Brad Milch

Small arms & ammunition is the area of this case where Robert Prudhomme really shines & teaches with his expertise IMHO. As this thread develops I would like to see Mr. Prudhomme use theoretic scenarios for the multitude of popular theories about where the assassin(s) were located in Dealey Plaza & what damage could be expected had any used specific weapons & ammo on President Kennedy's upper torso & head plus the different places John Connally was wounded on his body. Does Mr. Prudhomme see any evidence for a SBT? For instance, a popular theory is Greer or Kellerman shot JFK with a .45 or .38 pistol from the front seat of the touring car. What would Mr. Prudhomme expect to see in a film capturing such a horrific event with those weapons & different ammo? Repeat for the stockade fence, North pergola, TSBD, Dal-Tex, South pergola, SS follow-up car, storm drains, TUP (top, bottom & corners) and any other areas I did not mention that are popular suspected attack platforms. What would Mr. Prudhomme expect to see on film with silenced & unsilenced weapons at each of those locations with a multitude of different weapons & ammo? What does the z-film suggest to him was used to kill JFK & wound JBC? I could never direct myself to destroy a beautiful creature like Bambi & therefore never became a hunter (but I have met & talked to a lot of them). Hunters have a lot of good input on weapons & ammo based on personal experience. Much can be learned from them, even though a person does not hunt. I have had hunters, military & police shooters tell me that what they see in the z-film is what they'd expect to see with a typical 30.30 of 1963 & 'varmit' ammo. Others have told me what they see in the z-film looks more like JFK was killed with something like a BAR (Browning Automatic Rifle) that Clyde Barrow was so fond of back in his day of crime. Some see Remington damage, others see an M-16 or M-1. Some don't see enough damage; others see too much. Robert would know. We all know both JFK & John Connally were shot with some type of weapon(s) & ammo in late 1963. Let's suppose that any given researcher is postulating that a shooter positioned in the North Pergola shelter behind Zapruder & Sitzman shot JFK and/or JBC with a silenced or unsilenced weapon with some type of ammo. What would Mr. Prudhomme expect to see in the z-film if that actually happened using different weapons & ammo? Next, move the shooter(s) to different locations suspected of being firing platforms. Would the effects expected from the North pergola be the same or different from different vantage points & distances? Understanding this aspect of the case & the multitude of shooting theories postulated in the last 51 years will aid EF readers today in determining if what a researcher is suggesting has merit or is groundless IMHO. In following Mr. Prudhomme's research in other venues online I was quite startled to learn that the 'Oswald weapon' fired bullets manufactured in the 1950's under contract for the CIA. EF readers stand to learn a great deal from him. BM

J.C. White told the Warren Commission a noisy train was traveling between he & J.W. Foster that prevented him from viewing and hearing the assassination while both officers were stationed on top of the TUP. The entire testimony can be found in Volume 6 of Hearings (Testimony), page 253. Officer White's testimony was taken in Dallas on 9 April, 1964 by Joseph A Ball. Here's a portion of that testimony: Mr. BALL. First time you saw the President’s car it was going underneath? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. What did you do after that? Mr. WHILE. As soon as the train passed I went over and on the northwestside of the Depository Building. On the northwest side of the book store up there with the rest of the ofseers and after about 30 minutes they told me to go out and work traffic at Main and Houston, and I stood out there and worked traffic. Mr. BALL. All right, now, you heard no sound of no rifle fire or anything? Mr. WHITE. No, sir. Mr. BALL. Freight train was going through at the time? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. Making noise? . Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir; noisy train. Mr. BALL. Mr. White, Mr. Foster was on the east side of the overpass? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir. Mr. BALL. This deposition will be written up and submitted to you for your signature if you wish to sign it, or you can waive your signature. Which do you wish to do? PS: Mark Lane failed to ask any of the railroad employees he interviewed in his film 'Rush To Judgment' about White's testimony about the noisy train crossing the TUP during the shooting.

I agree, Robert (Prudhomme). Steam trains are fascinating, they take me back to the '60's TV show ‘Petticoat Junction’ & the rags to riches story of railroad baron Cornelius Vanderbilt (this led to the creation of Gloria Vanderbilt & her son, CNN's Anderson Cooper). My dad noticed my interest in Petticoat Junction; I tried to explain it was all about the little steam locomotive but he wasn't buying it at all. Several 'dating too young' lectures followed (lol). He need not worry, all my pre-teen buddies were warning me that girls had something mysterious called 'cooties'. There are still unanswered questions about the Dealey Plaza train yards activity on 22 Nov 1963. In Mark Lane's film 'Rush To Judgment', one of the railmen on top of the TUP describes rounding the stockade fence corner after the shots & encountering a railroad detective. Lane didn't inquire as to what his name was nor interviewed him. Reference to this detective appears in witness testimony published in the WC & small TV interviews over the years. I've not read anything as to who this person was & why he was on the scene during JFK's ambush, have you? Did he file any after action reports with the railroad company? No one seems to know. He seems to be another person that witnessed the ambush that fell through the cracks afterwards. The testimony of one of the two DPD officers stationed on top of the TUP stating a noisy train crossing the TUP during the shooting blocked his view of the ambush & the sounds of it is still published in the WC. No follow-up to verify this account was ever performed in Government investigations that I know of, do you? It's still 'hanging in the air' as far as I can tell. I'm not certain of the proper description of the rail yards at Dealey Plaza at the time of the ambush. I've read it being described as a 'switching station' and also as a 'sub-station'. Do you have a better description of it (having worked for the railroads)? The death of Lee Bowers after he left railroad employment still continues to intrigue. Now Eugene Boone tells of a Pullman car porter he encountered while investigating the rail yards after the ambush in his recent 6th Floor Museum interview posted at Y/T (Boone doesn't mention seeing the mud scrapings on the stockade fence or a car bumper that Sam 'Skinny' Holland told Mark Lane & Josiah Thompson about in interviews with both authors). This train porter is another person who has not been interviewed as to what he saw & heard during the attack of President Kennedy's life. There is still much to learn about what went down in & around the railyards when JFK lost his life. Robert Mady's pergola shooters most likely would have made their escape via the rail yards. I've read comments that some people believe such shooters escaped via the motorcade itself. BM

Sorry for the extra 'd' I accidentally gave you, Robert (Mady). I'm old, sometimes my fingers don't cooperate with this tired old brain I own. I risked your possible wrath by posting what I did solely because I didn't see anyone else mentioning the rail yards. Something occurred in that area that drew the attention of a lot of people (some on police radios, some not). As for rear shooters, I believe Pat Speer covers that nicely in his analysis posted on his website. Sherry Fiester has South Knoll shooter(s) posted in her analysis at her website. Other researchers have their opinions online & in books. Some believe Lee Oswald did it all solo. I simply draw a 360 degree circle around JFK's parade car on Elm Street & state with confidence that within that circle someone shot & killed him from somewhere in Dealey Plaza. That's the best I can do for not being present when the crime occurred & not seeing & hearing it happen myself. Those viewing old film footage of Warren Commission members visiting Dealey Plaza in 1964 might notice some members visited portions of the rail yards. Some might notice Pullman train cars were still on site. It never occurred to the WC or HSCA or any of the TV re-enactments to position the Pullman cars as they were initially photographed during the ambush & determine if a shooter there had a line of sight to JFK on Elm Street. This is not unusual when so many 'experts' crowd the kettle in any subject. It is not too late to do such an inquiry now, 51 years after the fact. I sometimes forget to follow Doug Horne's advise to 'steer clear of Dealey Plaza' & focus on what happened at Parkland & Bethesda & avoid the clash of opinions as to how the ambush went down when so many living witnesses that WERE there can't agree on exactly what happened. I simply posted for the quiet ones, Robert. BM

I wasn't there, Robert (Maddy). Probably about the same time this Wilma Bond slide was snapped Sheriff Decker was ordering his men to the rail yards on the radio. Eugene Boone was also running towards the rail yards from where he was near the Main/Elm intersection. Newsman such as Darnell also would run past the pergola & film police & spectators around the Pullman cars in the rail yards. Murray & Beers would be snapping photos back there. A lot of people ran past the pergola and into the rail yards. I can say that because there is visual & audio evidence to support it & makes Lee Bowers & the porter Eugene Boone encountered by the Pullman cars that more important to getting a grip on what the heck happened in the rail yards when JFK was murdered on Elm Street.

I envy you, Robert. If I could live my life over I would find an avenue that got me into railroad employment. There's just something about trains that appeals to me, starting with my first Lionel train set many moons ago. Many words in the English language (such as 'deadbeat' & 'mule skinner') are attributed to railroad terminology (lingo). The railroads helped build America & provided employment for minorities at a time when little else was available. You are in an elite group that is familiar with the sounds of train activity & I'm sure you are well accustomed to loud noises that occur regularly around train stations as locomotives hook up to railcars as well as the sound of 'torpedoes'. Many people are not that familiar with the sounds of train activity other than the sound of its horns or how similar the tornado sounded to it (LOL). It's often glossed over or ignored that JFK was driven past such a train station & I believe it's important to the story to focus on the rail yards as an important part of the overall scenario. I hope Robert Maddy does not find fault with my comments; I didn't present them in an argumentive spirit or try to 'derail' his theory of pergola shooters. I'm merely pointing out that the pergola & the stockade fence are both on the Southern & Western perimeters of the rail yards. When Sheriff decker ordered his men into the rail yards, had he gotten out of Jesse Curry's white Ford Galaxie lead car following traversing the TUP & gone up the bridge embankment he would have been in the rail yards he ordered his men to report to. Decker was that close it. What he heard that impressed him the sounds of 'gunfire' originated in that area is important to understanding what happened IMHO. Decker might have even noticed Dan Rather standing nearby waiting to make his film drop. I hope Robert Maddy doesn't take issue with anything I stated; I presented what some people are thinking but too timid to post about (perhaps?). As you,know, I am an admirer of your work in the area of small arms, ballistics & ammo, Mr. Prudhomme. Everyone stands to learn a great deal from you. Sincerely, BM

duplicate post deleted.

Oops! I sincerely apologize for the confusion I caused. I meant Robert Maddy....His focus in this thread is on the pergola as a shooting platform. I forgot about Emmett Hudson & the other 2 fellows on the pergola steps. All of them literally would have 'jumped out of their skin' had something like a 30-30 been fired unexpectedly several feet behind them IMHO. It's different when weapons are known to be in the vicinity, shots are expected (as per a military firing line at small arms qualifications) and hearing protection is in place IMHO. for those requiring verification,ask anyone who has had a small arms weapon discharged unexpectedly near their unprotected ears how long they suffered a 'ringing' in their ears & hearing loss & what their reaction was when the shot was unexpectedly fired. I believe Robert Prudhomme & others interested in small arms weapons would enjoy the YouTube videos posted on different train components detonating railroad torpedoes. It's amazing how similar they sound to a rifle shot. With enough of them placed in sequence it sounds like a machine gun spraying bullets as a train component rolls over them continuously. I believe some, if not all the 'gunfire' witnesses heard originated from such devices in the railyards. I can't prove it, but that's what I believe went down that day. The YouTube videos can be found quickly by typing 'train torpedoes' or train detonators' into Y/T's search engine & activating it. I've emailed one of the JFK assassination channel contributors & encouraged him to put together a visual on the Pullman trains to visually explain what the late Jack White was working on when we lost him. BM

I agree with you, Jon. It's obvious to a lot of people that something out of the ordinary was happening in the rail yards (this includes the stockade fence & North pergola structure IMO; both are on the Southern perimeter of the rail yards) just prior, during & after the attack. Out of state cars came into the area, people were noticed behind the stockade fence, a horde of spectators, police & newsmen were drawn to the area BEHIND the North pergola). Witnesses like Zapruder & the Newmans placed the 'gunfire' they heard from behind them. Something was going on back there. One of the fallacies I believe some researchers & others interested in the case make is assuming what killers would or should have done or not done when the identity of the killers is not even known. Another fallacy is someone would have talked. A family psychologist taught her class in college that I attended years ago that the most common conspiracy involves family infidelity (particularly incest). at the time, she told us that his was a worldwide problem that often extends into participants marriages; sometimes even to the point of death. All the while repeating without anyone talking & revealing the conspiracy in all the years of involvement & post-activity. For some, the yellow painted stripes on the south side of the Elm Street curb line is visual evidence of the actual kill zone the people that pulled this horrific crime off 51 years ago left for the ages to ponder. Like you, Jon, I have no faith at all in the validly of the Zapruder film or any other visual evidence that passed thru the hands of those working for or with the Government of the time. As I recall, it was Life magazine calling the shots initially on how the shooting went down because it had bought the Zapruder film. For a long time, some of us older folks waited for visible proof that JFK had turned around in his seat & looked back at the TSBD at the moment he was shot in the throat. Why? Because Life magazine told us that was in the film. It wasn't. New information is still developing on the rail yards: in a recent 6th Floor Museum interview (posted at YouTube), Deputy Eugene Boone describes running to & investigating the rail yards & encountering a porter outside one of the Pullman cars parked on a track. His name, what he saw & heard during the attack & what became of him later at this time is not known. Boone didn't hear Decker's call for his officers to report to the rail yards on the radio; Boone ran there because that's where the 'gunfire' sounded to him where it originated from. Robert faces the challenge of explaining how shooters with high powered weapons could be shooting at JFK within feet or yards of the Hestors, Zapruder & Sitzman without causing them to literally 'jump out of their shoes'. BM

Just as an argument can be made that earwitnesses were running PAST the pergola (and not TO it) and INTO THE RAIL YARDS behind the North pergola (as seen in the available amateur & newsmen videos), another argument can be made that the sounds they heard originated in the Rail Yards. At least 3 Pullman train cars connected together were parked behind the pergola & can be seen in numerous films & photos during & post-attack. YouTube has several videos of trains running over 'railroad torpedoes' (rail road explosive signaling devices usually attached to a rail by 2 straps & detonated when the wheels of a train car run over it). They sound very similar to rifle shot(s) when detonated. The rail yards is where Sheriff Bill Decker directed his men, not to the pergola or the TSBD. Decker was in the white Ford lead car about to enter the TUP when the ambush took place (see Altgens7). This is not to say the pergola housed no shooters. Shooters very easily could have run into the rail yards where a small sea of cars, trucks & campers were parked. Focus should be on both the rail yards & the pergola IMHO. The late Jack White was working on his analysis that the Pullman cars moved during or immediately after the attack by someone releasing the brake. The cars could have run over railroad torpedoes placed to alert Lee Bowers (or the railroad detective on scene for some unexplained reason) that the Pullman cars were moving out of place. Railroad 'torpedoes' can be detonated by dropping a brick or heavy object on top of them. Recently a young person lost one of his hands by striking a railroad torpedo with a hammer. The explosives used in railroad torpedoes produce smoke, gunpowder smell and a noise similar to a gun shot; the same items that ear & eyewitnesses reported. I'm including this comment for those too timid to do so. I, like Pat Speer, believe a diversionary noise (or noises) similar to gunfire were a part of the ambush to allow rear building shooters to escape. It would not surprise me if the entire attack was carried out with silenced weapons & the 'gunfire' people heard was all diversionary sounds originating around the Pullman train cars behind the North pergola.

You'll notice in the latest posted interview with Jim DiEugenio at Black Ops near the end Len Osanic states 'McAdams has taken it over' (JFKFacts). This actually was a subject topic at JFKFacts a few months back. The website published several complaints that McAdams & his cheerleaders were 'hogging' the posts. To someone that had just visited aaj & then clicked on Facts it might seem as if they were still at the same website. Mr. Osanic has a point. At one point, a visitor to Facts would see more comment posts from McAdams than they would at alt. As Bob Dylan wrote, it was 'too much of nothing' for some folks. It great to see Pat Speer commenting, I am a huge admirer of his website work. I completely forgot about him in my earlier comment about no website being able to sway my opinion on the JFK case. Pat's did. I believe it's always good to check in & refresh one's memory banks at his website. I used to think maybe Lee Oswald pulled this crime off solo until I visited Pat's place & slowly absorbed what he was detailing on his website. Pat's website work changed my perspective. I encourage all to check in with Pat from time to time. I am also a huge admirer of Robert Prudhomme's work regarding the ballistics of the case & rifles & ammunition questions & answers. I hope to live long enough to see a website dedicated to what he knows about those topics constructed & visible globally on the Internet. Robert has the coolest last name I've ever seen too. BM

@Len: According to Mr. DiEugenio in the Black Op interview, the immediate visible damage created by Mr. McAdams' blog posts were 'setting up a fellow academic instructor for ridicule' that resulted in 'hate messages'. Like a tornado spinning off multiple vortices, underlying issues not so 'visible' are also a part of this story; a clash between Left wing & Right wing ideals. Mr. DiEugenio buddies Mr. McAdams up with the likes of Rush Limbaugh & Bill O'Reilly as Right wing talking heads & accuses him of attacking the Left wing in this issue. Is he correct? According to Mr. Osanic, John McAdams has 3 websites under his wing: his own, aaj & JFKFacts. Like Len Osanic, I prefer to avoid all 3. There's only 3 reasonable explanations for the death of President Kennedy IMHO: Oswald did it alone, Oswald did it with some help or Oswald had no involvement in the crime. I haven't seen a website yet capable of swaying my opinion of what occurred 51 years ago; for me propaganda websites are (to use the words of Casey Anthony) 'a huge waste'. What researchers & cloak & dagger types have to say about this issue is important for many, especially if facts are getting bent out of shape as the story develops. BM

Bill, as a huge admirer of your work on the AF-1 tapes (with several friends also following your progress) I can attest that many people find McAdams an intriguing personality simply from the allegations that have been flying around that he is sponsored by a US Intelligence agency with a dark & disturbing reputation. For some, what he does & says is a living example of Operation Mockingbird coming across from media & educational platforms. Just how the 'Company' will come to his aid in this kettle of hot water he fell into or will he be left out to dry (as predicts Jim DiEugenio in the recent Black Ops interview I posted a link to a few posts back) is intriguing to a lot of people. It appears to many globally that the more the Company makes itself visible in the JFK arena via 'sock puppets', the more some people feel it has something really big to hide about JFK's murder. For some, Big John's Internet escapades is a constant reminder that the Company is not asleep at the wheel.

@ Len & Steven: I'm guessing here but I believe DiEugenio was suggesting CYA for McAdams. Had McAdams gotten the OK from the Dean of the Ethics Department before posting to the blog, he might not been suspended (or at least have some company during the holidays). Like others, I am curious as to what the internal 'investigation' brings about. Every story has two sides. BM

I listened to Jim DiEugenio & Len Osanic's take on the situation last night & found it quite interesting here (at the top of the listings): http://blackopradio.com/archives2014.html Big Jim believes McAdams should have consulted the Dean of the Ethics department before posting to the blog in question. Both researchers predict bigger, better things are in store for big John should Marquette boot him out for good (such as a possible permanent spot on Fox news). Neither come across as your typical McAdams cheerleaders or groupies (lol), although I do believe McAdams was treated much more fairly than he is known for treating others on the Internet. Len Osanic gives me the impression the 'gun' McAdams used to shoot himself in the foot wasn't large enough (lol). It's a thought provoking , free & downloadable listen for those who don't want to listen to it online at the website. BM

reply to Thomas Graves (post #94): Thomas, Pat Speer covers his analysis of the ambush in the last chapter on his website. In a nutshell, Pat believes the shooters were located in the TSBD & the Dal-Tex buildings (TSBD 'sniper's nest' & upper floors &/or rooftop of the Dal-Tex) with no shooter on the knoll (a diversionary noise was created there to attract attention so as the rear shooters could escape the 2 buildings), believes Mr. Speer. Shot #1 was fired from the TSBD sniper's nest at z-frame z188 & struck JFK in the back around z-190. Shot (or shots) #2 was/were fired from the upper floors or roof of the Dal-Tex building at z-frame 222 & struck JFK in the back of his head at the hairline & exited his throat at z-224. Pat believes the weapon/weapons used were silenced & may have been using sub-sonic ammo. Shot #3 was fired at z-frame 310-311 from the TSBD sniper's nest & struck JFK near the temple at z-313, a piece of this bullet's core traveled forward to strike the Main Street curb & wound James Tague. Sound #4 was created at z-frame z-320-z327 in the vicinity of the rear of the North pergola & the railroad yards. Possibly a firecracker or other noise & smoke creating explosive device. Pat will correct me if I got any of that wrong (lol). In Chapter 2, Pat explains the very 1st Secret Service & FBI re-enactments beginning 27 Nov 1963 & commencing again on 5 Dec 1963 & how the traffic cones indicating where involved investigators & surveyors placed the shots, particularly the headshot, are not all correct & in sync with he z-film released to the public. I found this analysis quite intriguing & I believe Pat is the 1st researcher to point out all these inconsistencies with the initial re-enactments of the shooting. I belong to the group that does not believe where the Z-313 headshot is marked in Dealey Plaza indicates the TSBD 6th floor window as the source of that shot. I base this on having visited the site with friends assisting me while I was standing, squatting & sitting on the 'headshot X' & my friends were acting as JFK's guards a few yards behind me (they being closer to the TSBD than I was). Each time we tried this simple experiment, my friends blocked either the entire TSBD 'sniper's nest' window or the lower part of it. I believe JFK's rear guards & the windshield of the 'Queen Mary' blocked a shot to JFK sagging towards his wife at Z-313 where Z-313 is presently marked in Dealey Plaza by a historic landmark plaque. I am willing to concede that if the fatal headshot did indeed originate from the TSBD 'sniper's nest', it missed Agents Ready & Landis & the windshield of the Queen Mary by mere fractions of a few inches. I believe the SS/FBI/WC realized the headshot was blocked from the TSBD 'sniper's nest' by the JFK guards & their followup car & purposely left representations of them out of their photographic analysis record in an effort not to deal with the issue & also to deceive the public into believing JFK was an unobstructed target to a TSBD 'sniper's nest' shooter when he was struck in the head at Z-313. If JFK was struck in the head from the sniper's nest during the attack, I don't believe it happened at the Z-313 plaque marker in Dealey Plaza today. The further away one gets from the TSBD in Elm Street, the more someone or something 'tailgating' blocks one's view from the TSBD sniper's nest. One need only visit the site, stand on the 2nd 'headshot X' with some friends standing a couple yards closer to the TSBD, note the sharp drop in street elevation & attempt to see the 'sniper's nest' window's lower portion to verify this for themselves. Had Oswald lived to be tried I do believe his attorneys would have demonstrated to the jury that there was no opportunity for their client to shoot JFK in the head & kill him at the Z-313 location because his guards & their car blocked a line of sight to JFK from the TSBD 'sniper's nest' at that street location. Since there was no trial, it was easy for early investigators to 'pull a fast one' on a trusting public in their distorted & historically inaccurate re-enactments of the ambush, presented without legal challenge (cross-examination). Where did the fatal headshot originate? I'm open to researchers analysis that places the shooter on the corner of the TOP, the South Knoll area, storm drains, North Knoll fence line, railroad signal tower, North & South pergola cupolas (shelters), cars parked on Elm Street extension (red brick road), trees, Dal-Tex, Records Building, etc.. I would not dismiss SS agents involvement in the crime in some way, shape or form, regardless if photographic evidence exists or not. JFK was fatally shot by someone, somewhere within a 360 degree circle enveloping Dealey Plaza. That is indisputable. Pat has his opinion, I have mine. Pat put a lot of useful work into his website that will help humanity understand this crime much better than wading through the quagmire from scratch, IMHO. Chris is explaining his analysis as he goes along each step he takes in his thread. I'm not about to try & guess where he's going; I'll quietly follow along.... BM

Thomas, I found re-visiting Pat Speer's website & refreshing my memory on what Pat pointed out several years ago about the wrong shot locations early investigators kept changing around & conflicting surveys helpful to try & keep up with Chris's present analysis. If I read both researchers correctly, early government investigators guided by still photos from the Zapruder film & professional surveyors couldn't figure out where exactly JFK was shot on Elm Street OR some hanky panky was taking place to accommodate the WC's single assassin theory. Chris is using the science & laws of mathematics to explain what the alleged hanky panky was (in my opinion). Among several oddities, Pat observed that the Z-313 headshot was marked with a traffic cone several yards closer to the North pergola sidewalk steps than where it appears in the Z-film seen by the public (and currently marked with a historic landmark plaque today). He also points out the 3rd shot is indicated as almost parallel to the sidewalk steps (this is indicated by a string in the model the WC used that is on exhibit at the 6th Floor Museum & also is published in the WC volumes as a photo booklet). I remember the late visuals analyst, Jack White, also examining limo travel oddities in the Z-film. Like Chris, Jack was intrigued with 'Position A' & a seemingly increase in limo distance travel late in the Z-film unjustified by the amount of frames the Z-film demonstrates the travel distance in. Jack was posting his analysis of those areas here at EF; perhaps his threads still exist & can be read by those following Chris's work? Both Jack & Chris noticed something that has been in plain view all these years, post-ambush, that slipped past a tremendous amount of people globally interested in the ambush & the initial re-enactments of it by Government operatives. That's why I find his analysis extremely intriguing; I hope he can tell me what was done to the Z-film to 'sell" the 'Oswald did it alone' theory to the public in 1964. BM

I spoke with a friend's father the past week about Chris's research & he told me some things about spring wound amateur home movie cameras from the early 1960's that may be useful to Chris & his viewers. The man is in his early 80's & told me he used several spring wound cameras 'back in the day' before batteries & electricity powered those cameras. My friend's father believes current visuals analysts may be overlooking some 'peculiarities' of those old home move cameras in modern research. The man told me that spring wound cameras would often slow down & record less frames per second as the spring 'wound down' during continuous filming, resulting in 'hurried scenes' the longer the film was recorded. In essence, the camera would perform 'self frame excision' by filming fewer frames per second the more the spring 'wound down', making it difficult for analysts studying the film record to determine if humans removed frames or if the camera simply recorded fewer frames during continuous filming. In Zapruder's case, had Zapruder started filming when he originally said he did on live TV (a few hours after the ambush) his camera may have 'wound down' by the time the execution of JFK took place, making the limo appear to go faster than it actually was traveling by dropping below 24 frames per second the weaker the spring action got. Also, let's say Zapruder forgot to wind or fully wind his camera before he began filming anything. Depending on when Mr. Z started filming at 24 frames per second he might have been filming at 18, 16, 14 or even 12 frames per second by the time the ambush was triggered. The presence of the lead motorcycles in the z-film could be an indication that Mr. Zapruder filmed not only the lead motorcycles, but also Jesse Curry's lead car & the JFK limo turn from Main onto Houston St. & then onto Elm St. that followed the lead motorcycles as well (the lead motorcycles can be seen in the Weaver polaroid, just beginning their journey down Elm Street with Curry's car approaching the Elm St. intersection between the intersection & JFK's vehicle, just turning onto Houston St. from Main St). The elderly man believes Zapruder could have filmed all of that entirely and his camera's spring would have been very weak by the time the limo traversed Elm Street. The man noticed in the SS re-enactment films (not included in the SS film with credits at the end, but in the comparison gif Chris posted for us) following the '59 Chevy's travel down Elm Street (starting from the Z-133 spot in Chris's comparison gif) the next filmed car traveling down Elm Street was a 1956 two-tone Chevy that filming begins before that car becomes visible on Houston St. & then makes the left turn at the Elm St. intersection & continues to the TUP. The man questions why would the SS/FBI film that scene if it didn't exist already on what they using as guides from static photos of the z-frames in their possession? I believe Chris has discovered unexplored territory in the JFK case with his analysis. I don't recall any other researcher or visuals expert examining the JFK limo speed as seen in the Zapruder, Nix, Muchmore & Bronson films and comparing the speed in each film against the speed in the other films, has anyone else? What Chris raises (among other issues) leaves one wondering if all the aforementioned ambush films match each other or not in limo speed; is it even possible to get 4 different films from 4 different home movie cameras to agree with each other on the speed of the limo during the ambush, considering all cameras were prone to their own 'spring wind down' the longer the photographer continuously filmed a particular scene? With spring wound cameras running slower as the spring winds down (causing a 'speeded up' effect on the film the camera recorded), wouldn't that make it easier to remove frames & blame the resulting film's frame rate on a 'wound down spring'? How would the public know if any film had frames removed & then the camera given a bogus camera film rate following the removal? How would the public know if frame removal resulted from human intervention or a camera 'self frame removal' from its spring 'winding down'? This is obviously not an easy subject to analyze, which makes Chris's efforts all the more admirable for tackling it head on. I trust the info shared with me will assist the members engaged in & reviewing Chris's intriguing analysis. BM

I also have math questions for Chris, James. How can JFK's parade car be traveling at a speed of 7+ mph in the Nix film and roughly twice as fast in the Zapruder film? In Donald Thomas' acoustics analysis research video link I posted, he is using the WC determination of a limo speed of slightly over 11 mph, much faster than what Itek determined the limo speed to be in the Nix film. Chris hasn't gotten to the Muchmore & Bronson films yet to determine the limo speed in those short films of the ambush. The many different versions of the Zapruder film may be presenting confusion for some people. The Costella & unenhanced, unstabilized & slowed down Robert Groden version of the Zapruder film depicts to some observers a hurried, jumpy parade car zipping down Elm Street like a small rocket BM PS: I pointed out to Chris earlier than I am a dummy when it comes to math (I failed college Calculus 3 times). I only made it through high school math by sitting near smart girls who felt sorry for my misery in struggling with complicated math & helped me survive it (lol). Chris has a talent I don't possess. I suspect that I'm not alone on this planet in possessing poor math skills. That's why I pay others to prepare my tax returns.

After viewing your photo comparison of the WC & SS re-enactment filming spots, don't you just love how the SS/FBI/WC all left out a car tailgating the 'JFK limo' along with actor stand ins for the guards inside the car & on the running boards in their Elm St. ambush re-enactments, Chris? They all started this mind game of presenting JFK's limo traversing Elm Street as a solo, unobstructed target that continued until just last year in TV documentaries 'The Smoking Gun' & 'The Definitive Guide', where the guards & their car were finally represented. The most obscene distortion of the history of the ambush was shown in 'The Kennedy Detail', where the actual JFK SS agents on duty during the attack were looking down from the TSBD 'sniper's nest' at a replica of the JFK limo parked on Elm Street; their SS followup vehicle they all rode in & on & Clint Hill dismounted being nowhere in sight. It took a while for the public to catch on to this rigged 're-enactment'; the purpose of it probably being so as not to address a possible blockage of the alleged TSBD sniper's view of JFK at Z-313. The closest view of what that line of sight looked like is in the 2004 computer game 'JFK Reloaded'. All of the Federal investigators & almost all of the re-enactments conducted in TV specials fail to include the SS guards & their vehicle when showing the alleged sniper's view of JFK, leaving the public no reliable visuals to determine if a Z-313 shot was even possible from the TSBD 'sniper's nest' with recreations that are historically inaccurate & distorted.

You will probably receive questions as to how your Zapruder film research applies to the other JFK amateur ambush films as you near completion or complete your presentation, Chris. Because the films are all incomplete film records of the ambush & Orville Nix went on camera for Mark Lane in the mid '60's stating frames were missing from his film there is a high degree of suspicion about all of them. Does the limo speed in those films match your analysis of the z-film? This is very intriguing research, Chris. Your visitor count has increased dramatically since you began, indicating a lot of people globally are interested in what you are telling them here at EF. BM

Chris, For the benefit of non-members following your presentation that communicate privately with me & cannont post comments, I'd like to present some comments: (1) If frames are removed from any film record of an event (regardless of the camera's frame rate), does that not result in an action that appears 'speeded up'? For instance, let's say JFK's limo traversed Elm Street at 7 mph at a camera rate of 24 frames per second. Lets suppose frames were removed from the film record. Now the limo is traveling faster, correct? If frames were added, the limo would appear to be traveling SLOWER, correct? I found a good example of how removing frames 'speeds up' an action in a film record (regardless of camera frame rate) here: (2) The speed of the limo factors into the acoustics analysis recently presented by Donald Thomas: http://www.c-span.org/video/?321702-4/acoustic-analysis-kennedy-assassination In his lecture, Mr. Thomas relies on the FBI/WC speed of JFK's limo at slightly over 11 mph. If your research presents the analysis that this speed is not factual, does it not also indicate the audio analysis of Dr. Thomas is based on untrustworthy data? (3) In your speed comparison gif that compared the speed of JFK's limo (in the z-film record) against the 27 Nov 1963 SS recreation filmed from Zapruder's pedestal at 24 fps, it is quite noticeable that the traffic cone indicating the fatal z-313 headshot is several yards closer to the pergola sidewalk steps than where it is indicated in the Z-film released to the public (and where the marker is presently located in Dealey Plaza today). Can your research explain this discrepancy, keeping in mind the initial investigators were relying on photo stills from the Z-film that had not yet been released to the public (via Life magazine's 29 Nov 1963 issue). How could initial investigators be several yards off? (Pat Speer was one of the 1st, if not the 1st researchers to point this strange event out to the public in Chapter 2 on his website). According to Doug Horne's research, the stills from the Z-film that these initial investigators were relying on came from a z-film altered at Hawkeyeworks on Sunday, Nov 24 1963). 27 Nov 1963 was just 3 days after Hawkeyeworks technicians falsified the Z-film (according to Mr. Horne), 2 days after JFK was buried at Arlington. Can you determine a reason for the wrong placement of the headshot traffic cone by initial investigators on 27 Nov 1963 (seen in your gif & pointed out on Pat Speer's website) vs. where the headshot is seen in the z-film released to the public? Is the public seeing evidence of 2 separate z-film alterations when comparing the two events? Does your research 'catch' film alterationists at what they allegedly did to the z-film at Hawkeyeworks or later while in the hands of Federal operatives or the media giant that paid a fortune to purchase the original film & all copies from Mr. Zapruder? Please explain to where the unsophisticated in math can comprehend. Doug Horne has predicted that within the next 20 years the Zapruder film will be considered not as a film record of the JFK ambush, but as evidence of 1963-1964 Government operatives falsifying crucial evidence in the case. Your research may be what tips the scales in that very direction. BM

Chris, a quick comment between presentation gaps, if I may: Anyone preaching a new gospel can expect rumblings from those clinging to older beliefs. If you were the Lone Ranger & I was Tonto returning from a scout mission, you'd expect Tonto to inform you the natives were gearing up for an attack. With that thought in mind, I recall from the recent past years several anti-Zapruder alteration essays posted online & presented in lectures that will probably be used to attack your research. Just from memory, there's anti-alteration essays from Josiah Thompson & Roland Zavala posted online. This one here is popular with the McAdams camp: http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/zapruder.htm The researcher in the essay presents the opinion that the Zapruder sprocket holes 'ghost images' would not line up & would expose frame removal if frames were indeed removed . I read some comments on this viewpoint when the essay was originally posted many moons ago & it's not clear if every single Zapruder frame had 'ghost images' in each sprocket hole area or not in the essay. I seem to recall ghost images coming & going in the film. Some folks discussing your research privately are questioning if the amount of frames corresponding to the black portion of the Zapruder film were removed from the original 24 fps film, would that alone speed up the film & make the limo appear to be traveling faster down Elm St. than it really was at 18 fps?. If so, could those same black frames be the missing limo turn from Houston onto Elm Street scene? IOW, if cutting out the limo turn onto Elm Street was all that was allegedly done to the film & what remained of the film was copied as a false original, would the removal of the limo turn speed up the film (from 24 fps to 18 fps) & this is why Shaneyfelt testified the limo was traveling at a little over 11 mph in a now false 18 fps film? I have always had problems understanding the z-film. The 1st part of it (where the motorcycles begin to traverse Elm Street) always looked to me like it was in slow motion & the motorcycles were 'stalling for time' waiting for the motorcade to catch up to them & then here comes the limo zipping down Elm Street. That part of the film always looked like it was running too fast to me (similar to an old Keystone Kops comedy). The two scenes didn't match (to my eyes). Have a blessed & rewarding Thanksgiving. BM

Comment removed to aid instructor's presentation continuity. BM

Comments removed to aid instructor's presentation continuity. BM