John Butler

This is from the McAdams site. It could be what you are recalling. It is Oswald evidence without the minox camera only the light meter for the camera. This is the difference between the light meter and camera. I don't see the camera is this evidence layout. There should be a camera in the evidence photo. If you saw something different then maybe someone will post it. I had one version of the Minox long ago. (not the spy version). It was just something I bought in a Korean "kimchi shop". Obviously it was stolen from someone in the military. Someone stole it from me and that broke my heart. It was a great camera in a small package.

The card still reads Jepson. It is not significant because people often spell Jepsen as Jepson. They sound the same. I couldn't find any FBI agents named Jepson. Gary Murr has made a sensible correction.

Jepson might be W. B. Jepson Naval Intelligence Service. He was involved in HSCA matters.

Frazier maybe Robert Frazier at https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/the-jfk-assassination-former-agent-recalls-his-role-in-the-investigation "old info" might be a better interpretation if you magnify, adjust contrast, and sharpen with software. Gallagher might be FBI agent John F. Gallagher.

Gallagher 5/11 Ret 5/ 11 Comm 399 C1 To Frazier 5/11 To Comm 5/13 R From Comm 5/18/64 RW To Jepson 5/18/64 (last part unreadable) To Dallas 6/2/64 To Chas? old info Alex R For an old school teacher, this should have been a piece of cake. However, some lines were difficult to read.

John Butler Advanced Member Members 535 posts Gender:Male This was posted under Gifts from Uncle Malcom. It made help with some understanding of Danny Arce. This was left out of the post: Was Danny Arce one of the assassins of President Kennedy? Danny Arce made the following statements to the authorities about the Kennedy Assassination in 1963 and 1964: Dallas Police Department on 11-22-63 FBI Statement on 11-22-63 (handwritten) FBI Statement on 11-22-63 (typed version of handwritten) FBI Statement 12-19-63 FBI Statement 3-18-64 Warren Commission 4-7-64 Where was Danny located that day as the President passed by? He first said in his Dallas Police Department on 11-22-63 that he was: Posted September 5 Thanks Bart, The first issue is about Dealey Plaza photographers. It doesn't really fit this thread so ignore that. The second I just found more interesting because sometime back I had went through Danny Arce's testimony and noted there was an issue with his location. On your website prayerman.com you locate Arce in front of the Dal-Tex in Altgens 6. It appears to be Arce. You know how people are on this forum. They will say the image is to vague or some such. But, I agree that it is Arce. He appears to have something in his hand. It appears to be a handheld radio. If that is Danny Arce and that is a radio then he is one of the assassins of President Kennedy, a spotter or coordinator. His location is so ambiguous in his testimony you can place him on all four corners of the Elm / Houston intersection. Back out a little and you have this: That's is clearer. He still appears to have a radio. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites John Butler John Butler Advanced Member Members 535 posts Gender:Male Posted September 6 (edited) Danny Arce made the following statements to the authorities about the Kennedy Assassination in 1963 and 1964: Dallas Police Department on 11-22-63 FBI Statement on 11-22-63 (handwritten) FBI Statement on 11-22-63 (typed version of handwritten) FBI Statement 12-19-63 FBI Statement 3-18-64 Warren Commission 4-7-64 If you look through these statements then Danny Arce's location becomes suspicious. Eventually, he mentions he was on a grassy area in front of the TSBD. There is no grassy area in front of the Dal-Tex. This further adds to his ambiguous, suspicious location. Here is where history.com places Arce's location with a white dot. He should be visible in the Zapruder film and from the SW corner of Elm Street from such photographers as Betzner, Willis, and Croft. But, he is not. According to his testimony he could be there or across the street on South Elm. Only problem with this there is no pictorial evidence for either location. Bart Kamp has provided his location in front of the Dal-Tex as shown in Altgens 6. How many radios can you hide under that raincoat? Much less why is he wearing that when the temp was above 60 and the rain had stopped hours before. It seems Danny Arce has been seen as a suspicious character before. Check out Bill Shelley. Does he look like he is in fear of his life? Can you imagine the cop saying "Watch what you say, boy. Accidents happen."

Bell Film: This frame is from the Bell film showing and absence of Mannequin Row: The next two are of lesser evidentiary value since they were taken after the assassination by several minutes. The John Martin Film: The Malcom Couch Film: Two or three minutes may be enough time for 19 people to disperse. But, that’s an argument that can’t really be solved.

Bronson Frame This is one of the clearer Charles Bronson film frames. I don’t know why. It is another example of the 19-member Mannequin Row missing in media other than Zapruder and Bronson. There are several frames in the Bronson Film that show this. The clearer one is posted below: The Newmans are across the street from Mary Moorman and Jean Hill. The Umbrella Man and the Latin Man clearly indicate where the Stemmons sign is. There are people there in the Mannequin Row area but, not 19 people. Another you might recognize is the lady with a blue babushka from Zapruder. Maybe. But, I wouldn’t stake a paycheck on that.

The Existence of Mannequin Row in the Zapruder Film There are other films and photos that do not show the 19-member group, Mannequin Row, and contradict what is shown the Zapruder film. The first of these is the McBride Polaroid or as sometimes called Moorman 3. Here is Glen McBride. You will see that there are some peculiarities in the photo. First off, there is a giant tree much bigger than any tree to be found in Dealey Plaza in 1963. This tree is a painted artifact to cover the western face of the TSBD. Why? Probably to hide something the editors didn’t want you to see. The second thing is Mannequin Row is not there. Some will say they are but, they are east of where you indicate Mannequin Row begins. But, look carefully Mannequin Row begins with the street lamppost and R L Thornton sign and ends with the Stemmons sign which is not visible in this Polaroid. This is sloppy editing. But, sloppy or not these editors knew their craft. Hardly anyone would notice this kind of foolishness and most would not see what is going on here. But, several have and tried to make excuse for the absence of the 19 people seen in the Zapruder. Examples would be that Glen McBride was a member of the Early Lead Motorcycles and this Polariod was made about 15 minutes before the president passed through. There are no Early Lead Motorcycles only Lead Motorcycles. Another suggested this Polaroid was taken 2 minutes before the president turned onto Elm Street. We can see Glen McBride and Sgt. Bellah in the Zapruder film for 132 frames and then they vanish into the Zapruder Gap. Moorman 3 is a look into that gap. 132 frames divided by 18 frames is 7 or 8 seconds or there abouts. Even with a brief stop the Lead Motorcycles would have cleared the area in less than 30 seconds. The McBride Polaroid is a good look into the Zapruder Gap and Mannequin Row is not there. This is one of many direct contradictions of the Zapruder film.

Bart, Thanks. You advice is always appreciated. I went and read the earlier thread you recommended concerning this. There seems to be an argument there also. This is a late response due to thinking about replying to your post. I became interested in the Gloria Calvert problem. Here's my take on that. Gloria Calvert in the Zapruder Film There has been some discussion as to whether Gloria Calvert can be seen standing in a group of people in the Zapruder film or, not. The group of people the alleged Gloria Calvert is standing in is what I call Mannequin Row after Jack White. Mannequin Row is a group of 19 people standing from the lamppost / R L Thornton sign area to the Stemmons Freeway sign. It is an area of about 40 ft. on the north side of Elm Street just off the southwest corner of the TSBD. What follows is the only pictorial evidence I can find for this Mannequin Row group’s existence. There are witnesses who say they were standing there. There is more evidence that this group of people is an alteration of the Zapruder film. They do not exist and are a figment of the photo editor’s imagination and exists only in the Zapruder film and the Betzner 3 photo. Here is a comparison of Zapruder and Betzner: In the Betzner Photo 9 people are absent from the lineup in the Zapruder frame. They are more than likely hidden by the 5 Secret Service agents riding in the security vehicle shown in Betzner. This makes it difficult to completely match the two photos. I have matched by number those that can be easily identified. The group with numbers 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 in the Zapruder frame can be partially identified in the Betzner photo. No. 8 in both photos is a short man. 9 through 12 in Zapruder are women with babushkas. In the Betzner photo they don’t appear to be wearing babushkas. Numbers 1,3 and 18, 19 can be readily identified in both Betzner and Zapruder. These two visual records match fairly well and are good evidence that Mannequin Row exists. Or, are they just another of the myriad instances of photo alteration available for the Dealey Plaza pictorial record. That will be taken up in the next post.

I don't think Groden would have mixed two films together. Why? Where is the proof? As far as I know the Darnell film starts out with Darnell out of the vehicle standing on the south side of Elm and facing Ike Altgens and the Newmans north of Elm by the Grassy Knoll. It could be this is a hoax film by the laughing fellow shown but, it is posted as the Darnell film. Or, it could really be reality. If Groden had pasted two films together what would be the point? What would that do to his credibility? It would be found out over time. Would he risk his credibility and financial possibilities doing something stupid and risky. I need more proof before accepting Unger's statements.

As an example, these frames from the Darnell gif are the same as the Malcom Couch film. They are crops from the Couch film. and, I don't see how these same frames can be in two different films. Darnell and Couch were in the same camera car, Camera Car #3. Even so, I don't see how they would have captured the exact same scenes. But, of course for many of the folks on the forum that is possible because they want it to be possible.

Another big problem for this thread, is the motorcycle policemen shown running, toward the TSBD, really Marion Baker? Or, is it another motorcycle policeman such as Bobby Hargis of the Presidential Motorcycles, or, DPD J. B. Garrick of the Advance Motorcycles. TA Hutson testified that he saw Garrick at the door of the TSBD, after the shooting. S. G. Bellah is said to have returned to the TSBD but, he would easily be identified by Sgt.’s stripes. Were there any others? Marion Baker was a member of the 2 Forward Mid Motorcycles. The other Officer was H. B. Mclain. These motorcycle policemen were in the 16th motorcade position. While on Houston street Baker said he heard a shot and saw pigeons flying from the roof of the TSBD. He left his motorcade position and went directly to the TSBD and entered in time to meet Oswald in the 2nd floor break room in 90 seconds from the time he left his motoracade position. If Baker is on the 2nd floor in the break room with Oswald than it is likely he can’t be outside when Weigman and Couch come by in Camera Car #1 and Camera Car #3 and make their films. Marion Baker’s position in the motorcade was the 16th position. He left that position and the people he was supposed to protect to go off on his own. To Me, this has always been suspicious behavior. Getting to the 2nd floor break room in 90 seconds is also suspicious. Did he have another motive for breaking formation and leaving his section of the motorcade unguarded? The presidential motorcade passed through Dealey Plaza in segments. The visual record confirms this if you look closely. There was a time interval between each segment. What that interval was is not known but, can be conjectured to be as many as 3 or more minutes for the 1st and 2nd segments to pass the TSBD and leave the plaza via passing under the Triple Underpass. The Third segment contained people who filmed a few minutes after the assassination. It has been indicated that the motorcade stretched for ½ mile in length. 1st segment: 1 Car Advance Car (Did not enter Dealey Plaza- AMIPA film) 2 Car Pilot Car 3 Motorcycle Advance 4 Motorcycle Lead 5 Car Lead Car 6 Car Presidential Limousine 7 Motorcycle Presidential Motorcycles 8 Car Presidential SS Follow-up 9 Car Vice Presidential Car 10 Car VP SS Follow-up 2nd Segment: 11 Car Mayor’s Car 12 Car National Press Pool Car 3rd Segment: 13 Car Camera Car #1 National Motion Pictures 14 Car Camera Car #2 National Still Cameras 15 Car Camera Car #3 Local Cameras 16 Motorcycle Forward Mid Motorcade Motorcycles 4th Segment and other Segments: 17 Car Congressman’s Car #1 18 Car Congressman’s Car #2 19 Car Congressman’s Car #3 20 Car VIP Car 21 Motorcycle Mid Motorcade Motorcycles 22 Bus White House Press Bus #1 23 Car Local Press Pool Car 24 Bus White House Press Bus #2 25 Motorcycle Rear Mid Motorcade Motorcycles 26 Car Extra Car #1 27 Car Western Union Car 28 Car White House Signal Corps 29 Car Extra Car #2 30 Bus Official Party Bus 31 Car Rear Police Car 32 Motorcycle Rear Police Motorcycle This is from the testimony of Mrs. Earle Cabell at the Warren Commission hearing of 7-13-64. She was in the Mayor’s Car. It confirms her part of the motorcade was stopped for a period of time. “Mr. Hubert. You also mentioned that you were acutely aware of the smell of gunpowder? Mrs. Cabell. Yes. Mr. Hubert. When was that relative to the shots? I mean how soon after? Mrs. Cabell. I cannot say for sure, because as I told you, the motorcade was stopped. And somewhere in there, Congressman Roberts said, “That is a .30-06.” I didn’t know what a .30-06 was.” This frame from the Couch film shows the Camera Cars #1 and #2 and DPD H. B. Mclain. In front of the motorcycles the road is clear. Earlier segments of the motorcade, the 1st and the 2nd Segments have cleared Dealey Plaza. This indicates some time since the assassination. David Weigman was in Camera Car #1, Frank Cancellare was in Camera Car #2, and Malcom Couch was in Camera Car #3. These bits of evidence calls into question whether the Running Motorcycle Policeman was Marion Baker of not. I say not.

I think there needs to be a clarification at this point in this thread. Which film are people talking about here? The Cook-Darnell film or the Darnell gif? Or, are we really looking at the Malcom Couch film? I say the Malcom Couch film. Robert Prudhomme Super Member Members 4,105 posts Gender:Male Location:British Columbia, Canada Interests:Gold mining, horses, pickup trucks, fishing, hunting, killing trees, you know....the usual redneck stuff Report post Posted August 26, 2015 In previous threads, I believe serious doubt has been cast upon the identification of a woman loitering down near the Stemmons sign post-assassination as being Gloria Calvery. Linda turned up an interesting piece from FindaGrave concerning Gloria Calvery: Immediately following the assassination she ran back to the TSBD, following about 10-15 feet behind the sprinting DPD Officer, Marrion Baker, and they went up the front steps and into the building, as was partially captured on the Cook-Darnell Film and recounted in eyewitness testimony: http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i286/niteprowler147/bl3_zps34f39e84.gif This is the so-called Cook-Darnell film gif. It has been slowed down to 4 seconds per frame to give one more time to look at each image and compare it to the Malcom Couch film. This is the same imagery as the Malcom Couch film. It has been cropped and selected frames have been used. This gives the appearance of the Running Woman who isn’t running but walking. This Walking Woman can be seen in the post by Robin Unger. Members 3,756 posts Gender:Male Location:Australia Report post Posted 10 hours ago Darnell GIF The Darnell gif that Unger has posted is actually the Malcom Couch film. The imagery is the same. But, that is not the real problem with this post.

Thanks Chris, You have been a great help in my quest to answer a question about Groden's assassination tapes going back several years. You state "The artifacts you present stem from an (8mm film -18fps) to (30fps) conversion.". From your statements we can conclude this is not the original home movie film stock. But, this is a 30 fps conversion to videotape. Is there any way to determine who made this conversion? Maybe, based on what you said could we determine whether this was done in 1963 as versus 1995 for Groden's work. For instance the early SSTV had this kind of resolution : "The concept of SSTV was introduced by Copthorne Macdonald[1] in 1957–58.[2] He developed the first SSTV system using an electrostatic monitor and a vidicon tube. In those days it seemed sufficient to use 120 lines and about 120 pixels per line to transmit a black-and-white still picture within a 3 kHz phone channel. First live tests were performed on the 11 Meter ham band – which was later given to the CB service in the US. In the 1970s, two forms of paper printout receivers were invented by hams. " The two frames I posted from the Bell film (not the same image) to demonstrate Part A and Part B interlacing have by a non-scientific count of about 60 green pixel lines in Part A and 60 red pixel lines lines in Part B. And, there seems to be about 120 pixels per line. Does this suggest 1960's tech rather than a 1995 tech that would be used by Robert Groden? I would appreciate your analysis and thanks again.

You are dealing with Interlaced and Progressive frames. The frame you posted started out as an Interlaced frame. (Left side of graphic.) It was then De-interlaced and saved. (Right side of graphic.) Which matches what you posted. The frame you posted is from Groden's version. Anybody interested in seeing the PROGRESSIVE frame where the cop helmet is not translucent, can view it there. I don't see the logic of this. Both interlaced and deinterlaced objects are see through. This is an unnatural situation that would not have occurred in an unaltered amateur home movie. This is not motion blurring or some other thing like that. It appears to be a transparent or opaque image overlayed onto the original film to cover up something. What? This frame showing President Kennedy is the same as one shown just a few frames earlier. What could be covered up here? It is a strange image. Kennedy appears to be in distress of some sort. He could just be smiling or laughing. If so, why overlay this with the image of a policeman. At 18 frames per second this is perhaps 1/3 of a seconds difference in time. Is that long enough for a see through policeman to motor up and be even with the president? The presidential vehicle has moved perhaps 5 feet further north on Houston in the other frame.

If I am understanding what Chris is saying then the process in those days is someone takes an amateur home movie which does not have the feature of interlaced / deinterlaced frames. This home movie cannot be shown on TV because the frame rates per second do not match. The interlaced frames made and are added when a videotape of the film is made to show on TV or make a DVD. Or, they are there because an SSTV videotape was made. These interlaced film frames are from the Mark Bell film via Groden’s Assassination Films. These are not the same images but, they give one the notion of an interlaced frame Part A and Part B. Part A has green video pixel lines and Part B has red video pixel lines. A man by the name of Steven Osborn testified before Chairman Tunheim of the Assassination Records Review Board in Dallas, Texas on November 18, 1994. He wanted to inform the Board of the possibility of military intelligence films that an unnamed person told him about. He said that a communications unit from Fort Hood, Texas at Clean, Texas (actually Killeen, Texas) had videotaped the motorcade. He said, “In my conversations with this gentleman, I asked questions of a technical nature trying to discovery how their assignment was accomplished. After discovering that the camera signals were transported by wireless means back to the control studio, which was actually a semi-tractor-trailer, I found myself doubting that this type of equipment was available in 1963. I knew that ham radio operators have been sending television signals easily for a number of years, and I had also participated in that hobby. I also knew that videotaping was still in its infant years in 1963. I started to research available equipment to see if this story had any possibility of being true. I have another handout that I would like to give you. Now that we know that equipment existed in 1963, and I can tell you a little bit about the equipment, if you would like, in the question and answer, I can relate his entire story, the following information was obtained over approximately three separate conversations with this individual. I had extracted a verbal consent to get his story on videotape, like any good researcher would, but when the time came for doing so, his attitude on the matter had completely reversed and I am only left today with the recollection, you know, the notes that I had taken from the conversation and the subsequent information by my independent investigation. This military communications group had several cameras stationed around the Plaza. The signals from the cameras were sent back to a semi-tractor-trailer acting as a mobile studio parked a short distance from the Plaza. Each camera had a preview monitor and videotape machine associated with it inside the trailer recording the view of each camera. There was no sound recorded in this assignment. Each videotape position had a single person responsible for its proper operation. Each position these men occupied was shielded from the others so that they could only see the preview for their individual camera. Each man saw the assassination occur from a different perspective of their monitors. About 15 minutes after the assassination, a group of men appeared who identified themselves as FBI agents. These agents seized all the equipment used to videotape the motorcade. Each man was put on a bus which had been summoned to the scene and they were all driven back to their base. Upon their arrival, they were simply told to forget it. Finding that there was equipment available in 1963 that would do this made it easier for me to accept the story I have just related to you. Several things have made me believe that this group was an intelligence unit.” But, in actuality the technique and technology had been available for some years. Slow-scan television From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Slow Scan television (SSTV) is a picture transmission method used mainly by amateur radio operators, to transmit and receive static pictures via radio in monochrome or color. A literal term for SSTV is narrowband television. Analog broadcast television requires at least 6 MHz wide channels, because it transmits 25 or 30 picture frames per second (in the NTSC, PAL or SECAM color systems), The concept of SSTV was introduced by Copthorne Macdonald[1] in 1957–58.[2] He developed the first SSTV system using an electrostatic monitor and a vidicon tube. In those days it seemed sufficient to use 120 lines and about 120 pixels per line to transmit a black-and-white still picture within a 3 kHz phone channel. First live tests were performed on the 11 Meter ham band – which was later given to the CB service in the US. In the 1970s, two forms of paper printout receivers were invented by hams. So, it was possible to make a videotape of the motorcade’s passage through Dealey Plaza in 1963. Yes. And, this is pretty much the low-quality images seen in the assassination films. Groden’s various films have SSTV frames. This raises the question I originally asked when I first wrote about this. Did Groden make the original home movies (assassination films) into videotapes where interlacing is possible or was this done earlier? Is the various assassination films produced by Military Photographers using SSTV to transmit imagery to a central location (many think it was the semi at the intersection of Elm and Houston) and then made into videotape to record a film of the motorcade. And, according to Steve Osborn’s testimony could these videotapes be substituted for the original home movies.

The time difference between the Cancellare photo and the Zapruder film. In the Zapruder film is that a vehicle moving east or a three wheeler motorbike cop moving west? If not where is that vehicle in Cancellare. Cancellare took his photo several minutes after the assassination so there is time to move people or vehicles and account for this discrepancy. Again the time difference suggests an assassin would not hang around after the assassination. If so, who was he hanging around to shoot? The image of an assassin under the tree is a dwarf image undersized in relation to the giant pickup truck in the parking lot. Another point to research is whether one would see anything past the Triple Underpass and the railroad bank. At street level on Elm Street you can't see the Stemmons Freeway.

Chris, Can you explain for me how interlaced frames from analog TV got into a 60's era film? Is this a product of Groden's work? Or, someone else? How does that occur? Doesn't this require after the fact manipulation of the taken film? Stock in those days was celluloid or plastic? Does interlacing occur while the film is being made or added afterwards? How's that mix with interlaced analog TV signals in a amateur film? Someone has manipulated this film when? This is a problem for me since I started looking at Groden's films. I have speculated military photographers film blended into the assassination films. Any advice or help on this would be appreciated. I'm sure Ron would agree that anyone makes more sense than me since I have no credibility.

Is this an example of a interlaced analog TV frame? Groden's DVD films have many images similar to this in different films.

Chris, I might understand what you are saying if you would explain what you are talking about to someone who doesn't know that much about video or film techniques Dealing with interlaced and progressive frames is beyond my pay grade. I just assumed this was a transparent or opaque image formed by one image overlaying the other. This is from Groden's DVD. I can't see Robert Groden faking an image or using a technique that fakes an image. I can see photo editors of the time doing it. In my mind this is just another of the many mistakes the photo editors made in editing the assassination films and photos. Why interlacing is used in television? "Designed for the analog NTSC television system, interlaced scanning uses two fields to create a frame. One field contains all the odd lines in the image, the other contains all the even lines of the image" This is a note I found on the internet. This notes makes some sense. Are you saying these interlaced images are analog TV images? Particularly, the type used in the 1960's. And, when deinterlaced form opaque images? Can you explain why this frame and others are interlaced analog TV video. Here is another odd photo frame involving Phil Willis. Because of this photo I call Willis the flat-headed see-through man. Can you explain what went wrong here. Particularly, the flat head? It looks like it has been cut off.

Since I mentioned it, here is the altered frame from the John Martin film showing the motorcycle helmet of the policemen that is see through. You can capture other frames where this phenomenon is observed. The question is why were these frames altered? I hadn't noticed before that there is a babushka lady in the frame. What does that make? 14 in various films? Chris has posted some interesting films supposedly stabilized for better use. The problem is that they are much shorter than the originals therefore a lot of information is lost.

I don’t know why Ron is wasting his time but, I can guess. By the way, I am not writing this for Ron. I am writing it for the readers. As far as reading up on Chauncey Holt what I said is straight from a video made by Holt in which he says what I reported. It is one of the things I thought was creditable about what Holt was saying. I am not really going to rehash earlier posts showing the train frames of the 5 films mentioned. That’s been done in earlier posts. The four other films show what is seen in the Hughes frame. A passenger train on the tracks, no one on the triple underpass (no Officer Foster and 10 railroad workers), and a very indistinct Foster standing on the Triple Underpass above the grassing area leading up to the Triple Underpass just to the left of the Triple Underpass. Robert Hughes does show a passenger train in the railroad yards at the end of the film but, only a section of it. That frame is not what was being discussed. I am very familiar with trains of the 1950’s and 1960’s. Our farm had a railroad (the L & N) at the end of the property line. Saw many trains every day. Trains are rare with only passenger cars. Generally, they were of mixed variety with passenger cars and freight cars. Officer J. C. White testified there was a “slow freight train passing by”. There are I think 7 or maybe less tracks on the Triple Underpass. There could have been more than one train on the tracks? This series of posts began when Ron mentioned a “non-existent” train on the railroad tracks. And, now to the main part of the post. Ron says “You do know you lost all credibility when you claimed shot's were fired on Main street?”. Lost credibility is not about me losing credibility but, about the credibility of the evidence presented. The credibility of my statements on are based on the evidence for shooting on Main Street which comes from: The AMIPA film. I posted several slowed gifs on that occurrence. Jackie Kennedy’s statements about seeing a blue-grey building ahead and to the left when she heard shots. You cannot find a blue-grey building on Houston or Elm. You could at that time of the assassination on Main street but, not now since the Kennedy Monument sits where that building was. There were one or two witnesses saying shooting occurred on Main. If you go on from there you will see that things were happening in the intersection of Main and Houston. Can you recall the posts on Robert Hughes and the cut-apart policeman? Can you recall the posts on Altgens 5. Altgens 5 is what started the suspicion that something was being covered up. Altgens 5 can clearly be demonstrated that it is a photo altered photo. Just look at the tires. I had no evidence of what might be covered up in those days. And, knowing that an altered photo, Altgens 5, was not telling the real story I couldn’t justify saying that shooting occurred there and was being covered up. Even though that is what was suspected. Bonnie Ray Williams early testimony helped but, Williams was not a reliable witness sense his testimony evolved over time. Altgens 5 is just one of several peculiarities one can see in the assassination films taken on Houston Street. Eight assassination films say something happened in front of Court Records building. When the presidential limousine arrives in that area films become distorted and the films skip down to the intersection of Houston and Elm or beyond that to Elm Street. Elsie Dorman said she heard shots coming from the Court Records building. James “Junior” Jarmen changed his testimony at the Warren Commission hearing by saying he heard shots coming from low and to the left. This changed his earlier testimony that agreed with Harold Norman and Bonnie Ray Williams. What are the odds of that happening naturally in those 8 films. I would say astronomical. The John Martin film has scenes where the motorcycle policemen escorting the presidential limousine have see through helmets. The walls of the buildings on Houston Street can be seen through their helmets. I haven’t posted on this. Parts of the Nix film could not have been filmed by Nix. There are elevated scenes from someone else. Nix, from where he was positioned could not have filmed portions of his film do to the crowd in the intersection blocking his view. And, then we get to the intersection of Houston and Elm and what some the witnesses said about what happened there. There are enough witness statements that say shooting occurred there to be believable. I posted the witnesses, essentially what they said, and their references earlier. Altgens 5, 6, and 7, the Zapruder film, Mary Moorman’s Polaroid are what people first saw about the assassination in the week following the assassination. All are false. But, they are part of the pictorial basis for the Warren Commission findings, The Lone Gunman Theory, and in the Zapruder film the Single Bullet Theory. That is why some people find these posts reprehensible and outside their biases. It can’t be true because of the theories mentioned above. You must be like Robert Grodin and others with an absolute believe in the validity of the Zapruder film and other media in the film and photo record. If you really analyze Z frames 157 and 163 you will find about 8 or so things that indicate alteration. That is just two frames and there are others. Using the standard of Falsum in Uno, Falsum in Omnibus you will understand that the Zapruder film is not valid. Even under a loser standard of Falsum in Multis, Falsum in Omnibus the Zapruder film is still invalid.

The Mark Bell film and the Robert Hughes film shows a train on the tracks during the assassination. The other films, Dave Weigman, Malcom Couch, and John Martin show a train on the tracks after the assassination. So, I guess their timing was right for the assassination. It's the same train Chauncy Holt was told to get on and wait after the assassination. He feared for his life by being made a patsy when he thought the boxcar he was in was going to be blown up. It didn't and he lived because Oswald was caught with an hour. I don't think Oswald was the lone designated patsy. There were others. Mainly those who were laying floor on the 6th floor, particularly Bill Shelley. Most of them were arrested and taken in.

Firing angles from the Triple Underpass with a train on the tracks. The following films show a train on the tracks during the assassination of President Kennedy plus several witness statements say much the same. Mark Bell Robert Hughes Dave Weigman Malcom Couch John Martin A passenger train with empty cars would make a perfect platform to assassinate the President. This note doesn’t say an assassin could not shoot from the South Knoll. It just says there are better firing angles. The Zapruder film has 486 frames. At roughly one foot for frame is 486 feet or roughly 160 yards. That's not a difficult shot for a trained marksman with a scope or unscoped rifle. That's about the same distance from the intersection of Main and Houston as the intersection of Elm and Houston.