Martin Hinrichs

Sounds similar Tom, sure. Martin

You already dropped to my shadowing of "to take serious persons" Craig. Sorry, i will publish my work when it's done exactly when i think it's done and follow zero rule of any request. Let it say that way, you have to thank my clients thats it's not already done. I know what you did with your camera, your lenses and your applications. The public deservers the answers too. Meanwhile i will try to give an inspiraton. It's not your music taste but the words are important: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTfZXh427B0 Martin

Hi James When see the whole turnaround in 3D in the shows you will face that Connally is always a midget and JFK has a shoulder blade like Schwarzenegger. This is not a mistake. The slope on Elm differs from 3.3 to 3.5° degree on Elm. The more towards the triple underpass, the lower at some point. Well, Croft is taken at an angle and not orthogonal like the Screenshot i provided from Myers. I'am 3D artist since 1992 and know what i'am talking about. Myers is free to join this forum and is able to answer. He did not. But he should be aware that i'am going to publish his work on all well known international 3D Forums with a Poll. Realtive, very relative. In most cases incorrcet. Connally was sitting lower but his body was taller a bit. There is no room to neglect it. And JFK was not a hunchback as Myers illustrated. The sidewiew i showed was not the only "mistake". In German: Wir können es aufdröseln bis ins kleinste, er hat betrogen. Das steht fest. My best to you Martin

Read this and learn to become a better human, Craig. http://skdesigns.com/internet/articles/quotes/williamson/our_deepest_fear/ Martin

Not just this. It's not a non-quality (I dislike it to it call work) obfcuscation. It is betraying with full intention which makes it clear that Myers is not hesitate to betray without any morality. Not hesitate to receive an Emmy award for "that". It tells a lot about this person. Martin

I'am not talking for Pat, but i believe were are on eye to eye to that. John Connally was a bit taller then JFK. Now look at this Myers illustration What is wrong here? Martin

Thanks for your responce Glenn. To your question: a simple "no". Not in a straight downwards line. best Martin

No Glenn, the SBT is already history like Big foot or Nessie to go the extreme comparisons. To me the whole discussion about it is meanwhile boring. best Martin

Sometimes it's boring to observe the old odd disscussion over here. Game play as it can be. But this Research from you Mark, Lee and Greg is educating. Thank you very much for taken the time. Neely Street 214 is very important Martin

You are correct Mark.

I take a sword for you Craig. Perspective is important to understand the photographic evidence. Martin

I know Robin. As i said, the whole idea to overlay the two images is great. best to you my friend Martin Edit: After re-reading some passages again i'am a bit confused. It is my understanding that Pat meant the backwound of the "head". I believe it's Pat's theory the JFK was hit once in the head from behind. Surely, i believe the vast majority of blood on the clothes does come from the head wound and not the wound in the back of JFK.

Hi Ian, sure Jim Garrison was pretty much alone during the trial. Almost ervery CT'er left him after that. Even Mark Lane laughed after it. I don't know that much about this fellow Clay Shaw and what is fiction or not. I was informed by Gary Mack that Clay Shaw's life was ruined after that trial. If that is true, i have trouble with Garrison. Do i know the truth: Certainly not. I was not there. Mhh, i have the Garrison tapes here on video and can say that i raised may eyebrow more then once. He exaggerated i believe but in the end he was right. It was a conspiracy. Too much victims he stepped over. But as you said perfect: Compare him with Henry Wade. How many death convictions? How many were wrong? How many people died because of his character. I make it simple: A world without Wade would be have been a better one. best to you Martin

Now, thats interesting Robin. To place clothing, maybe shot from different directions (camera location) to an overlay in a GIF is a good idea but it's difficult. It's maybe impossible to get it perfect. But the whole idea is great. I would never have this idea i believe. The difference is astonishing. I mean the blood traces/contures) You raise (again) interesting questions. best to you Martin A quick thought. The blood on the shirt came primarily from the back wound. That is why so much of it drips straight down. It was already headed in this direction when Kennedy was hit in the head and fell over, and then continued on in this direction when Jackie put his head in her lap. Possible Pat. I'am no expert in blood traces in clothes. Was just a thought. best to you Martin

Sometimes i believe you have no control over your postings, Mike. Mhh Why is that Martin? I simply wanted others take on Garrison. Let me try to explain Mike. Excuse me to take a swing. Some but few researchers here know each other in person from meetings in DP or elsewhere but the vast majority is anonymous. As an anonymous Poster on the Internet, your Reputation is all you have. In particular here some threads were read 1000'es times from many people. I believe more then on any other Forum. As a neutral observer i see often the same negative empty and heartless platitude from you. Here a little taster from this thread: Garrison was as corrupt as the day is long Garrison was as much of a kook as you are Jimmy D. No two ways around that Garrison was nothing more than a corrupt DA. He appears quite unstable mentally, and in fact if I were to be one to believe in reincarnation, he does seem a bit like Jimmy D himself in this regard. The mentality of the conspiracy buffs never cease to amaze me. I don't want copy tasters from Duncan's forum over here. You know..... Quantity is not quality. Ok, that was flat but true. I mean at some point, when people have read enough from a person, they take him/she not serious anymore. I hope you take this not as offense but as a hint from me. Martin Martin, No offense taken my friend. I only post what I find and have interest in. I simply offer my view and ask others for theirs. Not completely true, my friend. If you take a good look in a mirror I suspect you'll realize that you used to enjoy sharing ideas, but now mostly enjoy insulting people. Why does it have to be "Garrison's a nutcase, who built his case on nothing!" Which you KNOW isn't true. Why can't it be "I beg to differ with Jim DiEugenio; I'm just not convinced Garrison was rational or sincere"? In my diagnosis, you've been bitten by the LN bug. Once bitten, the victim has a hard time accepting new ideas, and promoting fresh arguments, but delights instead in cutting and pasting bits of info from scared LN texts, many of which are completely out of date, or have since been discredited. Once bitten by this bug one's demeanor becomes nasty; often, in extreme cases, the victim froths at the moth and spews bile. Of course, Bugliosi is just a foreign word for bug. There's a CT bug, too, of course. But that's another matter. Surely you've explained it better then me Pat. I wish i would have a better english. Martin

Now, thats interesting Robin. To place clothing, maybe shot from different directions (camera location) to an overlay in a GIF is a good idea but it's difficult. It's maybe impossible to get it perfect. But the whole idea is great. I would never have this idea i believe. The difference is astonishing. I mean the blood traces/contures) You raise (again) interesting questions. best to you Martin

Sometimes i believe you have no control over your postings, Mike. Mhh Why is that Martin? I simply wanted others take on Garrison. Let me try to explain Mike. Excuse me to take a swing. Some but few researchers here know each other in person from meetings in DP or elsewhere but the vast majority is anonymous. As an anonymous Poster on the Internet, your Reputation is all you have. In particular here some threads were read 1000'es times from many people. I believe more then on any other Forum. As a neutral observer i see often the same negative empty and heartless platitude from you. Here a little taster from this thread: Garrison was as corrupt as the day is long Garrison was as much of a kook as you are Jimmy D. No two ways around that Garrison was nothing more than a corrupt DA. He appears quite unstable mentally, and in fact if I were to be one to believe in reincarnation, he does seem a bit like Jimmy D himself in this regard. The mentality of the conspiracy buffs never cease to amaze me. I don't want copy tasters from Duncan's forum over here. You know..... Quantity is not quality. Ok, that was flat but true. I mean at some point, when people have read enough from a person, they take him/she not serious anymore. I hope you take this not as offense but as a hint from me. Martin

Sometimes i believe you have no control over your postings, Mike. Mhh

Thank you Josiah! The windshield...yes i do recall it. In Altgens 6. Wasn't it? Til today i have no logical explanation for this image irritation but i can be wrong with my guess that this is a bullet damage. I've spend a lot of time and found no solution. It's still in the same place as in Altgens 7 (the bullet damage) but thats not enough. It can have another logical solution (in the background). I don't know. Thank you for adding me as as friend. best to you Martin

Dear Josiah, i've seen the posting's you made and discover integrity and honesty. To admit a few errors is to me a great strenght an not a flaw. That happen not often in the JFK research. I think it's important for you to know that some little younger reseacher notice this very well. By the way: "Six seconds in Dallas" was for me (i'am having mostly interest's in the photographic evidence) one of the most captivating books i've read. For the record, i've read just some 30 books. Please go on your own way. We are following your words. My respect and my very best to you Martin

Sometimes it's frightening how close we both are when it goes to the photograhic evidence, Robin. I come many many months ago independent to exact the same conclusion. I don't know when exactly this Bogus photos appeared for the first time and i don't like to talk about alteration but: i don't know who this person is with the serious damage at the right front of his head. I can't see his face. They are contradicting strictly the photographic evidence. I'am certain of it. best to you Martin

Thanks Bernice. We have unfortunately to rely on the overwhelming witness reports from Parkland. I'am not aware of any existant photo showing the devastating wounds of JFKs's head at Parkland. They may never been shot or been covered. Dr. Boswell's drawings at a real comparable skull at Bethesda-Marine-Hospital fo the NARA is maybe the best source to see what happend to JFK's head. It confirms the photographic evidence. Credit to John Hunt. Great guy. My very best to you Martin thanks Martin, how come you can post photos??, i cannot neither can Jack, darn and i have zillions of space left for doing so,but all fail, anyway, thank you, there are no photos showing wounds from parkland, though there is the old story that some were taken, but never have appeared, the photo, is the very old one, posted a zillion times, showing the witnesses from parkland, placng theirs hands on the back of their heads, where the hole was that they saw, it shows small photos of all, compiled into one photo, i thought you would have it, anyway it does show them holding their hands on the back right hand side of their heads, as you posted......i will try one more time to upload a photo, but that and that's a big but.. .carry on, thanks...b;) no good, it did not upload.so ..for now... Bernice, i use http://photobucket.com/ or Imageshack for posting images: http://imageshack.us/ I prefer Photobucket. I understand because of the bandwith that internal upload of images is still too complex for the hosters of a forum. Give Photobucket a try. It's worthwhile. I can assisting you. best to you Martin

Thanks Bernice. We have unfortunately to rely on the overwhelming witness reports from Parkland. I'am not aware of any existant photo showing the devastating wounds of JFKs's head at Parkland. They may never been shot or been covered. Dr. Boswell's drawings at a real comparable skull at Bethesda-Marine-Hospital fo the NARA is maybe the best source to see what happend to JFK's head. It confirms the photographic evidence. Credit to John Hunt. Great guy. My very best to you Martin

Sure, that was it, Duncan.

I mean the Nix film conversation, Duncan. I blamed you for that somehow i admit. Martin