Chris Davidson

Mike, I believe that is Mr.Chism. A little later on, they are in various photos traversing the knoll, headed towards the direction of the triple underpass. (Nix and Couch films, also.) chris

Mike, Betzner and Willis show the umbrella is above his head. According to the extant Z version, approx 1/2 to 1 second from those two photos, the umbrella is being raised and twirled somewhat. chris

The question is: How did the WC measure their distances? Answer: It depends on what distances they needed to fulfill their requirements. Did they use straight-line, angles or maybe a combination of both. Repeatedly, I have suggested that Herbert and Craig work from both ends of the equation, it appears you're unwilling to do so. So, I'll do it for them. Since you introduced Don's plat, here is a partial overlay of it onto Drommer. In the upper left side is a portion of CE884. Note the entries in the red boxes. On the plat itself, Don has listed a few elevations in Gold type. They are 421.25 inside a purple box and 426.7 inside the red box. Also note, there is white numbering from Drommer in alignment with the + sign Don has used in noting his elevations. The elevation 426.7 inside the red box signifies Zframe161 or (Drommer 97.2) The elevation 421.25 signifies Zframe 255 or (Drommer 91.5) CE884 Zframe161= elevation 429.25 which does not = Don's 426.7 CE884 Zframe313= elevation 421.75 which has its elevation much closer to Z255. Do you guys remember the equation: 13.95 sec x 18.3fps =255.28 frames Why do you think the CE884 elevation entry for Zframe313 is near the Zframe255 real elevation? Here's a hint!!! It's called vertical to horizontal distance transfer disease. The WC was infected with it. Better yet, take Drommer, connect the white number elevations (97.2 Zframe 161 and 88.8 Zframe 313) with a straight line, then measure it at the angle it sits, rotate it so it's a straight line and measure again. You might just come up with differences of 15 and 30ft in comparison to the CE884 WC distance of 136.1ft from Z161-Z313. Just as Myers has done, so has the WC, I've just synced them together for you. chris P.S. Remember to shrink Drommer down to 71.5% need that Houston St. 60ft wide.

David, Some more numbers for you: Just in case you don't like my numbers, primarily the 3.16 sec span, here is a little more from Myers on 2 other films that were running while the limo was up near the TSBD corner. (SEC-6) F.M. “Mark” Bell Film – Camera Frame Rate: 19.0 fps The F.M. “Mark” Bell film consists of 14 sequences; 3 pre-assassination and 11 post assassination. The third sequence depicts the presidential limousine passing in front of the Texas School Book Depository after turning from Houston onto Elm Street, and was the only sequence used in this study. The third sequence encompasses frames numbered B001 through B060 and covers a time period of 3.16 seconds; beginning 14.69 seconds before the fatal head shot and ending 11.58 seconds before the head shot. The frame rate of the Bell camera, relative to Zapruder’s camera, was determined to be 19.0 frames-per-second. There are no camera stops or splices during the third sequence identified as Bell frames B001 through B060. (SEC-7) John Martin, Jr., Film – Camera Frame Rate: 22.8 fps The John Martin, Jr., film consists of 9 sequences; 6 pre-assassination and 3 post assassination. Sequence 1 depicts the lead motorcycles turning from Main Street onto Houston Street. Sequences 2 and 3 depict the lead vehicle driven by Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry turning from Main onto Houston Street. Sequences 4 and 5 depict the presidential limousine as it turns off of Main Street and travels north on Houston Street. Sequence 6 depicts the presidential limousine passing in front of the Texas School Book Depository, and eyewitness Rosemary Willis running alongside the south side of Elm Street. Sequences 7, 8, and 9 depict events in Dealey Plaza following the assassination. The sixth sequence encompasses frames MN207 through MN278 and covers a time period of 3.15 seconds; beginning 12.54 seconds before the fatal head shot and ending 9.45 seconds before the head shot. The frame rate of the Martin camera, relative to Zapruder’s camera, was determined to be 22.8 frames-per-second. There are no camera stops or splices between Martin frames MN207-MN278. Besides the same matching (3.16) time frame, the Martin film was running exactly at the same rate as Towner. I guess Martin's camera was made from the same elements as Towners, which is supposed to be running at approx 18fps, but on the same day, at the same time approx, both frame rates were identical and they all sync up with Z. chris

Myers time for JFK aligned with TSBD corner to Z313= 13.95 sec. Chris's remedy for 2 film speeds @ 18.3 and 24fps frame 1-156 24fps = 6.5 sec. frame 157-207 18.3 fps=3.16 sec Actually, this is 58 frames, not 50, but slice the excess back behind the Stemmons sign and continue with the 24fps version. frame 207-313 24fps=4.29 sec The splice to 24 fps behind the Stemmons sign is to accommodate the Altgen's photo sync with the Zfilm at 255. Myers has given you the time for JFK from point A to B (13.95 sec) What he hasn't given you is a distance. He can't make his syncing work without the limo jumping forward some huge distance in a very short period of time. Why do you think he has to change his measuring mark from "JFK in the limo" to the "front of the limo" within his sync analysis. If you want to believe Towner's camera ran at 22.8fps (Myers rate to sync with the existing films), when it was made to run at approx 18fps. chris P.S. Now work the time spans backward from 313 and look at the WC frame total from 161-313.

Refer back to this document: http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/VehicleSpeed-2.jpg I have tried to point out this is a document the WC used for their calculations regarding what we are discussing. You have to deal with differences in this document to understand it. For instance: The top 2 left hand columns have (3 and 14) frames listed and (.9ft and 19.2ft) as distance traveled. It is the difference between both of these sets that give you your 11 frames @18.3ft traveled. If it takes 11 frames to travel 18.3ft, converted to 1 sec will take 18.3/11=1.66 18.3ft x 1.66 = 30ft. Myers has to move the measuring point back from the "front of the limo" to "JFK in the limo" in a very short amount of time. Now take a look at the upper and lower top frame counts. you have 3 + 5 3/5=.6 5/3=1.66 Look at the miles per hour difference between the two. 3.74 and 2.24 2.24/3.74=.5989 = .6 Now reverse it: 3.74/2.24= 1.66 You now have the conversion formula, from the WC documents, relating to Myers predicament. And if you doubt it, look at the time Myers needs to get from frame 150-161. He has .6 sec. chris

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Myers150-161.jpg Look at the difference in time between frame 150 and 160. That is .55sec for 10 frames which is .05sec per frame for that span. I need frame 161 included, 1 more frame so I add .05 to .55 = .6sec. So Myers needs the limo to go 30ft (previous graphics) from frame 150-161 in .6sec and 11 frames. to start syncing with the WC scenario starting with frame 161. According to the Zfilm which has the limo traveling at a steady speed, referring to CE884 and the frame x frame speed comparisons within, it's going approx 1ft per 1frame = 12+ mph. The supplied document gives you the conversion for this predicament of Myers. chris

You have to go back to this chart to understand. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Myers2-1.png If you check back to the Myers Time Til 313 13.95 sec chart I supplied, look where he starts his countdown from. JFK within the limo is aligned with the TSBD corner. Now look at the graph where he shows the limo intersecting Towner and the difference between Z150 and Z170. It's the front of the limo touching the intersecting line, not JFK within the limo. He changed the measuring point. That is a difference of 15ft. Since he only has the front of the limo at Z150, JFK is some 30ft back from frame 161. I'm going to go through this very slowly, so everyone can see what's been done. Be patient, it will hit you eventually. Any questions, please ask. chris

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Myers255.png From the graphic provided, how about multiplying the Time Til 313 (13.95 sec) by 18.3fps. You see, it doesn't matter if someone was filming at this point or not, their camera(Zapruder) would still be running at 18.3fps. Once your done with that, there are 58 frames to go. Warning!!! Something smells fishy. You can then plug that back into an equation such as 58/18.3fps=3.169 sec. Then add that back to the Time Til 313 which is 13.95 + 3.169=17.12 sec. Now multiply 17.12 sec x 18.3 fps=313.29 frames Now multiply 13.95 x 22.8(The film speed Myers has for Towner)=318frames Now take 318-313=5 frames. (161-166) adjustment Do you understand what he did? 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. Hi Robert, Yes, the 313 headshot is locked in by the yellow curb marker in the background. There is another headshot some 30ft farther down Elm St. chris

Craig, I'm glad you're enjoying the show. Here's some more numbers for you. Referring back to post #1, in the Myer's chart there is a constant frame difference among each of the entries. For instance, 75 and 133=58 frames 102 and 160=58 frames 58 frames is the frame difference between the last entries on CE884. Which are frames 255-313. 18.3/24=.7625 .7625 x 58 =44.225 frames Frame 290-334=44frames When does the limo start slowing down and what are the last frames published? According to Shaneyfelt it was 334 as nothing eventful happened after that. chris

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

Daniel, By the way, from the previous post: 24 frames @20.1ft frame161-185 24/18.3=1.31 20.1/1.31=15.34ft sec 15.34/1.47(1mph)=10.44mph 24 frames@20.2ft=10.489mph Why might this be important. I will use it in a broader context for you. Using CE884: frame 161-313=152 frames Distance traveled=136.1ft 18.3fps 152/18.3=8.30 sec 136.1/8.30sec=16.397ft per sec 16.397/1.4791mph)=11.15 mph Now, let me remove the 2 gifs I created consisting of the (13 frames/15ft scenario) =26frames@30ft from the CE884 equation. 152-26=126total frames 136.1ft -30ft=106.1ft 18.3fps 126/18.3=6.885sec 106.1ft/6.885sec=15.41ft sec 15.41/1.47(1mph)=10.48mph Now compare that to the calculations for frame 255-313 from CE884 58frames@48.9ft 18.3fps 58/18.3=3.169 48.9ft/3.169sec=15.43ft sec 15.43/1.4791mph)=10.49mph chris

I am wondering Chris how you integrate a limo stop into your analysis. Based on eyewitness testimony, as best as I can understand it, the limo was slowing down and stopped after or during the headshot, if indeed there was but one, as I am inclined to think based on the Dallas' testimony. The extant Z-film does show the limo slowing below the 11 mph average right before the head shot, but I believe the limo stop was removed, along with ejecta exiting out of the back of Kennedy's head, which would have been a major problem for framing Oswald for the crime. Would be interestd on your take,and thanks in advance. Respectfully, Daniel Hi Daniel, I'm not going to integrate a limo stop in my analysis. That is not what I am trying to accomplish. I am trying to expose a film created from different frame rates, created by the WC, to cover up a shot some 30ft farther down Elm than the 313 headshot. chris As a math teacher I should be interested in your study, Chris, and I thank you for summarizing succicintly exactly what you are trying to show. But all this still begs the questions: why do you suppose it was the WC which created the fradulant film, and not the CIA; and how does the most central aspect of the that fraud, the limo stop, figure into the numbers? Because the limo does show a distinct slowing, even in the extant film, before 313. If your study is about averages, would it not do to take smaller and smaller time increments as one nears 313? Best regards, Daniel Daniel, I can't argue as to who created the film, I make the assumption that the WC was responsible for making the math work. I'm not trying to prove the limo stopped, that is not my objective. If I can formulate a scenario after all I have presented, I will gladly share it. Smaller and smaller increments would make sense, Let's see where the math and plat leads. The following is a reply from Herbert over on Duncan's forum: Frames 161-166 show the limousine moving forward at about one foot per frame. So obviously the tabulation of CE 884 has an error. They mistakenly assigned 161 to the row whose other numbers clearly show that they belonged to 165. This is my response to Herbert over on Duncan's forum http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/VehicleSpeed-2.jpg If that's the case, what should they have entered in the Vehicle Speed Analysis sections under frames168-171 and below under frames161-166. I guess they calculated the same wrong distance traveled for both those spans. Let's see if that is another coincidence!!! Have you tried calculating those entries in the upper and lower columns: frame 168-185=17frames@20.2ft 17/18.3=1.07 1.07 x 20.1=21.5ft sec 21.50/1.47(1mph)=14.63mph frame161-185 24/18.3=1.31 20.1/1.31=15.34ft sec 15.34/1.47(1mph)=10.44mph Does that 14.6 mph number sound familiar to you. If it doesn't, it's the same speed as the 2 film clips with a 13 frame to 15ft ratio. Once again, let's just unseal WC CE882, that's the original document which contains all these calculations and see if they match CE884. Let's not deal with a copy entered into evidence as being an exact replica of CE882 where the plat is too small to decipher. chris

Daniel, I'm sorry I failed to explain the Vehicle Speed Analysis chart. It was provided to me by Tom Purvis. Those are his comments at the bottom. Yes, the WC came up with those numbers. They appear strange in the form they are in, but when applied in their proper context, they reveal calculations done on 2 different frame rates as described in a previous posting. I'm not claiming the limo kept to an average speed, I'm showing how the WC created that scenario using different frame rates. chris

Now cross multiply those last two ratios. 24 x 14=336 18.3x18.3 =334.89 What frame number did the WC stop their film investigation at? I believe according to Shaneyfelt it was frame 334. That's no coincidence, is it. chris

Did you know that 1.66 x 18.3ft = 30.378 ft Did you also know the ratio of 24/18.3=1.31 And the ratio of 18.3/14=1.307 chris

Referring back to the chart with the 3.74 and 2.24 mph entries. The top two rows go like this: FRAME TO FRAME #of Frames Distance Traveled 168-171 3 .9ft 171-185 14 19.2 ft Think in terms of differences: 11 frame difference and 18.3ft difference. Now create a ratio from it: 18.3/11=1.666 11/18.3=.60 Bottom Rows: FRAME TO FRAME #of Frames Distance Traveled 161-166 5 .9ft 166-185 19 19.2ft Once again, differences 14 frames 18.3ft Ratio= 18.3/14=1.307 14/18.3=.765 Keep these numbers in mind!!! chris

I am wondering Chris how you integrate a limo stop into your analysis. Based on eyewitness testimony, as best as I can understand it, the limo was slowing down and stopped after or during the headshot, if indeed there was but one, as I am inclined to think based on the Dallas' testimony. The extant Z-film does show the limo slowing below the 11 mph average right before the head shot, but I believe the limo stop was removed, along with ejecta exiting out of the back of Kennedy's head, which would have been a major problem for framing Oswald for the crime. Would be interestd on your take,and thanks in advance. Respectfully, Daniel Hi Daniel, I'm not going to integrate a limo stop in my analysis. That is not what I am trying to accomplish. I am trying to expose a film created from different frame rates, created by the WC, to cover up a shot some 30ft farther down Elm than the 313 headshot. chris

So what does the previous posting pertain to. WC CE884 of course. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Frame161-2.png You'll notice the top two entries are frame 161 and 166. The station# for each is 3+29.2 and 3+30.1 the ratio between these two is: 29.2/30.1=.97ft If I was working with 2 different frame rates with a 15ft marker in mind , I would need to calculate the differences between the two. Difference between frame 161and 166 = 5frames 5FRAMES/18.3FRAMES PER SECOND=.273sec 5FRAMES/24 FRAMES PER SECOND=.208 .273 x 15ft=4.095ft .208 x 15ft=3.12ft 4.095ft-3.12ft=.97ft That is a match for the difference between frame 161 and 166 distance traveled. If you look at the difference in the rest of the entries, you come up with approx 1 frame per 1 foot traveled. Distance between frame 161 and 166 is an adjustment made for a film at 2 different frame rates with a 15 ft length as the mark. chris

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/VehicleSpeed-2.jpg The supplied chart may not make sense to you at first, so I will break some of it down for you. The average MPH listing in the upper far right corner of each chart lists 3.74 and 2.24 mph. Remember, the WC was using averages and ratios to figure out how to make the film work, along with some obvious splices. The 3.74 mph figure is arrived this way: 100 frames @30ft@18.3 fps 100/18.3=5.464seconds 30ft/5.464=5.49ft per sec 5.49/1.47(1mph)=3.735mph Then they used the same distance and frame rate for 166.66 frames. If you look to the left side of the charts, the entry for the far left upper and lower column is 3 and 5 frames. 5/3=1.666666667 or 166.66 frames 166.66/18.3=9.107seconds 30ft/9.107sec=3.294ft per sec 3.294/1.47(1mph)=2.24mph chris

The distance from frame 1(JFK aligned with the TSBD corner)-Z161 is 85ft. There is a 15ft adjustment included in the WC scenario which sets the distance at 100ft. 161frames/18.3fps=8.797seconds 100ft/8.797sec=11.367ft per sec 11.367/1.47(1mph)=7.73mph If I want to create an average vehicle speed over the entire distance of frame1 to 313 with the above scenario, I need to incorporate WC calculations from CE884, So frame 161-313 is 152 frames @136.1ft traveled. There is one problem though, I will not be able to use 18.3fps as my frame rate. I'll have to use 24fps. 152frames/24fps=6.33sec 136.1ft/6.33sec=21.5ft per sec 21.5ft per sec x 1.47(1mph)=14.62mph Now average the above scenario's together since we are talking about 152 and 161 frame scenarios. 7.73+14.62=22.35/2=11.17mph Now run the WC scenario which uses 18.3fps with the same numbers above: 152/18.3=8.30 seconds 136.1ft/8.3 seconds=16.397ft per sec 16.397ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=11.154mph Do you see how you can hide distances and frame rates within a bigger picture? chris

13 frames @15ft converted to 18.3fps= 18.3/13=1.407 Actually, it's closer to 15ft3in or 15.25ft 15.25ft x 1.407=21.467ft per sec 21.467 x 1.47(1mph)=14.6 mph chris

Did you know that 313frames/13 frames@15ft=24sec. You see, that would be an average. chris

Let me try and tie the chart to an example. If you notice the bottom entry of 160 frames@5.59seconds, you get a Frame speed of 28.62 a second. Obviously, this doesn't work. But, in the same time of 5.59 seconds, 134 frames would give you 24frames per sec. 24 x 5.59= 134 The difference in frame count between 160 and 134 is 26 frames. The distance difference between JFK in the limo and the limo front is 15-15.25ft. The gif shows that distance traveled. It occurs in 13 frames. 13 frames for 15ft = 26frames for 30ft. 30ft is the adjustment needed for the Altgen's headshot. chris