John Butler

Some witnesses said there were 5 or 6 shots at the Tippit murder. Is this the "missing" shell that is being mentioned here? Instead of 3 Winchester shell and 1 Remington the "missing" shell would make 3 Winchesters and 2 Remingtons? Any other information on Dhority and the shell manufacturer? Or, was this lost by the wayside?

Tony, That's really interesting. Never heard of that before. Thanks. I am going to take Virgie at her word. I generally do that until some other evidence contradicts what was said. Chris Barstow and I beat just about every bush north of the underpass and didn't really find any exact proof of a train on or just off the underpass after the assassination. Just speculation on my part and DPD officer statements that can lead one to think of the "ghost train". Claims of seeing a train are like the Chisms and Newmans who saw the President stand in the p. limo and then sit directly before the shooting. It's like witnesses on Main and Houston saying they heard shots when the p. limo entered the intersection. Other witnesses claimed they heard shooting when the p. limo was on Main Street. Toni Glover sees the President's head explode in the intersection of Houston and Elm. These sort of statements are hard to ignore and at the same time hard to believe. OBTW, didn't Phil Willis sue or claim that his film was altered and a train removed from it while in the hands of the authorities? A train behind the pergola? Maybe someone should look into all the weird statements in Dealey Plaza. Often times at the periphery of an event one finds truths that are sometimes obscured by the majority view.

There is little information on the internet about Richard Bothun. He is a mysterious and suspicious person as far as I am concerned. Being suspicious may not be his fault, but rather the fault of the authorities who kept Bothun in the dark. At the time I did the post, Who was Richard O. “Dick” Bothun, I did not have a copy of Richard B. Trask’s Pictures of Pain. At the time the price was exorbitant at Amazon, but later came down to a reasonable price and I obtained a copy. This is an update with new and relevant information from the Trask book. As you will see there is little relevant and new material to talk about. Bothun knowledge: · Richard “Dick” Bothun was born in 1921 and died in 1981. This would make him 42 at the time of the assassination. · James “Ike” Altgens was born in 1919. At the time of the assassination he would have been 45. · Altgens was an amateur photographer who loved to develop and print his work. He used a 50mm lens with either a Nikon or Pentax camera according to his wife. · We do not have any direct evidence from an interview of Dick Bothun. Nobody bothered to contact him while he was alive. · His photos of the motorcade and the events of Dealey Plaza are virtually the same as Ike Altgens. This is except for Bothun 4. · Richard Bothun was a railroad worker. Why would a railroad worker be dressed in a suit and tie exactly similar to Altgens? · Mr. Bothun took pictures in Dealey Plaza on the day of the assassination. · Mr. Bothun took pictures before the assassination and after, but not during the shooting. He was emotionally overcome. Why isn’t there any photos prior to the shooting? · There are at least 4 photos accredited to Mr. Bothun of which number 4 seems to be the most important. · He took photos from the same locations as Ike Altgens on the Houston St. and Main St. intersection, along Elm St. in the grassy area between Elm St. and Main St. and, he is with Altgens in the Zapruder film. His photos are similar to Altgens, Willis, and Hughes. · He gave one of his photos to the Dallas Morning News, the home of Ike Altgens. · Mr. Bothun did not give any interviews to reporters, or make a statement with either the FBI or Secret Service, nor was he interviewed by attorneys for the WC. As far as I know he didn’t talk to anyone. If anyone has something different, please advise. · Most of the major assassination researchers do not mention Richard Bothun. There is little or no information about Bothun. If they do mention him it is mostly about Bothun 4. · There are curious problems with Jack White and his statements over the years regarding the authenticity of the Altgens photos and Dick Bothun. · In Bothun 4 there is a woman across the street taking a photo. The importance of this escapes Trask. Who was and where is that woman’s photo? · Richard Bothun, who photographed JFK motorcade and assassination aftermath, dies of heart attack in 1981. · What little is said on the internet about Bothun concerns the photo Bothun 4. · Does anyone else know anything extra about Dick Bothun? Are there any photos of Dick Bothun other than the Zapruder film? If anyone has anything extra to add or clarify please do.

This re-opens this thread from 2017. I want to say before I begin talking about Richard Bothun again, I feel an opinion about Richard Trask’s Pictures of Pain is necessary. I didn’t care for the book. In my opinion, Trask’s book is a complimentary piece to the Warren Commission conclusions, or the tale of the official conspiracy. It is descriptive at best. As an example, in Chapter 3, he could have at least asked the question why the Chisms and Newmans said the president stood and waved to the crowd before the shooting. There are no examples in films or photos of this behavior and the majority of witnesses say something different. From Chapter 3 page 157, “Shortly after the shooting Mr. Bothun apparently went back to work. He seems not to have been stopped or questioned as a witness at the scene, and apparently did not volunteer information to any official”. The fact the record says very little about Bothun and “any official” was not interested or ducked anything to do with Richard Bothun. There is no DPD, or county statements, no FBI or Secret Service statement, or any Warren Commission testimony. There were no reporters questioning Bothun. His photo gets published in the Dallas Morning News and no one questions him. Apparently, the only person interested in Richard Bothun was Richard Trask. Jack White knew Bothun and he gives a description of Bothun as being thin and not like portly Ike Atlgens at the time of the assassination. This is contrary to Zapruder which shows Altgens and Bothun as being virtual twins. On November 23, a cropped version of Bothun’s fourth photo appeared in the Dallas Morning News. Bothun’s wife said he might have dropped it off there. Bothun’s photos are very similar to Altgens and other photographers such as Willis and Hughes. Here are his 4 photos: Since Bothun’s photos are similar to Altgens, one might ask the question why did Bothun only take 4 photos. According to Trask, he was an avid photographer who loved to develop and print his work. 4 photos is strange for that kind of person. Altgens took 8. He might be excused as being a professional who only took the best photos anyone could. But, a former newspaper editor said once on the forum that if Altgens brought back that many photos from a major event to him he would have fired him. So, Bothun’s only 4 photos can be considered strange for an amateur photographer who loved his work. They are very similar to Altgens photos. Since Bothun and Altgens were mirror twins in Zapruder and Altgens worked at the DMN could Bothun's photo 4 be one of Altgen’s other photos? I have this image in my mind of a professional photographer’s camera rapidly shooting like a slow machine gun on a roll of say 36 frames. Strange, indeed.

Tony, I believe the bottom photo is Willis slide 7. It is rather boring. There is no giant, evil machine visible. Because of the presence of the press bus this is about 1 or 2 minutes after the assassination. There is the Babushka Lady present, I believe the peripatetic Altgens or "Oscar" Bothun is running across the street, the two or three men on the steps are still visible when they are gone in other media. Jean Hill is back from her run up the hill in Bell. It's obvious she didn't spent much time in the railroad yard. It is interesting to note that the people on the bridge are very similar to the blobs in the recently posted Bell frames. This could mean that there were people on the bridge in Bell, although hard to see. But, they are still different from Altgens 7 with a couple of people above Main. The spacing of the people is the same. There is at least a minute between Bell and Willis due to the presence of the bus. They haven't moved in the interval between Bell and Wills. Due to the ground level view we don't see all the signs and buildings in Bell. Bell does not view far enough south to see the Texas Bank sign. Maybe the Willis photo is not so boring with "Oscar" Bothun there. More on Richard O. “Dick” Bothun later.

This is from Chris's gif. Bell frame #12. This is a cleaned up and very clear (for a Dealey Plaza film) frame. I don't think I can see any of the 10 railroad men on the overpass above Elm Street in the areas shown above. The horizon line is not table top flat. The other side of the bridge is still to high and gives a false impression of the width of the Triple Underpass. The view of the Stemmons is better in a film with traffic moving. Here is a crop and mag of the same area: I can't tell whether there are people or blobs above Elm Street. If people, it is not the right number. I am assuming blobs since two people are clearly seen at the north end of the bridge above the grass. This is where I place Officer Foster and the 10 railroad men. You can still see everything from there and do not need to be artificially posted above Elm Street as in Altgens 7. There is no train here which as it was designed to contradict the statements of Officer White, Earle Brown, and others. Seeing is believing! Right? This is a crop and mag of Bell # 22 from the gif: If you accept the blobs above Elm Street as people then you need to accept the blobs above Main Street as people. Definitely not Altgens 7! What is that giant evil machine beyond the overpass??

That's it. Great gif. Worthy of Chris Davidson. You can see the traffic in the background on the Bell film. Ron's truck or van is seen briefly. Perhaps the gif needs to be slowed down a bit so that you can view the material a little better. I notice the horizon is not flat like a table top here. I would have to see if some of the individual frames show a flat horizon line. The vehicles still seem somewhat large for that distance. How far from the bridge to the Stemmons is it? A couple of hundred feet?

Isn't this the kind of writing that use to be called purple prose? Madness!! Evil machines!! I am not replying to the J & J crowd. I am simply beginning to wonder if I am living in their heads rent free. Ron Bulman's point about a south bound train is not me. I have argued and still do that there was a train in Dealey Plaza. This is based on several witnesses, but mainly 3 DPD officers. Maybe Ron is thinking about my argument along with Chris Bristow that a shot from the south knoll could account for one of the Elm Street shots based on reasoning from the Zapruder. Chris was basing his shot from the ground in the area of the south knoll. I was working on the angle that it could have come from as high the railroad tracks and possibly from inside a train. I'm not the greatest in math and angles and such. However, what I was doing was being overlooked by and given occasional help from Chris Bristow, Chris Davidson, and David Josephs. So, a shot from the south end of the railroad bridge at train height is a possibility. That's all.

This doesn't exactly show what Ron was talking about. I believe, if I am recalling correctly, Chris Davidson did a gif showing cars moving on the Stemmons at the north end of the railroad bridge. This is from the Bell film done by Dunkel. I do not recall exactly who that was. This film shows an auto on the Stemmons. It size is bigger then it should be. Notice that the other or west side of the railroad bridge is higher then the east side. The decorative features on the west side are taller then the same features on the east side. This shouldn't be. The railroad bridge is about 120 feet across and has a 3 degree slope downward towards the west. What I am saying is you can't trust the Bell film. Here is another example: This film frame from Bell is not exactly Altgens 7. It varies in showing few, if any people on the bridge as the p. limo approaches the structure. About 5 other films and photos have something similar to this. Some even show no people there about 40 seconds after the shooting. In Bell, just a few frames after the frame above, probably less then a second, people appear there. There appears to be things that resemble boxcars, but I am told they are signs west of the bridge. That whole area seems magnified with that giant machine resembling some kind of Star Wars machine. The bridge ornamentation suffers from the same size and perspective that the first frame does. One other thing you might notice. The horizon line is as flat as a table top. Texas is generally a flat state for the most part, but that is simply a cut and past error indicating haste in alteration. So, which parts of the Bell film are edited and which parts are credible?

Steven, What you have said here is something that I have believed for years, but lacked the eloquence that you have in saying this. I believe this truly reflects my discontent with fellow researchers on what happened in Dealey Plaza. Thanks for stating this so well.

Thanks Richard, I believe I read somewhere and haven't been able to find again, that years later Foster did say there was a train. I'll keep looking. Thanks again

Richard, Correct me if I am wrong. But, I don't think Foster mentioned a train on the tracks in his WC testimony. Thanks,

Tony, Thanks again. If what he said was true then that may destroy all of the good work Chris Barstow and I put into looking at what was available in the photographic record about trains north of the railroad bridge. I'm not sure I trust Foster's testimony. Several bad and blurry photos and frames show he was on the northern end of the Triple Underpass above the grass just north of Elm. Yet, in his testimony he says that he was above the south curb of Elm Street. Altgens 7 verifies what he said. Altgens 7 as far as I can determine is a fake. He says he was there with either 9 or 10 railroad personnel. There is at least 5 maybe six, if my memory is right, other frames and photos that show that part of the bridge didn't have anyone on it. So, a south bound train instead of a north bound one. I don't recall, but believe that Officer J. C. White didn't mention a direction in which the train traveled. I guess I can speculate just for fun that the l train described by Officer White, the long freight train, had two engines, one in the center or other part of the train, and once the assassination was over the trains were decoupled and one partial train went south and another partial train went north. That would be a quicker way of getting a train that possibly had assassins on it out of Dealey Plaza. It's the only way I would believe Officer Foster, who first denied the presence of a train, then later admitted one, and said it was south bound.

I don't either. Simply because there was only one film of the passenger side of the p. limo allowed. There are 5 or six cameras seen in the Croft photo and further down the Betzner photo has about 3 in the Betzner photo. Phil Willis slide 5 has 3. Put altogether there may have been 8 or more extra cameras in that area that Zapuder was filming. Who was those people and what happened to there film?

Tony, Sorry, I gave it a try, but could not find any relevant information about CD 897 on the internet. Just one page in a pdf of someone other than Foster. Maybe a reference to something other?

Tony, Correct me if I'm wrong. But, didn't Foster originally say there was not a train on the railroad bridge. But, then later changed his testimony. It has been some time or I missed where he said what direction the train was traveling in on the bridge. Could you point out where he said that? And, possibly when? Nowadays, I have to many problems to have a good memory.

Karl, Did you ever wonder why Jack White "came over" to the Harvey and Lee sermon? Could it be his work on the JFKA that took place over decades? And, during those decades found one instance of fraud after the other. Just looking at the photos that are alleging to be Lee Harvey Oswald is enough to turn one to Harvey and Lee. Here, is an example: Robert Oswald said this was his brother Lee. Note the Date. It is February, 1958. Lee Oswald was at Atsuki, Japan for most the year of 1958. At this time Lee was on maneuvers in the Pacific Ocean near the Philippines. Robert later changed the date. Actually, I believe this is Harvey who went AWOL from the service in 1958 and stayed in New Orleans for months. Lee did not have that hair pattern as shown in this photo. The 1958 photo of Harvey shows a curious receding hair pattern that in later photos Harvey disguised with comb overs. But, if you look close at the DPD photos of Harvey you can see this pattern. These photos show two different men in the same year.

I am going to use some out dated language from that long gone era the mid-fifties that was brought up recently. That's cool, daddy-o. Acutally, I'm liking that so much I am going to have to ask for more and more. "Bronson and Z do not match each other." I totally agree. I have focused on the people shown in Zapruder between the lamppost/R L Thornton sign and the Stemmons sign. It is just another example of the fraudulence of the Z film: Bronson appears to have been stretched to an area much greater than 40 feet approximately. I say approximately because the people lined in Zapruder are lined up shoulder to shoulder between the lamppost and the Stemmons sign. This is shown in the Betzner photo. This area I have calculated by saying each person is about 2 feet wide or just a little over and there were 19 counted in Zapruder. That's where the 40 feet comes from. The area shown in Bronson between people is much greater than shoulder to shoulder. Camera angles won't explain it. Besides, there are only 15 or so showing with distance between them. To me Bronson calls into question Zapruder, Willis, and Betzner.

I didn't know this fella was that old to recall the mid-fifties, but looking at his photo I would guess he is. Me, I was a mere child in that era. I don't know anything about beatniks or other counter-culture people. As far as Mr. J's list of films being altered immediately, or taken by the feds immediately is kind of a dodge on the whole film alteration business. The proper time for film alteration was from Nov. 22, 1963 to about May, 1964 or later after witnesses had been called to testify. Here's one that will generate outrage. Earlier films, particularly those that were shown earlier, could be seized and altered and who would know the difference? Just to be wasting time, I will give you an example of the cut-apart policemen in the Robert Hughes film. I obtained my copy from Robert Groden down in Dealey Plaza. Some internet Hughes films I have seen have that part, the cut-apart policemen, frames fixed where there is no splice. If Mr. JB, I should say, wants to know how those films were altered then all he has to do is look up the history of my posts on those films and photos over the last 5 years. I don't think I said anything about Wilma Bond, except maybe the Babushka Lady is surrounded by a glow that suggests she was transported, not by a Star Trek transporter, but, a film alterer.

Jim, It's good that you've come back to the forum. You have been missed. I have missed your logical reasoning and knowledge. My notions of which of the two, Lee and Harvey, was the first into Russia are fairly weak. They are based primarily on speculation, speculation of known facts, some facts that people don't consider, different interpretations of the stories about the Russian Oswald, and some speculation about the Russian interrogation of Oswald. And, now the statement by John Newman that he was not certain that the Russian Oswald was the same as the Dallas Oswald at the DPD station. The first thing that bothered me about the traditional Harvey and Lee interpretation of events, was looking at David Joseph's timeline there is a scarcity of evidence about Lee Oswald from the time he left the military in March, 1959 to about late 1960. Things go really dark about Lee Oswald from Sep., 1959 to April, 1960. The only thing in that period is Robert Oswald's picture of Oswald hunting with Robert sometime in 1958. I say some time in 1958 because Robert gave different dates for that photo. At the time Lee was in Japan and there is no record in 1958 of his taking leave for Texas. There is the Steenberger statement saying Lee Oswald was on a Mats flight to Germany in mid-October, 1959. There's a lot of blanks there in that time. The second problem I had with Oswald in Russia is his interrogation by the KGB. Not much is said about that or even hinted at. I don't see show a defector would escape notice of the KGB. He was obviously interrogated and the KGB would have known everything. Oswald would not be able to hide anything from them. So, the most suitable Oswald would be the one who knew radar technology and didn't speak Russian except at a primitive level. Later on he was followed around by 20 or 30 spies. That says KGB. IMO, stories about the early Oswald in Russia point to Lee not Harvey. Later stories point to Harvey. Well, you can see this is fairly weak. But, there is enough agitation in thinking that something different is going on concerning the Russian Oswald. Therefore, I keep an open mind on the question of who was first into Russia and when did Harvey get there. Oh, one other thing. It is this new language such as "derp" and "cack" and similar suitable words to use when writing on the internet. I suspect they are ok since most people, I assume, don't know what they mean. I prefer the old Anglo-Saxon vulgarities. Of course they are not suitable for print, but they can convey your feelings in much better manner than modernisms or new inventive words.

Tony, That is a really nice piece of work. The top photo says that the p. limo was close to Jean Hill. It must have been in the lane, left lane, that Hill described. Hill Exhibit No. 5 must be fairly accurate in describing Jean's location as she related it to Arlen Specter, and must have shocked him that he couldn't change what she said. Therefore, Top Secret was the only route to cover that up.

I didn't mention that most or all of these films were in government possession by the opening of the WC hearings. I could go back and list the things wrong with these films and photos, but I have already done that over the last 5 years.

Mmh? Strange. "Can you prove that? This sounds to me as no more than speculation. Speaking about misinterpretation" and, and, This may clear up your misunderstanding." Are witnesses wrong when they don't agree with you? Are they to be ignored? Or, simply are they to be dismissed as if something was wrong with them? If the above statements are true about the Bolton Ford incident then Lee Oswald was the first into Russia and Harvey was out doing CIA business for the period fall of of 1959 to spring of 1960 approx-. This would include the Bolton Ford incident and be in most people's eyes totally wrong. This would also make Marina Oswald what? A spy for the Russians? A girl who just likes polyandrous relationships? What does this make the Russians? Aware of what was going on or duped? What was said above certainly raises questions.

Can you prove that? This sounds to me as no more than speculation. Speaking about misinterpretation" and, and, This may clear up your misunderstanding.

Does this make my speculation that Lee Oswald was in Russia and Lee and Harvey were playing there usual game of "switch em" early on there. Lee was reported to be in Germany at a similar time. Harvey was not a tech guy and Lee was to some extent. Lee Oswald was the one who had aircraft maintenance training and worked in that area. This training does not show up in the record. But, he is reported to be doing just that in the fall of 1957 while Harvey enters the Marine Corps. Lee Oswald was the person who visited many of the U2 bases. Lee visited Area 51 or bases near there and important SAC radar facilities. How would Harvey handle being a supervisor/regulator in the experimental shop where new products were developed. This was a person who supposedly could not drive a vehicle.