Chris Davidson

Craig, CE884, when you can prove the limo traveled only .9ft from Zframes 161-166 using the extant Zfilm, then you have something to stand on. Until then, you have an altered film. btw, are you finding it difficult from the film to arrive at a Station# for Z166, once you figure it out, then we can talk. It probably has something to do with that .9ft distance. Another coincidence!!!!! Not. chris

It's hard to screw up measurements when accommodating for extra distance. Frame 166 might be an indicator of that. chris

Referring back to the Vehicle Speed Analysis chart the ratio of 2.24mph/3.74mph = .6 Converting data changes (Z161-168) provided by the WC. chris

You are relying on a reporters take now? Boy oh boy desperation sets in for Chris. You are relying on a reporters take now? Boy oh boy desperation sets in for Chris. Well, no. I use the reporter to help me find the story within the story. Or, in this case, the film within the film. For example: When dealing with math, you should include ratio's. Especially when using different scenarios to fit one event. So, the change from Z168-255 to 161-255 changed the ratio away from .6 87frames/145frames = .6 Mandel says 74 frames and 48 frames later or a total of 122 frames. His second shot location becomes a matching ratio from 1st-3rd shot span. 74/122 = .6 chris

Craig, You are having a tough time understanding what occurs when you add and subtract frames from one span to another. Go back to the beginning and calculate 24 frames (161-185) @ 20.1ft and 17frames @ 20.1ft and let us know what the difference is in terms of MPH. It's only a 7 frame difference, how different could it be? Say 4.28 mph. chris P.S. Then you should take into account what it does to the span before Z168 and after.

It always helps to convert back to time spans every once in awhile. For instance, 87frames/18.3fps = 4.75 sec. 4.75 sec x 21.623ft sec (14.71mph) = 102.7ft 102.7ft - 87.2 = 15.5ft That's how you make up 15.5ft, the difference between StationC 2+34.5 and the snipers nest, Station# 2+50 by the time you reach extant Z255. chris

In order to connect the 8.73 mph to Zframes 168-255 (87.2ft) in terms that Mandel can deal with, convert 8.73mph to ft per sec. 8.73 x 1.47 = 12.83ft per sec x 6.8 sec = 87.24ft. WC CE884 distance from Z168-255 = 87.2ft. chris

The reason I jumped to the limo speed was to come back and tie it back in to the 3mph/30ft scenario. Since Z168 is actually Station# 3+29.2 (on paper at least), the frame span between this and Z255 becomes 87 frames @87.2ft traveled. The ratio of 8.73 mph to 87.2 ft is a ratio of 1mph for 10ft. Or, 3mph for 30ft. See post 10 + 11 for the connection. chris

Briefly, I want to go back and get the speed of the limo from Z168-185. Using the Vehicle Speed Analysis chart, that would be 17frames @ 20.1ft traveled. This = 21.63 ft per sec = 14.71 mph. 14.71 mph minus the Average MPH (3.74 +2.24) added together for entries (Z168-171)+ (Z161-166)= 14.71-5.98 = 8.73mph. 8.73 mph = limo speed from frames Z133-168 = 35frames @ 24.5ft (on film). Change to "on paper"

An average difference of 3 mph= 3 x 1.47ft (1mph) = 4.41ft per sec. 4.41ft sec x 6.8 sec = 29.988ft or 30ft/4.41ft sec= 6.8sec Where is that Mandel article? chris P.S. In case it didn't occur to you, that 30ft entry is somewhat important in the overall scheme of things.

There is only one Station# 3+29.2, that belongs to Frame168. Yes, Moving on. The Vehicle Speed Analysis document supplied previously should provide you with a better comparison of what occurs when you make a 7 frame adjustment 161-168. Since the WC likes working with averages, (easier to hide starts and stops) why not figure out the difference between the 2 averages for frames (168-185) and frames (161-185) using the Vehicle Speed Analysis chart. 168-185 = 20.84mph/2 = 10.42 mph 161-185 = 14.84mph/2 = 7.42 mph An average difference of 3mph. chris

Craig, I can see that you don't approve of the .9ft conversion to 11.20 mph. That is an exact recreation. Straight from the WC. But, as you have mis-stated in the past, (imo) the recreations were much more exact than you will ever know or admit to. chris P.S. Moving on!!!

That's a big but t. Frame161 was never surveyed in. In fact, frame161 survey info belongs to frame168, as was long ago revealed by Tom P. That might get the wheel rolling a bit. chris

At first glance, one might look at the difference between total distance traveled from frame 161-166 which is .9ft. Then, from the previous post, assume that the WC made a mistake and meant to input each frame traveled from 161-166 (5 frames) was .9ft. which would then give frame 166 a Station# location of 3+33.7 or 3+29.2 + 4.5ft(5 x.9ft)= 3+33.7 And, as further proof, expand those 5 frames over an 18.3 frames per sec span. 18.3 x .9ft = 16.47 ft per sec = 11.20 mph. See previous Shaneyfelt testimony. See Zfilm at 161-166 chris P.S. But!!!

Frames 161-313=152 frames 152 frames x .9ft per frame = 136.8ft CE884 Frames 161-313= 136.1ft chris

chris

If you want to get more specific about the actual location, the SS/FBI plat from DEC63/Feb64 gives the elevation for you. If you refer back to CE884, use the elevation entry from Z313 (421.75), subtract JFK's "head height above the ground" from that, then you can figure out exactly where the "powers that be" determined the shot down near Altgens was. Still no testimony!!! chris

And another!!! chris

Down the Street. No testimony necessary. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/FBIREENACTMENT.mp4 chris

Pretty opened ended. "DIRECTLY" where? Was he looking and sitting LEFT? CENTERED? RIGHT? Gets you nowhere ... fast. And it gets even worse. IF you take him literally, it puts the head shot in the 370's Pretty opened ended. "DIRECTLY" where? Was he looking and sitting LEFT? CENTERED? RIGHT? Gets you nowhere ... fast. And it gets even worse. IF you take him literally, it puts the head shot in the 370's Unless the powers that be were using Hudson's affidavit to place a shot past 313, there are alternatives to testimony/affidavits when locating a shot farther down Elm St. chris

Craig, CE875, Harper fragment location and Hudson's testimony. chris

Hi Robert, Z313= Station # 4+65.3 CE 875 states a shot at Station # approx 4+95. Across the steps would be Station # 5+25. Distance from Z313 to steps is approx 60ft. Distance from CE875 to steps = 30ft. A shot near Altgens could be a more likely starting point for the Harper fragment. chris

I would recommend studying CE884 and looking at the extant Z film (207 splice), before making a judgement on Mandel's article. chris

Tom has asked me to post this for him. chris

Reality = Chris understands completely what he is posting. Craig doesn't understand what Chris is posting. Once Craig understands the 15.5ft conversion process, then Craig will understand what Chris has posted. I haven't given up on you Craig, I'm just inching along. (Plat talk verbiage). chris