Robert Harris

Bob Harris,

Maybe you'd better learn to quote people better. The quote regarding "Dick Johnsen" that you seem to think came from my mouth actually was written by Gerald Blaine, as I clearly indicated in my previous post. It was Blaine who said that Johnsen probably marked the envelope, and the reason he said that is because of the additional info I supplied Mr. Blaine in a prior e-mail conversation I had with him, which is fully revealed HERE.

Yes David, the "additional info" you provided, consisted of FBI documents - the same FBI that lied about Odum interviewing the two civilians, lied about agent Todd identifying his initials on the bullet and lied about their interview with Audrey Bell. If you don't mind, I think I'll go with Johnson's statement that he marked the bullet and not the envelope.

BTW, how do you explain the statements by Gov. Connally, DA Wade, officer Nolan and the nurse who recovered the bullet, which clearly demonstrate that the actual bullet that wounded Connally, fell from his gurney on the second floor and was picked up by that nurse, and given to Nolan?

You never seem to want to talk about that. Why not?

Clint Hill talked to Dick [Johnsen] a month or two before he passed away and Clint told me that Dick had marked the evidence. Sounds like he must have put it in an envelope rather that initialing it [the bullet itself

No David, it doesn't sound like that at all. It sounds like he marked the bullet the same way everybody else marked bullets in 1963. They initialed them. Why do you need to embellish what these witnesses say? The FBI's first opportunity to test the stretcher bullet against fragments that were large enough to be evaluated, arrived at their labs just after 11 PM. Roughly 90 minutes after that, Tomlinson was awakened by a phone call from the FBI, demanding that he "keep his mouth shut" about the bullet. Obviously, they did not match, which is undoubtedly why everyone who originally handled the stretcher bullet refused to confirm that is the same as CE399. And as I told you before, the most likely reason why the SS agents refused to verify CE399 was that it didn't bear their initials.

Neither did it bear the initials of FBI agent Elmer Todd, who lied when he claimed that his initials were on CE399. As you know very well, they are nowhere on that bullet.

As Connally himself stated, the actual bullet that wounded him, fell from his gurney to the floor, where it was recovered by a nurse, just prior to his surgery. DA Wade encountered that nurse after the surgery and as Wade stated, she was holding the bullet in her hand and told him it came from Connally's gurney. He told her to get it to the police ASAP.

The nurse did exactly as she was told and put it into an envelope which she gave to officer Bobby Nolan. Nolan, who I interviewed, stated that the nurse told him the bullet came from Connally's gurney - exactly as she told Wade. He then delivered it to the DPD the following morning, where it was undoubtedly, scarfed up by the FBI.

The FBI tried to coverup the bullet by claiming that it was the envelope into which nursing supervisor, Audrey Bell placed tiny fragments from Connally's wrist. But not surprisingly, Bell adamantly denied their claim that she gave her envelope to Nolan and that it contained only a single fragment, which is not surprising since her envelope was clearly labelled, "fragments" (plural).

There is much more about this in my article on the subject which can be found here:

http://jfkhistory.com/bell/bellarticle/BellArticle.html

As some of you may know, David Reitzes posted an article at McAdams website entitled, "Impeaching Clinton", in which he tried to convince readers that the Clinton La. witnesses who identified Lee Harvey Oswald actually mistook Estus Morgan for Oswald. I was reminded of this ridiculous article when someone at my forum said that the article debunked those witnesses.

It only took me a few minutes to track down information on the late Mr. Morgan at ancestory.com. As David correctly pointed out, Morgan died in 1966, but what he failed to mention is that the man was 56 years old in 1963, when he stood in line at the voter registration drive. David's theory that the witnesses thought he was Oswald, is ridiculous, as I'm sure David knew when he wrote the article.

http://jfkhistory.com/pix/estusmorgan.jpg

At alt.assassination.jfk where David regularly posts, I asked if he or McAdams intended to correct the article or at least, let readers know what Morgan's age was in '63. Not surprisingly, they refuse to even reply.

One of the few things related to the shooting that Posner and I agree on, is that there were shots at app. 160 and 223. Only one of them was audible to most witnesses however, and I believe the evidence confirms that that was the one at 160.

But I don't believe that was the first shot fired at the President that day. There was an earlier shot fired during the Towner film. And like the one at 223, that shot was suppressed and went unheard by the witnesses.

It was not a coincidence that this first shot was fired in the same instant that the limo pulled in front of the west face of the Daltex building.

This video explains in detail.

Robert Harris

For many years now I've argued in forums and newsgroups that there was NOTHING that connected the bullet allegedly found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, Commission Exhibit 399, with the shooting in Dealey Plaza.

I base this opinion on the fact that no blood, no bones particles, no clothing fibers and no tissue particles from either victim were on the bullet when the FBI received it.

Now I find confirmation of this in a parallel case involving the court-martial of a Marine Corporal during the Vietnam War.

In this case, a Vietnamese civilian had been shot to death, Lance Corporal Douglas R. Collard was seen to have fired a rifle from a truck in which he and others were riding, seemingly drunk and in high spirits. He acknowledged firing a shot, but recalled it as having been fired in the air.

The prosecution presented an expended bullet that matched the rifle Collard was allegedly holding at the time of the killing. The bullet was found on the floor inside the dead man's house.

The prosecution contended that this was the bullet that killed the man.

But Leland Jones, who at the time was the former head of the Los Angeles Police Crime Lab ( retired ), testified that the bullet could not possibly have entered a human body, because during his examination he found no blood or tissue particles on it. The significance of the absence of both of these substances left no doubt, because according to Jones, blood and tissue residue would have remained on the bullet for years.

Collard was acquitted.

Compare this with the condition of CE 399 when it was received at the FBI lab for examination:

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you prepare the bullet in any way for examination? That is, did you clean it or in any way alter it?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; it was not necessary. The bullet was clean and it was not necessary to change it in any way.

( Testimony of Robert Frazier in 3 H 428 )

Keep in mind that Frazier received the bullet from agent Elmer Todd on November 22, 1963, the same day of the assassination ( ibid.) and the bullet was clean !!!!

This wasn't years afer the assassination, this was the same day !!!!

I don't believe the bullet was "planted". Parkland processes over a thousand gunshot victims per year and the one Tomlinson found may have come from a victim who was not in DP that day. Of course it was not the one that wounded Governor Connally or JFK. The best explanation I can find for CE399 is that it was later fired into cotton wadding or water by the FBI and swapped out with Tomlinson's bullet.

This article goes into a LOT of detail about CE399 and the actual bullet that wounded Connally. Of course, if the perps had planted a bullet from Oswald's rifle there would have been no need for the FBI to wake up Tomlinson in the middle of the night and tell him to keep his mouth shut.

http://jfkhistory.co...ellArticle.html

I recently updated this article in order to incorporate the relevant portion of Ray Marcus's interview of Daryl Tomlinson, in which Tomlinson stated that he was awakened by a phone call in the wee morning hours following the assassination, and told by the FBI to "keep his mouth shut" about the bullet.

Not surprisingly, this was less than two hours after the FBI received a pair of sizable fragments from the limousine which provided their first opportunity to see if Tomlinson's bullet was a match with others fired during the attack.

Later, they decided to make this terrible lemon into lemonade by replacing the inconvenient bullet with one that really did come from the alleged murder weapon.

As the article also points out, Governor Connally, DA Henry Wade, officer Bobby Nolan, Connally aide Bill Stinson and nursing supervisor, Audrey Bell, all confirmed in one way or another that the actual bullet from Connally's thigh was recovered by a nurse on the second floor and given to officer Nolan. It could not possibly have been the one that Tomlinson found. You can read the article and see the evidence here:

http://jfkhistory.co...ellArticle.html

David,

Nicely put.

They worked all the way back to the corner of the TSBD as their starting point.

It looks like you're starting to understand the complete math equation.

chris

Chris, I'm not sure I understand your math. I would not be surprised though, if the WC got their measurements wrong. What I can say for sure however, is that the fatal head shot was indeed fired at the actual point in time it is seen in the Zapruder film - at 313. Various frames in the film can be compared with other photos and films, and in this case we can look at Moorman's last photo.

This photo was taken at the equivalent of Zapruder frame 315, just a hair after the fatal head shot and we can see the obvious damage to the top of JFK's head. Had the limo been 30 feet further up the road, when the fatal shot was fired, Moorman would have been long gone from Zapruder's view. As it is, both she and officer Hargis are in the picture, which matches perfectly with her position, relative to Zapruder at that frame.

To the best of my knowledge, ALL other relevant photos and films match up with the Zfilm, perfectly. Even Mantik has admitted that when he studied the Nix and Muchmore films he could find no discrepancies between them and Zapruder.

Actually, I think we can see his hand rise to his ear. I put this animation together using part of yours.

What do you think?

Also, I am a bit surprised that you do not see Jackie looking down and away from JFK.

This is a considerably sharper picture of her at 312.

Robin, I hope you reply to this, because I do respect your opinion, and I think it's important to understand Kellerman's reactions then, as well as what I consider to be a fact, that Jackie was looking down and away from her husband and was not inspecting him.

Two additional facts which support that are first, that her reaction began in perfect unison with the other four reactions, and that she testified that her original recollection was that she heard Connally shout and then heard two "terrible noises" afterward.

Actually, I think we can see his hand rise to his ear. I put this animation together using part of yours.

What do you think?

Also, I am a bit surprised that you do not see Jackie looking down and away from JFK.

This is a considerably sharper picture of her at 312.

Robin, look at your own GIF animation. Kellerman was too low on the screen to see his hand rise, but we can certainly see it drop from the left side of his head. And his hand wasn't there when he was turned around.

So, it had to have risen sometime after he turned back to the front and he had begun to drop his head. And do you also see his head simultaneously twist to the right and then back? He dropped his head, twisted his head to the right and raised his hand to his ear and then reversed each of those motions, straightening back up, turning back to the front, and then dropping his hand.

And he did all six of those things within a single second.

It appears to me that Jean Hill may be tracking the motorcycle Cops movement ?

Uh huh.. her thinking..

"Gosh, too bad the President's being murdered - Oh well, guess I'll just check out that hot cop back there"

But Robin, have you seen the presentation yet??

Do you disagree with my analysis? And if so, what part do you think I got wrong?

I posted a revised version of the presentation at Youtube yesterday, in which the video is enlarged and a tad sharper.

Hopefully, this will make it a little easier to see the reactions by Kellerman.

Bob,

Jean Hill starts her head turn at approx frame 304.

I could argue she was turning her head to get a last glimpse of the limo, as it has passed her by 304.

That is too many elapsed frames for someone reacting to a shot at 285. imo

What was Jean's description of her actions when she heard the shots?

chris

I think we must have different Zapruder films

She began to turn at some point in the range of 294-296. Those frames are blurry, but by 298 she is fully turned to her right. It doesn't make sense that she would turn away from the spectacle of the POTUS approaching with his elbows above his shoulders, unless there was a very good reason for doing so.

Her turn was not a startle reaction, BTW. She just looked back in the direction of the shot. Only those who were quite close to the path of the bullet should have been startled in a way that their reactions would be so dramatic and visible. For example, if we were looking at Zapruder when he "jiggled" the camera, we probably would have never realized that he was reacting.

Robert,

Though I understand the argument you make here, I am not sure I agree. I think Christ' point about bystanders is a very valid reason to have doubts.

However, by starting a Z285 you have omitted a crucial point that might explain what you are seeing. In the frames preceding Z285, we see Jackie turn her attention from JFK to John Connelly. This, because he is screaming in pain. At Z285, the frame you start with, Jackie returns her attention to JFK. Rather than a shot that no one reacts to other than the passengers, is it not possible that what gets Kellerman's and Greer's attention is Connelly's screams?

I find it difficult to interpret Jackie doing anything else at Z312, than be looking at JFK's face/neck. Perspective and clarity of the frame make it difficult to be certain. However the logic of the reality of the moment make it difficult for me to accept that she is doing anything else than finding out what is wrong with her husband.

James.

And one other thing James. You said,

At Z285, the frame you start with, Jackie returns her attention to JFK.

It's important to realize that this statement was incorrect. Check your Zapruder film. She didn't turn back toward JFK until 290, as she reacted in almost perfect unison with the other passengers.

And one other point. I suppose this is a bit of a subjective call, but it seems pretty clear to me that by 312, Mrs. Kennedy was looking down and away from her husband. She was not inspecting him at all. She was ducking.

The fact that all of those reactions began within the same 1/6th of a second is either the greatest coincidence in the history of mankind, or it is proof that those people were startled.

Robert,

Though I understand the argument you make here, I am not sure I agree. I think Christ' point about bystanders is a very valid reason to have doubts.

However, by starting a Z285 you have omitted a crucial point that might explain what you are seeing. In the frames preceding Z285, we see Jackie turn her attention from JFK to John Connelly. This, because he is screaming in pain. At Z285, the frame you start with, Jackie returns her attention to JFK. Rather than a shot that no one reacts to other than the passengers, is it not possible that what gets Kellerman's and Greer's attention is Connelly's screams?

I find it difficult to interpret Jackie doing anything else at Z312, than be looking at JFK's face/neck. Perspective and clarity of the frame make it difficult to be certain. However the logic of the reality of the moment make it difficult for me to accept that she is doing anything else than finding out what is wrong with her husband.

James.

Ok,let's start by taking a very close look at Mrs. Kennedy and her actions:

Connally starts to shout in the 240's and she responds by turning her attention to him.

Mrs. KENNEDY. ..I guess there was a noise, but it didn't seem like any different noise really because there is so much noise, motorcycles and things. But then suddenly Governor Connally was yelling, "Oh, no, no, no."

Mr. RANKIN. Did he turn toward you?

Mrs. KENNEDY. No; I was looking this way, to the left..

Ok, she was NOT talking about looking to the left, pre-223, right? She was answering Rankin's question - No, he didn't turn toward me. I turned to my left, toward him.

Also notice, that she didn't believe the first noise was a gunshot. She told Theodore White the same thing.

She continued:

and I heard these terrible noises. You know. And my husband never made any sound. So I turned to the right. And all I remember is seeing my husband, he had this sort of quizzical look on his face

Those were the two shots that followed, at 285 and 312. Her testimony matches her actions in the film, perfectly.

She confirms this again, in this part of her testimony. This gets a bit confusing, because Mrs. Kennedy basically, told two significantly different stories to the WC. One was about what she "used to believe" and the other was her obviously, altered story.

Mrs. KENNEDY. Well, there must have been two because the one that made me turn around was Governor Connally yelling..

That had to have been a transcription error. It makes no sense that "the one that made me turn around" was Connally yelling. What she undoubtedly said was, "Well, there must have been two because what made me turn around was Governor Connally yelling.."

Does that make sense? She continued..

And it used to confuse me because first I remembered there were three and I used to think my husband didn't make any sound when he was shot. And Governor Connally screamed. And then I read the other day that it was the same shot that hit them both. But I used to think if I only had been looking to the right I would have seen the first shot hit him, then I could have pulled him down, and then the second shot would not have hit him. But I heard Governor Connally yelling and that made me turn around, and as I turned to the right my husband was doing this [indicating with hand at neck]. He was receiving a bullet. And those are the only two I remember.

Mrs. Kennedy felt badly that her attention had been drawn to Connally, because if she had been looking at JFK when he was hit by the first of those two shots, she might have been able to pull him down before the fatal shot. Right?

Obviously, she heard the first of those two shots as she was turned toward JBC and then reacted to it, beginning at 290 - just like the other passengers did.

I don't believe for a millisecond that Mrs. Kennedy just forgot that she reached back across the trunk and recovered a piece of brain tissue and then carried it all the way back to Parkland and gave it to Dr. Jenkins. I think she was asked to withhold information about that shot, probably on the argument that any conspiracy would lead to Castro and provoke a world war.

But I don't think she was happy about it. She did everything in her power, to get the WC to read between the lines, by constantly referring to what she "used to believe". But they seemed to have a terrible aversion to asking her about any of that, even once.

But if you read her testimony carefully, I think you will agree that she heard TWO gunshots after Connally began to shout and she turned toward him. Those were the shots at 285 and 312.

Mrs. Connally's testimony about that was much clearer, with no ambiguity at all. Look at the animation at the top of this post. She looked back and saw JFK in distress in the late 250's, and then shortly after that, heard the shot that she (mistakenly I believe) thought wounded her husband. That was the same shot at 285 that Jackie heard after she had been distracted by JBC. Nellie testified that after she heard it, she turned her full attention to her husband and pulled him back to her.

It's very easy to see exactly when that happened, and that her reaction was simultaneous with Jackie's and the other witnesses.

Bob,

Where is the reaction from those on the grass to a shot at approx 285?

Background stabilized. Frames 282-312

http://24.152.179.96:8400/6B1FE/Z.gif

chris

Since I just replied to your question in another forum, I will paste it here:

First of all, Jean Hill DID react within a fraction of a second following the limo passengers, snapping her head to the right.

But the loudest noise then was the shock wave which if from Oswald's rifle, generated a 130 decibel sound level, within a radius of 10 feet.

Brehm and the others along the road were about 20-40 feet from JFK then, and the sound level drops off exponentially, with distance. So what those people heard was probably less than half as loud as what the limo passengers heard.

But Brehm was very clear about where the limo was when he heard the first of three shots. He said he was "15-20 feet" from JFK in one interview on 11/22/63, and that he was "about 15 feet" from him in another interview. That's spot on for where JFK was at 285.

Jean Hill said she heard the first of several shots as the limo was "almost abreast" of her position, and Muchmore heard them begin just as she was snapping her final photo.

Those witnesses couldn't have supported me better if I had hired them :-)

You are doing a good job of making your point here. You are demonstrating that there is something going on at this timespan of the Z-film. You also have corroboration from Alvarez, who acknowledges that something occurred that is consistent with the evidence of the known shots, though he tries to sidestep the critical issue of an additional gunshot by claiming it was caused by a 'siren'.

This is the most important part of your research in my book. Any other ideas as to where the shot came from should not detract from this critical issue.

'

The nature of the reactions and the fact that they all began within the same 1/6th of a second, combined with the statements of the same people we see reacting really do make this a slam dunk.

That's why the large majority of relevant witnesses in Dealey Plaza heard "closely bunched" shots at the end. I think some people are bothered by the apparent fact that there was also a shot after 312, but that shot was from a smaller weapon and came within half a second of the much louder 312 shot. Most people didn't hear it.

This new video presentation includes the Zapruder segment from 282 to 312 in both extreme slow motion and at real time speed.

I really don't see how there can be any doubt that the limo passengers who all reacted within the same 1/6th of a second of one another, were startled then by a loud gunshot.

Decide for yourself:

The shots at 285 and 312 were only 1.5 seconds apart and much too close for Oswald to have fired both.

(edit) BTW, if you go to Youtube to view this, you can increase the resolution to 480p and enlarge the display. I also have a much better, Quicktime version of the film at this link. It is much easier to see Kellerman's reactions in that video.

http://jfkhistory.com/285reactions.mov

Perhaps a bit off topic here, but I do think it's worth mentioning.

It is a sad day. Christopher Hitchens passed on Wednesday. One of the most exciting, thought-provoking and endlessly masterful debaters of our - and I'd say, of all - times. This UK born American never ceased to provoke or stand rock steady no matter what. A master of the English language as well as a staunch atheist - or with his own words, anti-theist.

Here he is with his brother, in the US 1995:

Hitchens on Camelot

This is from Fora.TV, "Hitchens in memoriam":

Fora.TV.

A sad day, the world need lots more personalities of "The Hitch" caliber.

I couldn't agree more. This guy had a great mind and never compromised his principles or pulled his punches. The world could use a few more like him.

I want to also thank Josiah Thompson for his quick reply to Robert Harris' question, which Robert only asked in the first place because he had seen where I had already asked the very same question of Josiah in this post on December 9, 2011

Actually, I didn't see it. This is not my primary forum and I only drop in now and then, which is also why I didn't notice that you had linked the Marcus interview.

Please realize that I would be absolutely delighted to discover that Wright verified CE399, exactly as the FBI said he did. As I think I mentioned before to you, I am here to learn what happened, with no concern at all for how the chips fall. And I find it mind boggling that everyone else doesn't think that way.

Sure thing, Robert.

I don't recall ever asking Wright about whether he ever talked to the FBI. When I saw him, I knew that identification of the bullet was important and I had seen the memos or reports saying that Wright had not been able to identify the bullet and then the memo from the Washington Field Office saying he thought C1 and CE 399 looked similar. I didn't pursue the point with either Tomlinson or Wright and they didn't bring it up. At least, that's what my memory tells me after forty some years.

Look, I know I made some mistakes back in 1967. Saying JFK's head went forward between 312 and 313 is only the most serious. I'm delighted to be able to remedy mistakes now. In part, that's what I'm trying to do with what I'm writing now.

However, the vitriol that passes for discussion I find discouraging.

JT

Thank you for the prompt reply.

Actually, I think the head did go forward then, exactly as you claimed it did. We would have a very convoluted debate, with me arguing that you were right and you, that you were wrong

Anyway, thanks again. Please let me know if you can think of anything at all that might be relevant to this issue.

Mr. Thompson - first, I am a huge fan of your work and have read your book several times. With forty extra years of hindsight and much better copies of the Zapruder film, I think there may be better explanations for some of your theories, but you laid a foundation that is critical to our research, even today.

Anyway, enough sucking up

My question is, in your conversations with O.P. Wright, did you ever discuss whether the FBI asked him about CE399? I'm particularly interested in whether such an interview took place in the spring of '64. I would also be curious about what might have been discussed in the apparent meeting that Tomlinson described as taking place in 11/63, in which he said Wright was present.

Any help you could provide on these issues would be greatly appreciated, by myself and i'm sure, many others.

Robert Harris

...anyone...?????

This illustration compares the trajectory from the alleged sniper's nest with a trajectory from a third floor window in the Daltex.

And this video discusses the possibility that the early shots were fired from that window,

Nice job Bob.

Can we reprint at CTKA?

Thanks. Yes, of course you can reprint it.