John Butler

I don’t think anyone fired a shot at the presidential limousine as it passed the Grassy Knoll.  If someone did, then they missed and the shot went into the grass in the grassy area between Elm Street and Main Street.  The best evidence on this is Mary Moorman’s Polaroid. 

To demonstrate this I will use the Parkland Doctor’s description of the Kennedy head wound.  This was attested to by 40 medical people at Parkland Hospital. The head wound was caused by a shot that struck President Kennedy’s right temple and exited in the rear of his head in the occipital region. 

The firing angles for that wound are all wrong there at the Grassy Knoll for that shot.  If someone shot President Kennedy from the Badge Man’s position then it would look something like this.

Although others say different, I consider the Mannlicher Carcano a high powered rifle.  It fires a round at about 2,000 feet per second. The Mannlicher has enough velocity and power to pass through two bodies.  Other rifles need to be considered also.

The black line shows the firing angle from the Badge Man’s position.  Jackie Kennedy would have been wounded as the round passed through President Kennedy and perhaps killed her.

At the least she would have been covered with blood and other body materials.  This is not evident in photos taken afterwards.  Her clothing and hair are not heavily covered with blood and other matter.

What about other places on the Grassy Knoll.  There could have been other shooters or shooting from other places on the Grassy Knoll.  The next modified copy of Mary Moorman’s Polaroid attempts to deal with that issue.

The firing angles in this photo are still wrong.  They indicate that the further you move to the west the greater the opportunity to place correctly the firing angle to produce President Kennedy’s head wound in front of the Grassy Knoll.

There, I have placed myself into deep water.  In other posts I have said it is not possible to prove someone fired a shot from the 6^th floor sniper’s nest beyond a reasonable doubt.  

Here I’m saying that when the limousine was in front of the Grassy Knoll no one fired at the President from the Grassy Knoll. If someone did, they missed.

Well, we know that someone shot the President from some place.  But, from where did that happen?

It's time to move on.  This will be my last post here. 

The replies on the things I've presented are entertaining.  Some, are laugh out loud funny.  Others, are bizarre and delusional.

I'm going to continue this stroll through Dealey Plaza by stopping off at the Grassy Knoll.

This wasn't a dull topic by any means with over 2,000 views in less than a week.  I hope what I have presented will help people to a different understanding than what has been available for the last 50+ years. 

This post just has interesting odds and ends in it.

Harold Weisberg, in Whitewash III p. 48, 1967 did note that there was some kind of projecting object sticking out a second floor window.  You can see that in the window to the left of the group in the window.  It appears as a large flashlight or a rifle blast.  What it really appears as is a painted object.  Artists always have trouble painting light rays.

Until I had read Whitewash III I thought someone had played around with this internet photo.  There are what appears to be bullet holes above the window here and other places.  They seem to be too large to be rifle or pistol holes.  This has led me to believe someone has played with this photo and still does. 

But, the business with Harold Weisberg says that these large bullet holes may also go back in time.  I still don’t think this is of any consequences.  Maybe, a bunch of drunk Texans shot up Dealey Plaza late one night.  That would be risky business with the Sheriff’s Office just up the street.

This is just speculation.  Maybe, Tosh Plumlee’s abort team disrupted the assassination ambush by shooting at the assassins.  I don’t like the idea.  I put Tosh Plumlee in the same category as Gerry Patrick Hemming.

The explanations here are becoming loopier and loopier.  Here's one in that vein.

The Woman in Blue knew Abraham Zapruder would be filming.  Being innovative an wanting to set a new style she sewed the front of her blue dress to the back of her tan rain coat so that Abe would notice.  That way they could market a new concept and makes lots of money.

Thing is John, if you hear hooves think horse, not unicorn

Well, what about deer, cows, zebras, and other animals?  We want to keep an open mind on the "hooves" issue. 

The invisible tan raincoat?  Is that related to an invisible rabbit named Harvey?  

Bill,

I actually did what you are saying some time ago about the lines on the highway.  I thought it was a fairly weak argument.  The white lines are 10 ft (3 meters) and the distance between is 30 ft (9 meters).  So the distance from the intersection (turn off Houston St.) is about 150 to 200 ft.  The four car caravan seen in Altgens 6 at this point would be about 160 ft. or 4 stripes.  The TSBD is 100 ft wide and 100 feet long. 

The presidential limousine is just past the TSBD and not to the R L Thornton Freeway sign. 

The confusion comes from the image of Mr. and Mrs. Kennedy in the limo. Jackie has her hand on John's arm.  This is very similar or the same as the scene in Z frame 255.

Many people say this is at the same time.  One (Altgens 6) proves the others (Zapruder) validity. 

Z frame 287 is somewhat clearer.  The Woman in Blue appears to have on a blue dress and a black head ban.  The Babushka Lady is dressed in a head scarf, purse, and tan rain coat.

They are not the same people by appearance.  The Woman in Blue is in the Zapruder film and no where else.  The Babushka Lady is not in Zapruder.  She can be found in other photos and films.

Some people say they are the same person.  It's a curiosity.  One that others have spoke of long ago.  Jack White comes to mind.

Hi Ray,

Whose this Ralph Cinque everyone seems to be wanting to tar brush me with.  I've seen the name around but, have no idea what kind of work he does.  Remember, I am a newbie to this kind of forum activity. 

I've only posted on one other site and was not well received.  Oh, just like here with your ad hominem attacks.

And, now we come to the first thing I noticed about Altgens 6.  It is something I went looking for with this question “what was reflected on the side of the presidential limousine?”

Here’s the same crop from the last posting:

I really don’t know what to make of this reflection.  I can see that it has been edited.  On the front fender something is blacked out with black paint.  Some of the motorcycle policemen are edited out.  There are two long lines of black paint running toward the end of the limousine.  I don’t see what their purpose is.

I can see what appears to be a lamp post with light.  Behind it are possibly cars with headlights on.  There are buildings and room for streets in between buildings.  On the rear fender is a bus, maybe.

This is what I see.  You might see something else.  The problem is none of this should be seen.

If this vehicle is truly at Z frame 255 you should see the grassy area between Elm and Main Street.  You should see the reflecting pool area viewed from the west.

The reflections of a bus on Houston Street can possibly be seen if the vehicle is turning into Elm Street and reflecting whatever is on Houston Street.   

Remember the Law of Reflection, whatever the viewer sees depends on his location in relation to the reflected scene.  The angle of reflection (what the viewer sees) is equal to the angle of incidence (what is being reflected).   

Alastair,

the first two guys you show are two black guys in z frame 229.  The woman in blue is behind Charles brehm in what you refer to as z frame 285.

The babushka woman is seen in Marie much more.  The woman in blue is seen in zapruder.  Some say both are bev Oliver.

sorry for the typing

Bill,

can you tell me where the limo is on elm st.?  Is it at z frame 255 and after the freeway signs or before and closer to the TSBD?

to know where the viewer is important in knowing the angle of reflection.  Is altgens in the street?  He is shown on the grass in zapruder.  We can imagine him in the street.  Or take zapruder for his location.  The angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection.  That is hard to determine whe you don't know the viewers location or the position of the object providing the reflection.

Hey Ray,

That building has a wrinkle in it.  That's strange.

Alastair,

The Woman in Blue is the Babushka Woman.  The Woman in Blue is seen in the Zapruder film and no where else.  The Babushka Women is seen in the place of the Woman in Blue in other films and photos. 

Here's one for you.  Have you ever seen the face of the Babushka Woman?  There's a woman over on Main St. in Altgens 4 or maybe Altgens 3 that is a good candidate.  But, based on what you see you can't really say that's the Babushka Woman.  Other than that you never see her face.  Curious? 

If you go out west to the mountains in a particular western state which I will not name so that tourists don't find it you will find a high sheer mountain face.  Into the face of that mountain cliff is inscribed "Thou Shalt Not See The Face Of The Babushka Woman." 

Bill,

Thanks for making my point with the two photos.

Ray,

What building might that be?  Is it the widely distorted Dal-Tex in the rear of the photo?  Is it a building on east Elm such as the Purse and Co. building?  Is it the Terminal Annex on Commerce?  Could it be a building on the other side of the Triple Underpass?

Stayed tuned for the next post it has a mini lesson on the Law of Reflection. 

Here is a crop of Altgens 6 concerning the on and off nature of the screen or shade on Nellie Connolly’s window.

Altgens 4 does not have a screen, Altgens 5 probably, Altgens 6 has a screen and Altgens 7 does not. 

Nellie has to be screened and not seen.  If she is visible then she screws up the perspective on the interior of the limousine seen through the windshield.  If she is seen then you have to place Jackie Kennedy directly behind her.  And, that makes for one long arm on Jackie Kennedy.

This scene, Altgens 6, everyone says is equivalent to Zapruder frame 255.

The first thing to notice is Nellie’s window does not have a screen.  You can see grass through the window.

The second is Jackie Kennedy’s position is behind Nellie Connolly.  She is seated near the rear door, touching it with her side.  If these photos are equivalent then she should be visible in Altgens 6 directly behind the shaded window.

I believe I may have said this before.  It is worth repeating.  You LGTs need to calm down.  I'm actually doing you a favor by pointing out Altgens 6 is fake.  In the future you will not have to come up with these illogical, irrational, and contrived explanations.

Best Wishes

Alastair,

I see the point your making.  Besides other things, I was a Psych student in college.  There are many and varied types of perceptual illusions.  It doesn't explain the warped, distorted security vehicle for Johnson and the perfectly clear and undistorted people standing directly behind it.

As always, thanks for you comment and advise.

Alastair,

Thanks for the clarification.  I was basing what I said on William's FBI statements and his Warren Commission testimony.

I can see no one wants to talk about painted shadows.  So, let's move on.

The R L Thornton Freeway sign comes before the Stemmons Freeway sign.  If we use the Zapruder film as a yardstick of sorts, we have the Stemmons Freeway sign at about Z frame 210.  The black men are at Z frames 217 to 255.  Charles Brehm and the Lady in Blue are at Z frames 275 to 299.  Mary Moorman and Jean Hill show up at Z frames 287 to 317.  Ike Altgens first appears in Zapruder starting at about Z frame 338.

The last two shadows in Altgens 6 ( down in the corner) are said to be Mary Moorman and Jean Hill’s shadows.  The problem comes from Jean Hill being taller than Mary Moorman and in the Zapruder film she comes first in the duo and her shadow is shorter than Mary Moormans in this photo.

There are plenty of plausible answers to explain this.

I contend that you cannot prove these are the shadows of Mary Moorman and Jean Hill.  Even if these shadows are real (which I think is false) I don’t know whose they would be.

I put up Altgens 6 again just to show the wider picture for discussion purposes.

I do not see the R L Thornton Freeway sign or the Stemmons Freeway sign.  If these were the shadows of Moorman and Hill they should be 77 frames past the signs.  I would think that is about 75 feet.  Ike Altgens is in the street 128 frames or feet pass the Stemmons Free Way sign.  The signs are in front of the presidential vehicle not behind it.  The TSBD is 100 feet long.  We only see a portion of it.  I would think less than one third.

If the R L Thornton Freeway sign and the Stemmons Freeway sign are just to the right in this photo out of the picture then the shadows of the alleged Hill and Moorman would appear to be across from the signs.  Charles Brehm’s shadow is there and you might say his boy’s is there but, I see little evidence to prove it.  What I see is just shadow marks.  And, where is the shadow of the Woman in Blue standing directly behind him?  Their shadows also appear to be at or before the free way signs. 

The Zapruder yardstick on the left is different from the Zapruder yardstick on the right.  They are mismatched by almost a 100 frames.

Before I get jumped on with an explanation about camera lens and distortions, I simply do not believe it.  If Altgens is in the middle of the road (not shown in Zapruder) about 130 feet away then there shouldn’t be that much distortion.  The people down at the Elm Street crosswalk are not blurred or distorted such as the Vice-President’s security details car is.

Whoever composed Altgens 6 seriously screwed up the perspective in their composition.  Altgens did not have a magic camera lens.

Where is the correct position of the presidential limousine?  This Betzner photo might help.  You will need to back up the motorcade until the presidential limousine is before the R L Thornton Freeway sign.  This will just about put the vehicle off the SW corner of the TSBD.  That might be across Elm St. from you know who.

Alastair,

ouch!

i'll have to rephrase.

Good try on the shadows.  Just remove what you find offensive.

There are suspicious things about the Main and Houston intersection at the time of the motorcade.  The Patsy Paschall film shows the presidential vehicle until it nears the intersection then jumps over to Elm Street.  The same thing happens as the presidential limousine approaches the Court Record building.  8 films skip over that area.  In Elsie Dorman the figures in the limousine are blacked out or darkened to incomprehension at the beginning of the film when the vehicle moves onto Houston Street. 

I suspect Altgens 5 and others are attempts to show nothing happening here, move on.  I mentioned Bonnie Ray Williams earlier.  Here's a fantasy. 

Imagine you are a lawyer and you have Bonnie Ray Williams on the witness stand.  It could happen like this.

Lawyer:  Now, Bonnie we are only interested in the truth.

Bonnie:  Yes, Sir

Lawyer:  What is it, Bonnie?  Did you hear two shots when the president's vehicle turned onto Houston from Main or, did you hear gunfire when the limousine turned into Elm Street from Houston Street or, did you hear 3 shots sometime after the president's vehicle passed your position?

Bonnie:  Uh, Uh....

It's hard for me to believe Bonnie Ray Williams but, the Warren Commission did.  Bonnie and Harold Norman were their star witnesses.  Junior Jarmen, who was with Williams and Norman, blew up in their faces.