David Josephs

Is it possible for unicorns to exist in caves in the middle of Mt Everest? Possible? most anything is "possible"... Thomas... ever consider the thought that Oswald was pure military and was ORDERED to fall on the sword... claim he's a patsy... play a part.... are you asking for evidence of the thought or just opinions and discussion? Do we understand that "playing an active part" in the conspiracy and "being entangled by it" still get one INVOLVED but at two very different levels. Elmer Todd ordered to get Perry to reverse his position is "playin an active part" Kellerman orchestrating the Bethesda scene... ACTIVE Oswald went home thursday... something he'd never done. He was specifically called out as not there afterward - the first on the list of employees. If he was PART of the conspiracy.... all he had to do was sit there in the corner of the 6th floor, rifle in hand, and wait for them to catch him. Do the witnesses who place Oswald with Ruby and Tippit give us evidence of involvment of set-up? How would you differentiate the evidence to tell the difference? and if he somehow knew it... all he needed to do was be in a photo at the time of the shots.... His behavior suggests either a devious co-conspirator or a man set up... at least how I see it... today. DJ

Where? Really David? How about YOU answer questions posed to YOU and I will answer them when asked of ME... K? Sorry DVP, but that drawing at the instruction of one of the commissioners is FRAUD... This is an exerpt from the JAN 27, 1964 Commish meeting... LONG before Ford works this magic.... Mr. Rankin: Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time. We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent, since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front , and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through. So that how it could turn, and -- Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went.in a finger's length. Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said The hole in the jacket was 5 1/8" below the collar.... 5 1/4" on the shirt. the "14cm below mastoid process" is a technically incorrect way to identify something on the body... The hole in the throat was ABOVE the collar as described by the nurses and doctors who saw it before the removal of his clothes... the holes in the shirt is once again FRAUDULENTLY described as the exit holes for the SBT bullet.... FRAUD is being perpetrated by the WCR writers at most every turn... prove otherwise. In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; A flaw occurs when it is NOT INTENTIONAL.... FLAWED Adjective (of a substance or object) Blemished, damaged, or imperfect in some way. (of something abstract) Containing a mistake, weakness, or fault. Will you now tell us that this change was NOT INTENTIONAL and without the full knowledge that he was intentionally deceiving the reader about the wound as described in the extant autopsy and by Burkley?? No David, the SBT does NOT work out fine... from back to front an 11 degree angles was determine.. 11 degrees UP from back to front. AND a 25+ degree from right to left - which would extend past JFK to JC for the SBT to even be considered... How again does an 11 degree UPWARD angle become a 25 degree DOWNWARD and if the right to left angle is correct... how far over to the left must JC be to even get hit? Oh wait... JFK needs to be leaning over to tie his shoes at the time... you have anything that changes JFK's vertical position in the car as well?? No, bullets are taken, removed, hidden and lied about. they do NOT disappear. The only thing RIGHT about this book is the Title

Sorry David, but not so much. That there was a conspiracy and cover-up is a priori at this point... it's a postulate, an AXIOM from which intelligent and honest people discuss the case. It has only been the WCR apologists, the LONE NUTTERS who these past 50 years search in vain for the evidence of his guilt in a tome so entirely discredited within the first few years of its existence as to render it one of history's finest example of FRAUD as perpetrated by the US Government. Evidence itself is not "flawed"... the manner it was collected, preserved and presented is... so much so as to render it FRAUD... Specter's SBT for example. So David... is this FLAWED or FRAUD? (edit: in case you're not paying attention... one makes the SBT "more" possible without addressing all the other problems CREATED by moving the shot to that location... while the other is the truth and makes the SBT and the rest of the WCR the pile of burning bs it is...)

Well one of 2948 is KINDA like the only one.... Now... if he had one of THESE it would be worth something...

The two biggest lessons that JFK conspiracy theorists need to learn are these: 1.) "Flaws in the evidence" do not automatically equal "All The Evidence Is Fake". and 2.) "Flaws in the evidence" do not automatically equal "Oswald Was An Innocent Patsy". A lot of Internet conspiracy theorists do not seem to agree with either one of the above two statements. But each of those statements is 100% true nonetheless. That's correct David... Flaws in the evidence requires we look to CONTEXT, COROBORRATION and AUTHENTICATION of said evidence to determine its value When this is done, "FLAWS" become "FRAUD" and point directly to a conspiracy and cover-up... how that changes the determination about Oswald is a matter of interpretation. If you conclude that a T3 bullet hole is moved to the middle of the cervical vertebrae for "clarity" - and this is simply a FLAW or FRAUD with no bearing on the evidence as a whole or Oswald's guilt or ability to have performed the assassination from his supposed position... you're a bit more far gone than anyone cares to know. Tell you what Dave... try telling us what FLAWS IN THE EVIDENCE means... not what it doesn't mean. (and not just 1 flaw buddy, ALL the flaws... what in YOUR MIND do they add up to... just the grossest examples of massive incompetece ever seen? coincidence upon coincidence?) At what point do the FLAWS in the WCR and beyond actually lead to Oswald's guilt and to the conclusion that all the evidence is actually reliable, authentic, coroborrated and within context. Stop trying to get us to prove negatives... YOU offer a conclusive statement about said evidence and support it... offer some evidence you can PROVE is not Fake or Flawed... and has a bearing on the case. C'mon now Dave... here are the WCR conclusions and a few questions.... got the chops for it? 1. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired from the sixth floor window at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository. (put Oswald in that window) 2. The weight of the evidence indicates that there were three shots fired. (the HSCA proved that wrong plus there are numerous “marks” in DP from that day to prove well more than the 4 shots the HSCA found (they actually found 6, 2 were not fired from the only two locations they test- fired from… they were still gunshot sounds… just not from the GK or SE window) 3. Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot. hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President’s throat also caused Governor Connally’s wounds. (please present said evidence – show how an 11 degree UPWARD angle needed to connect back to front can be accomplished from 70 feet above the target) 4. The shots which killed President Kennedy and wounded Governor Connally were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald (any evidence that shows he fired a rifle or THAT rifle was fired would be appreciated) 5. Oswald killed Dallas Police Patrolman J. D. Tippit approximately 45 minutes after the assassination (please connect this with the killing of JFK and the evidence presented by Markham and Bowley) 6. Within 80 minutes of the assassination and 35 minutes of the Tippit killing Oswald resisted arrest at the theatre by attempting to shoot another Dallas police officer. (and this has to do with JFK how?) 7. The Commission has reached the following conclusions concerning Oswald’s interrogation and detention by the Dallas police : (a) Except for the force required to effect his arrest, Oswald was not subjected to any physical coercion by any law enforcement officials. He was advised that he could not be compelled to give any information and that any statements made by him might be used against him in court. He was advised of his right to counsel. He was given the opportunity to obtain counsel of his own choice and was offered legal assistance by the Dallas Bar Association, which he rejected at that time. (Newspaper, radio, and television reporters were allowed uninhibited access to the area through which Oswald had to pass when he was moved from his cell to the interrogation room and other sections of the building, thereby subjecting Oswald to harassment and creating chaotic conditions which were not conducive to orderly interrogation or the protection of the rights of the prisoner. © The numerous statements, sometimes erroneous, made to the press by various local law enforcement officials, during this period of confusion and disorder in the police station, would have presented serious obstacles to the obtaining of a fair trial for Oswald. To the extent that the information was erroneous or misleading, it helped to create doubts, speculations, and fears in the mind of the public which might otherwise not have arisen. (explain what this has to do with FLAWED EVIDENCE) 8. The Commission has reached the following conclusions concerning the killing of Oswald by Jack Ruby on November 24, 1963 (this has what to do with proving Oswald’s guilt or the killing of JFK?) 9. The Commission has found no evidence that either Lee Harvey Oswald or Jack Ruby was part of any conspiracy, domestic or foreign, to assassinate President Kennedy (it was right there, in a pile in the corner… they didn’t even bother to look at it… what exactly are Duran and Alvarado? What was he doing in Mexico or why was he FRAUDULENTLY placed in Mexico? please address the evidence that DOES indicate a connection and was presented in the WCR… it was found, it was ignored…. Just another FLAW?) 10. In its entire investigation the Commission has found no evidence of conspiracy, subversion, or disloyalty to the U.S. Government by any Federal, State, or local official (there’s “found” again do we really need to cover the mountain of evidence that DOES support this?)) 11. On the basis of the evidence before the Commission it concludes that. Oswald acted alone Hoover on Dec 12, 1963: I said I personally believe Oswald was the assassin; that the second aspect as to whether he was the only man gives me great concern; that we have several letters, not in the report because we were not able to prove it, written to him from Cuba referring to the job he was going to do, his good marksmanship, and stating when it was all over he would be brought back to Cuba and presented to the chief; but we do not know if the chief was Castro and cannot make an investigation because we have no intelligence operation in Cuba; that I did not put this into the report because we did not have proof of it and didn't want to put speculation in the report; that this was the reason I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man. The FBI report from Dec 9th: On the contrary, the data developed strongly indicates that he acted on his own initiative or impulse with little advance planning. 12. (f) Within these limitations, however, the Commission finds that the (SS) agents most immediately responsible for the President’s safety reacted promptly at the time the shots were fired from the TSBD. (who would you say are the agents MOST IMMEDIATELY REPONSIBLE for the President’s safety? Greer? Kellerman? Ready? - who are they talking about here David and please provide the evidence that shows they reacted “promptly” All I have is this Greer who has without a doubt the GREATEST RESPONSIBILITY and ABILITY TO AFFECT JFK's ENVIRONMENT: just stares at him as he is killed...and this AFTER he is told to get the heck ouot of there... Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes. Good. There was enough for me to verify that the man was hit. So, in the same motion I come right back and grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, "Let's get out of here; we are hit," and grabbed the mike and I said, "Lawson, this is Kellerman,"--this is Lawson, who is in the front car. "We are hit; get us to the hospital immediately." Now, in the seconds that I talked just now, a flurry of shells come into the car. I then looked back and this time Mr. Hill, who was riding on the left front bumper of our followup car, was on the back trunk of that car; the President was sideways down into. the back seat As you can see below, Kellerman has his hand/mike to his head starting in this image at z302... he had ALREADY told Greer to get out of here. Instead of leaving, Greer SLOWS and turns to look at JFK. Mr. GREER. Well, when we were going down Elm Street, I heard a noise that I thought was a backfire of one of the motorcycle policemen. And I didn't--it did not affect me like anything else. I just thought that it is what it was. We had had so many motorcycles around us. So I heard this noise. And I thought that is what it was. And then I heard it again. And I glanced over my shoulder. And I saw Governor Connally like he was starting to fall. Then I realized there was something wrong. I tramped on the accelerator, and at the same time Mr. Kellerman said to me, "Get out of here fast." And I cannot remember even the other shots or noises that was. I cannot quite remember any more. I did not see anything happen behind me any more, because I was occupied with getting away. So David... is he lying or is the Zfilm wrong?

The only 99 cent book that's 98 cents overpriced... well... you get what you pay for. So, anyone wonder how he addresses the 11 degree UPWARD MOVEMENT of the SBT with a shot from 70 feet ABOVE the target... The holes in the clothing at T3 and Humes letting us know he was working on JFK 25 minutes before he arrived... at least he got the title right

WTF is "OPPS" old man... so excited to make a point you simply can't concentrate? Maybe if you ran off and took a p-iss first...you know, BEFORE you get all worked up... old men and their bladders ... That you posess knowledge and wait around to bait others is pathetic... the much needed jollies of a hasbeen old man with nothing left to offer.... Your childish "I know something you don't" BS adds to your reputation. and your inability to ackowledge an admitted mistake further proves your worthlessness as a human and your inability to play with or be accepted by others. No wonder you sit alone all day at your computer... you're just not any good at the HUMAN thing... Your paraphrasing anything in the case is worthless... post what was said so we can see what a shill you are. Mr. ALTGENS - Yes. What made me almost certain that the shot came from behind was because at the time I was looking at the President, just as he was struck, it caused him to move a bit forward. He seemed as if at the time----well, he was in a position-- sort of immobile. He wasn't upright. He was at an angle but when it hit him, it seemed to have just lodged--it seemed as if he were hung up on a seat button or something like that. It knocked him just enough forward that he came right on down. There was flesh particles that flew out of the side of his head in my direction from where I was standing, so much so that it indicated to me that the shot came out of the left side of his head. Also, the fact that his head was covered with blood, the hairline included, on the left side all the way down, with no blood on his forehead or face--- suggested to me, too, that the shot came from the opposite side, meaning in the direction of this Depository Building, but at no time did I know for certain where the shot came from. "with no blood on his forehead or face--- suggested to me, too, that the shot came from the opposite side" From where JFK was at the headshot and where the TSBD is... the only way for the shot to exit the LEFT SIDE is that it came "from the opposite side"... and since he also says there was no blood on his FOREHEAD or FACE.... maybe explain this: Mr. ALTGENS - Because, having heard these shots and then having seen the damage that was done on this shot to the President's head, I was aware at that time that shooting was taking place and there was not a shot--I looked--I looked because I knew the shot had to come from either over here, if it were close range, or had to come from a high-powered rifle. Mr. LIEBELER - When you say "over here," you indicate what? Mr. ALTGENS - The left side of the car. The LEFT SIDE of the car based on where Altgens was, is the area behind Zapruder, the pergola and over to the RR yard and fence. Mr. LIEBELER - All right, as you stood here on the abutment and looked down into Elm Street, you saw the President hit on the right side of the head and you thought perhaps the shots had come from behind you? Mr. ZAPRUDER - Well, yes. Mr. LIEBELER - From the direction behind you? Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes, actually As to what happened--I remember the police were running behind me. There were police running right behind me. Of course, they didn't realize yet, I guess, where the shot came from--that it came from that height. Mr. LIEBELER - As you were standing on this abutment facing Elm street, you say the police ran over behind the concrete structure behind you and down the railroad track behind that, is that right? Mr. ZAPRUDER - After the shots? Mr. LIEBELER - Yes. Mr. ZAPRUDER - Yes--after the shots--yes, some of them were motorcycle cops--I guess they left their motorcycles running and they were running right behind me, of course, in the line of the shooting. I guess they thought it came from right behind me. So we continue to see reactions related to shots from the rear AND from the side/front are mentioned by many.... Mr. STERN - Just a minute. Do you recall your impression at the time regarding the source of the shots? Mr. HARGIS - Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn't any way in the world I could tell where they were coming from, but at the time there was something in my head that said that they probably could have been coming from the railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered, with blood--I was Just a little back and left of--Just a little bit back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I didn't know. I had a feeling that it might have been from the Texas Book Depository, and these two places was the primary place that could have been shot from This from the person closest to JFK when he was hit, and not in the car at the time. You take a helf step forward and 9 steps back every time you get cloe to the case. The evidence and witnesses describe a cross-fire. A FILM EXPERT who actually saw the movie that weekend says he saw 6-8 shots from 3 directions... 2 sets of teams creating two sets of boards from two different Z films..... That hole your digging for yourself just gets deeper and deeper... the more you do to defend your beloved WCR, the worst your argument gets.... How many people run to the TSBD after the shots? I can only rememeber one who goes on to commit perjury during his testimony by contradicting his AFFIDAVIT from that day. but hey, watching you flounder around with your limited understanding of only bits and pieces of the case is highly entertaining... Adopting YOUR attitude that engaging in a thread with you is purely entertainment will work just fine from here on out... You're always good for a laugh, a {sigh}... and One more very big problem for you davie jo. You love to quote Altgens, yet Altgens tells us about the wounds he sees to JFK's head...AFTER the headshot...but if the head shot occurs where you just said it did..Altgens can't SEE the damage to the side of JFK's head. IT IS HIDDEN FROM HIS VIEW. He can only see the damage he describes if the shot occurs up around the 313 area... OPPS...

Well then... looks like I was wrong about those two frames... MPI did not make copies of 341 or 350 (486 as well I come to learn) and there does not seem to be copies of those two frames in general circulation... they would only be available at the archives or if you ordered that $$$ set of images. Mr. LIEBELER - You also testified that you were standing perhaps no more than 15 feet away when the President was hit in the head and that you are absolutely certain that there were no shots fired after the President was hit in the head? Mr. ALTGENS - Yes, sir; that's correct. At z340 Altgens moves into frame and is about 15 feet from JFK at z350.... A headshot occurs at station 4+95 or 30 feet past z313 which is at station 4+65. Other than that I do not know of any significance to those frames.... It would seem to me that if those two frames existed in their full glory... we'd have seen them by now and they would be incorporated into the available versions of the zframe movies. That the other two "breaks" occur at a time when shots were fired is, of course, no coincidence at all... DJ Mistakes happen... you learn and move on. You, on the other hand, will always be a

No I do not base the conclusion on Costella Show us ANY FILM or ANY COLLECTION of frames that shows 341 and 350 intact, complete with IS area. The frames in the WCR go from 171-334 with the 208/212 spliced together frame... Since YOU surely have copies of every frame from the original... prove me wrong.

Then post the original frames... 341 and 350 Simple. Right now all we have are these, and the IS area is missing in all of them since the COPY FRAMES are used to fill in the missing frames: Post the intact 341 and 350 and prove yourself correct.

Hi Daniel.... I use the Zfilm because I believe the images we see on the film did occur... like the Knudsen autopsy photos... they happened yet they do not tell the entire story and in fact suggest a story that is completely opposite from what actually occurred... but like these autopsy photos... that IS his shoulder, that IS his head... it's just been set up in such a way as to show what they wanted to show... So, imo, the Zfilm does include imagery from DP at the time of the assassination... some of it covered up, painted over... and some of it removed. I am postulating that Z filmed in slo motion for a good portion of the assassination sequence... this created 3 times as many frames and allowed the film to be refilmed frame by frame. The jerks and quick movements within the film can be explained while removing large sections of the film - the limo stop - without leaving a trace. The splices occur in very specific locations 157, 208, 341, 350 as seen within the existing film. When a discussion of shots is had, we see that these splices coincide with descriptions of shots fired in every case except z313. By losing the Intersprocket area for these frames, we removed the replication barrior... I can replace everything between 209 and 341 without a trace, same with 157 thru 208... or 341 thru 350. As long as the IS area is gone, AND there is a splice, a physical splice, anything is possible. Now ask yourself. The FBI and SS were in charge... taking whatever they wanted... film from cameras, the cameras themselves and basically TAKING whatever it is they wanted. YET, the Zfilm, Zapruder, is handled with kid gloves... I personally do not believe that Zapruder had ANY FILMS IN HIS POSSESSION friday night yet the impression was that he always had it, that the SS/FBI were willing to wait around until Zapruder DECIDED to give them the original... to give this film more credibility. --------- With regards to the blood seen by so many exiting the right rear... the frames with that spray were removed, which is why JFK appears to move so violently backward. Looking at the transitions between 313 and 314... and then compare that to 315/6/7 the amount of change in the movement of the head, the appearance of the white blob, the removal of the blood to the rear... (I believe most of that blood overshoots the limo and hit Hargis) the removal of a few key frames and the blood is gone, yet the backward motion was exaggerated... better that than the sight of blood shooting out the rear of JFK's head. we do see remnants of the blood above his head in 315/6/7 just nothing behind his head.... Once we understand how fraudulent the evidence is... most ALL of it... our job becomes picking out the real from within these frauds. While quite a bit of the evidence was in fact created speifically to support Oswald's guilt... much was the original evidence that has undergone some change... the roots are there but are hidden by the branches and leaves... Just my opinions and conclusions from the evdience I get to work with.... question remains... Where is the evidence of blood and debris forward of JFK in the limo? DJ David, I have never used the Z-film to prove anything because I find the lack of debris exiting the avulsive wound in the right rear of the head as proof of alteration. 10 years ago Bill Miller on Lancer responded that the debris exited the back of Kennedy's head too fast for the camera to capture. Funny-- Toni Foster in her 2000 interview with Debra Conway said the "spray went behind him." So Toni could see easily what the camera could not. Therefore I argue nothing from the film. Yet you seem to take the film seriously. May I pose the question then to you: how do you account for the lack of debris exiting the back of Kennedy's head? ITEK confirmed there are no debris exiting the back of Kennedy's head in the extant film . thanks in advance, Daniel

Great to see/hear you Bob... yes indeed... that forum has become LNers falling all over themselves to see who can bury their head in the sand fastest... while delivering as many insults as possible. Nothing but tons of fun. Not a whole lot better here at the moment. A handful of nutters like to think they are derailing the efforts of many with their pithy little ad homs posts.... while admitting they could care less about the actual assassination or its effect on history.... Let's put it this way in this thread... any forward movement of JFK's head is attributed to the 3rd law of physics.... NOT to a shot from the rear... Photo-man Lamson can't - nor anyone else - produce images of the blood and gore in front of JFK within the limo that corresponds to Frazier's statement... so given witness statements are worthless - according to LNers - Where's all that forward spraying blood from the front of his forehead popping open? If a bullet was able to travel from JFK thru JC... then why wasn't JC and Nellie awash in JFK's blood from the SAME BULLET fired from behind blowing JFK's forehead off... Given the "evidence"... maybe cause the photos and xrays tell two different stories.... Look at Z345... this is well after any blood was sprayed from the wound hitting Hargis (EAST and SOUTH of JFK) We can see the blood from the shot to JC already spreading thru his jacket... yet I challenge the impotent Lamson to find ANY EXAMPLE of blood on the backs of the middle seats, blood on Nellie, blood on the SS agents, blood on the handrails... or on the hood of the vehicle.... Mr. SPECTER - I hand you a subsequent exhibit of the Commission, No. 346, showing the interior view of the automobile and ask you if that depicts the automobile which you examined? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; however, it wasn't in this condition. It wasn't as clean as it is in Exhibit 346. Mr. SPECTER - What was the condition with respect to cleanliness? Mr. FRAZIER - There were blood and particles of flesh scattered all over the hood, the windshield, in the front seat and all over the rear floor rugs, the jump seats, and over the rear seat, and down both sides of the side rails or tops of the doors of the car. Mr. SPECTER - Is that condition depicted by Commission Exhibits 352 and 353 to the extent that they show the interior of the automobile? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. If the shot was from JFK's right to left, from behind... blowing the debris FORWARD... we'd expect to see it all over the LEFT SIDE of the limo to the FRONT of JFK.... Do we see any blood on these areas? Where is all the blood to the FRONT of JFK... We can see it just fine on the seat... but the buckt of blood and debris that supposedly fell forward SHOULD have been seen all over the left side of that limo. When in reality.. the backsplatter of the shot to the right temple area is ALL the debris that fell forward... Prove otherwise. Now you get to see CL in all is ad hom glory.... He has nothing with which to counter so out comes his third grader alter ego.... something that starts with "davie jo" and goes on to show his VAST knowledge in this case...

I started with the topic and expanded. A second shot to the head requires results which are seen and caused by that action. The amount of blood forward of JFK's seat has never been conclusively shown. As a result... I fail to see the DALLAS results of a shot from the rear other than the shot to T3 in the back which, as I come to learn from Horne, left a bullet that was removed from JFK's right torso prior to the 8pm autopsy and was probably the result of the back shot... the throat bullet was also dug out prior to the 8pm autopsy and the SS/FBI ackowledged yet another bullet stuck behind JFK's right ear. I hope you don't mind the tangents as I believe they add to the no rear shot to the head conclusion. Cheers DJ No... JFK's head does not move forward in the Zfilm we get to look at. The top/front of his head seems to be reacting into the gunshot as is expected via physics. First law: An object at rest remains at rest unless acted upon by a force. An object in motion remains in motion, and at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force. JFK's head is moving at 2-8mph within a car moving at the same speed... unless the car stops or accelerates... OR JFK's head stops, accelerates or resists the motion of the car... it's movement should not change. (we FORCE our head to stop moving forward when we stop our cars) Second law: The acceleration of a body is directly proportional to, and in the same direction as, the net force acting on the body, and inversely proportional to its mass. Thus, F = ma, where F is the net force acting on the object, m is the mass of the object and a is the acceleration of the object. A 160grain bullet moving at 1500fps will impart FORCE onto JFK's head at the moment of impact Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body. So at the moment of impact, the head will resist the bullet based on the FORCE it imparts... a bullet with more surface area at the front will impart more FORCE than one that has less surface area... if a pointed bullet tumbles and hits sideways, the force will be much greater than if the same pointed bullet hits with the pointed end first and slices thru the victim. The force we see on the Zfilm is a result of the particles and expansion of the bullet thru the head... this was no FMJ bullet designed to slice thru... this bullet exploded at impact and hurled it's lead thru JFK's head. The lion share coming out the right rear while leaving it's trail and betraying its origin extending from the right temple backward. Whether there was another bullet hit to the head is, imo, not determinable via the Zfilm or even the available forensic evidence... but from the brain sections that Burkley made sure no one would ever see or do on the original brain. and since none of the other occupants of the limo are thrown toward the back of the car - it is not a result of Greer accelerating away... If JFK's butt is in the seat corner and his upper torso is leaning forward in a back brace, the only movements for him are either: 1 - falling forward into the footwell or into Jackie's lap... (without a seatbelt and him supposedly hit from the rear in the middle of his head - he SHOULD have fallen forward) OR 2 - back toward the rear seat cushion Given that is impossible for him to be hit in the head with a bullet and NOT move forward to meet it... how much FORWARD should be expected? Back to Rule #3... If all that strikes JFK is the pointed end of a bullet and then its sides as it passes thru... the movement forward should be miniscule... Problem being that he losses all control of his motor skills immediately... the car is moving or will be moving forward very soon. Now... hang a plate from a string... hit it with a rubber ball.... the 3rd law still applies, but since the FORCE of the plate is not enough to overcome the force of the ball... the ball will indeed be slowed done and may even just drop to the ground... but the plate WILL move backward as there is nothing in addition to the Mass/Acceleration to stop it. Same with JFK's head. Since most of the debris exits back and to the left.... the head travels in the direction of the shot once the inital 3rd law response is done and the FORCE of the bullet can now act on an object that has no resistence at all. The movement of the bullet thru the head pushes it back... the fact that JFK can no longer offer resistance to this force is why he falls AWAY from the bullet.... and is also the reason I believe, we do not see example of the gore thrown to the FRONT of the limo. If there had been a shot from behind we should see Nellie and JC covered in blood - as Hargis was. Mr. HARGIS - Yes; when President Kennedy straightened back up in the car the bullet him in the head, the one that killed him and it seemed like his head exploded, and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water, It wasn't really blood. And at that time the Presidential car slowed down. I heard somebody say, "Get going," or "get going," The limo slowed at the time of the headshots... and the debris is blown back and to the left Mr. HARGIS - Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn't any way in the world I could tell where they were coming from, but at the time there was something in my head that said that they probably could have been coming from the railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered, with blood--I was Just a little back and left of--Just a little bit back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I didn't know. I had a feeling that it might have been from the Texas Book Depository, and these two places was the primary place that could have been shot from. Cause a shot from the NORTH EAST would of course cause the blood to splatter SOUTH EAST... huh? Do you ever find it interesting that the images of the "MESS" left on and in the limo is confined to the rear seat and what little is seen on the rearview mirror, the sunshades, the windshield and the testimony of the occupants. Do we ever see the mess on Nellie? Greer? Kellerman? back of the middle seats? Mr. SPECTER - I hand you a subsequent exhibit of the Commission, No. 346, showing the interior view of the automobile and ask you if that depicts the automobile which you examined? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; however, it wasn't in this condition. It wasn't as clean as it is in Exhibit 346. Mr. SPECTER - What was the condition with respect to cleanliness? Mr. FRAZIER - There were blood and particles of flesh scattered all over the hood, the windshield, in the front seat and all over the rear floor rugs, the jump seats, and over the rear seat, and down both sides of the side rails or tops of the doors of the car. Mr. SPECTER - Is that condition depicted by Commission Exhibits 352 and 353 to the extent that they show the interior of the automobile? Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. Looking at the photos of the limo at parkland - does anyone see this? Do we ever see Nellie's clothes? Is there any image of the limo that can be used to substantiate what Frazier says he saw? As I have never seen one. ================================= The description of the injury by Boswell states "Falx loose from sagital sinus from the Coronal suture back" and that the "Vomer crushed" and "Fracture thru floor" under the right eye. Looking where the VOMER is and the floor of the right eye socket... and the particle trail in the xrays... Either there was more than one shot to JFK's head or JFK's skull and brain were subject to some pretty nasty rearranging between Elm street and Boswell's drawing. DJ

Here is a gif I did of the Bell corner turn for a discussion about Truly's comment regarding the limo almost hitting the curb... Seems to me we SHOULD see Worrell somewhere... especially given where he marks the photo... 'cept he's not there.... unless he's the tall guy directly in the middle of that wall sculpture. I also posted the frames used to create the gif... they are MUCH larger and may help in finding him... or showing he's not really there. DJ http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0491a.htm Mr. SPECTER - Now take a look at that picture and tell us where you were standing - and I will give you a pencil so you can mark it on that picture itself - at the time the Presidential motorcade came by. Mark it with an "X," if you would, just exactly where were you standing, as best you can recollect it, at this moment, at the time the President went by. Mr. WORRELL - Right underneath that window right there. Mr. SPECTER - Now, how close were you standing to this building which I will ask you to identify; first of all, what building is that? Mr. WORRELL - That is the Texas Depository. Mr. SPECTER - All right. Now how close to that building were you standing? Mr. WORRELL - I was, I don't know, 4 or 5 feet out from it. Mr. SPECTER - Were you standing with your face to the building, with your back to the building, or how? Mr. WORRELL - My back was to the building. Mr. SPECTER - I show you a photograph which has been identified as Commission Exhibit 360 and I will ask you if you can identify what that building is? Mr. WORRELL - That is the Depository. Mr. SPECTER - All right. Now on this picture will you again, with an "X," mark where you were standing as closely as you can recollect it. Mr. WORRELL - That car is in the way. Mr. SPECTER - All right. Put a mark then right above where the car is, indicating where you were standing on the sidewalk near that building. (Witness marking.)

Hi Sean... another thing, these men don't appear in either Hughes or Weaver...? and in the Dillard I posted, we DO see two of the men still in the window - so it can't be that much after the shots, yet NONE of the women who should be at the window on the 4th floor are there.... odd. DJ

You seem to be forgetting that few if anyone would know about the OTHER one. All that needed matching was their backgrounds... maybe someone used Oswald as the Patsy knowing that the Angleton can of worms would provide cover should anyone come snooping.... IDK Bernie... And asI've posted... not everything in that book or coming from John's mouth need be golden. He too is trying to piece together a 1000 piece puzzle with only the handful of pieces available.. many with more than dubious origins. IDK how Angleton thought, or Helms or Hunt... and I thin that remains key here.... Until you can get inside the creation of covert planning... or have an extensive background in understanding these plans... we can only guess. My question... whatever prompted John to go look... don't you find it somewhat amazing that our LONE NUT has such an interesting and convoluted history - missing school records taken by the FBI within days of the assassination? That there are explanations which can be argued from both sides with a high degree of authenticity makes the case that much more easy to see as a PLANNED OPERATION... Finally... I'd ask that you look at the sources of evidence from each side... Uncorroborated FBI reports versus witnesses who were there.... AFTER the fact changes to stories that used to point away from Oswald are now implicating Oswald.... 2 feet becomes 3'6", 12:15 becomes 11:45... the 1st floor becomes the 6th, a Mauser becomes a Carcano.... and a shot from Above somehow enters the back and travels UP to exit the throat, then DOWN at 25 degrees to go thur the next man.... At what point do you not concede... ? "Don't believe anything until it's been officially denied" ... "we never imagined planes being flown into buildings" there's only so much BS to take, isn't there? DJ

YOUR memory? that'll be as accurate as the WCR... Sorry you can't come to grips with the reality of the evidence and what your EXPERT Rollie concludes... In every instance of a stop/start on the Zfilm's side A, the FFO is obvious In the transition from the "test" frames on side B to Z001... wuddya know... there is it again. The only place where there is no significant change... or a change that resembles any of the other stop/starts... is at 131/2/3/4.... A few sentences above on page 39 he says 1 of his 5 cameras repeatedly produces FFO. "Mr Z's camera seems prone to the problem" is what Zavada also says. Finally... I only post the frames available to me... if I had the 6K scans Horne does, I would post those.... But I don't need to old man... Rollie did the work for us and on the supposed originals... and he explains quite plainly the anomolie does not appear as it did on all the other occurances... as anyone can see from these frames... Z134 looks just like z001.... So tell us Big Brain... if it did not happen at any other Stop/Starts on either the A or B side of the film... why doesn't Rollie call it out to substantiate the randomness of it? To prove this one occurance at a location Zapruder himself says he never stopped filming... was simply that.. a random NON occurance... he doesn't, cause it wasn't... and he knew it. Just like all the rest of the anomolies he can't explain or deal with... maybe you should refresh that aging memory of yours and read the Zavada report again. Count how many problems he explains away by saying... "well, it's on the SS copy of the film so it MUST have been on the original, even though it's not" Consistently getting beaten at your own game must really suck for you old man... but I suppose you're getting used to it by now... poor, confused old man....

Not me old man... I have never looked at the original film's frames directly... your hero Zavada tells us that when looking at the original as presented to him, HE could not detect any significant change... I even posted the link for you since I know how computer & mentally challenged you are.. . When have YOU looked at the original frames old man so you can actually make an educated comment about it? Zavada is pretty direct in his statement... your old eyes must be too tired to read things correctly any more I guess. Let me help... "I did not detect" means that he could not find the same anomolie occuring at a place IT SHOULD BE "any significant exposure change" means that while the other stop/start transitions had SIGNIFICANT EXPOSURE CHANGES (as I illustrated) there was none ... where? "at this transition" the 131/132 claimed stop/start... So your argument is with ZAVADA old man, not me. I'm simply here to report what your EXPERT told us and put into some context. An EXPERT, mind you, that never got to test the original camera... You remember CONTEXT, that which you refuse to incorporate into your "posting" behavior... it's what separates people like you... from people who know better.

Hey there Lindsay, These are the side by sides I did to show that nothing like we see at 001/2/3 is evident when the camera supposedly stopped and restarted at 131/2/3. When added to the testimony of both Zap and Sitz it is really not hard to see this is a splice and not a stop/start. Since his camera was not made to stop and start with such single frame precision as we see from 131 to 132...we can conclude this is an alteration Page 4 of Part 4a of the Zavada study states that First FrameOverExposure occurs AT LEAST twice on the family side and at z frame 001 on the B/Motorcade side http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Zavada/zstudy4a.pdf and on page 37 part 4c http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Zavada/zstudy4c.pdf On page 39 Zavada once again admits that the Z camera was prone to the First Frame Overexposure and that while he mentions the z131 stop/start he includes: (I did not detect any significant exposure change at this transition) So while each and every other STOP/START has this tell tale sign of such activity... and are included in the report images... There is no such anomolie at 131/132. He also states that 1 of the 5 cameras he DID TEST (just not the Z camera) REPEATEDLY produced First Frame Overexposure... ==== Mr. TRULY. That is right. And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn. Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb? Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left. If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here. Now watch Towner.... when did this occur?

While I have great respect for the work you've done Tom... I simply cannot resolve your conclusion about three and only three shots... The "flurry" was recognized as occurring AT THE SAME MOMENT... not 4+65 and 4+95 which would be a couple seconds later... The "flurry" amounts to a number of bullets, fire virtually simultaneously at the limo and arriving at the limo virtually simultaneously... Let's try to recall the number of SHOT RESULTS observed: 1. first shot miss (sparks seen on the street just as the limo finishes the turn) 2. JFK throat 3. JFK back 4. Tague 5. Manhole concrete 6. JC chest 7. JC wrist 8. JFK head 9. Windshield 10. chrome dent 11. North curb of Elm (p40 Killing of a President) Now I'm not claiming each of these was a separate shot... but I'd like to understand how three bullets did all this... and all from behind no less. DJ

B.A. - you'd think, right? Can we say the background to the Fox photos IS the morgue at Bethesda?

Seems my post disappeared.... This is O'Connors diagram

Tom... I happen to appreciate and agree with your statement... to a point. Within the volumes and evidence there are surely honest accounts of what happened AS THEY EXPERIENCED IT. There are surely FBI/SS/CIA lies, red herrings and evidence with dubious, even ridiculous credentials... There's an old axion that works very well as one examines the case...: "Don't believe anything until it's been officially denied" Take a close look at what was denied (first stories that needed "amending") in this case and I believe you have the basis for the real and authenticated facts of the case... which can indeed be corroborated and authenticated. Peace DJ

Thanks Pat.... So now we have two witnesses who saw Oswald that morning yet did not see him carrying anything... What concerns me is that this is yet another unsigned report of what a witness supposedly says... If you go back one page you have a report concerning Linnie Mae... SHE CLAIMS that Oswald had already put the bag in the car by the time he is seen by the window... and that her kids did not see anyone as the window was too high... and since they know nothing, she prefers they are not interviewed... FBI Report dated NOV 23, 1963 by James Bookout: RANDLE stated that about 7:15 a.m., November 22, 1963, she looked out of a window of her residence and observed LEE HARVEY OSWALD walking up her driveway and saw him put a long brown package, approximately 3 feet by 6 inches, in the back seat area of WESLEY FRAZIER's 1954 black Chevrolet four door automobile. Thereafter, she observed OSWALD walk to the front, or entrance area, of her residence where he waited for FRAZIER to come out of the house and give him a ride to work. Mrs. RANDLE. What I remember seeing is about this long, sir, as I told you it was folded down so it could have been this long. Mr. BALL. I see. You figure about 2 feet long, is that right? Mrs. RANDLE. A little bit more. Mr. BALL. A little more than 2 feet Mr. BALL. Is that about right? That is 28 1/2 inches. Mrs. RANDLE. I measured 27 last time. Mr. BALL. You measured 27 once before? Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir. Thereafter, she observed OSWALD walk to the front, or entrance area, of her residence where he waited for FRAZIER to come out of the house and give him a ride to work Mr. BALL - What was he doing? Mr. FRAZIER - He just looked through the kitchen window. The Kitchen window is on the WEST side of the house next to the carport... for Linnie to say that Oswald needs to walk all the way around to the front of the house.. this is contradicted by Wesley Representative FORD - Did this different method of him meeting you raise any questions in your mind? Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; it didn't. I just thought maybe, you know, he just left a little bit earlier but when I looked up and saw that the clock was. I knew I was the one who was running a little bit late because, as I say, I was talking, sitting there eating breakfast and talking to the little nieces, it was later than I thought it was. Mr. BALL - When you went out the back door where was Oswald? Mr. FRAZIER - He was standing just a few feet there outside the back door there Regarding Linnie Mae's statement... she supposedly sees Oswald thru the wondow and then goes over to the carport door, opens it, watches him put it into the car and walk back around. Except... Wesley does not tell us this occurs, in fact, he states he realizes he is late at 7:15, running out at 7:21 according to his looking at a clock... the FBI report does not jive with the actual timing or events that morning... I venture to say that the sequence of events is anything but solid... This morning, Friday, November 22, 1963, I got up between 6:00 - 6:30 AM, and got ready to go to work, and then sit down to eat breakfast, about 7:15 AM, me, my mother, and my two little neices [sic] were at the table, and my sister was at the sink. My mother looked up and said, "Who is that looking in the window?" I looked up and said, "That's Lee."

Yes Jim... I was following... I wanted to know your take on Shields and the fact that none of his friends corroborate the story... not one says they were outside and saw Oswald dropped off or even coming in... I am also looking forward to hearing about this other witness... Did the FBI ever check with the regular bus that Oswald takes from his apartment? (E. Roberts says that Oswald was not there Thursday night... so it SEEMS that he did go back to Irving with Welsey... DSL did not answer... was Wesley's mother ever questioned? She supposedly saw Oswald thru the window... DJ