David A. Bodner

Hi Shanet – I’m pretty new to this group, and I’ve been doing a lot of catch up on various threads. First of all, let me compliment you on a very well written piece that you started off this topic with. It was chilling to read and brought up things I had not considered with respect to the assassination. If you do not write in other venues I would urge you to do so; you have a natural talent for clear exposition. I had never thought of the 25th Amendment in connection with the assassination, except that the JFK assassination obviously highlighted a need for making sure the Constitution took into account the human frailties of the Presidency. The position you take revolves around how we all think about ex post facto. I believe I am correct in saying that, in general, legal rulings in regard to ex post facto go in favor of the individual rather than to the state. So, when the 25th Amendment talks about removal of the President for cause, by those authorized by it to do so, I assume that the individuals involved on an ex post facto basis would be protected by the positive aspects of ex post facto. However, the 25th does not mention execution (state murder) as a means of removal, but I suppose it could indeed be construed to imply “by ANY means necessary.” And since there was no Federal Statute at the time about assassinating Presidents that would be in their favor also. Federal Statute on murder? But Texas surely would have had laws proscribing murder in 1963. How would a general Federal Law, especially (even Positive) ex post facto protect the “guilty” from Texas law? That’s really stretching the positive side of ex post facto. To sum up, I think more discussion on ex post facto would be informative. I think your position and theory is fascinating but I need more reason to swallow it. Somewhere here I think 2039 came up as a revelation date? And I think I do understand that, in as much as Oswald and I share a birth year: 1939. Regards, Dave Bodner

Hi Bill and others - I plan on doing some of what you say when I get a chance. Agreed, that it would take very high speed film and a very fast shutter speed to catch a bullet, frozen in flight. I've seen some of those kinds of images, staged under laboratory conditions. But I'm talking about catching the track of a bullet as it blurs across about 10 feet while a frame is being exposed. I also doubt that that is possible - due to the lack of reflected brightness blurred out and attenuated over 10 feet. Maybe sometime I can find a friend with a rifle and we might test out the particulars. Dave

BTW, an additional thought or two. I do notice that Wrone, in his recent book on page 42, does mention that the bullet would travel about 100 feet between frames. However, the action on each frame takes place at the shutter speed, not the frame speed. And so my two figures of 33 feet or 17 feet do, indeed, sort of fit. In fact, when a guess is made of the car speed and the fact that Zapruder was panning forward with the car, then about half of the blur image distance of any bullet from the front would be truncated downwards. In the case of 17 feet above, that would just about be cut in half to about 9 feet. My estimate of what I actually see is about 10 feet. It IS sad that ~ 2/3 of the action we never DO see because it's when the shutter and/or protective gate is closed as the film travels unexposed between frames. And, yes, I will read further and track down the f stop involved, if I can. My working conclusion still is that's it's an artifact - that the only fit is coincidence. Unfortunately! ;-( Dave

Hi Jack and Bill - I have slowly come to the conclusion that the chain of evidence on the Zapruder film is very good. For instance, it is now apparent that the reversal of frames #313/314 was in the printed frames in the WCR and labeled wrong also. What a convenient way to show the head moving in the opposite direction from Newton's Law, even if the placement and labeling were, indeed, "mistakes." As far as the 18.3 fps is concerned, that is a measure of frame edge to frame edge or center to center. 18.3 fps translates to 1/18.3 sec between the same frame edges (like the top edge of each) on adjcent frames, or ~55 ms. The actual exposure time has to be considerably less than 55 ms in order to allow the film to move and come to a complete stop before the next frame is exposed. I'm assuming either 1/60 sec exposure (~17 ms) or 1/120 sec (~8 ms). For Kodachrome II I think this is a good guess, but I would love correction on that by someone who knows the f stop of the camera/lens and all that that would imply. A bullet, which could be copper clad BTW and therefore very slightly reflective, travelling at 2000 fps would cover ~17 feet in 1/120 sec and would cover ~33 feet in 1/60 sec. The "streak" I can see on frame #225 in the printed version appears to be about 10 feet long, at least the part I perceive. I must repeat that my conclusion is that it is an artifact of the printing process, based on the meager visual evidence I've seen. But it IS interesting. And I thank each of you for you comments. Dave

If you view the printed version of frame #225 of the Zapruder film in Wrone's recent book, my copy at least indicates a very vague (nearly invisible) streak of light angling down toward the car from the front. If real, it is of a length that would agree with an approximate range of exposure times for the Kodachrome II of possibly 1/60 or 1/120 second. The streak may well be an artifact. I ordered, and have received and viewed, the digital DVD copy of the original. Checking frame #225 I do NOT see a definitive streak in that area, or anywhere else. There ARE two points of light which may be parts of that streak, but they may be spots on the grass or digitizing artifacts. If these two spots are, indeed, part of the streak I see in the printed version, what puzzles me is that while the DVD is slightly superior quality to the print version, why would the two spots show up as part of a longer streak in the lower quality print and not the higher quality DVD? If anyone else would like to check this in a print version of frame #225 (either Wrone's book or elsewhere), it is very hard to see the streak. The best lighting is needed. It works best held in direct sunlight, but with the sunlight NOT falling on YOU. The streak is just above the driver's side visor of the car and, if extended, the streak would intercept Gov. C's head. The sunlight that day would be approximately at the correct angle to make a minimal reflection from a bullet possible in my opinion, although unlikely. My tentative conclusion is that this is an artifact of some sort, possibly in the digitizing/printing process. But I would love to know if anyone else has ever noticed anything like this. Regards, Dave

Hi - I'm Dave Bodner and I live in the heart of New York State - nowhere near the Big Apple, Baghdad On The Hudson, Sin(cerity) City, New York City - whatever you want to call that big place down there keeping the Statue of Liberty company. I've been looking through the other intros, at least 5 pages so far!, and it seem us yanks are way under-represented here. Count me in as from the Blue States of America. In another 5 years we may decide to rejoin the good 'ole USA ;-) My biography has other details, including a (useable) picture. My interest in this board is primarily the JFK assassination topic, although John (Simkin) is encouraging me to get in on the science discussions also. I'm doing volunteer work at Sciencenter, which is a science museum in Ithaca, NY. Besides that in Ithaca there's also Cornell (sort of the JPL of the east) and a rather interesting cemetary where 2 of the giants of the nuclear age are buried within 50 meters of each other. Leo Szilard originated the famous "Einstein Letter" which got FDR interested in making us the first nuclear power. Szilard later regretted his involvement and tried in limited ways to restrain the nuclear genie. Close by is buried Carl Sagan - who more than anyone else helped bring the nuclear monster under some kind of control. Actually, only half of Szilard's cremains are in Lakeview Cemetary. The rest of him is in his home town, Budapest. Where else could you get such trivia? As an American who sat through that awful day in 1963 I may be able to bring some local color to bear if there really aren't many US nationals here. How about it, John? Do you have a breakdown by location of members that you could share? Dave

Hi - I'm brand new here, but not brand new to the JFK assassination debate. ICW the Lincoln assassination, I think the controversial parts of that that remain to this day are twofold: was Booth really killed or did he get away? AND how much were the South and/or political interests in the North involved? I've read most of the books on the JFK assassination and even scanned a lot of the Warren Commission Report. I don't know if David Wrone is a member of this Forum but he did a great job on summing up where we're at in his recent book: "The Zapruder Film." I've always held the WCR to be bad science and bad logic, but now some of the motives are clearer. And some of the other name brand books on the assassination are truly "off the wall." I've just ordered the digitized DVD version of the Zapruder Film. I want to see what I can see on it. I'm particularly interested in frame 225; there's a nearly invisible streak downwards towards JFK and Gov C. It's probably an artifact in the printing in the book, but I want to see if it's on the digital film version of that frame. This sounds like an interesting forum, and I will be back often. Regards, Dave David Bodner Manlius, NY, USA crumblinggorge@yahoo.com

I'm a retired Electrical Engineer. I worked twenty years at the original New York Telephone Co., leaving in 1982. My degree in Electrical Engineering is a bachelor's (B.E.E.) from Syracuse University 1961. I have a New York State Professional Engineering License, #042983, presently on the inactive, retired, list. I am Secretary of the Exhibits Committee at The Sciencenter (a science museum) in Ithaca, NY, a volunteer position. We develop science related exhibits, building most of our own exhibits. I'm married and we live in Manlius, NY. My interest in the Forum is in being able to exchange views on the mystery of the JFK assassination.