John Butler

Jeremy, You make these bold proclamations on a regular basis. I have yet to see any proof to back up such statements as this from you. Show me how you know this to be true and maybe I will pay more attention.

Alan Smith was neither at the TSBD under the Sniper's Nest at the SE corner of the building, nor was he in the area I call Manniken Row on Elm Street. First off I could only find a couple of photos/films that show the area in detail clear enough to determine Alan Smith and at least two friends were not there. First off in a Bell frame crop: Mostly women there and one male who could be James Worrell. Next is a Betzner 2 crop: Again, mostly women and one male leaning against the building and probably James Worrell. Next is from Bronson film and a crop of one of the frames: In this frame we see Speer/Scully's claim for Alan Smith and friend. Not friends. Alan said friends implying at least two. The next is a comparison of a frame and photo showing the same area at the same time. They are different and contradict Bronson. In the bottom Z frame the individual is named as John Templin. Alan Smith was not in Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination. He was on Main Street.

Be nice to read this.

Except for Allen and the AMIPA film. There were witnesses who testified to hearing gunshots when the p. limo was on Main Street. True, few in number. You know Alan's friends were never tracked down and interviewed leaving poor Alan to swing in the wind. Just as you can't rely on the media to be honest and unaltered, you can't rely on the witnesses to be honest and non-biased. John and Nellie were politicians. They said what they could under the constraints of the time. If their testimony was allowed to vary then that's just more point towards their honesty. Or, maybe not. Every testimony in Dealey Plaza dealing with the JFKA has to be viewed suspiciously. Was the witness allowed to be honest and testify to what they knew? Was their testimony coerced? Were they told what to say. Or, changed later by the FBI or other government authorities? How much was rehearsed before testifying to the WC lawyers and WC members? Basically, on any event in Dealey Plaza you can find contrary information or a different view point. That is why in 58 years there is no agreement on the assassination. Everyone thinks something different. There is agreement on some things, but not all. We tend to think we are right with what we see and think. And, a lot of times that is not the case. Fortunately, for myself, I have a number of good people who keep track of what I say and point out where I am wrong or where they think I am wrong. When they take the time to do that generally they are right. Not always, but mostly. I generally don't support what I think about Main Street by arguing with another. It is a waste of my energy and time. Most folks don't see what I see or admit it. But, I am not going to change my mind since I have spent years and months looking at these things and these are the only conclusions I can come to.

Denise, I think your Elm intersection bias is causing you to misread the article on Alan Smith. Smith said a few minutes later. He probably ran from Main St. as many others did in time to see what was happening at the TSBD. He saw what was happening at the TSBD at a later time from his description. He said he saw the policemen at the TSBD with ladders. How long do you think it took those policemen to find and employ ladders? Where did they get them? The police surrounded the place and then move the crowd away. This happening is not evident in the early media around the TSBD. Maybe later. I would think much later. There are no films or photos that put Alan Smith and his friends at the SE corner to the TSBD to be under the Sniper's window. Just as there are no films or photos that put Alan and his friends in Mannikin Row. That's Alan and his friends suggesting at least two friends. They are simply not there. Same with Pat Speers and Chris Scully. If you haven't read what I said about this then let me know and I will repost it. You are operating out of the same mindset as Speers and Scully. Sorry, if that sounds rude or obnoxious. They could not conceive of shooting on Main Street therefore Alan Smith had to be confused and wrong. His character had to be challenged and discredited. Not everything fits shooting at the Elm Street intersection. Consider Altgens 5 and its alteration. Why was it altered? Generally, when you alter film you what to tell a story that is different than what actually occurred. I believe that the JFKA happened there from the witnesses and the Zapruder Gap. I think thinks happened in the Zapruder Gap and that's why it was excised from the film. There are many more witness statements that read as the ones I listed but it is as if someone changed the statements to read past the TSBD down toward the triple underpass.

Hmmm? Speechless? I must have made a major impression. But, don't worry it is simply a part of the "magic" of Dealey Plaza. The dope culture psychologists and anthropologists of the early 60's were talking about alternate realities or separate realites at about the time of the JFKA. Maybe that is what you are seeing. A reality where there were no face masks, no Harvey and Lee, and no shooting on Main Street. It is the "Warren Commission" reality.

2232 November 1963 23 November 1963 An Introduction to the Jfk Assassination Oswald's Rifle and Paraffin Tests : The JFK Assassination (22november1963.org.uk) Three Tests Proved Oswald’s Innocence Test 1: Spectrographic Analysis Oswald’s paraffin casts were subjected to two analyses. Spectrographic analysis, the method normally used by the police, showed evidence of barium and antimony on Oswald's hands, but not on his cheek.4 Test 2: Neutron Activation Analysis on Oswald Spectrographic analysis was considered sufficiently reliable for criminal investigations, but in this case a more incisive test was also used. Neutron activation analysis, which is capable of identifying the presence of substances in quantities much too small to be captured by spectrographic analysis, also showed no incriminating quantities of residues on Oswald’s cheek.5 The result was reported in an internal Warren Commission memo: “At best, the analysis shows that Oswald may have fired a pistol, although this is by no means certain. … There is no basis for concluding that he also fired a rifle.”6 Test 3: Controlled Neutron Activation Analysis In order to check the validity of the neutron activation analysis of Oswald’s paraffin casts, a controlled test was made. Seven marksmen fired a rifle of the same type as that found on the sixth floor. The standard paraffin test was administered, and the paraffin casts were subjected to neutron activation analysis. All seven subjects showed substantial amounts of barium and antimony on their hands and, more importantly, on their cheeks.7 The absence of significant quantities of residues on Oswald’s cheek meant that he almost certainly had not fired a rifle that day.

This is what I consider the head shot on Main Street. It is as Alan Smith described. A closer look matches an autopsy photo: As I said earlier this could be considered arguable. However, I think this is a real wound made by a weapon first described by Ron Bulman, the HS Man. The DeLisle carbine. This was a .45 caliber weapon devised in WWII for snipers. It was sound suppressed to the point where you only heard the bolt action of the gun. The British had a version based on the 9mm Sten. When I was a kid a restaurant owner who live down the street, a braggart and bully, was shot in the head at a card game. He lived for years afterwards. I didn't notice any difference in his behavior afterwards. There are many examples of people taking horrendous head wounds such as a railroad spike in the forehead and not only living but doing things after the wound. This was a major topic in a psychology class I had taken in college. My thought is that Kennedy was shot in the forehead as noted by Alan Smith and this stunned him to the point he didn't react much to the back wounds. He knew he should be smiling and waving to the crowd. That's what he was there for, so he did. I don't think this was involuntary. He was still thinking, but just not rationally.

I happen to believe in JC's preposterous 2 or 3 Oswalds running amok in Dealey Plaza. Well, at least two. One upstairs and another on the street. No one knew Oswald/PM was on the street until I ran across it in the John Martin film just a few years ago. I think that is something even the film alterers missed. They didn't catch everything in twisting and warping the story into the official version.

It wouldn't matter at the time. The coverup would take care of that. And, it did. My take on the PM is over 50 years since the event. As are most others. The "patsy" must be kept at the TSBD for the big event. I believe based on the John Martin film Oswald was told to film the p. limo and motorcade. He had to go back to Irving to get one of his cameras. It was in a standard grocery paper bag of the time which Frazier described as about 2 feet. Not big enough for a rifle or curtain rods. Oswald told Frazier it was curtain rods in the bag. He did not trust him. It was none of Frazier's business. It was spy vs spy business. I often wonder what happened to his film? Did it go to the CIA masters so they could see true imagery of the shooting and aftermath? Did it go to Dallas business men and political leaders? John Martin and Couch definitely show PM using a camera with a flash.

This film does not show a head shot such as Zapruder on Main Street. Just the back shot(s). More than one. There is a forehead wound fairly bloodless in appearance, IMO, but it is arguable.

Thanks Chris, I know. It is hard to take in and believe. I don't really support myself since all the evidence points toward something different. And, most folks do not see what I see. Thanks for supporting what you can live with and bluntly telling what you can't. I couldn't expect more. Keep up the good work and let me know when I have erred or gone astray. extra: It is too much of a headache from opposition to support what I really believe. The time and energy is just not worth it. Besides, there is other fish to fry that is more believable such as your work. Exposure of what happened during the assassination is the first priority and then one can move on to other important aspects of the Kennedy assassination. The whole truth of the assassination in Dealey Plaza has not been exposed yet. Enough has that we know basically what happened. The work of several people in recent years has destroyed the Zapruder film as the main agent of what happened. Not many people believe the Z film is real.

Bob Yeargan made a film of the presidential limousine and the motorcade on Main Street. It escaped the dragnet and capture of most media related to the assassination. It is called the AMIPA film. Here is a crop from a larger scene showing the presidential limousine on Main Street. If the president was not shot here, then he may have swallowed a bug and is coughing it up. IMO, what this shows is the president is shot in the back and the air in his lungs is violently propelled into his mouth in a large quantity and faster than he is able to deal with in a cough puffing his cheeks out. There are about 3 scenes similar to this suggesting 3 shots to the back. If that's not true than I don't know what this is. And, I'm sure JB and JC will capitalize on this statement.

Jackie Kennedy- It is what she said Part II From a Jackie Kennedy Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZawMA_vXfc JFK Murder Jackie Kennedy Reveals All Rich Torne Published May 10, 2017 Jackie says: “They were gunning the motorcycles, there were these little backfires; there was one noise like that; I thought it was a backfire. Then next I saw Connally grabbing his arms and saying “No No No,” with his fist beating---Then Jack turned and turned--- All I remember was a blue grey building up ahead; then turned back, so neatly; his last expression was so neat; he had his hand out….” The reference for this is 11/29/63 The Making of the President 1960 People have a tendency to ignore or disbelieve what they don’t understand or what doesn’t make sense to them. Jackie Kennedy said something strange decades ago and it just kind of went over people’s heads. The problem with this statement by Mrs. Kennedy is there is no blue-grey building down by “X marks the spot” in front of the Grassy Knoll. Nowhere in the Zapruder film will you find a blue-grey building on Elm Street. Everyone believes President Kennedy was shot in front of the Grassy Knoll because of the all-pervasive influence of the Zapruder film and other media. Let me repeat that. There is no blue-grey building on Elm Street that can be seen driving toward the Triple Underpass. What was she talking about? In fact, there is no blue-grey building on Elm Street or Houston Street in Dealey Plaza. The Old Court House on Main and Houston has a first floor that is grey. But, the overall impression is one of a red, brick building. You really don’t notice that the first floor is grey when you look at the building. OK, maybe some do notice. I looked at the building for ages and never connected the first floor was grey until someone pointed it out. It was simply a red brick building. There was a blue-grey building on Main Street just east of the Old Court House on the corner of Main Street and South Record Street. This was the only blue-grey building in the area. This blue-grey building is no longer there. The area is now a park, the John F. Kennedy Memorial Plaza. It vanished shortly after the assassination. The building was gone by at least 1966. At first it was a parking lot and then the monument. Jackie Kennedy’s information can be interpreted as the shooting of Jack Kennedy happened just after she noticed a blue grey building ahead. The phrase “last expression” means he was shot and killed there on Main Street just before reaching the area of the Old Court House. With all of the other assassination evidence saying otherwise, it is reasonable for people to ignore and not be convinced that what she said had any meaning. This notion that President Kennedy was shot on Main Street struck people as bizarre and was ignored. I’m sure this disbelief caused Mrs. Kennedy to move toward what is seen in the Zapruder film. In her WC testimony Rankin leads her and she reluctantly goes where he leads. If you read her WC testimony it sounds as if she is describing two events. Contrary to that, I’m not so certain what she said should be ignored. Keep this article in mind in the future as we explore the events of the presidential motorcade coming down Main Street, turning onto Houston Street, and then heading down Elm Street in other media. The "blue-grey building" is just east of the policeman in the street. This is what I believe she said.

Having some idea of how photos are altered, one could say this throat shot was done on Main Street by Altgens photographing it there and then later part of that scene containing the vehicle was added to film taken on Elm Street. All the films of the p limo turning from Main Street on to Houston Street are altered by distortion, frames missing, splices, and in some humans blocking the view. That is about as relevant as saying Kennedy was shot in the throat behind the Stemmons sign or just before. The art of alteration in those days is amazing if done correctly. Altgens 6 is not done correctly. There are mistakes visible not only in the doorway of the TSBD, but in other parts of the film. I have a problem with how many times Kennedy was shot in the head. There was a post sometime back that when you counted everyone's ideas then Kennedy had been shot in the head more than 5 times. Here's what I think: 1. There was a forehead wound. This was not in the temple area, but near the forehead. This is evident in an autopsy photo where a flap of skin triangular in nature exposes the wound. 2. A second wound was in the temple area coming out at the occipital/parietal area at the back of the skull. This was the tangential wound of Dr. Kemp Clark and the wound seen by 40 or so Parkland people. I credit this as being a luck shot. 3. There may have been a 3rd wound to the head done after the fact to have a wound from the rear.

He used different rounds also. Not quite the same as what was available in the 60s. How much this would effect his tests I don't know. But, it was better than Dan Rather's years ago test shooting up a log through the center to show that the Carcano round wound not deform that much. I was somewhat surprised by the force of the Carcano round. I wonder whether that was just the effect of water in producing hydrostatic shock rather normal hydrostatic shock from the body of a being or animal.

I would say a shot came from the direction of the TSBD. It could have come from the Dal-Tex or further up the street where there was construction work going on there. Toni Glover may have said it best: 20. Toni Glover- in a YouTube video from the JFK Assassination Forum, Rare Interview With JFK Assassination Witness Toni Glover Who Was Only 11 Years Old In 1963, Toni Glover said as Kennedy rounded the corner (corner of Houston and Elm intersection) his head exploded.

There is film on Main Street showing that door open.

They were on the fourth floor of the TSBD. I believe they were one room, a store room, east from where Dorothy Garner, Vickie Adams, etc were. The trees also blocked their view.

The head wound from the front removed a great deal of the President's brain. Particularly, in the cerebellum and rear of the skulll near the spinal cord. He was effectively dead when shot there. I usually catch a lot of flack for this. I believe there were several ambush teams directed to fire 3 shots along the route. I believe Kennedy was shot early on and because of his back brace he did not appear to be decisively shot and killed. He was still upright and in times waving to the crowd. I believe his forehead wound as described by Alan Smith to be of low caliber which simply confused the president mentally. He couldn't figure out what was going on but knew he must wave to the crowd and smile. And, that image contradicts the whole thing that I have just said for folks. I get these notions by watching the AMIPA film frame by frame. This waving was before the head shot described by the Parkland doctors.

I consider Howard Brennan to not be telling the truth when he changed the distance he was from the p limo several times. Actually, he was quite close, but tried to distance himself as much as he could to please the authorities, mainly the FBI.

I have a problem with the Railroad Men on the bridge. Based on other films and photos they were not as we see in Altgens 7 above Elm Street. They were off to the side above the grass leading up to the bridges north side. They were kept there by Officer Foster. I am not doubting what they say except for those who say they were on the bridge when they state whatever they are saying.

Remember, Mary Moorman said she heard the first shot (that which is usually seen as the Z 313 shot) when she was taking or had just taken her Polaroid. I think shots were fired in groups of three and that is my best guess from what I have read in witness statement. These 3 shot groups run from the intersection of Main and Houston all the way down to the Grassy Knoll. That's my best guess which I will not strictly defend. It could have happened in a different manner.

I think her testimony was changed or at least what she said coerced by the FBI. Perhaps, she willing testified to something different than the other two ladies that were with her said. They couldn't have a third lady saying shooting occurred on Main Street.

Earlier on I think you have confused Alan Smith with James Worrell. He was the person leaning against the building directly under the Sniper's Nest. However, there is no visual evidence for Worrell or Smith being in that location.