder if he knew that so many people heard two shots close together when the kill shot to the President was fatally hit .... how did Agent Kellerman put it ... 'sounded like when a plane breaks the sound barrier ... Boom - Boom!'

I rely on being informed and not by what I wish to believe. There is no evidence that the Zapruder film was altered and I have given the several solid reasons for my saying that. As far as the autopsy photos being altered ... I cannot say the photos were altered or whether they were staged as there is a difference. All hat I said was that I am aware that the autopsy photos are not accurate and I stand by that.Those photos do not match the eye witness accounts of those who actually saw the damage to the rear of the President's head both at Parkland and at Bethesda. The Xrays have always looked to me as though someone took a skull and shot it from behind and blew out the right frontal bones around the cheek and eye. On the other hand, there were witnesses who saw the top of the President's head come off - which was what you were saying there was no proof of. I have now addressed that as well.

I just mentioned a few pages ago how the back of the President's head was avulsed where the bones were sprung open. Now are you asking if I am aware that the autopsy photos do not show any avulsion to the back of the head. I have studied the autopsy photos many times in detail. I have also discussed with Dennis David in detail what the real images of the autopsy looked like after his seeing them at Bethesda in the company of William Pitzer. So yes I am aware that the autopsy photos are not accurate.

I have not the time to look for every source, but here are two that mentioned the skull plate that was atop of the President's head - how Jackie held it in place on the the way to Parkland - and how Dr. Jenkin's examined it after JFK was dead. And it was mentioned in WC testimony by some of the medical personnnel that wounds were not looked for because life saving procedures came first. By GLEN JOHNSON Associated Press Writer BOSTON (AP) -- Even in her grief, Jacqueline Kennedy had the strength to recount her husband's assassination in vivid detail and the presence of mind to convey her hopes for his memorials. "His last expression was so neat," Mrs. Kennedy told journalist Theodore H. White in comments released for the first time Friday. "He had his hand out, I could see a piece of his skull coming off ... and I can see this perfectly clean piece detaching itself from his head. "Then he slumped in my lap," she said. "His blood and brains were in my lap. "I kept saying: `Jack, Jack, Jack' and someone was yelling: `He's dead, he's dead.' All the ride to the hospital I kept bending over him saying: `Jack, Jack, can you hear me, I love you Jack.' I kept holding the top of his head down, trying to keep the brains in," she said on Nov. 29, 1963, a week after the president's assassination. Advance to time mark: 6:05

Connally conceded a scenario that he didn't believe nor ever supported. As we may remember - Connally heard the FIRST shot and always said that he never heard the shot that hit him - and then heard the impact of the third shot. But witnesses like Mary Woodward who was standing abreast of the President who seem to be looking right at her said that when the first shot rang out that the President immediately brought his hand towards his face - A slowed down version of the Zapruder film shows JFK coming out from behind the road sign with eyes closed and both hands on their way up to his mouth as if you cough so to dislodge what ever he felt had entered his throat - So all is left to know is when Connally was actually hit by the bullet that slammed into his back. He described it as feeling like a doubled up fist impacting with him. That seem pretty obvious when one watches Connally's shoulders for the moment the right one drops and moves slightly forward while the left one rises into the air. It is a shame that Connally never got to see these sorts of things before 1967. But then again he only said in 67' that the scenario he gave would be the only way for both men to have been hit by the same bullet. He always stood by the first shot hitting the President and the next shot hitting him which seems to be supported by the images provided here.

Michael - I agree as I didn't know Sandy was talking about the rear of the head. The bones only sprung open exposing a hole to anyone looking at it from behind. Zapruder's camera only see's the head in profile around the time of the kill shot. Once the car is further down the street - there is too much poor quality in the image from things you mentioned compounded by motion and panning blur to ever see such detail as some think should be present.

The reason for the people at Parkland not seeing the top of the head opened up was because Jackie tried holding the flap back into place. After the five minute ride to Parkland ... the President's hair was soaked in blood and like most wounds I ever had - the blood starts to dry/clot and works to seal the wound when it gets sticky. Then there was the testimony of the Parkland doctors where they said they didn't inspect for any wounds for if they didn't stabilize the President's condition - none of that would matter.

Sandy, I can only explain it in the most obvious way I know how .... Watch this transition clip that I created so everyone can see the large fractured bone plate that was blown from the top of the President's head as it flips into the air and over - thus leaving Zapruder to capture a glimpse of the open cavity on top of the head from where it came - along with the underside of the tethered bone hanging off the right side of the President's head. Combine that with the underlining jiggling flesh and moist cranial fluid being illuminated from the bright sunlight. Remember how Ed Hoffman described this wound as jiggling like jello as the car passed under him As stated to death now - Zapruder's camera was not able to see this with clarity because not only was the car moving, but his camera could not film fast enough to prevent the blurring of the image. No one needed to alter that wound because a slow running camera filming at 18fps and 100 feet away - along with a shaky camera being held by a man with vertigo removed any chance of a clear look at the wound. But considering that even before the shots were fired there wasn't anything clear to see in Zapruder's film - and that was with the car approach Zapruder. At the time of the kill shot the blurring became worse as the limo is moving across his field of view from left to right at a faster rate of speed. The only time Zapruder got a decent image was when his pan accidentally matched the movement of the limo's speed.

I will sit down and write down what I think based on my research. It will take a while and I would like to have some of my images from Roberdeau to post - hopefully soon.

I believe no one even knew of the small hole in Kennedy's throat until his clothing was removed and the doctors saw it.

I do not think you are correct about anyone seeing JFK or Jackie turning around to back behind them. The Secret Service Agents on the follow-up car did turn and looked back. Some witnesses said the President looked at them as he went by and considering the first shot hit JFK - he obviously had other things to do than to turn around in his seat to see who shot him.

" The "throat Gash" as you refer to it was obviously made after the body left Parkland. The most logical reason for this was that someone looked to see if there was a projectile lodged in the neck anywhere before an autopsy might find it. Where this was done I cannot say, but my thinking is that it was not done at Bethesda by trained medical personnel because a simple Xray would have answered that question with leaving behind such a tell-tale sign of body tampering. " I believe from the evidence that it was done after leaving Dallas and before the official autopsy started.

Ray, The "throat Gash" as you refer to it was obviously made after the body left Parkland. The most logical reason for this was that someone looked to see if there was a projectile lodged in the neck anywhere before an autopsy might find it. Where this was done I cannot say, but my thinking is that it was not done at Bethesda by trained medical personnel because a simple Xray would have answered that question with leaving behind such a tell-tale sign of body tampering. The head wound on the Zapruder film is another matter and has been discussed already. What I didn't say at the time was that had someone wanted to alter Zapruder's film if it could have been magically done without detection for reasons I have currently mentioned - they left the most damaging piece of evidence on the film and that was the back-spatter! It is a fact that back-spatter moves much slower than that which is moving with the speed of the bullet as it travels through an object such as the head. The back spatter also makes a much wider pattern. In the impact gif I posted - the large back-spatter of the missile breaking into the skull came from the top frontal part of the head. If you cover the screen and only watch the back of the head - that despite the abrupt motion blur .... you may be able to see the back of the head open up. Because that damage was moving much faster and Zapruder's camera is moving at only 18fps - its is not readily seen like the slower moving back-spatter was. This wide back-spatter pattern is what would have been removed from the film frame so to hide from which direction JFK's head was shot in my view, but wasn't done for the simple reasons I had previously stated in an earlier post. In summary, the point of impact of a bullet slamming into the head caused the wide back-spatter seen flying from the top frontal portion of the President's head while a more narrow faster moving pattern flew from the exit would in the rear of the head. The taking control of the body along with the threat of a court-martial to anyone ever mentioning what they had seen at Bethesda - the faking of the autopsy photos hiding the large 5" hole in the rear of the head - were things that could be done in 1963. Tampering with the Zapruder film without it being detected with high magnification and careful scrutiny at some point was not. Those that saw the smear of skull and blood right away claimed it looked painted without consideration of it merely being blurred from motion captured by a slow shutter exposure. Here is a gif I created years ago that has been darkened and the contrast bumped up so to show the sunlight illuminating the blood. Please note the amount seen coming from the front of Kennedy's head is slightly less than seen on Zapruder's film while the amount illuminated in the rear of the head is more than what is seen in Zapruder's film. The reason for this is quite simple - the cameras of Zapruder and Nix had shutters that were opening and closing slightly out of sync with each others. The moment of the head shot in Nix's film was exposed a slight fraction of a second ahead of Zapruder's film. Concentrate on only the back of JFK's head in the Zapruder gif. Can you see the hair move and its outer border lighten for that fraction of a second - I believe that was the bones avulsing open and they being illuminated with light after the debris already flew out the rear of the head before the camera shutter exposed the frame. The Nix film shutter exposed slightly quicker and caught some of the debris flying from the back of the head. And when JFK's head turns to a profile position - the avulsion of bones result in the oblong appearance of the back of Kennedy's head in Z321. The large opening then becomes apparent to Jackie as witnessed in Z335 and Z337 by the expression on her face. High speed photos of impact and exit spray patterns and all with the projectile moving from left to right

The replies given to you are not funny or show signs of being delusional to those who understand the simple rules of physics behind them. Good luck on your stroll through the Plaza and don't get lost. PS: Here is the view that Muchmore had. In her film - the shoes of Jean hill are visible and Moorman's is not in Muchmore's film. That was simply because Mary was over the slope near the curb, which is why her shadow extended further out into the street than Jean Hill's did. Muchmore's view was tested and recreated two men standing atop of the slope and then again over the slope and next to the curb while still in the grass. I post it here for your benefit and to check for yourself during your stroll through Dealey Plaza the next time you are there.

The poor devil that walked in front of the guns sure paid the price. Holy smokes! I don't know what to say about the notch in the rear of the skull other than there is a good chance that it never existed. The doctors and others who saw the rear head wound had it about 5" in width and lower on the back of the skull which isn't seen in the official autopsy photos which makes that whole area suspect to me.

Images I created years ago: I was never one to buy into the head b lowuot being altered for reasons I have already mentioned concerning alteration processes when dealing with film grains. The bullet and the explosion of the head was moving faster than Zapruder's camera could capture images, which alteration supporters didn't seem to want to understand. And the quality of the Abe's camera could not give the resolution to see fine detail of JFK's face - let alone the back of his blood soaked hair. What the camera could capture was the avulsion that so many medical personnel spoke about. The cone that suddenly appeared on the rear of JFK's head in both the Nix and Zapruder films demonstrated this avulsion. I believe in the laws of physics, so I don't waste time debating the painted head explosion silliness anymore. If an alteration could have been accomplished - it would have been done to remove the bulge off the rear of the skull caused by the bones being sprung outward.

It does seem like a strong possibility or else he really does have a very hard time understanding simple angles and basic physics and how they apply to cross referencing images. I have given him the benefit of the doubt so far, but I do think he will have to start better explaining how he ruled out the alternatives for if he doesn't - I will have to think you were certainly correct.

I take it that you never considered it to be a light on the ceiling further back into the room.