Bill Miller

Ink blot type illustrations made up of lights and shadows seen on a wall .... is this a sign of whats to come? Bill Miller

It is truly Clint Hill's foot. Thre is another photo taken from the other side of the car which shows Hill's outsretched leg getting into that position. Why Holland said it was JFK's foot as the limo passed below him is a mystery to me. I can only assume Sam saw the foot over the door panel as the car raced down the highway and got the timing of his observation incorrect. Bill

Lee, you think you see someone, but look down on the same spot in the Dorman film and no one is there - sorry! Bill Miller

"Let's assume the hedge was 24" high in 1963, that would mean that this area of interest rises above 24 inches" .... what on earth does that mean? Look, Lee ... I had an interest in what you said when I looked at a good Dorman and Zapruder film image and saw no one was where you were claiming them to be ... what more is there to discuss? I wish I had my 'Death in Dealey Plaza' DVD with me because they show a good Dorman film and looking down on the area you are talking about there is nothing but a space between the wall and a perfectly intact knee high shrub. Zapruder's elevated view also allows us to see over the shrubs. There is roughly less than 2' between those shrubs and the wall and his angle shows no one present there. What else is there to consider, Lee? That's like me saying it is possible that a sniper was standing by the tree on the South pasture and showing cross-hair views from that spot to offer effect, but when someone looks at the films showing that tree ... they find no one is there ... what other consideration is there to kick around when that happens??? Maybe we differ on this approach, but I don't consider spending a lot of time pondering the impossible as some form of a good research practice. Bill Miller

The individual on the south knoll behind the lamppost appears to me to be the guy that ran around and behind the truck bed. Bill

You are correct. The truck bed rails are illiminated from the sunlight. The man is shading the portion of the rail directly in front of him which causes Jack to wrongfully think the man is sitting inside the truck bed. Jack used an inferior frame from another film and has admitted in doing so which led to an erred observation, so no need to explain that mistake any further. The frame Jack uses where he thinks he sees a bed cover on the truck is the two illuminated railings blurred just enough to make it appear the truck has a bed cover. The frame Jack chose to make his observation with is probably the only frame that he could have used for the rest of the frames show a sharper image of the truck bed. Note below that one frame shows horizontal blur while the vertical objects are sharp and visa versa. Bill Miller

Right, Lee ... that's what you need to do. ........ or you could talk to someone who has spoken to Rosemary like Gary Mack and see if you can hear more about what she meant when she said certain things. Yeh, like a garden nome for the shrubs aren't hardly 2' high. The couple is seen below before the younger couple enters the walkway and blocks them from view. (see below) The woman (dark dress) is blocking the man (leaning forward in light colored jacket) who was with her from Zapruder's view IMO (see 2 red arrows). The old man is still seen under the red arrow on the right. Bill Miller

Brendan, you say the above as if you find glee in what happen to JFK. Bill Miller

Anyway, the first shot rang out. It was to the front of me, and to the right of me, up high. DalTex? The second shot that I heard came across from my right shoulder. By that time, the limousine had already moved further down. And that shot came across my shoulder. Peristyle Corner? The 6th floor is to Rosemary's right and up high ... the 2nd floor of the Daltex would be lower and further back. As she is basically facing towards the Stemmons road sign after the first shot - any shot coming from low and from the direction of the Daltex building not 20 feet out into the street would sound as if it were going over Rosemary's right shoulder. The point being is that the shrubs behind Rosemary Willis were short in height ... they are not spread apart as if someone was laying in them ... and they were also away from the wall allowing both Dorman and Zapruder a partial view over the top of them. So unless a garden nome carried out the assassination - there is simply no one in or behind the shrubs. Bill Miller

http://cgi.ebay.com/Warren-Commission-Repo...1QQcmdZViewItem

Purvy, I like how your illustration in post #14 shows how a bullet entering the body will push what it penetrates INWARD, thus what it does leaving the body will push that surface OUTWARD. It certainly addresses the sprung opened bones on the back of JFK's head quite nicely. Thanks! Bill Miller

Lee. for the last time ... please look at the Dorman film for it shows this area from above and there is simply no one there. The space between the 2' tall shrubs and the wall is in clear view as Elsie's camera pans over it. So unless one claims her film has been altered, then the chance of a shooter being in the shrubs is zero. Bill Miller

You appear to have misinterpreted what she was trying to say. Looking over her Dad's shoulder face on at the Stemmons Road sign is "across from it" to some people. I didn't know there was a routine for seeing the President of the United States. Bill

Brendan, How much of a subject do you feel that you know about before forming an opinion? Groden never said that the other pictures that were taken of OJ at the game had been doctored, but rather the one photo that he testified to had been altered. It is possible that the lone photographer did play with his photo in hopes of being well compensated for his efforts, but with the second set of photos being presented as evidence - it would still make OJ appear guilty even if Robert was correct about the one photo and its owners manipulation of it. And if Groden was in error, then it certainly wouldn't mean that he was in error on other matters. No one is always wrong! And so you know this ... I have never tried to pass myself off as anything. In fact, I have posted on this forum that I do not feel that I am a photo expert. However, I do know the photogrqaphical record quite well and have studied it about as mush as anyone. So when you claim the opposite as my postings concerning my qualifications, then it makes you appear to not know what you are talking about, thus you are passing yourself as someone who has their facts straight when you acyually do not. Bill Miller

Chuck, blood starts to clot and becomes sticky within minutes. Jackie said she held her husbands head on all the way to the hospital. This is all it would have taken for the bone plate to have started to set up, not to mention the extra drying that would have taken place from the windy ride at high speed in an open car. Besides, Dr. Baxter mentions that at some point that he and Clark did see the bone plate laying on its side, so some of the professionals eventually got around to finding it at Parkland. Dr. Baxter - The only wound that I actually saw--Dr. Clark examined this above the manubrium of the sternum, the sternal notch. This wound was in temporal parietal plate of bone laid outward to the side and there was a large area .... Bill Correct! I removed some of the blurred frames and created a dissolving image from Z312 and Z317 if I remember correctly. It's purpose was to track the path JFK's body took from point A to point B. Bill

I think the difference is that the Dallas doctors confirmed a wound seen in the back of the head and on the front of the neck, but had not seen the wound on the top of the head because the bone plate had gotten held into place by Jackie on the way to Parkland and had sealed up by a lot of dried blood on the top of JFK's head. Baxter, However does mention seeing the wound as he referred to it as a 'bone plate'. Bill[/b]

Brendan, you didn't bother to find out from someone what it meant as far as the direction the bullet was traveling to have sprung open bones on the back of someone head before reaching your conclusion, so why would it matter if you didn't follow the posters as far as who had said what! Bill

Brendan, I hope this wasn't your best answer. So you know ... there is a saying that says that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but no one is entitled to be wrong about the facts ... for without knowing the facts - your opinion is of no value. You denounced a frontal shot when several experts told of seeing first hand the avusled bones on the back of the President's head protruding up through JFK's scalp. So this is why I asked the question I did just to see if you had even bothered to find out what it means if the bones on someones head were sprung rearward when talking about the direction the bullet must have traveled. Your answer seems to imply that you had not attempted to find out that particular bit of information, which makes me wonder how you could have honestly reached a conclusion as to the direction of all the shots without first learning a few things. What you have done is come up with an answer to an addition problem without first knowing what numbers you were to add together. And to address the childish response you made concerning my expertise ... I don't need to be an expert to witness an event - research an event - or cite what experts had said about an event. Not only did the Dallas doctors offer their expertise as both first hand witnesses and medical doctors experienced in gunshot wounds, but I have solicited a few medical people, as well as law enforcement personnel ... not to mention a blood expert and all the answers I recieved seemed to be very consistent of a front to back shot. Bill Miller

Brendan, I will ask you the same question ... What direction was a bullet traveling in order to spring open the bones to the rear on the back of JFK's head? Bill

Mark, I believe that just because one has seen the Zapruder film more times than they can count doesn't mean much unless you first know how high they are capable of counting in the first place, but look at the Muchmore film and note how Jackie's hand is positioned and you will find the answer you were originally seeking. Bill

Yes, cans can rust to the point of being paper thin, as well as pipes in a persons home until one day all of a sudden you have water spraying from a pin hole that wasn't leaking only moments before. I too, have shot soda cans, beer cans, and a few paint cans in my day. The Dallas doctors, who were quite familiar with gunshots to the human body, knew that when entering the body a bullet will puncture the surface, while exiting the body it will push open the surface. This is exactly why they therorized that a bullet may have entered the throat and exited the back of the President's head. A simple test can be done by taking a paper napkin and shoving your finger through it and seeing that the napkin will avulse/spring open in the direction your finger was being pushed as it penetrated the surface. I have repeatedly asked Purvis to acknowledge this rule of physics, but I assume that because he is aware of its implications ... he instead chose to dance around the matter. Purvis will ask you to look at an autopsy report, but doesn't ask that you look at what those individuals who were present at the autopsy had to say about the large hole in the back of JFK's head. This is one example of the type of criticsms Al had about Purvis's modus-operandi on this forum. Purvis knows that if he admits that a missile leaving the head will spring open the bones, then one is left with then weighing the credibility of the Dallas doctors and nurses, the FBI Agents Sibert and O'Neal, and the Bethesda witnesses who saw a large hole in the back of the President's head over what the autopsy report stated. Purvis reminds me of a realtor who after you have interviewed the firemen who were once called to a 4'alarm fire at the said property and heard how they battled the flames, then talked to the construction crew who came in and did the cleanup and remodeling ... Purvis will tell you there must never of been a fire because the listing shows a nice pristine home for sale. Bill Miller

Purvis, it just dawned on me that you are not interested in the truth, but rather you are someone on a mission of spreading disinformation. Are you aware that Al has had CSI training which deals in forensic evidence? Again, Purvy ... if the bones on the back of someone's head are sprung opened to the rear - tell us what direction was the bullet traveling? Why not answer the simple question I have put to you a half of a dozen times now rather than making an ass out of yourself trying to compete with Al. Bill

Purvy, you are jackin' around here. We are not talking about my interpretation, but rather what the Dallas doctors described seeing with their own eyes. So again, regardless of anyones interpretations - just tell this forum what direction a shot was traveling if the bones on the back of someones head is sprung open to the rear? This is a simple question that can be answered outside the realm of the JFK asassination. Bill Miller

Purvy, you are jackin' around here. We are not talking about my interpretation, but rather what the Dallas doctors described seeing with their own eyes. So again, regardless of anyones interpretations - just tell this forum what direction a shot was traveling if the bones on the back of someones head is sprung open to the rear? This is a simple question that can be answered outside the realm of the JFK asassination. Bill Miller

Please just answer the question. Again, Purvy ... when the bones on the back of someone's skull are sprung opened to the rear - what direction was that projectile traveling? Bill