David Josephs

Your questions asking what I SEE is still not the point... What can you coroborrate about the existance of that woman and baby, in that spot at that time...

Nothing. Come back when you have more than opinion....

You totally ignored the information I gave you in the Lee Bowers thread...

What you are willing to admit you see is exactly the point. Just admit what you see in the picture. You will not admit it because to do so will corroborate what I see.

You still have not anwered the Zapruder question. I will ask it again....

Do you really believe that people altered Zapruder frame 313 to add ejected skull in order to coverup horseplay between Parkland and Bethesda? You will not answer this question either because to do so will once again corroborate what I see.

First off, I believe you completely misinterpret what Lee says and you place these men in the wrong places... the MOUTH OF THE UNDERPASS is to the WEST Mike... not EAST by the pergola or in the direction of Zapruder... the OPPOSITE DIRECTION.... WEST, toward the MOUTH of the overpass....

Mr. BALL - Now, were there any people standing on the high side---high ground between your tower and where Elm Street goes down under the underpass toward the mouth of the underpass?

Mr. BOWERS - Directly in line, towards the mouth of the underpass, there were two men. One man, middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers. Another younger man, about midtwenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket.

In terms of the BDM image... I KNOW it was not a baby and mother, just like I know there was noone kneeling in front of the wall... it's an illusion you;ve bought into and cannot get away from....

and Mike... I'm all for you thinking whatever you want... hell... write a book about the mom and baby... but like the Gordon Arnold story... it is extremely difficult to coroborrate.

Finally, re:Zappy. Coroborrating what you see? please.

As sure as you are about that being a mom and baby... I am sure that the Zfilm was altered to remove evidence of more than one shot to the head and the extreme slowing of the limo that made it linger in that area for as long as it did.. but then again you are wrong about the BDM while I am right about the Zfilm.

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.

Add this to what Altgens says and the outright LIE of the Plat legend that places the head shot UP THE STREET AT 313 rather than where it really was, 30 feet farther down... and MAYBE you can start to understand how the Zfilm was changed...

are you familiar with that situation? Do you understand that 4+65, where the legend tells us 313 occurred is 30 feet EAST of where it actually occurred... at 4+95...

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.

Here he is, 15 feet from JFK... looks to me that JFK has already been shot... how again can the measurements, the film and Altgens all be correct?

Gary wants to know what I've done to find these orders....

What have I done?

I have found that the curator of the 6^th floor propaganda machine could care less if these were other orders that can substantiate or refute the claim about Kleins and what they shipped on THAT and other orders like it.

That he cannot see the Intelligence Connection and wishes Oswald had a “I work for the FBI/CIA” T-shirt in his closet so he can be satisfied.

I have identified a means for questioning the integrity of the FBI once again in this case… If the FBI could have produced an order that showed the identical thing occurring with the shipment of C20-T750… CASE CLOSED

but they can’t, didn’t, couldn’t or wouldn’t…. and the proof was in their hands THAT NIGHT….

So sorry that is too much for you to follow Gary…. that you need to copy/past your required responses rather than think independently.

Someone LOST one or two negatives….

So What… right Gary?

All the evidence that went to the FBI that night… included the Camera, photos and negatives… no records were kept, no idea what occurred to these items…

and on that evidence alone, the WCR concludes Oswald shot and killed JFK using that rifle…

So this direct testimony from the FBI EXPERT… So what again, right?

No one sees him in the window, he is seen on the 1^st/2^nd floors, others are seen on these floors, there is not residue on his cheek, and his fingerprints are not on anything related to the rifle…

How again does the FBI tie this rifle to Oswald at the time of the assassination? A photo supposedly taken in March that Marina says was taken at the end of February?

You must sell an awful lot of Brooklyn Bridges there at that museum if that’s what you want people to believe….

So Gary, if Oswald’s prints were not on the rifle after he assembled it, transported it, reassembled it, loaded it, fired it 3 times, and then hid it… all after owning it since March…

How can it be used as evidence against him related to THAT DAY’S use?

Mr. EISENBERG. We will get other evidence in the record at a subsequent time to show those were the prints of Oswald. Mr. Latona, you were saying that you had worked over that rifle by applying a gray powder to it. Did you develop any fingerprints?

Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything else. And no latent prints of value were developed.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the clip?

Mr. LATONA. That included the clip, that included the bolt, it included the underside of the barrel which is covered by the stock.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were cartridge cases furnished to you at that time?

Mr. LATONA. They were, which I processed, and from which I got no prints.

Mr. EISENBERG. Therefore, the net result of your work on Exhibit 139 was that you could not produce an identifiable print?

Mr. LATONA. That's correct.

Congrats Craig... you know how to link to zframes...

You also know that these frames were replaced with frames from the supposed SS copies, from which more copies were made... yet their copies did NOT have the IS images... hence the darkness there during those frames...

You have an explanation for Z341 do you? Sure looks like something went awry on that frame... and the SS had to splice in a frame of their own.... yet no where in the WCR do we hear about a problem with THAT frame... maybe cause they stopped looking at frames right around that spot since according to them, the shot had occurred 30 frames before....

Mike... looking at those questions all I see is a wide eyed boy asking incredulous questions about something he does not want to hear about...

and the same little boy crying wolf and wondering why no one believes him...

Yes' date=' I have given my opinion of what I see in the photos. And you are right that is all it is my opinion.

[/quote']

Your questions asking what I SEE is still not the point... What can you coroborrate about the existance of that woman and baby, in that spot at that time...

Nothing. Come back when you have more than opinion....

No Gary, you cannot WHAT IF yourself to death… only into the realities of this case.

The BYPix are NOT legit when you cannot find 2 of the three negatives, when one of the negatives is LOST by the DPD and additional photos are recovered in the strangest of places …

I’m not talking Roscoe White Gary… I am simply asking that the ordering records of the company that shipped HIDELL the wrong rifle, or the rifle they say they did, SUBSTANTIATE IT WITH EXAMPLES OF SIMILAR TRANSACTIONS..

That you would FIGHT ME over your not wanting to see these docs is hilarious…. Kleins is not Santa Claus buddy… Kleins was a real business with REAL RECORDS the FBI choses to hide from us…

True or False Gary… and please keep it simple:

#1 - If Kleins shipped FC rifles and recorded the serial #’s like the HIDELL order… on other C20-T750 rifle orders…

seeing any one of these would HELP PROVE that Kleins shipped FC rifles for C20-T750 orders and SUBSTANTIATE your argument. T or F?

#2 – If there are orders for FC rifles with DIFFERENT ITEM #’s – that wouldn’t help you T or F?

#3 – If there are orders for C20-T750 without a single FC rifle sent, but the TS rifles ordered – that also wouldn’t help you T or F?

This is not some deep dark secret… the microfilm is Cadigan Ex #1… No researcher in the past 50 years has been interested enough to request and see these orders? Really?

The sum total of all CT researchers have been willing to accept that ONE KLEINS ORDER was representative of ALL C20-T750 orders

and that seeing the rest of the printed orders from that same microfilm cannister would not resolve the shipping claims of the LNer crowd and WCR?

Amazing

DJ

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.

Here we have Altgens, 15 feet from JFK... at frame 341... 30 frames after the actual headshot seen on the Zfilm...

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.

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.

and finally, my favorite WCR statement of all....

(e) The configuration of the Presidential car and the seating

arrangements of the Secret Service agents in the car did not afford

the Secret Service agents the opportunity they should have had to

be of immediate assistance to the President at the first sign of

danger.

(f) Within these limitations, however, the Commission finds

that the agents most immediately responsible for the President’s

safety reacted promptly at the time the shots were fired from the TSBD.

Can anyone point out the agents MOST IMMEDIATELY RESPONSIBLE (Greer and Kellerman??) for protecting the POTUS

REACTING PROMPTLY... thanks.

Mike - I will ask only once and this applies to ALL EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE

AUTHENTICATE IT.

Max Phillips sends a letter to Rowley that the THIRD COPY IS BEING SENT.... when in fact Zap has the master and "the best copy from the three produced",

Sorrels has 2 copies and Max sends yet another ... 0184? THAT NIGHT.... 11/22 at 9:55.

An 8mm film.... so the 16mm film that was received at NPIC as the "original" came from ?????

CD - 87 Folder 1

CO2 34030 11/22

9:55

To: Chief Rowley

From: Max D. Phillips

Subject: 8mm movie film showing President

Kennedy being shot

Enclosed is an 8mm movie film

taken by Mr. A. Zapruder, 501 Elm St., Dallas

Texas (RI8-6071)

Mr.. Zapruder was photographing

the President at the instant he was shot.

According to Mr. Zapruder, the position of

the assassin was behind Mr. Zapruder.

Note: Disregard personnel scenes

shown on Mr. Zapruder’s film.. Mr. Zapruder

is in custody of the "master" film. Two prints

were given to SAIC Sorrels, this date.

The third print is forwarded.

Max D. Phillips

Special Agent - PRS

Mr. LIEBELER - As you stood there on this abutment with your camera, the motorcade came down Houston Street and turned left on Elm Street, did it not?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's right.

Mr. LIEBELER - And it proceeded then down Elm Street toward the triple underpass; is that correct?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - That's correct. I started shooting--when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street.

Sitzman: Yes. Well, he stood up there, and he asked me to come up and stand behind him, 'cause when he takes the pictures looking through the telescopic lens, he might get dizzy, and he wanted me to stand behind him, so in case he got dizzy I could hold onto him. so I got up behind him, and we saw the motorcade turn the corner at Main onto Houston. He hadn't started taking the pictures there then, and we watched them as they came down Houston; and just as the motorcycles that were leading the parade came ... started ... came around the corner and started down the hill, he started taking the pictures then.

Curious... are there other examples of the camera STOPPING... STARTING.... and the frames prior to and just after the Stop/Start are blurry, while the start up frame is PERFECT... no lightened areas like Z001?

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.

Mr. BELIN. All right.

Is there any single frame, photo or film that depicts this occurring?

So Mike,

We KNOW frames are missing from the film... 156/57, 205-212, and btw did you know about the zplice at 341 that was replaced with a different film's frame?

So we KNOW the film was in at least 3-4 pieces at some point.

LIFE and the NPIC could NOT find a shot occurring at 224.... 190, 203, 206, 242, 264.... all were marked for having a shot visible... the WCR says that JC could NOT have been hit after 240...

there are 40 frames in the reload of the weapon...

If JFK is hit at Z190... why is it that we do not see JC reacting to the SBT scenario until well after 225?

Been having yet another email conversation with GMack... He dont like that I want to see OTHER KLEINS ORDERS to substantiate the calim that Kleins was shipping a M91/38FC rifle for C20-T750 orders for months....

Any single order with a M91/38FC seriel # on it next to an Item # C20-T750 would PROIVE that Kleins was shipping the bigger rifle for the "TS" rifle in the ad....

Yet on the flip side, any C20-T750 that was shipped a M91/38TS would allow us to see WHEN did Kleins run out of TS's, and HOW did they complete these orders if the cancelled their April shipment of TS rifles?

- Is there any proof that Kleins bought TS's elsewhere?

- Did Kleins EVER have TS rifles for sale?

- Did the TS's Kleins shipped have Seriel numbers like the FC's?

So I ask again - GARY, in October 1962, when Kleins rec'd a C20-T750 coupon... WHAT DID THEY SHIP THE CUSTOMER?

Without publishing his emails y'all should know the general tone of his reply...

Only interested in Oswald's order

WHAT DOES A REGULAR ORDER, that was shipped a M91/38FC Look Like? Again Gary… you have no interest in what Kleins was doing with the two and only two rifles types we are concerned about?

and what Kleins was doing to fulfill C20-T750 orders for 8 months?

Only interested in Oswald's order

A logical next step FOR THE FBI would be to print out all C20-T750 orders… and see what was shipped – if over and over an FC was hipped for C20-T750, you have your supporting evidence… IF NOT, and the HIDELL ORDER was the ONLY ONE in which an FC rifle was shipped

- wouldn’t you be interested in that info in determining whether Kleins had established a pattern or THE HIDELL ORDER was the only one referenceing a FC rifle for a C20-T750 order prior to April 1963… duh!

Only interested in Oswald's order

Additionally, from your answer… Kleins would have been shipping TS rifles in Jan 63, Dec 62, Nov 62, etc… WHERE DID THEY GET THESE RIFLE GARY?

Only interested in Oswald's order

perfect dude… can’t address a question, start in on the insults… I find it interesting that you think being called a propaganda doll for the WCR is an insult… you wear the badge so proudly.

“but what is known is that by February 1963, they had no more 36” Carcanos to ship” - this is exactly what we are trying to find out Gary… we do NOT KNOW this to be a fact at all…

that is the HYPOTHESIS you are starting with….

Additionally, from your answer… Kleins would have been shipping TS rifles in Jan 63, Dec 62, Nov 62, etc… WHERE DID THEY GET THESE RIFLES GARY?

Also from your answer there would be OTHER orders shipped in March, April, May 63 and beyond that referencing the SERIAL # and VC # of OTHER “FC” RIFLES as was on the HIDELL order – no?

A logical next step FOR THE FBI would be to print out all C20-T750 orders… and see what was shipped – if over and over an FC was hipped for C20-T750, you have your supporting evidence… IF NOT, and the HIDELL ORDER was the ONLY ONE in which an FC rifle was shipped...

Wouldn’t you be interested in that info in determining whether Kleins had established a pattern or THE HIDELL ORDER was the only one referenceing a FC rifle for a C20-T750 order prior to April 1963… duh!

And to print out any order that referenced one of the other 99 rifles on the list… Surely they sold more than just the one M91/38FC during this time period….

WHAT DOES A REGULAR ORDER, that was shipped a M91/38FC Look Like? Again Gary… you have no interest in what Kleins was doing with the two and only two rifles types we are concerned about?

and what Kleins was doing to fulfill C20-T750 orders for 8 months?

Prove me paranoid then Gary… show us that the HIDELL ORDER was not the ONE AND ONLY TIME a M91/38FC was shipped for a C20-T750 ordered

An open letter to Gary Mack and DVP:

Are you going to now try and say that the HIDELL ORDER was the only one in which a rifle serial # and VC # were written?

That Kleins would not keep track of who bought what, when and where? As they did on the HIDELL ORDER?

Even your Dad’s food business would keep track of what it shipped for orders placed…. this isn’t about INVENTORY ERRORS… this is about the FBI creating an order that is used to implicate Oswald by HANDWRITTING a serial number on it.

Are you claiming that you’ve NEVER SEEN ANOTHER KLEIN’S order… EVER? if so, how would you know what they shipped for C20-T750 orders thru Jan/Feb 1963 or where any of the “FC” rifles were shipped and what ITEM # was used…

Gary – this is the same BS excuse for the Seaport/REA revolver order…. it was as if the rules of business were suspended and common sense thrown out the door….

There is simply no hard proof that REA ever got its COD charges or the SEAPORT ever got its $19.95 from REA…

If REA paid Seaport… forwarded them the money, don’t you supposed REA would have a receipt of the actual movement of money to SEAPORT? of actually receiving and depositing the $1.27?

None of these things exist cause it did not happen that way….

We can see Ruby’s mother’s dental records, but not the paper trial that substantiates two of the most important pieces of evidence against Oswald…. the revolver and rifle.

Dave..Mr. Mack does seem to use quite a few probably's, may haves,likely's,don't knows,would think's,perhaps,etc... to use this as an example of fact......Robert

S.O.P. Robert...

But he does not address what would certainly be PROOF of their shipping activity for orders of Item # C20-T750

There are 99 other rifles on the 10 packing slips that included C2766... Are we saying that the FBI cannot point to a single OTHER ORDER for which they shipped one of those seriel #'s for a C20-T750 order?

Not ONE, Dave?

Does it not make ANY SENSE TO YOU AT ALL that substantiation for such a claim would be EASILY PROVEN with any number of other orders showing the SAME DAMN THING....

The FBI even has the microfilm of orders.... and I would even imagine that the microfilm cannister prior to this one ALSO HAS PROOF to support

YOUR LONE CONTENTION that Kleins shipped HIDELL a different rifle than ordered...

GARY - IF Kleins ran out of 36" rifles in January, then we would have orders from as early as APRIL 1962 which were shipped a 36" M91/38TS rifle for an ad for C20-T750...

If they cancelled their TS order in April 1962, WHAT RIFLES WERE THEY SHPPING FOR C20-T750 ORDERS FROM MAY THRU JANUARY?

GARY - Can you offer any coroborration for what Kleins was shipping? Did they not keep a list of "TS" rifles that satisfied C20-T750 orders as the kept a list of "FC" rifles?

IF KLEINS BEGAN SHIPPING THE "FC" RIFLE FOR C20-T750 ORDERS, WHY DONT WE HAVE A LIST OF SERIEL #'S LIKE C2766 AND A VC # ASSOCIATED WITH ANY OF THOSE ORDERS?

The ongoing WC apologist argument that Kleins shipped Hidell a "FC" without a single coroborrating order, when the FBI HAS THE RECORDS SINCE 11/23... is a problem DVP...

Why are we being hidden from all those orders?

DJ

Furthermore... the MONEY ORDER has a stamp also for March 12...

Doesn't that suggest that the purchaser had to buy this MO that morning so that the envelope included the payment...

It could not have been mailed the night before or any time before the MO was purchased - right?

and maybe explain why we see anotyher post mark starting to the right of the one we see here... yet that is where the MO was torn from some book...

any explanation for why this overlaps the mark we see and why it does not match ..

The other thing that bothers me is the KLEINS stamp that Waldman says "Looks identical" to their stamp... on the back of the MO..

Not so much.... Didn't Oswald have an entire STAMP KIT? Dr. HIDEEL's vaccination slip comes to mind....

I did this composite a while back...

Seems that DALLAS had the postal zone on its envelopes for quite a while...

ALL the Dallas stamps have a zone right after TEXAS or TEX....

Gonna bump this one more time...

With all the argument over the Kleins order and their shipping a replacement for C20-T750, one would think that the ABSENCE of any other orders that show the same thing, or a batch of orders which show the actual rifles shipped for C20-T750, and the ACTUAL item # of the M91/38FC rifles shipped,...

... might be something worht concealing if it did not show what was needed....

We havre the photo of the microfilm cannister... Any idea where we can actually SEE the FBI D-77 contents?

Gary Mack maybe has the printout at the museum?

Armstrong/Weisberg in their collections?

Mary Ferrell?

Thanks in advance for any assistance

DJ

270502 was the order #... the info on the orders prior to this would be VERY interesting

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0133a.htm

269288 thru 270596... 1200 orders !! prior and 90 or so AFTER....

WHAT Kleins shipped for C20-T750 orders from Aug 1962 thru March 1963 would be right there on these orders, no?

Mike, all you have are your opinions of what you see in the photos....

Taking a look at the other thread you linked to reveals quite a lot about you Mike...

You are married to your conclusion and will defend it to the death, regardless of what other evidence may point to...

I simply disagree with your analysis and conclusion... Aint no big thing. Yet I also agree that once you see a certain thing in a photo, it is very hard to see anything else...

Case in point - and what I was referring to you seeing in a moorman image I posted - is the kneeling person I showed you in Moorman really there? (your not being able to follow along from a previous post is not necesarily Rambling on my part as much as your inability to see anything from anyone else's POV.)

Now we both know he's not there... but now look at the image at the bottom... Dont know about you, but I can STILL see him.. Yet that still does not prove he is there Mike....

The next step is to COROBORRATE... NOT by telling us you see the baby and woman in other photos, of course YOU will see that...

Who in the great 26 volumes or since, has EVER spoken of seeing a woman and baby in that area at that time? No one I know of... You?

Has any other researcher agreed with your conclusion and how do they deal with the evidence against such a conclusion?

Mike, I learned long ago that each person will have their take on the case and see what they see in the photos and films....

I've also learned that the physical evidence we get to see MAY or MAY NOT be authentic... as compared to other "normal" cases where tampering with evidence is not as prevelant..

In "normal" cases when a witness disagrees with evidence, the evidence trumps... witnesses reliability is supposed to be judged AGAINST the physical evidence since in most NORMAL CASES the physical evidence is simple and direct and easily authenticated.... not so here Mike.

In this case, with such poorly supported, authenticated physical evidence, the reverse is true... when 20 people tell us the limo stopped, when 50 people tell us there were shots from the GK,

when numerous people see particles flying back and to the left, away from JFK, leaving remnants in the street to the SOUTH AND EAST of JFK at the time of the shots... one begins to question the physical evidence... WHO HAD IT, WHO CONTROLLED IT, WHO AUTHENTICATED and COROBORRATED IT?

When over and over the answers are anything but reassuring, it becomes this physical evidnce that becomes suspect and the coroborrated testimony of the witnesses there TRUMPS IT.

It is time for you to understand that the physical evidence in the JFK case is CRAP.... and will NEVER lead to a complete understanding of the assassination... only the extent to which it was covered up...

I am no longer interested in discussing this with you as long as all you present is YOUR OPINION of the photos.

Coroborrate the baby and mom with testimony of those who saw her... Gordon Arnold HIMSELF will tell you he was right there... that HE is BDM and the person you are pointing to in Moorman

yet the coroborration for such a thing is very limited to the point of non-existant..

Prove your point with authenticated and coroborrated evidence... otherwise we might as well ALL see the little kneeling man and say he was indeed there.

DJ

Has anyone determined the credibility of Lee's brother's story that Lee disappeared for a couple of days to reappear missing a finger and acting oddly?

Wasn't that Stephen King's story about quitting smoking?

Yes, this is a bit frustrating... this microfilm has orders processed all around the HIDELL order which could show other C20-T750 orders identifying which rifles were shipped.... M91/38TS or FC's...

but the FBI has it since 11/23/63...

DJ

Mike, you first, post a picture of a little common sense and the ability to recognize coroborrating evidence.

I've shown you myself there is a person kneeling in front of the wall within the bushes in morrman... are you ready to PROVE the negative?

You have no photographic or film proof of his being there other than this? So what, we have THIS. and I say he's there....

That conclusion shows neither common sense or the ability to coroborate evidence... two traits much needed and sorely missing from your presentation.

There are photos of Jack Ruby in DP post assassination...BDM also appears to be a man in a hat and dark suit... hmmmm...

Ruby was seen pre assassination with a truck, rifle, fence, knoll and other men.... while the DPD ignored it. hmmmm...

A black couple is eating pre-assassination on a bench... where they told to be there, throw the bottle and run? Maybe... nice extra diversion....

Was Gordon Arnold back there?

He says he was... Moorman in some interpretations suggest the same...

People will even tell you the llimo stopped... yet not a single person, film or photo will place a woman holding a baby near or at the corner of the retaining wall infront of the picket fence on the grassy knoll...

But we both agree it's there Mike... and then, in willis next, it's gone. Rosemary described it very well... that it could be someone taking a shot and then running off is mind boggling...

Personally I had always hoped it was Emmett Hudson - but that theory did not pan out.

DJ

in Moorman, just cause you say it's a baby and mom doesn't make it so, Mike....

As I've shown you, I can place a kneeling person in front of the wall who we both know is not there... there are more BDM's than just Moorman and Betzner... there is Willis, in color

and then an extreme close up... showing a causcasian face and no baby... so I am not convinced, especially when we add who was there just before and just afterward and who they saw, that is the mom/child you point to.

As you can see from Willis, there is noone behind BDM... this other person is behind the fence west of the tree/steps... there is simply no coroborration for anyone being in FRONT of the fence at that spot...

unless you have something we haven't seen... look at muchmore... aint nobody there Mike.

as for the man chaning into khakis... interesting theory, yet pretty much all speculation without any real proof...

Mr. WEITZMAN - There was a little period in between the second and third shot.

Mr. BALL - What was the longest, between the first and second or the second and third shot; which had the longest time lapse in there?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Between the first and second shot.

Mr. BALL - What did you do then?

Mr. WEITZMAN - I immediately ran toward the President's car. Of course, it was speeding away and somebody said the shots or the firecrackers, whatever it was at that time, we still didn't know the President was shot, came from the wall. I immediately scaled that wall.

Mr. BALL - What is the location of that wall?

Mr. WEITZMAN - It would be between the railroad overpass and I can't remember the name of that little street that runs off Elm; it's cater-corner--the section there between the--what do you call it--the monument section?

Mr. BALL - That's where Elm actually dead ends?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir; I scaled the wall and, apparently, my hands grabbed steampipes. I burned them.

Mr. BALL - Did you go into the railroad yards?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - What did you notice in the railroad yards?

Mr. WEITZMAN - We noticed numerous kinds of footprints that did not make sense because they were going different directions.

Mr. BALL - Were there other people there besides you?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir; other officers, Secret Service as well, and somebody started, there was something red in the street and I went back over the wall and somebody brought me a piece of what he thought to be a firecracker and it turned out to be, I believe, I wouldn't quote this, but I turned it over to one of the Secret Service men and I told them it should go to the lab because it looked to me like human bone. I later found out it was supposedly a portion of the President's skull.

Mr. BALL - That you picked up off the street?

Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes.

Mr. BALL - What part of the street did you pick this up?

Mr. WEITZMAN - As the President's car was going off, it would be on the left-hand side of the street. It would be the----

Mr. BALL - The left-hand side facing----

Mr. WEITZMAN - That would be the south side of the street.

The shot came from there...

During Waldman's testimony he is shown FBI Item D-77, the microfilm record of the orders during THAT time period...

and they find and print order 270502

It is my claim that we see no other Klein's orders that identify any one other rifle from the lot of 100 included with C2766 as SOLD on orders listing the Item # as C20-T750 as the LNers claim occurred for the Hidell order becasue there NEVER WERE ANY. I contend that every other order for C20-T750 was shipped something OTHER than M91/38FC rifles and that every order that was shipped an M91/38FC rifle shows us a completely different Item #.

In fact, we are not shown a single other order where a M91/38FC was shipped to ANYONE, for either a C20-T750 order or an order for its item number either.

Does D-77 exist other than as a photo of the film cannister from Cadigan Ex #1 http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0133a.htm

So that we can see some of these other orders?

Did no one EVER ASK to see where the other 99 rifles from the 10 packing lists wound up and on which orders?

Thx

DJ

Mr. BELIN. I'm handing you what has been marked as an FBI Exhibit D-77 and ask you if you know what this is.

Mr. WALDMAN. This is a microfilm record that---of mail order transactions for a given period of time. It was turned over by us to the FBI.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know when it was turned over to the FBI?

Mr. WALDMAN. It was turned over to them on November 23, 1963.

Mr. BELIN. Now, you are reading from the carton containing that microfilm. Do you know whose initials are on there?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; the initials on here are mine and they were put on the date on which this was turned over to the FBI concerned with the investigation.

Mr. BELIN. You have on your premises a machine for looking at the microfilm prints?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. And you can make copies of the microfilm prints?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. I wonder if we can adjourn the deposition upstairs to take a look at these records in the microfilm and get copies of the appropriate records that you found on the evening of November 22.

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes.

(Whereupon, the following proceedings were had at the microfilm machine.)

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, you have just put the microfilm which we call D-77 into your viewer which is marked a Microfilm Reader-Printer, and you have identified this as No. 270502, according to your records. Is this just a record number of yours on this particular shipment?

Mr. WALDMAN. That's a number which we assign for identification purposes.

Mr. BELIN. And on the microfilm record, would you please state who it shows this particular rifle was shipped

Mr. WALDMAN. Shipped to a Mr. A.--last name H-i-d-e-l-l, Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex.

Mr. BELIN. And does it show arts' serial number or control number?

Mr. WALDMAN. It shows shipment of a rifle bearing our control number VC-836 and serial number C-2766.

The Betzner photo provides one of the best views of the retaining wall within 7 seconds of the headshots.

There is no indication that anyone is at the bench area behind the wall.

Hey Mike... maybe you can explain something then...

As one looks at the photos, one is hard pressed to find anyone with that black an appearance as this person holding the baby in white...

The other photos show her to have light colored clothing on... and we can see people also in light colored clothing waving at the top of Elm... THEY are not turned completely BLACK o nthe side facing away from the sun, and furthermore, the front of the "baby" shows no indication of being in the shade or in any shadow at all... the contrast between mother and baby is literally black and white... which seems to me, impossible.

I am posting this as an example of what one can find with shadows, light, foliage and an imagination... There is of course no one kneeling there... but making it look like there is is not hard...

Plus, she would have to come from somewhere and go somewhere afterward... Sitzman does not talk about a woman and baby, just a boy and girl.

Now whether what we are seeing is a trick of the eye or a desire to see what's not there, IDK, but the events as described by G Arnold, Sitzman, Hill, Craig, Weitzman do not support the conclusion that it was a mother and baby.

I don't know what Dr. McClelland said in later years, but he clearly believed, in November 1963, that a bullet exited from the wound he described at the back of the head; repeated essentially the same thing when he testified (1964); and certainly said that to me and Pat Valentino when we conducted a detailed filmed interview in 1989.

The problem with this case is that many folks said one thing in 1963/1964, and then, years later, read books or articles, formed opinions about what happened, and then those opinions affected their own recollections. Always its best to deal with the earliest recorded recollection. That's true in a simple auto accident, and its also true in the case of the Kennedy assassination.

DSL

7/30/12; 4 AM PDT

Los Angeles, California

The reasons you think we should believe McClelland saw a wound on the far back of Kennedy's head are the very reasons I don't believe he saw such a wound: his earliest statements.

"The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple." Dr. McClelland's report on the death of President Kennedy, written on 11-22-63.

"I am fully satisfied that the two bullets that hit him were from behind." Dr. Robert McClelland, as quoted by Richard Dudman in the 12-18-63 St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

If you know of any statements by McClelland made prior to his Warren Commission testimony, in which he indicated he saw an exit wound on the far back of Kennedy's head, I'd appreciate your bringing them to my attention.

Wasn't McClelland's report coroborrated by the Father who gave the last rites? I believe it was mentioned in JFK/Unspeakable that he saw a great and terrible wound over the left eye...

and Mike.. both Zap and Sitzman tell us how Zap films the limo coming down Houton and turning onto Elm.. no breaks, no stops...

the mathematics of the corner turn, frame #'s and other films that also do NOT capture the extra wide turn as described by Truly and the fact that the transition from a camera at full stop to instant start and instantly having a perfect interprocket image EXACTLY on the frame lines seems a bit too much to swallow,,,

There is no start up lightened frames as we see on Z001... looks much more like a splice and reflim than a start/stop of the camera.

Hi David; sorry no, i know of no known photo that shows anyone on the bench, i wish, imo i always had the impression that Sitzman was referring to the Kennedys coming down Houston and round the corner, that is whom she was concentrating on, i believe, not the motorcycles,but to each their own interpretation, ta b..

Thanks for the confirmation... I've tried and can't see them in anything...

And I agree, Sitzman IS talking about the Kennedy's coming round Houston onto Elm... yet the Z film splices to them already on Elm... It is my opinion, based on work by Chris Davidson and others, that the corner turn was removed to align all the films... I've written about this before...this was why the frame numbers were determined by working BACKWARD from 312... and NPIC could not understand how LIFE determined the frames for the first and second shots...

Do you know if there was mention of all that broken glass while all these people are milling around? and it looks to me that there is still a paper bag with a bottle in it...

Does it makes sense that they would literally throwing the bottle on the ground and make it explode?

Doesn't her statement about when Zap starts filming... "just before they came around the corner" at :42

help support Zaps memory about filming the entire turn?

re:BDM and the kids...

Sitzman: Some ran ... I mean ... I finally got back up to the alcove. There was bunches of people just swarming back there, and I think almost everybody on that hill ran back up that way. And another thing that I remember this day: there was a colored couple. I figure they were between 18 and 21, a boy and a girl, sitting on a bench, just almost, oh, parallel with me, on my right side, close to the fence.

• Thompson: Darn right. I know. I've seen the films too. Now, to get to this area between the stockade fence and the cement abutment, or small mall: Did you turn after the shot to look in this general area?
  
• Sitzman: Yes.
  
• Thompson: And did you see anyone in this area?
  
• Sitzman: No, just the two colored people running back.
  
• Thompson: I see. They were already ... they'd gotten up from the bench and were now running around into the gap made between the stockade fence and the pergola.
  
• Sitzman: Either in the gap there or back in the alcove. I don't recall which way they went. I saw ... I heard the bottles crash, and of course I looked that way, to my right, right away, and they were getting up and running towards the back. And I turned back to see if there was anything in the front street, because then they didn't affect me one way or another.
  
• Thompson: To see if anything else was going on. Had you seen them sitting on the bench before you stood next to them?
  
• Sitzman: Oh year, yes. Everybody is ... oh, ten or fifteen minutes before, everybody was milling around down there, trying to find a place to stand and everything, and I know when we went over to get up on the marble thing, they were already sitting there.
  

Seeing the height of the wall and the bench... anyone sitting there SHOULD be seen in either Betzner, Willis, Moorman, ??? at least the tops of their heads if Sitzman can see them...

Are you aware of ANY photo or image that shows these two people at that bench?

James,

In this thread propose that the first shot to the head came from a very high elevation,such as the roof of the Criminal Records or Criminal Courts Building. I think it struck the top of JFK's head and exited at the right temple. It had a very steep downward slope and would have penetrated deep into the brain.

http://educationforu...45

The exit wound is inside the red ellipse. It is seen as the round hole in the temple area in the xray.

Couple of concerns with your conclusions Mike...

1) If it was a high to low shot from behind... why are the fragments leading away from SOLID BONE at the back of the head, when there should be an opening for an entrance wound at the back..?

2) Looking at the following images... the pre/post of JFK's skull shows there would be bone where the xray shows it's gone... if the skull is gone there, what is holding JFK's face and forehead up?

and finally... can you explain the HUGE difference in the headwound from Parkland to Bethesda?

What started as a small temple wound and a 3-4 inch blowout in the right rear becomes 3/4 of his skull gone... based on Boswell and the xrays...

Thanks Josh... interesting.

I am of the opinion that copy #184, the missing copy, was of the original film and ultimately becomes the basis for the existing copies... this MAY be the copy Max refers to that is sent to DC, or is taken directly to Hawkeye which becomes the "original" SS agent Bill Smith delivers to NPIC.

I am suprised this hasn't gotten more attention... Max referring to Zapruder's as the "master" as opposed to the "original" is also interesting to me.

If it was not #184, then at some point the in camera original is altered and duplicated onto K2 film stock and PRESENTED as the original, while the actual original is ???

DJ