David Josephs

THEY REMOVED THE 30 PLUS FEET PAST Z313 TO THE 3RD SHOT BY MOVING THE ACTUAL Z161 BACK TO Z131

SHANEYFELT REPEATEDLY TALKS OF THE START OF THE SEQUENCE, THE EARLIEST FILM THEY HAVE STARTING AT Z161.

AS WE'VE SAID ALL ALONG...NPIC STARTED WITH Z312 AND WORKED BACKWARD AS BEST THEY COULD...

THE FRAME NUMBERS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ARBITRARY SIONCE WE HAVE A SPLICED FILM...

AFTER THE 131 OR 161 SPLICE TO REMOVE THOSE 30 FRAMES, WE HAVE NO IDEA ANYMORE THE ACTUAL FRAME NUMBERS

Paz,

Here is a list of the recent docs which come FROM ROME...  followed by one TO ROME

I have yet to go thru them all, maybe there are some gems...

DJ

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10103-10149.pdf

17-page report on DeMohrenschildt

Comments on "Reputed Former CIA Agent" George DeM

DJ  

Except take a look at the HOSTY report on that Suitcase and compare it with what is listed above...

https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/010/10477/images/img_10477_704_300.png 

https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/010/10477/images/img_10477_705_300.png

https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/010/10477/images/img_10477_706_300.png

CD75 page 700.

... the typewriter letter of 11/9 mailed 11/2,   the Backyard photos and negatives,    the rifle blanket and string

and they went back on the 23rd...   They find negatives (AND photos) of Oswald holding a rifle and a pistol... probably the most important thing found on the 23rd...

Do we see that on here?   of course not....

1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:

Liebeler and Marina

One must wonder how Liebeler has the BUS TICKET for his return trip from Marina 2 weeks prior to the note he writes below...

" I do not think there is "convincing evidence" that Oswald was on the buses as stated"

HSCA Hearing and Volumes V11 p236

JFK Exhibit No. 37

[Memorandum]

SEPTEMBER 14, 1964.

To: Mr. Willens.

From: Mr. Liebeler.

e. The paragraph on bus transportation starting "There is no firm evidence" should be completely rewritten. I do not think there is "convincing evidence" that Oswald was on the buses as stated. One sentence says he was apparently one of four passengers bound for a point beyond Texas. The next suggests that lie bought a ticket in Houston for Laredo, which is in Texas. The McFarland testimony is given too much weight. I don't think Mexican immigration records show the time of day he crossed the border.  Slawson told me he got the time of crossing from the scheduled arrival of the bus. Now we are using it to show that since he crossed at that time he had to be on the bus.

f . Since we have no direct evidence that Oswald boarded bus 5133 in Houston, the first sentence of the next paragraph ("Hence, the only time . . .") should be changed. That also obviates the necessity that he had to go from New Orleans to Dallas and thence too Houston. There really is almost no evidence at all that he left Houston on that bus and there is really no reason why we should suggest there is . The point can be made without saying that and to seem to rely on really weak evidence is to invite trouble.

g. Again-later in the same paragraph-more reliance on the McFarlands. Their affidavit is very weak-we should not fight it.

h. Then the single ticket from Houston to Laredo again-which probably could not have been Oswald if he were one of the four heading for points beyond Laredo.

i. Also, the assumption that the Twiford call was a local call. Why speculate, make the arguments-he probably would not have called at all if he were not in Houston or going to be in Houston.

j. The conclusion that the evidence is persuasive that Oswald was not in Dallas on September 25 is too strong.

Mr. LIEBELER. I did not ask the FBI for an explanation and they never offered me one.

Mr. CORNWELL. The reason I ask the question is I suppose there might be some chance that the evidence had been fabricated and did not even exist in November 1963. Is that correct? Did you even ask to see if they had checked this location earlier and found nothing?  

Mr. LIEBELER. I don't recall making that request.

   you mean evidence was .... created??   

52 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

Once again, what part of the equation (frame#) did the limo first appear in and what part of the equation did the data begin with?

Data begins with Station C and Position A...  and z168. 

Mr. McCLOY. Where is that point? What significance is that point? The first point? 
Mr. SPECTER. This frame 161. 
Mr. McCLOY. Yes. 
Mr. SPECTER. Is the first frame we have on the Zapruder film. 

Really?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is an album that I prepared of black and white photographs made of the majority of the frames in the Zapruder film---- 
Mr. SPECTER. Starting with what frame number? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Starting with frame 171, going through frame 334. 
Mr. SPECTER. And why did you start with frame 171? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. This is the frame that the slides start from. This was an arbitrary frame number that was decided on as being far enough back to include the area that we wanted to study. 

334 - 171 = 163    334 - 166 = 168

168 thru 171 becomes 161 to 166.

16 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Now what span would give us 183 frames?

2+50 = elevation 429.7   ....    Shot #2 at 419.7 (not 419.07) is 10 feet lower in elevation

313 - 183 = 130...  just about the splice for the limo cut...

On 3/3/2018 at 10:56 AM, Steve Thomas said:

Gary and David.

 

Could you boil this down for me?

 

Are you saying that this is an American document, written by and American person, and that the rifle being displayed was a 7.35 caliber and not a 6.5?

I had always thought the rifle came through Interarmco, but this document says it came through Adams? Or it might be one of the tens of thousand floating around on the black market?

 

Steve Thomas

 

I understand it Steve...  The report is from the ROME CIA station (William Harvey) after a report was compiled for Giulio Andreotti.

I have to assume that the CIA and Italian "XXXX Service" would share info...

Couple things of note...  I am still not convinced the rifle DAY carries from the TSBD is CE139...  the markings are not there...

The problem with the MAUSER designation and the scope... is that the scope covers where the rifle markings are...  and the MAUSER designation was used to account for there NOT being a clip... since it uses a stripper clip... and not a full metal clip...

Thanks Larry.. 

Yes, everyone was..is better at it than we are.. It seems.

Page 2 and 3.... ?

I understood these to be from Rome...

I have the rest... Space probs...

Having trouble... On a tablet.  But will post asap....

They also knew about the planted rifle from what I read...

I have the report from Rome CIA station....

11 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Please refrain from agreeing with me about any thing...unless you're a Golden State Warriors fan...

2 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

A very good post, David.  This is where the Hardly crowd gets themselves in trouble, taking 3rd and 4th generation hearsay testimony, mistakes, a scribble on 50 year old papers and blow it into a full-blown ridiculous theory

the defense rests...  next he'll be offering McAdams a quickie...

You might consider lying down and getting some medication ... 

And I'm 100% sure those authors do not want you representing their work in any manner...  if you could even begin to understand any of it

You really don't get it.   you're the proverbial gnat ...

Nope...  only kept 3 year old payment stubs for someone else...

It's as if Marina didn't bother to see what of her husband's they took...  y'know, just out of curiosity...

the detail in those lists is amazing... yet the BYP and negatives were supposedly written down as "Misc photos and maps"
- Stovall B -

And kind of my point about the rifle carton...  What better place to FREELY keep your rifle than in the carton it came in?... how else would he have gotten it home if, in that parallel universe, the rifle was shipped and waiting for him at the GPO.

Mr. BELIN. And do you know in what kind of a container it would have been shipped? 
Mr. WALDMAN. It was customary for us to ship these rifles with scopes attached in a corrugated cardboard carton made for us by the Rudd Container Corporation of Chicago. 
Mr. BELIN. About how long would that carton be in size, if you know? 
Mr. WALDMAN. Approximately 60 inches. 

All we need now is to determine if the FBI or CIA had access to quality forgers...

Your HSCA in action....

(71) Five items of evidence were not examined in the original, but were copies. Photocopies have several limitations. They do not reproduce all the fine details in handwriting needed in making an examination and comparison. At best, they do not produce as sharp an image as a properly produced photograph, and they lack tonal gradations, a result of the contrasting process of reproduction. In addition, it is possible to incorporate or insert changes and alterations into copies. A method frequently used is to paste together parts of documents to make one fradulent document, which is then copied. If the first copy can pass inspection, it will be used ; if not, it will be reworked to eliminate all signs of alteration. This amended copy is then recopied for the finished product. This is usually referred to as the "cut and paste" method.

(72) Document examiners only render a qualified or conditional opinion when working from copies. They stipulate that they have to examine the original before a definite opinion will be made.

(73) Because of problems with the following documents, no definite opinion can be rendered

(74) Item 18 (Nov 15, 1959 letter from Oswald), a halftone copy of a photograph of the original document. This is at least a third generation copy and is not suitable for comparison. (A halftone copy consists of very small dots and not continuous lines.)

(75) Item 29 (US POSTAL ORDER) was a Xerox copy made from a microfilm copy. Such a second generation copy has the defects of both processes.

(76) Item 39 (HOTEL REGISTRATION MEXICO Sept 27)  was a photograph taken without a scale so that the magnification or reduction of the writing could not be determined .

(77) Items 40 and 41 (ORIGINAL AND COPY of Visa Application from Cuban Consulate) were very poor quality photographs and lacked scales to determine the size of enlargements .

(78) Item 47 (Letter to HUNT) was a photograph of an out-of-focus facsimile copy. Instead of having clear discernible lines, the copy has indistinct and blurred outlines . Such a muddy and unclear copy gives the appearance that it might have been so made for a purpose.

21 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

The RSS is probably Richard S. Stovall, and the GFR is probably Guy F. Rose - two of the Detectives who searched the 2515 W. 5th St. property in Irving. I don't know who the other two guys are: (Hmm and J Pa.)

19 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Here are the two signatures. It's up to us I guess to decide if they were done by the same person.

 

Steve Thomas

Sure does look like it Steve... but why the different "A"  One of the two Oswalds did not usually write in script... (Lee)

The HSCA handwriting report was a sham from start to finish Steve...  I hope you don't place too much faith in most of the HSCA work...

I stopped after finding this at the beginning of my Mexico Journey...