John Butler

Like it or not, it is a fact. Classified as Top Secret and hidden until the ARRB. These 3 facts are meaningful. Believe it or not! Recall that Mary said when she took that "Grassy Knoll" Polaroid she heard the first shot and then 3 or 4 later. Definitely not the official story. She never changed that. That account matches what the witnesses who said shooting occurred in front of the TSBD.

The giant railroad man is behind someone and not near the rail. I won't swear to it, but I think one can actually see his feet up in the air behind that fellow near the rail. Another curious thing about that Altgens shot is you can see to the other side of the bridge. I believe that is impossible from the position Altgens was at when he took that photo on Elm that close to the bridge. The bridge is some 115+ feet wide. Elm runs downhill, and not uphill. There are 7 tracks on the bridge. This is what it looked like back in the day. It is impossible to see to the other side from Altgens position. There was no other rail to the rear in those days. That is a modern addition. Here's another view of the bridge. It is roughly the distance from the bridge as Altgens, but on North Elm. I think you can go back to the intersection in front of the TSBD and you still cannot see the railing on the west side of the bridge. It is not possible to see to the other side of the bridge from Altgens position. From Bell's position yes. But, I have my doubts due the partitions of the monument that Bell filmed through or didn't. I don't see how those partitions are not in the frames. Someone have a good explanation? You can't even see the fence that was present in 2015.

Chris, I believe that is a few frames later. Bell has both kinds of scenes. I think I have made mention of this several times.

WC Exhibit Hill No. 5: and, and, TSBD is the background for her Grassy Knoll Polaroid. Which by the way isn't the Grassy Knoll, but should the TSBD. I don't know when this was changed, but according to Jean Hill's testimony it was. The interview with Arlen Specter was a hostile one. Jean fought to get this information in her testimony. It is a shame she later changed her testimony and that testimony in later years said much the same as Mary Morman. If I remember correctly, Mary Moorman never changed her testimony. She was always down by the Grassy Knoll. There is a film out there somewhere in which Mary is very nervous describing where she was at. It may be the same film where she said she wasn't wearing white slacks that day. I keep mentioning this in hopes of jogging someone else's memory and iding that film.

Bond Photo 6:

Bell Film:

Patsy Paschal: There are several more photos showing no one on the bridge. Should I go on?

From the Robert Hughes film:

That's how to win an argument! Step one: claim that a piece of evidence is a fake. Step two: if another piece of evidence comes along that contradicts your claim, just claim that the second piece of evidence is also a fake. Your claims become unfalsifiable. You can't lose! Jeremy, Don't ascribe your techniques to me.

That's how to win an argument! Step one: claim that a piece of evidence is a fake. Step two: if another piece of evidence comes along that contradicts your claim, just claim that the second piece of evidence is also a fake. Your claims become unfalsifiable. You can't lose! Foster said, "Mr. BALL. I have a map that I will---just a moment. I will get it.Mr. FOSTER. All right. (Off the record.)Mr. BALL. Tell me where you were standing on the triple overpass about the time that the President's motorcade came into sight?Mr. FOSTER. I was standing approximately along the---I believe the south curb of Elm Street.Mr. BALL. Were you on the overpass?Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir; at the east--be the east side of the overpass.Mr. BALL. On the east side of the overpass?Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir." and, "Mr. BALL. Off the record.(Discussion off the record.) and, the record had to be corrected and improved: "Mr. BALL. Now, where were you standing?Mr. FOSTER. Standing along the east curb of---east side of the overpass over Elm Street there. About the south curb.Mr. BALL. Over, above the south curb of Elm?Mr. FOSTER. Yes, sir.Mr. BALL Will you put a mark on there? Mark an "X" where you were standing and write your initials right next to that "X".J.---what are the initials?Mr. FOSTER. J. W.Mr. BALL. J. W. F. That marks where you were standing.Mr. FOSTER. Approximately; yes, sir." His testimony had to match Altgens 7. If you look close every person on the bridge is surrounded with a halo of light. I believe this is an indication of cutting and pasting. A closer look: I can hear it now. That's just light reflection. Who is the giant railroad man standing on the left-hand side behind a person. Giant? Standing on a box? Wrongly placed in the film by the alterers? And, Where is Officer Foster? Is he the last man going north on the bridge? His Dallas Police white had doesn't show up very well. But, that is where he said he was.

Chris, It is just one more story in Dealey Plaza that has holes and is false. There are way too many people making up things, like false stories, to justify Lone Nutism and stir controversy into the understanding of Dealey Plaza.

I have read all the testimony of these witnesses. I have watched the Mark Lane interviews. Foster committed perjury. He said what they wanted him to say. He later said different things. Officer White on the other hand spoke truly. Why be considered crazy with a Ghost Train on the bridge that kept him from seeing or hearing anything during the assassination while nobody else believed a train was there? And, then there is the 3rd officer, Officer Brown out on the Stemmons bridge. I know the railroad men said they were on the bridge. Oher evidence contradicts that. I first notice this in the badly edited Patsy Paschal film. Someone or an editing team didn't get the word. They didn't put the railroad men on the bridge. Officer Foster's white cap is visible just off the bridge to the north. In part I believe the railroad men were agents of the company they worked that were sent out to say things that would keep their company out of the investigation occurring in Dealey Plaza. No train. Railroad men on the bridge. Officer Foster verification. Shooting from the Grassy Knoll. I believe this was prepared to keep the railroad company (I'll have to go back and look up the name) out of the investigation and any thought of a train being on the railroad tracks during the assassination. The railroad bridge is the absolute best place to shoot for the assassination in Dealey Plaza on Elm Street.

No problems Sean, A person believes what they believe. Intelligent people will find a counter argument whether it is valid or not. Speaking of beliefs, I have doubts about the NPIC/Hawkeye Works story. But, those doubts have nothing to do with the so-called chain of evidence on the handling of the film.

The list contains more than 105+ witnesses. I just can't remember from time to time whether that number is 108 or 114 since I took some off the list due to their statements being more arguable than what I am comfortable with.

That's not what was being said. The 10 or so railroad men could see the same events if they were stationed above Elm Street, or just off the bridge to the north. There is more than 5+ photo sources that show there is no one on the bridge just before the shooting. They don't show a train. There are witnesses saying a train was there during the shooting. Officer Foster would not have allowed those men on the bridge due to mishaps occurring. 3 of Dallas' finest said a train was there. One didn't at first, but later admitted a train was there. Altgens 7 shows them on the bridge, Bell shows them off the bridge and just a few frames later on the bridge, and there are others which I am not recalling at the moment. What the railroad men did testify to was in nature a conspiracy with shooting from the Grassy Knoll. That is priceless. I don't understand the bit about railroad men concealing alteration of photo evidence. What they talked about to Mark Lane was seeing smoke rising above the Grassy Knoll suggesting a rifle being fired. Rifles use smokeless powder. I sure what they were seeing was steam from the heat of the round. It was a humid day. It had just rained prior to the assassination. I have read their testimony and some said something different from the official story and are included in the list of 105+ witnesses I collected saying something different than the official story about where shooting occurred.

Sandy didn't say this. Jeremy B. did. Jeremy has a disturbing habit of expressing his opinion as if it is the opinion of others. Someone with a casual interest would not know enough about the assassination to judge whether something is nonsensical or not. Of course, everything that Jeremy disagrees with is "nonsensical stuff". And, of course his opinion and the folks that agree with him are the ones that count as true and nonsensical.

Why? The truth doesn't depend on quantity or randomness. The truth depends on an honest interpretation of a single event. And, there could be a long series of true events.

There was plenty of time to alter these frames. This is all the public was allowed to see. Add Moorman's Polaroid and the Altgens photos and you have the official story. Somewhere near 100 witnesses said these scenes happened in front of the TSBD. The action was over by the time we see the first frame, Z 133 above. The work was done at the Hawkeye Works and at the NPIC. These are in the "original" film since they were altered to be in that film. The rest came later. The rest of the film took more time. There was plenty of time to do that later after all of the witnesses' testimony was gathered and all other films were in the possession of the government. This is what John Costella meant by his thinking that the film was built from the ground up. Stage sets in Zapruder: 1. Mannikin Row- this group of 19 people between the Stemmons Sign and the lamppost near the TSBD does very little moving. And, that is suspicious. Many have remarked on this. 2. The crosswalk at the intersection of Houston and Elm on East Houston. This group of people in Zapruder does not match the ones shown in Altgens 5. It is a stage set. Jack White first noticed this. 3. The SW corner of Houston and Elm. The number of people on this corner in Zapruder does not match the number of people seen in Elsie Dorman during the same time period. There are people in Elsie Dorman who do not show up in the Zapruder film. I would like to say the same for Zapruder people not in Dorman, but I am not certain at this point. The different number of people first noticed by yours truly. No. 1 is somewhat arguable. Nos. 2 and 3 are not. Since, the critics here do not pay attention to facts or clearly seen images then they can say whatever they want. I think Mr. Healey would probably call those groups traveling mattes.

I'm not certain Pat watched this short film, or he simply didn't understand what Linda was saying. Particularly, about the train behind the Pergola in the railroad yards. Maybe he confused me with her. I am a proponent of a train being on the Triple Underpass during the assassination based on witness statements. I call it the "Ghost Train" since there is no evidence of it except witness statements. There is sufficient evidence to show the railroad men were not on the Triple Underpass above Elm. They were nearby with Officer Foster just off the bridge.

Oh dear! I'm sure that John, like everyone else, does actually accept this obvious and uncontroversial fact. Unlike everyone else, he just doesn't want to admit it. Jeremy, I continue to say no. There are two sources for the imagery I use. Groden's films and John Costella. The "obvious and uncontroversial fact" is something you should confront with honesty and unclouded eyes from preconceptions and suppositions that only reside in your head. You are like a dog with a bone, gnawing on something that doesn't have much meat on it.

Chris, Once again. Well said. The Willis family were speed demons. They moved around quickly. After viewing the assassination on Elm they can be seen in the Hughes Film near Main Street. They got there quickly also??

Richard Bothun. I don't know what he really looked like. But, in Zapruder he is a carbon copy of Ike Altgens. Bothun was a railroad worker. Guess who he gave his film too? Altgens' Daily Morning News, if my memory hasn't failed me. I've been there. Last time 2015. Houston Street is roughly 200 feet. I don't remember the exact dimensions. Croft ran from the south side of the intersection of Main and Houston to the SW Corner of Elm. That is if he did it? Maybe something like 250 feet. Zapruder shows he is there waiting for the p limo to come by. Elsie says he wasn't there. He does look painted in. He is standing close to where Allman and Ford should be.

ha, ha, very charming.

True. There is no Pierce and Terry film. But, Elsie Dorman shows they had cameras and were taking photos. Maybe they just liked to carry cameras around. What happened to there film? I have always suspected that Robert Croft was not on the SW corner. Do you know where he was at in the intersection of Main and Houston? He was on the south side of the intersection on Houston Street. To beat the p limo to the SW corner of Houston and Elm he would have to have made a similar miraculous run such as the one Phil Willis made. He had a longer distance to travel. In Zapruder Croft looks like he was painted into the film. His much credited photo may be either from Allman or Ford. He is not in the Elsie Dorman film. OBTW, Phil is either. Are they really in the Zapruder film? There is no more than about a second or two difference in the films. The p limo is just about to turn the corner into the intersection. As far as Linda identifying herself as the dark haired girl in the gold skirt, you yourself said she was "talking out of her butt". If she can't be trusted with what she said, then why believe her in this instance? That's been gone over before and the consensus was she is not Linda. I wonder who is making up things now?

Linda says differently. Check out John Deignan at the top of the page. The above piece is skillful piece of nonsense designed to charge someone with a malicious accusation. The above was designed to ruin a fellow's honesty and place doubt on what he said.