David Von Pein

Bob?

If the Costella frames are stabilized, then the answer to your question (with regard to the video below) is yes. I created this slo-mo version by using the 486 "Costella" frames. This looks pretty stable to me...

James, You really think the lapel movement in the following clip is merely a "distortion" in the Z-Film? I'd beg to differ. This is a nice clear version of Z223-224 too....

Connally had no choice but to be sitting inboard of Kennedy. The jump seats were made that way....

James, The subtle and very fast involuntary movements made by Connally take place in the wink of an eye, making it imperative they be seen IN MOTION, vs. just still frames.

Ray, You surely aren't saying that you think Connally was NOT seated somewhat "inboard" of JFK, are you? The "inboard" status of Connally's position in the limo throughout the entire Dallas motorcade has been illustrated in many photographs, such as the two below....

James, Just looking at individual Z-Film still frames isn't going to get you anywhere. That's the same mistake John Connally himself made when he studied individual frames and decided he was hit around Z231 to Z234. You need to watch the clips in motion--and on a repeating loop, like here..... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/sbt-clips.html If you can examine the clips presented above and say to yourself that the SBT is still impossible, then I would have to think you just viewed those clips with your eyes closed.

I never said anything of the kind, Bob. You're making stuff up. I gave my reason for believing Kellerman heard Connally, in Post 15 in this thread.

The Zapruder Film provides a good answer to your last question, Ray. SOME MORE SBT TALK: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-941.html

I know what you mean about deteriorating memory, Ron. It sucks becoming ancient. I feel it too. (And I'm only 53.) My memory is getting worse too. Just yesterday, I was kicking myself for not being able to remember somebody's name in connection with the JFK case. After about an hour, the name popped back into my head. But now, just 24 hours later, I haven't the slightest memory of who the person was that I forgot about yesterday. (LOL)

I don't think Roy Kellerman was a "xxxx". He was wrong (i.e., "mistaken"), but not a xxxx. IMO, Kellerman heard Governor Connally shouting "My God, they're going to kill us all". I know that Connally didn't have the Boston accent that JFK had, but given the fact the zero other people in the car heard JFK utter a word, and since we know that Gov. Connally DID utter the above words (including two of the words Kellerman claimed he heard JFK say--"My God"), well, in my view, the answer is that Kellerman must have heard Connally and not Kennedy.

Ron Ecker has now taken to just making up alleged quotes from the mouth of JFK. "Take me to the hospital..."??? For Pete sake. LOL. Ron, do YOU think Connally was looking at JFK when JFK was first hit by a bullet? If not, then tell me HOW Connally could have known with such certainty that the SBT is false? And as you correctly pointed out, Connally didn't hear JFK say anything at all. "My God, I'm hit!" -----> jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-94.html

Translation.... DVP should not be allowed to express his views on The Education Forum. Either that, or.... DVP should never be allowed to start a thread on The Edcuation Forum, because whenever he does it looks like nothing more than LN "propaganda" to me [Robert Prudhomme]. Prudhomme seems to have a lot in common with somebody calling himself Ralph Yates.... "I'm against censorship, but persons like Mr Von Pein have crossed a line where they no longer deserve fair hearing amongst honest people. I think we also need to figure out a way to move towards prosecuting them. These persons are just in flagrant denial of the obvious evidence of Oswald's CIA relationship." -- Ralph Yates; 1/31/2015 jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-891.html

Tell us, Greg, when Hoover told LBJ in that same 11/29/63 phone call that the shooter was located on the fifth floor and an intact bullet had rolled out of the head of JFK and all the shots had been fired "within three seconds", was Hoover just "running the story by" the new President when it came to all of those erroneous things too? And if not, then why would you treat Hoover's cluelessness about "Connally being in the way" any differently than all of those other things that Hoover got wrong when he spoke to LBJ on November 29th?

I guess that makes you the fourth, Greg.

What I hear are two clueless men. https://app.box.com/shared/x143w38kk4

You must be kidding, Ron. John Connally was THE WORST eyewitness in all of Dealey Plaza when it comes to being able to tell anybody if he was hit by the same bullet as JFK. Connally wasn't looking at the President---so how could he possibly know for sure? He couldn't. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/what-did-john-connally-see.html

Whether it's called a bulge or a flip, what's really the difference? The point is---the right side of Connally's coat is displaced quite a bit between Z-frames 223 and 224. And the right side of Connally's coat ended up with a bullet hole in it that same day. What do you think is causing this movement of JBC's coat, Bob? ....

Greg, Do you really think J. Edgar Hoover "planned" the incredibly silly remarks he made to LBJ in the 11/29/63 phone call? This was not a "plan" by Hoover to keep people guessing about what really happened in Dallas. It's an example of a man saying things when he obviously just doesn't know what the hell he was talking about at the time he was saying them to President Johnson. Let's examine just a few more items, further illustrating how utterly misinfomed the Director of the FBI was as of November 29th. This isn't a "plan" to keep America off-balance or to "cover up" anything. It's the head of the FBI just not knowing all the facts. His agents who were doing the investigating at the time no doubt knew the details much better than Mr. Hoover knew them.... [From my "FBI Errors" article....] President Lyndon B. Johnson was told several incorrect things by the FBI in the days that immediately followed the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in November 1963. Such as when FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover (for some reason) told Johnson that the "Stretcher Bullet" connected to JFK's murder was found on KENNEDY'S stretcher....when, in fact, that was impossible, since JFK's stretcher was never in the area of Parkland Hospital where that bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit No. 399) was found by hospital employee Darrell Tomlinson. In a taped telephone conversation between Hoover and President Johnson on November 29, 1963, which can be heard in its entirety HERE, several other errors can also be found, including Hoover telling LBJ that the shots from the Texas School Book Depository Building had come from the "fifth" floor, instead of the sixth floor. Hoover's FBI took control of most of the physical evidence in the JFK murder investigation late on the night of November 22nd....taking it out of the hands of the Dallas Police Department, which is the organization that collected the majority of the physical evidence in the case -- which is evidence that all points to Lee Harvey Oswald as the one and only killer of President Kennedy and policeman J.D. Tippit. In hindsight, it would have been nice if Hoover's boys could have found a way to transfer Oswald himself back to Washington, too, along with LHO's rifle, the bullet fragments in the car, the President's car itself, the bullet shells from the Book Depository, and all the rest of that mile-high mountain of stuff that proves it was Lee Oswald who killed President Kennedy that day in Dallas. But the assassin himself remained in Dallas during that dark weekend in '63....with the tragic result being: a dead Mr. Oswald two days after the assassination, thanks to a well-aimed bullet fired from the gun of Dallas nightclub operator Jack Ruby. Upon listening to the 20-minute-long Hoover/Johnson phone call from 11/29/63, which was the same day LBJ created the Warren Commission to investigate President Kennedy's murder, a decent-sized number of significant errors crop up as Mr. Hoover is relaying what he says are the facts surrounding various elements of the JFK assassination which had taken place exactly one week earlier. Let's now examine that November 29th phone call and take a look at some of the obvious mistakes uttered by Mr. Hoover -- mistakes that were later corrected by the Warren Commission during that Commission's nearly ten-month probe into the events of November 22: Lyndon B. Johnson [LBJ] -- "How many shots were fired?" J. Edgar Hoover [JEH] -- "Three." LBJ -- "Any of 'em fired at me?" JEH -- "No." LBJ -- "All three at the President?" JEH -- "All three at the President....and we have them." I'm surprised more conspiracy theorists don't do more hollering about the above erroneous statement made by Mr. Hoover, wherein he claims that the FBI had in its possession ALL THREE of the rifle bullets fired by Oswald's Carcano rifle during the Presidential shooting. When, of course, in reality, only two of the three bullets were recovered, because one of the shots (as later determined by the Warren Commission) missed the car entirely and was unrecoverable. It seems fairly obvious that Hoover (as of the date of the November 29 phone call) was under the impression that the two bullet fragments found in the front seat of JFK's limousine represented the remains of two separate bullets. Later detailed examination, however, would determine that the two front-seat fragments were almost certainly portions of just one single bullet, not two. (With one of the front-seat fragments being a "nose" section of a bullet; while the other fragment was the "base" portion of a FMJ 6.5-mm. Mannlicher-Carcano missile.) JEH -- "He [JFK] was hit by the first and the third [shots]. The second shot hit the Governor. The third shot is a complete bullet, and wasn't shattered; and that rolled out of the President's head, and tore a large part of the President's head off. And in trying to massage his heart at the hospital, they apparently loosened that, and it fell onto the stretcher." The above paragraph spoken by J. Edgar Hoover is simply amazing -- amazing, that is, in terms of the number of errors contained in that paragraph. To say that the THIRD shot (which was the JFK "head shot") was the "complete bullet" (which would be CE399, the Stretcher Bullet), and that it "rolled out of the President's head" in a whole, nearly-undamaged condition, is utterly crazy. In that conversation with President Johnson, Mr. Hoover had his bullets mixed up, to say the least. JEH -- "Those three shots were fired within three seconds." The above is yet another error-filled statement spoken by Mr. Hoover. Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was unable to fire three shots "within three seconds". That, in fact, is an absurd comment by Hoover, and I haven't the foggiest of notions where he arrived at such a conclusion. Per the WC test firings, Oswald's rifle had a minimum mechanical firing time of 2.295 seconds between EACH shot (and that doesn't count any aim time; it only includes the time required to work the bolt and squeeze the trigger again). But the Zapruder Film of the entire assassination proves beyond very much doubt at all (at least I have no doubts) that one gunman most certainly fired all the shots that resulted in each of the two victims' wounds -- with the entire shooting timeline taking approx. 8.4 seconds from start to finish, with ample space between the three shots for Oswald to work the bolt on his rifle and to aim and fire again. Of course, Hoover was talking to LBJ just a week after the assassination, which I suppose resulted in some of these errors in judgment on Hoover's behalf. But the "3 shots within 3 seconds from LHO's rifle" business is just simply crazy (and impossible). And here's another very strange Hoover statement from that same November 29th phone call: LBJ -- "If Connally hadn't been in his way..." JEH -- "Oh yes....yes. The President no doubt would have been hit [a third time]." LBJ -- "He [JFK] would have been hit three times." JEH -- "He would have been hit three times." Now, yes, it was a mere seven days after JFK's terrible murder, and a lot of facts had not yet been researched and verified concerning the full events in Dallas -- but the above quote from the FBI head man is just absolutely nutty. Because even by November 29th, it was surely common FBI knowledge as to WHERE on Elm Street the shooting began and ended. Via photos, films, and witness accounts, it was very obvious that the ENTIRE shooting occurred while both JFK and John Connally had their backs to the assassin. And JFK was sitting behind Connally in the limousine. Which means that at no time was Connally blocking Oswald's view of President Kennedy. And yet Hoover misinforms Johnson with these words: "He would have been hit three times" had Connally not been "in the way". Just....amazing. I think even long-time conspiracy advocates would agree with me that the above quote from J. Edgar can't really be taken as a "shady" or "conspiratorial" comment in any fashion (even though many conspiracists do, indeed, firmly believe that Mr. Hoover was a rotten xxxx and started covering up the true facts in the JFK case from the get-go) -- but the above comment about the victims' positions in the car relative to the gunman (Oswald) is just plain ignorance on the part of the FBI Director. How can it be anything else? It's just flat-out wrong....even, as I said, if you're a conspiracy theorist. And, of course, Hoover's agency got the shooting scenario all fouled up as well, as we all know....when the FBI said that each of Oswald's three shots resulted in a "hit" to one of the victims. Hoover's men came to this "3 Hits" conclusion even though they should have known full well that such a three-hits scenario was utterly impossible just by glancing at President Kennedy's autopsy report (which states that a bullet came out of JFK's throat). Unless the FBI did no checking at all with respect to Robert Frazier's detailed study of the limousine on the night of 11/22/63 (which was a limo examination that was performed by one of their OWN FBI AGENTS, which verified the fact that the bullet that exited JFK's throat did NOT hit the limousine and did not cause any limo damage whatsoever) -- the Bureau SHOULD have been able to put 2 and 2 together before even submitting its December 9, 1963, report to the Warren Commission. The FBI investigators should have been able to conclude that bullets rarely, if ever, vanish into thin air after entering a vehicle on a 17.72-degree downward trajectory from a 60-foot-high source, and that the JFK "SBT" back-thru-throat bullet HAD to have gone into the man who was sitting almost directly in front of the President in the limousine (John B. Connally). I've long wondered why the Federal Bureau of Investigation itself didn't propose the Single-Bullet Theory to account for the double-man wounding of President Kennedy and Governor Connally. They should probably have done so, in my opinion. Because -- Given the lack of limo damage to the back-seat and jump-seat areas of the car....plus the autopsy report verifying the fact that a whole bullet came out of Kennedy's neck on a downward angle and went SOMEPLACE....and knowing the location where Connally was injured on his back -- how is ANY other solution even possible, other than to conclude that the first bullet that struck JFK (which, per the autopsy, is hanging in mid-air between JFK and Connally and proceeding, obviously, toward the front of the limo) went into the only other injured victim in that car? Did Hoover's men not even study ANY of this evidence before arriving at a "3 Shots & 3 Hits" scenario? If they didn't know these basic pieces of information -- why didn't they? That would be my first question to them? I'm not accusing the FBI of being involved in any kind of massive cover-up operation...because I don't think they were. And, along those same lines, I certainly don't believe for a moment that LBJ was a part of some crooked conspiracy and cover-up following JFK's death. Because if Johnson had been involved in some type of cover-up plot, would he have voluntarily taped some of the phone calls that he made sure were recorded in the days and weeks following such a "cover-up" operation? Particularly a phone conversation in September 1964 with Warren Commission member Richard Russell, during which Johnson and Russell each say they do not believe the Single-Bullet Theory is true. Would LBJ want that comment on tape if he had a desire to squelch all talk of conspiracy? I kinda doubt it. A whole lot of people have doubts about the Single-Bullet Theory. But their doubts don't make the SBT any less true. The SBT, in my view, is THE best explanation for the injuries to both JFK and John Connally (not counting the fatal head shot to JFK, that is). The single-bullet conclusion perfectly aligns with all of the physical evidence....from the (one) whole bullet recovered in the hospital where the victims were taken....to the wound patterns on the victims....to the timing visible on Abraham Zapruder's film....and right on into Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle (which was found in the TSBD shortly after the shooting). The SBT fits -- to an absolute T. Believing in ANY other anti-SBT solution only adds numerous layers of mystery and unexplainables to the mix. And is that type of thinking more logical than the completely-within-reason (and "within the evidence") single-bullet conclusion? If you look up "Occam's Razor" in the dictionary, I think you'll find the answer to that last question. Final comments: I think the FBI was merely rushed to get a report out to the newly-created Warren Commission as soon as humanly possible, and therefore they very likely didn't dig deep enough to resolve all of the questions surrounding the murder of President Kennedy. Hence, some inaccuracies were bound to result. But the basic, raw information was there for Hoover's agency to use, even via a somewhat-rushed-to-press report that was issued just 17 days after an event that had many, many things to sort out, including THREE separate murders (John F. Kennedy's, J.D. Tippit's, and Lee Harvey Oswald's) and all of the various issues that went with each of those three killings. But, possibly, in this "rushed" state to get some kind of final report to the Warren Commission members, Mr. Hoover and the FBI missed a lot of important info. Obviously, in hindsight, that's precisely what did occur. Hindsight, of course, is almost always 20/20. David Von Pein November 2006 September 2010 LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (NOVEMBER 3, 2006) Posted By: David Von Pein

Bob, One possible explanation (and undoubtedly not the only one) is that the wind accentuated the coat/lapel "bulge/flip" after Connally's suit coat had been moved to some extent by Oswald's bullet. But the notion that John Connally's coat just HAPPENS to bulge outward a great deal at virtually the exact same instant that a bullet is striking the Texas Governor (with that bullet creating damage to the right side of JBC's jacket) is almost impossible to contemplate, IMO. Sure, I guess such a miraculous "coincidence" IS possible. But is it very likely?

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-940.html DAVE REITZES SAID: Has Pamela [brown] refuted the lapel flip? Actually, I think it's quite possible she has. I paid little attention to her article on [the] SBT when it appeared [see the link below], as it's a pretty typical CT rant on that subject: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2372 But, lo and behold, there is a little nugget of research buried within it that casts serious doubt on the legitimacy of the "lapel flip," advanced by Robert Piziali and publicized by Gerald Posner (and endorsed by me for the past decade or so). Pamela posted an animated GIF of Z223-226 [the one below] that appears to show that the lapel flip was no such thing, but rather a shadow. It looks awfully compelling to me. Comments, anyone? JOHN FIORENTINO SAID: Dave: Yes, I can comment explicitly. Firstly, Posner has nothing to do with this other than in supporting his own importance. He was very adept at taking credit for things which were observed/investigated/postulated by others without proper attribution. I had numerous discussions with John Lattimer about this, and in fact have done some photo work on this myself which is on another computer, but which I have posted to this newsgroup [alt.assassination.jfk]. Rather than a "lapel flip", the correct term might be "suit jacket bulge." It's unclear as to whether the lapel actually "flipped." In discussions with Lattimer, he himself was undecided on this issue. My personal opinion is, and always was, that indeed it didn't. I have used the term lapel flip to describe this action however. In fact, Piziali is a Johnny come lately. As our moderator Prof. McAdams can attest, the most unlikely of candidates, Cyril Wecht, was the first "official" proponent of this idea. But "somebody" actually beat him to it. I can assure you, it is no "shadow" and I go into this in great detail in my book. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I think Governor Connally's lapel is moving. It's not just a shadow (as some people have theorized). Although, due to the apparent movement of that same part of Connally's jacket at a point which I believe was PRIOR to the bullet passing through Connally's body, I've revised my thinking on the "lapel flip" over the years. I now feel it's quite possible that a combination of the wind (which was gusty that day) and Oswald's CE399 bullet are causing the movement of Connally's lapel that we see in the Zapruder Film. Something appears to be happening with the right side of Connally's suit coat in this Z222-Z223 toggling clip: And then we get the bigger "bulging out" (for lack of a better term) of that same area of Connally's jacket at the precise instant when I think the bullet is striking Connally (at Z224). There is no way this is only a shadow, IMO: In the final analysis, the "lapel flip" or "jacket bulge" is probably the LEAST compelling evidence on the Z-Film that proves the SBT is occurring at precisely Z224. There are multiple other indicators that show JBC is "reacting" to an external stimulus just after Z224, e.g.: JBC opens his mouth at Z225 (his mouth is closed at Z224), and a startled (or pained) look comes over his face; his shoulders "hunch" up, or flinch, starting at exactly Z225. This "hunching" is extremely important, IMO, because it's showing us an involuntary reaction on the part of the Governor. So we don't need to depend only on the CLOTHING (the lapel) of Connally to prove the Single-Bullet Theory. Connally's OWN BODY is telling us that the bullet has just pierced him. Just look: Here's another clip showing the very noticeable (but often overlooked) "hunching" of Connally's shoulders and the distressed look that crosses his face at Z225: And then there's also the very important "hat flip" of JBC's, which begins just an instant later, at Z226: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2tK_GSE7HOg/UolSwJ5-AEI/AAAAAAAAw1s/9I0RZMn_3yY/s1600/109.+Z225-Z226+Toggling+Clip.gif And I challenge anyone to look at the Zapruder Film clip presented below a few times in a row and arrive at the following conclusion ---- There's NO WAY that President Kennedy and Governor Connally were struck by the same bullet! No way! http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AXW-bE6isPQ/UolNvHneNSI/AAAAAAAAw1I/wwG51z8e7zY/s1600/Z-Film+Clip+(SBT+In+Motion)(2).gif Anyone who could utter the above words after watching that Z-Film clip must either be blind or closely related to Oliver Stone. PAMELA BROWN SAID: That is just silly. There is no 'bulging' of the jacket. Has it occurred to you that there may have been a shadow from more than one source? Probably not. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: The bulging jacket is obvious. PAMELA BROWN SAID: No it is not. It is a speculation imposed on us by Posner. It does not take into account the fact that there are much more reasonable explanations. The idea falls prey to the fallacy of false alternatives. JOHN FIORENTINO SAID: The fact that you believe ANY of this was "Posner's" idea shows me that you really haven't done your homework. MORE: jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-940.html Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-940.html

The biggest mystery in this thread is: Why does Bob Prudhomme seem to think John F. Kennedy had "long hair" on 11/22/63? His hair is anything but long here (especially in the back of his head), perfectly matching what we see in the autopsy photographs....

Those idiotic plotters are at it again, aren't they Bob? They decided to give JFK a haircut when they "faked" all of the autopsy pictures. Oops! And they left the Mauser on the sixth floor (even though they were trying to frame their patsy with a Carcano). Oops again! And then they screwed up the paper trail for Oswald's rifle purchase, making it look like he bought a 36-inch gun instead of the 40-incher that the plotters used to frame their one and only patsy with. Another oops! "They" can't get anything right, can they? Remind me to never hire those boobs the next time I want to cover up a Presidential assassination. As JFK himself said in the 7/25/63 phone call below (referring to the "silly bastard" in the accompanying picture).... "I wouldn't have him running a cathouse!" I feel the same way about the stumblebums who the conspiracy theorists assure me were responsible for engineering and/or covering up your death, Mr. President.

But we must keep in mind this all-important point ---- Internet CTers will ALWAYS find some kind of "fakery" in EVERYTHING connected with the JFK murder case. It's as inevitable as a windy day at Wrigley Field. "When you are desperate enough, and you scour the evidence thinking real hard how each thing could be fishy or suspicious, you will come to the conclusion that everything you look at is fishy and suspicious. It's inevitable." -- Bud (at acj/aaj); June 21, 2010