John Butler

Andrej said, “This is the sole reason for quoting you and responding again even if I do not wish to extend the photographic discussions in this thread. I have no intention to change your views, however, I want that whoever reads this thread understands the reasons for my claims and conclusions.” Exactly. You’ve stated your views well. I happen to disagree. The photographic evidence bears directly on the central issues of this thread. These are: Was Vickie Adams untruthful when she saw Shelley and Lovelady at the elevators? And, was Shelley and Lovelady at the elevators and how did they get there? Altgens 6 has a fairly portly gentleman who you said was Bill Shelley. Bill Shelley is a short and slender man. This figure in Altgens six is fairly fat and is taller than the Oswald/Lovelady figure. When I made the decision on the portly man with a suit in Altgens 6 I took all of the thing you said into consideration. Your use of a model is still a model and open to interpretation. I concede that Billy Lovelady and Bill Shelley were on the steps. So, whose who in Altgens 6 is not that relevant. Altgens 6 is a fraud. In my opinion it cannot be used to time anything. And, timing Altgens 6 is important. Vickie Adams and most of the witnesses on the 4th floor said the shooting took place in front of the TSBD at not as portrayed in Altgens 6 and Zapruder. This is also the statements of the majority of 105+ witnesses who said much the same thing. Let’s back up a moment and talk about how fast Vickie and Sandra came down the steps to get to the elevators. They are said to be speedy and arrived at the back door by the elevator in about 60 seconds. Let’s compare that to Oswald’s alleged descent from the 6th floor to the second floor. That’s 4 floors in 90 seconds. How many floors the two ladies descend. 4 floors in 60 seconds? Let’s give the ladies the same speed as Oswald, 90 seconds. Shelley and Lovelady are captured by Darnell about 37 or 38 seconds after the shooting. Weigman has a frame at that time showing the camera car that Darnell was in turning the corner and heading down Elm at that time. The problem is that the Darnell and Weigman frames are too blurry to identify the main characters on the steps. Can you identify with certainty who Prayerman was? Or, anyone? After Darnell we don’t know where Shelley and Lovelady went. There is one frame that show a pair resembling Shelley and Lovelady walking towards the west side of the TSBD. The pair being Shelley and Lovelady is debatable. In this sense Pat Speer may very well be right: “I guess I agree with Armstrong then. When I went back and looked at this a few years back, it became quite clear that Adams and Styles raced downstairs and came across Shelley and Lovelady entering from the west side. Her saying her testimony was changed was, in my opinion, a defense mechanism begun as a reaction to the actions of Ball and Belin, who told her Shelley and Lovelady failed to return for 5 minutes or so after the shooting. This was a lie. I firmly believe, moreover, that Ball and Belin knew this was a lie. They never asked Shelley and Lovelady if they saw Truly and Baker when they (S and L) came back in through the west side. And this even though Baker swore he saw two white men at the back of the building when he was standing by the elevators. When you read through all the statements it's clear these two were S and L.” If it took 90 seconds for Vickie and Sandra (a reasonable assumption, some say 2 minutes- 10:38) to come down the steps then it would have given Shelley and Lovelady 50 seconds or more to get to the elevators. I don’t know if Pat Speer’s route can be done in 50 seconds to two minutes. But, its less than 200 feet to travel in that time. What I think is that Shelley after thinking about it for some time followed his boss into the TSBD to see what was going on and went back to the elevators. Lovelady may have been with him or followed a few seconds later. This is the quickest and easiest route to the elevators to have Truly to order them to watch the elevators. Nearly everything one talks about in the Kennedy Assassination is debatable. There is not an agreement by all on much of what is reported to have happened that day. I am one who believes that what truly happened that day is still hid from the public. This is based on what I have discovered in the photo record and from witness statements. The Zapruder film was a stroke of pure genius. Hidden for years until memory of that day had fade in the minds of people. Then it burst unto the scene at a relevant point in history. It was so shocking and terrible to see the actual blowing up of the president’s head. Oh, that’s the way it was, that’s where it was, I must have been wrong remembering it the way I did. This was a big help even though authorities had corrupted the witness testimony record. It took years for most people to start questioning the events portrayed in the Zapruder film. The Zapruder film is a fraud starting at frame one and continuing through out the film.

Stupid editor!!!

Thanks Andrej, I thank you for pointing that out. Altgens 6 has a man in a suit and tie. However, he is a portly man sort of like Alfred Hitchcok. Bill Shelley was short and slender. In my opinion Altgens 6 is not a match. Shelley: I don't know Shelley's height, he appears the shortest in this crowd, slender and not rotund. He could be about 5'7 or maybe and inch or so less. Black suits were common in those days. I didn't mean to insult or assault. I just have different ideas and think my arguments are stronger. Thanks again.

Thanks for replying Andrej, Sorry, but I have to disagree. By discussing this and other things I have mentioned, they relate to the heart of the Armstrong/Ernest argument. Did Vickie Adams lie or tell the truth? And, when was that? I believe Vickie Adams spoke truthfully in 1964 in two statements. At that time she no had reason to not speak truthfully. I don't know why she refuted in later years what she said 1964. Sandra Styles saying she didn't see them either sort of puts Vickie Adams on the spot in 1964, but clinches Ernest's argument. Maybe? I don't give much credit to Sandra Styles as a witness. Decades after an event one's memory could change and often does concerning things that happened decades before. I won't make excuses for Adams or Styles. What I will do is stick to what Vickie Adams said in 1964. Vickie Adams did not lie. We have the Top Secret classification for a part of her testimony. This indicates the seriousness of what she said. What she said about the shooting contradicts the official story of the WC. I don't see how Shelley and Lovelady's whereabouts is some kind of great secret that needs to be covered up. I don't think the location of Shelley/Lovelady is significant. What is significant about the testimony is what she said about shooting and the p. limo's location. The same thing occurred with Jean Hill in Hill Exhibit No. 5, Arlen Specter, and the Top Secret classification of locating where the p. limo was when Mary took her picture. I saw the figures you have pointed to, but they are too vague for me to say that they are Bill Shelley. That figure appears to have glasses. I am not certain Bill Shelley wore glasses. Shelley was a short and slender figure. This character doesn't seem to be. Still to vague to make any kind of identification. IMO, the Armstrong/Ernest argument centers on whether Vickie Adams was truthful. I don't think Vickie Adams lied then or decades later. The problem may be her memory of events much later. " Saturday, 27 February 2021 18:00 Barry Ernest Replies to John Armstrong, RE: Victoria Adams Written by Barry Ernest Print Barry Ernest replies to John Armstrong’s recent article entitled “Oswald DID NOT Run Down the Stairs” by clarifying the record and revealing various assumptions Armstrong makes in his evaluation of the evidence. In a recent website article titled “Oswald DID NOT Run Down the Stairs” (his emphasis), researcher/author John Armstrong dissects the story of Victoria Adams. He wholeheartedly upholds her account that she descended the back stairs of the Texas School Book Depository immediately after the assassination. But he takes strong exception to statements she made to me that she did not (my emphasis) see employees William Shelley and Billy Lovelady when she arrived on the first floor."

And, now where were Shelley and Lovelady? The following can provide some info on that: These are Darnell/Weigman. In the first one we can see Lovelady. But, I don't see Shelley. The second one at the top we seen a policeman who could very well be Baker. In the next two down we can see Prayerman taking photos, as seen in the Martin film just as he did on Elm Street and next to him is Lovelady again, but I still do not see Shelley. The timing of these frames can give you an idea when at least Lovelady showed up at the elevators in the TSBD. In the motorcade as it proceeding down Houston Street the car containing the Mayor of Dallas and his wife were stopped at the intersection of Houston and Elm Streets by either Joe Marshall Smith or Welcome Eugene Barnett or both. They were detained for about 40 seconds. Another problem is that people believe there is 15 seconds between the Dave Wiegman and Weigman-Darnell scenes of the TSBD steps. There is something close to 37 second or more difference shown in the frame below which has the Camera Cars making the turn onto Elm Street from Houston Street at 38 seconds. According to the last photo in the montage Shelley and Lovelady had left the steps of the TSBD and had at a minimum of 20 seconds to cross 100 feet of TSBD floor to the elevators. Plenty of time to be there and seen by Adams and Styles whether they took 60 seconds or 90 seconds to get there.

Adams and Styles crossed 100 feet of the TSBD, less their office space, and ran down 4 flights of steps in 60 seconds, not 90 seconds or 2 minutes. Speed demons! "The point is that Mrs. Garner, Adams's and Styles's supervisor, confirmed that they left before Truly and Baker climbed up the stairs and reached the fourth floor." How is this possible? That would make 70 seconds plus some few seconds trying to use the elevator, plus another 90 seconds to climb the stairs (here we give Baker and Truly the same speed as Oswald in stair traversing) to get to the 4th floor. Styles and Adams were simply not that fast. Your reasoning is a convenient reasoning for a truly in explicable situation. It is an answer, but not a realistic one. Vickie Adams said twice when she had no reason to lie or forget that she saw Shelley and Lovelady at the elevators. She did not mention Truly anywhere at the elevators or on the steps. This is the inexplicable part. You can dismiss these two statements to the authorities if you wish. OBTW, This is not the important part of her testimony. It is the means to discredit her as a witness who said things that shouldn't have been said. To wit, shooting occurred in front of the TSBD and out of sight under the trees. There were several people on the 3rd and 4th floor of the TSBD looking out their respective windows and guess what? They all (except Elsie Dorman who said shots came from the Court Records Building) said the same as Vickie Adams (here Sandra Styles at first said she didn't see anything, but later said much the same thing as Vickie). These are : Vickie Adams Sandra Styles (at a later date) Elsie Dorman (did not say what the rest said) Dorothy Gardner Yola Hopson Ruth Nelson Steven Wilson (3rd floor) Alice Foster (on either the fourth or fifth floor as later claimed by Mary Hollies) heard shooting as th p. limo turned down Elm Street). Mary Hollies (either on the 4th or 5th floor) made two ambiguous statements concerning the shooting. First, shooting occurred when the p. limo turned down toward the Triple Underpass and the Second, she heard shooting as the p. limo passed the TSBD). I take this to mean in front of the TSBD, but others have their opinions.

Adams and Styles crossed 100 feet of the TSBD, less their office space, and ran down 4 flights of steps in 60 seconds, not 90 seconds or 2 minutes. Speed demons! "The point is that Mrs. Garner, Adams's and Styles's supervisor, confirmed that they left before Truly and Baker climbed up the stairs and reached the fourth floor." How is this possible? That would make 70 seconds plus some few seconds trying to use the elevator, plus another 90 seconds to climb the stairs to the fourth floor (here we give Baker and Truly the same speed as Oswald in stair traversing) to get to the 4th floor. Styles and Adams were simply not that fast. Your reasoning is a convenient reasoning for a truly inexplicable situation. It is an answer, but not a realistic one. Vickie Adams said twice when she had no reason to lie or forget that she saw Shelley and Lovelady at the elevators. She did not mention Truly anywhere at the elevators or on the steps. This is the inexplicable part. You can dismiss these two statements to the authorities if you wish. OBTW, This is not the important part of her testimony. It is the means to discredit her as a witness who said things that shouldn't have been said. To wit, shooting occurred in front of the TSBD and out of sight under the trees. There were several people on the 3rd and 4th floor of the TSBD looking out their respective windows and guess what? They all (except Elsie Dorman who said shots came from the Court Records Building) said much the same as Vickie Adams (here Sandra Styles at first said she didn't see anything, but later said much the same thing as Vickie). These are : Vickie Adams Sandra Styles (at a later date) Elsie Dorman (did not say what the rest said) Dorothy Gardner Yola Hopson Ruth Nelson Steven Wilson (3rd floor) Alice Foster (on either the fourth or fifth floor as later claimed by Mary Hollies) heard shooting as the p. limo turned down Elm Street). Mary Hollies (either on the 4th or 5th floor) made two ambiguous statements concerning the shooting. First, shooting occurred when the p. limo turned down toward the Triple Underpass and the Second, she heard shooting as the p. limo passed the TSBD). I take this to mean in front of the TSBD, but others have their opinions.

But, she did. Adams said she saw Shelley and Lovelady in two statements. Feb., 14, 1964 and in her WC statement of April 7, 1964. She and Styles should have seen Baker and Truly if they made the run in 60 seconds. Should have met them on the steps.

They were speed demons. Bold and capable step runners. And, the Oswald character was not. He took 90 seconds to traverse 4 floors. And, Adams and Styles took 60 seconds to traverse 4 floors and be out of the building? Doesn't seem reasonable.

This more or less reflects what I am saying about Shelley and Lovelady following Baker and Truly into the building. It is easier and with less time than going out and around the TSBD and entering the north door of the building. Whatever is the real event they had 90 seconds to 2 minutes to do that. Actually not, if Baker said he saw two white men standing by the elevator (assumed to be Shelley and Lovelady). How long did Baker and Truly stand by the elevators before they decided to take the steps. The two white men had to be there at the same time as Baker and Truly. They went up the steps before Vickie and Sandra came down or did they? Adams and Styles didn't see Baker and Truly, but saw Shelley and Lovelady. This is giving me a headache. Did Adams and Styles come down the steps before Baker and Truly went up the steps. Well, no. Vickie would have said she saw Roy Truly one of the big bosses at the TSBD. So, they came down after Baker and Truly went up the steps? Well, no, maybe? If Adams and Styles went directly across the TSBD (100 feet they would have been on the steps before Baker and Truly and would have seen the unknown man at about the 3rd or 4th floor) after the shooting they should have heard or seen Baker and Truly, or met them on the steps. Recall, Baker takes about 15 seconds to get to the TSBD door then he and Truly are at the back elevators for a few seconds before deciding to go upstairs. By this time, Adams and Styles should be on the stairs. It is my believe that Baker and Truly made up the story of the second floor breakroom encounter. The real event was meeting the unknown individual at the 3rd or 4th floor. And, by the way why did Adams and Styles not see the fellow if he was on the 4th floor? Or, the 3rd floor steps.

Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles came down the steps from the fourth floor to the 1st floor. How long did that take? About 1 minute? Or, was it longer due to taking some time to make up their mind to do so? We don't know. Oswald is supposed to have made his journey from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor in 90 seconds. 4 floors versus 4 floors says the ladies made it in a minute? Not so! That's just illogical. Their trip could have been slightly longer such as 90 seconds (It would match Oswald's(?) speed). Maybe by 12:37:30 or possibly 12:38 (90 seconds). If so Oswald is already on the 2nd floor (90 seconds or 12:37:30)? This is a crucial question. How long did it really take gives one an idea on other matters such as the whereabouts of Shelley and Lovelady. If it took them two minutes then Lovelady and Shelley had enough time to come inside after seeing Truly and Baker go into the building. Enough time to walk to the north face of the building and be by the elevators. Films show Baker arriving at the TSBD about 15 seconds after the shooting. He and Truly run into the building. Wouldn't Shelley (Truly's deputy administrator and his sidekick, Lovelady, go into the building to see what was making Baker and Truly go into the building? This seems more reasonable then wandering around the parking lot for 5 or 10 minutes. The TSBD is 100 feet square. From the front door (south door) to the back door (north door) would it take to walk 100 feet? At a walk or run? Not long. They had a 90 seconds or 2 minutes to do that. I think they followed Baker and Truly into the building. Vicky Adams didn't lie about seeing Shelley and Lovelady on the 1st floor as they came down the steps onto the first floor. I always like to take what a witness first said as the more reliable statements then what they said later on be that days or years. Vickie Adams made 4 statements on what she saw: Vickie Adams statements on the murder of President Kennedy: 11-24-63- Vickie Adams- FBI statement 2-17-64- Vickie Adams- Jim Leavelle statement 3-23-64- Vickie Adams- FBI statement 4-7-64- Warren Commission testimony Go back to my earlier post and you will see the Top Secret section of her WC testimony that states she saw Lovelady and Shelley by the elevators. There are two things that needed to be kept Top Secret: 1) Shelley and Lovelady were by the elevators when they came down the steps. 2.) She heard shooting when the p. limo was out of sight under trees below her window. This is the shooting occurred below her window under the trees and not down in front of the Grassy Knoll. She did say she heard shots from the west in direction of the Grassy Knoll. I said this earlier and still can't believe that people will simply dismiss this. Could it be that folks are so blinded (like a mule with blinders) by their own theories that they can't see or dismiss what she said?

This is what he should have been paid. But, it didn't turn out that way. He was given more money and a supervisory role, a regulator, in the experimental shop where new electronical devices were conceived. It seems this note is to cover up, perhaps, later events. The only other defector to the Soviet Union, Kim Philby, was given more money than Lee Oswald.

Anyone know of these photos or are copies available?

Quick healer or shallow cuts?

This runs contrary to the Harvey and Lee story in Russia in the sense that the real and original Lee Harvey Oswald is the one who had the mastoid surgery. But, it doesn't run contrary to my way of thinking that at one time both Harvey and Lee were in the Soviet Union with Lee perhaps leading the way and Harvey coming later. There's very little evidence for this and mostly of an arguable nature. Lee had the technical knowledge about radars and U2 technology gained at Atsuki, Japan. He paved the way into the MInsk radio factory. Harvey came later after Lee's job at the Minsk factory on radar technology was transferred to the Russians. Harvey replaced Lee and was the real spy there. Of course this is essentially speculation with few facts, but to my mind it accounts for several odd things about Lee Harvey Oswald in the first months in the Soviet Union. One example would be is inability to speak Russian and then his ability to speak Russian fluently as if he was a native from the Baltic region. Another is that Lee Oswald is reported to be in Germany in mid-October, 1959.

The very beginning of the diary starts off with interesting and perhaps questionable things in it. Did Rima Sherikova give the book the "Idiot" to Oswald in English or Russian? If she gave him the book in Russian why would she think he had the ability to read it? Anyone know?

Paul, You are absolutely right. To verify the Willis #5 slide we have the statements of 5 witnesses saying essentially the same as you are saying about Willis. People who remained in the TSBD on the 3rd, 4th, and 5th floors had an unobstructed view of the intersection of Houston and Elm Street. However, at one point their view of the motorcade was obscured as the vehicles went under oak trees for a moment. Vickie Adams- 11-24-63- She said when the president’s vehicle entered the intersection of Elm and Houston she heard 3 shots. She could not see the shooting since it happened while the presidential limousine was under trees. And, that would be in front of the TSBD. And, I take that to mean all the shots were fired under the trees. WC Testimony 4-7-1964: Dorothy Garner- 3-20-64 FBI report- When the shots occurred the presidential vehicle was out of sight, obscured by trees. Dorothy Garner says basically the same as Vickie Adams. Yola Hopson- 12-1-63- FBI report- She heard two or more sounds / firecrackers when the presidential limousine was obscured by trees. This would be in front of the TSBD. Ditto for Yola Hopson. Ruth Nelson- FBI Report 3 23 64- Ruth said she did not see the p. limo when she heard shots. She was watching the motorcade, but could not see the President. She was standing in the same place as Yola Hopson who said she could not see the President when she heard shots due to the p. limo being obscured by trees in front of the TBSD. Ditto Ruth Nelson. Steven Wilson- 3-25-64- FBI statement- He said he heard 3 shots while the president was obscured by trees. 1963, employees of his office had gone to view the Presiden- tial Motorcade on the corner of Elm and Houston Streets, and due to a heart condition which he has had, he opened the blinds on the third floor opposite from his reception desk and viewed the Presidential Motoroade as it proceeded north on Houston Street and then west on Elm Street. Due to a large tree being in the way, he could not view the entire procession, but as his view became obstructed, he heard, three distinct shots which he thought came from a rifle, and sub- sequently it was determined that the President had been shot. Ditto Steve Wilson. If you review the entire record of the pictorial evidence of the motorcade from the turn onto Houston from Main the the continuance on Elm Street, you will see only two photographers shooting the passenger side of the p. limo. These are Jay Skaggs and Zapruder. Jay Skaggs takes photos at the intersection of Main and Houston. Zapruder films Elm Street. We are asked to believe there were no other photographers on East Houston and North Elm. If you look at the various photos and films taken that day you will see at least 14 (if my memory is correct and not 18) others who had cameras on East Houston, North Elm and the intersection crosswalk of East Houston. What happened to their film? What would those films and photos shown? I think you would see the action in front of the TSBD that was cut from the Zapruder film which is now called the Zapruder Gap. How many witnesses does it take to convince someone of something the witnesses said. 105+? or more?

Thanks Richard, Thanks for pointing that out. This isn't the first time I've made that mistake. If I am recalling correctly, about 3 times. Generally, I have to correct my thinking on what pedestal Zapruder was on. It is a peculiar flaw. Thanks again for pointing that out. The photo should show the line approximating Zapruder's line of side with the longer red line: They are still pretty much the same. The corrected line of sight moves slightly more northward. Your are saying that the four lanes on east side of the Houston and Elm intersection are starting on the north side: 1. A turning lane or at times a parking lane? 2. A travel lane 3. A travel lane 4. A parking lane I don't think that interferes too much with what I was thinking. If so, let me know. Zapruder still shows only two lanes in Z 002 and three in Z 130. The pavement still looks unnatural and hand painted. Thanks Chris D, Your Bell and Howell of the area points out many of the differences I'm trying to explain. These scenes are at the same time of day. These scenes don't compare very well due to the more distance view of Chris' Bell and Howell shot. Here's an attempt to make that clearer by enlarging slightly the Bell and Howell shot. That didn't work out either. Z002 looks like it was shot by another camera with a different angle. The signs across Elm are two stories high in Z002 and 3 stories high in the later Bell and Howell shot. The lamp pole in Z002 appears to be on the east Houston side and in the Bell and Howell on the west Houston side. I understand things could of changed in Dallas over the years, whether that is intentional or not is debatable.

Turning lanes in Dallas streets at that time were 3.9 meters or 13 feet. The bikes are narrowing to stay within the turning lane of Houston into the 3rd or south lane of Elm. The p. limo is in the second lane or center lane on Houston and shown in Dorman they are still in the second lane until something goes wrong and they go into the 1st lane or northernmost lane of Elm. This is shown in the first depiction. I believe this is David Josephs work: The Position A p. limo location in this reenactment shows a recovery from going to far into the 1st lane (northernmost on Elm). I notice there are no white stripes to distinguish the center lane from the northernmost lane. But, a policeman is standing near the side walk so white stripes should be there. It is my opinion based upon testimony from 105+ witnesses that shooting may have occurred in that turn and Will Greer lost control momentarily. And, that is a no-no for the official story.

Chris, Your right. This is an interesting puzzle. And, the more I look at it the more I confirmed in the notion of fraud in the very first part of the Zapruder film which is an indicator for the rest of the film. Some back ground info: Elm Street east of Houston and Elm has 4 lanes. Elm Street west of the Houston and Elm intersection has 3 lanes. These are by Texas highway department standards: Change lane- 3.3 m or 10.8 ft Travel lane- 3.6 m or 11.8 ft Turning lane- 3.9 m or 13 ft The turning lane has extra width adjustments for the gutter perhaps sidewalk. With this info one should be armed and dangerous. But, not so. I don't think measurements can be made in the Zapruder film because of its distortions of reality. Let's look at what Dealey Plaza looks like in 1967. This is the closest photo showing what we need to look at as I can find. It is from 1967. The last tree going east has grown but, is basically the same size as shown in Zapruder 002/Z 130. This line of sight cuts the second lane of east Elm in half roughly. In the Zapruder frames we see there are cars in this lane. Or, possibly cars are seen in the Turning lane going north. I don't think that is right, but possible. If I had to choose between Altgens 5 or Zapruder as being the most realistic I would choose Altgens 5 for that area. This is based upon the need to cover up something there. And, it the area of the intersection of Houston and Elm there is no need to change anything there in Altgens. This is based on who would normally look at that area and study it. And, the changes to Altgens 5 involve the p. limo just off the intersection of Houston and Main. Here are the two frames in question. I use Z 130 as a comparison of Z 002 for change. As we see in these two frames the positions of the motorbikes change, but the position of the crowd in the crosswalk remains basically unchanged. Your light shirt/dark trousers guy is basically the same position in both frames. This places him in the 4th lane of East Elm and the 3rd lane of West Elm as seen here. Z 130 shows the center of lane of West Elm is to the right of the ls/dt guy. (here I think the pavement and stripes have been repainted) It is also apparent that the black youth is not there from Altgens. In Z 130 there is a black mark to the right of ls/dt man and that is a bit suspicious. Z frame 002 clearly shows the black youth not present. Both frames show that the last tree in the row could be edited and not as large as seen in 1967. It is easier to make a tree larger than put more people in the crosswalk. I can't see any people or vehicles in the crosswalk behind the tree. So, if all of this is true Officer Joe Marshal Smith should be seen in the 3rd lane of East Elm which corresponds to the center lane of West Elm. From Altgens 5 perspective Officer Smith and the ls/dt man appear to be over by the turning lane or 2nd lane of Elm. The van is not seen in Zapruder. This tells us there is perhaps a time difference in the photo/frames comparison greater than just a few seconds or a minute of so. Something is going on here. Zapruder takes his film before Altgens. Could Zapruder have made two films or more? Depending when Zapruder got upon his perch there may have been time to make more than one film. One earlier with no motorbikes and a crowd in the crosswalk and a basic setup of the motorcade route in Dealey Plaza. A second film showing a bare intersection with the motorbikes coming through. Then everything is rearranged and the stage is set by painting in a new pavement and setting the crowd in the first film with the motorbikes of the second in the new modified film. This is just speculation, but I feel something is going on there. A second film showing a bare intersection with the motorbikes coming through? A bare intersection would be necessary to avoid collateral damage if one planned to have people shooting from the Triple Underpass, the South Grassy Knoll, or the North Grassy Knoll. This is contradicted by Altgens 5. Has anyone ever suggested two Zapruder films? It is a crazy idea, but worth speculating about.

Thanks Chris, I always pay attention to what you write. Thanks again for correcting some of my errors in previous times. But on the Altgens 5/Zapruder frames I have to disagree. There is basically two reasons. First, Jack White did this same kind of comparison many years ago. I believe he was working from original material rather than what I have picked up from the internet. So, that's reason number one. The second is I don't see things as you do. Here is Altgens 5: The man in the white shirt and dark slacks has a young black kid next to or just behind him. In front and nearby there is Officer Joe Marshall Smith. I believe his testimony said he was standing in the middle of the crosswalk. These two are indicated by red arrows. You don't see the black youth or Officer Smith in the Zapruder frames. This may be really confusing. I have added red arrows to the Zapruder frame. The 3 red arrows pointing downward indicate other white men wearing a light shirt and dark trousers. The two on the right hand side (left) are not in Altgens 5. There are two question marks near your blue arrow. Those present "Where is Officer Foster?" and "Where is the black youth?" The black youth is clearly seen in Altgens 5, but not seen clearly in Zapruder. There is something there, but to vague and blurry to make out. Based on Jack White and the too vague Zapruder frame I would say the black youth is not present in Zapruder. Regardless of the camera angles Officer Marshall should be seen in the middle of the street in Zapruder as he is seen in Altgens 5. The furthest red ? to the left hand side refers to the automobile/van differences in the photo frame comparison. The amount of time difference between Z 002 and Altgens 5 should not matter. Frames 130 and other frames after the gap show much the same scene as Z oo2. So, we will just have to disagree. Keep up the good work. I do need checking on from time to time. Thanks.

Paul, I agree and perhaps what the zooming did not show. I went back and reviewed Z frames 254 to 350. Zooming occurs here to show the contents of the p. limo and possibly hide something (Like Bill Newman not really being there). I believe that is correct rather than Zapruder camera wandering off target or losing balance for that length of time. It's like the camera jiggles that folks talk about. It could simply be Zapruder's aide steadying him as he is filming. All is that is arguable. When you look closely at the content of many Z frames something is always awry. For instance, Mary and Jean have a barely noticeable glow or fuzziness surrounding in some of these frames from 254 to 350. I won't argue what that means. Here's an example: That is somewhat arguable here in Z 298 and Z 306 is that aura. What is not arguable is the lack of a half raised window by Nellie Connally. This is demonstrated by the arrows pointing to where a window should be. This half raised window is seen in many other films and photos. I suppose one could argue that she lowered the window. But, that's not a good argument for a windy day. Besides that, the Marie Muchmore film shows the window up at about the same time as those Zapruder frames. In this example at least 3 other films show the window up. As I said you can find flaky things like this throughout the Zapruder film. And, why people haven't seen this particular thing in over 50+ years I haven't got a clue.

On the Authenticity of the Zapruder Film The next pictorial presentation is based on what David Joseph said about Z 001 as a start up frame and Z 133 not being a startup frame after the Zapruder Gap . In other words the frames in the Zapruder Gap have been excised from the film and Zapruder did not shut his camera down for a brief time. Frame Z 001 is a start up frame and is lighter in color than the others. The next Frame 002 is similar to all the other Zapruder frames and particularly like Z 133. The reason I started this comment if that I didn't realize why I rejected Z 001 in favor of Z 002 in another montage based on something Jack White said many years ago. I rejected Z 001 in favor of Z 002 because Z 001 is a lighter and less usable than Z 002 for my purposes. Jack White said that you can take a frame from the Zapruder film showing the east crosswalk of Houston and Elm and compare it to the crosswalk of east Houston and Elm as show in Altgens 5 and you would not find a single person that is in the Zapruder frame and Altgens 5. Not a single one. See if you can find the same person in the Zapruder Frame Z 002 and Altgens 5. I can't find a single person that matches. Another thing you might notice is that an automobile is present in Zapruder and a van is present in Altgens 5. Z 001 and Z 002 to the artist's eye seems like an alteration by painting out the other white strips that should be visible at the Houston and Elm turn. I am sure this was done to hide something by altering the appearance of the road bed in the turn. This is where Chris, David, and Tony's work excels concerning the p. limo as in turned in the intersection. Notice in Z 133 you can see 3 lanes as versus 2 in Z 001 and Z 002. I don't see how anyone can base anything on the Zapruder film since it starts as an altered fraud from the very beginning in Z001 and Z 002 and continues on with other stage sets such as the SW corner of Elm and Houston and the Mannikin Row. And, there are many other problems I have pointed out over time.

Chris, The wheels go missing about z 256 and come back about z 350. Very well could be the limo stop is the reason, but there are other considerations. First off one could have a good excuse to say well that's why we don't see Bill Newman or One-armed Bill Newman as the p. limo passes him. Another set of missing characters are the 2 or 3 men on the sidewalk coming down from the parking lot. Your video showed that they should be seen. There could be other things. As I study the Zapruder film I get closer and closer to John Costella's idea that the film was built from the ground up.

I ran across this while re-reading through the thread. This is somewhat speculative. There is some evidence to support the next statement, but not enough to stake a firm position on. It could be because she thought the assassination was at the corner of Houston and Main and later down Houston at Houston and Elm. This is what I read from her testimony when first given. She lied to the FBI about not taking photos or films on 11-22-63. I wrote a note on this: " Marie Muchmore: A second look at truthfulness Part I From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia “Muchmore was an employee of Justin McCarty Dress Manufacturer in Dallas located at 707 Young Street, four blocks south of the Texas School Book Depository. On November 22, 1963, Muchmore was in Dealey Plaza with five co-workers, including Wilma Bond, who had a still camera, to watch the presidential motorcade. Muchmore stood near the northwest corner of Main Street and Houston Street with her 8 mm Keystone movie camera and awaited the president’s arrival…. Muchmore sold the undeveloped film to the Dallas office of United Press International on November 25, 1963, for $1,000. It was processed by Kodak in Dallas, and flown to New York City. It appeared the following day on local television station WNEW-TV.[6] The film now belongs to the Associated Press Television News, which restored it in 2002.” Wikipedia is saying in this article that Marie Muchmore is a xxxx and committed perjury to the FBI in her statement dated December 4, 1963. She basically said two things of importance there. First, she said she was standing on Main and Houston Streets when the parade passed by and she heard a shot. This statement had to be clarified so that one wouldn’t think that she heard a shot on Main Street as the President passed by. Secondly, her perjury statement saying she did not take photographs as the presidential motorcade passed by. These statements are underlined in red. Understanding these statements make it easy to interpret what happened in her next statement to the FBI on February 14, 1964. Because of a possible perjury charge the FBI could have induced her to say anything they wanted." I wonder if this film made a side track to the Rochester editing facility or was the work done in Dallas. Of course it did. Just look at the frames on the p. limo in the Houston and Main intersection. There we have the treat of Flat-headed See Through Man, Phil Willis blocking the view of the p. limo and also many distorted and damaged frames of the p. limo in the turn.