Chris Davidson

No Craig. Let me know. BTW, That straightened vertical object I mentioned going up through Newman's armpit, shows up in Nix. It's not a curved windshield I wonder why this frame doesn't sync with Moorman. chris

Comparison 1 is wrong. The black object showing through the cycle windshield is fine. Frame is from Muchmore. chris NO, Chris...you are NOT wrong. It still coincides EXACTLY with the limo wheelwell...just not all of it! Jack Thanks Jack, In fairness and haste, I didn't want the previous photo to come as a surprise to anyone interested. Looked long and hard for other clear images of this area. Please pick it apart. I still believe there are too many commonly aligned elements among both photos, for this to be a coincidence. chris

Comparison 1 is wrong. The black object showing through the cycle windshield is fine. Frame is from Muchmore. chris

I wonder if a Hughes frame of the limo, in a similar position, might raise a question or two. Hughes filmed from the street at the corner of Houston/Main. It appears that he was closer than Moorman. Objects appearing somewhat larger. That being the case, using the white tire stripe and Clint limo handrail as registration points, should the left end/brakelight in Hughes extend out past what is seen in Moorman? Is the left side of that handrail bent, as it doesn't appear to keep it's shape when compared to Hughes? chris

It is difficult on my part to argue the lighting conditions which lead to the disappearance of Newman's left arm. However, when Newman is created and aligned as a whole, out of the ashes arises much more of Muchmore. The green arrows only point to the obvious common elements between both photos. There are others, see what you can find. A closer look (outline of figures) will reveal Charles Brehm and Babushka lady arising from Moorman. I whole-heartedly agree with Tom about the strategic positioning of the thumbprint. The Moorman alteration relates to the LOS lessons he was giving us with regards to Muchmore and Bond. imo chris P.S. Craig, after aligning Newman, I couldn't figure out why the cycle windscreen edge would appear perfectly vertical(passing right through Newman's armpit). All the cycle windscreens I've seen are built with a curve. Even from Moorman's perspective, wouldn't I expect to see that curve as I see with the other's?

Josiah Thompson quote: "Hence, the films and photos from Dealey Plaza form a bedrock of evidence in the case that future historians can use to evaluate eyewitness testimony and physical evidence. This will happen even if the films and photos from Dealey Plaza are not used in a future legal proceeding." Math will rule the day. It is admissible in a court of law. The Towner camera FPS / Myer's individual film frames sync contradiction awaits. What type of movie camera's filmed at 24FPS back in 1963? Surely not Towner's 8mm. chris

Darnell stabilized. http://76.89.77.141:8400/11831/DARNELLSTABILIZED.mov I see no movement from the object behind the fence. chris

Could this actually be someone behind the fence? Or, like my Moorman creation's, is this picturesque pixels? chris

Chris, actually it was Geoffrey Crawley (a well noted photo scientist who specializes in debunking images) who was able to duplicate the clarity as represented in Jack's work. Crawley used the same type camera with the glass lens. So it isn't a matter of what I or you say, but rather a fact that it was done using the same equipment as Moorman did. Bill Miller Bill, That's fine. I'm referring to the actual photo. He probably missed this behind the wall. Or, we all see things we want to see. chris

Thanks Robin, Have you come across any photos/film where the windscreen actually obscurs the object seen through it? Remember, at least according to Bill, this camera len's resolving power is good enough to pick up badgeman in shadow, how many feet away? chris

Bill, Maybe Craig should ask you the same question: Are all the bikes of the exact same vintage and equipped exactly the same? In regards to the Moorman prints, at least 5 different versions have been posted. I was hoping one of these would be of high quality. Not one shows Newman's left arm. Do you have any that do? Please post!!! No, I do not know the photographer's height. Are you implying that a comparison of the same motorcycle, shot from ground level with 2 different camera's, is not possible? What 2 bikes on Elm have you overlayed to scale? Craig, A few bike photos. chris

To all concerned, How far down Elm in elevation, is Officer Martin than Towner? I would imagine this should be taken into account, when making height comparison's. chris

If someone would like to prove that all films/photos are in sync with each other, please obtain Meyer's " EPIPOLAR GEOMETRIC ANALYSIS" http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/acoustics.htm The PDF link is just below the photo and to the right. Read through it and if you're convinced he has properly completed his synchronization, ask yourself how Tina Towner's camera was capable of shooting at 23/24FPS. I have that model camera. It shoots at 16-18 FPS on full wind. There's a long way to go until we arrive at a seamless conclusion. chris

Sorry about that folks. Original included. It was reduced to 88% and rotated 5 degrees CW to fit Moorman. chris

Quoting Craig "Chris, just curious, where whould you place the windshield of the forth motorcycle in Moorman 5?" Craig, Do you believe the fourth motorcycle windshield is obscuring Newman's left arm? Some more studying for anyone interested. Is there a problem with the gas tank emblem. Also, the support rod to the left and below the emblem. I do believe this was shot from street level. Had to rotate it 5 degrees CW to align the cycles. chris

The 3.6 seconds from Z313 to the moment of Moorman's photo being exposed was obtained by Anthony Marsh by breaking each frame into tenths. The position of the cycles to each other in Mary's photo comes between the two exposed frames (Z315 and Z316). If you fade in one frame over the other and do it in 1/10th increments, then 6/10ths into the transition ... the two cycles come into line on the Zapruder film as they are seen in Moorman's photo. As far as the Moorman being in the street claim ... I agree with you that its a farce. Bill Miller Bill, No need to break it down in tenth's 2 frames should do. Headshot to well after frame 316. That arm never leaves his son's head. Stays at approx 45 degrees. Color frame of Newman. Sleeve consists of dark/black cross striped pattern. I'm not concerned with an actual distance in feet with regards to Sitzman. The size difference between Sitzman and Newman is enormous. More detail from Newman's left arm should appear. If this camera can't pick up the rest of his arm at approx 40ft, what would make someone believe it can distinguish between elements behind the wall or fence. Keep the comparisons within the Moorman photo itself. chris Chris, just curious, where whould you place the windshield of the forth motorcycle in Moorman 5? Craig, Probably near where we don't see Newman's arm. Since the windshield is a known object, and other elements within the photo are known (???), would it mean 2 people appear behind the wall, as opposed to the 1 we think we see in multiple photos? Do the physical attributes correctly appear for these two. chris chris

The 3.6 seconds from Z313 to the moment of Moorman's photo being exposed was obtained by Anthony Marsh by breaking each frame into tenths. The position of the cycles to each other in Mary's photo comes between the two exposed frames (Z315 and Z316). If you fade in one frame over the other and do it in 1/10th increments, then 6/10ths into the transition ... the two cycles come into line on the Zapruder film as they are seen in Moorman's photo. As far as the Moorman being in the street claim ... I agree with you that its a farce. Bill Miller Bill, No need to break it down in tenth's 2 frames should do. Headshot to well after frame 316. That arm never leaves his son's head. Stays at approx 45 degrees. Color frame of Newman. Sleeve consists of dark/black cross striped pattern. I'm not concerned with an actual distance in feet with regards to Sitzman. The size difference between Sitzman and Newman is enormous. More detail from Newman's left arm should appear. If this camera can't pick up the rest of his arm at approx 40ft, what would make someone believe it can distinguish between elements behind the wall or fence. Keep the comparisons within the Moorman photo itself. chris

More of Newman. chris

Perhaps the entire photo should be brought into question. Bill Newman and Marilyn Sitzman appear to be wearing similar colored shirts. Bill Newman is some 40ft away from Moorman. How much farther back is Sitzman on the pedestal? Where is Newman's whole left arm in Moorman? I certainly see Sitzman's left elbow pointing outward. In fact, the inset animation shows Newman backing up and his arm extending away from his son. Where is this extension shown in Moorman? I can see the front side of Newman's shirt and it is surely distinguishable against the grass. chris

It would appear that the modern day lamp-post position would give us the Bond true LOS. While the original lamp-post position would give us Muchmore's true LOS. Or, very close. Tom, If only we had those original Bond photos. chris

Lamp-Post original position. Also included a 2 frame composite from Darnell's video, showing the original orientation. chris

The WC replicated the Z, Nix and Muchmore filming positions in their investigation. But I guess they got a little confused, as the Muchmore segment is from Bond's location/LOS. HONEST MISTAKE I SEE!!!! chris

What exactly is your point here? Craig, Part of email from G.Mack: You are still comparing apples to oranges. The photo showing an agent standing in Elm Street is not part of the Zapruder re-creation. The photo is actually Shaneyfelt Exhibit 33 at 8H699 and it merely shows the view from Zapruder's general location to the mark on the curb from the Tague injury. Here is Shaneyfelt's description: As for the failure of the Stemmons sign to match the Z film, it shouldn't match. The Dealey Plaza groundskeeper testified in late July 1964 that the sign had been moved in recent months. The Stemmons signs doesn't match as of early December 1963, per the SS investigation. Shaneyfelt's description does not refer to a general location chris

Sorry if I was too vague about the original 3 segment animation. The point is to show that the new movie was filmed from the pedestal. The lightpost segment is a match with the Z film. The wall segment is a match with the film I shot from the pedestal. Which means the Stemmons sign segment was shot from the pedestal. The LOS does not match between Z film and new film in regards to the Stemmons sign. RED LINE So, new film, compared three different locations, 2 are fine(lightpost/wall) and the third is fine except for the Stemmons Sign. chris

Tom, Hopefully the email version was successful. For others, Here's a timestamp of the Stemmons sign. Looks like the SS investigation of December, 1963. chris