Todd W. Vaughan

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”. Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed? I await your apology Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera. So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology. But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse! Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with! To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order: DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered. Kind of like your ignorance of you making claims without reading posts? I never said it proves the Z-film was altered It has already been proven You "never said it proves the Z-film was altered"? You've got to be kidding me, Dean. Anyone can see that your statement “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was made in direct reference to the Youtube video that you posted the link for. And with your "look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn", followed by your “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, it's plainly obvious that you were claiming that this FBI film proved the Zapruder film was altered! Now you're trying to say that you weren’t claiming that the FBI film proves the Zapruder film was altered? Whatever, Dean, whatever.

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...?? what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the films are not in any record. Jack Nonsense, Jack. Did you even bother to READ Shaneyfelt's testimony? LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "During the reenactment the black-and-white photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they were established with the car just stationary in those locations. After establishing all those points and making these film records of it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position, and this was done twice." The reconstruction film, which can be seen here... ...clearly shows that not only did they film the car stopped at fixed points as Shaeyfelt stated but that they also filmed the car in motion as Shaneyfelt stated. Why would you claim otherwise? where are the film slates (you know what those are? If not, tell'em Gary), Sherlock.... surely someone, ANYONE with a modicum of film knowledge KNOWS you slate: film type-speed and camera type, cameraman, date and time. How do we know these are Shaneyfelt films? Hell, he can't even tell us when he numbered the Z-frames, nor can you or the Pope of Dealey Plaza... No cigar chum! Ridiculous Dave, utterly ridiculous.

Todd you say "And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”. Well there is my first post, read it again real slow and tell me what you missed You might miss it again so I will give you a hint, it ends with a question mark You know what im going to post my question for you tro read again so you dont miss it are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Just like I said, I was asking others if these were the films we were looking for or something else that was filmed? I await your apology Well then, yes, I was wrong – you apparently HAD earlier asked if these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera. So, for the assumption on my end that you only asked this afterwards, you have my sincere apology. But good grief Dean, that makes it even worse! Now it’s apparent that you made your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, made in a follow up answer to your question “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” when you admittedly didn’t even know if these were the films made through Zapruders camera to begin with! To illustrate this, here are your relevant posts all in one place in chronological order: DEAN 1 - Here we Test Films www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK1HeKmE3jE Here we go, are these the films with the camera starting and stoping like the testimony said? Also is the Nix and Muchmore positions DEAN 2 - Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn? Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming DEAN 3 - Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera. They look to be the ones, but im not sure. Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work So thanks for pointing out my mistake, Dean, because now everyone can see for themselves that your ignorance as to whether or not these were the films that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zapruders camera sure didn’t stop you from claiming they proved the Zapruder film was altered.

any thoughts ?? I take the above to mean and i could be in error that mr.zapruder's camera was used to take photos of as it states ''and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they were established with the car just stationary in those locations."" anyone any idea...?? what fixed locations ,with the car just stationary , the limo supposedly never stopped...????? thanks b The car was not shot in motion. Surveyors established the car locations based on Zapruder photos and Shaneyfelt photographed the stationary cars at those locations. The WC even provides the surveyor elevation figures based on the limo position as it turned from Houston onto Elm. Shaneyfelt used a 4x5 Speed Graphic from the pedestal. If they took any photos using the Zapruder camera, the films are not in any record. Jack Nonsense, Jack. Did you even bother to READ Shaneyfelt's testimony? LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "During the reenactment the black-and-white photographs were made from Zapruder's position with a Speedgraphic camera and we also took motion pictures with Mr. Zapruder's camera from Zapruder's position with the car in the fixed locations as they were established with the car just stationary in those locations. After establishing all those points and making these film records of it, we then had the car proceed along that Elm Street route at approximately 11 miles per hour, and filmed it with Mr. Zapruder's camera loaded with color film from Mr. Zapruder's position and simultaneously photographed it with Mr. Nix's camera from Mr. Nix's position, and Mrs. Muchmore's camera from Mrs. Muchmore's position, and this was done twice." The reconstruction film, which can be seen here... ...clearly shows that not only did they film the car stopped at fixed points as Shaeyfelt stated but that they also filmed the car in motion as Shaneyfelt stated. Why would you claim otherwise?

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds.... the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh? Ah, Turtle…I’ve kind of missed responding to your empty posts, devoid of facts or any type of thought or analysis about the case. Yep, I see you’re still posting much about nothing here, there, everywhere, Dave, using your pseudo-hipster style. Ah well, to each their own I guess. Me and .John shooting at sandbags at 50 yards and then making grand declarations on LHO’s guilt? I see you still can’t get even the simplest of facts correct. Why is that I wonder? The real question we should be asking, as it relates to this thread, is how can we get this film that was shot through Zapruders camera so that we can take a look at it. Will you be calling NARA II tomorrow? that never happened sonny. If it did it's incumbent on you to deliver same, but then we know how DVP and his merry band trolls work... now why did the 6th floor not allow Rollie Zavada to use Abe Zapruder's Bell & Howell 414 PD double 8mm camera again... you seem to have glossed over that little gem.... must be the grease in those Wendy's fries, eh kiddo? Old Doug Horne and his missives have got the nutters running far and wide these day's.... grab your socks and mittens, kittens -- 2010, it's just beginning... What is the world are you talking about, Dave? What “never happened”? As for your question, I don’t know why the 6th floor not allow Rollie Zavada to use Abe Zapruder's – why don’t you ask Zavada.

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera They look to be the ones, but im not sure Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work So now you don't know if it was the film taken with Zapruders camera. I see. But that didn't stop you from claiming that it proved the Zapruder film was altered. So your saying the film type would make a difference when the camera was stopped and started back up again? You have my attention Todd, please keep going No, I’m not saying that at all. A real forensic test of the Zapruder camera would require not only using the original camera but also the EXACT same type of film, among other things. Certainly you know that different kinds of film gives you different types of results, correct? For you to not know what type of film the FBI used, and to then make some grand claim that the white flashes between stops and starts prove that the Zapruder film was altered has me wondering. What does it have you wondering Todd? The fact that Zappy never stopped filming has been talked about for years, I never made a grand claim, if you would go back and read what I wrote (read slowly as you always seem to not catch the more important parts of my post) I said that I dont know if these are the FBI films taken by Shaneyfelt with Zappys camera, I just posted the link to the video to see if anyone else had either an opinion or if they knew for sure if those were the videos we are looking for. I know that the same film has to be used to get the exact results, but all I was saying was to look for the fading in and out that happens when the camera is turned on and off, that is claimed to have happened in the Z-film but yet we dont see that fading Now you have me making a grand claim about Z-film alteration because of my opinion on the video in the link I posted? Here is a grand claim, You are WRONG Todd, the Z-film is altered You made the grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, in a follow up answer to your question that “Also of note look at how when the camera is turned off and on we can see the picture fade into white, how come we dont see this in the Z-film when the camera was turned off during the limo turn?” Thus, your grand claim “Because it was taken out and Zappy never stopped filming”, was quite obviously based on your observations of the FBI film you posted the link for. And yet you've admitted that you don't have all the facts regarding that FBI film. And let's be clear, it was only in a separate, follow-up post that you noted “I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera”. So I'm wondering why you would make a grand claim regarding what the FBI film supposedly proves when you admittedly don’t have all the facts regarding the FBI film.

He mistook sandbags for pumpkins and your saying he is misleading me? I trust Davids research and stand behind him on his theories and his conclusions in TGZFH Yes, Dean, he is misleading you (and any other reader) by making claims that are not true. Tell me Dean, in your reply why do you isolate (and thereby minimize to only one) only one of the things he said that I identified as misleading, and why do you ignore what I identified as his most important misleading claim, i.e. that after the shooting I made some grand declaration about Oswald doing the shooting when in fact I did not? I’ll ask you again Dean, why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue?

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds.... the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh? Todd did you record this earth shattering test with sandbags for us to watch? The “test” that Dave alludes to was not a “test” at all – rather it was just an opportunity for some JFK researchers at an informal gathering to fire a Model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano – nothing less, nothing more. What you should find “earth shattering is that Dave falsely claims here that we fired at sandbags when we fired at a pumpkin or two left over from Halloween, that we fired at 50 yards when we fired at about 25, and , most importantly, that after the shooting I made some grand declaration about Oswald doing the shooting when in fact I did not. Why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue? And how does it feel to have been misled by Dave? i have one todd did you all hit the pumpkins or just the sand bags..or neither .just wondering..??.b As I stated before, there were no sandbags, just pumpkins. As I recall there were varying degrees of marksmanship. It was a very cold, windy, blustery day and we were all firing offhand (no support). Also, we all used both the scope and the iron sights, which are both set for 100 yards, to fire at targets only 25 yards away. As a result a lot of shots went high. When I've used a makeshift rest and fired at human silhouette targets at 100 yards I've for the most part been right on target. The Carcano is quite accurate.

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds.... the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh? Todd did you record this earth shattering test with sandbags for us to watch? The “test” that Dave alludes to was not a “test” at all – rather it was just an opportunity for some JFK researchers at an informal gathering to fire a Model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano – nothing less, nothing more. What you should find “earth shattering is that Dave falsely claims here that we fired at sandbags when we fired at a pumpkin or two left over from Halloween, that we fired at 50 yards when we fired at about 25, and , most importantly, that after the shooting I made some grand declaration about Oswald doing the shooting when in fact I did not. Why would Dave say such things, Dean, when they are untrue? And how does it feel to have been misled by Dave?

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera They look to be the ones, but im not sure Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work So now you don't know if it was the film taken with Zapruders camera. I see. But that didn't stop you from claiming that it proved the Zapruder film was altered. So your saying the film type would make a difference when the camera was stopped and started back up again? You have my attention Todd, please keep going No, I’m not saying that at all. A real forensic test of the Zapruder camera would require not only using the original camera but also the EXACT same type of film, among other things. Certainly you know that different kinds of film gives you different types of results, correct? For you to not know what type of film the FBI used, and to then make some grand claim that the white flashes between stops and starts prove that the Zapruder film was altered has me wondering.

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd still posting from Wendy's eh, Todd? I expected better from you old chap -- this rates up there with you and .joihn shooting at overstuffed, non-moving sandbags at 50 yards then declaring: yep, old Oswald got off 3 shots under 8 seconds.... the question we should ALL be asking is why did the 6th Floor Museum deny Rollie Zavada use of Zapruder's B&H 414PD film camera for his ARRB tests? let's get serious, huh? Ah, Turtle…I’ve kind of missed responding to your empty posts, devoid of facts or any type of thought or analysis about the case. Yep, I see you’re still posting much about nothing here, there, everywhere, Dave, using your pseudo-hipster style. Ah well, to each their own I guess. Me and .John shooting at sandbags at 50 yards and then making grand declarations on LHO’s guilt? I see you still can’t get even the simplest of facts correct. Why is that I wonder? The real question we should be asking, as it relates to this thread, is how can we get this film that was shot through Zapruders camera so that we can take a look at it. Will you be calling NARA II tomorrow?

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd Todd I dont know if these are the films that we are looking for that Shaneyfelt said he took with Zappys camera They look to be the ones, but im not sure Im going to try to look into it tonight when im off work So now you don't know if it was the film taken with Zapruders camera. I see. But that didn't stop you from claiming that it proved the Zapruder film was altered.

Dean, What kind of film was the FBI using? Todd

It looks pretty accurate to me Dean. I dont think so You need to move the line over to the left of the bottom sprocket hole, your line goes through the white area of the sprocket hole not the edge of it, and if you do that it will take away that small amount of black nothing that you are claiming proves Lifton wrong How can you say that small amount of nothing you point to in any way looks the same as the Z-film with Clint Hill and all other images clearly shown beyond the left of the sprocket holes Duncan you are wrong Dean, Have you been to an Optician recently? if not, now's the time. The line is on the edges of the sprocket hole edges, and I doubt any of the other photo analysts will disagree. I'll give you a clue as to why you think it goes through the sprocket hole...over use of plus contrast to the white sprocket hole areas, added by whoever created the image. I would also suggest not misquoting me. I did NOT say that David's images look the same as the Z-film image with Clint Hill. Sorry that I "misquoted" you, what are you trying to prove or say then? That David is wrong? Am I correct in saying that? Why dont you use a different color line to prove your point? I can do that but im at work all day, if you want to prove me wrong use a bright green line and we can see if it lines up with the sprocket holes and takes away the tiny amount of black that goes beyond the sprocket holes Dean Also I can see the uneven fuzz of the sprocket hole on the bottom left instead of the sharp white line that you used, so do you still think I should get my eyes checked? Because we should not see the fuzzy line of the sprocket hole if the line is lined up correctly as you say, we should see a sharp line Anyone agree with me? Dean, I agree that Duncan's line is to the right of the sprocket hole's left-most edge. Todd

"On 9th August, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald distributed leaflets that supported Fidel Castro and his government in Cuba. On these leaflets was the address 544 Camp Street, New Orleans. This was also the office of Carlos Bringuier, an anti-Castro exile." Sorry, but none of the leaflets contained the 544 Camp Street Address. Also, what is your source that 544 Camp Street Address was Bringuier's office?

All, The only problem with this is that Craig was very clear that he was on the South side of Elm Street when he observed the Nash Rambler. The Murray photos show him on the North side. Todd

Robin, Sorry to be so long in getting back to you. Bond 1 can be seen on page 202 of Trask's POP. Todd

Jack White wrote: Twice in the same thread Todd has to be corrected.... the more things change the more they stay the same, eh? Have you noticed attendance on this board has sharply decreased during the past month or so.... then Todd shows up here THEN Wild Bill Miller makes a half-baked return? Yeah Dave, imagine that, sometimes I make mistakes.

Hi B The original was the same resolution and color as the Crop i posted. It was the FULL SIZE image in Black & White and was VERY lARGE Hi Todd Looking at the frame ratio of Cancellare, his images are basically SQUARE in format. The Uncropped shaw image i posted is wide, rectangular in format. Robin, The Cancellare photos are actually not a true square format. Cancellare 1 is taller than it is wide. I think have a full-framed sized image at home that I will try and find and post. Cancellare 2 is wider than it is tall. So it seems Cancellare turned his camera as the scene dictated, like a veteran cameraman would. Also, as far as Cancellare being identified as Rickerby by Shaw and Harris in Cover-Ups, are you sure about that? What page is that ID? Thanks. Todd I believe this is wrong. Cancellare was using a square format camera. Jack OK, I could be wrong, but I recall seeing what I thought was the negative for Cacnellare 1 that was taller than it was wide...I'll check and get back to you.

Hi B The original was the same resolution and color as the Crop i posted. It was the FULL SIZE image in Black & White and was VERY lARGE Hi Todd Looking at the frame ratio of Cancellare, his images are basically SQUARE in format. The Uncropped shaw image i posted is wide, rectangular in format. Robin, The Cancellare photos are actually not a true square format. Cancellare 1 is taller than it is wide. I think have a full-framed sized image at home that I will try and find and post. Cancellare 2 is wider than it is tall. So it seems Cancellare turned his camera as the scene dictated, like a veteran cameraman would. Also, as far as Cancellare being identified as Rickerby by Shaw and Harris in Cover-Ups, are you sure about that? What page is that ID? Thanks. Todd

tune up.... I believe Al Healy deserves the credit, what say you? OK, awesome job Alan Healy!

Are you sure that it is not Cancellare? As I recall, Rickerby was shooting color film and Cancellare b/w. That is from memory. I would have to check. Jack 90% Sure Jack. Anthony Marsh has this on his site as ( rickerbyshaw29uo.jpg ) I also received this Email from Gary Mack. Robin, Art Rickerby had two cameras, one loaded with color film and the other with b&w. His two later photos from the motorcade of the Umbrella Man were also b&w. Gary Robin, I can assure you that photo is not Rickerby. Rickerby did not get out of Camera Car 2. Todd

Are you sure that it is not Cancellare? As I recall, Rickerby was shooting color film and Cancellare b/w. That is from memory. I would have to check. Jack Jack, Rickerby had two cameras and was shooting BW in one and color in the other. Cancellare was shooting BW. Todd

Robin, Where you say "Lee Forman's Rickerby Scan", that photo was actually taken by Cancellare. Todd Robin, Awesone job IDing Underwood. Todd

Robin, Where you say "Lee Forman's Rickerby Scan", that photo was actually taken by Cancellare. Todd