Christian Toussay

...I am not sure it is really useful to break down the evidence that much. I would think that the crucial fact here is that the only agent who was not supposed to be there, Clint Hill, realized he had a greater chance to reach JFK and protect him by running, and not by waiting for the Secret Service car to accelerate. This spontaneous action tells a lot, for those with eyes to see...

Ok, so let us conclude this with the most brazen example of the fraud that took place in order to hide the truth: the Nix film. We have already seen many examples of alteration and forgery in the record, but the Nix film, capturing both the wall and the fence during the shooting, is something else. Evidently, the men we have already seen in this presentation, two men wearing DPD unifoms, would have been captured in this film too. How they were suppressed and made invisible until now is what I am going to present here. If I were a concerned US citizen seeing this, I would be very angry. I used the word "remastering" when describing the forgery of the Nix film. The composite below explains why. It shows the evolution of Nix frame 16 from "original" to the final result. The odd perspective of the wall in the Nix film had always intrigued me, just as much as the very weird whitish rectangular artifact behind the wall, which doesn't correspond to the known background of the area. So let's see what comes up, when we process Nix frame 16 : Notice (iteration 5) totally unnatural neon-bluish hue on two specific areas: - the terminal segment of the wall - the location of the (formerly) whitish rectangular artifact People who where able to access the images in the "Assassins behind the Fence" thread will remember that this same neon-bluish hue was also present in altered portions of the Nix film showing the fence assassins. Note striking discrepancy in vertical alignment of terminal segment of wall between "original" and iteration 23 just below. Notice also that, as the perspective of the wall changes between each iteration, the low bush running along the wall remains unchanged. This means that the wall we see in the Nix film, and that we have been looking at and poring over for half a century, is actually a Special FX. It has been painted over the original picture, to modify the perspective of the wall and allow for easier suppression of the unwanted images, i.e. those two DPD officers close to the wall corner. The unexplainable rectangular white artifact behind the retouched wall is simply a patch hiding DPD n°2, located about 6/8 feet from the wall corner, but that the forged perspective makes appear to be much farther down the wall... I post below different composites, using different results from Nix 16 data bank, to support the above statement: Notice Coke bottle visible on the left in processed frame: Here is a crop of the man the forgers suppressed for more than half a century, by using Hollywood Special FX. Note details now visible: - of course, the obnoxious Coke bottle on the left - but also a sizable object on the right, close to his chest, which reflects light differently than his uniform This could be some sort of communication device : Below is a triple composite, showing the man just retrieved from Nix 16, compared to other images from the exact same area obtained from Betzner (left) and Willis 5 (right). Note high coherence between all three images. Notice also that in Willis 5, the "sizable object" observed in Nix on the right appears to be right in front of his face: So let's summarize here: - when you compare the wall perspective in the Nix film to pictures taken from a different but quite similar point of view, like Moorman (see above), or Muchmore, there is a noticeable discrepancy. Actually the wall in Nix appears to be much longer than it really is, if we believe the perspective - the processing of Nix film frames shows that in fact the weird perspective of the wall is artificial, and that the "whitish rectangular artifact" is a Special FX Just like the Powell picture and its fake stack of boxes, the fake trees in Zapruder hiding the fence corner, or the fake hair in the autopsy picture. The magnitude of the fraud seems almost unbelievable, now that it is crumbling, but remember: - the techniques applied were the best of the times: think "The Ten Commandments" kind of stuff - the forgers never thought that the altered films and pictures would be wildly available in the future - the forgers never considered the fact that technological progress would make tools and methodologies capable of detecting their treachery available to concerned citizens decades later.... Alright, so the next thread will be about the science behind the results presented here. With the exception of somebody calling me a liar, with no argumentation, I appreciate that most expressed questions or skepticism were in a courteous way. One member stated that he could not understand how the process could do what I claim it does: retrieve data invisible to the human eye. So the next thread will be about recognized scientific techniques and methodologies, which may not be known to those criticizing the results presented here, but are identical in conceptual frame, and very similar in operational modalities to what I am presenting here.

...a good presentation of the case for the reality of the limousine stop. Even if I had not find confirmation myself, the suppression of the stop would still convince me that the film has been altered. This means of course that the car stop is a crucial element in the crime, which they did not want us to know about in the first place. The interesting thing in this, I would think, is that we see Greer developing a convoluted explanation for his actions during the shooting, actions that, however, do not appear in the film.

...sorry, duplicate post...

...I am talking about page 339 of Livingstone "Kaleidoscope", which shows three images of Jack Brazil standing in " the storm drain on the north end of the Triple Underpass, facing east". This would be in my opinion a more plausible location for a fourth shooter.

...Hi.. Yep, we agree on all that. The only point of my presentation on this Forum is to explain that " point n°1" can now be resolved: the true content of films and pictures which were forged to hide the truth can now be retrieved. And I believe Dr Mantik did a great job on the autopsy X-Rays. So evidence of forgery can now be established before a Court of Law. The results I presented on the Dillard and Powell pictures, for instance, are evidence of FBI / CIA tampering with the criminal evidence. Researching this case for all those years, and coming from a non-American, European culture, I'd like to add this: there is a major difference in knowledge-filter between US citizens and the rest of the world. We know that power struggles exist between competing elites, and that they can manifest outside of the democratic process, by violent means. We are not surprised by these types of events: our history is full of them. But US citizens generally seem to be reluctant to believe that this could happen in their country. I think this myth of "It couldn't happen here" is the major fuel of the "Oswald did it" supporters. I also believe that the magnitude of the fraud that was played on them is so immense that, like in the Fable of the Emperor's Clothes, it is actually better and safer to pretend you still see the magnificent garment, and not the Emperor's naked ass... I will present tomorrow results obtained on the analysis of the Nix film. We have already seen a fake stack of boxes (Powell, hiding a DPD officer), a fake tree (Z 462 and 472, hiding two DPD officers), a fake occiput (autopsy picture, hiding a vertical, serrated occipital exit), a fake sunlight spot on the fence (Nix, hiding a tree-man team of assassins behind the fence). But in the Nix film, the forgers had much work to do. Remember, we have already seen evidence of at least two men, wearing DPD uniforms, in close proximity to the wall corner: - one near the extremity of the wall, close to the steps - another one about 8 / 10 feet from the corner Those men are seen from different angles, during different but coherent time sequences, using different cameras and films, so their presence is not under dispute. Thus it is interesting to review what the Nix film, which has captured during a long sequence the area of interest, will reveal. The original shows nothing, as the image posted earlier shows. But there is nevertheless something interesting in this image, when we compared it to another image, showing the same area with a slightly different point of view: I post below a composite of the wall section in Moorman, as compared to what is seen in Nix film frame 16. If I may suggest a very easy exercise, please just do this: just flip rapidly your gaze between the two images : Of course, we acknowledge that the angle of sight is not identical between the two images. Nevertheless, the discrepancy does not correspond to optical / physical laws. There is simply no way Nix could have captured this perspective of the wall from his location, a perspective drastically different from Moorman's, seen just above... Here is the same composite, both with some captions to facilitate the analysis: Ok, so we have just compared Nix 16 to Moorman, and noticed several discrepancies, indicative of forgery. Most notably, the perspective of the wall is very different in both pictures, almost perfectly flat in Moorman, and markedly tilted to the right ( about 20°) in Nix. Just like we have demonstrated with the Dillard / Powell discrepancy, this significant difference in perspective cannot be explained away by the difference in angle of sight. So since analysis of Moorman did not show any evidence of forgery on the wall perspective, the conclusion we arrive at is that images from the Nix film showing the wall were forged. I will post tomorrow results supporting this statement.

..Those pics can be found in H E Livingstone book, "Kaleidoscope". The book is not easy to read, since it is essentially a rant / diatribe against Doug Horne and David Lifton, but does contain valuable information. But the storm drain investigated by Brazil is located at the extremity of the Triple Overpass. If that is the location of a "storm drain" shooter, this would fit more with the facts: a frontal, low-angle trajectory. I was talking about the theory of a shot coming from one of the sewer openings along the street, where one of the DPD bikers had parked his bike...

...The theory of a shot from the drain is alluring, but in my view suffers from severe constrictions: - the line of sight would be very limited, with very limited space for the shooter to adjust - the line of sight of a drain shooter would be heavily influenced by the position of the limousine relative to the storm drain and of the escort bikes relative to the target This last point means that the use of a storm drain shooter is only conceivable if the movements of the limousine once it entered Dealey Plaza where precisely choreographed to allow for such a shot. Any slight derivation of any of the variables (speed and location of target, speed and location of DPD escort bikes, some bystander stepping on the street...) could derail the assassination. I would guess that the plotters went for a more secure modus operandi: three or four shooters surrounding the target from different locations and elevations, with lines of sight allowing for long sequences of target acquisition. That being said, the actions, and inactions of the Secret Service in Dallas clearly show that this Agency was a crucial element in the JFKA. The fact that the limousine stop has disappeared from the extant films (despite 51 eyewitnesses...) indicates that there was something embarrassing here for the official version. And the fact that Agent Hill, the one not supposed to be here, suddenly realized that he would reach the President more rapidly by running than by waiting for the SS car, of which he was a passenger, to accelerate to protect the President, as is their duty, in my opinion closes the case. Secret Service complicity is I would think evident, and what they did or did not do that day in Dallas weighs heavily on what finally happened: the illegal motorcade route, the reduced motorcycle escort, the incredibly slow speed inside the kill zone, the total absence of reaction from the Secret Service car just behind the President during the shooting, the stop before the fatal head shot, the illegal kidnapping of the body from Dallas, the delivery of the body to military authorities for a deliberately botched autopsy... I don't believe this plan needs a storm drain shooter, but I could be wrong. Possibly if we can have the precise location and orientation of JFK's head relative to the storm drain we could go further: we have now quite good images of JFK's head wounds, some of which I posted here.

... I do believe a new, concerted effort to analyze the photographic and film record with 21st Century tools and methods is needed. I remember hearing about those two Hollywood experts concluding that Z 317 showed an artificial patch hiding the back of JFK's head in the Z film. I even downloaded the frame to examine it myself, but got too busy with my own discoveries to pursue this track specific clue I did, however, examine the possibility of alteration of the occipital head wound, using Z 337, which shows a perfect profile of JFK's head. My reasoning was that, since all the witnesses describe an avulsive exit wound with blasted bones surrounding a hole devoid of bone, it would be easier to spot in this profile shot. As it happens, I was right, and I posted the results in the "Jfk's Head Wounds" thread. Since most people could not access the image, here it is again: Z 337 is about 1 second after Z 317, so no human intervention of any kind has been applied to the wound. What we see in Z 337 is as close as we can get to the real aspect of the wound, about 1 second after the head shot. Evidently, Z 337 has been forged. The original frame does not show any ominous black patch, but does exhibit what appears to be heavy blurring in the occipital area. This burring, as shown in the result posted above, is entirely artificial, and simply vanishes through the processing of the frame. So, since forgery to hide the occipital wound is definitely present in Z 337, logic would tend to indicate that forgery was also applied to all frames showing the back of JFK's head, like for instance Z 317... I don't think you need to be any expert in visual optics to realize that the "black patch" in the original frame is unnatural. In order to contribute something valuabe to this interesting thread, this is what I did: I captured yesterday a version of Z 317 from this thread, and started processing it. From experience, this is what will normally follow: - first, the process will produce results establishing that the "black patch" is not part of the original picture, but is an artificial addition. This should be quite easy for the process, and thus quite rapid. - then the process will start looking for weak signals still present in the altered area, and retrieve them by iterative accretion. This will take more time: it can go from a few days from several weeks, depending on variables (image quality and operational steps taken to analyze the image). Actually, this is a real-time test of the methodology. So I post now below a result obtained on Z 317 yesterday, after about 45 minutes of working on it. Please note that the shape of the patch is clearly seen here, and is clearly artificial: it shows an almost perfect half circle covering the occiput, with a perfectly straight bisecting line joining the two extremities of the half circle: There is simply no conventional explanation for the massive discrepancy in grain / texture between the black spot, and other areas of the image., except deliberate forgery. Here is a simple negative of the result above, confirming the artificiality of the "black patch"...: From experience, it would appear to me that alterations were also done on JFK's right arm, and the shadows surrounding Jackie's face. My guess is that was done by the forgers to darken those specific areas, so that they may look more compatible with the black patch, in terms of light distribution. I will let you know here how the retrieving of weak signals progresses...

...OK, let's finish now the segment on the forgery of the Zapruder film. But let's review the sequence first: - I have found several dozen of photographic and film evidence of men wearing DPD officers directly involved in the shooting, some of them present on the Knoll both behind the wall and behind the fence - I, logically, searched for potential eyewitnesses of these men - I discovered (actually, re-discovered...) that the closest known witness to the area, Abraham Zapruder, actually went out of his way to tell the WC that there was "indication" of a second assassin. He did not say where this "indication" might be found. Nevertheless, the WC staff's answer establishes he knew Zapruder was talking about something he had filmed... - Since the camera is entirely focused on the limousine during most of the film, the only place where any "indication" of a second assassin might be found are the few frames where he caught the extremity of the fence just before the extant film stops - So I decided to process two frames, close enough to allow variations but not total modification or disappearance: so something visible in frame A should, given the known Laws of Physics, still be present in frame B in a coherent fashion , if the image being analyzed is real. I chose Z 462 and Z 472, separated by about half a second (0,6 sec actually), and presented the results In summary: results obtained on pictures and films led us to an eyewitness's statement, which in turn led us to another set of positive results, confirming the original ones. Again, I would think people with sound mind would realize that this continuity in corroboration cannot be dismissed as being simply coincidental. I post below a composite of Z 462 and Z 472. This the correct time sequence. Note that the movement of the man is coherent with the time sequence, i.e, a bit more than half a second between the two frames: I'd like to use Z 462 once again, to illustrate why it is important, as I am trying to convey here, that the photographic and film record be re-assessed using 21st Century tools and methods. The last time this record was scientifically evaluated was in 1978: that is Jurassic Park compared to what we now have at our disposal. I re-post below the original Z 462, just to illustrate the fact that, even without processing it, it still shows clear evidence of forgery, visible to the naked eye, now that we have already established that the small tree hiding the top of the fence is actually a Special FX. It is also a good illustration of the difficulty of image analysis. This evidence has been sitting in plain view for 60 years. See if you can find it: If you could not, there it is: Here is a cropped enlargement: Remember, we have already seen that: - the apparent location of this "small tree", relative to Zapruder and the Fence, is highly suspect and doesn't correspond to what we see in other pictures and films - this "small tree" actually disappears in the processed results, to reveal the image of two men behind the fence. This is also verified in identical fashion in Z 472 So what we see here is that, in the "original" / unprocessed frame, we still find direct evidence of forgery. Evidently, the alteration of dozens of successive frames could not be done in automated batch sessions in the 60s... There are very probably many more instances of such slip-ups in the actual record. We should now be able to pick them up.... Ok, so up to the Nix film. Because of its unique angle of vision capturing the Knoll, the Nix film is actually the piece of evidence which required the most alteration. The forgers could not simply "patch" unwanted details, as they did elsewhere: the Nix film necessitated a whole "remastering" to hide the truth. Researchers of the Old guard type will remember that first the Nix film was "unavailable", then appeared in a severely cropped version cutting out anything above the wall, then later on in an incredibly dark version still hiding everything behind the wall and fence. Evidently, there is something with the Nix film which should be of interest to serious researchers... So that is what we are going to look into right now. But first, I will seek, if I may, contribution from members here about an important feature of the Nix film we are going to analyze. I post below the original I worked with: frame 16 (my own count) of a clip of Nix I downloaded from YouTube: "1", "2" and "3" are reference points that will be used later in the analysis. What I am concerned about, is the whitish, rectangular artifact that is indicated below by a question mark: Does anyone know what this is ? On the right of it, we can see the infamous "Shooter in a White Shirt" that was debunked in the 70s. But what about that whitish rectangular artifact? I will wait a day or two for contributions / explanations / theories about this artifact, before posting results...

..Thanks for your interest. The results that I am presenting here, of massive DPD participation / complicity in the shooting,and of complete forgery of the photographic and film record to hide it, have one strong quality that should not be overlooked: they solve a whole lot of problems / puzzles / mysteries in the case, when you apply simple logic, being the open-and-shut case against Oswald, the systematic mishandling of crucial evidence or the assassination of Oswald live on TV from the basement of the DPD station. In science, the strength of a new theory is evaluated by its capacity at resolving previously unsolved problems... As an example, my conclusion is that the "almost perfect plan" was derailed when Oswald, the intended patsy, was confronted alone in room by a DPD officer with his gun drawn, 90 seconds after the shooting, and managed to get out alive. I do not believe for one second that this confrontation could have been a mere coincidence, now that I have seen the cleaned up pictures of the shooting showing the involvement of men in DPD attire. Something went wrong there, and led to Tippitt being dispatched to find him, which was obviously not part of the original plan. How Tippitt reacted to these new, emergency instructions about finding Oswald might explain, I would think, why he was killed. It is significant, I would think, that the DPD officer who stationed and honked in front of Oswald's lodging did not come out to knock on the door to inquire about Oswald. He just honked a few times and left. That is not what you would do if your mission is to find the patsy-at-large, essential for the conspiracy you are a part of. So my interpretation is that Tippitt got cold feet at some point, or did not know the exact nature of the conspiracy he was involved in, and tried to back up off the deal, having failed to find Oswald, and that is why he was killed. All the data in the Tippitt case shows that the DPD lied repeatedly, going so far as to forge documents, to explain the presence of Tippitt where he had no reason to be. The fact that the DPD went this far to hide the truth is another confirmation that the Dallas Police was a major player in the JFKA.

...I post below an extreme enlargement of the man n°1 we just saw in Zapruder film frame 472 : Notice that this previously invisible image is enclosed within a semi circular whitish area, which bears no relation to the actual background of the image. These are traces of the forgery used to erase this man. Below is a composite comparing the Z 472 image to that of Moorman, taken from a perfectly opposite point of view: We will now analyze frame 462. Here is the original: Again, we see the same incongruous small tree with dense dark foliage hiding from view the top of the picket fence. Below are several results from the data bank of Z 462: Note disappearance of tree limbs and foliage previously obscuring this precise area. Note also the presence, yet again, of a semi circular whitish blob surrounding the previously invisible image of this man. And here is a detoured version, to close the argument: There is still more to discover in Z 462 as far as forgery is concerned, so I will conclude this tomorrow.

...Interesting contribution. Thank for your input. You have either: - superhuman visual skills - or severely repressed homo erotic fantasy about big hulking men with brown eyes (known as the Jack Reacher Syndrome in specialized circles..) I would go for the latter: I've heard some people really gets turned on by uniforms... As stated, my patience with fools is limited. I value all serious questions about results or methodology and will respond to them. I have no time for nor interest in junior school humor.

So, the Zapruder film... The Z film has become a a festering point of discord within the so-called JFKA research community, some arguing that this piece of evidence has been forged, some arguing ferociously for its authenticy. So let us be precise here: there are three ways to alter a film : - you can modify content of individual frames, which is the technique applied to fake the pictures, as we have seen, by hiding unwanted details by blacking out, whitening out, blurring or painted forgery. - you can modify the time sequence of the filmed event, by editing the continuity : suppressing frames will accelerate, while adding duplicates frames will slow the apparent motion seen on the screen. - you can modify the background of a movie segment to include what you wish and thus change the perception of what is being seen. That's basically what Hollywood has been doing for 30 years, and calling it cinema. That technology already existed in the 60s, as anyone who has seen "The Ten Commandments" will testify. The results that I will present here do not prove that sophisticated editing of the Zapruder film did take place, though it is my personal conclusion: I have still to find an explanation for the "stop / almost stop" of the limousine described by dozens of witnesses not being visible in the film. But I will show now that individual frames of the Zapruder film have been forged: the probability that other tampering might have been done is thus, in my view, strengthened. We first saw evidence of tampering in the Z film in the thread about JFK's head wounds. I will repost some results here, since most people could not access them. Below is the original Z 337, from the "Image of an Assassination" DVD: In the triple composite below, note that in the image on the left the heavy blur in the occipital area has already disappeared: Below is a rotated result of Z 337, showing the shape of the occipital wound: So this is a first instance of forgery in the Zapruder film. Here is another one. But first let me quote Zapruder's closing statements to the WC, which I read with a different knowledge filter after discovering the images of the assassins behind the fence : "...and they said it all could have been done by one man...Do you know there was indication there were two?.." Now what kind of "indication" of a second assassin could Zapruder, the man who filmed the most important film of the assassination, be talking about ? For all we know, he had his eyes glued to the viewer, filming the limousine until it disappears behind the fence corner, of which he catches a few frames. Anything Zapruder could have seen during the assassination, and which would have led him to believe it indicated the presence of a second assassin, is actually captured on film. And since the last frames of the Z film shows the picket fence corner, where we have already identified the presence of an assassins team, I decided to processed them. I post below Z frame 472, again from the IMA DVD: First note that the picket fence corner area, where we have already seen the team of assassins in other pictures and films, is heavily obscured by the foliage of two small trees, with dense dark leaves. Now this is problematic because the larger tree, in the center of the frame, and relative to Zapruder filming it, would have to be located near the extremity of the wall, close to the stairs. There is no such tree there. Here is the same frame after processing. Even people with medium visual skills should be able to pick up patterns worthy of interest behind the fence, which is not obscured any more by the foliage: Here is a different result from the data bank: Below is a crop focusing on the fence corner: And for those who missed it, this may help: Man n°2 appears to wear the same kind of eyewear than the shooter in Moorman and Nix, so I would assume that those two men are actually the shooter and his accomplice having moved closer to the fence corner, about ten seconds after the head shot. So this is what Zapruder saw, and what led him to his startling closing statement, at a point where his testimony had actually already ended. You would think it was something he thought was important to mention. As to the WC staff's answer to Zapruder's statement, there it is: " Thank you. Your films (yes, plural, and that's something else...) have been very helpful to the investigation." So it would appear that the WC staff knew exactly not only what kind of "indication of a second assassin" Zapruder was talking about, but also where to find it. So here, we find a mix of several technique: fake trees, blacking / whitening, blur, etc. I will present tomorrow results obtained on a different frame, Z 462.

Good. In the concluding thread, I will repost some of the pictures that were not accessible.