John Butler

Joe is right. There are over 105+ witnesses that say the Zapruder film is junk fraud. These 105+ witnesses were "ruthlessly cherry picked" from all of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza. They were "ruthlessly cherry picked" based on the question asked of witness testimony "Where was the p. limo when you heard shots?". Two very able researchers concluded that many of the frames in the Zapruder film were missing. I reminded them of the Zapruder Gap of about 15 seconds. When I added up their numbers with the numbers from the Zapruder Gap I saw that more than half of the film was missing. I don't see how anyone can put credence in any thing in the Zapruder film. If you come to that conclusion then almost every theory based on the Zapruder film is wrong. Is the Zapruder film faulty? Yes, based on this example. And, there are many others. Sometime back Jack White said when you compare the East crosswalk of Elm and Houston in the Zapruder film and Altgens 5 you cannot identify a single soul that is in both film and photo. Try to do that in the following: Can you match anyone? You can talk about this jiggle or that jiggle, but you still cannot determine how many shots there were, or when they were fired, or which shot struck what. Those are questions that can't be answered based on witness statements or the so called extant Zapruder film. You will have to declare some witnesses as decieving, or inept, or something to to eliminate the offending witness. And, use the ones you favor. In my selection of 105+ witnesses, from all the witnesses in Dealey Plaza, there were those that had something different to say about what happened in Dealey Plaza. Then there were those I that I eliminated who said similar things to the 105+ witnesses, but it could be argued that they said something different from the 105+ witnesses based on a single word or two.

Steve T., Didn't Worrell in his testimony say he was at one point leaning back against the building?

Eddy B, She made her statement saying the things she said about the shooting sequence within a few short hours of the assassination, possibly two. She never changed her testimony over the years. I don't know what sequence she said the shots were in, but she said there were 3 or 4. That's at least 2 or 3 after the headshot. She makes a xxxx out of the Zapruder film or vice versa. Pat Speer's diagram above lends credence to what she said.

Chauncy Holt: Assassin, or alternative Patsy, or both? Holt said in a video interview with Wm Dankmar (sp) that he was in the boxcar he was instructed to hide out in if there was trouble. He was in the boxcar by 12:31 or 12:32. What if he was in that boxcar before 12:30. What if that boxcar was on the Triple Underpass and he was a member of one of the shooting teams in the assassination. Holt was a weapons expert and an expert marksman. According to his stories be was a lookout for the killing of Bugsy Siegel, a member of a 5 man assassination team sent to Guatemala in 1953 or 1954. He stated he was involved with the assassination of Trujillo in the Domincan Republic. He didn't say he was an assassin, but hinted at it. With that kind of background he could very well have been in a boxcar shooting from the Triple Underpass up Elm Street. Chauncy Holt, Bill Shelley, Lee Harvey Oswald I believe were being set up as patsies for the assassination of JFK. All 3 are seen in a New Orleans photo/frame near the Trade Mart. Holt said there was ammunitiion and explosives in the boxcar. He also mentioned he was nervous about being blown up and made into a patsy. This has went way off the thread's original. I apologize.

Jonathan C., About being in Dealey Plaza as one of the Tramps, I agree with you, but for different reasons. Chauncy Holt was a career criminal and a long time CIA agent. Anything he says has to be looked at very carefully. Chauncy Holt was in New Orleans and was in contact with and close proximity to Oswald in a film in front of the New Orleans Trade Mart. This was a dying man at the end of his life in the interview in the video Spooks, Hoods, and JFK. Perhaps, he wanted to be truthful for once. He died 8 days later. On the other hand, Chauncy Holt was a very loyal person. Perhaps, he wanted to spread one last bit of disinformation as a last act for the CIA.

Jamey F, Right. I'm a strong supporter of the Harvey and Lee scenario. I don't want to say theory. It is more than a theory. I have one or two differences with the Harvey and Lee folks. I don't contest it because their version is factual to the point in what they are saying. I'm just going a little further on certain things based on my interpretation of the evidence.

This is a bit off bringing up the double Oswalds. Reasoning that if you were an assassin bent on shooting Kennedy wouldn't you be on the 6th floor waiting to do that? The motorcade was due to pass the depository somewhere around 12:00 or 12:10. Why would Oswald be downstairs at 12:15 to 12:25 when he should be upstairs watching out the window on the sixth floor armed and dangerous? It could be there was one Oswald upstairs and another downstairs providing an alibi for the two. Many researcher believe that there were at least two Oswalds at the TSBD because of the way they left the depository after the assassination. More than two Oswalds? Could be. Chauncey Holt said he took 4 indentities to New Orleans for Oswald. They were Lee Harvey Oswald, Lee Henry Oswald, Leon Osbourne, and Alex Hiddell.

MOORMAN's Highlander Model 80A Polaroid camera was designed to accept Polaroid's series 30 film and produced eight prints.

Karl, Yeah, her camera model was mentioned and analyzed in some thread some time back. I don't recall what the thread was. She had the new or newer model of the Polaroid in 1963. I believe she just bought it before the parade. Mary Moorman was consistent in what she said about the assassination throughout the years. The only thing I remember her saying (which I can't verify since I don't recall the video this was from. It was not important at the time. I didn't make the connection until later. This was sometime after the assassination she and Jean Hill were being interviewed in front of the Grassy Knoll. She must have seen some media, perhaps early Zapruder photo/frames. She said in a somewhat upset and sullen manner that she did not wear white slacks that day. I wish I could find that or someone could. She didn't say anything about high heels, but there is the scene of Jim Featherstone and her in the grass. One high heel is edited out and the other is not. This can be seen in this photo: But, one needs to magnify the section in the rectangular yellow: From a Jack White crop: If you have good eyes and look closely at Mary's legs you can see what appears to be a dress matching the top half of her shown in the Dallas photos. As an example, you never see below her or Jean Hill's waist. I suspect both were wearing dresses. There is one photo of Jean Hill on the grass in front of the Grassy Knoll with bare legs not slacks.

James Worrell’s location James Worrell said where he was located in his Warren Commission testimony when asked Arlen Specter: CE 360 shows the location of the vehicle talked about by Specter and Worrell. The X puts him in the middle of the window: A crop and mag of this photo shows this in a clearer light: The Betzner photo shows the area better than other photos or frames. Here is a crop and mag of Betzner: This Betzner crop is different from other depictions of this area. More in a moment. Just as an aside this photo by Betzner has two perhaps three people taking photos of the limousine. Where are their photos? Who are they? In this crop the man with the western hat is out of place according to other media when the p. limo passes by: One has to count the glass blocks in the window to see that the man in the hat is standing under the ninth block in a row on the westward side. In the others he is standing under the 5th glass block in a row in a western direction. Towner is hard to see, but the man with the western hat is standing in about the same location as Bell. What’s going on? I haven’t a clue. In the Betzner photo crop there seems to be mostly women standing in the area marked in CE 360. There are only two men in the crop that I can identify. Of these two men the one standing to the east of the man with the western hat might be Worrell. Conclusions: From these photo/frames one cannot conclusively identify James Worrell. But, on the other hand you cannot conclusively said he was not there.

No, unless I am recalling wrongly. It takes about 10 seconds for the camera to process a Polaroid shot before it is taken from the camera. This is why Moorman had only the one shot of the shooting sequence. If the film came out instantly she may have had time to take a second photo. OBTW, Moorman's Polaroid says the Zapruder film is wrong in it's shooting sequence. Moorman said she heard the first shot when she took her photo and 2 or 3 more afterwards. (3 or 4 shots) Definitely not in tune with the Zapruder film and others.

This is not a good representation of the Moorman Polaroid: Things are missing from the above when compared to the so-called original. For instance there is Zapruder on his perch and Bill Newman the one-armed man.: This photo has been altered to: This photo is rather strange. Notice the position of John Connally. The windshield appears to end on the driver's side, but where is Greer? Where is Clint Hill we see in other films? Mary Moorman's photos missing one, given to someone, if I am recalling correctly. Hill and Moorman: Glen McBride and the too tall tree near the TSBD. The tree must be covering the men see on the west side of the TSBD: and,

I like your idea of a Polaroid of a single frame of a moving film. All of the relevant films are in color. But, that's not to say a color film frame could not be shot in a black and white with a black and white Polaroid film or some other film portrayed as a Polaroid. Or, are there special features of the current Moorman Polaroid that it identifies it as a Polaroid? Can you identify the film Kellerman was talking about? More importantly is the notion that a photo was taken from a film that has the same angle as the Moorman shot. Perhaps from the films Muchmore, Bronson, and Nix. Hughes is right for the angle but doesn't show those scenes.

There were a number of things the WC lawyers didn't like. They kept part of her WC testimony classified as Top Secret. This lasted until 1967 when the following was de-classifed. It might be interesting to review: Adams says the shooting, 3 shots, took place in front of the TSBD. Her view of the shooting was obscured by trees. She also said the shooting came from the right and not from above on the 6th floor. This is in the record and why people missed or dismissed this shooting statement is beyond me. Then there is the testimony about seeing Bill Shelley and Bill (Lovelady) before the exited the building for the parking lot. This was also stated in a earlier statement in February. Harvey and Lee site: “On February 17, 1964 Adams told Dallas Police detective Jim Leavelle that she saw Bill Shelley and an employee named Billy (Lovelady) when she arrived on the first floor, one minute after the shooting. Six weeks later, on April 7, Adams said exactly that same thing to the WC. She told WC attorney David Belin that Shelley and Lovelady were "slightly east of the front of the east elevator, and probably as far south as the length of the elevator." Seeing Shelley and Lovelady must have been an important piece of information to hide it by classifying this statement as Top Secret. I also thing that the info on where the shooting took place is relevant. If my memory is right the other witnesses with Vickie said similar things. 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 Her March 23, 1964 statement is fairly hard to find. I found this interesting doc at Mary Ferrell. I don't think it is a fraud, but it is not an original doc: The wording is the same as CE No. 1381. I originally thought something was up, but:

Chris, It's a tough problem. It's value is it did not come from behind. The truck on Commerce has been suggested several times if I am recalling correctly. My limited experience with high power weapons is that the round could go just about anywhere once it struck an object. But, that's not the situation with the hole in the mirror. It is a through the windshield shot. High power weapons have another consideration. That is the force of the bullet's shock power. Here's an example. I walked out of a gun shop directly after another fellow walked out. I don't know what he did, but his 30.06 rifle discharged. The round struck a pick-up truck in it's bed and then ricchocheted into the cabin and shattered the windows of the cab. That kind of force needs to be considered when one thinks of the hole in the windshield. Most folks agree that the throat shot and the window hole line up. If so, then that round, if not a short round, should have gone through Kennedy's neck and out the back of his neck or lower down in his back creating massive damage internally. But, most folks believe the back wound to be a shallow wound with little or no internal damage. Hence, another unsolvable Dealey Plaza mystery. I watched a video of Harold Weisberg in which he stated that the killing in Dealey Plaza could not be solved do to the kind of problem just discussed. And, there are many such problems in the record. Thanks for your help in trying to understand this problem.

Thanks Chris B., This is preferable to David Lipton's trajectory. I just couldn't see that shot from there. Just a rough estimate would say that a shot from Commerce Street below the railroad bridge through the windshield by the rear view mirror would have missed Kennedy and would have probably hit the Dal-Tex building. Altgens 6 shows what looks like bullet holes on its westward face around the second floor.

Jamey F, Only one hole. Chris B, David Lipton's calculations don't look right just by estimating the shot from under the bypass on Commerce. I haven't seen what he has done and I am probably wrong, but your choice of 3 1/2 degrees agrees with David Josephs and the surveyors of Dealey Plaza in those days. Your notion of using 3 1/2 degrees for the slope and 6 degrees for the rise, and 15% for the angle from the hole in Kennedy's throat to the hole in the windshield seems more reasonable. Can you show (in simple language for us non-math folks) what David Lipton is talking about.

If you take the lower frame rate of 16.82 fps you would have 22.16 x 16.82 = 372.73 frames missing by your calculations. If you add in the Zapruder Gap there would be more. Various people have estimated the time of this from about 15 seconds to 30 seconds. If I am recalling correctly David Josephs estimated about 15 seconds. Using his estimate and your 16.82 fps one would find 15 x 16.82 = 252.3. Add 372.73 + 252.3 = 625.03+ missing frames. This is just a rough estimate, but 625+ missing frames make a statement. Who could trust anything about this film? 625 frames missing? That is most of the film! 22 seconds + 15 seconds equal 37 seconds missing. The film is only 26 seconds long? If these figures are correct the film should be 22 seconds + 15 seconds + 26 seconds = 63 seconds long instead of 26 seconds long. That's a lot of missing information.

Chris D, I don't know why I didn't make this connection months ago on reading through your material. OBTW, excellent work. First Rate. This photo frame 275 shows this: There is a large light spot on the top of Kennedy's head. This connects to your hair flap sequence later. But, did you notice the large black spot on the back of Kennedy's head. Sometimes, their is a dent in that area more noticeable in other frames. I see this light spot and dark spot in earlier frames. Starting about Z 227 or directly after the p. limo appears from behind the Stemmons Sign. These same two spots are shown in Z 242. It is hard to see if a hair flap is there. It may be covered by Kennedy's hand: and, again in Z 227: Some folks would say this is just light and shadow in these Z frames. But, this light spot is connected to the hair flap sequence you have shown. The black spot looks suspiciously like the Hollywood black spot covering the Kennedy exit wound at the back of his head. If so, these frames put the Kennedy Head wound ahead of the throat wound and possibly back wound. That reverses the shot order and won't make sense to others. But, that is what Mary Moorman said. Believable?

This is Altgens 6 showing a bullet hole by the rearview mirror. You can clearly see a hole in the windshield in this crop and magnify of the relevant area. And from the video: I don't see a hole at the bottom similar to the hole at the rearview mirror. Altgens 6 and this frame from the video confirm there was a bullet hole by the rearview mirror. I have arbitrarily labelled the hole by the mirror the first bullet in the windshield. It may have been the second if a shot is determined to be at the bottom of the windshield.

Disguises are an interesting idea. One can't really do much with the photos of various people said to be one of the tramps. Like almost everything else in Dealey Plaza photos of the tramps are not the best for identification. At least from what you can pick up from the internet. I had forgotten Harrelson. Sorry, but here is something from the internets as a way means of comparison. There is a general resemblance between Harrelson and Tramp B. But, not enough to say conclusively yeah that's him. Tramp C has been said to be E. Howard Hunt: As with Harrelson/Tramp B, there is a general resemblance of E. Howard Hunt to Tramp C. Photo montage from the internet. The photos of Tramp C are not clear enough to tell whether he has make up of any kind. The main problem with this montage is the hairline of Tramp C's as versus Hunt's hairline. They are not the same. The forehead is not the same. Tramp C's chin appears to be narrower than Hunt's. The ears are different. I would say a general resemblance, but not the same. Chauncey Holt was another candidate for Tramp C. He doesn't work out either even though he said he was one of the Dealey Plaza Tramps. Here is something I put together to compare Holt, Tramp C, and E. Howard Hunt. Holt has a longer nose, both Holt and Hunt have a broader chin, and higher forehead. The eyebrows are close for all 3 of them. Hunt has a different ear formation then the others. The hairline is comparable in this montage, but in other photos Tramp C seems to have more hair then the other two. Mouth shape for all 3 differ. These may differ simply due to perspective since all are not in the same pose. However, I don't think so. Even though there are resemblance, some would say close, I don't see enough character traits to match the 3 Tramps to any person that is being claimed by others. The idea of make up or disguise facial features could throw this analysis off. Thanks Chris.

Chris, Right. I don't see any of the proposed people in the literature as Tramp A as he is sometimes referred to. He seems to be a unique fellow. Also, I do not see Frank Sturgis as Tramp B.

Chris D., As far as I can tell, Paschall, Hughes, and Daniel have the same 3-wheeler coming down Main St. after the p. limo goes under the bridge and leaves Dealey Plaza. The Bell film and Daniel have another 3-wheeler stationed just on the other side of the railroad bridge. It seems reasonable to speculate that the other 3-wheeler, the one in Paschall, Hughes, and Daniel, was stationed somewhere on Main Street, perhaps just off the Main/Houston intersection. I don't recall any film or photo showing a 3-wheeler in that area. So, where would that 3-wheeler, the one motoring down Main St., have been stationed? It maybe a candidate for Chris B.'s 3-wheeler.

I believe Hughes also has a 3-wheeler speeding down Main at about the same time or just a few seconds later. Hughes and Paschall may be showing the same 3-wheeler. Bell has a 3-wheeler parked under the railroad bridge on Main as the p. limo is almost at the bridge. Can't remember the exact wordage, but Earle Brown has some info on a 3-wheeler.

Chris, I haven't found any photos that I think look like the tramp identified as Tramp A. Here is two more which I think is unlikely. I don't know Carswell is, but they don't look alike. And, the idea that Doyle was one of the Tramps is also unlikely in my opinion.