Was Muchmore’s film shown on WNEW-TV, New York, on November 26, 1963?

[Paul Rigby]

Zapruder public version 1:

"When the assassin opened fire, the Presidential limousine had just passed the steps which lead to the concrete monument on the grassy knoll,"

Harold Feldman, "Fifty-one Witnesses: The Grassy Knoll," The Minority of One, (Vol VII, No 3), March 1965, p.17.

Feldman, like Lane, obviously hadn't been told about the new, improved second version, the one which which moved the shooting back down Elm in the direction of the TSBD - and, of course, removed the footage of the turn of the presidential limousine from Houston onto Elm.

The version Feldman here describes is, of course, the version shown on WNEW-TV, New York, in the first hour of Tuesday, 26 November 1963; as witnessed by, among others, Mark Lane.

[Paul Rigby]

Features in Zapruder public version 1 (Zpv1) absent from or different to Zapruder public version 2 (Zpv2):

1) Presidential limousine turning left from Houston onto Elm

2) No street sign interposed between camera and President at moment of impact of first bullet

3) Shooting took place further up Elm St towards Overpass, either opposite (or “abreast” of) Zapruder, or beginning at the steps leading up to the grassy knoll

4) Connolly’s white shirt visibly covered in blood following impact of shot

5) JFK’s head went forward in response to impact of head shot

Elements of Zpv1 (1) to (5) described in following:

1) Presidential limousine filmed turning left from Houston onto Elm:

• Abraham Zapruder on WFAA-TV, at 2:10pm CST, November 22, 1963: transcript: http://www.jfk-info.com/wfaa-tv.htm

• Dan Rather, CBS radio & TV, 251163: http://www.i-accuse.com/Rudd_Hotelet.html

• UPI (New York), “Film Showing Assassination Is Released,” The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5 (description of film shown on WNEW-TV, NY, at 00:46hrs, November 26, 1963)

• Arthur J. Snider (Chicago Daily News Service), “Movies Reconstruct Tragedy,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, (Evening edition), November 27, 1963, section 2, p.1

• Warren Report (U.S. Government Printing Office (1964), p.98

• Roy Kellerman, 090364 (2WCH91): http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm

• Mark Lane. Rush to Judgment: A Critique of the Warren Commission’s Inquiry into the Murders of President John F. Kennedy, Officer J. D. Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald (London: The Bodley Head Ltd., 1966), p.66, footnote 2

2) No street sign interposed between camera and President at moment of impact of first bullet:

• Dallas Morning News, “Photographer Sells Pictures of Assassination for $25,000,” November 24, 1963

• Dan Rather, CBS radio & TV, 251163 (Richard Trask. Pictures of the Pain, p.87): http://www.i-accuse.com/Rudd_Hotelet.html

• Associated Press (Dallas), "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3

• UPI (New York), “Film Showing Assassination Is Released,” The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5 (description of film shown on WNEW-TV, NY, at 00:46hrs, November 26, 1963)

• UPI (Dallas), “Movie Film Shows Murder of President,” Philadelphia Daily News, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.3 (4 star edition)

• Express Staff Reporter (New York, Monday), “The Man Who Got the Historic Pictures,” Daily Express, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.10

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

• Arthur J. Snider (Chicago Daily News Service), “Movies Reconstruct Tragedy,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, (Evening edition), November 27, 1963, section 2, p.1

• “The Man Who Killed Kennedy,” Time, December 6, 1963, p.29

• Abraham Zapruder (7WCH571): http://www.jfk-info.com/wc-zapr.htm

• William Manchester, Look magazine, 040467; Death of a President (London: Pan, paperback, 1968), p.234

3) Shooting took place further up Elm St towards Overpass, either opposite (or “abreast” of) Zapruder, or beginning at the steps leading up to the grassy knoll:

• Associated Press (Dallas), "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

• Abraham Zapruder, 7WCH571: http://www.jfk-info.com/wc-zapr.htm

• Harold Feldman, “Fifty-one witnesses: The Grassy Knoll,” The Minority of One, March 1965, p.17

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

4) Connolly’s white shirt visibly covered in blood following impact of shot:

• Dan Rather, CBS, Radio & TV, 251163: http://www.etcfilmunit.com/iaccuse.html

5) JFK’s head went forward in response to impact of head shot:

• Dan Rather, CBS, Radio & TV, 251163 (Richard Trask, Pictures of the Pain (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 1994, p.87): http://www.etcfilmunit.com/iaccuse.html

• Associated Press (Dallas), "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3

• UPI (Dallas), “Movie Film Shows Murder of President,” Philadelphia Daily News, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.3 (4 star edition)

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

• Cartha DeLoach, Hoover’s FBI: The Inside Story by Hoover’s Trusted Lieutenant (1995), p.139: http://www.kenrahn.com/jfk/the_critics/gri...Alteration.html

Most of the newspaper articles cited above can be found in the thread Eleven early print descriptions of the Zapruder film: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8953

[Dean Hagerman]

Features in Zapruder public version 1 (Zpv1) absent from or different to Zapruder public version 2 (Zpv2):

1) Presidential limousine turning left from Houston onto Elm

2) No street sign interposed between camera and President at moment of impact of first bullet

3) Shooting took place further up Elm St towards Overpass, either opposite (or “abreast” of) Zapruder, or beginning at the steps leading up to the grassy knoll

4) Connolly’s white shirt visibly covered in blood following impact of shot

5) JFK’s head went forward in response to impact of head shot

Elements of Zpv1 (1) to (5) described in following:

1) Presidential limousine filmed turning left from Houston onto Elm:

• Abraham Zapruder on WFAA-TV, at 2:10pm CST, November 22, 1963: transcript: http://www.jfk-info.com/wfaa-tv.htm

• Dan Rather, CBS radio & TV, 251163: http://www.i-accuse.com/Rudd_Hotelet.html

• UPI (New York), “Film Showing Assassination Is Released,” The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5 (description of film shown on WNEW-TV, NY, at 00:46hrs, November 26, 1963)

• Arthur J. Snider (Chicago Daily News Service), “Movies Reconstruct Tragedy,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, (Evening edition), November 27, 1963, section 2, p.1

• Warren Report (U.S. Government Printing Office (1964), p.98

• Roy Kellerman, 090364 (2WCH91): http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm

• Mark Lane. Rush to Judgment: A Critique of the Warren Commission’s Inquiry into the Murders of President John F. Kennedy, Officer J. D. Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald (London: The Bodley Head Ltd., 1966), p.66, footnote 2

2) No street sign interposed between camera and President at moment of impact of first bullet:

• Dallas Morning News, “Photographer Sells Pictures of Assassination for $25,000,” November 24, 1963

• Dan Rather, CBS radio & TV, 251163 (Richard Trask. Pictures of the Pain, p.87): http://www.i-accuse.com/Rudd_Hotelet.html

• Associated Press (Dallas), "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3

• UPI (New York), “Film Showing Assassination Is Released,” The Valley Independent, (Monessen, Pennsylvania), Tuesday, November 26, 1963, Page 5 (description of film shown on WNEW-TV, NY, at 00:46hrs, November 26, 1963)

• UPI (Dallas), “Movie Film Shows Murder of President,” Philadelphia Daily News, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.3 (4 star edition)

• Express Staff Reporter (New York, Monday), “The Man Who Got the Historic Pictures,” Daily Express, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.10

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

• Arthur J. Snider (Chicago Daily News Service), “Movies Reconstruct Tragedy,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, (Evening edition), November 27, 1963, section 2, p.1

• “The Man Who Killed Kennedy,” Time, December 6, 1963, p.29

• Abraham Zapruder (7WCH571): http://www.jfk-info.com/wc-zapr.htm

• William Manchester, Look magazine, 040467; Death of a President (London: Pan, paperback, 1968), p.234

3) Shooting took place further up Elm St towards Overpass, either opposite (or “abreast” of) Zapruder, or beginning at the steps leading up to the grassy knoll:

• Associated Press (Dallas), "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

• Abraham Zapruder, 7WCH571: http://www.jfk-info.com/wc-zapr.htm

• Harold Feldman, “Fifty-one witnesses: The Grassy Knoll,” The Minority of One, March 1965, p.17

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

4) Connolly’s white shirt visibly covered in blood following impact of shot:

• Dan Rather, CBS, Radio & TV, 251163: http://www.etcfilmunit.com/iaccuse.html

5) JFK’s head went forward in response to impact of head shot:

• Dan Rather, CBS, Radio & TV, 251163 (Richard Trask, Pictures of the Pain (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 1994, p.87): http://www.etcfilmunit.com/iaccuse.html

• Associated Press (Dallas), "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3

• UPI (Dallas), “Movie Film Shows Murder of President,” Philadelphia Daily News, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.3 (4 star edition)

• John Herbers, “Kennedy Struck by Two Bullets, Doctor Who Attended Him Says,” New York Times, November 27, 1963, p.20

• Cartha DeLoach, Hoover’s FBI: The Inside Story by Hoover’s Trusted Lieutenant (1995), p.139: http://www.kenrahn.com/jfk/the_critics/gri...Alteration.html

Most of the newspaper articles cited above can be found in the thread Eleven early print descriptions of the Zapruder film: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8953

Very nice Paul!

[Paul Rigby]

Dan Rather, CBS Radio interview, 25 November 1963:

“I…have just returned from seeing a…a movie…the President’s open black automobile…made a turn, a left turn off of Houston Street in Dallas onto Elm Street…as the car completed the turn…,”

Richard Trask. Pictures of the Pain: Photography and the assassination of President Kennedy (Danvers, Ma: Yeoman Press, 1994), pp.86-87.

Dan Rather’s first detailed public description of the Z-film, 1963, versus Bob Huffaker’s, 2004:

Dan Rather, CBS radio, 25 November 1963, as interviewed by Hughes Rudd and Richard C. Hotelett:

Dan Rather:

“Well let me tell you then, give you a word picture of the motion picture that we have just seen. The President’s automobile which was proceeded by only one other car containing Secret Service Agents…the President’s open black Lincoln limousine…made a turn, a left turn off of Houston Street in Dallas onto Elm Street, this was right on the fringe area of the downtown area. This left turn was made right below the window from which the shot was fired.

As the car made the turn, completed the turn, went below the window from which the shot was fired…went on past the building, keep in mind the window was on the sixth floor, it got about 35 yards from the base of the building that is if you had dropped a plumb line from the window to the sidewalk to the President’s car, was around 35 yards from that spot…President Kennedy had just put his right hand up to the side of his right eye, it appeared that he was perhaps brushing back his hair or rubbing his eyebrow. Mrs. Kennedy was not looking in his direction. In front of them, in the jump seat of the Lincoln, were Governor and Mrs. Connally. The Governor, as was the President was on the side of the car of the building in which the assassin was located. Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally were on the opposite side, two Secret Servicemen on the front seat.

At almost the instant the President put his hand up to his eyebrow…on the right side of his face, with Mrs. Kennedy looking away…the President lurched forward just a bit, uh, it was obvious he had been hit in the movie, but you had to be looking very closely in order to see it.

Mrs. Kennedy did not appear to be aware that he was hit, but Governor Connally in the seat just in front of the President…seemingly heard the shot…or sensed that something was wrong…Governor Connally whose coat button was open turned in such a way to extend his right hand out toward the President and the Governor seemed to have a look on his face that might say, ‘What is it? What happened?’ and as he turned he exposed his entire shirtfront and chest because his coat was unbuttoned…at that moment a shot very clearly hit the part of the Governor.

He was wounded once with a chest shot, this we now know…uh the Governor fell back in his seat…Mrs. Connally immediately fell over the Governor, uh, I say fell, threw herself over the Governor…and at that instant the second shot, the third shot total, but the second shot hit President Kennedy and there was there, his head…went forward with considerable violence…Mrs. Kennedy stood up immediately her mouth wide open…the President slumped over against Mrs. Kennedy almost toppling her over as she was standing…Mrs. Kennedy then threw herself out of the back seat of the car onto the trunk of the car almost on all fours stretched out over the trunk of the car…there was a Secret Service man standing on the back bumper…it would appear that Mrs. Kennedy was either trying to get herself out of what she knew instinctively was danger or perhaps was trying to grab the Secret Service man and pull him into the back seat of the car for help.

At any rate, Mrs. Kennedy was prone, uh, face down on the back of the car on the trunk…the Secret Service man leaned over put his hands on her shoulders and shoved her back into the car. She seemed to be in danger of perhaps rolling or falling off the back. A Secret Service man in the front seat of the car, uh, was already on the telephone - perhaps he had been on the phone all along, it was not clear – and the car sped away.

Dick Hotelett:

The car never stopped, did it?

Dan Rather:

The car never stopped, it never paused.

Hughes Rudd:

How long did it all take, Dan? In a matter of seconds?

Dan Rather:

Well, the complete scene that I just described to you covers exactly 20 seconds; that is, from the time the car made the turn until the car disappeared onto an underpass.

Dick Hotelett:

Is it clear; is it clear that the President was hit twice?

Dan Rather:

It was very clear that the President was hit twice. He was hit, Governor Connally has hit and the Gov…uh the President was hit again.

Hughes Rudd:

How long a time did the actual three shots take from the first shot until the final shot, Dan?

Dan Rather:

Not more than five seconds and I…am inclined to think slightly less than that perhaps.

Hughes Rudd:

There [sic] must have been very grim pictures to watch, especially today.

Dick Hotelett:

What was the source of these pictures, Dan?

Dan Rather:

An amateur photographer had an 8 millimeter color, uh, camera. He had positioned himself up off the sidewalk on an old street lamp base, he was above the heads of the crowd and he was facing the automobile.

Dick Hotelett:

Of course he was focused on the automobile so there’s no indication of where the shots came from.

Dan Rather:

No, he was focused on the automobile with his back or side to the window from which the shots came. Only the automobile was shown in the film.”

Richard Trask, National Nightmare on six feet of film: Mr Zapruder’s home movie and murder of President Kennedy (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 2005), pp.138-142.

Bob Huffaker of KRLD on, er, the same film:

While Jack Ruby had been intervening to confuse an already complicated tale, Dan Rather, the CBS Southwest Bureau chief, had been negotiating to buy the 8mm color movie film that Abraham Zapruder had taken of the fatal bullet striking JFK. The Time-Life corporation outbid him and bought the only film that had captured the terrible sight. We were not allowed to show the film, so each of the three networks could only describe what it revealed. Dan brought a 16 mm print of the film to our newsroom a few days after the assassination, and he and I took it into the projection room. Dan had to view it and feed a report about it to Walter Cronkite’s evening news. I ran the soundless film over and over again for the better part of an hour while Dan took notes.

We timed the bullet’s impacts and noted how the president’s head and body reacted to the two shots that hit their mark. We did not know then that the first of the three shots had ricocheted off an oak limb and hit a main street curb. When the second one strikes Kennedy in the upper back, a road sign obscures the president in Abraham Zapruder’s frame, which shows Governor Connally react to the shot from the back. The film shows JFK grasping at his throat when he reappears from behind the sign. As Kennedy holds both arms upward toward his throat where the bullet had emerged, Governor Connally, having glanced over his right shoulder at the sound of the first shot, which had missed, slumps after being hit by the same slug that wounds the president. Then the third and final shot hits the back of Kennedy’s head, which is tilted forward when the bullet blasts away a massive section of right rear skull and brain. The bullet’s plowing through the right posterior brain causes the president’s head to snap to the left and roll violently back towards his horrified wife.

As I ran the now-famous film time after time, Dan and I talked about what its fuzzy sequence revealed. Dan was well acquainted with firearms, and I’d been an expert army rifleman. We agreed that the film showed reactions to at least two hits from behind, consistent with ballistics evidence of shots fired from the sixth floor. I’d warn a lumbar back brace like the president’s, and right or wrong, I speculated that the corsetlike device might have helped to hold JFK up and account for the backward movement of his head and upper body when the final shot had struck.

Dan went to a typewriter, then into our television studio, where he reported our conclusions for CBS. Like the rest of us, he read directly from the copy he wrote, since TelePrompTers were still in their early stages of development. Dan, who had begun his career at KSAM in Huntsville while he was attending Sam Houston State, and while I was at KORA in Bryan thirty miles away, was a careful and wise journalist. Years later some assassination buffs labelled him a conspirator for distorting what Zapruder’s film showed as he reported it that evening. That would make both of us part of the conspiracy.

When the News Went Live: Dallas 1963 (Lanham, Maryland: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2004), pp.67-8

[Paul Rigby]

Dan Rather’s first detailed public description of the Z-film, 1963...

Dan Rather, CBS radio, 25 November 1963, as interviewed by Hughes Rudd and Richard C. Hotelett:

Dan Rather:

“Well let me tell you then, give you a word picture of the motion picture that we have just seen. The President’s automobile which was proceeded by only one other car containing Secret Service Agents…the President’s open black Lincoln limousine…made a turn, a left turn off of Houston Street in Dallas onto Elm Street, this was right on the fringe area of the downtown area. This left turn was made right below the window from which the shot was fired.

As the car made the turn, completed the turn, went below the window from which the shot was fired…went on past the building, keep in mind the window was on the sixth floor, it got about 35 yards from the base of the building that is if you had dropped a plumb line from the window to the sidewalk to the President’s car, was around 35 yards from that spot…President Kennedy had just put his right hand up to the side of his right eye, it appeared that he was perhaps brushing back his hair or rubbing his eyebrow. Mrs. Kennedy was not looking in his direction. In front of them, in the jump seat of the Lincoln, were Governor and Mrs. Connally. The Governor, as was the President was on the side of the car of the building in which the assassin was located. Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally were on the opposite side, two Secret Servicemen on the front seat.

At almost the instant the President put his hand up to his eyebrow…on the right side of his face, with Mrs. Kennedy looking away…the President lurched forward just a bit, uh, it was obvious he had been hit in the movie, but you had to be looking very closely in order to see it.

Mrs. Kennedy did not appear to be aware that he was hit, but Governor Connally in the seat just in front of the President…seemingly heard the shot…or sensed that something was wrong…Governor Connally whose coat button was open turned in such a way to extend his right hand out toward the President and the Governor seemed to have a look on his face that might say, ‘What is it? What happened?’ and as he turned he exposed his entire shirtfront and chest because his coat was unbuttoned…at that moment a shot very clearly hit the part of the Governor.

He was wounded once with a chest shot, this we now know…uh the Governor fell back in his seat…Mrs. Connally immediately fell over the Governor, uh, I say fell, threw herself over the Governor…and at that instant the second shot, the third shot total, but the second shot hit President Kennedy and there was there, his head…went forward with considerable violence…Mrs. Kennedy stood up immediately her mouth wide open…the President slumped over against Mrs. Kennedy almost toppling her over as she was standing…Mrs. Kennedy then threw herself out of the back seat of the car onto the trunk of the car almost on all fours stretched out over the trunk of the car…there was a Secret Service man standing on the back bumper…it would appear that Mrs. Kennedy was either trying to get herself out of what she knew instinctively was danger or perhaps was trying to grab the Secret Service man and pull him into the back seat of the car for help.

At any rate, Mrs. Kennedy was prone, uh, face down on the back of the car on the trunk…the Secret Service man leaned over put his hands on her shoulders and shoved her back into the car. She seemed to be in danger of perhaps rolling or falling off the back. A Secret Service man in the front seat of the car, uh, was already on the telephone - perhaps he had been on the phone all along, it was not clear – and the car sped away.

Dick Hotelett:

The car never stopped, did it?

Dan Rather:

The car never stopped, it never paused.

Hughes Rudd:

How long did it all take, Dan? In a matter of seconds?

Dan Rather:

Well, the complete scene that I just described to you covers exactly 20 seconds; that is, from the time the car made the turn until the car disappeared onto an underpass.

Dick Hotelett:

Is it clear; is it clear that the President was hit twice?

Dan Rather:

It was very clear that the President was hit twice. He was hit, Governor Connally has hit and the Gov…uh the President was hit again.

Hughes Rudd:

How long a time did the actual three shots take from the first shot until the final shot, Dan?

Dan Rather:

Not more than five seconds and I…am inclined to think slightly less than that perhaps.

Hughes Rudd:

There [sic] must have been very grim pictures to watch, especially today.

Dick Hotelett:

What was the source of these pictures, Dan?

Dan Rather:

An amateur photographer had an 8 millimeter color, uh, camera. He had positioned himself up off the sidewalk on an old street lamp base, he was above the heads of the crowd and he was facing the automobile.

Dick Hotelett:

Of course he was focused on the automobile so there’s no indication of where the shots came from.

Dan Rather:

No, he was focused on the automobile with his back or side to the window from which the shots came. Only the automobile was shown in the film.”

Richard Trask, National Nightmare on six feet of film: Mr Zapruder’s home movie and murder of President Kennedy (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 2005), pp.138-142.

Dan Rather's second description of the first version of the Zapruder film on CBS, this time for television news, from November 25:

Walter Cronkite:

Correspondent Dan Rather was permitted today to see some films of the actual assassination and here is his report from Dallas.

Dan Rather:

The films we saw were taken by an amateur photographer, who had a particularly good vantage point, just past the building from which the fatal shot was fired. The films show President Kennedy’s open, black limousine, making a left turn off Houston Street on to Elm Street on the fringe of downtown Dallas, a left turn made just below the window in which the assassin was waiting. About 35 yards past the very base of the building, just below the window, President Kennedy could be seen to, to put his right hand, up to the side of his head to, either brush back his hair or cover up his eyebrow. President Kennedy was sitting on the same side of the car, as the building from which the shots came. Mrs. Kennedy was by his side. In the jump seat in front of him, Mrs. Connally, and Governor Connally, Governor Connally on the same side of the car as the President. And in the front seat, two Secret Service men.

Just as the President put that right hand up to the side of his head, he, you could see him, lurch forward. The first shot had hit him. Mrs. Kennedy was looking in another direction, apparently didn’t see him, or sense that first shot, or didn’t hear it. But Governor Connally, in the seat in front, appeared to have heard it, or at least sensed that something was wrong. The Governor’s coat was open. He, he reached back in this fashion, back as if to, to offer aid or ask the President something. At that moment, a shot clearly hit the Governor, in the front, and he fell back in his seat. Mrs. Connally immediately threw herself over him in a protective position.

In the next instant, with this time Mrs. Kennedy apparently looking on, a second shot, the third total shot, hit the President’s head. He, his head can be seen to move violently forward. And Mrs. Kennedy stood up immediately, the President leaned over her way. It appeared that he might have brushed her legs. Mrs. Kennedy then, literally, went over the top of the trunk, of the Lincoln car, p-put practically her whole body on the trunk. It, it appeared she might have been on all fours, there, reaching out for the Secret Service man, the lone Secret Service man who was riding on the bumper of the car, the back bumper on Mrs. Kennedy’s side. Uh, the Secret Service man leaned forward and put his hands on Mrs. Kennedy’s shoulder to, to push her back into the car. She was in some danger, it appeared, of rolling off or falling off. And when we described this before, there was some question about what we meant by Mrs. Kennedy being on the trunk of the car. Only she knows, but it appeared that she was trying desperately to, to get the Secret Service man’s attention or perhaps to help pull him into the car.

The car never stopped, it never paused. In the front seat, a Secret Service man was, was on the telephone. The car picked up speed, and disappeared beneath an underpass. This is Dan Rather in Dallas.

Walter Cronkite:

The White House tonight announced a full investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy under orders from President Johnson. All Federal agencies have been advised to cooperate with the FBI.

Source: Richard B. Trask. National Nightmare on six feet of film: Mr. Zapruder’s home movie and the murder of President Kennedy (Danvers, Mass.: Yeoman Press, 2005), pp. 142-14, citing “CBS Radio Description of Zapruder Film by Dan Rather,” from a transcript from the Richard Sprague Papers, Special Collections Division, Georgetown University Library, Washington, D.C., p.[1-3]

[William Kelly]

Why does it have to be the Muchmore film?

Why not another film, or since it was aired so quickly, why not video?

While still primitive, reel to reel, video was being used, and could be sent wireless via microwave relay.

Besides the cases mentioned by Paul, there's also one among the FBI files from Dallas, I think it is among the Gimberling reports - about the investigation of a guy who said he saw the assassination on TV within hours of it happening.

The FBI tracked this guy down and he said he saw the assassination on a TV at the IBM office in Dallas.

Now this investigation never went any further, but I started an IBM assassination file and it's now getting pretty thick.

The second entry came when I re-read Brewer's testimony, and the Oak Cliff shoe store clerk said he had previously sold Oswald a pair of loafers, and then saw him suspicously duck into the store front window while a cop car went by, instigating him to follow Oswald down the block to watch him enter the theater without buying a ticket.

Brewer said he was in his shop with two friends from the neighborhood, not customers, two guys who worked at IBM. But these guys, also witnesses to the flight of Oswald or the person who shot a police officer, were never identified or questioned. I wondered why?

Then I learned that IBM had an important stake in the development of the video-microwave relay technology.

The history of the satellite recon makes note of the fact that the Itec cameras used Kodak film that was dropped from the passing satellite and picked up in mid-air by a SAC Flying Boxcar and delivered to a lab at Kodak's HQ at Rochester, New York for processing, until it could be relayed directly from the satellite by the new microwave technology.

If you google "Hawkeye Works," the name of the building where much of the secret work was done, you will find a real estate adverstisement for office space at the Kodak plant that is now for lease, in a building that is still being partially used by IBM.

So the idea of the assassination being shot in video and placed on TV within hours of the assassination, as some witnesses attest, is not such a far out idea.

And it also gives Steve Osborn's ARRB testimony more weight.

-BK

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/arrb/index71.htm]

Steve Osborn: The gentleman I spoke with proceeded to tell me he was in the Army Station in Fort Hood, in Clean, Texas. On the day of the assassination his group, a communications group, was assigned the task of observing and videotaping the presidential motorcade as it moved through the Plaza. This unit had no similar assignment in any other Texas city during the President's visit, and they were only to tape that portion of the motorcade as it proceeded through Dealey Plaza.

Now if this event actually occurred, if it actually happened, it makes their activity highly suspicious and adds new questions to the assassination, particularly with reference to the possible foreknowledge of the assassination of intelligence personnel.

In my conversations with this gentleman, I asked questions of a technical nature trying to discovery how their assignment was accomplished. After discovering that the camera signals were transported by wireless means back to the control studio, which was actually a semi-tractor-trailer, I found myself doubting that this type of equipment was available in 1963.

I knew that ham radio operators have been sending television signals easily for a number of years, and I had also participated in that hobby. I also knew that videotaping was still in its infant years in 1963. I started to research available equipment to see if this story had any possibility of being true.

I have another handout that I would like to give you. Now that we know that equipment existed in 1963, and I can tell you a little bit about the equipment, if you would like, in the question and answer, I can relate his entire story, the following information was obtained over approximately three separate conversations with this individual. I had extracted a verbal consent to get his story on videotape, like any good researcher would, but when the time came for doing so, his attitude on the matter had completely reversed and I am only left today with the recollection, you know, the notes that I had taken from the conversation and the subsequent information by my independent investigation.

This military communications group had several cameras stationed around the Plaza. The signals from the cameras were sent back to a semi-tractor-trailer acting as a mobile studio parked a short distance from the Plaza.

Editorial remark – this would work well for the "Clean" Van parked at the corner of Elm and Houston as the receiving point for these signals.

Each camera had a preview monitor and videotape machine associated with it inside the trailer recording the view of each camera. There was no sound recorded in this assignment.

Each videotape position had a single person responsible for its proper operation. Each position these men occupied was shielded from the others so that they could only see the preview for their individual camera. Each man saw the assassination occur from a different perspective of their monitors.

About 15 minutes after the assassination, a group of men appeared who identified themselves as FBI agents. These agents seized all the equipment used to videotape the motorcade. Each man was put on a bus which had been summoned to the scene and they were all driven back to their base. Upon their arrival, they were simply told to forget it.

Dallas, Texas -- November 18, 1994 Hearing

MR. MARWELL: Mr. Steve Osborn.

CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Good afternoon, Mr. Osborn.

MR. OSBORN: Good afternoon.

I, too, appreciate the opportunity to address the Board today and appreciate the time you are spending going to the public for information. One of the theories of the assassination revolves around the possibility that there may have been some involvement by persons with experience in the U.S. intelligence community.

In my study and research of the assassination I have discovered and investigated supporting information of the presence of an intelligence unit of the U.S. Army having been present and on assignment in Dealey Plaza just before, during and immediately after the assassination. To the best of my knowledge, information on this unit has not been released publicly.

In 1992, as the fury of the public resulted in the proposed legislation which created your Board, I came across an individual who claimed to have been very near Dealey Plaza during the assassination. Now, as a researcher, you can understand that this immediately caught my attention, and I began to question this gentleman about the experience.

Now before I tell you the entire story, I want you to know that I had a difficult time believing his story the more and more I thought about it. Even though I had personal experience with some of the devices and the techniques that this group used, I was still very skeptical, as you may be also. But with further investigation I convinced myself that it technically could have been accomplished, and I think you will be similarly so impressed about the possibility when we are finished.

The gentleman I spoke with proceeded to tell me he was in the Army Station in Fort Hood, in Clean, Texas. On the day of the assassination his group, a communications group, was assigned the task of observing and videotaping the presidential motorcade as it moved through the Plaza. This unit had no similar assignment in any other Texas city during the President's visit, and they were only to tape that portion of the motorcade as it proceeded through Dealey Plaza.

Now if this event actually occurred, if it actually happened, it makes their activity highly suspicious and adds new questions to the assassination, particularly with reference to the possible foreknowledge of the assassination of intelligence personnel.

In my conversations with this gentleman, I asked questions of a technical nature trying to discovery how their assignment was accomplished. After discovering that the camera signals were transported by wireless means back to the control studio, which was actually a semi-tractor-trailer, I found myself doubting that this type of equipment was available in 1963.

I knew that ham radio operators have been sending television signals easily for a number of years, and I had also participated in that hobby. I also knew that videotaping was still in its infant years in 1963. I started to research available equipment to see if this story had any possibility of being true.

I have another handout that I would like to give you. Now that we know that equipment existed in 1963, and I can tell you a little bit about the equipment, if you would like, in the question and answer, I can relate his entire story, the following information was obtained over approximately three separate conversations with this individual. I had extracted a verbal consent to get his story on videotape, like any good researcher would, but when the time came for doing so, his attitude on the matter had completely reversed and I am only left today with the recollection, you know, the notes that I had taken from the conversation and the subsequent information by my independent investigation.

This military communications group had several cameras stationed around the Plaza. The signals from the cameras were sent back to a semi-tractor-trailer acting as a mobile studio parked a short distance from the Plaza. Each camera had a preview monitor and videotape machine associated with it inside the trailer recording the view of each camera. There was no sound recorded in this assignment.

Each videotape position had a single person responsible for its proper operation. Each position these men occupied was shielded from the others so that they could only see the preview for their individual camera. Each man saw the assassination occur from a different perspective of their monitors.

About 15 minutes after the assassination, a group of men appeared who identified themselves as FBI agents. These agents seized all the equipment used to videotape the motorcade. Each man was put on a bus which had been summoned to the scene and they were all driven back to their base. Upon their arrival, they were simply told to forget it.

Finding that there was equipment available in 1963 that would do this made it easier for me to accept the story I have just related to you. Several things have made me believe that this group was an intelligence unit.

First, the gentleman would not give me the name of his unit.

Secondly, this individual advised me that his 201 file was inaccessible.

Thirdly, he offered his opinion as pertaining to the reason his group was sent there, which would probably have been in line with the responsibility of an intelligence unit.

Fourth, having reflected on his story and what I have what I have additionally discovered, I am impressed that he realizes that he probably said more things to me than he should have revealed. At one point, he mentioned to me that he was allowed by a letter from the military to discuss some things in relation to his duties on the day of the assassination, but I believe he probably went further than he was allowed.

All these things collectively make me believe that this unit in Dealey Plaza was an intelligence unit. Still, one important step in my investigation was to find some additional evidence that the event occurred. You should know that there is some possible photographic evidence of this communication group being in Dealey Plaza that day, and I would be happy to provide you with further information on that if time allows at the end of my presentation.

Some requested things I would like to see the Board do, obviously what was recorded on this videotapes would be of invaluable aid to a serious study of the assassination, as well as cast more suspicion on the intelligence community. An attempt should be made by the Board to locate the tapes and request that another government agency attempt to get the exact electrical format determined and a video machine constructed to bring their images to view. Duplication to modern day formats would then make the tapes available publicly.

So far as locating the videotapes are concerned, the Dallas Field Office of the FBI and the Bureau Headquarters may have information or be in possession of the tapes. If there remains an estate of the late J. Edgar Hoover, they may have some information or be in possession of the tapes themselves.

If the men who seized the tapes were not real FBI agents, then CIA, military intelligence and other splinter groups of the intelligence community should be checked. Also, I would inquire of Mr. E. Howard Hunt, if he is still alive, as to his knowledge of the tapes and their subsequent disposition. There exists a possibility that he may even have them in his possession.

Regarding locations where you might find documents supporting this activity, I would suggest beginning with the records at Fort Hood. I would not be familiar with other depositories of documents, and you will probably have to use some of your existing source to hopefully lead you in the correct directions.

There seems to be a problem of gag orders that I would like to address also, and the fact that this individual I had interviewed had received notification that he did not have to continue to keep certain things confidential is further indication that there continue to be individuals who continue are under an obligation of confidentiality.

I believe this brings up an interesting problem for the Board. There appear to have been several instances of this happening to individuals required by military order or other Executive Branch order not to discuss any details of what they know of the assassination or its subsequent investigations, perhaps even the Board members itself have been required to sign promises of confidentiality.

Since these individuals do not have the permission of disclosure, many have not written of their experiences or granted interviews to members of the media or the research community to record their recollection. This will give history an incomplete record of this tragic event as well as making this information unavailable to the Board for review and release.

Therefore, I believe and propose that the Board consider asking the President of the United States as Commander and Chief to rescind any and all standing orders issued from any Department or part of the U.S. Government requiring the confidentiality of the information retained by these individuals, whether that knowledge is in written or memory form. If our government is really serious about full disclosure of all facts surrounding the assassination, he will rescind these orders, prevent them from being renewed and allow a complete compilation of personal records and recollections. This will allow the Review Board to further fulfill and properly perform its congressionally mandated task.

Additionally, as distasteful and wild as the thought is that the American intelligence community could be involved in such an event, I hope the Board will keep an open mind as you sift through the records. Your work may be the last official attempt to bring to the light of day this dark deed, so it is vital for you to question everything you find.

Remember, if any intelligence personnel were involved, it is their profession and they are very adept at covering up any evidence of their involvement in any activity. I mean, would we as citizens expect anything else of them? In any operation that U.S. intelligence personnel are involved in, we the citizens would expect them to be able to complete their missions with expert precision. We would expect that they would be able to cover up their involvement as an agency and our involvement as a nation if the nature of the task so dictated. We would expect them to have thought of every possible snag in an operation and work to make their mission completely successful.

I have spoken with individuals involved in intelligence work or who have known persons who were, and they have indicated that the intelligence community could basically do anything they wanted, and we have had some recent indications of that, of this, in the form of millions of dollars spent on building projects unknown to Congress.

Be this right or wrong, we as citizens should have a great amount of respect for and suspicion of the power that these individuals and agencies wield in our world. Please keep this in mind as you ponder the information brought to your attention in whatever form it is presented.

Finally, I would like to make a comment in relation to the Board's mandate. One of the problems that certain individuals in our government have had with the idea of releasing all the assassination records is that to do so may compromise methods employed by the various intelligence agencies in their covert activities. At first glance, we may take this to mean that it may make it difficult for them to use these techniques in the future if they are made known to the general public, but I would encourage the Board to consider that it may be that many of these covert methods were used to carry out the assassination of President Kennedy, whether by Americans or some other government.

I have found considerable circumstantial evidence of more than a few intelligence techniques used in the assassination that may not be generally known. But if this assassination was accomplished by Americans from the intelligence community, they have not only betrayed the citizenry of this country by taking from them their President, but they have betrayed their agencies and the U.S. public by making it necessary to uncover and publicly expose their methods in order to bring satisfaction to the American people in this matter. This betrayal of their agencies alone makes them no better than Mr. Ames of recent history.

I again thank you for your time.

CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Thank you very much.

Questions?

Go ahead, Dr. Joyce.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Osborn, in your testimony you indicated that information you had gathered from a subsequent independent investigation helped you in forming your conclusion that there was an intelligence unit in Dealey Plaza. Is there any documentary information that you have been able to acquire as part of your subsequent investigation?

MR. OSBORN: I have not made any attempts at that because I believe the story so thoroughly. I felt that if I were to make any attempts to confirm any of this or search for the tapes that those things might be destroyed, because these tapes -- if you would like to discuss the photographic evidence, there is one that would probably show a shooter behind the stockade fence, so I did not want these materials because of something that I did to end up disappearing. However, your mandate and your sources are much better than anything that I could ever do.

DR. HALL: Mr. Chairman, with that in mind, I would like to pose to you a set of questions, if I may, and you can cut me off if I get too long-winded here, as I am sure you will. Who are you?

MR. OSBORN: I am a citizen of the United States. I have not had any type of military experience, so I probably approach this a little bit differently as a citizen that would like to know what my government has been up to or persons within my government have been up to, why I can't know, why it has been hushed up so much.

I have been researching for approximately the last 15 years, not quite, and have mostly focused my investigation on identifying the man who fired the fatal head shot. These other things have just come about because of various digging and this is one of the things that I hope to use to be able to further identify that individual.

DR. HALL: I am wondering, Mr. Chairman, for the record, we could ask Mr. Osborn to provide us with a biographical statement, if that would be acceptable to you.

Can you provide us with the name of the individual with whom you spoke?

MR. OSBORN: Because I feel that he may have violated military orders, I believe that he thought that he had originally been saying things he could, and then the way that he froze up -- in fact, I have had several individuals that have done that, I feel that he may be guilty of some sort of violation. If the President were to rescind all those orders, I would be happy to provide his name. At this point, because of the way that he did not really want to be involved any more in the discussions, I feel incumbent upon myself for his personal privacy not to reveal that.

DR. HALL: Did he ever provide to you any written information or did you take any notes arising out of your conversations with this individual?

MR. OSBORN: The only thing that I really did was, from the conversations that we had, I prepared a list of questions, because I do have a technical background, I have been in electronics since I was 14, ham radio, and television, and most recently personal communications, and so I was very interested in the technical aspects of this because I doubted in my senses that this could be done in 1963.

If you would look at the cameras, this is a fully transistorized camera. It comes with a backpack transmitter so that you don't have to have a cable going back to a videotape recorder, and this device was available in 1962 by a company that regularly supplied the military with all kinds of camera equipment and, as I also indicated, there is some photographic evidence that exists that may possibly show one of these individuals. If you would like a summation of that, I am prepared to do that.

DR. HALL: If you will document it, that would be helpful.

You also indicate on page 5 that he had mentioned to you that he was allowed by a letter from the military to discuss some things in relation to his duties on the day of the assassination. Now it would obviously be in the interest of the Board, since you purport that a connection exists between this individual, the military establishment, and the assassination, to be able to know the name of that individual so that it would be possible to try to secure whatever copy of a letter may have existed that would have been written to him by the military.

MR. OSBORN: I will -- what I will do, sir, is, I will probably seek some counsel on that to ensure that I, myself, do not get into a situation here that may make me liable for something, and I will be glad to consider that for you.

I was going to, let me go on record saying, I was going to ask that individual for that document in the videotaped session, but because he cut everything off, I was not able to actually view that document. So I had to just go from my recollection as I made my notes as to what the individual had.

DR. HALL: One final question for you, if I may, Mr. Osborn, would your view be that this Commission or this Board, rather, excuse me, should undertake to disclose the names, identities of both living as well as deceased informants, agents, and intelligence operatives of the United States Government?

MR. OSBORN: That certainly is a gray area, and the problem with dealing -- if we are dealing with the intelligence community here in this time, they certainly have at their disposal, shall we say, executive privilege, and the rules are a little bit different when dealing with these type of people because they can claim national security.

I think national security a lot of times can mean more than one thing. It can mean security of our nation from its people being held in arms over something that the government or people within the government have done, so I think they really use the term national security quite widely, and I would fully expect that if there were individuals from the intelligence community involved that they would do everything in their power, like I had mentioned before, they are very adept at covering up. So that is a gray area because we don't know if these persons were really involved, and they may be saying that these are operatives that we can't afford to let their names go. So we have to -- it is going to have to be analyzed.

I used to think that it would be nice to have been a member of this Board, after hearing what is going on today, I think I am kind of glad it is you.

DR. HALL: Would it be fair to say that any effort to pursue the line of inquiry that you have set out would turn directly on an evidentiary and documentary basis on being able to know the name of the individual, and inasmuch as you have indicated that that person is known to you by name, there is some responsibility here, I would think, to be able to assist the Board in this matter in a significant way.

DR. GRAFF: I would like to ask this question with respect to the letter that this young man received saying what he could say about his activities. Was this a cover that he was being given, was this a story that was being laid upon him so that he would have an answer when people asked what are you doing?

MR. OSBORN: I don't believe so. I believe this had been received by him a number of years later.

Edited December 31, 2009 by William Kelly

[Guest John Gillespie]

It is an article of faith among leading anti-alterationists that Mary Muchmore a) definitely did shoot film footage of President Kennedy’s execution (despite her explicit denial to the FBI); and that this brief film sequence was shown on WNEW-TV, New York, on Tuesday, 26 November 1963.

When asked for both a specific timing and print sources for this certainly, however, said advocates have a marked tendency to become a little vague, or just plain conflicting. Responses for the showing time range from “morning,” to “just after midday,” or “afternoon” – of November 28, according to a recent bizarre contribution from Josiah Thompson – with appropriately imprecise citations of an unnamed New York newspaper report, of unspecified title on an unknown page, which appeared either on the afternoon of 26 November, or a day, possibly two, later. All of which is odd, because there are contemporaneous print sources for the showing of an assassination film by WNEW-TV on Nov. 26. The trouble is, as we shall see, that they don’t quite reinforce the simple-minded story the anti-alterationists would have us believe.

I first came across a dating of and location for the Muchmore film’s debut in Barbie Zeliger’s Covering the Body: The Kennedy Assassination, the Media, and the Shaping of Collective Memory (University of Chicago Press, 1992), which directed the reader – see p.68 n7 (p.233) - to the December 2, 1963, edition of Broadcasting: The Businessweekly of Television and Radio (Vol 65, No 23), and a piece entitled “A World Listened and Watched.” On p.37, I found the following:

“United Press International claimed it provided the first film for TV of President Kennedy’s assassination when it sold sequences shot by Dallas amateur photographer Marie Muchmore to WNEW-TV New York, which showed it last Tuesday (Nov. 26). The 8mm film, which was enlarged to 16mm, shows the President being hit by the bullets as Mrs Kennedy and a Secret Service agent try to help him. UPI Newsfilm rushed additional copies to its subscribers around the world.”

So far, so good for the anti-alterationists.

Better still, the same edition, on p.69, carried a full page advertisement from UPI. Curiously, however, the advert made no mention of the film-taker’s name. Here it is, in full:

“The first film showing the assassination of President Kennedy was telecast in New York on November 26. It was a UPI Newsfilm exclusive It was serviced to UPI Newsfilm subscribers the world over.”

This reluctance to name the film-taker, as noted, struck me as curious: It was not without precedent, though, as we shall shortly see.

Further reading unearthed an even earlier print source for the claim that the Muchmore film had debuted on WNEW-TV, New York, on Tuesday, Nov 26. The lengthy report, entitled Pictures of the Assassination Fall to Amateurs on Street, was authored by Rick Friedman, and appeared over three pages in the Editor and Publisher edition dated November 30, 1963. The germane passage ran as follows:

“Another film clip taken by an amateur went out to the public Nov. 26. United Press International released to its television subscribers around the world a 16mm sequence which was exclusive to the wire service. Taken by Marie Muchmore of Dallas, it also shows the motorcade coming into view, the President slumping over, Mrs Kennedy reaching for him, and Secret Service man jumping into the back of the President’s car. The film was enlarged for tv from its original 8mm format.”

This seemed such unequivocal confirmation of the anti-alterationists’ version of events – I didn’t flatter myself that all of them had missed the item - that I wondered what on earth stopped them from citing this source with cheerful regularity. Then I turned the page.

Friedman’s article was spread over three pages. The passage on Muchmore and WNEW-TV appeared on p.17, the second of them. The third and final page was to be found distantly on p.67. As I read it, I realised at once why Friedman’s article could not be adduced by Thompson, Mack et al: Friedman had proceeded to commit heresy. The Muchmore film was not the only film of the assassination to have made it onto American television on November 26, 1963:

“By Tuesday, numerous pictures, both still and movie, were being offered to news media. At least one television station was besieged with protests after it had shown scenes of the President’s motorcade at the moment of the shooting. Many viewers considered them to be too gruesome.”

This couldn’t have been the Muchmore film, which, even allowing for changing mores, could not conceivably have been considered “too gruesome,” even in 1963. Nor, to his limited credit, did Friedman seek to pretend it was. But what was this film, and who had taken it? Was there another assassination film in circulation in the US on November 26? Indeed there was, according to the Milwaukee Journal of November 26:

AP, "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3:

Dallas, Tex.-AP - A strip of color movie film graphically depicting the assassination of President Kennedy was made by a Dallas clothing manufacturer with an 8 millimeter camera.

Several persons in Dallas who have seen the film, which lasts about 15 seconds, say it clearly shows how the president was hit in the head with shattering force by the second of two bullets fired by the assassin.

Life magazine reportedly purchased still picture rights to the material for about $40,000.

("The film also was being distributed by United Press International Newsfilms to subscribing stations. WITI-TV in Milwaukee is a subscriber, but will reserve judgment on whether to show the film until after its officials have viewed it.")

The tale is not quite finished, though. There was, I discovered last year, an even earlier print source for a film shown on WNEW-TV on Tuesday, November 26. Again, note the absence of an attribution to a named film-taker:

“WNEW-TV (Channel 5) claimed it was the first TV station in the country to televise an amateur photographer’s film footage of President Kennedy’s assassination. The film was distributed by United Press International and aired by Channel 5 at 12:46 a.m. yesterday,”

Richard K. Doan, “Now the Task of Righting Upset Schedules,” New York Herald Tribune, 27 November 1963, section 1, p.21.

As with Friedman’s piece, so, too, with Doan’s report – it didn’t quite tell the tale the anti-alterationists peddle. And begged the question: Was it really the Muchmore film shown on WNEW-TV? Or was it the first public version of the Zapruder, the one seen and twice described by Dan Rather on November 25? Had the films been switched, with the Z film (public version one) hastily withdrawn, and the Muchmore – or merely frames from it - substituted? What there any evidence to support such a hypothesis? To my surprise, there was.

On the front page of the Philadelphia Daily News, 4 star edition, on Tuesday, 26 November 1963, under the headline “Man Who Came to See JFK Makes Tragic Movie,” there is the following blurb above 4 stills, which take up the rest of the page:

“These dramatic pictures are from an 8mm ‘home movie’ reel, shot by Dallas dressmaker Abraham Zapruder who went to see President Kennedy ride through cheering throngs in Texas city. His camera recorded one of the most tragic moments in American history. Story page 3,” Philadelphia Daily News, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.1 (4 star edition).

Below lay from 4 frames from…the Muchmore film.

Something very interesting was going on with the assassination films on November 25-26, 1963. What it was, and why, offers the potential to shed important light on much more than just the history of the films.

_____________________________________

For Mr. Thompson, a lot is riding on the validity of the Z film and the legacy of that masterpiece he wrote. C'est dommage. We simply rely on what we know and that is, as you put it, "Something very interesting was going on with the assassination films on November 25-26, 1963." More specifically, it is documented that the chain of evidence looks more like the confetti they will shower in tonight in Times Square. The thing was in the hands of the CIA's photo shop and go prove otherewise, anybody.

[Guest John Gillespie]

It is an article of faith among leading anti-alterationists that Mary Muchmore a) definitely did shoot film footage of President Kennedy’s execution (despite her explicit denial to the FBI); and that this brief film sequence was shown on WNEW-TV, New York, on Tuesday, 26 November 1963.

When asked for both a specific timing and print sources for this certainly, however, said advocates have a marked tendency to become a little vague, or just plain conflicting. Responses for the showing time range from “morning,” to “just after midday,” or “afternoon” – of November 28, according to a recent bizarre contribution from Josiah Thompson – with appropriately imprecise citations of an unnamed New York newspaper report, of unspecified title on an unknown page, which appeared either on the afternoon of 26 November, or a day, possibly two, later. All of which is odd, because there are contemporaneous print sources for the showing of an assassination film by WNEW-TV on Nov. 26. The trouble is, as we shall see, that they don’t quite reinforce the simple-minded story the anti-alterationists would have us believe.

I first came across a dating of and location for the Muchmore film’s debut in Barbie Zeliger’s Covering the Body: The Kennedy Assassination, the Media, and the Shaping of Collective Memory (University of Chicago Press, 1992), which directed the reader – see p.68 n7 (p.233) - to the December 2, 1963, edition of Broadcasting: The Businessweekly of Television and Radio (Vol 65, No 23), and a piece entitled “A World Listened and Watched.” On p.37, I found the following:

“United Press International claimed it provided the first film for TV of President Kennedy’s assassination when it sold sequences shot by Dallas amateur photographer Marie Muchmore to WNEW-TV New York, which showed it last Tuesday (Nov. 26). The 8mm film, which was enlarged to 16mm, shows the President being hit by the bullets as Mrs Kennedy and a Secret Service agent try to help him. UPI Newsfilm rushed additional copies to its subscribers around the world.”

So far, so good for the anti-alterationists.

Better still, the same edition, on p.69, carried a full page advertisement from UPI. Curiously, however, the advert made no mention of the film-taker’s name. Here it is, in full:

“The first film showing the assassination of President Kennedy was telecast in New York on November 26. It was a UPI Newsfilm exclusive It was serviced to UPI Newsfilm subscribers the world over.”

This reluctance to name the film-taker, as noted, struck me as curious: It was not without precedent, though, as we shall shortly see.

Further reading unearthed an even earlier print source for the claim that the Muchmore film had debuted on WNEW-TV, New York, on Tuesday, Nov 26. The lengthy report, entitled Pictures of the Assassination Fall to Amateurs on Street, was authored by Rick Friedman, and appeared over three pages in the Editor and Publisher edition dated November 30, 1963. The germane passage ran as follows:

“Another film clip taken by an amateur went out to the public Nov. 26. United Press International released to its television subscribers around the world a 16mm sequence which was exclusive to the wire service. Taken by Marie Muchmore of Dallas, it also shows the motorcade coming into view, the President slumping over, Mrs Kennedy reaching for him, and Secret Service man jumping into the back of the President’s car. The film was enlarged for tv from its original 8mm format.”

This seemed such unequivocal confirmation of the anti-alterationists’ version of events – I didn’t flatter myself that all of them had missed the item - that I wondered what on earth stopped them from citing this source with cheerful regularity. Then I turned the page.

Friedman’s article was spread over three pages. The passage on Muchmore and WNEW-TV appeared on p.17, the second of them. The third and final page was to be found distantly on p.67. As I read it, I realised at once why Friedman’s article could not be adduced by Thompson, Mack et al: Friedman had proceeded to commit heresy. The Muchmore film was not the only film of the assassination to have made it onto American television on November 26, 1963:

“By Tuesday, numerous pictures, both still and movie, were being offered to news media. At least one television station was besieged with protests after it had shown scenes of the President’s motorcade at the moment of the shooting. Many viewers considered them to be too gruesome.”

This couldn’t have been the Muchmore film, which, even allowing for changing mores, could not conceivably have been considered “too gruesome,” even in 1963. Nor, to his limited credit, did Friedman seek to pretend it was. But what was this film, and who had taken it? Was there another assassination film in circulation in the US on November 26? Indeed there was, according to the Milwaukee Journal of November 26:

AP, "Movie Film Depicts Shooting of Kennedy,” Milwaukee Journal, November 26, 1963, part 1, p.3:

Dallas, Tex.-AP - A strip of color movie film graphically depicting the assassination of President Kennedy was made by a Dallas clothing manufacturer with an 8 millimeter camera.

Several persons in Dallas who have seen the film, which lasts about 15 seconds, say it clearly shows how the president was hit in the head with shattering force by the second of two bullets fired by the assassin.

Life magazine reportedly purchased still picture rights to the material for about $40,000.

("The film also was being distributed by United Press International Newsfilms to subscribing stations. WITI-TV in Milwaukee is a subscriber, but will reserve judgment on whether to show the film until after its officials have viewed it.")

The tale is not quite finished, though. There was, I discovered last year, an even earlier print source for a film shown on WNEW-TV on Tuesday, November 26. Again, note the absence of an attribution to a named film-taker:

“WNEW-TV (Channel 5) claimed it was the first TV station in the country to televise an amateur photographer’s film footage of President Kennedy’s assassination. The film was distributed by United Press International and aired by Channel 5 at 12:46 a.m. yesterday,”

Richard K. Doan, “Now the Task of Righting Upset Schedules,” New York Herald Tribune, 27 November 1963, section 1, p.21.

As with Friedman’s piece, so, too, with Doan’s report – it didn’t quite tell the tale the anti-alterationists peddle. And begged the question: Was it really the Muchmore film shown on WNEW-TV? Or was it the first public version of the Zapruder, the one seen and twice described by Dan Rather on November 25? Had the films been switched, with the Z film (public version one) hastily withdrawn, and the Muchmore – or merely frames from it - substituted? What there any evidence to support such a hypothesis? To my surprise, there was.

On the front page of the Philadelphia Daily News, 4 star edition, on Tuesday, 26 November 1963, under the headline “Man Who Came to See JFK Makes Tragic Movie,” there is the following blurb above 4 stills, which take up the rest of the page:

“These dramatic pictures are from an 8mm ‘home movie’ reel, shot by Dallas dressmaker Abraham Zapruder who went to see President Kennedy ride through cheering throngs in Texas city. His camera recorded one of the most tragic moments in American history. Story page 3,” Philadelphia Daily News, Tuesday, 26 November 1963, p.1 (4 star edition).

Below lay from 4 frames from…the Muchmore film.

Something very interesting was going on with the assassination films on November 25-26, 1963. What it was, and why, offers the potential to shed important light on much more than just the history of the films.

_____________________________________

Paul,

I salute you. This is genuine investigative work where you simply allow the unearthed facts - now disinterred - to speak for themselves. In my five or so years as a member I have not seen anything like this truly historical piece.

Happy New Year,

JG

[Jack White]

Fort Hood is in Killeen, Texas...NOT Clean, Texas.

[William Kelly]

Fort Hood is in Killeen, Texas...NOT Clean, Texas.

Jack,

As you know, when a person testifies under oath their testimony is taken by a stenographer who spells names and places phonetically, as they are heard, so the transcription mistake can be understood.

It also seems that one of the ARRB members actually took a keen interest in this testimony, and asked a few questions, but it does not appear from the records we have that the ARRB followed up on any of this.

It didn't take me long to Google Fort Hood signal corps and find that there are a number of signal intelligence units assigned to that base at the time, and their unit histories should be checked to see if they were deployed to Dallas that day.

Nobody apparently has bothered to check

BK

[Bill Miller]

It certainly did on the morning of Tuesday, 26 November, as noted elsewhere in this thread. Thereafter, however, a politic reticence took hold. Unsurprising if the film shown in the early hours on WNEW-TV was the first version of the Z fraud – and no sooner broadcast than withdrawn for reworking - rather less so if it was Muchmore's, which, of course, it plainly wasn't.*

Sure it was Muchmore's film .... this is old news.

[Paul Rigby]

It certainly did on the morning of Tuesday, 26 November, as noted elsewhere in this thread. Thereafter, however, a politic reticence took hold. Unsurprising if the film shown in the early hours on WNEW-TV was the first version of the Z fraud – and no sooner broadcast than withdrawn for reworking - rather less so if it was Muchmore's, which, of course, it plainly wasn't.*

Sure it was Muchmore's film .... this is old news.

Bill,

Thanks for the bump. And with apologies to John Gillespie, whose New Year best wishes I missed first time around and now belatedly reciprocate.

Paul

[J. Raymond Carroll]

,

Thanks for the bump. And with apologies to John Gillespie, whose New Year best wishes I missed first time around and now belatedly reciprocate.

Paul

Happy New Year Paul, hope all is well in Jolly Old Blighty!

If John Gillespie agrees with you, then that alone should tell you that you are on the WRONG TRACK!

[Paul Rigby]

Happy New Year Paul, hope all is well in Jolly Old Blighty!

Unfortunately not, Jay, as we are in the governmental grip of a bunch of economic illiterates who solemnly propose to revive the UK economy by sacking everyone and raising taxes. Gideon Osborne is, I contend, Brian Cowen's love-child.

But greetings returned, nonetheless.

If John Gillespie agrees with you, then that alone should tell you that you are on the WRONG TRACK!

You mean up the grassy knoll? Outrageous! Have no doubt, my solicitor will be contacting your solicitor with a view to both solicitors making a large sum of money at our expense. That'll teach you.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Gideon Osborne is, I contend, Brian Cowen's love-child.

I think I speak for the entire disgruntled Irish nation when I say "Please do not mention the name of Brian Cowen, AKA Biffo the Bear!"

But I am confident that we will all come out of this economic mess with at least our shirts on. My dear departed Mother liked to quote the old saying which goes: LIVE HORSE! AND YOU WILL GET GRASS!