David Josephs

This is a bit strange...

Cannot find which flight either Phillips, Zapruder or Swartz put the film on for Rowley
Wrone states it is not until just before dawn Saturday that this film arrives - it's only 2.5 hours from Dallas to DC...  why does it take 6 more hours?

Did a car/person meet the plane - who?
The receipt of this film is not noted in anything Rowley or Phillips wrote....

And then somehow it makes its way back to the Zapruder group with the other copies and original?

How?

Indeed Mark...  Look at the size of the little tree on the south side of Elm.   Looks like a reenactment of some sort....

and yes, the sidewalk witnesses are not the same at all

Hey there George...  gonna have to disagree with some of your post...    Regarding the shot that missed and the WCR passage, it still does not say which of the three allowed shots missed and hit the curb by Tague....

Quote

1. Shot No. 1 ... from Del Tex hit Kennedy in the back. Frame Z-158

2. Shot No. 2 ... from the grassy knoll hit Kennedy in the  throat. Frame Z-193

3. Shot No. 3 ... from the TSBD hit Connally in the back. Frame Z-224?

4. Shot No. 4 ... from the TSBD hit the pavement on the right side of the limo and ricochetted to chip a piece of concrete that hit Tague on his cheek Frame Z-290

5. Shot No. 5 ... from the grassy knoll hit Kennedy in the head Frame Z- 313

6. Shot No. 6 ... from the TSBD passed over the limo and lodged in the grass on the south side of Elm Z- 332

1. Please explain how JFK continues on without showing the slightest indication he was hit in the throat at this point.  Witnesses describe a puff of concrete to the left of the limo as Hickey is looking down.  If you can,please provide substantiation for this shot.
    
2. Agreed
    
3. The way JFK reacts after 224 I see his getting hit in the back while behind the sign.  I also think shots were fired simultaneously based on there being radio contact between the shooters.  Between 207 and 225 there are at least 2 shots fired making one shooter impossible, again.
   JC is hit, imo just as he emerges from the sign
    
4. agreed that Tague is nicked and a shot hitting that curb causes it...  but this shot is terribly high and wide of the mark... your explanation is plausible for sure as I review the line of sight for that shot
    
5. Agreed - with a real possibility another shot is fired at this time hitting Connally
    
6. the manhole cover shot that mystery man scoops up was more in line with county records where a Det Weatherford, an accomplished shooter with a scoped rifle was stationed with an unnamed deputy.
    

   Cover-Up by Gary Shaw, undated interview of Roger Craig by Shaw and Penn Jones (pg.144)
   
   A man with a gun is known to have been on the roof of County Records Building during the assassination. According to Roger Craig, Deputy Sheriff Harry Weatherford was at this location with a rifle equipped with a telescopic sight… Deputy Sheriff Pat Boyd told Craig that two weeks prior to the shooting of Kennedy and Connally, he (Boyd) had built a silencer for a .30 caliber carbine owned by Weatherford.
   
   Interview by Gary Shaw and Larry Harris of an unknown researcher, November of 1975 (pg.144)
   
   In 1969 a young assassination researcher interviewed Weatherford, and was taken by the man’s savage demeanor. He asked him point-blank if he had shot Connally or Kennedy. Weatherford snapped, “You little son of a b----, I shoot a lot of people.”

   =====
   
   Letter 2 
   
   July 18, 1991 email
   Question: Was Harry Weatherford on the roof a building AT THE TIME of the JFK assassination? Which building was it, and who was Wheatherford with at the time? Who asked him to go up there?
   
   Did Weatherford tell you this himself? If not, who told you?
   
   BOWLES:  Harry Weatherford was on the roof of the county records building with another officer whose name escapes me.  He was assigned there by Decker, and this information was from Weatherford.  You may relate this if you keep it straight.

Funny thing about those random thoughts Alistair....

when we come upon what actually happened, it's crazier than anyone could have ever imagined.

Take care

DJ

There also remains evidence from those at Kodak that day claiming repeatedly that Zapruder was only given 2 rolls of "Type A" film or Kodachrome IIA which was indoor film versus the non type A which was outdoor film.

Regardless - a timeline of the Rowley film would be appreciated if anyone has info....

16 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Agreed. The third loud report was most likely just after the head shot, and the first was at 190-224.

In reality z313 was shot #4 or #5...  190 to JFK's throat from the front, 206/7 to JFK's back, 225 or so to Connally; possibly another shot to Connally yet I think the "flurry" at z313 might also have caught Connally. but at least 3 shots hitting their mark prior to z313.  IF the WC had kept any of the first three surveys, the "SHOT THAT MISSED" would have been the third at z358 yet the report from the FBI stated 3 shots = 3 hits

While I agree that during the z313 flurry sequence mutiple shots were fired,...  another shot, 40 feet down Elm at either 4+96 or 5+04, just 15 feet from Altgens was recorded 3 successive times by the same man at street elevation 416.83.  Shot #2 at 419.07.  (419.07-416.83=2.24 vertical elevation change times the rise/run of 18.3:1 we get a distance of 41 feet; 40.992').  Considering the limo was now accelerating and speeding away at much more than 1 foot per frame, it is considerably less than 42 frames between shots and therefore impossible for the bolt action Carcano to fire at both z313 and 41 feet further down Elm.  A man was seen by Rowland in the far WEST window which is a more likely place for a shot to be traveling SOUTH as opposed to WEST...  it is also possible that this T-shirt wearing man in the west window is the man Mrs Reid sees on the 2nd floor.

Mr. ROWLAND - This was very odd. There were this picture was not taken immediately after that, I don't think, because there were several windows, there are pairs of windows, and there were several pairs where both windows were open fully and in each pair there was one or more persons hanging out the window.
Yet this was on the west corner of the building, the sixth floor, the first floor--second floor down from the top, the first was the arched, the larger windows, not the arch, but the larger windows, and this was the only pair of windows where both windows were completely open and no one was hanging out the windows, or next to the window.
It was this pair of windows here at that time. 
Mr. SPECTER - All right.
Will you mark that pair of windows with a circle?

(Witness marking.)  http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0488b.htm

Mr. LIEBELER - Now, the thing that is troubling me, though, Mr. Altgens, is that you say the car was 30 feet away at the time you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and that is the time at which the first shot was fired?
Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER - And that it was 15 feet away at the time the third shot was fired.
Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER - But during that period of time the car moved much more than 15 feet down Elm Street going down toward the triple underpass?
Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER - I don't know how many feet it moved, but it moved quite a ways from the time the first shot was fired until the time the third shot was fired. I'm having trouble on this Exhibit No. 203 understanding how you could have been within 30 feet of the President's car when you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and within 15 feet of the car when he was hit with the last shot in the head without having moved yourself. Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President's car when he was hit in the head.
Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I was about 15 feet from it.

Furthermore, Altgens is corroborated by Brehm:

BREHM expressed his opinion that between the first and third shots, the President's car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet. It seemed to him that the automobile almost came to a halt after the first shot, but of this he is not certain. After the third shot, the car in which the President was riding increased its speed and went under the freeway overpass and out of his sight.

The slowing and virtual stopping of the limo, along with the evidence of the limo's very wide turn onto Elm which is represented by POSITION A.  If the limo does not make that turn, there would be no reason for Shaneyfelt to have positioned the car at that spot in the first place.

What we will see is how position A is the beginning of a limo path which is slightly south and slightly west of the actual limo path derived by Surveyor Robert West.

As Doug Horne points out in his IARRB, Life's Paul Mandel wrote that the shot at z190 enters JFK's throat due to his turning around to completely face the TSBD.  We know this is a falsehood provided him by someone at LIFE since he either 1) sees the film and lies about it, or 2) does not see the film and is told what to write.

It is not until Melvin Eisenberg and the viewing of the Zfilm in March 1964 to determine the exact frames on which shots hit their target that the problem of the agreed upon Z190 first shot.  

The problem presented by the Zfilm is that there is no place to put a 3rd shot prior to z210 (the tree blocks all shots from Shaneyfelt's POS A until z210) unless it is the throat shot at z190 or a shot that many believe occurs at z156 just as the limo finishes its turn

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0068a.htm is the WCR section titled "THE SHOT THAT MISSED" from which it must be determined if John Connally is mistaken about his NOT being hit by the first sound of a rifle.  Since there are both holes in the front of his throat and one at approx T3 on his back, it is my feeling that JFK is hit in the throat from the front between z190-z200 and is hit in the back at z207 which is the reaction of his we see as he emerges from the sign.

It is obviously just after this - between z224 and z238 - that John is hit by his own shot.  IOW, by the time JC is hit, at least 3 shots have been fired and hit their target.  Nothing then happens until 302/3/4 when we have the unnatural Greer headspin and a conclusion that in frame 303, the limo is not moving.

https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsFBIZ313.pdf is a paper I did related to WCD298 which asks the question:

Was a shot 4 feet from station 5+00 created to account for 3 shells or was there actually a shot down by Altgens and Hudson at the foot of the stairs? And what about Tague?
A shot has to miss terribly for it to hit the curb, leave no copper, and nick Tague.  While the WC chooses to claim that "no copper" indicates a fragment from within one of the copper jacketed bullets

I was standing on top of the train trestle where it crosses Elm Street with Austin Miller. We saw the motorcade come around the corner and I heard something which I thought was fireworks. I saw something hit the pavement at the left rear of the car, then the car got in the right hand lane and I heard two more shots. I heard a woman sa "Oh no" or something and grab a man inside the car. I then heard another shot and saw the bullet hit the pavement. the concrete was knocked to the south away from the car. It hit the pavement in the left or middle lane. I then went down to my car radio to see if I could find out what happened. After I came back up, a policeman asked me if I had seen anything and brought me to the Sheriff's Office.

/s/ R G Skelton

This helps confirm what I had been saying about a shot at the top of Elm where we see SA Hickey lean over and look at the street to the left of the limo just as little Rosemary is stopping her running...   yet it also corroborates a shot that missed after z313...   what has confused me is why another shot is fired after z313.

Q: As you saw it, what happened at the time the second shot went off in regard to President Kennedy? What did you see? 
A(Zapruder): I thought I just described what I saw. You mean where it hit him? 
Q: Yes. 
A: I saw the head practically open up and blood and many more things, whatever it was, brains, just came out of his head. 
--------------

Mr. KELLERMAN. Our car accelerated immediately on the time-at the time--this flurry of shots came into it. 
Mr. SPECTER. Would you say the acceleration-- 
Mr. KELLERMAN. Between the second and third shot. 
Senator COOPER. Might I ask a question there? 
Mr. SPECTER. Yes. 
Senator COOPER. A few minutes ago you said in response to a question that when you spoke to the driver the car leaped forward from an acceleration immediately. Did that acceleration occur before the second shot was fired?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir. Just about the time that it came in. 
--------------

Mr. SPECTER. Do you recollect whether you accelerated before or at the same time or after the third shot? 
Mr. GREER. I couldn't really say. Just as soon as I turned my head back from the second shot, right away I accelerated right then. It was a matter of my reflexes to the accelerator. 
--------------

Between the time I originally grabbed the handhold and until I was up on the car, Mrs. Kennedy--the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head, and he had slumped noticeably to his left.
Mr. SPECTER. When, in relationship to the second shot, did the car accelerate that is, the President's car? 
Mr. HILL. Almost simultaneously.
----------------

 I happened to be looking right at him when that bullet hit him - the second shot. 
Mr. LIEBELER - That was when the bullet hit him in the head; is that correct? 
Mr. HUDSON - Yes; it looked like it ht him somewhere along about a little bit behind the ear and a little bit above the ear. 
Mr. LIEBELER - On the right-hand side or the left-hand side? 
Mr. HUDSON - Right hand. 

Mr. LIEBELER - How many shots did you here altogether? 
Mr. HUDSON - Three. 
Mr. LIEBELER - Three shots? 
Mr. HUDSON - Yes, sir. 
Mr. LIEBELER - Are you sure about that? 
Mr. HUDSON - Yes, sir. 
Mr. LIEBELER - You say that it was the second shot that hit him in the head; is that right? 
Mr. HUDSON - Yes; I do believe that - I know it was. 
Mr. LIEBELER - You saw him hit in the head, there wasn't any question in your mind about that, was there? 
Mr. HUDSON - No, sir. 
Mr. LIEBELER - And after you saw him hit in the head, did you here another shot? 
Mr. HUDSON - Yes, sir. 
--------------------

In every survey done prior to the May 1964 charade for 1) Time/Life 11/26; The Secret Service for Warren Commission Doc 298 12/2,3,4; and for the FBI on 2/7/64 the three shots are outlined as shown in WCD298 with 210, 313 and circa z350 for the 3 shots.

Witnesses closest to the shooting all state z313 is the second shot after which the limo accelerates away, just as Kellerman, Greer and Hill state.  Greer actually watched until JFK's head explodes, then accelerates...

Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to see anything of President Kennedy as you glanced to the rear? 
Mr. GREER. No, sir; I didn't see anything of the President, I didn't look, I wasn't far enough around to see the President.

Yeah, not so much...  

As I've been rereading Horne's work on the "master" film and copies chain of custody - which takes from Wrone and Trask - I keep reading about the impossibility of a 4th copy or 5th film yet repeatedly there is a film missing in the narrative.

Max's note spells out pretty clearly that Zapruder has the "master", Sorrels has 2 copies and "The third print is forwarded"
We also know that Zapruder shows a film on Sunday...  but let's start at the beginning with Doug:

Zapruder departed Kodak’s Dallas Plant at about 9 PM, and turned over two of the three “first day copies” to the Secret Service. One was sent to Washington, D.C.---to Secret Service Headquarters---by Dallas Secret Service agent Max Phillips, who placed it on a commercial flight late Friday night. It arrived in Washington after midnight, and sometime before dawn, on Saturday, 11/23/63. The second “same day copy” relinquished to the Secret Service by Zapruder on Friday night was loaned by the Secret Service to the FBI in Dallas the next day, on Saturday; and then flown by the Dallas office of the FBI to FBI headquarters, in Washington, on Saturday evening

Yet in Max's note Sorrels KEEPS 2 copies and a 3rd is forwarded...  all the while Zapruder has the "master" and his best copy.  
Is it fair to assume that Zap's "best copy" is counted as one of Sorrels' copies ?
Is it further fair to assume that Sorrels relinquishes his only copy to the FBI while asking Zapruder to send a copy to DC?

And then there is the evidence from Erwin Swartz, Zap's partner who, with Zapruder, basically remove Max Phillips from the equation.

If Zapruder has "the best copy" and the original until Monday, and a copy is given to Phillips to send to Rowley with his hand-written note (surely Zap didn't write the note, nor does it appear he or Sorrels gave Phillips a copy to send but they Zap and/or his partner Erwin were to do it)  and another copy is retained by Sorrels and given to the FBI on Ervay (Kelley) on Sat morning... there appears to be another copy:

MASTER - Zap
Best original - Zap
Philips to Rowley - 8mm copy (the SS would only get a 2nd best or worse copy of the "master" - ?)
Sorrels is given 2 copies - 1 is supposedly given back to Zapruder to send to DC on an Army transport, and 1 is retained and given to FBI SA Kelley the next morning... except that's not what the subsequent evidence shows

Mr. LIEBELER - Now, Mr. Zapruder, after you had the film developed I understand Mr. Sorrels from the Secret Service came over and helped you get the films developed and you gave two copies of your films to Mr. Sorrels, is that correct?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes. One we have sent to Washington the same night and one went over for the viewers of the FBI on Ervay Street.
Mr. LIEBELER - That's the Secret Service?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - The Secret Service--I brought one roll there and they told me to dispatch it by Army plane or I don't know what they had done with it but it was supposed to have gone to Washington and one of them, I believe, remained here with Mr. Sorrels. He came to my office quite a few times to show them to different people.
Mr. LIEBELER - Now, I understand that you, yourself, retained the original film?
Mr. ZAPRUDER - No; I don't have that at all--I don't have any at all. They were sold to Time and Life magazines.  

The following is an internal FBI memo from Brennan to Sullivan a year later telling us that the FBI had a copy of Zapruder's film BEFORE Zapruder meets with LIFE Saturday morning.  The way Zapruder speaks here is appears that Sorrels brings a copy of the film with him on Saturday to show people, YET Zapruder shows Stolley his "best-copy" before anyone arrives on Saturday morning.

Zapruder has 2 films (master & best copy), Sorrels has 2 films (one that goes to the FBI and one he shows Saturday at Zapruder's office & keeps) with "The third print is forwarded" per Max Phillips.  

Sorrels cannot show a film he does not have, Phillips cannot send a film he was not given, Kelley could not get a film Saturday from Sorrels if Sorrels doesn't have one, and the CIA claims the FBI had a film friday night - since Zapruder is showing a film and talking with Stolley Saturday morning.  Yet this makes little sense at all:

Abraham Zapruder met with Secret Service officials and Mr. Stolley of LIFE in his office on Saturday morning, 11/23/63, and projected the original film for them on his 8 mm projector.9   9 Trask, 2005, p. 127-131; and Wrone, 2003, p. 32-35

1st - the original was a 16mm film and only Rollie Zavada concluded it was split  Both Dino at NPIC and Max Phillips discuss 8mm films.  Only Homer talks about working on a 16mm unslit original which in turn created the briefing boards that match the extent film.

2nd - does it make any sense at all for Zapruder to risk damaging the original by showing it when Sorrels and he supposedly have 8mm copies to watch?

Doug also talks about how impossible it is for LIFE to see a film on Sunday...  yet Doug, like everyone else in the mix has never addressed the elephant in the room...

What happened to Rowley's 8mm film, in DC by midnight the 22nd?  This would be the first and ONLY version of the film shown to people in DC who could have actually implemented the alteration..  There is literally nothing on what becomes of that film once it is delivered to Rowley - ANYONE ???.

Furthermore there is the issue of Jaggers whose offices are equidistant from Dealey plaza and Ervay..  Additionally, Erwin Swartz claims the films did not get to Jamison until 6pm...

Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall was a very sophisticated photographic lab doing sensitive government work with film and photos.  The investigation of what their involvement may have been that day seems like something we ought to have a better handle on...  just sayin'

DJ

On 2/4/2017 at 7:25 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

Thanks Steve.

I've read everything you've provided, and it appears to me that this is what happened:  (Only some of this is gathered from Steve's post.)

1. Oswald eats lunch on the first floor.
2. He may have momentarily gone up to the 2nd floor to buy a coke. After which he returned.
3. Oswald is on the first floor during the shooting. (Conceivably outside IMO.)
4. Oswald is outside ("with Shelley") after the shooting for a few minutes. Then goes inside.
5. Oswald directs a SS agent to the telephone. (As per Oswald's interrogation.)
6. After a few minutes Oswald tries to leave the building but is stopped by Officer Kaminski. Kaminski tells Oswald to stay inside. Roy Truly informs Kaminski that Oswald is an employee and Kaminski lets him leave. (Why did Kaminski let Oswald leave?? When others presumably couldn't?)
7. Truly goes to the 6th floor and informs Captain Fritz that Oswald has vanished.

At the core, moving Oswald to the 2nd floor when Bakers affidavit moves him closer to the 6th floor and "escaping" seems counter productive.  If the point was to get him away from the front door - whether just inside or he is actually prayerman - his being above the 2nd floor at any time after 12:15 appears unlikely from the evidence offered.  I've been posting that the Baker/Truly/Oswald 2nd floor lunchroom scene never happened for many years...  common sense and the windowed door's closing, along with where Truly and Baker were on the stairs has always made it impossible...  

Thanks for writing it out in timeline form...  as we fill in more blanks, maybe we can figure out who they really stopped on the stairs...  any ideas?

So then who did Baker describe as " As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket. "

1. 11:50 - 12:15
2. by 12:15
3. Mrs. R. E. ARNOLD, Secretary, Texas School Book Depository, advised she was in her office on the second floor of the building on November 22, 1963, and left that office between 12:00 and 12:15 PM, to go downstairs and stand in front of the building to view the Presidential Motorcade. As she was standing in front of the building, she stated she thought she caught a fleeting glimpse of LEE HARVEY OSWALD standing in the hallway between the front door and the double doors leading to the warehouse, located on the first floor. She could not be sure that this was OSWALD, but said she felt it was and believed the time to be a few minutes before 12:15 PM
4. Bookout's report claims this is well after the assassination...  and reverses the Coke and lunch timeline.  In the Bookout /Hosty report it says Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when the limo went by..  (how would he know when the limo went by if he was inside on the first floor?)
5. Mr. BELIN. How did you know the person you saw was Lee Harvey Oswald on the second floor? 
   Mrs. REID. Because it looked just like him. 
   Mr. BELIN. You mean the picture with the name Lee Harvey Oswald? 
   Mrs. REID. Oh, yes. 
   Mr. BELIN. But you had seen him in the building? 
   Mrs. REID. Other than that day, sure. 
   Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what clothes he had on when you saw him? 
   Mrs. REID. What he was wearing, he had on a white T-shirt and some kind of wash trousers. What color I couldn't tell you. 
   Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked Commission Exhibit, first 157 and then 158, and I will ask you if either or both look like they might have been the trousers that you saw him wear or can you tell? 
   Mrs. REID. I just couldn't be positive about that. I would rather not say, because I just cannot. 
   Mr. BELIN. Do you remember whether he had any shirt or jacket on over his T-shirt? 
   Mrs. REID. He did not. He did not have any jacket on. 
   
   (Since the interrogation reports all state that he wore a brownish-reddish shirt over his T-shirt...  AND that he changed clothes at home
   1 - Bledsoe and Whaley are telling a canned story & 2 - the man Reid sees cannot be Harvey... can it?
   
   Mrs. REID. Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several feet and I told him, I said, "Oh, the President has been shot, but maybe they didn't hit him." 
   He mumbled something to me, I kept walking, he did, too. I didn't pay any attention to what he said because I had no thoughts of anything of him having any connection with it at all because he was very calm. He had gotten a coke and was holding it in his hands and I guess the reason it impressed me seeing him in there I thought it was a little strange that one of -the warehouse boys would be up in the office at the time, not that he had done anything wrong. The only time I had seen him in the office was to come and get change and he already had his coke in his hand so he didn't come for change and I dismissed him. I didn't think anything else. 
   
   Mr. BELIN. When you saw him, I believe you said you first saw him when he was coming through the door? 
   Mrs. REID. Yes, sir. 
   Mr. BELIN. Turning to Exhibit 497, what doorway was it where you first saw him? 
   Mrs. REID. Right here. 
   Mr. BELIN. You are pointing to the doorway between numbers 27 and 28? 
   Mrs. REID. That is right. 
   Mr. BELIN. On Exhibit 497? 
   Mrs. REID. That is right. 
   Mr. BELIN. Where were you when you saw him in that doorway? 
   Mrs. REID. I was coming right through here.
   Mr. BELIN. You are pointing to what number there?
   Mrs. REID. Well, it is 29. 
   Mr. BELIN. 29. And then about where were you when you actually passed him or had this exchange? 
   Mrs. REID. Right along here. I passed my desk. 
   Mr. BELIN. Why don't you put on Exhibit 496 an "X" as to where you were when you thought you passed him. 
   Mrs. REID. Here. 
   Mr. BELIN. I wonder if you would put the initial "R" which we will put for Mrs. Reid. 
   Mrs. REID. All right. 
   Mr. BELIN. By the "X" and that is where you were when you passed him.
    
6. Is this the list you think was created by these DPD men?   And do we have Truly corroborating any of this? not from what I read of his testimony.  in fact, if you go and read thru it, there are a number of conflicts in the timing of things...  http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/truly2.htm 
   
   
   
    
7. As mentioned:
   Mr. BALL. Where was Captain Fritz when you saw him? 
   Mr. TRULY. He was on the sixth floor in the area where they found the rifle. 
   Mr. BALL. And was the rifle there at the time? 
   Mr. TRULY. No, I never saw the rifle. 
   Mr. BALL. Was this after or before the rifle had been taken from the building? 
   Mr. TRULY. It was before the rifle had been taken from the building. 
   Mr. BALL. And do you know whether it was before or after the rifle was found? 
   Mr. TRULY. Apparently the rifle had been found before I got to the sixth floor, but just how early, I don't know. 
   Mr. BALL. But you had heard that the rifle was found, had you, by your talk with Fritz? 
   Mr. TRULY. That's--I don't know--I learned it was found while I was on the sixth floor. 
   Mr. BALL. While you were on the sixth floor? 
   Mr. TRULY. While I was on the sixth floor. 
   Mr. BALL. In other words, you went with Chief Lumpkin to the sixth floor, didn't you? 
   Mr. TRULY. Yes. 
   Mr. BALL. And what was your purpose of going there? 
   Mr. TRULY. My purpose in going there was to inform Captain Fritz that this boy was missing and give him his telephone number, and his Irving address, at the suggestion of Chief Lumpkin, who accompanied me. 
   Mr. BALL. Did you give Captain Fritz this name and address? 
   Mr. TRULY. Yes, I did. 
   Mr. BALL. Was it while you were there that you learned the rifle had been found? 
   Mr. TRULY. I don't remember who I learned this from---- 
   Mr. BALL. I didn't ask you that, I'm talking about time only. 
   Mr. TRULY. That was while I was on the sixth floor is when I learned the rifle was found, but I did not see it. 
   Mr. BALL. All right. Now, was it before or after you told Captain Fritz the name and address of Lee Oswald, that you learned that the rifle was found? 
   Mr. TRULY. I can't remember, I believe it was afterwards. 
   Mr. BALL. You are sure it was after you told Captain Fritz---after what, you tell me? 
   Mr. TRULY. I told--well, when Chief Lumpkin and I went to the sixth floor, Captain Fritz was standing in ,the area where I later learned they had found the gun, and Chief Lumpkin told Captain Fritz that Mr. Truly had something to tell him, which I would like to tell him, so he stepped over 4 or 5 feet to where I was, away from the other men---officers and reporters, I would say, that were on the floor, and I repeated the words to Captain Fritz. 
   Mr. BALL. What did you tell him? 
   Mr. TRULY. I told him that we had a man missing---I told him what his name was and his Irving address and he said, "All right, thank you, Mr. Truly. We will get right on it," or words to that effect, and so I left the sixth floor shortly.
   While I was up there, just as I left Captain Fritz, a reporter walked over and said, "What about this fellow Oswald?" And I said, "Where did you learn the name 'Oswald'?" Because I had talked rather low to Captain Fritz and I said, "He's just an employee here," and I left, and sometime---someone informed me that they had found the gun. I don't know who it was. 
   Mr. BALL. About that time? 
   Mr. TRULY. It was along about that time, as near as I can remember, and I went back down to the first floor and I don't think I was up on the sixth floor any other time that day. I possibly could have been, but I don'.t recall it, because I was besieged by reporters and everybody else on the first floor, and talking to officers and so forth and I had no occasion to go back up there. 
   Mr. BALL. Now, about what time of day would you say is your best estimate that you told Captain Fritz of the name "Lee Oswald" and his address? 
   Mr. TRULY. My best estimate would be a little before 1 o'clock--10 minutes. 
   Mr. BALL. The gun wasn't found until after 1 o'clock? 
   Mr. TRULY. It wasn't found until after 1 o'clock? 
   Mr. BALL. No, it wasn't found until after 1 o'clock. I won't tell you exactly the time the gun was found, but I will say that the gun was not found until after 1 o'clock. 
   Mr. TRULY. Well, I may be mistaken about where I learned they had found the gun. I thought it was on the sixth floor--it could have been some other place. 
   Mr. BALL. Captain Fritz said you didn't tell him that until after the gun was found and that seems to correspond with your memory too, is that correct? 
   Mr. TRULY. It sure does, because I remember clearly that Captain Fritz was over at where the gun was found and I'm sure they must have found it or he wouldn't have been standing in that area when we came up there. 
   Mr. BALL. Now, if the gun was found after I o'clock, when was it that you discovered that Lee Oswald wasn't there? 
   Mr. TRULY. I thought it was about 20 minutes after the shooting--the assassination, but it could have been longer. 
   Mr. BALL. In other words, you thought originally it might have been 10 minutes of 2 or so that you learned that? 
   Mr. TRULY. Ten minutes to 1. 
   Mr. BALL. Ten minutes to 1? 
   Mr. TRULY. It was around 1 o'clock--that period of time after I came down from the sixth floor to the first floor was rather hazy in my memory. 
   Mr. BALL. You think it might have been after 1 when you first noticed he wasn't there? 
   Mr. TRULY. I don't think so---I don't feel like at was. It could have possibly been so. 
   Mr. BALL. Well, if the gun was not found before 1:10, if it wasn't found before that, can you give me any estimate? 
   Mr. TRULY. That seems to be a longer time after the assassination. 
   Mr. BALL. You didn't wait 20 minutes from the time you learned Lee Oswald's address until the time you told Captain Fritz, did you? 
   Mr. TRULY. No, sir; I did stand there on the first floor waiting until Chief Lumpkin got through talking for a few minutes. 
   Mr. BALL. Tell me about how many minutes you think it was from the time you obtained the address of Lee Oswald until you told Captain Fritz the name and address? 
   Mr. TRULY. I think it was immediately. 
   Mr. BALL. Immediately? 
   Mr. TRULY. Immediately, after I called to the warehouse and got his name and address in Irving, I turned around and walked over and told Captain Fritz at that time. 

2 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

David,

 

I feel sheepish.

 

Several days ago, I looked at the handwritten  part of Fritz's interrogation notes.  Just above the letters, B.O. are written Jame W  and below the letters, B.O. is written Bookhout.

Bookhout's name was James W.  It looks like there was an oil spot where the "s" should have been in "James", or Fritz just didn't press down hard enough on his pen to finish the word.  I think that at the time, Fritz didn't know how to spell Bookhout's name, so he just used the letters, B.O. and filled it in later.

 

The person typing those notes made the same mistake I did.

 

Steve (red in the face) Thomas

Steve, 

On page 2 of the notes Fritz lists "B.O. + myself"  yet the "0" may instead be a "G" since both appear to have a little tail where it should be.

It appears again on page 4 of the notes related to B.O. asking about the Hidell SSS Card.

It could be "Robert" for Bob, and maybe it's a G...  BG or RG...  and in the DPD or SS or FBI or ???

On 2/1/2017 at 1:33 PM, Alistair Briggs said:

Cheers David.

Whoever Oswald was an 'informant' for, no doubt they would have had a good number of other people in similar positions that they can 'manipulate' for whatever reason they deem fit - that makes sense to me. As you say, if JFK was shot in Chicago or Tampa then it would be someone else's name that we would be talking about. That goes on the assumption that Oswald was set up and it was inevitable that JFK was going to be shot...

... what if for example, Oswald wanted out (as he had another child on the way) and wanted to try and settle in to a family life. Scared of Oswald knowing too much the decision is made to set him up for something and the opportunity presents itself with JFK passing by his work...

... or what if Oswald was the shooter but he had been persuaded to do it as a set-up against the FPCC...

... or what if Oswald was the shooter but he thought he would get away with it as the 'evidence' pointed away from him...

Too many thoughts pop in to my head, so apologies for them being disjointed. There's just something in my head that makes me wonder whether the JFK assassination was a separate thing from what Oswald had been up to previously, or at least not an inevitable continuation. Like (whoever it was that actually took the shots, either way) it was just actualy a taking advantage of the circumstances.

(Example: I have never thought that the rifle was purchased (either by Oswald or by someone else) for the express use of killing JFK.)

Regards

I like your thinking... mostly.  There really is no place any longer for entertaining the thought that Oswald shot anyone that day.  Like Vallee, Oswald was positioned to be useful if necessary.  The Warren Comm Docs which deal with Vallee are especially interesting to me... 

"Never believe anything until it is officially denied" - Howard Zinn

If men were not arrest and there was nothing of any consequence in Chicago, why does WCD47 insist on linking Vallee with Oswald

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10448#relPageId=14&tab=page  is a report within CD47 which connects the Nov 2 arrest of Vallee with the belief "Vallee" was LEE HARVEY OSWALD under an assumed name...

I highly suggest working thru this WCD...

With regards to the rifle... My work helped me conclude that not a single one of those 100 rifles were ever at Klein's.  No other rifle from those 100 has ever been seen, ever been on a SOLD receipt.  These 40.5" FC rifles were on sale from Feb 1963 until Nov 23 1963 after Waldman claims he gathered all the remaining rifles up and removed them from inventory - are we to believe that the only rifle from that delivery ever sold was to HIDELL/OSWALD?

As I wrote in my article, there are almost 1000 orders on that microfilm, and there are numerous films yet not a single order has ever been offered to confirm that any of the other 100 rifles actually existed.  Nor do we ever learn what rifle was shipped between Feb-Nov 1963 when a customer ordered the newly revised "C20-T750" no longer a 36" scoped carbine but a 40.5" scoped FC.

And finally, another nail in the coffin is the SS declaring the rifle Oswald/Hidell ordered was a Troop Special (TS) 1891 carbine and not the larger Fucile Corto model.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy IS the Evidence IS the Conspiracy IS the Evidence.  They can't be separated.  Nothing I have found in the evidence can authentically incriminate Oswald, it can only reveal the shadows created by the cover-up and conspiracy.  You'll see the likes of DVP "list" the evidence which incriminates Ozzie, but never take it any further or address the inherent authenticity problem.

If it can't be prove that Ozzie ever ordered or picked up these weapons, discussing what he did with them is worthless.

Quote

I've never heard of this, "Nationalities Intelligence Section." Do you know much about it?

lol..  I hadn't either.  Not as secretive or mysterious as the FBI's SIS from 1940-1945 though...

Another small reference mentions this section only being responsible for Cuban related conspiracies.

http://dlib.nyu.edu/findingaids/html/tamwag/tam_576/dscref34.html

Belmont became FBI SA in 1937 and then served in Birmingham and Chicago field offices as well as ASAC of Chicago and NYC. In 1950 he became Assistant Director in charge of the Domestic Intelligence Division. He retired in 1965 and became Assistant Director of Hoover Institution on War, Peace and Revolution.

1926-1930 – San Diego State College -- 1930-1931 = Stanford University, B.A. degree, Accounting -- 11/30/36 = EOD FBI = Special Agent -- 3/7/37 = Birmingham AL -- 6/24/37 = Chicago -- 6/6/38 = Chief Clerk’s Office, WDC, Supervisor, Supply Division -- 7/2/40 = Division 5, National Defense Division -- 10/28/40 = Chief Clerk’s Office (Administrative Division) -- 1/28/41 = NYC, Supervisor, Section 2 (applicant investigations) -- 8/16/42 = ASAC, Chicago -- 1/15/43 = SAC Cincinnati -- 7/8/44 = Transferred from Cincinnati to become ASAC of NYC -- 7/29/49 = Commended by Hoover for his work on Judith Coplon case -- 8/31/49 and 3/15/50 = commended by Hoover for his work on Alger Hiss case -- 2/27/50 = Inspector in Charge, Security Division (Division 5) -- 09/30/51 – 6/1/61 = Hoover appointed him Assistant Director, Domestic Intelligence Division -- 02/60 = Became FBI liaison to U.S. Intelligence Board headed by Allen W. Dulles -- 6/2/61 – 12/30/65 = Belmont promoted to Assistant to Director—Investigative (replacing Donald J. Parsons who retired). In this position he supervised/directed Laboratory, General Investigative, Special Investigative and Domestic Intelligence Divisions -- 12/30/65 = retired

9/58 Staff of DID; Belmont – Assistant Director

Inspectors:

Donald E. Moore = 10/14/56  Branch Chief, Espionage – Central Research Branch -- Joseph A. Sizoo = 9/15/53  #1 Man and Branch Chief, Internal Security-Liaison Branch

Section Chiefs:

Fred J. Baumgardner = Internal Security Section -- James F. Bland = Subversive Control Section (until 9/1/55 he headed Internal Security Section) -- Ralph R. Roach = Liaison Section -- William A. Branigan = Espionage Section -- Sterling B. Donahoe = Nationalities Intelligence Section

Quote

Just to be up front with both of you, the thought that popped in to my head was something like this: The FBI employed Oswald in a plot to set up Hidell/FPFC for some reason (other than JFK's assassination) but it never came to fruition, and then subsequently (but separately) the same stuff was used either to set up Oswald or by Osawld to try and get away with it. I've not followed it through fully though, just a thought.

and a good thought it is...  The FPCC was being attacked from all sides...

I was in a thread a while back that asked about the switch from Oswald the informant to Oswald the patsy..  what one notices after he moves to New Orleans is that his activities can be interpreted in a number of ways leaving the "plot" to twist and turn around him.  

As Oswald is carrying out his informant orders by playing both sides of the Castro fence (Anti-Castro Bannister forces yet "pro-Castro" flyers) he is also in the process of incriminating himself by sheer association - also in either direction.

If JFK is somehow shot in Chicago, or Tampa...  Oswald continues his $200/month informant job and everyone remembers Arthur Vallee instead.

Virtually everything he is sent to do serves as both his quiet relationship with US intel and to incriminate him - should it become necessary.

Just a couple observations

The evidence which pays for a rifle order in March - the Money Order - was created after the fact...  There are 4 completely different stories related to the finding and securing of that Money Order  https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsMOTimeline.pdf  https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/JosephsRiflePart1.pdf 

Holmes' story is a complete fabrication while the SS offers evidence which has them finding the MO in Kansas City, then again later that night in Virginia.  Point being that the existence of the name "Hidell" and the Money Order in March does not necessarily backdate the use of that name...  Since "Hidell" was not an authorized recipient of mail at Oswald's Box one would think Hidell being on the MO and order form and in at least 2 of his wallets was done only to create this association.  

The other thing to consider related to HIDELL is the same thing related to the rifle purchase and the faked trip to Mexico - where are the FBI reports?  All during 1963 Oswald was watched, carefully.  There is not a single FBI/USPS report mentioning the receipt of a 5 foot carton from Klein's, a visit to REA to pick up his pistol, the traveling from downtown Dallas with a 5 foot carton... and given how cheap Ozzie was supposed to be, that carton would make a great traveling case...  or did he just get on a bus from Dallas with a rifle in his hands - also not remembered..?  The next trick was getting that rifle from Neely to Magazine St in New Orleans and then in Ruth's car to Irving with Marina and kids..

This is yet another case of inauthentic evidence leading to erroneous conclusions.  Hidell, like the entire mess, was part of the set-up of Oswald...  Could "Hidell" have simply been a "never-to-be-found" co-conspirator to give validity to the Cuba/Castro-conspiracy story enabling an attack on Cuba.    Here is the only use of "Robert Hidell" after crossing out "W.S. Oswald"  On Nov 24th the CIA puts out a memo claiming the FBI is unaware if "Hidell" was another person (i.e. Mystery Man) or an Oswald Alias...

Again, the FBI was consciously watching Oswald all thru 1963.  Even at Neely.  The man had supposedly ordered 2 weapons using an alias and went thru the necessary steps to pick up said weapons from the delivery point and bring them to his ever-changing homes.  The ONLY evidence of their existence comes from Marina and Mr/Mrs DeMorn....

Ruth and Michael testify to never seeing any rifle prior to Nov 22. despite loading and unloading her car at both ends.

===========

Could "B.O." be FBI Agent Robert "Bob" Olsen?  The other two names for the 11/22 interrogation are Hosty and Bookout, both FBI.  I checked all the DPD references I had and couldn't find a "B.O."

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10675#relPageId=2&tab=page  

The fact of the matter is we are talking about CE399 as having performed some amazing feat when the evidence offered shows it does not exist until Rowley hands it to Todd... Please notice how DVP ignores this most critical of proofs.  Also recognize how DVP stays away from the 7:30 versus 8:50pm time conflict.  Since he cannot authenticate CE399 as ever being in Dallas, he talks about what the Dr's said about the wounds and ASSUMES CE399 authentic...

Believing the evidence on face value is nice but doesn't cut it when convicting a man of murder...  Evidence needs authentication... without it the "evidence" is not longer "real" or "material" let alone admissible as such.   Prove the assumptions you make BEFORE you move on to conclusions based off them Dave... otherwise all you do is sound good while what you present is completely worthless as a basis for a conclusion.

Mr. SPECTER - Does that bullet appear to you to have any of its metal flaked off? 
Dr. SHAW - I have been told that the one point on the nose of this bullet that is deformed was cut off for purposes of examination. With that information, I would have to say that this bullet has lost literally none of its substance. 

Is Dr Shaw suggesting that Connally was struck by 2 different bullets?

Dr. SHAW - All right. As far as the wounds of the chest are concerned, I feel that this bullet could have inflicted those wounds. But the examination of the wrist both by X-ray and at the time of surgery showed some fragments of metal that make it difficult to believe that the same missile could have caused these two wounds. There seems to be more than three grains of metal missing as far as the I mean in the wrist. 

Mr. SPECTER - What is your opinion as to whether bullet 399 could have inflicted all of the wounds on the Governor, then, without respect at this point to the wound of the President's neck? 
Dr. SHAW - I feel that there would be some difficulty in explaining all of the wounds as being inflicted by bullet Exhibit 399 without causing more in the way of loss of substance to the bullet or deformation of the bullet. 
(Discussion off the record.) 

Whether in a recreation, or with the original manipulation of evidence by Ford....

Nothing DVP or anyone within the government's investigative bodies have an answer for why it was necessary to offer "alternative facts" about the entry point as it related to the jacket and shirt.

DVP - why doesn't the shot thru the back exit the mannequin's throat as opposed to his pectoral muscle?

DVP - why does Ford insist on moving the entry to a point where there is no medical evidence offered to corroborate that change?

And finally for this post, notice the angle at which the rifle is pointing at those critical "SBT" frames.  

In each case a shot thru JFK hits the seat-back in front of him which again is the reason no bullet was found lodged in the limo, there was no Silly Bullet, and ce399 only comes into being as SS Chief Rowley hands Elmer Todd a bullet at 8:50pm, 100 minutes after Frazier receives ce399 at the FBI lab...  Until that point, not a single person handling that bullet corroborates, (IOW "authenticates") the bullet in evidence as the bullet they brought forth...

So I've now shown you how the Silly Bullet Theory was a sham and the knee-jerk reaction to the acknowledgement of Tague and the "shot that missed"... via the work of Purvis, Murr, Davidson and myself it is now common knowledge that the 5+00 WCD298, ce875, ce585 shot was removed after the May 1964 surveys were completed....

Let's see what you present:

Based on the official evidence in the John F. Kennedy murder case, all of the following things are true:

1.) President John F. Kennedy and Texas Governor John B. Connally were shot by rifle bullets in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on Friday, November 22, 1963.

That's one right... 

2.) Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (Serial Number C2766) was located inside a building which overlooked the assassination site (the Texas School Book Depository) when JFK and JBC were being wounded by gunfire.

This statement is unproven with the evidence available.  In fact, the evidence related to that rifle and the FBI investigation proves there were 2 other Klein's orders for rifles not offered as evidence.  Where are these 2 other orders from Crescent to Kleins and why are they not on the original order with the Feb 1963 delivery?  The FBI learns about orders and rifle serial #'s from June 18, 1962 and March 27, 1963 shipments to Klein's followed by a report that C2766, as offered by Feldsott, was sold to Kleins on June 18, 1962.  Below this is a list from Century Arms for a shipment of 41" FC rifles, all written without the leading letter... yet there is 2766

and finally, the Secret Service confirms that C-2766 as ordered from Kleins is a 36" 1891 TS "Troop Special" not a 41" FC.
 

3.) A nearly-whole bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit #399) was found inside the hospital where JFK and JBC were taken after the shooting. And CE399 was found in a location within the hospital where President Kennedy was never located prior to the bullet being found by Darrell Tomlinson. (Nor was JFK's stretcher ever in the area of the hospital where Tomlinson discovered the bullet.)

Addressed already - ce399 only comes into existence when Rowley gives it to Todd...  Prove otherwise.

4.) Bullet CE399 was positively fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle.

You still haven't proven it's Oswald's rifle yet...  and I prove that the rifle taken out of the TSBD by Day is not ce139 - it has none of the same markings at all...

5.) Bullet CE399, based on the above points in total, HAD to have been inside Governor Connally's body on 11/22/63.

Based on What?  ce399 did not have a single bit of human debris on it, every Dr who knew of JC's injuries and the lead left in his body says ce399 could not have caused the damage,,,  DVP, 1+1+1 does not equal 7 no matter how hard you try and make it work.

6.) A man who looked like Lee Harvey Oswald was seen firing a rifle at the President's limousine from a southeast corner window on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository Building. No other gunmen were seen firing any weapons in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.

Really?  Your star witness disagrees with you... and does not put a scoped rifle in that window... nor does he see this person fire a shot.  You got someone who actually describes someone looking like Oswald at 5'8" and 135 lbs wearing a dark buttoned up shirt & dark pants in that window shooting?

7.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found in the upper back or neck of John Kennedy's body. And no significant damage was found inside these areas of JFK's body either.

No bullets might be in evidence but they were surely found and mentioned in the available evidence.  On the left, DURING the autopsy aknowledgement of a 2nd lodged bullet is mentioned along with the Tolson's assurance that BOTH BULLETS would be procured.  O'Connor was at the autopsy.  A bullet was removed from the torso muscles on the right side, right about where that back bullet would have come to rest...  Your stated conclusions are without merit of substance.

 

8.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found inside the body of Governor Connally after the shooting. The only bullet, anywhere, that can possibly be connected with Connally's wounds is Bullet CE399.

Once again, simply not true.  In fact the fragments left in JC add up to more lead missing from ce399.  You arguing the medical evidence is amusing Dave..  you and Trump's "alternative facts" are right at home with the Nutters out there.

9.) Given the point in time when both JFK and JBC were first hit by rifle fire (based on the Abraham Zapruder Film), and given the known location of Governor Connally's back (entrance) wound, and also taking into account the individual points made above -- Bullet CE399 had no choice but to have gone through the body of President Kennedy prior to entering the back of John B. Connally.

Addressed by the WCR and shown to be incorrect.  The claim is the bullet's course was not affected by passing thru JFK.. for the SBT to work JFK needs to be leaning over and tying his shoes at the time of the shot... unless you can prove otherwise.

My favorite still remains the "Bonus Quotes" from 1) Bugliosi, 2 )Myers and 3) Specter...  to prove your point...  

Here's a "strange but true" thing I found when I was researching Oswald in the summer before the Mexico City thing...
He looks for only Photo related work except for an entry at "United Fruit" in New Orleans.  

As to the seed of assassination?  The military and CIA were made to look very foolish in the eyes of the world in April 1961 when the time island of Cuba kicked the crap out of the US backed incursion.  Ike was asleep while Nixon's war machine began overthrowing countries.  1960 needed to be Nixon.  When he lost I believe those involved used the Bay of Pigs as the new president's first big test - a litmus on whether his rhetoric was politics or policy.   

JFK approved the D-Day strikes (subsequent to the previous strike) on April 16... and the story goes that he called it off the night before...   but;

At about 9:30 P.M. on 16 April, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, Special Assistant to the President, telephoned General C.P. Cabell of CIA to inform him that the dawn air strikes the following morning should not be launched until they could be conducted from a strip within the beachhead. Mr. Bundy indicated that any further consultation with regard to this matter should be with the Secretary of State (Memo. 1, para. 43).

G

eneral Cabell, accompanied by Mr. Bissell, went at once to Secretary Rusk's office, arriving there about 10:15 P.M. There they received a telephone call from [deleted reference to one of the brigade commanders] who, having learned of the cancellation of the D-Day strikes, called to present his view of the gravity of the decision. General Cabell and Mr. Bissell then tried to persuade the Secretary of State to permit the dawn D-Day strkes. The Secretary indicated that there were policy consideratons against air strikes before the beachhead airfield was in the hands of the landing force and completely operational, capable of supporting the raids. The two CIA representatives pointed out the risk of loss to the shipping if the Castro Air Force were not neutralized by the dawn strkes. They also stressed the difficulty which the B-26 airplanes would have in isolating the battlefield after the landing, as well as the heavier scale of air attack to which the disembarked forces would be exposed. The Secretary of State indicated subsequently that their presentation led him to feel that while the air strikes were indeed important, they were not vital.

However, he offered them the privilege of telephoning the President in order to present their views to him. They saw no point in speaking personally to the President and so informed the Secretary of State. The order cancelling the D-Day strkes was dispatched to the departure field in Nicaragua, arriving when the pilots were in their cockpits ready for take-off. The Joint Chiefs of Staff learned of the cancellation at varying hours the following morning (Memo. 1, para. 44).

Question: Did you attempt to advise the President as to the importance of the air strikes?

Rusk: I had talked to him and he had stated that if there weren't overriding considerations the second strikes shouldn't be made. Since Mr. Bissell and General Cabell didn't want to talk to the President on the matter, I felt there were no overriding considerations to advise him of. I didn't think they believed the dawn air strikes were too important. I believe that Castro turned out to have more operational air strength than we figured.

It appears to me that Bundy, Cabell, Bissell and Rusk are in on something that will push JFK into a corner since virtually all the discussion to this point in the records shows an agreement on this D-Day air support.  The CIA putting the blame all on JFK in the eyes of the Joint Chiefs and JFK focusing on the CIA rather than the military shows me the military was always pulling the CIA strings.

Dulles went to far as to actually say he believe the young president would break and send air support.  since it was never JFK who removed the support, I believe this was the initial seed of JFK's assassination.

On ‎1‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 6:39 PM, Brad Milch said:

@Chris & David:

In the spirit of aiding those Education Forum readers following this thread with interest, allow me to present some questions for those non-members to aid in their personal analysis & conclusions about this cold case:

From what you know of this case in your studies, does the ambush of JFK & entourage on Elm Street suggest a sophisticated military type ambush or (as 'Oswald did it' preachers like EF's own David Von Pein's well publicized take on the case)  a happenstance situation where an amateur, solely by himself, chose a spot in a building that happened to be free of internal witnesses, cleared JFK's security & other outside obstacles & created the damage that resulted after his/her gunfire in Dealey Plaza over 53 years ago?

Brad - not sure what you're doing here...  seems to me as I reread, you want to use our work to convince the DVP faithful of the reality of the situation... but it doesn't come off that way - or am I mistaken?.

1st off ... it's not a cold case by any means.  

2nd, you seem to have confused 1) the act of killing JFK and 2) the conspiratorial act of covering up the evidence while convicting a Lone shooter.

Can anyone accurately explain the "thinking behind the thinking" related to this assassination?
- was the initial plan to implicate a Castro Conspiracy to allow for a US retaliatory invasion?
- was the initial plan to use a Castro Conspiracy simply to keep people quiet about what they knew about the real killers?

No one within the list of characters was in a position to dictate the terms of the autopsy - e.g. the "Best Evidence" - other than the Military
Virtually everyone involved (from Dallas to New Orleans) had served for or was responsible to the US Military and/or FBI/CIA

The authentication of the offered evidence proves that there was no where near enough incriminating evidence to convict Oswald, so the evidence was expanded between Friday night when the FBI took all the evidence and The following week when it was returned and retaken by the FBI, only now there were hundreds of items that were not taken Friday night but were now part of the evidence against Oswald.  When you come to terms with that first and supremely important FBI act of evidence manipulation you may understand how Oswald doing any of this is not possible..

To Z-film alteration believers or skeptics, wasn't the first indication that something was wrong with the Z-film introduced to the world by Life magazine (purchasers & owners of the film), who told us JFK looked back to the TSBD from his parade car traversing Elm Street & was shot in the neck by Oswald (supposedly stationed there in the 'sniper's nest' with his weapon)? Did this actually happen, was it ever in the Z-film & was it's absence merely a big lie; the first of many to follow by early investigators & MSM supporting them?

Let's take this one at a time...  http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MQHux-LGI7A/VcfRG-ZaIMI/AAAAAAABG5A/RRfN7tt0jz8/s1700-h/LIFE-Magazine-12-6-63-Paul-Mandel-Article.png is a link to the LIFE article by Paul Mandel where this is written and the attached is the paragraph you refer to..

"...who told us JFK looked back to the TSBD...." is what you wrote to summarize the paragraph.  I guess you neglected to mention the "Hence the recurring guess..."

So why on earth would a LIFE author inject his own thoughts about a film no one had seen which allows for Oswald to shoot JFK in the front of the throat?  And why then would that be removed if it added strength to the Oswald=Lone Nut theory?  Because it was never on the film in the first place... but we don't get to see the film, only stills...  Wouldn't a still frame of JFK's throat facing the TSBD make sense to support the conclusion? LIFE owned the film and photographic rights.

One thing we can conclude though... LIFE magazine corroborates the throat wound at the front as an entrance, not an exit...  ooops!  Now if they could only show that image of JFK turned to the TSBD.... right?

Was the early stages of the 'single bullet theory' supposed to be the reverse of what it became in 1964, namely, was JFK supposed to have been shot in the throat (while facing his TSBD assailant) & that shot exiting JFK's back, going on to strike Gov Connally, the chrome windshield strip, the parade car's windshield and/or James Tague? Was the apparent editing imposed on the Z-film evidence of 1963-1964 government CYA?

The SBT did not exist until after Tague and the WCR survey in May 1964... there were no "early stages"  
WCD1 - the FBI report states 3 shots = 3 hits, 2 to JFK, 1 to JC.  

This comes after the Dec 2,3,4 reenactment which becomes WCD298 which places shot #2 at z313.     

 

CE875's SS photos also states the last shot occurred within 4 feet of 5+00 which is exactly where the final car representing the limo is placed in the above image.  No missed shots... same result on the TIME/LIFE survey from Nov 26 and from the FBI reenactment in Feb 1964.
In April 1964 the Eisenberg group of people viewed the film with a desire, yet again, to place the shots on their correct frames.  As a result of these meetings a memo is sent from Redlich to Rankin suggesting that the above image, and the 3 surveys done by the same man and concluding the same thing for LIFE, the FBI and the Secret Service, do not represent what the WCR was supposed to say, and they needed to be changed:

Redlich to Rankin April 27, 1964
We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to frame 190.  We could locate the position on the ground which corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the President prior to this point.  Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin.

I had always assumed that our final report would be accompanied by a surveyor's diagram which would indicate the approximate location of the three shots.  We certainly cannot prepare such a diagram without establishing that we are describing an occurrence which is physically possible.  Our failure to do this will, in my opinion, place this Report in jeopardy since it is a certainty that others will examine the Zapruder films and raise the same questions which have been raised by our examination of the films.  If we do not attempt to answer these observable facts, others may answer them with facts which challenge our most basic assumptions, or with fanciful theories based on our unwillingness to test our assumptions by the investigatory methods available to us.

I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will present a completely misleading picture.
---------------------

Lee Oswald was to be convicted thru all of history as the assassin of JFK, regardless of what authentication of the evidence shows about the quality of said evidence.  When and if you ever learn what the FBI did to make reconstructing the assassination impossible by manipulating the frame data from the zfilm, you may begin to ask more insightful questions

Quote

Interested persons today that recognize the Zapruder film as a CIA MSM deception tool ask hard questions never asked by a society blindly trusting US institutions & agencies in 1963: questions like what the heck was Life Magazine doing telling Hoover's 1963 FBI how JFK's ambush supposedly occurred & why wasn't Hoover protesting & retaliating against the corporation?

LIFE was not telling the FBI anything ...  LIFE unilaterally decided on which frames to place the shots: 190, 242 & 313.   Other than 313 being the head shot as seen by all, where does the FBI - or the Ss for that matter - talk about shots at 190 and 242?  And please fill us in on what else LIFE told Hoover about the reality of the assassination?  I for one am very curious and please include references and sources... thanks.

It may seem to some that David is presenting early stages of government investigators trying to CYA & explain an ambush away as the work of a solo, lucky shooter in a building behind the doomed President.

May seem?  There was an orchestrated cover-up of the real facts by substituting the desired evidence for the actual.  No where is this better illustrated than the medical evidence's changes over the years.  When in 1997 Humes reiterates the time JFK arrived despite what the official story was...

Q. Dr. Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy?
A. I didn't look at my watch, if I even had a watch on, but I would guess it was 6:45 or 7 o'clock, something like that, approximately.
Q. Was the body in the casket when you first saw it?
A. Yes, it was in a casket.

Ok, maybe it was years later and the memory was only so good but we both acknowledge the official time the casket was brought into the morgue was 8pm.  what did Humes say in 1964?

Mr. SPECTER - What time did the autopsy start approximately?
Commander HUMES - The president's body was received at 25 minutes before 8

HSCA?
Mr. CORNWELL. Approximately what time of the day or night did the autopsy begin? 
Dr. HUMES. well, the President's body, as I recall, arrived about 7:30 or 7:35 the evening

So, if JFK is both in the Navy Ambulance on the way from Andrews AND in a casket in front of Humes - both on 11/22, how much "Cover-up" do you think was needed at this early stage?  There is much more evidence to corroborate a 6:30 arrival than an 8pm one...  I guess that's why, that night, all medical MILITARY personnel signed an oath never to divulge what they saw under penalty of court-martial...  what do these actions "seem" to you to be doing?

 

People enter all sorts of ambushes every day, all over the globe. Not all of them are sophisticated military tactics. Not all ambushes terminate in death of the victim. Some victims suffer monetary & personal possessions loss. Some never realize they've been victimized in an ambush: for example: the grocery store cashier that charges someone for groceries not bagged & pockets the money spent later when the customer fails to notice the loss & return to the store for a refund. That rip off, like the person enticed to meet someone for an amorous escapade that ends up beaten & robbed are both examples of common, every day ambushes executed on innocent victims globally. Sometimes amateur perpetrators are the culprits. Sometimes it's smooth, professional criminals.

Ambushes are an unfortunate part of our world. Not all ambushes are recognized or avoidable.

While your little soapbox opera scene was nice and all, how does this relate to the military coup perpetrated in 1963 in the US?  Nothing in this post of yours adds to anyone's understanding of the work, only the understanding of how one-sidedly blind you remain in the face of more and more evidence to the contrary.  How about sticking to the topic and offering substantiated information to support you ideas?  Too much work?

Brad Milch

PS: What do the concerned researchers in this thread have to say to former Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden's well publicized belief that JFK killers in Dallas escaped Chicago & Federal law enforcement in Chicago a few weeks before the slaughter in Dallas in a planned ambush of JFK in Chicago that was thwarted & subsequently covered up by Chicago & Federal law enforcement agencies (namely: U.S. Secret Service)?

Mr. Bolden describes an agenda driven mindset that is evidenced by Life Magazine's description of the JFK ambush they presented globally a week following JFK's, Officer Tippit's & Lee Oswald's violent deaths in Dallas, namely: deceive the global public as opposed to reporting the truth to them.

Tie this research into Bolden's comments & you just might convince Mr. Von Pein's many confused followers to follow the path to the light.

We're not here to convince anyone of anything.  The direct connection between the FBI and Luce's magazine, and the who was dictating the "facts" to who appears to be backward.  LIFE cooperated with the FBI.  KLEINS cooperated with the FBI.  DPD cooperated with the FBI.  SS cooperated with the FBI.

For those interested go to WCD1's table of contents - https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=9&tab=toc - and then notice the Exhibits in Vol 2.  Of those which have any bearing on the case, how provably authentic or in-authentic are these items of evidence for if they are not authentic, the evidence cannot be used against Oswald...  it means the evidence's meaning cannot be substantiated by the 3 means of creating "Real Evidence" thru authentication.  

Chain of Custody is the 3rd and most difficult to prove, the other two are "by identification of a unique object" or by "identification of an object that has been made unique"

Bottom line is whatever evidence is used to incriminate Oswald must be Authenticated for us to even accept it as related to the case.  

When each of the men shown ce399 tells us that was not the bullet they saw and handed to the next person, until it gets to the bullet Chief Rowley gives to FBI agent Todd.. ce399 cannot be considered AUTHENTIC since there is no identification as an unique item nor is there an established chain of custody.  In fact that chain of custody shows that ce399 was received by the FBI 1 hour and 20 mins before Todd claims to have even picked it up from Rowley...  ooops.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy...because the evidence is not real or authentic

DJ.

 

IV. REAL EVIDENCE.

Real evidence is a thing the existence or characteristics of which are relevant and material. It is usually a thing that was directly involved in some event in the case. The written contract upon which an action is based is real evidence both to prove its terms and that it was executed by the defendant. If it is written in a faltering and unsteady hand, it may also be relevant to show that the writer was under duress at the time of its execution. The bloody bloomers, the murder weapon, a crumpled automobile, the scene of an accident--all may be real evidence.

To be admissible, real evidence, like all evidence, must be relevant, material, and competent. Establishing these basic prerequisites, and any other special ones that may apply, is called laying a foundation. The relevance and materiality of real evidence are usually obvious. Its competence is established by showing that it really is what it is supposed to be. Proving that real or other evidence is what it purports to be is called authentication. Evid. Code § 1400; Fed. Rules Evid. 901.

Real evidence may be authenticated in three ways--by identification of a unique object, by identification of an object that has been made unique, and by establishing a chain of custody. You only have to be able to use one of these ways, though it is prudent to prepare to use an alternate method in case the court is not satisfied with the one you have chosen.

The easiest and usually the least troublesome way to authenticate real evidence is by the testimony of a witness who can identify a unique object in court. For example, the curator of a museum may be able to testify that he is familiar with, say, Picasso's "Dames de Avignon" and that what has been marked as exhibit so-and-so is in fact that unfortunate painting. It is important to remember, however, that many more mundane objects may be amenable to this kind of identification. A unique contract, or one that has been signed, may be authenticated by a person who is familiar with the document or its signatures. A ring may have an inscription by which it can be identified. Even a manufactured object, like a wallet, may be identifiable by its owner after years of use have given it a unique personality.

The second method--identification in court of an object that has been made unique, is extremely useful since it sometimes allows a lawyer or client to avoid the pitfalls of proving a chain of custody by exercising some forethought. If a witness who can establish an object's relevance to the case marks it with his signature, initials, or another mark that will allow him to testify that he can tell it from all other objects of its kind, that witness will be allowed to identify the object in court and thus to authenticate it. Often, if a member of the lawyer's staff or another person early in the chain of custody marks the evidence, big problems can be avoided if a later link in the chain turns out to be missing.

The third and least desirable way to authenticate real evidence is by establishing a chain of custody. Establishing a chain of custody requires that the whereabouts of the evidence at all times since the evidence was involved in the events at issue be established by competent testimony. -

 

 

 

Robin,

He sent me these studies directly, at my request, and I told him the same things.

Aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know...

And thanks for all the great gallery updates... DJ

16 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is really nice work David.

You are right, it does not look like he is staring upwards.

Is that synced with the shot sequence?

 

Another points, if Sorrels was there, why did he have to ask Fritz what time the line up was?

 

 

These are all the available frames with Brennan on them...This takes up thru z207, a point after which LIFE believed a shot was fired...

Seems he should have been looking up by then... 

Thanks for the kind words Mitch...

If the Zfilm was an original representation of what occurred, why bother with 4 recreations?  

Why use 161 or 171 as the "first" frame of the sequence when we have the entire film?

Why?

April 27, 1964, after 3 surveys finding arriving at the same results:

"We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine
whether the assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to
frame 190.  We could locate the position on the ground which
corresponds to this frame and it would then be our intent to establish
by photography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the
President prior to this point.  Our intention is not to establish the point with complete accuracy,
but merely to substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole assassin."

Why?

There are 6 different frames on which shots are located and the experts questioning how LIFE knew the frame #'s for the 1st and 2nd shots...

Now let me take it a step further....  Shaneyfelt took the established frames locations along WEST's surveyed route (along the "+" signs) and moved the limo in a southerly direction by 1.1 feet which resulted in a change in JFK's position at that frame by also moving down Elm by .9 foot.  

.9 foot is the plug figure used in ce884 for the distance between 161 and 166, which originally was 168 and 171.  The information provided in WCD298 and all the ce885=ce895 exhibits is painfully incorrect by a HUGE factor.

An example...  there is a 10 inch vertical difference between the recreation JFK and the actual JFK.  Hitting a mark on the back of the stand-in winds up being 15.25' short of where JFK would actually be.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the adjusted frame for the first view that the marksman had of the President's stand-in coming out from under the tree? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is frame 210 and has been marked as Commission Exhibit No. 893 and represents the 10-inch adjustment for the difference in the height of the car as compared with frame 207. 

Attached is CE893 as mentioned showing frame 210 and claiming this represents the 10" vertical movement from frame 207.  Again, moving 10" vertically moves the limo forward 15.25'  (10"/12" = .833 x 18.3' = 15.25' horiztonally for a 10" vertical movement)

As Chris D. helped me understand, the line of sight for 166 and 171 after Shaneyfelt's movement, is the same.  Yet when you compare where the limo is when JFK is at 166 to where Shaneyfelt put him for 171 we find 171 is further up Elm than 166...  ooops, not possible.  The inset is frame z168, still before 171 and not yet reaching the lane stripe.  If the limo was actually where Shaneyfelt put it for 171, the limo would be 3-4 feet short of that stripe.

This is the primae facia evidence for FBI alteration of the evidence in order to make it virtually impossible to piece back together - I believe Tom Wilson came to the same conclusion.  ce884 represents the breadcrumbs left over from the alteration of information.  

If you can contend that the 132-133, 156-157, 207-212, 302-303 and 315-316 evidence of splicing, tearing and/or removal of frames does not equate to alteration, fine.  That the 6 plus feet of film at the archive, supposedly 0183, does not have 0183 printed on it without a splice attaching that piece is in reality the camera original.

I'm not going to get into a discussion over "whether or not"...  I am going to continue to present the evidence of what the FBI did, starting with WCD298 up thru ce884 and how these two findings are in direct conflict with each other

Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by
the first bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President
by the third and fatal bullet.  The report will also conclude that the
bullets were fired by one person located in the sixth floor southeast
corner window of the TSBD building.

    As our investigation now stands, however, we have not shown
that these events could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested
above.  All we have is a reasonable hypothesis which appears to be
supported by the medical testimony but which has not been checked out
against the physical facts at the scene of the assassination.

---
I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession,
submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service,
are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will present a
completely misleading picture.
 

At this point, April 27, 1964, the primary reports offered related to the Dealey activity are the FBI's WCD298, The SS's ce875, FBI's ce884, and WCR's ce585.
The conclusion still at this point, was 3 shots = 3 hits at z220, z313, z350 yet LIFE is telling the WC the shot was at z190.

That's an awful lot of confusion for a situation where you have a filmed record of the event which supposedly is THE ACCURATE ACCOUNT of what occurred.

On 1/10/2017 at 6:00 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I am not a photo analyst, It would be impossible for the shadows to "fall the exact same way as the BYP" IMO because the photos are taken in different locations in the world and latitude/longitude would make a difference.

So basically you'll argue against anything and everything.  You can't trust your own eyes to see how the shadows fall on top of each other and in the same direction away from the subject.  Their lengths are almost the same as well.  That it does not follow for you that shadows falling at an angle creating a shadow on a nose also at that angle might suggest the BYP face and the position of the sun in that photo are in conflict?

With regards to Oswald being two people with different heights and weights, this is not confined to military records. 

What do you have to say about Ely report and then the followup memo from Jenner to Rankin?  

Any ideas why "material alterations and omissions" would be necessary?  Amazing how many conflicts there are within the man's history and how many third party investigators stumble upon the same inconsistencies suggesting the existence of two men.

Believe it or not Tracy, I respect what you're doing.  I take issue only with the fact you don't like to include ALL the evidence, just that which you want to contradict.  There are literally hundreds of instances of conflict throughout the H&L book.  Of instances where Oswalds are in multiple locations at the same time (the Robert McKowen incident while Oswald and family are in Ft Worth for one, for two - Anna Lewis swearing twice with JVB in the room that she and her husband and Lee and Judy are in New Orleans Jan-Apr 1962 when the Oswalds are in Minsk)

I have no doubt that out of these hundreds of conflicts, some are the result of speculation based off some evidence.  that other nefarious activities may have been going on at the time involving Cubans, Oswald-look alikes, the FBI and the CIA... the entire Alice TX episode with Lee, a foreign woman and 2 children months before the 2nd child is born for example.  Point is for every single hole you think you've uncovered there are 40 more related to it that you cannot, but because so few people are fully versed in the H&L evidence, you get away with it.

What amazes me most is this need to prove John wrong about a subject that is truly not that far outside the activities of the time.  As more and more of what Dulles and his "staffers" did throughout the war and up thru the 60's, the H&L not only makes sense but would be something our CIA would want to try and succeed at...  While the rest of the world had been spying successfully for hundreds of years, the US intelligence community was in its infancy.  

Tracy, I'm sorry you need to attack this with so much passion.  It appears that you forget all the strange and amazing things our CIA and FBI did over the years... so much so you can discount evidence rather than give it the deep and considerate thought you give your rebuttals.  

Please stop cherry-picking and do your homework.  As for what you've seen or not... or whether I am trying to change your mind... I'm not.  You've decided regardless.  But for those reading your work, they should know that you leave out 10 times as much supporting evidence as you present conflicting.  Between Gorsky, Donovan, Felde, Grafe, and a list of Marines who knew one but not the other, you're telling only a small portion of the story - which worked for the WCR but doesn't fly here.

On 1/11/2017 at 10:51 AM, David Josephs said:

So Item #3 says that they "witnessed this line-up" - not necessarily a line-up for Brennan's sake.

Brown and Dhority were at the 6:30, not the 7:55 it seems.  The "officers with witness" were with Barbara, not Brennan.  As I read it Steve, it appears the Barbara line-up was crashed by Sorrels and Brennen.  

The other DPD men were simply not involved and since he "Failed to ID" why would they make more of that in a report  or testimony?

With regards to the use of "WE",  it seems he uses "we" as the preferred pronoun regardless.  "We" in the case you name refers to he and Brennan.. FWIW

DJ

Mr. SORRELS - I did not talk to Oswald again, and I was around there. When I contacted Washington, I was informed that Inspector Kelley was being directed to be there, and he would be there later on that evening, that they had caught him out on the road, and he would come there to help out.
I also got information to Captain Fritz that I had this witness, Brennan, that I had talked to, and that I would like very much for him to get a chance to see Oswald in a lineup. And Captain Fritz said that would be fine.
So I instructed Special Agent Patterson, I believe it was, after I had located Brennan---had quite a difficult time to locate him, because he wasn't at home. And they finally prevailed upon his wife to try to help me locate him, and she, as I recall it, said that she would see if she could locate him by phone. I called her, I believe, the second time and finally got a phone number and called him and told him we would like for him to come down and arrange for him to meet one of our agents to pick him up at the place there. And when they came down there with him, I got ahold of Captain Fritz and told him that the witness was there, Mr. Brennan.
He said, "I wish he would have been here a little sooner, we just got through with a lineup. But we will get another fixed up."
So I took Mr. Brennan, and we went to the assembly room, which is also where they have the lineup, and Mr. Brennan, upon arrival at the police station, said, "I don't know if I can do you any good or not, because I have seen the man that they have under arrest on television," and he said. "I just don't know whether I can identify him positively or not" because he said that the man on television was a bit disheveled and his shirt was open or something like that, and he said "The man I saw was not in that condition."
So when we got to the assembly room, Mr. Brennan said he would like to get quite a ways back, because he would like to get as close to the distance away from where he saw this man at the time that the shooting took place as he could.
And I said, "Well, we will get you clear on to the back and then we can move up forward."
They did bring Oswald in in a lineup.
He looked very carefully, and then we rooted him up closer and so forth, and he said, "I cannot positively say."
I said, "Well, is there anyone there that looks like him?"
He said, "Well, that second man from the left," who was Oswald--"he looks like him."
Then he repeated that the man he saw was not disheveled.

 

 

As the last post on a page, it was lost in the shuffle...

You echoed my thoughts about the DPD not being there for Brennan...  and from all accounts, Brennan is the only witness claiming to have seen the shooter other than Euins whose story had to be discounted immediately.  

I did this little gif focusing on Brennan...  he doesn't appear to be looking up at any time...  and he kinda shoots himself in the foot with this testimony, no?

As I've been developing my article which traces the alteration of the Zfilm to the ultimate alteration of ce585 with the offering of the fraudulent ce884, the first thing that jumps out at me are the results of the first 3 surveys regarding shot #1 and how this was changed for the WC's version.

On ce535 - a version which is readable directly from WEST - we see the location marked for Shot #1 as the same as was found in Dec for the SS and Feb for the FBI: 3+81.3 @ elevation 423.07.   When the shamefully admitted ce884 was finally uncovered, this changes to 3+71.1 at elevation 423.75.    a Difference of 10.2 feet

(note: Elm has an 18.3':1' run:rise, for every 18.3' horizontal Elm drops 1' vertically.)

Elevation 423.07' - 423.75' = .68'   .68' x 18.3' = 12.44'  = the distance between these two spots is 12.44' - 10.2' = 2.24 feet further than ce884 suggests.
2.24' is the distance between 207-208 on the first ce884 (yellow).  This equated to the limo moving at almost 30mph for those 2 frames then slowing down to around 11mph in the next frame.  In the white version, 208 is changed to 210 slowing that speed from 30mph to just under 10mph - much more acceptable and realistic... but moving the same physical location to a different frame means we lose the 2.24' and wind up with a 423.75' elevation @ station 3+81.3.

To move from 3+71.1 to 3+81.3 the elevation would no longer be 423.07 but is 10.2'/18.3' = .56' vertically lower than 3+81.3
Elev 423.75' - .56' = Elev 423.19 = 10.2 feet down Elm from 3+71.1 = 3+81.3

So where is 423.07 since the opnly fixed frame in this game was z207 @ 423.75 @ 3+71.1?  
Elev 423.19' - Elev 423.07' = .12' * 18.3' = 2.196' further down Elm.  3+81.3 + 2.196 = 3+83.496 or 3+83.5

208 and 210 cannot both be 2.24' from 207.  Shaneyfelt and Frazier placed the maximum of 3 shots where they made the most sense since the only accurate frame # we have for a shot is 313.  ce884 also occurs after Tague comes forward.  The "Shot that Missed" becomes a shot which was never officially acknowledged in the WCR other than on ce535.   The last image is an overlay of ce585 and the clear plat showing that shot notations are still showing a 3rd shot 35-40 feet past z313... and is why ce884 ends at z313

 The infamous WCD298 which was the result of the Dec survey also shows shot #3 down by Altgens at the foot of the stairs.  Whether this was a real shot supported by real evidence is hard to tell.  3 surveys, the surveyor's notes and a number of witnesses state a shot was fired after z313 in the area by the foot of the Knoll stairs.  

WCD1, the FBI report, concludes 3 shots = 3 hits.  The surveys need to match this conclusion.  Rather than place a shot at the top of Elm during the turn onto Elm and the creation of the amazing Position A, it was decided to put the shot near station 5+00 some 35 feet further down Elm than Z313.  

The final piece of the puzzle related to the WCR survey plat is the difference between the actual route of the limo, and the frame number dots created by Shaneyfelt and documented in West's notes.

So, other than not wanting to show all the shots fired, but only 3 until May 1964, then 2 after that...  do the conflicts in the evidence for shot #1 point to something else other than hiding 2 real shots too close together to be possible from one shooter?

Maybe some of these will help with your question Micah.

This is Humes' description of the wound for the WCR.  I then took this description and placed it on a few images of a 3D skull and brain to give you an idea of what he was describing.  In reality, most of the damage HUMES describes is related to the pre-craniotomy he (or someone else) performed on JFK prior to 8pm.  If a single bullet entered at that red spot - ask yourself if the following accurately represents the results of such an entry.  

And then ask yourself how those fragments got to be at a point above the entry and exit as offered when in fact they represent a straight line from the right temple to the middle occipital.

Commander HUMES - Exhibit 391 is listed as a supplementary report on the autopsy of the late President Kennedy, and was prepared some days after the examination.
This delay necessitated by, primarily, our desire to have the brain better fixed with formaldehyde before we proceeded further with the examination of the brain which is a standard means of approach to study of the brain.
The brain in its fresh state does not lend itself well to examination.
From my notes of the examination, at the time of the post-mortem examination, we noted that clearly visible in the large skull defect and exuding from it was lacerated brain tissue which, on close inspection proved to represent the major portion of the right cerebral hemisphere.
We also noted at this point that the flocculus cerebri was extensively lacerated and that the superior sagittal sinus which is a venous blood containing channel in the top of the meninges was also lacerated. 
To continue to answer your question with regard to the damage of the brain, following the formal infixation, Dr. Boswell, Dr. Finck and I convened to examine the brain in this state.
We also prepared photographs of the brain from several aspects to depict the extent of these injuries.
We found that the right cerebral hemisphere was markedly disrupted. There was a longitudinal laceration of the right hemisphere which was parasagittal in position. By the saggital plane, as you may know, is a plane in the midline which would divide the brain into right and left halves. This laceration was parasagittal. It was situated approximately 2.5 cm. to the right of the midline, and extended from the tip of occipital lobe, which is the posterior portion of the brain, to the tip of the frontal lobe which is the most anterior portion of the brain, and it extended from the top down to the substance of the brain a distance of approximately 5 or 6 cm.
The base of the laceration was situated approximately 4.5 cm. below the vertex in the white matter. By the vertex we mean--the highest point on the skull is referred to as the vertex.
The area in which the greatest loss of brain substance was particularly in the parietal lobe, which is the major portion of the right cerebral hemisphere.
The margins of this laceration at all points were jagged and irregular, with additional lacerations extending in varying directions and for varying distances from the main laceration.
In addition, there was a laceration of the corpus callosum which is a body of fibers which connects the two hemispheres of the brain to each other, which extended from the posterior to the anterior portion of this structure, that is the corpus callosum. Exposed in this laceration were portions of the ventricular system in which the spinal fluid normally is disposed within the brain.
When viewed from above the left cerebral hemisphere was intact. There was engorgement of blood vessels in the meninges covering the brain. We note that the gyri and sulci, which are the convolutions of the brain over the left hemisphere were of normal size and distribution.
Those on the right were too fragmented and distorted for satisfactory description.
When the brain was turned over and viewed from its basular or inferior aspect, there was found a longitudinal laceration of the mid-brain through the floor of the third ventricle, just behind the optic chiasma and the mammillary bodies.
This laceration partially communicates with an oblique 1.5 cm. tear through the left cerebral peduncle. This is a portion of the brain which connects the higher centers of the brain with the spinal cord which is more concerned with reflex actions.
There were irregular superficial lacerations over the basular or inferior aspects of the left temporal and frontal lobes. We interpret that these later contusions were brought about when the disruptive force of the injury pushed that portion of the brain against the relative intact skull.
This has been described as contre-coup injury in that location.
This, then, I believe, Mr. Specter, are the major points with regard to the President's head wound.