Chris Davidson

Chris...that is my point...IT IS ANATOMICALLY INCORRECT! I must disagree with your assessment. Watch the entire sequence IN MOTION. You clearly see THE ARM SWING, THE THUMB EXTEND, ETC. What you see as his folded arm appears to be a broad black belt which goes around his waist and is seen in back. I will be glad to do a complete study of the man, but it is unnecessary if one watches IN MOTION as the "arm" swings and the thumb extends. It is ALL ANIMATION, and poorly done. The best way to view it is ONE FRAME AT A TIME. Jack Jack, I totally agree. It is anatomically incorrect. I do see the incorrect anatomic arm swing and extending thumb. But I also see his left arm folded across his waist. (red arrow) Which is a different color than the black waist stripe. I'm still with you on this and if others will look a bit closer, they might see a missing leg. (red box) chris

Bernice, That is not his left arm. His left arm is folded across his waist. It is holding something which leads through his armpit and droops back behind his left leg. It looks like an arm and hand or is supposed to be an arm/hand, but is not, and can't be. (Anatomically speaking). It also seems as if the drooping hand attached to the drooping arm disappears for a few frames. Watch closely. See if this looped movie helps. chris

Jack, This is Nix stabilized. http://98.155.2.255:8400/95505/2.gif chris

Thanks Bernice, That would be my work. As I have stated many times before, the same photo method which brought Charles Hester out of the shadows (or whoever it is) in Bell, shows this stranger inside the pergola. chris

I assume you mean BEIGE...the color of Sitzman's dress. You think she is the woman on the ground? Beatrice was wearing GREEN, so I don't think she is a match. Jack, What I mistook for pink or beige appears to be the step behind her. Yes, I meant the object on the ground in front of the rising silhouette. chris

Thanks Chris I am still thinking I was on the right lines above as I think the person in the colonnade already is Mr Hester who has got up and walked away from his wife. The movement we see is Mrs Hester rising up to a sitting position under her own steam as seen a bit later on in Wiegman if you run it a bit longer than the bit where they are both on the ground together. I will try and find a frame from Wiegman that shows it but the part I am thinking of is where she rises to a sitting position from lying down on her own as her husband is already up and behind her and about to walk behind the pillar in the pergola which is what I think is seen in Bell. I'm not sure about the bit above with John Dolva and any smoke as I haven't looked for that as yet... Cheers David David, Upon closer examination, I'm now inclined to agree with you. Looking at Wiegman, what I believed to be the pink clothing of a person, now looks to be the concrete step behind her, as she moves her arms apart. Attach this to the newspaper and black bag and a matching body is created. This stabilization should help. If we only had quality films. nice work, chris

I think it's been staring us in the face for a long time. Who was in PINK in that area? chris

David, That is what I thought when I originally did the research. But you have to come up with a plausible explanation for the shape that's lying on the ground(not rising) which fits Beatrice Hester to a T. in two different films. As you can see in the Bell gif I did, someone is at the colonnade already and someone is starting to rise from the object on the ground. Let me add a few other tidbits to this. 1. Here is the Bell and Nix frame side by side. Notice a similarity between the angle of the 2 films. I believe most people try to shoot film/photos level to the horizon. Coincidence????? 2. John Dolva has pointed out he thought their might be some shenanigan's near the colonnade. (Totally unrelated research as far as I know.) I stabilize Nix and there appears to be a blue discoloration (possibly smoke) of the film, after the headshot. Charles Hester (or whomever that is) ends up at that exact spot. Here's the reminder stabilized gif of that area from Nix. chris

hi jack , well it was dixie that brought this thread back to life so i know she is interested . and really i have been watching for info on them for years and picking up what bits and typing out from books etc i have read or whatever wee gems may appear on the sites, because of the connection to marilyn that day and the peggy burney info to the contrary that she was with zapruder and filmed from the street......but there is very little there not much and only in the Livingstone book was anything new that came out in ages of which i was grateful if it is not out there or is known by say the dallas people and is not released for others by them then it is that continuing brick wall..i mention at times....many thanks for your input this thread turned out to be informative and a saver...best b..if i have doubled with any photos below that have been posted so far i will check and delete to save resources...take care all best ..two did not take so you must open them... Thanks, Bernice, for the Hester stuff. See attachment with questions. A little progress. I still think that WiegHester and ZapHesters are not the same couples, based on the dress Beatrice is wearing. Jack PS. I need to clarify "where is her husband?" by comparing this image to others. Obviously there is a black shape that is supposed to be him. I intended to rework that sentence. jack contact chris davidson seems to he that he did research on the black shape with some and came to the conclusion it was wiegman himself look in that direction the thread may be here on the f but is so i have no idea the title perhaps he will come along or and will find it...best b.. is this any help bell... Thanks Bernice, Jack, I did a great deal of work filmwise with Bell/Wiegman awhile ago. Quite possibly I didn't convey my findings clearly. So I will start with this movie which actually would be a conclusion to what I found. My conclusion is: The Bell film shows 2 different people rise up from (so called) Beatrice Hester who is on the ground. One person we see in the Wiegman film. The second we do not. I have shown this with previous animation's when I exposed the other person (in the shadows) from the Bell film. (Gif provided) Someone would have to show that the body shape of (so called) Beatrice Hester on the ground is not a person at all. I think the supplied movie comparing the body shape in Bell/Wiegman puts that argument to rest. Any questions I'm all ears, chris

Chris, You are a sphinx! Believe me, I mean that in the best possible way! Are there any more good frames from the movie or was this it for our purposes here? My very best regards to you, Jerry Jerry The frame is from Don Cook's footage I believe By the way thanks for pointing out the full plat shows Nix numbered locations from my earlier comment. I hadn't seen the full version.. Robin I am interested in getting a copy of the DVD you recommended a few posts back but Googling around for "Murder in Dealey Plaza" seems to only bring me back a book by a member of this forum ? Is it known by any other title ? Thanks David David, Thank you for the I.D. on Cook's film. Jerry, The previous frame is about as far to the corner as he gets. I have another which shows a bit more, but nothing of any significance. This is from my better copy of Cook. http://98.155.2.255:8400/82E13/Cook.mov chris

Great info Bernice. Perhaps you or Dixie can give us some insight into the length of a ladies scarf and the probability of the two different designs which Sitz (or whoever this might be) uses in these frames. Notice the scarf shape on her chest. By the way, this is the other frame I couldn't remember with both Hester/Sitz in it. (Or whoever they may be.) chris

Chris, That's a really uncommon view! Any idea for the source of the photo? Also, do you have access to a good Dorman? There are some early frames that look promising but the Groden version isn't very clear. Best to you, Jerry Jerry, I extacted that frame from a movie. Sorry, I do not know who filmed it. The beginning frames I have from Dorman are lousy. chris

Bernice, More than likely, it is something I put together. chris

Thanks for the fantastic photo, Robin! I had never seen it before. It clears up many things, like the firetruck and white ambulance (?). It gives precise locations of some things like the tall fluorescent lamp post seen in Hughes, the entire side of the sheriff building, etc. This is great! Jack The tall lamp pole in the middle of the block is seen the the Hughes film against windows of the TSBD. By drawing a line from the pole to the windows it intersects, Hughes exact line of sight can be determined on the line extended to the Main intersection. Jack Robin and Jack, Jack has made a great observation. I was going to say that the man in the intersection looks correct n/s but needed to go a little further west. Using the lamp per Jack's suggestion places Hughes just where I thought he should go. As Martin has already clarified, I think the photographers and crowd were off the southwest curb and in an arc in the intersection itself. Jerry The only one I could find that comes remotely close to that area. Robin, another photographer for you (red arrow). chris

John, Just for my orientation, the box (left side photo) with the patch I have squared off in red, where would that be in the right side photo? thanks chris

Thanks for that clarification, Pat. John, As you have brought up, would this be the same area? I don't know, but thought it was interesting. Both from Alyea I believe. chris

Did you miss the post above? Surely being the expert photographer you claim to be, this is not beyond your ken. So what WAS the guide number of the flash in your photo Jack? Was it a thyristor flash or a flashbulb? Can you adjust the power of the flash? What was the shutter speed? What was the film speed? Answer the questions and I'll then tell you exactly why. I spent several weeks studying Studebaker's photos early last year while researching a still-unfinished and unpublished chapter of my webpage. I started out convinced the Studebaker photos were taken at night. It simply made no sense to me that the view out the window would be black during daytime. I later realized that the photos used by the WC were copies of copies etc, and that in the earliest generation prints you could see the County Records building across the street. I also realized that you could see shadows on the floor from the window frame, and that the shadows corresponded to photos taken in the afternoon. I still think there are problems with the photos, but it's no longer clear to me they were taken at night. As far as my earlier question regarding the boxes in the window...I did a quick experiment and am pretty sure Craig is right. I placed the right edge of my son's baby chair behind a railing in our house, half the width of the chair behind the rail. As I moved to the right, at roughly 45 degrees, I was able to see the entire width of the chair to the right of the rail. This leads me to suspect that the boxes to the west of the window frame in Dillard would indeed appear to the east of the window frame in Powell, provided Powell was taken from somewhere around the southeast corner of Houston and Elm. This is confirmed by Studebaker B, which shows the closest boxes to be far west of the window frame, and the approximate corner of Houston and Elm out the window. I'm still not entirely sold, however. If anyone has any objections based upon the shape of the boxes in Powell, which appear to be fairly rectangular even though they've supposedly been photographed from a severe angle, I would be most interested. Well, we know from Tom Alyea's statements that whatever photos Studebaker took of the sniper's nest, they were AFTER Capt. Fritz picked up the shells and after at least two boxes were moved, so what good are they at all? It's also hard to believe that the HSCA photo panel experts would not take parallax perspective into consideration of their analysis. The film Alyea took of the sniper's nest before anyone touched anything - assuming Luke Mooney didn't, is the only accurate version of the area. Someone has posted one photo from Alyea, can someone view the YouTube of his film and freeze frame some shots of the sniper's nest? And what ever became of Alyea's film, and the excerpts that he claimed he shot but are no longer in existence? Thanks, BK Bill, as stated, I spent a lot of time on this while putting together a still unfinished chapter for my webpage. Unfortunately, the Alyea film was cut to bits by his editors, and there is no intact version of it available. Some good chunks of it were broadcast on WFAA on the 22nd, and Groden has a pretty good version of it, but I've seen additional snippets appear in a number of documentaries that were not broadcast on the 22nd and are not seen in Groden. There are several interesting shots that support that the nest was reconstructed. One of these shows Capt. Fritz kneeling down by where one of the shells was supposedly found. Sure enough it looks like he picks something up to show the detective at his right. This may very well be the moment Alyea remembered as Fritz showing HIM the shells. If Fritz picked this shell up, it follows that the placement of either this shell or another back onto the floor for the Studebaker photos was a re-construction. There is also a long shot of a number of detectives standing in the far corner, by the sniper's nest. In this image, it appears as though Fritz himself is standing in the corner, within a few feet of where the "paper bag" was supposedly found. If so, then it is most interesting that he claimed to have never seen the "bag" and indicated that it must have been found after he left. P.S. One should also note that in this last image the highest box in the row of boxes by the window appears to be on the west, when in the Dillard and Powell photos it is on the east. Even if it is on the second box from the west, as indicated by the image of the window already posted by Chris, the Powell photo shows two boxes to the west of the highest box. It follows then that the sniper's nest boxes were moved before they could be photographed by the DPD. From Alyea "Paper Bag" possibly? chris

Bernice, The 3 frames starting from left to right were extracted from: A. MPI's "Image of an Assassination" B. History Channel's "Death in Dealy Plaza" C. Groden's "Assassination Films" I'm pretty sure there is one more of her in front of the TSBD, but don't remember where I saw it. chris

A frame from Alyea's movie. chris

John, This one might be a little bit easier on the eyes (stabilization wise) that is. Watch the 3 vertical light flashes that appear for one frame, near where you pointed out, someone might be tracking the limo. This occurs 2 frames before the head shot A few frames after the light flash, their appears to be a blue (smoke flash) tint which shows up a little higher than the light flashes. I can slow it down, but for now, this is what I get chris

John, Something like this I presume. chris

Hi Bernice, How about a comparison to this stabilized Nix. chris

Was he wearing a hat while filming the assassination? chris

Great catch, Chris! I saw that while watching in a smaller size a frame at a time, but thought it part of the shadow. In your bigger and clearer frame grab, it looks very anomalous! Jack Jack, That's two different Bell films in my opinion. chris Chris, At least on my copy of Groden's Bell the two photos you've posted are from the same film. On the left is the limousine and on the right is the SS car. I believe you were correct, and Chris Scally mistaken, the first (left) frame does show the limousine. However, I think there's a good possibility that your three figures are Hill and the two flipped up visors with spaces between them. Best to you, Jerry Jerry, I'm inclined to agree with you on this. I had forgotten Hill was somewhat slumped over at this point, which lowers his height. Looks like Chris S. got help with his question also. I''ll keep searching, Jack. thanks chris

Great catch, Chris! I saw that while watching in a smaller size a frame at a time, but thought it part of the shadow. In your bigger and clearer frame grab, it looks very anomalous! Jack Jack, That's two different Bell films in my opinion. chris