Ian Kingsbury

I don't think I see enough detail or resolution to claim that.

We'll see if any others can see the detail.

Jim

Connally is facing almost to his right in this picture would you agree this is clear evidence against the serpentine bullet theory?.

Ian

C. David Heymann (RFK: A Candid Heymann) does not mention the meeting with Mark Lane. Nor does Arthur Schlesinger (Robert Kennedy and His Times). However, he does include details of a telephone call LBJ made to RFK shortly after the assassination. LBJ told RFK that he believed that his brother had been killed as part of a "worldwide plot".

Schlesinger also includes this interesting passage:

Robert Kennedy perceived so much hatred about, so many enemies: the Teamsters; the gangsters; the pro-Castro Cubans; the anti-Castro Cubans; the racists; the right-wing fanatics; the lonely deluded nuts mumbling to themselves in the night. I do not know whether he suspected how much vital information both the FBI and the CIA deliberately denied the Warren Commission or whether he ever read its report. But on October 30, 1966, as we talked till two-thirty in the morning in P. J. Clarke's saloon in New York City, "RFK wondered how long he could continue to avoid comment on the report. It is evident that he believes that it was a poor job and will not endorse it, but that he is unwilling to criticize it and thereby reopen the whole tragic business.""

The next year Jim Garrison, the New Orleans district attorney, started making sensational charges about a conspiracy. I asked Kennedy what he made of them. He thought Garrison might be onto something; NBC, he added, had sent Walter Sheridan to New Orleans to find out what Garrison had. Garrison's villain turned out to be the CIA. Kennedy said to Sheridan something like: "You know, at the time I asked McCone . . . if they had killed my brother, and I asked him in a way that he couldn't lie to me, and they hadn't."" Kennedy asked Frank Mankiewicz of his Senate staff whether he thought Garrison had anything. "And I started to tell him, and he said, `Well, I don't think I want to know.' Kennedy told me later: "Walter Sheridan is satisfied that Garrison is a fraud."

I cannot say what his essential feeling was. He came to believe the Warren Commission had done an inadequate job; but he had no conviction - though his mind was not sealed against the idea of conspitacy - that an adequate inquiry would necessarily have reached a different conclusion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Denis,

This is what I have always heard, that RFK intended to open up the investigation of his brother's murder once he was president. But obviously the powers that be could not have that, so they "invented" Sirhan Sirhan. I have always felt that this case would be, by far, the easiest to "solve" because there was a real autopsy by an honest coroner. I believe that Dr. Thomas Noguchi is even still alive. As is Sirhan. (Who does have an conspiracy-aware lawyer working on his case, against all odds).

People saw a security guard immediately behind RFK with a gun drawn, exactly at the spot where Dr. Noguchi's autopsy said the killing shot had to have come from ( vs. several feet in front of RFK, where Sirhan was). Security guard, Thane Eugene Cesar was the name of this guard and he was in fact located in I blieve 1987 and interviewed. In this interview he admitted not only to being there but to HAVING HIS GUN DRAWN,. This was for a mag called "Ragaldies". I used to have a copy of it and probably sitill do someplace.

This case can be solved!!!

Dawn

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dawn, I think that talk of RFK re-opening his brother's murder case upon assuming the presidency is a lot of bull. Even if he had wanted to, which in some measure he may have, he would still have had to face all the other disclosures mentioned above, such as that he was working with anti-Castro exiles, that he was conducting foreign policy as an Attorney General, that he and his brother had accepted big help from the Mafia to get elected in 1960, and on and on. The Kennedys were not the innocent public servants many today continue to suppose, and all hell would have broken loose. Even if RFK told someone just prior to California that he wouldn't be able to discover "who did it" until assuming the presidency, I don't believe he would have followed through on it.

Royce Bierma

Royce

LBJ managed to avoid all sorts of problems while in the Whitehouse and it appears he was one edition of Life away from jail.RFK as president would have been the end for many !.

Ian

Hello Lee, Appears you are correct. Thanks for the clarification and the greater insights. Jim

I found this useful Why was Curry there?.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LBJ_oath_with_captions.jpg

I have no control over what he posts, or the time it takes him to do it.

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

I am sure that Jim Garrison made a few enemies among all sorts of folk .But how many of his convictions were overturned due to his "crookedness"?. Perhaps we could compare it to other DA"s like............Wade .Which one had the scruples?.

I always thought Garrison was depicted as a hero before he became a D.A?.

what was the perception of Garrison before the trial?.

If you cannot refute his evidence attack him .Thats innovative and still works today !

Ian

Why did NBC give him the air time had they wronged him unjustly?.

Are you attempting to be condescending, or simply coming off that way out of habit?

Neither. I was simply stating a fact.

Why don't you take a shot at answering the questions instead of evading them?

Fine, as droll as they are.

1. Any and all experience is listed in Testimony. Read what the qualifications are and then see for yourself.

2. I do not doubt their competence, I only question their experience. They were certainly less qualified than Nicol. (See #1)

3. I dont know that they do disagree with Nicol.

4. I do not know that anyone else ever looked at his work. I find little rebutting evidence.

5. Who ever said it did not create any doubt. That is why I made the post in the first place.

MIKE

It was 7-1 against maybe Nichol thought it a conspiracy?.

Ian

[

Brilliant Mr lamson I do believe you got it 40 foot 50 frames pukka dude!.

Care to refute it or are you just blowing the usual ct smoke?

Not at all Mr Lamson sir I was merely pointing out that the difference between What we are looking at and when it occurred is about 40 feet 50 frames I thought you had some eureka moment .I was mistaken and will try to use up less of your valuable Oxygen in the future.

Ian

Thomas,

Bonnie Ray Williams is on record as saying it was the workcrew who were laying the new floor that arranged the boxes in that manner and that configuration. WCH III, p.166. It was more than likely built as a smokers den for the likes of Charles Givens during breaks. Hence the cigarette package being found there and ignored because Oswald didn't smoke.

That being the case it becomes a big coincidence that it then just happened to become a "snipers nest" during the assassination.

I always come back to a intuitive stance on this matter; the assassination, IMO, could not have happened the way that it ultimately happened without some sort of coordinated effort and plan taking place inside the TSBD. There is something dodgy with a core group of the employees, including Roy Truly, Billy Lovelady, William Shelley and Jack Dougherty. And BWF.

Whoever it was that moved those boxes around had to have worked in the building if you want my opinion.

Lee

I have thought about the 3D chess game in the TSBD before and after the shooting and read and re-read testimonies and affadavits and I know there is something amiss Jack Dougherty for example no pictures,no history I even contacted his old Alumni for news of re-unions past but to no avail I cant get past his military time at an airbase in Indiana.

Perhaps others here have had more luck.Danny Arce any relative of Remigio Arce who was mixed up in Op 40?.

Givens double trip to the 6th and his APB at 1.45 ?.

Soo many questions so little time.

All the best

Ian

Hi Ian

There is one picture of Jack Dougherty from what I remember. I won't be on my PC for a few days so wonder of the likes of Bernice has access to it?

Not to derail Thomas' thread too much but the fact that the elevators are both locked down on the 5th floor when Truly and Baker are looking up from the 1st floor and when they get up to the 5th one of the elevators has descended leaving only one is curious enough. To have Williams, Jarman and Norman who were "hiding" for some reason on the 5th and not notice anyone get into it is even stranger. Add to this the fact that when Truly and Baker get to the 5th they jump in the elevator that is available and then conveniently bypass the 6th floor because they then go straight on up to the 7th is an eyebrow raiser for me.

Everything that happened seems to have had a degree of foresight built into it.

Lee

Lee

Bakers first report indicates a man in a tan jacket walking away from Him or the stairs somewhere on the fourth floor

If not staff then who?.Do we need to see if any of the workers had a tan jacket?.

Ian

Thomas,

Bonnie Ray Williams is on record as saying it was the workcrew who were laying the new floor that arranged the boxes in that manner and that configuration. WCH III, p.166. It was more than likely built as a smokers den for the likes of Charles Givens during breaks. Hence the cigarette package being found there and ignored because Oswald didn't smoke.

That being the case it becomes a big coincidence that it then just happened to become a "snipers nest" during the assassination.

I always come back to a intuitive stance on this matter; the assassination, IMO, could not have happened the way that it ultimately happened without some sort of coordinated effort and plan taking place inside the TSBD. There is something dodgy with a core group of the employees, including Roy Truly, Billy Lovelady, William Shelley and Jack Dougherty. And BWF.

Whoever it was that moved those boxes around had to have worked in the building if you want my opinion.

Lee

I have thought about the 3D chess game in the TSBD before and after the shooting and read and re-read testimonies and affadavits and I know there is something amiss Jack Dougherty for example no pictures,no history I even contacted his old Alumni for news of re-unions past but to no avail I cant get past his military time at an airbase in Indiana.

Perhaps others here have had more luck.Danny Arce any relative of Remigio Arce who was mixed up in Op 40?.

Givens double trip to the 6th and his APB at 1.45 ?.

Soo many questions so little time.

All the best

Ian

What a NON-RESPONSE! I point out visual clues as to the limo speed, and Mr. Light refuses

to admit he is wrong. Incredible!

No, I was happy to admit are there are SOME lamdmarks. The ones you show are over 40 feet and 50 frames apart. Not very helpful for viewing the film and trying to make speed judgements. And of course that was the entire point of my post.

You simply can't read.

And maybe you might want to consider refraining for chastising anyone over admissions of error. Your posts over on the PC forum about the rover are a perfect example of your failure to do just that.

And of course there is this CLASSIC Jack White blunder to which he has still not admitted error after all of these years...

http://www.craiglamson.com/apollo.htm

Thanks for the grins.

Brilliant Mr lamson I do believe you got it 40 foot 50 frames pukka dude!.

The jetliner analogy is apples and oranges Jack...

Relative to the ground when you walk forward in the airplane you are going 301 mph, just not relative to others in the plane. Same thing with the QM... relative to the ground Hill is moving at 9 mph and if he can jump of and maintain his motion he has effectively cutout the 0-9 mph acceleration, once he lets go... he either continues at 9mph, slows or accelerates.

But a good point was raised on Duncan's forum thread regarding this.... relative to each other, as you say Jack, the limo and QM are going virtually the same speed. And since the QM does not ride up the limo's rear, it too must have slowed to less than 9mph from 301 thru 335 or so... some indications are as slow as 7.8mph

now WHY the limo would slow as it travels THRU DP heading towards the freeway, with no one in front of them... is THE real mystery

In any case... If Hill jumps off an is instantly running at the same speed as the limo, he would never catch the limo which was about 12-14 feet from him as he rode on the QM's running board

As my math tried to show, the time it takes for him to catch the limo from 312 thru 337 is just under 1.35 seconds at 18.3fps. now how much faster must Hill be running than the 8mph limo to make up 12-14 feet in 1.35 seconds? He has to run at least 13mph FASTER than the limo or 21mph for that short sprint. If he leaves earlier, say 301, he has 2 whole seconds of frame time - 36 frames - yet still only has to make up the total of 12-14 feet.

My calculations above add back the total distance the limo travels as the amount of ground he has to cover - which he does - yet since he is already moving at the speed of the limo or better, the limo never gets more than 12-14 feet from Hill...

so by adding in the total distance travled - I was wrong. While his running and the left-right-left of his legs seems a bit suspect as one watches it... I do not see how much more than a few random frames could be removed to make it appear the limo did not slow as much as it really did... I dont believe Hill could run as fast or faster than world class sprinters... but the distance is so small he could reach speeds into the high teens, and if the limo slowed more severely - which sounds possible from eye witness testimony - than overtaking it as quick as he did is more than possible.

In my 1st example above we see that Hill is gaining on the limo at the rate of 6.2 feet per second (he runs 14 while the limo stays at 9.8) so the 12 feet is covered easily in 2 seconds. He's running at about 20 feet per second and covers the 40+ feet total distance in the same time... just the limo is only going 14.4 feet per second...

So if Chris could oblige.... what does your MATH ultimately look like within the major films? There are splices in Nix, Zap, Muchmore and Towner... if he was shot 30 feet further west - why/how do these films put him elsewhere..

is it really all about where they start, stop, how much is spliced and where they were spliced?

thanks

DJ

Thanks for agreeing with me (except for the apples-oranges comment). Once Hill leaves the QM, his speed comes from him, not the QM.

He no longer is carried forward by the movement of the QM. My comment was directed to Mark Haley.

Jack

Jack

Hill would decelerate as he landed and would have to accelerate from the first step and continue accelerating until he reached the already moving limo he could not land at 9mph and hit 9mph within the first step Maybe Ed moses could in his prime but I doubt it.The supporting or landing leg has to absorb the deceleration /Compression followed by acceleration with the extension of the leg.

Ian

Interesting thread David.

While watching the Muchmore video in this thread, I saw something curious in the background. There are 3 men on the steps leading up the grassy knoll. The one in front appears to be wearing a brown shirt. In one of the frames just before Hill reaches the limo, this guy's head disappears. The rest of his body is there, but the head disappears completely and then reappears in the next frame. Any idea on how that could happen?

Richard

It looks like Marie "jumped" and shook the camera in mainly an upward motion ,it looks compressed slightly but the head is there just lower down the trunk .

Ian

As I look thru each and every frame of the Z film I see the black lines that separates the intersprocket images from the "above and below the sprocket hole" images...

These "holes" are the sprocket holes themselves and should not contain any photographic information - they're holes, right?

So why do these black separation lines change size as well as appear to extend INTO the sprocket holes...

this shouldn't be, should it?

DJ

David

It may have been part of the punching process when I enlarge it shows a colour running right into the black stripe right along the edge not seen on a small copy and certainly not at speed.The blackstripe does not extend into the hole.

Sorry was typing at the same time as John, I think I will go with Johns explanation

Ian

Sounds like a very rare, collector's item, probably self-published, if the lack of search results by author's name and keyword are an indication.

I didn't know that Bowley had been employed by Jack Ruby.

http://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/news/view/6543

Dallas to honor man whose 'officer down' report led police to Lee Harvey Oswald

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/crime/stories/112110dnmetbowley.2fc35b6.html

By SCOTT K. PARKS / The Dallas Morning News

sparks@dallasnews.com

Temple F. Bowley's life changed forever when he came upon a Dallas police officer lying dead in an Oak Cliff street on Nov. 22, 1963.

"You don't run upon a dead man every day," Bowley said...

TF Bowley Age 82

Tom

I think 2 0r 3 people present at the Tippet scene had themselves worked for Ruby or had close relatives/Wives ,girlfreinds also will try and find it.

Found this http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6421

Also Robert Howard and Raymond J Carrol were part of a thread Involving Donald Willis who had requested info on Bowley and ruby.

Ian

Chris... please tell me if what you are presenting supports this conclusion:

Distance from 313 to 341, 28 frames, is about 22 feet.

Distance from 255 to 313, 58 frames, is about 45 feet

45 + 22 = 67 feet

Altgens is at MAX 40 feet from his z255 image which he says is the first shot but we know this not to be the case - which in itself is a case for at least 4 shots.

Move the entire scene 30 feet to the west and Mr. Altgens is telling the truth yet is in direct conflict with Nix, Zapruder and Muchmoore...

In an alteration we can have all the extra frames at 24 fps used to push the limo east 30 feet ????

I am just having a difficult time visualizing how that is done on the Z film. and more importantly, when and where is the 24fps movie shot from?

As this collage illustrates - a camera anywhere but in Zapruder's hands would have to move a huge distance to maintain camera angle integrity. I keep thinking that maybe the Zap film was actually 24fps, claimed at 18.3 fps and a single film has more than enough frames to remove as needed to result in the claimed 18.3fps version we now see.

If you can somehow convert the math into real concerns on the extant Zfilm, as I am attempting above, and get it right - which of course I am not sure of in my case - I think it will allow us to find more and more places where this type of alteration occurs...

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

DJ

David,

This is the formula you have given me.

Frame 255-341=86 total frames=67 ft.

Run two different scenario's on it and compare the results such as:

First scenario:

86frames/24.3 FPS=3.53sec.

67ft/3.53sec=18.98ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=12.91mph

Second scenario:

86frames/18.3 FPS=4.69sec

67ft/4.69sec=14.28ft per sec/1.47(1mph)=9.71mph

Comparison between 9.71mph/12.91mph=.752=3/4

Looks Good!!!

chris

Chris

I am sure you have this :-

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

:-Camera Specifications

Camera Maker: Bell & Howell.

Model: 414PD Director Series

Film Type: Double 8mm - 25ft or 50ft film roll

Film Speeds: ASA 10 to ASA 40

Running Speed: Single frame, 16fps and 48fps (slow motion.)

Lens: Bell & Howell Varamat f1.8 / 9-27mm - Power Zoom

Mechanism: Spring Motor

Lightmeter: Built-in Dual Electric-Eye.

Non-reflex viewfinder (parallax corrected and coupled with zoom.)

Additional Parts: Removable Pistol Gr

my math is improving 48/16=.75 .

cheers ian

Mr. LIEBELER - I don't know how many feet it moved, but it moved quite a ways from the time the first shot was fired until the time the third shot was fired. I'm having trouble on this Exhibit No. 203 (severly cropped ALTGENS 6) understanding how you could have been within 30 feet of the President's car when you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and within 15 feet of the car when he was hit with the last shot in the head without having moved yourself. Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President's car when he was hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I was about 15 feet from it.

Mr. LIEBELER - But it was almost directly in front of you as it went down the street; isn't that right?

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER - Am I wrong, or isn't it correct that under that testimony the car couldn't have moved very far down Elm Street between the time you took Exhibit No. 203, which you took when the first shot was fired, and the time that you saw his head being hit, which was the time the last shot was fired?

DJ: Even Liebeler is not buying it !!

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, I have to take into consideration the law governing photographic materials and the use of optics in cameras--lenses--and while my camera may have been set on a distance of 30 feet, there is a plus or minus, area in which the focus still is maintained. I figure that this is approximately 30 feet because that's what I have measured on my camera.

Mr. LIEBELER - And you say Exhibit No. 203 was taken about 30 feet away?

Mr. ALTGENS - But it might be 40 feet, but I couldn't say that that's exactly the distance because while it may be in focus at 40 feet, my camera has it in focus 30 feet. It's the same thing--if I focus at 15 feet, my focus might extend 20 feet and it might also be reduced to 10 feet, but my focusing was in that general area of 30 feet. I believe, if you will let me say something further here about this picture----

Mr. LIEBELER - Go ahead.

Mr. ALTGENS - Possibly I could step this off myself from this position, this approximate position where I was standing and step off the distance, using as a guidepost the marker on this post here or some marker that I can find in the area and I can probably step it off or measure it off and get the exact footage. I was just going by the markings on my camera.

Mr. LIEBELER - The important thing is--it's not all that important as to how far you were away from the car at the time you took the picture--the thing that I want to establish is that you are absolutely sure that you took Exhibit No. 203 at about the time the first shot was fired and that you are quite sure also in your own mind, that there were no shots fired after you saw the President hit in the head.

Mr. ALTGENS - That is correct; in both cases.

Mr. LIEBELER - So, it is clear from your testimony that the third shot--the last shot, rather--hit the President?

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, off and on we have been referring to the third shot and the fourth shot; but actually, it was the last shot, the shot did strike the President and there was no other sound like a shot that was made after that. I was just going to make a conclusion here, but that's not my place to do that, so I'll just forget it--what I was going to say.

Mr. LIEBELER - Well, what were you going to suggest--go ahead.

Mr. ALTGENS - Well, it seems obvious now, when you think back on it--of course, at the time you don't reason these things out in a state of shock, but it seemed obvious to me afterwards that there wouldn't be another shot if the sniper saw what damage he did. He did enough damage to create enough attention to the fact that everybody knew he was firing a gun. Another shot would have truly given him away, because everybody was looking for him, but as I say, that's an obvious conclusion on my part, but there was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head. {yeah, thanks for toting the company line Mr. A}

Chris... please tell me if what you are presenting supports this conclusion:

Distance from 313 to 341, 28 frames, is about 22 feet.

Distance from 255 to 313, 58 frames, is about 45 feet

45 + 22 = 67 feet

Altgens is at MAX 40 feet from his z255 image which he says is the first shot but we know this not to be the case - which in itself is a case for at least 4 shots.

Move the entire scene 30 feet to the west and Mr. Altgens is telling the truth yet is in direct conflict with Nix, Zapruder and Muchmoore...

In an alteration we can have all the extra frames at 24 fps used to push the limo east 30 feet ????

I am just having a difficult time visualizing how that is done on the Z film. and more importantly, when and where is the 24fps movie shot from?

As this collage illustrates - a camera anywhere but in Zapruder's hands would have to move a huge distance to maintain camera angle integrity. I keep thinking that maybe the Zap film was actually 24fps, claimed at 18.3 fps and a single film has more than enough frames to remove as needed to result in the claimed 18.3fps version we now see.

If you can somehow convert the math into real concerns on the extant Zfilm, as I am attempting above, and get it right - which of course I am not sure of in my case - I think it will allow us to find more and more places where this type of alteration occurs...

Would an overly wound B&H camera run at 24fps for a shot (short - freudian slip?? ) period of time?

DJ

David

This never used to make sense either

Charles F.Brehm

When the President's automobile was very close to him and he could see the President's face very well, the President was seated, but was leaning forward when he stiffened perceptibly at the same instant what appeared to be a rifle shot sounded. According to BREHM, the President seemed do to stiffen and come to a pause when another shot sounded and the President appeared to be badly hit in the head. BREHM said when the President was hit by the second shot, he could notice the President's hair fly up, and then roll over to his side, as Mrs. KENNEDY was apparently pulling him in that direction.

BREHM said that a third shot followed and that all three shots were relatively close together. BREHM stated that he was in military service and he has had experience with bolt-action rifles, and he expressed the opinion that the three shots were fired just about as quickly as an individual can maneuver a bolt-action rifle, take aim, and fire three shots.

I Now read it without the paragraph split I believe this ties in with Altgens mess of a sentence.

Ian

Chris...thanks, but you take us for a lot smarter than we are.

You have got it all figured out so YOU UNDERSTAND IT but that

does not mean all of us do.

I am a bottom line person. WHAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE?

After all your figuring, what is the conclusion? What does it

mean?

Like...

...was the limo stop edited out?

...was the limo farther west at the head shot?

...was the film shot at 24fps and reduced to 18.3fps?

...were altered films made to conform with each other by changing frame count?

...what is the significance of the numbers you have come up with?

Math has always been my poorest subject. Too abstract. I like things

which make conclusions clear, and I can understand. When you just give me

calculations, my brain does not relate them to a complete picture.

Please tell us the conclusions from the calculations...the bottom line.

Thanks.

Jack

Jack,

So far, I would say 1 film, 2 versions, one at 18.3 FPS, the other at 24.3.

Both versions used to create the final version.

This would allow the excising of frames and control of timing and the synchronization with other films.

Short stints between splices. The ability to distinguish the viewing difference in FramesPerSecond in these short stints, very difficult.

2 head shots, one at the physical film location 313, and one at the physical film location 353.

So far, the 353 head shot was excised.

Not enough info for limo stop determination, yet. But, 2 seconds or so, would probably be a good guess if it did!!!

chris

Chris I beiieve we could reconstruct a montage digitally by establishing a clock running in realtime over the montage at its staggered sp

speeds and the flow would be interupted and would appear to stutter unlike the flow of the math Ian

Ian,

Could you give me a brief example, say from frame 133-157.

It sounds something along the lines of the multiple film syncing I've done in the past.

thanks

chris

P.S. Remember the "MysteryMan" (Croft more than likely) discussion on Duncan's forum and why he was still moving in Dorman, when less than a quarter second later (Martin film ending), according to Meyer's latest film sync revision, we see him at Zframe 133, set to take his photo. That's what occurs when you can't quite sync multiple films changing frame speeds.

Looking back, my guess would be I probably adjusted it somewhere around 9 frames to make it work for what I had to go on at the time.

Looks like I ended up adjusting it 7 frames to z140.

Frame 100-133=33 frames-.25sec (1/4 second)=4.5 zframes=frame 100-frame 128 approx.

28frames/18.3 FPS= 1.53seconds.

1.53seconds x 24.3 FPS=37 frames

37-28=9 frames.

I'll get back to the film syncing aspect as I move along.

Ian,

Could you give me a brief example, say from frame 133-157.

It sounds something along the lines of the multiple film syncing I've done in the past.

thanks

chris

Chris

It would not work on a section only a length long enough for the brain to recognise a stutter in the "flow of the film"

To show the differing speeds the 18fps section gets played at the same speed as the 24fps .The only thing on the screen running at a constant would be your timer overlayed.

Sorry if I am not explaining very well but I remember watching a crash at Santa pod raceway one of the cars crashed at 280 mph it was not till I watched it on the news later that I saw the Wobble on the rearend I did not see this live at the track perhaps it is something to do with recognition and what we are expecting to happen.

Ian

Chris...thanks, but you take us for a lot smarter than we are.

You have got it all figured out so YOU UNDERSTAND IT but that

does not mean all of us do.

I am a bottom line person. WHAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE?

After all your figuring, what is the conclusion? What does it

mean?

Like...

...was the limo stop edited out?

...was the limo farther west at the head shot?

...was the film shot at 24fps and reduced to 18.3fps?

...were altered films made to conform with each other by changing frame count?

...what is the significance of the numbers you have come up with?

Math has always been my poorest subject. Too abstract. I like things

which make conclusions clear, and I can understand. When you just give me

calculations, my brain does not relate them to a complete picture.

Please tell us the conclusions from the calculations...the bottom line.

Thanks.

Jack

Jack,

So far, I would say 1 film, 2 versions, one at 18.3 FPS, the other at 24.3.

Both versions used to create the final version.

This would allow the excising of frames and control of timing and the synchronization with other films.

Short stints between splices. The ability to distinguish the viewing difference in FramesPerSecond in these short stints, very difficult.

2 head shots, one at the physical film location 313, and one at the physical film location 353.

So far, the 353 head shot was excised.

Not enough info for limo stop determination, yet. But, 2 seconds or so, would probably be a good guess if it did!!!

chris

speeds and the flow would be interupted and would appear to stutter unlike the flow of the math Ian

Air guns were used in warfare as far back as the 18th century and for large game like wild boars more recently so do I doubt a human head or throat would have been much of a challenge in 1963.

Reccommended to be used by Olympic class sprinters only .There is nothing angrier than a "stung Bore"

Thanks Greg,

Just thought the sound of an air gun might be a reason some only heard 3 shots.

jim

Hi Jim,

Do you mean that you were wondering if the reason ONLY 3 shots were heard by some is that the remaining

shots were unheard as a result of the relatively inaudible air gun sound? I think that's what you are asking.

IMO, the amount of mass that a projectile would need to possess in order to inflict the kind of damage that

JFK suffered exceeds the upper limit of 1963 "air power" technology. IOW: the mass of the bullets required

to do the job was too high for "air" alone to power. Again, that is my opinion only. Although I have a fairly

good working knowledge of the subject, I'm no expert by any means.

Greg/Jim

you are looking at over 1000 FPS for a .22 but some home(overgassed) gas powered can reach double that figure. But with such a small (throat wound type )projectile penetration would be a problem.Unless just delivering to blood supply levels in the Derma .

Ian

Ian,

The Elm St turn in Z was cut out for timing purposes, to hide what I've been previously presenting.

If I read your thoughts this way, we are in agreement.

chris

P.S. Check out the location of JFK, in the limo, in relation to the corner of the TSBD, in all films dealing with the Elm St turn.

For starters, use the Bell film. Keep the corner of the TSBD in mind.

Chris

Ian

Question 9:

What numbers added together = 48.

Answer:

24+24

See question 6

chris

Chris

Frame 100(z) would be at the corner TSBD in line with the towner splice .So if Zapruder did film before the limo this would have to be discarded as it would show the 30 feet difference.anything before that would be ok .IOW this is the reason there is no footage of the turn at Elm anywhere. You do not need to alter it if you are not going to show it.

Ian

Thanks Tony,

It appears that is the same document that Robert refers to.

How come you don't post the whole thing?

You leave out the best parts.

Why not include the part that says, "agents of the US Alochol Tax Unit assisted in the search...." ?

Who were those guys and did they file reports, and if so where are they?

Is this a federal agency at the TSBD we have never heard of before?

Or the interesting fact that it was Limpkin who called Fitz's attention to the fact that Oswald was not there

and was suddenly determined to be a suspect?

Why would Limplin suddenly thrust himself on Fitz to call attention to Oswald?

And who else was in the Advance Car with Perdue Lawrence, and why didn't they do their job of

securing the overpasses and buildings?

Please post the entire document if you are able.

I am unable to do so with this computer.

Thanks,

And also, we need to find Limpkin's HSCA testimony. Who can provide a link to that, and if not, why not?

And there are also reports from the homicide detectives who were in the Pilot Car.

BK

Bill

It has been indicated that Lumpkin stopped at the corner of Houston and Elm (near TSBD) surely just the presence of the car would be an indicator of the approx time for the limo to arrive at that corner why did he need to get out and inform the officers they were on thier way. We know the entourage was late and who was on the 6th floor at the time Or was this a timing stop to inform others of the 2 minute warning?.

Ian

Question 7:

If the NPIC created a document that stated:

1. jfk throat

2.74 frames later Connally

3.48 frames after that jfk head shot

then listed

1. 73.8

2.

3.122.4

How would I decipher that?

Answer:

Connally hit at:

190+74=264-33frames=30ft@18.3 fps@11.3 mph=frame 231 or 157 + 74 =frame231

Frame 231+122(74+48)=frame 353

Frame 353, that sounds familiar.

It should, it's what Tom Purvis calculated to be the 2nd head shot down in front of Altgen's.

Tom Purvis: 29.7 feet covered in 2.1857923seconds/40 elapsed frames , = 0 .7425 ' per frame X 18.3 =13.58775 fps X 60 =815.265 fpm X 60 =48,915.9 fph/5280 =9.264375 mph. From Z313 to Z353

chris

P.S. Hide in plain sight!! Where have I heard that before.

Chris

I can see You and Tom have put a lot into this and it is appreciated by many.

Would this indicate the cut in the towner film to be non_accidental?. And the timing between the shots remains the same

Just 30 feet further down Elm?.Would this also tell us why the wound ballistics are so confusing as to the angle of entrance ,with JBC and JFK leaning way over to the left and not in an upright position to recieve the wounds makes a bit more sense of the impact orientations.

I wish I paid more attention to math all those years ago.

Ian

Here are the other two Altgens Images i purchased from Corbis.

I might as well keep them together in the one post as a set.

Enjoy

Each of the 3-Images Cost $250.00 Australian to download full size from Corbis, and just about cleaned out my bank account at the time.

but, they have given myself and the visitors to my galleries a lot of pleasure over the last 3 - years.

So in the end i think it was well worth it.

Robin

Looks like you could fit a sniper on top of the clean van ?.

Ian