Dean Hagerman

I have 0 Reputation! Thats good and bad

Good questions Bernie

Why not?

None of my preferred locations were right out in the open for the whole world to see like Greer was And I have explained my stance on Z-film alteration like 500 times Paul, im sure you have read it on this forum

Purely out of curiosity, Dean, if you don't buy the eyewitnesses, and you think the Z-fake's a fake, what exactly are you relying upon? Is there something that we've all missed? Or, if you are persuaded by some eyewitnesses, but not others, what are your criteria for so discriminating? Nothing too esoteric, mind, as it's getting late. Show me an eyewitness that said "The driver turned around and shot JFK in the head!" I believe a lot of the eyewitnesses Paul, I also believe that certain parts of the Z-film were altered, not the entire film

For some reason I got this picture of Greer with a crazy look on his face doing a kamikazi into the TSBD and started laughing I dont buy Greer as an assassin for a second

What are you trying to say? That im from a hick town? LMAO

Dean, I'd like to hear more about how you see it happening... Shot #1 DalTex: Hits curb, fragments strike Tague Shot #2 Picket Fence/Grassy Knoll: Hits JFK in throat Shot #3 TSBD: Hits Connally in back, wrist, thigh Shot #4 DalTex: Hits JFK in back Shot #5 TSBD: Hits JFK in head Shot# 6 Picket Fence/Grassy Knoll: Hits JFK in head just after shot #5 6 shots, 2 shots from each position

Not funny

I dont think so Cliff I will believe a shot around Z190 (or a little after) from the front, but not a blood soluble flechette from the BDM position Hi Dean, This scenario matches the neck x-ray perfectly: bruised lung tip, hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, subcutaneous air pocket overlaying C7 and T1. There was no exit and no round recovered. Same thing with the back wound -- shallow, no exit, no round was recovered. This scenario also matches the testimony of Rosemary Willis, who described BDM as a "conspicuous" person who happened to "disappear the next instant." The HSCA photography panel examined Willis #5, taken a split second after the throat shot, and observed a "distinct straight-line feature" which was "near the region of the hands." http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0006a.htm This scenario was first put forth by the prosectors themselves at the end of the autopsy. From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's sworn affidavit: (quote on) Some discussion did occur concerning the disintegration of the bullet. A general feeling existed that a soft-nosed bullet struck JFK. There was discussion concerning the back wound that the bullet could have been a "plastic" type or an "Ice" [sic] bullet, one which dissolves after contact. (quote off) From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's sworn affidavit: (quote on) The doctors also discussed a possible deflection of the bullet in the body caused by striking bone. Consideration was also given to a type of bullet which fragments completely....Following discussion among the doctors relating to the back injury, I left the autopsy room to call the FBI Laboratory and spoke with Agent Chuch [sic] Killion. I asked if he could furnish any information regarding a type of bullet that would almost completely fragmentize (sic). (quote off) Cliff The scenario that you back up is possible, no doubt in my mind But for my personal shooting scenario it just does not fit

And before anyone says dont you believe the film was altered? I do, but not in the way that the entire film was fabricated I believe that for sure the limo turn was taken out, the limo stop was taken out, the head shot was altered, along with some other minor alterations The footage we see of the limo occupants was the film that Zappy shot (sans the head shot) So I believe that we can watch the Z-film for the timing of the first shot I think Duncan is correct I think JFK is reacting to a shot from the front that hit him in the throat

I dont think so Cliff I will believe a shot around Z190 (or a little after) from the front, but not a blood soluble flechette from the BDM position

So is this what its like to see through the eyes of a LNer?

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black Hey Francis, why dont you send me 9 emails in a row again smart guy?

I wonder if Ray thinks Mark Chapman is 100% innocent as well?

Weak

Best answer of all time Jack I bet Robert had a near fatal heart attack reading that Ignorance continues to breed ignorance... I know that you laughed when you read Jacks reply Craig

Hey Dave Tell your LN buddy to join the Ed forum and post his own garbage on here instead of hiding behind you

There is really no doubt that the limousine slowed. Alvarez did a frame-by-frame study and concluded it went from 12 to 8 MPH. And did they also "fabricate" the Nix and Muchmore films to make them sychronize, as even Dr. Mantik has admitted? That was fast work on the Muchmore film since it was on television on 11/25/63. And when they fabricated those other films, how exactly did they do it in way in which there were no improperly spaced gaps between the frames in which images were removed? And were frames removed during the time that Clint Hill was running? How did they manage to make his motions appear unbroken? Since Kodak will stop processing movie film for Zapruder's camera at the end of this year, why don't you guys shoot a simple movie in DP and then alter it the way the perps did, using only 1963 technology? Then you can do more than just tell us that they did it, you can at least PROVE that it was possible. Yes. Best answer of all time Jack I bet Robert had a near fatal heart attack reading that

Yea right, now I suspect you will quote that hoax..hoax.... What did you say Craig? Talk louder I cant hear you

Yes I really think that in the altered Z-film we see the real Mrs. Connally And im sure that she looked at JFK when she said she did

Dean, would you agree that Mrs. Connally at least thought she heard a shot between the time she saw JFK react and the explosive head wound, and that she spun around to tend to her husband, beginning at 291-292? And would you agree that she reacted at the same time that Mrs. Kennedy, Kellerman, and Greer reacted? No and No Dean, you seem to have a habit of making statements that you are unable or unwilling to support. Do I actually have to cite Mrs. Connally stating that she thought her husband was hit after she saw JFK in distress and before the explosive head wound? Have you listened to her statements in the interview which is at the beginning of the video presentation I linked? Why don't you cite the testimony she gave which convinced you that this was not what she said? And if you do not agree that she turned to her husband and pulled him back to her at 291-292, then when do you see her doing that? What frame number? Robert Harris The film has been altered Robert You know my stance