John Butler

When David Josephs take you to task he is almost always right. I have walked away from time to time chastised. He is a fellow that doesn't mind telling you what he thinks. Most people don't agree with the idea of a black patch covering President Kennedy's head wound. Josephs has expressed this notion in a way that can not be denied in Z frame 323. He can speak for himself. But, I think you can see a black patch on Kennedy far earlier than the 313 to say 330 frames. I think you can see the black patch in frames after he comes out from the Stemmons sign shortly after Z frame 215 at about Z 250. I am not certain how well this Towner frame is going to come out posted. In the frame President Kennedy's head in turned down and he has a black circle not properly pasted on this head. It was probably done with an air gun and ink. This frame is fairly close to the infamous, hit X, frame.

Thanks Lewis, There is an elephant in the room there also. Notice that the motorbike cop is an undistorted image. Notice the folks on Elm Street behind the Vice-Presidential Security Vehicle. They are undistorted also. Now, notice how grossly distorted the VP security vehicle is. How can you get a camera to be that selective? Shouldn't the whole scene be distorted or not? Ah... But, it was Ike Altgens, the camera master, who took this photo. I believe Altgens was in on things or he willing agreed to go along and support the three altered photos that were very influencial in shaping the public's opinion in the first days of the assassination. Altgens 5, Altgens 6 and Altgens 7 are all faked to conform and strength the official story.

Chris Scalley, I sorry that you are highly offended. It is nothing personal. The truth of the matter according to Speer is that you convinced him that the boy's story was not true. Your investigations refute what Alan Smith stated in his statement to the Chicago Tribune. In doing so you and Speer painted the young man as an inept, immature, and confused young man. As far as identifying young students in various films and photos, the imagery does not and can not do that due to image quality. The Bronson frame in question will not scale up to a point where you can say this or that about who I labelled No. 2?. It could be a man and a women rather than students. It could be two men. The same goes for Betzner and Willis. The two individuals in question could be adult males. Comparing their height to the surrounding women suggests adults rather than growing boys. This is the 1960's where a person over 6 feet is much rarer than today. And, that is particularly true for 14 year old boys in the 60's. I have a better candidate for you. A boy on north Elm Street demonstrates what a young man's height and appearance was in those days. He is even standing in front of a building where a shot may have come from. The images are insufficient to make a positive ID. Betzner, Willis, and Zapruder are all edited media when it comes to the 19 people standing between the R L Foreman sign and the Stemmons sign. Other media do not show 19 people there or some of the people there at all. The best example of that is Mary Moorman's Polaroid of Glen McBride. To me, this is the same situation when Jackie Kennedy said she first heard a shot she noticed a blue-grey building ahead and to the left. There are no blue-grey buildings on Elm Street. But, there was one on Main that was shortly thereafter replaced with a parking lot and later became the Kennedy Monument. Bonnie Ray Williams said he heard two shots when the presidential limo turned onto Houston from Main. He was convinced by the FBI that was incorrect and he changed his statement to Elm Street. In fact, he had to change his statements several times. Just as you have changed Alan Smith's statements from Main to Elm Street. The statements of Alan Smith, Jackie Kennedy, and Bonnie Ray Williams are outside the official story paradigm. Therefore, they are unbelievable and in need of change, refutation, or dismissal.

Thanks Ian, I will take a closer look at that.

Thanks Ken, Speer and Scally denigrate Alan Smith as “mysterious”, “he claimed”, “was not able to confirm”, “whether he attended the school he claimed to have attended”, “was only 14 at the time”, “made a tentative ID”, “honest mistake”, “how many 14 year-olds know from the suburbs know”, “a wide-eyed 14 year old”, etc. They made a 14 year old student a bogey man. I have spent nearly 3 decades around 14 years-old kids. You can’t just say they are goofy because they are age 14 as Speer and Scally do. Kids are always surprising and many are more mature and intelligent than most think. Speer and Scally do a continuous ad hominem attack on Alan Smith to destroy his testimony. They had an agenda. Whether a school kept a copy of a yearbook or not doesn’t mean someone did not go to school there. Who is Bob Goodman and what is his relevance? Why would he be believed over Smith. Smith didn’t say the building was behind him he said the shots came from overhead directly above him. I don’t think you really believe Alan Smith or give credit what he said. I have more reason now to believe what he said then before. I have been is Dealey Plaza before when I first went to Texas in 1969. The last trip was in 2015. Thanks anyway. I have enjoyed the conversation.

Ken, Smith said: "I was standing on the curb watching the parade along Main street. We were permitted to skip school, if we had a note from our parents, to watch it." "The crowds were cheering, but all at once they changed to screaming. The car was about 10 feet from me when a bullet hit the President in his forehead. The bullets came from a window right over my head in the building in front of which my friends and I were standing." "Mr. Kennedy had a big wide smile. But when he was hit, his face turned blank. There was no smile, no frown - nothing. He fell down over Jackie's knees and didn't say anything. She stood up screaming 'God, oh God, no.' There was blood all over her and everything. She tried to raise him up but he fell back over her." Pat Speer disputes this: From Pat Speer Chapter 7b: More pieces of the Plaza Alan Smith witness to shooting on Main Street Alan Smith is one of the more mysterious witnesses. He claimed he witnessed the shooting from up close while standing on Main Street, which made little sense. As a result, I avoided adding him to this list for a long time. In 2012, however, researcher Chris Scally looked into Smith and was able to confirm he attended the school he claimed to have attended, and was only 14 at the time of the shooting. He also made a tentative ID of Smith as one of the two boys standing under the Stemmons Freeway sign in the Wills and Betzner photos. (Scally's article on Smith can be found in the Winter 2012 Dealey Plaza Echo.) In any event, Scally's article convinced me that Smith's claim of being on Main Street was probably an honest mistake, and that he may very well have been on Elm. I mean, how many 14 year-olds from the suburbs know the names of the downtown streets in your hometown? Not a lot, I would guess. (11-22-63 datelined article found in the 11-23-63 Chicago Tribune) "A wide-eyed 14-year-old boy, who was standing 10 feet away and looking directly at President Kennedy at the time of the assassination, told THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE of his astonishment at watching the historic event unfold. "It made me weak! I felt like sitting down! It was horrible!" Alan Smith, a Boy Scout and a 9th grade pupil at Stockard Junior High School, related. I have a tendency to believe what people say of the day of the assassination in their first interview which was published on 11-23-63. Afterwards, I question things because of FBI and other authorities intimidation of witnesses and evidence tampering. And, I don't really count after the fact analysis based on assumptions that are just assumptions in the case of Scully and Speer. Also, Smith said there were cheering from the crowd and the shooting came from a building right over his head. There are no buildings on Elm St. except the TSBD. Even if you go along with Pat Speer or Chris Scally, you can't place him at the Stemmons sign. There are no buildings there. Can you list a good reason why Alan Smith should not be believed?

Cris' frame is a bit strange. Bell is still on the monument when this is being filmed. How did he get a Main Street perspective on this frame? The Bell film switches between different perspectives in different parts of the film. This frame is within a few seconds of the limo going under the Triple Underpass. The limo goes under the Triple Underpass at 49 seconds and those frames are correct and these frames are from 55 seconds in the film and appear to be from Main Street. The perspective showing the limo going under the railroad bridge is correct. This one is questionable. And, I can't find this frame in the Bell film. Maybe his Bell film is different than mine. Observe the following with frames and notes: I increased the light brightness in the right hand Bell frame until it was difficult to see anything. I did this in steps and still did not see the questionable figures in Chris' frame. I just realized by looking at this Altgens has not taken another step. The Motorcycle Policeman has taken another step in the right hand frame. And, that explains the different distance between the two. This film editing would throw any time sequence out of whack.

Michael, The Camera Cars were stopped at the intersection for some time. Enough time for the Presidential Party and related vehicles to leave the Plaza. Why? It is so they would not be able to film anything happening during the assassination or directly after

Ian, I just lost a response typed here in the editor for your post. If two of these show up don't worry. Your comment is really interesting. Can you provide which films / photos you looked at on west Main and Houston Sts. No. 4 through No. 8 are important people that have been ignored. We don't know what their testimony would be since they weren't asked. We don't even know who they are. What could they tell us about what they saw.

Chris, Altgens taking Altgens 6 at frame 255 of Zapruder is an old argument. I disputed that on several occasions. Altgens is in the street taking Altgens 6. The limo is headed directly towards him on Elm Street. If that matches frame 255 in Zapruder then the Stemmons sign would be behind the limo by about 40 feet and not off to the right in front of the limo. No amount of camera angle arguments will clear that situation. (I should have said after Altgens took Algens 7. I will admit to that) Just to be adversarial, how long is a few seconds? Maybe 2 seconds or 20 seconds? The argument is based on the internal timing of the Bell film. Which does not match others because of the Bell Gap. How long was that gap? Altgens is on the other side of north Elm Street early on. There is no one there when he crosses the street except the Newmans, DorisMumford, and the vanishing Dallas Policeman. There is no Wiegman. He is still on Houston Street. If not there he is running toward the Grassy Knoll. There is no Camera Car photographers. They are still on Houston Street. The scene is Couch is about a minute after the assassination based on the Bell Gap, how long the Mayor's Car and the National Press Pool Car was held up on Elm at the intersection. The Wiegman film adds at least 31 seconds to that bill before Couch appears. Wiegman did not make the run down the Hill. That is someone else. Wiegman was standing in front of the light pole by the Stemmons sign when he first filmed the Camera Cars at 37 seconds into the film. Altgens crossed the street before anyone was there. The Couch film is so blurry and vague you can't see the Newmans in some frames much less identify Altgens. Like a lot of folks you like to concentrate on an alleged weakness of a statement without looking at the whole argument. Cherry picking an alleged weakness is not a good argument.

I am reposting the original Bronson frame with Ken's information making this frame more complicated. Does anyone know who No. 2? are. They are either two men or a couple. I can't resolve that but, it looks like a couple. The figure west of the man looks somehow female. I'm not sure of that. Any help would be welcome. I recall Robin Unger identified either No. 8 or No. 9 at an earlier time in another situation. So, Robin if you are paying attention look through your notes and see if you can identify No. 9 or any other in the frame particularly No. 3 through No. 9. There is also a remnant Mannequin Row group under the Mannequin word on the frame. There should be 19 people stretching from the light pole / R L Thornton sign to the Stemmons sign. If you count everyone in that area there is only 11 people including the Umbrella Man and Latin Man who are usually not counted.

The Bell film is about 3 minutes in length. The first 38 or so seconds are spent on Main and Houston Streets before the turn onto Elm Street. At 42 seconds the presidential limousine is in front of the TSBD. And, here is the screwy part. The film skips to the Triple Underpass at 43 seconds. Obviously, some portion of the film has been skipped by some process. More than likely someone edited out the time spent going from the TSBD to the Triple Underpass. At 43 seconds the presidential limousine is very close to the Triple Underpass. And, here is another odd part. Really odd. The limousine takes 6 seconds to move into the shadows under the railroad bridge from a very short distance. This is the first clear frame at 44 seconds. It takes another 5 seconds to move into the shadows. Very odd. After that the camera pans back to the Grassy Knoll area. We see the Babushka Lady, Mary Moorman, Jean Hill, and the Brehms at 53 seconds. Next are the Newmans with a Dallas Policeman. Zapruder and Sitzman are still in the scene. The policeman is not a motorbike cop and does not show up in other films and photos. This policeman should have been in Zapruder, the Bronson frame, and Willis 5. At 54 seconds we see the Newmans in the grass and there is also Doris Mumford there. There is more time here than the time between 43 and 53 seconds. There is the additional time of the missing section of the film in the Bell Gap. The assassination occurs somewhere in the missing film between 42 and 43 seconds of the film. There is now a Bell Gap to go with the Zapruder Gap. At 59 seconds Altgens enters the scene and is seen standing by the Newmans. He crosses the street a few seconds after taking Altgens 6. The street were clear because the Mayor’s Car and the National Press Pool Car were being held in the intersection. How long were they held? The National Press Pool Car and the Mayor’s car are seen at 1:11 seconds in the Bell film at the steps of the Grassy Knoll. This means they could have been held at the intersection for 25 + seconds, leaving this kind of timing for the motorcade. 1st segment: Presidential Limousine, Security Vehicle, Vice Presidents Car, and the Vice Presidents Securtiy Car. This is an unknown length of time between 42 and 43 seconds in the Bell Gap. If one was to guess it would be in excess of 10 seconds. 2nd segment: Mayor’s Car and the National Press Pool Car. About 25 to 29 + seconds. 3rd segment: Camera Cars 1, 2, and 3. About 38 seconds less 9 seconds as the time difference between Wiegman’s run into the Plaza and the Camera Cars release as demonstrated by the Wiegman film and the Couch film. This would put Marion Bakers run for the TSBD at minimum of about 1 minute after he heard shooting. 10 + 25 + 31 seconds. This may help a little with the timing issue between Wiegman and Couch and some of the events and people seen and not seen in the Bronson frame and other related media.

Thanks Ken, That is very reasonable. Those two women will be listed as No. 1?. That fills in that spot and the two women Cheryl McKinnon and Doris Mumford are discussed from time to time. Once again I think that is a very reasonable suggestion for 1? and I don't think many will refute it. The Bell film shows Doris Mumford with the Newmans on the grass very early on at 54 seconds into the film. The presidential limousine goes under the Triple Underpass at about 49 seconds. It is in front of the TSBD at 43 seconds. That's not a lot of time for some other individual that someones says is Doris Mumford to show up. I think your confidence is justified.

David Andrews, As far as I can determine Doris Mumford is not in the Bronson frame. The Bronson frame is right at the time of the assassination's first shot (according to the official story) or just seconds away. When Doris Mumford appears it's about a minute or more later. Where she comes from I don't have a clue. And, that is a good question which I think you are asking. Where is she in earlier photos than the ones shown such as Betzner and Willis 5. Betzner shows what may be a skirt and woman's leg where the "Hesters" should be and Willis shows the alleged "Hesters". I don't think she can be identified as one of the Mannequin Row women.

I believe most folks would name her Doris Mumford. I think Mumford's daughter identified her. For some reason that name escapes me if I don't think of it for a long time. If the photographers have posed the Newmans in the grass then she has been posed also. I believe the south side photos were take by Dick Bothun. The two photos posted should have Weigman in them. It made simply be a matter of Wiegman running into the street towards the Camera Cars.

Thanks Lewis, That is a neat WWI photo. At least I think it is from the British soldier's sword bayonet. Whoever colorized the photo did a good job. The colors are about right for the distance if you were making a painting of the scene. Could you give me the source for the Newmans photo or film frame you posted.

Chris' gif has just two jpegs so there is no error in its operation. There may be alteration in the film but, I can't detect that. The only thing I question is both children wearing red. The color in these old films are simplistic and any colorized version of a frame may have it wrong. It seems in other place the children have different color clothes but, I will have to check on that. I am not a techo geek so I wouldn't know. I mostly work with content not technical matters. Chris has covered several areas where I have gone wrong.

Thanks Chris, You have put me back on the trail with your analysis of Weigman several times. I think I get it. Wiegman leaves the area of the Newmans for the Camera cars at about 10 or 11 seconds in Couch. And is seen in your photos by the Camera Cars. Then the man running down the hill passes the Newmans at about 13-14 seconds. That explains why Weigman is capturing the Camera Cars at 38 seconds and in Couch at 9 seconds the scenes correlates with Weigman. And, this is why the running man passes the Newman's at 13 seconds of the Couch film. Wiegman has a hat on the running man does not have a hat. The two are not the same. This timeline is awful tight. A key element of the scene is that Altgens is in the grass close to and almost behind the Newmans. In the Running Man frames Altgens is on the sidewalk. To travel from one spot to the other is a matter of seconds. Still, this timeline I am proposing is very tight. As far as Weigman running down the hill the Couch film doesn't really give a good indication of that. The images are too small and blurry. You can see some person running down the hill. I will take another look at Bell. It's Wiegman if he has a hat on or that should be what is checked with these small blurry images. BTW, the scene of Weigman and the Camera Car seems to be a cropped photo. I almost recognize it. Can you say whose photo that is?

The man running down the hill does not appear to be Wiegman but, someone else. Wiegman is standing by the Newmans when he films the approaching Cameras Cars that more or less equals 38 seconds into the Wiegman film and corresponds to 9 seconds into the Couch film. However, the man running down the hill is viewed at 12 seconds passing the Newmans on the ground and there is no sign of Wiegman. The following gif is directly after the tiny blurred image of the man running down the hill is seen. In this gif are camera men still in the Camera Car at 13 seconds into the film and still no sign of Wiegman. This means you cannot use the man running down the hill to time the differences between the timing of the Couch film and the Wiegman film.

I believe I did make a mistake on the name of this group of motorbike cops. I meant to say the Mid Motorcycle Policemen. This group followed the 3 Camera Cars. Instead I wrote Mid Forward Motorcycles Policemen which is neither Forward Mid Motorcycle Policemen or Mid Motorcycle Policemen. The small insert showing a motorcycle policeman is from 38 seconds into the Wiegman film and is probably a Forward Mid Motorcycle cop that proceeded the 3 camera cars but, maybe not. The Mid Motorcycle Policemen came after the Camera Cars. This is from Couch and shows the Forward Mid Motorcycle Policemen. Notice that there is no motorbike cops on the passenger side of the Camera Car #1 as shown in the insert. They sped out of the area as the Camera Cars stopped on Elm street and unloaded photographers and took on board others. Notice there are no Camera Car photographers on the slope of the Grassy Knoll. And, this next frame is also from Couch showing the Camera Cars stopped on Elm Street loading and unloading photographers. From these scenes we can conclude that the Motorcycle Policemen show earlier are the Mid Motorcycle Policemen if you will excuse my error of Mid Forward Motorcycle Policemen.

Before the prior scene showing the Newmans laying in the grass that I posted we have this:

Thanks Chris, I have this photo but couldn't find it. I really should spend time organizing files. Is this a colorized version of a black and white? Who was the photographer? The following notions have always bothered me about this photo and others showing the Newmans.

Joe, The last two paragraphs of your statement is dead on and well stated.

Tony, That is a neat observation. Do you think they are the Hesters. I noticed you place Hesters in quotation marks.

This frame from Bell should help.