Chris Bristow

The only point I'd like to make about the doorman frames is that in the first one you can see the shadow coming off the front of the Harley, I assume it's Chaney, and it angles off to the right. If you extended a line through the shadow it would probably hit the crowd about 30 feet down the road, in front of the limo. The point at which that line intersects the crowd is the point at which the Sun is directly behind the bike cop from their perspective. So everyone on Houston had a moment when the sun was right behind the limo and the glare was at its maximum.

Well the sun is in the Southwest and people on Elm would be looking East as the limo approached. If they looked at the limo after it passed them there would be some glare. The people on Houston would have a glare problem as the limo approached. I think taking a photo on Houston and centering JFK in the picture would have to include a lot of sky in the background. The Horizon would be a little above half way up in the frame? But Zapruder was looking down on the limo and zoomed in so he didn't catch any sky as he panned his camera. That's why he didn't get any glare.

It is true there is lack of images from certain areas. People on the East side of Houston held their hands up to block the Sun to see the limo coming and I would assume that is an awkward place to try and take a photo. The people on Elm would have not had any problem taking photos as he approached. Most of the photos show the limo after it passed like Beltzner and Willis. I think people on Elm would not have a great view till the limo gets close because JFK is almost behind Connally and no clear view of Jackie from the North side of Elm till they get very close. I think by the time the limo was close most would not want to be looking through a viewfinder.

If they were holding a camera it was not up to their face during the Croft photo. The point at which JFK is the closest and not one of them is taking a picture. Sometimes when people want a really good view of a very special moment they hold the camera down and try to aim without the viewfinder. Other people just don't want to waste the moment fiddling with the camera.

I love that photo because it is so clear. You don't have to strain your eyes like much of the photographic evidence. I think the limo was going around 15mph. It would travel one inch at a shutter speed of 1/250th. The antenna on the back looks perfect. That leaves one inch of blur That matches the people in the background pretty well. One inch is 1/15th the width of the hub cap or slightly more than the side of Nellie's window frame.

It's hard to evaluate because I don't know the speed of that car. At 25 miles an hour it would be going 3 times the speed of the limo.

EDIT: I just found the shutter speed could have been closer to 1/100th of a second after basing the example below on 1/50th. So the motion blur I thought should be 2 inches is more like an inch. And if you split that between background and foreground it would only be a half inch which it plausible. I deleted the post below

She did say she thought the limo may have momentarily halted. From other reports I think the limo may have halted just prior to the head shot and would be moving very slow at 315. FYI for anyone interested. I just found that in the motorcycle photo she had stepped into the middle of the south lane near Brehms position for that photo.

I have my doubts about the Z film too. But for what it's worth Mary Ann Moorman's location is consistent in the different films to within a couple inches. It rules out the possibility of using film from any different location other than where she was. The bushes right over Jean Hill are are barely visible as you noted. My thinking is matching the size of the bushes by aligning all the markers to the left of Hill creates an accurate representation of the bushes and peristyle above Hill and Moorman. Using the markers to match the size of the bushes also overcomes any prospective difference between Hughes and z. The only thing left is the slight bit of parallax from the shrubs to the peristyle. But it only comes out to about 5 in. The lack of blur in the photo is interesting. I've never tried to figure out how much movement you would expect to see from 15 ft at 8 miles an hour and I think a 1/50 of a second shutter time. I'm going to give it a look.

The top part of this comp is from the Hughes film when he was standing about 20 feet East of Z' pedestal after the shooting. Because it shows the shrubs and the peristyle behind it a comparison with the shrubs in Z can be used to find her location relative to the peristyle from Z's perspective. The shrubs above Moorman disappear from Z's view but once the two images are sized to match you can project just a few feet ahead of Jean Hill to determine Moorman's location. NOTE: There is a tiny bit of parallax between Z's and Hughes positions that creates misalignment of the shrubs to the peristyle but it is only maybe 5 inches.

first I relied on the Moorman photo itself for those two lines of sight. I've compared her location in all the other images of her. That would be the Nix film and Muchmore and the Z film. They all matched. Using lines of sight to verify the location of Nixs and muchmore before using lines of sight to find Mary Ann Moorman within the frame. The Z film is difficult because you have to rely on the limo position to find her because there isn't anything else in the frame. But there is a way to use the shrubs in the top of the frames prior to frame 315 to pin down her location. I'm going to free up some memory and post a graphic the verifies her location in the Z film

I thought about the bushka lady and she is the closest. But the Moorman photo shows two lines of sight that mark her position to within a few inches. Where the corner of the grassy knoll fence lines up behind and above the stairs is one line of sight. Where the right side of zapruder's pedestal lines up with the front of the pergola is the second line of sight. There is only one location where you could see both of those alignments and that is Moorman's location.

There is no other known film from Dealey Plaza that day that has the exact same perspective as the Mary Ann Moorman photo. You can calculate multiple lines of sight to her position and it matches the West/Roberdeau map to within just a few inches.

Yes thanks. There is still things to unravel there. I did just find that they also put the limo crooked on Elm but by 3 or 4 degrees. So the shot still might work, although the Franzen Family are so damn close to the trajectory that it gives me pause.

Yes i agree. I think they didn't bother creating a leaning JFK and just shoved him over to where they assume his head was. And the jump seats are too far out. I did lines of sight from Muchmore and Moorman and it put him right in the middle. But his forward lean throws it off a bit and it will make him look like he is a more to his left. Interesting though they do put the limo 3 or 4 degrees to the right. And when they show a comp of Muchmore's and Z's lines of sight they have Z at a 9 degree angle to JFK's head. According to their direction of travel it should be 3 or 4 degrees so I am confused at this point. But one thing for sure the line of sight they show through the x and to the TSB also passes less than a foot in front of the Franzens and less than 5 feet off the ground. And because of the way they are lined up it would come that close to each of them.

The limo being misaligned on Elm St by 6 degrees has some implications for the possible shot from the West end of the knoll fence and for the theory about the head shot coming from the South knoll. In the diagram of the limo below the black line shows the 35 degree angle to JFK from the West end of the knoll fence(It doesn't seem to clear the side window but I may just be a bit off). The blue line represents the 29 degree angle corrected trajectory to account for the 6 degree misalignment of the limo to that portion of Elm St. At 29 degrees is does not clear the window. If JFK's head was positioned at the center of the seat towards the front the shot would not work. The red dotted line shows where his head would have to be for the shot to work. everything I can determine about his head position puts him there. For the gunman to have a clear shot they would have to be standing about 60 feet farther East along the fence. The 313 head shot from the South knoll postulated by Sherry Fiester has a similar problem. The image on the right and the red line is from her documentary. The blue line is the 6 degree corrected trajectory. Depending on JFK's head location the 6 degree correction would make the shot impossible. If the shooter moved West to compensate the shot is obscured by the Franzens. You may be able to slip a shot between the Franzens and unknown couple but that is really tight. And the round would only be about 4.5 feet off the ground as it past them. The last implication depends on how JFK's leftward head rotation is determined. If you judge it from Z's viewpoint you will get the correct measurement as to how JFK's head sits in relation to Elm. But if you took the approx 25 degree rotation seen by Z and related that to the limo by having his head rotated 25 degrees relative to the limo, that is a mistake. His head was 25 degrees off the direction of Elm St. but when you place him in the limo you have to increase it to 31 degrees to account for limo's misalignment on Elm. An 8 or 9 degree trajectory from the TSB to the limo has always been the standard but we should be adding 6 degrees to that. Lastly in answer to Chris Davidson's question, at frame 292 the limo is not misaligned. It seem to start gradually after 292. Maybe Greer looking over his right shoulder caused him to veer right some.

THIS IS A NUTSO THEORY JUST FOR THE FUN OF IT. Lets say Oswald did the deed. To have a way out if caught he devises a plan. He creates the backyard photos but takes a copy of his head from the photo and pastes it onto another copy of the same photo. All elements of the background and Oswald would be a perfect match except for where the edge of his pasted head meets the background. He places the photo in the Paine garage and goes to work planning to do the deed. If he gets clean away with it he just destroys the photo the next day. But if the cops get onto him he will be arrested and the garage searched. They find the photo of him holding the Carcano and it becomes a centerpiece for the prosecution in the trial. Oswald then claims it is a forgery during the trial and asks for it to analyzed. The results show the photo is a cut and paste of his head, Someone has set this boy up! Who would be suspected? Well the cops had the chain of custody and the prosecution made a big deal of it so the jury would consider the cops or prosecutors to be the main suspects. Serious reasonable doubt is established and Oswald walks.

It is an interesting puzzle. I think the young black kid may be standing behind the women in the coat to the right of the white shirt/ dark pants guy. I don't know where the cop is but he is larger than the people behind him in Alt5 so he would be right of ws/dp guy in Z. The only solid fact is ws/dp guy in Alt5 and in Z are standing within 1 or 2 feet of the same location. more to come.

Trying to compare that crowd in Alt 5 and the Z film is really tough. Z's perspective does not show the white vans parked on Elm. It looks like you can see both sides of Elm but it is just an illusion. I put a blue arrow over the guy in both photos that I think is the same person. The blue arrow in the Dealey map shows his location. That guy has to be within that blue marker at the end of the arrow. I used the building behind him in the Z film to get a line of sight. The overhead photo of the plaza shows that line of sight. I know Altgens 5 really makes it look like he is standing out in the middle of the street or beyond, but he is really only about 12 feet from the South East corner of Elm. So both the guy in the Z and the guy in Alt5 are located within two feet of each other. There is only one person there with dark pants and light shirt so I conclude they are the same person. Based on that we can start mapping out the other people in Z.

I believe the window is visible in the lower right image you posted. Just next to Jackie's head is a reflection off the chrome of the top of the window frame. It is visible in many frames and shows more of the pink color of her dress or hat. As you follow that line to the right the reflection ends and the chrome looks dark. That makes it blend in with the shadow of the grass behind it. But you can see how that dark part of the chrome sits on top of the grass shadow and is a continuation from, is inline with, the reflection of Jackie. If you blow the photo up a lot you can see a dim light that is reflecting off the the chrome in the dark portion. It may be more visible in the photo on the left because Moorman's shadow surrounds it.

I am open to the possibility that the shot came from the covered truck sitting on commerce visible in the Z film. That makes the commerce location more viable imo. Another wrinkle is the bullet would tip downward from impacting the windshield. Adding that to the parking lot trajectory may put it all the way down to the sidewalk as David Lifton has surmised. I don't know exactly how he got to the sidewalk. It could be the bullet tipping down or slightly different measurements of windshield hole to throat or both. The tipping bullet may be inescapable but that is just based on reading some expert opinions. Maybe other experts disagree. Whether from the sidewalk or parking lot any missed shot would hit the street nearer the limo than the Dal Tex building. Since the trajectory was almost level and would hit JFK's throat when it was about 424 hasl then a missed shot would hit Elm St at a point where the street was also near 424 hasl. The hasl of street level at the Dal Tex is approx 431 hasl. The shot would have to miss JFK by flying 6 ft over his head to hit even the bottom of the Dal Tex building. I think both shooter locations are possible. It just depends on exactly what angles were involved.

I base JFK's sitting posture on frame 209 when you can see the very top of his head and fr 225. I estimate the throat to be 3.5 ft off the ground. I don't remember off hand the height of the bullet hole but the throat to windshield hole trajectory does lead to the annex parking lot. But if you take into account the bullet tipping down a bit from passing through the windshield then maybe you are back to the sidewalk on commerce. It all comes down to exactly how we estimate trajectories from measurements of photographs. Realistically it is possible to have come from the South knoll and created the trajectory plotted from windshield to throat. I don't see anything that makes the shot impossible, just can't be sure of the exact altitude of the shooter

If the slope of Elm and the slope from windshield to JFK are equal and opposite they cancel each other out and the line from windshield to JFK becomes level. That means the shooter would have to be at the same hasl as JFK for a level shot. His throat was about 424ft hasl and the annex parking lot is 424 hasl as is the overpass. But now I think I must have made a basic mistake. The slope of the limo was lessened by facing 45 deg to the Southwest at fr 223. That should steepen the angle from windshield to throat not lower it. The result would be to raise the shooter position not lower it down to the Commerce sidewalk as I envisioned it prior. I also noticed that the slope from windshield to JFK may be closer to 2.5 degrees than 3 deg. Now you would think turning 45 degrees from the slope of Elm(Half way between West and South) would cut the angle in half too, but it does not work that way. The 45 deg change only lessens the slope by 1 deg. So if the windshield to throat was 2.5 deg and the 3.5 elm slope was lessened by 1 deg to 2.5 deg then the slope of the windshield to throat is back to level and the shooter could be at the annex parking lot. I know you wanted a simpler answer but I can't seem to do it. The thing is a 1 deg different in the angles makes about a 7 foot elevation difference at the south knoll. To further complicate it I measured the windshield to throat from a side view of the limo. But a side view does not take into account the lateral aspect of the trajectory. That means in calculating the rise and run of the trajectory the length of the line(The run) is longer than the side view shows and that lessens the slope angle I perceived and measured from the side view. All these variables make it hard to locate the exact elevation of a shooter. The best I can say is it could be in the parking lot

Once I calculated the vertical trajectory from JFK's neck, and through the Bullet Hole next to the rear view mirror. It came to the parking lot of the terminal Annex Building. Someone crouching there could have made the shot. I heard David Lifton has calculated the shot coming from the sidewalk that goes under the triple underpass. So I rechecked it and found I made a mistake. I used the three and a half or four degrees slope of Elm Street to put the shooter in the terminal Annex parking lot. But the limo was not facing straight down Elm, the road bends to the left and it was actually at a 45 degree angle to the downward slope of the Plaza. The limo was not at a 4 degree slope. I corrected for that and it placed the shooter about 15 ft lower and matched with what David Lifton had said. That's too bad because the annex parking lot is great cover with a great Escape Route. It was a level shot and the sun was behind them. On the issue of the second bullet hole that sits much lower I think that white spot is just JFK's shirt. If you look closely at the bottom left of that white thing it is Connelly's coat that creates that line of demarcation. That would mean the white thing is behind Connelly.

Chris, no I haven't mapped out the limos movements prior to frame 312. The distance it travels on Elm from 312 up to 323 seems to be consistent with JFK's head lining up at 323. So it seems to be 6° off from 312 up to 323. I have noticed in the past that in Alt6 the line of sight through the limo has it pointing five or so degrees to the right. But of course the photo shows it is straight and lines up with the lane markers. So I have assumed in the past I just made a mistake. But the window alignment in 312 can't be a mistake. So I'll take another look at it alt 6.