Vince Palamara

more documents/articles, in addition to the original post above:

11 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

V-

 

There are several versions of the Z film out there, in terms of resolution, and with individual numbered frames. 

Do you know of the best, high-rez Z film, that is available on a frame-by-frame basis? 

I would definitely say one of the ones included in this compilation

***The Greatest JFK Assassination Witness and Film Compilation*** The major principal witnesses + the Zapruder, Nix, Muchmore, Bronson and Towner films. ALL the known versions of the Z film and more!

14 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

Awesome-thank you!!!

5 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

 

Vince, My copy of the April 2022 DPUK journal arrived in the post this week.

Awesome! Can you scan (or make iPhone copies) of the review?

5 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

BTW, would someone please be kind enough identify the name and year of this broadcast?

CBS 1975. The American Assassins.

16 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Many elderly people have a hard time reaching far back like that.

 

That's what a couple people on my Facebook told me!

3 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thanks for all the new (to me at least) videos. This one leaves off with a tantalizing question about DeM contacts. Are there filmed interviews of George talking about himself? 

The two Curry films, and the numerous other times Curry spoke publicly (I believe) made me wonder about all the filmed interviews that never happened, or were lost or in private hands. Curry comes off well enough. Do you have any interviews with the many Dallas Detectives who were integral to the framing of Oswald? Westbrook’s name keeps popping up. 

Thanks. I do not unless you mean the common ones in The Men Who Killed Kennedy from 1988/1991.

2 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Is Hill accurate? Was Johnsen asked to stay with the body? 

As far as his comments about tampering, I seriously doubt that was on anyone's mind at the time. Presumably that part was added by his wife to help shut down Lifton. 

Johnsen was on board:

I think Hill invented that bit about Johnsen- that is news to me...and who made HILL the boss (hello? Kellerman?) Also- you wrote  "Presumably that part was added by his wife to help shut down Lifton. " THAT is what I think Hill has been doing recently by moving the head wound more to the side...to shut down all these conspiracy folks.

3 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Yes, he has continued to say the rear back of the head was missing. But he has then pointed out where he means and he points to an area above and slightly behind the right ear. 

People use words in weird ways. To Hill, one can only presume, any area in back of the forehead is the back of the head. It is grossly unfair to claim he is lying about this. Where he places the wound is within a few inches of where Bill Newman placed the wound, and Gayle Newman placed the wound, and Abraham Zapruder placed the wound, and Malcolm Kilduff placed the wound, on television within a few hours of the assassination. To say they were all mistaken or lying or that they failed to see a giant gaping hole on the far back of the head is lunacy, IMO. 

As far as the semantics, I was mugged once by a guy who kept hitting me on the back of the head with his left hand. I told everyone he hit me on the back of the head, because his behavior seemed so cowardly and reprehensible. But when my brain buzz calmed down and I could see the gouge on my head left by his rings, it was on the side of my head above, and slightly behind my right ear. 

Here's another reason I believe Hill is credible--he never said he heard three shots. He could have changed from two to three--Bonnie Ray Williams and Bill Newman did. Bit instead he told the WC the second shot had a weird echo or something--a clear suggestion there were two shots fired quite close together. In fact, when one takes into account the speed of sound, Hill's recollection suggests a second shot (or sound) from close by, e.g. the grassy knoll area.

What is your take on this (he seems to predict Lifton's book years before it was even a thought):" if there is ever any doubt about whether Dr. Burkley stayed with the body until the autopsy, or suspicions about tampering"

15 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

From what I could track down, Hill first specified that the wound was above the right ear in 2004. He has been consistent ever since. There is no reason to believe he studied the x-rays or the Z-film before saying as much. While he may have been aware that some were citing him as a "back of the head" witness, I think it's just as likely he could give a rat's ass what conspiracy theorists say or believe (outside of that the SS was in on it, of course). 

As he continues to denounce the single-bullet theory and continues to describe the head wound in a manner inconsistent with the story pushed by Baden etc, I suspect he is telling the truth as he sees it. 

Pat- How about this from Hill:

“It strikes me that perhaps we should keep an agent with President Kennedy’s body – out of respect for both President and Mrs. Kennedy, and in light of the questions that were raised at Parkland Hospital about taking the body back to Washington for the autopsy. This way, if there is ever any doubt about whether Dr. Burkley stayed with the body until the autopsy, or suspicions about tampering, there will be a Secret Service agent who also remained with the casket and can vouch for the integrity of the body. Agent Dick Johnsen is selected for the post because he is an agent who was with President Kennedy from the beginning and is familiar to Mrs. Kennedy, O’Donnell, and Powers.”–Secret Service agent Clint Hill, Five Days in November, page 124

Also in the same book (I can't find the reference now but Horne made a big issue of it), Hill states that the autopsy doctors knew the throat wound was a thru and thru exit wound.

3 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

From what I could track down, Hill first specified that the wound was above the right ear in 2004. He has been consistent ever since. There is no reason to believe he studied the x-rays or the Z-film before saying as much. While he may have been aware that some were citing him as a "back of the head" witness, I think it's just as likely he could give a rat's ass what conspiracy theorists say or believe (outside of that the SS was in on it, of course). 

As he continues to denounce the single-bullet theory and continues to describe the head wound in a manner inconsistent with the story pushed by Baden etc, I suspect he is telling the truth as he sees it. 

The only thing is: in Blaine's (1 [Hill contributed and wrote the Foreword]) and Hill's books (3 with one pending), he states that the right rear or back of JFK's head was gone many times. The above video/still is from 2013. 

21 minutes ago, Michael Crane said:

I don't ever recall reading or seeing Clint Hill give a description of where or the size of the back of the head wound.I just figured that he was going off of the x-rays or possibly the Zapruder film.It certainly appears (to me at least) that he has changed the location according to what Vince has provided (absolutely nothing showing the side) I read Crenshaw's book Conspiracy of Silence and he is very very adamant about what he observed.

Also like to thank all the others for contributing to this thread.

Thanks guys.

I have noticed that Hill has been trying to move the wound more to the side since 1963-2013. He must now be aware of the controversy (here is the new location he points out in 2021):

Again- here he is from 2013 (video several comments above):

14 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

it depends on what you mean by "back of the head' and depends on what you mean by "gone". 

I'm with those who said the far back of the head was shattered beneath the scalp, and fell to pieces as Humes peeled back the scalp. 

As far as a conspiracy, of course I believe the medical evidence points to a conspiracy. I spent years of my life researching it, and writing about it. It's a fact, sure as your name is Vince Palamara. 

It's just not as simple as most want it to be. 

Very cool! Thanks, Pat!

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Clint Hill's depiction of the wound location is not remotely in line with the location depicted in the so-called McClelland drawing (which McClelland repeatedly disavowed before finally caving-in and telling people what they wanted to hear).

  

Hill in 2013 on the National Geographic special (also a DVD) JFK: THE FINAL HOURS

15 minutes ago, Bill Fite said:

Thanks for posting these videos on YouTube. 

They are very interesting and informative.

 

You're welcome!

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Robertson has convinced himself the large triangular fragment derived from the crown of Kennedy's head, and that there was no skull at the top of the back of the head (as shown in the so-called McClelland drawing.)

So he supports his pet theory by describing what he presumes to be a hole in this location as "documented bone loss."

As you know, Vince, researching the medical evidence is a mine-field, with experts on both sides of the fence mis-representing their pet theories as "facts". 

Fair enough. Pat, do you believe the back of the head was gone and do you believe the medical evidence points to a conspiracy?