Chris Davidson

You are correct Robin. In the first sequence of the Zapruder film, which is not a fake, 3 motorcyclists are seen going down Elm, including the one who Beverley Oliver wrongly states went straight along Houston and didn't make the turn. She could only make this assumption after viewing the Zapruder film without the sprocket holes. Due to the time gap between sequences, the 5 police motorclyclists, only 3 of which can be seen in Zapruder, do not appear in the Zapruder film when limo comes in to view, and 4 cyclists, 2 at either side of the limo can be seen. Simple really. Duncan Duncan/Robin, This is the same line up they were in, turning onto Houston. They just had to split the 5 into a 3/2 group to make the corner turn. 5 cycle cops , Decker's white car, then the limo with 4 more flanked on each side. chris All, Understanding the progression of the motorcycles through Dealey Plaza is crucial in fully understanding the sequence and timing of the Dealey Plaza photographic evidence. So far no one here has gotten this correct. The motorcade started out with 3 motorcycles leading the motorcade, called the Advance group That group was followed by 5 motorcycles, called the Lead group. That group was followed by the 4 motorcycles that were flanking the limousine. The DPD traffic control plan called for 2 of the 5 Lead motorcycles to break away from the Lead group at Main and Houston and join the Advance group. The (now) 5 motorcycle Advance group was then to ride ahead to Stemmons freeway and block off the 5 lanes of northbound traffic so that when the motorcade arrived the freeway would be clear. In the Muchmore film we can see the 3 Advance cycles turning followed by the 2 cycles that had left the Lead group. In Moorman 3 we can see the 2 cycles from either the Advance or the Lead group (I'll have to check. This left 3 motorcycles in the Lead group (Ellis, Grey, and Lumpkin). These are the 3 we see turning from Houston onto Elm in Weaver 1 and in the beginning of the Zapruder film, and these are 3 we later see on the west side of the underpass in the Bell film and in McIntire 1.* Todd * One or more of these 3 motorcylces should have appeared in Moorman 4, which is missing (Moorman gave it to Lumpkin, who lost it.) Todd, Thanks for the formation description. If this is correct, then Oliver's description of 3 cycles turning onto Elm, depend on her vantage point at the time. From where she stood in Bronson, if that is her (as Robin pointed out), What can be seen looking toward the Elm St turn with spectators in the way? She is standing on the ground. Bell's position would be close but he's elevated. Is it possible she could lose sight of the outside cycle at some point, and believe it stayed on Houston? chris

You are correct Robin. In the first sequence of the Zapruder film, which is not a fake, 3 motorcyclists are seen going down Elm, including the one who Beverley Oliver wrongly states went straight along Houston and didn't make the turn. She could only make this assumption after viewing the Zapruder film without the sprocket holes. Due to the time gap between sequences, the 5 police motorclyclists, only 3 of which can be seen in Zapruder, do not appear in the Zapruder film when limo comes in to view, and 4 cyclists, 2 at either side of the limo can be seen. Simple really. Duncan Duncan/Robin, This is the same line up they were in, turning onto Houston. They just had to split the 5 into a 3/2 group to make the corner turn. 5 cycle cops , Decker's white car, then the limo with 4 more flanked on each side. chris

Robin, Take a look at the Muchmore video I posted. 5 cycles come around the Main/ Houston St. corner. The first set is 3, the second set is 2. What happens to 2 of the 5 from Houston onto Elm. I don't know. I know of no footage that shows it. When she says one kept going straight down Houston, how do we know she is talking about 1 of 3 in the front pack(seen on Z) and not 1 of 2 from the trailing pack? If we can't account for all 5 cycles on Houston, how can her description of this segment be considered true or false. We need more proof. This is all that I'm referring to. chris

Bernice, What's wrong with pointing out a blatant discrepancy between the real evidence of the motorcycle cop's movements as seen in the Zapruder film, and the blatantly wrong description given by Beverly Oliver to Vince Palamara on video? I don't believe that she is genuine, but i'm not stopping anyone from believing that she is genuine. Duncan Nothing wrong Duncan if you have the proof of what you have stated,about the information she has expressed, did you contact her and ask if she knows what a sprocket hole is in a film , let alone if has she ever done any of the film studies, and therefore be aware of such, ??For all any of us know, the motorcycle officer may have been pointed out to her, by palamara or, but unless you have asked, and given her the opportunity to clarify..yet you have accused her that you have ''pointing out a blatant discrepancy between the real evidence of the motorcycle cop's movements as seen in the Zapruder film, and the blatantly wrong description given by Beverly Oliver to Vince Palamara on video?'' The whole world has not studied the films let alone the crappy zappy to that extent, nor seriously, to some it is not that important...they have seen it and that has been enough...b Bernice, Why would I want to contact her? I have already posted the video showing the evidence of her giving a verbally false version of the events. She said that "The one on the right went straight down Houston" and that only three of the four motorcycled were left to go down Elm. The Zapruder film, crappy or not, shows that this is clearly untrue, and that her recollection could only have come from a viewing of the Zapruder film without the sprocket holes. Duncan Duncan, Originally, there are 5 that turn onto Houston St. A set of three, and a set of two. You would need to account for these 5, from Houston onto to Elm, before you state Oliver is giving false accusations. You could alternately conclude that her statement includes a description of 5 total cycles, such as: 1 down Houston + (3 of 4) left to go down Elm. It all depends on her vantage point. chris http://98.155.2.196:8400/E0CC4/2.flv Beverly was filming the president's car, not the motorcycles. She was looking at the president, not the motorcycles. Beverly was the Babushka Lady. Other observations and speculations are irrelevant. Jack Jack, She was filming the limo, but before that occurs, she knows about the existance of 5 motorcycles approaching Elm from Houston, and describes their actions. (Muchmore film) This is very relevant. Once again, the actions of the motorcycles caught her attention, enough for her to describe their whereabouts. This is important because it's not something we see on any films or photos. What happened to 2 of the 5 cycles between Houston and Elm? She is also accurate in describing 3 motorcycles actually coming down Elm St. I believe it lays a good foundation for what she experienced that day. chris

Bernice, What's wrong with pointing out a blatant discrepancy between the real evidence of the motorcycle cop's movements as seen in the Zapruder film, and the blatantly wrong description given by Beverly Oliver to Vince Palamara on video? I don't believe that she is genuine, but i'm not stopping anyone from believing that she is genuine. Duncan Nothing wrong Duncan if you have the proof of what you have stated,about the information she has expressed, did you contact her and ask if she knows what a sprocket hole is in a film , let alone if has she ever done any of the film studies, and therefore be aware of such, ??For all any of us know, the motorcycle officer may have been pointed out to her, by palamara or, but unless you have asked, and given her the opportunity to clarify..yet you have accused her that you have ''pointing out a blatant discrepancy between the real evidence of the motorcycle cop's movements as seen in the Zapruder film, and the blatantly wrong description given by Beverly Oliver to Vince Palamara on video?'' The whole world has not studied the films let alone the crappy zappy to that extent, nor seriously, to some it is not that important...they have seen it and that has been enough...b Bernice, Why would I want to contact her? I have already posted the video showing the evidence of her giving a verbally false version of the events. She said that "The one on the right went straight down Houston" and that only three of the four motorcycled were left to go down Elm. The Zapruder film, crappy or not, shows that this is clearly untrue, and that her recollection could only have come from a viewing of the Zapruder film without the sprocket holes. Duncan Duncan, Originally, there are 5 that turn onto Houston St. A set of three, and a set of two. You would need to account for these 5, from Houston onto to Elm, before you state Oliver is giving false accusations. You could alternately conclude that her statement includes a description of 5 total cycles, such as: 1 down Houston + (3 of 4) left to go down Elm. It all depends on her vantage point. chris http://98.155.2.196:8400/E0CC4/2.flv

Links to the Flash versions, if preferred. chris http://98.155.2.196:8400/C9BE1/Z146.flv http://98.155.2.196:8400/D15DB/Martin2.flv

I've come up with a major mistake by Myer's. This involves a John Martin and Z film sync problem. If you have been following the other films we stabilized, I used the couple coming down the stairs as a sync point between Dorman and Martin. Using this same couple as a sync between Martin and Z, is a major problem. Myer's states that the last Martin frame is equal to Z146. I've created a stabilized gif of the couple in Z starting at frame 146. I threw out the Z damaged frame of 157, as it screws up the stabilization, but that frame doesn't matter at this point. Using Z146 as a sync point, one of the films has the couple out of order. In fact, if you look at the actions of the girl in Z, from behind the man, she extends her right arm toward him as if to use him as a brace, while she adjusts her shoe with her left. In Martin, she is down off the stairs, ahead of the man, who is still on the steps. For the two films to coincide with each other, the events occuring in Z would have to take place later than what we are seeing now. chris

Well, I have to admit I'm wrong again. The person in the Martin film who I originally thought was Betzner, then blue dress lady, the one who leads Rosemary as they run around the wall, is neither. That person is Overall's man. Check the hat and overall's in the 2 photo's. A match. imo I believe we're back to timing and positioning problem's again. chris

The version on the left is another version from MPI's "Image of an Assassination". No damage to this version. On the right is from Groden's undamaged copy. Frames 157/158. Appears to be a major frame shifting difference between the two. chris http://98.155.2.255:8400/C1D47/COMP.gif

Duncan, Check the Dorman, Martin and Bell films. They are supposed to be the 2 together, coming down the stairs. The girl turns the corner and apparently stops. The man looks as though he comes straight down the stairs and stops. chris

Robin, You are correct. She was there long before Phil Willis ever arrived. We should all refrain from calling her Mrs Willis. thanks chris

Look at her right arm waving in the gif. She has a black sleeve on, then a gap which shows her skin, then her black gloves start. Find the combination of a black/skin/black. Make sure it anatomically fits. chris

Duncan, The lady in Black, where is her right arm? As we can see the leg of the lady behind her, below where her elbow would be. chris

If you would like a larger view of MysteryPartner moving into place, I have provided a large stabilized movie(flv format) version for you. Look for her in the last few frames, above Willis' left shoulder, materializing out of thin air. This might also help if you're interested in studying Betzner's arm position's. 33 frames and counting. http://98.155.2.255:8400/66B84/MysteryPartner.flv chris

Just when you think MysteryMan's partner is an anomaly, they go and leave in MysteryArm and Hand. Give them credit though,they did get rid of MysteryMan's partner (upper left red arrow). It appears as if someone in a previous version didn't quite get fully excised. Down near where Willis is taking a photograph??? Another coincidence!!! 33 frames and counting. chris

I believe part of the original film. Mysterywoman!!! Good luck finding her in other films. 33 frames and counting. chris

Thanks Robin, And while there at it, maybe tell us what happened to the original #3 negative. chris

Thanks John, Here he is again. Betzner ready to take his first picture on Houston St. Elbows out/ Landscape position. http://98.155.2.255:8400/BFAD2/DormanBetz2.gif chris

More food for though on Betzner's photo's. The Portrait vs Landscape analogy, here's a few things to consider. Betzner shoots the first one in Landscape, long limo. Seems O.K. His next photo comes after he runs to the corner. He has that long limo coming around a corner. So he's going to turn his camera and shorten his view to take this photo. Wrong Notice the framing of photo's 1+2 in regards to the limo tires. Appears it could be the same if #2 was originally a Landscape photo. Next, he runs down Elm, with the limo moving away from him. Instead of tracking the limo in Portrait mode, he's going to keep his camera turned 90 degrees and shorten his view again. Wrong The focal point of #3 is supposed to be the limo. The focal point actually is the SS car. Why not step out a little closer to the curb to get JFK in center frame. Or, maybe take the picture a little earlier, say around Z154-160. Or, just keep it in Landscape position for tracking a moving object. Or, maybe they were all shot in Landscape mode originally, but some converted to Portrait. Makes too much sense. chris

From the previous sync frame I have pointed out, approx 12 frames later, Betzner appears to pull the camera away from his face. chris http://98.155.2.255:8400/34803/BetznerMotion.gif

Betzner sync frame or +1 frame. chris

In this gif, I have stabilized the chair on the sidewalk to the left of Jim Towner. If possible, play this frame by frame. If not, take note of Jim Towner's feet as he steps into his matching position in Betzner. Also, watch the leg movement of Mrs. Towner as she spreads her legs apart. I'm pretty sure this is a sync with Betzner's photo. chris http://98.155.2.255:8400/F5AD0/Dorman1.gif

Dean, If you have a camera handy, set up to take a picture in Landscape mode (normal position) camera horizontal. Now turn the camera 90 degrees either left or right. Take a look at your elbows in both positions Now look at Betzner in Dorman taking photo #2, does it look familiar to your stance. Betzner#2 was suppposedly shot in Portrait mode, camera vertical Elbows are wrong for Portrait mode. chris Chris, I think you're probably seeing Betzner winding his film. No winder arm, just a dial. Most people had to move the camera into a somewhat horizontal position to advance the film. As in "I have an old camera. I looked down real quick and rolled the film to take the next picture." Best to you, Jerry Jerry, I believe I can pinpoint the moment in time when Betzner takes his corner photo. I'll do this step by step. Take a look at Betzner's photo first. The feet and arm position of Jim Towner and the leg position of his wife will be the sync points. Not to sure about Tina yet!!! chris

Thanks to Jerry, Dean and Cliff for giving me the frame sync on Betzner #3. 186,187 or 188 puts me back to 153-154-155 + approx 33 frames. Will do some frame/shift comparisons among these. A little later. chris

Dean, If you have a camera handy, set up to take a picture in Landscape mode (normal position) camera horizontal. Now turn the camera 90 degrees either left or right. Take a look at your elbows in both positions Now look at Betzner in Dorman taking photo #2, does it look familiar to your stance. Betzner#2 was suppposedly shot in Portrait mode, camera vertical Elbows are wrong for Portrait mode. chris