Chris Davidson

Chris - remove the fade in process and just show the two images coming over the top of one another. This will allow even someone who is usually inept at reading images to see that the curb ends up in the center of the street near the rear wheel of the white car in one image and part of the lighter color leaves on the trees vanish altogether. This is because you cannot take two photos taken from two different angles, at least by the huge difference between these two, and use them to detect movement and to what degree it occurs. Bill Bill, There is no reason to do this. If someone wants to see the beginning of the curb out in the road, put your cursor on it, and let the animation play a few times. Parallax We are dealing with the elements closer to the underpass. There is a common point among both photos, which is the light pole I have the red arrow pointing to. That light pole is on the opposite side of the SIDEWALK I have the red line attached to. In other words, that (curb in the street) eventually aligns itself the closer to the underpass you get. The Distance between the light pole and tree leaves appears to be consistent in both photos, when Wiegman is scaled. chris

Yes Chris ... that is a splended view of the north curb now being in the center of the street ... not sure how that helps, but what do I know! Bill It's rather amazing how that curbline( from the North curb in the center of the street) lines up in both pictures, along with the many other common elements. Even with Parallax involved. Bill, why don't you take both photos and line them up as you see fit, then let us know where the smoke lands. chris

BTW, Here's another photo to add for comparison. chris

Because the white of the cropped frame comes into view - it reminds me of one of my original gifs, but with the borders added. It may also be worth noting once again in case anyone missed it ... that Hill and Moorman's coats were not been blown eastward in the Zframes leading up to the kill shot. It was just as the car passed their position and before Mary goes off the film frames that her coat blows open from a gust of wind. I don't have it in front of me at the moment, but the Bronson slide may also be a testimonial to the varying wind speeds and sudden gust that was going on also the street during this time period. The air current in the plaza was never consistent from moment to moment from what I recall. Bill Bill, I try to give credit when due. In this case, the previous Zapruder animation was done by me. The original reason for doing it had nothing to do with wind direction, just thought it might help with this topic. Thanks Robin. Onward. If we size/composite Towner and Wiegman, this is what we get. chris

It would appear the wind was blowing in the same direction, at least in the general area of Hill,Moorman,Babushka and blue scarf lady across the street. Babushka animation by John Dolva, I believe. Stabilized Zapruder frames 165-206. chris

Tree trunks in the background stabilized. (Couch) Wiegman slight shadow contrast adjustment. chris

You must be joking me, right! Unless someone saw the shooter(s) in the act - sound descriptions as to when they heard a shot(s) is all the witnesses had to go on as far as a time clock on the shooting. Willis, Betzner, Jean Hill, and a whole list of people described the shooting by telling of when they heard the shots. Some witnesses, depending on where they were or how their mind distinguished the difference between motorcycle backfires and shots had obviously been fooled because some of the sounds of gunfire had obviously not registered with them. I know this has been said before, but I think it must often be forgotten until maybe repeated enough times ... Just because a witness says something pertaining to what they recall happening during a state of shock and confusion - that can be shown to be in slight error - it doesn't mean they are being deceptive. If this is the case, then add William Newman to the list for saying JFK's ear was shot off. Add Jackie on there too for saying that she didn't recall getting up out of the car and climbing onto the trunk. For instance Clint Hill said, "I originally grabbed the handhold and until I was up on the car, Mrs. Kennedy--the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head, and he had slumped noticeably to his left." I cannot tell if Hill is saying that as he grabbed hold of the hand hold on the car is when part of JFK's head came off or if that was when he saw what the second shot (in his mind) had done to the president's head. If one carefully reads what Clint Hill was saying, it seems to me that when he said, " ... the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head" - I read that sentence as Hill talking about the noise he heard in a past tense and that it wasn't until he reached the car and was getting up on it that he saw that part of the president's head had been removed by the bullet. But getting back to witnesses recall ... If Clint Hill had actually meant that he had grabbed the hand hold on the car when the president's head had exploded and the Zfilm showed him to be off in his recollection by 9/18s of a second or so in his recollection - I say that is still pretty remarkable that he got the timing that close on memory alone. Bill Miller Clint Hill is in a state of shock and confusion. NOT Representative FORD. Did you see the President put his hands to his throat and chest while you were still on the followup car, or after you had left it? Mr. HILL. As I was leaving. And that is one of the reasons I jumped, because I saw him grab himself and pitch forward and to the left. I knew something was wrong. He's pretty adamant about when/why he leaves the followup car. Let's rephrase the question and answer. Clint Hill: As I was leaving the followup car one of the reasons I jumped is, because I saw the President put his hands to his throat and chest, grab himself and pitch forward to the left. Who is Clint (along with the cycle cops) looking at when JFK is grabbing his throat? Maybe the animation will help. Perhap's his recollection of JFK's hands to his throat, was from a viewing of the Zfilm. chris

Thanks Tom, I'll take a closer look at your many hints. It sure is amazing that those who claim to have read the WC report numerous times, fail to decipher the info fed to them. chris

Jack, How about a comparison at 7 frames apart. chris

Just to add to that time period between 313 and the Altgen's shot. Mr. HILL- I put my right foot, I believe it was, on the left rear step of the automobile. So he jumps off his left leg with his left arm more extended than his right, to mount the limo. Try it at home. Use a chair for a step. Stabilized Clint mounting the limo. And by coincidence, that's where Muchmore's ends. While in Nix he runs with his left arm extended out, as he chases the limo. chris

Thanks Tom. I guess I missed that one. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=88447 chris

Is this the same shirt? One has a horizontal hole across vertical shirt stripes. The other has a vertical hole across vertical shirt stipes. If you turn the shirt (with the enlarged inset) 90 degrees, the orientation of the holes agree, but the shirt stripes now match the direction of the shirt collar. I believe their was a bullet hole in JFK's back and one in his neck. I used the "Z" shape in the collar and the blood trail in the lower back, for registration. Using these registration points, the huge washed-out/white area to the right of the blood stain is off by approx 12 degrees. Explainable? thanks, chris

Tom, Clint Hill's testimony is deceptive. He makes references to sounds/noises. Specter/Boggs describe Shots. One might assume they are referring to the same thing, are they?. Mr. HILL. Well, as we came out of the curve, and began to straighten up, I was viewing the area which looked to be a park. There were people scattered throughout the entire park. And I heard a noise from my right rear, which to me seemed to be a firecracker. I immediately looked to my right and, in so doing, my eyes had to cross the Presidential limousine and I saw President Kennedy grab at himself and lurch forward and to the left. SHOT #1 ACCORDING TO ZFILM Mr. SPECTER. Why don't you just proceed, in narrative form, to tell us? Representative BOGGS. This was the first shot? Mr. HILL. This is the first sound that I heard; yes, sir. I jumped from the car, realizing that something was wrong, ran to the Presidential limousine. Just about as I reached it, there was another sound, which was different than the first sound. I think I described it in my statement as though someone was shooting a revolver into a hard object--it seemed to have some type of an echo. I put my right foot, I believe it was, on the left rear step of the automobile, and I had a hold of the handgrip with my hand, when the car lurched forward. I lost my footing and I had to run about three or four more steps before I could get back up in the car. DESCRIBES 2ND SOUND, BUT DOES NOT DESCRIBE IT AS THE 313 HEADSHOT. ACCORDING TO Z FILM, HEADSHOT IS RIGHT BEFORE CLINT REACHES THE LIMO. HE DOESN'T SEE JFK'S HEAD EXPLODE. Between the time I originally grabbed the handhold and until I was up on the car, Mrs. Kennedy--the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head, and he had slumped noticeably to his left. 313 HEADSHOT IS BEFORE HE GRABS THE HANDHOLD. THIS DESCRIBES THE NEAR ALTGEN'S HEADSHOT. Mrs. Kennedy had jumped up from the seat and was, it appeared to me, reaching for something coming off the right rear bumper of the car, the right rear tail, when she noticed that I was trying to climb on the car. She turned toward me and I grabbed her and put her back in the back seat, crawled up on top of the back seat and lay there. Mr. SPECTER. And would you mark a "Y" at the approximate position where the President's car was at the second shot you have described? What is your best estimate of the speed of the President's car at the precise time of the first shot, Mr. Hill? Mr. HILL. We were running between 12 to 15 miles per hour, but no faster than 15 miles per hour. Mr. SPECTER. How many shots have you described that you heard? Mr. HILL. Two. Mr. SPECTER. Did you hear any more than two shots? Mr. HILL. No, sir. Mr. SPECTER. And what is your best estimate of the speed of the President's automobile at the time of the second shot? Mr. HILL. Approximately the same speed as that of the first--although at the time that I jumped on the car, the car had surged forward. The President at that time had been shot in the head. IS THIS THE HEADSHOT AT 313 OR THE HEADSHOT NEAR ALTGEN'S? Mr. SPECTER. When, in relationship to the second shot, did the car accelerate that is, the President's car? Mr. HILL. Almost simultaneously. LIMO IS TRAVELING 10-15 MILES PER HOUR, CLINT JUMPS FROM A TRAILING CAR, DOESN'T BREAK STRIDE AND CATCHES IT IN LESS THAN 2 SECONDS, ACCORDING TO NIX/MUCHMORE. chris

How about approx 314-320. Looks as though Clint's part of the QM. chris

Yes, Quite so Bill. Clint Hill was running to the Lincoln by the time of the second? shot (at any rate well before the headshot). This is quite evident from the numerous photos and video footage from that day. JFK reacts to shot around Z225. Clint has approx 5 seconds afterward, to react before the headshot. Reaction to first shot/shots is captured by Altgens, they look towards the TSBD. What film/photograph shows any SS agent taking a proactive, not reactive stance to the first shot? What occurs that prompts Clint to exit the QM before the headshot? Probably the limo slowing. That would be a reasonable proactive action. chris

Tim, The rest is here: http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/6095/phrack/phrack45/p45-12 chris

Is this # a coincidence? Also, the rest of the CIA memo is rather interesting. chris

Film footage of Clint dismounting from the limo, a few seconds after turning a corner. The Muchmore clip was created by John Dolva. How long would it take for Clint to catch the limo on Elm, after the headshot? How fast was the limo moving? http://66.75.7.97 chris

Tom, From Zavada's research: Claw Shadow One of the image anomalies seen is a darker (higher density) band or wide bar in the image area between the perforations. This anomaly can be noted in the Zapruder frames as well as my practical test, photos. This higher density (band or streak) can be explained as being caused by the shadow of the intermittent claw (and its supporting arm) as it moves upward over the film to engage the following perforation and pull down the next frame. The pull-down is with the shutter closed, but the upward movement of the claw out of the perforation, over the area between the perforations, into the next perforation hole is done while the shutter is open and the film is being exposed. The claw movement over the area between the perforations reduces the amount of light reaching the film causing more density. (Less light is more density on a reversal film.) The reduction in exposure to the area behind the claw is not linear. The claw functions with a shutter crank pin engaging the claw slot giving a sinusoidal time relationship to the pulldown ratchet reentry action. Claw or Aperture Flare: Claw flare appears to be a very real image anomaly often, but not always, seen adjacent to the dark bar caused by the claw shadow and the normal image area. In addition, when the 8mm image is viewed normal, the bottom of the upper perforation may show some flare-like density difference. It is this perforation that "sees" the bottom of the claw arm as it enters the perforation hole and pauses before beginning its rapid positioning stroke. What do you think? chris Chris; I have read the report on the "Claw Shadow", and from it's reading it would appear that Zavada is reference the overall band/width area from sprocket hole to sprocket hole and from left edge of film to right edge of sprocket holes, of which the entire area has a darker density. His explanation appears to state that as the claw was moving upwards over the film to come into sync with the next upper hole, that it prevented a given amount of light from entering, thus this area of exposure remains darker as an "area" than does the normal film. The artifact is an "absolute" image of something! There are, for all practical purposes, only three items of which I can think of which would create such a frequently clear image. 1. Contamination within the camera lense within a specific area in which the contamination image was transposed.* 2. Contamination within the projector which was utilized to project the film for duplication.** 3. Alteration.*** * The artifact image is clearly present in those first frames of the film which Zapruder ran off before the Presidential Limo came into view, and for the great amount of the film, this image is clearly present. However, through that section which leads from the lamppost (Z278) until after the headshot at Z313, the image "fades" to oblivion. This too can not be, provided that this is all the same film, and yet the image also disappears in those copies presented in the WC. Yet, thereafter, the image clearly picks back up and continues it's relative clear, recurring, repetetive progression with the remainder of the film. **Even were this a "projector image artifact", the image would not be present, then disappear to oblivion, and thereafter again pick back up with complete clarity. ***If one will note: http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z207.jpg The artifact image is clearly present directly above the windshield of the SS followup car. Then: http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z208.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z209.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z210.jpg Need I remind everyone that Z208 through Z210 is that area where the WC altered the survey data and pulled their slight/sleight-of-hand. Also: http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z340.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z341.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z342.jpg As well as: http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z349.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg So, the artifact is too clearly defined to have merely disappeared prior to the headshot, and since it clearly provides an item for reference of progression, it's elimination at various points which have now been identified, certainly makes it's disappearance appear to be far more than some mere circumstance. Another item, and I would have to look for the specific instance(s), the artifact is in fact clear at other times when the film area itself is blurred. Thus providing additional support that it is either a camera induced/contamination artifact; a projector induced artifact; or an overlay artifact. http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z351.jpg http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z211.jpg The artifact would appear to change sizes between frames. Frames 195/196. If it's a physical part of the camera, wouldn't the size/shape of the artifact stay consistant? chris

Alan, That clip is from a 1967 T.V. special hosted by Walter Chronkite. chris

Tom, From Zavada's research: Claw Shadow One of the image anomalies seen is a darker (higher density) band or wide bar in the image area between the perforations. This anomaly can be noted in the Zapruder frames as well as my practical test, photos. This higher density (band or streak) can be explained as being caused by the shadow of the intermittent claw (and its supporting arm) as it moves upward over the film to engage the following perforation and pull down the next frame. The pull-down is with the shutter closed, but the upward movement of the claw out of the perforation, over the area between the perforations, into the next perforation hole is done while the shutter is open and the film is being exposed. The claw movement over the area between the perforations reduces the amount of light reaching the film causing more density. (Less light is more density on a reversal film.) The reduction in exposure to the area behind the claw is not linear. The claw functions with a shutter crank pin engaging the claw slot giving a sinusoidal time relationship to the pulldown ratchet reentry action. Claw or Aperture Flare: Claw flare appears to be a very real image anomaly often, but not always, seen adjacent to the dark bar caused by the claw shadow and the normal image area. In addition, when the 8mm image is viewed normal, the bottom of the upper perforation may show some flare-like density difference. It is this perforation that "sees" the bottom of the claw arm as it enters the perforation hole and pauses before beginning its rapid positioning stroke. What do you think? chris

Jack, I think the Crawley photo may be missing a few south facing palings. It's hard for me to tell where the actual corner is. Maybe with this comparison, you can point it out to me. chris Chris...since I am unable to post images, that is too much trouble. Just put your cursor on the corner in Moorman, and then see where the corner is in Crawley. They do not match. Also, as Miller points out in the next message, put your cursor on the center of the tree in Moorman, and watch where the tree moves in your animation. Crawley and I were only guessing at the Moorman line of sight....and WE WERE SITTING ON THE GRASS, NOT STANDING, ABOUT EIGHT FEET SOUTH OF THE CURB. The Crawley image was not intended to be an exact replication, but was to check resolving power for detail using Mary's camera, size relationships, etc. Because we were farther away than Mary was, the background objects shift even on the correct line of sight. Jack Bill/Jack It is not my intention to match the Moorman position with the comparisons. Rather to use as a possible size comparison between individuals near the wall/fence. It appears from the Crawley/Bill Miller/Dealy in Murder Plaza examples we get an idea of sizing. I was hoping other's had photos with multiple people in them. Bill, That's a nice example you have provided. Can we get the original with no layers and not as a gif. It appears you have others behind the center of the wall which might help in the sizing comparisons. thanks, chris

Comparison by Jack.

Jack, I think the Crawley photo may be missing a few south facing palings. It's hard for me to tell where the actual corner is. Maybe with this comparison, you can point it out to me. chris If one places their mouse arrow on the Hudson tree - they can quickly see that the one alleged Moorman view photo was not even taken from the correct location. The Hudson tree shifts dramatically because of the different angle each photographer had to the knoll. Bill Bill, Same photos (35mm.gif) with the Hudson tree aligned. Corner of the wall slightly shifted. Next, (Moorman Similar.gif). I think everyone knows that the Moorman position has not been successfully repeated. These examples are for sizing purposes, and not Moorman positioning. Even though these last two gif's are taken from the "Murder in Dealy Plaza" special. And as you know, they tried hard to duplicate Moorman's position exactly, both with a 35mm and Moorman Similar camera. chris BTW, Here is Moorman Similar and Moorman, as opposed to Crawley/Moorman. This is as close to the Moorman position that I have seen. Perhaps it gives a better representation of where the corner of the fence is. chris

Jack, I think the Crawley photo may be missing a few south facing palings. It's hard for me to tell where the actual corner is. Maybe with this comparison, you can point it out to me. chris If one places their mouse arrow on the Hudson tree - they can quickly see that the one alleged Moorman view photo was not even taken from the correct location. The Hudson tree shifts dramatically because of the different angle each photographer had to the knoll. Bill Bill, Same photos (35mm.gif) with the Hudson tree aligned. Corner of the wall slightly shifted. Next, (Moorman Similar.gif). I think everyone knows that the Moorman position has not been successfully repeated. These examples are for sizing purposes, and not Moorman positioning. Even though these last two gif's are taken from the "Murder in Dealy Plaza" special. And as you know, they tried hard to duplicate Moorman's position exactly, both with a 35mm and Moorman Similar camera. chris