Jump to content

Did Zapruder take "the Zapruder film"?


Guest James H. Fetzer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Mr. Fetzer,

If you are going to drag stuff here from another forum, please do it so that what

I have said is complete ... and in context.

You asked me,

"but were his brains blown

out the back of his head to the left and rear, where they hit Officer

Hargis with such force that he thought he himself had been shot? And

if that is indeed the case--as the evidence, including the discovery

of the Harper fragment, suggests--then why is that not shown in the

Zapruder film? "

You did NOT ask me whether or not I believe any of the Z frames show

damage to the back of the head. I surely do ... don't know what you are looking at

in 374, ... the one I find most telling and haunting, and have often posted so over

the years, is Z337.

This first caught my attention while at the National Archives looking at the first generation

slides of the film in 1995. So crisp, so clear in those slides ... haunting. There are other frames as well.

I responded to the question you asked ... more than once, I believe ... and

included more than you included here....including mention of photos of the limo (pre-bucket)

at Parkland, and Robert Frazier's testimony at the Shaw trial.

As you know quite clearly from your barrage at me on the other group all

day and half the night yesterday, it is not my intent to respond to you further on this ...

and I told you exactly why in no certain terms more than once. I don't see any purpose

in dragging that outrageous ugliness over here save to say that one reason is because this is what you do ...

you introduce an issue or ask a question, but when someone replies, you then come back

claiming a different issue and paraphrasing or reporting incomplete and out of context.

I am not interested in wasting my time untangling your knots ... particularly on a topic I am

not interested in discussing in the first place.

I understand it is too much to expect you to respect anyone's choice over what you want.

Now you have switched your tack there but are dragging

things over here ... but not quite in context. Tsk Tsk. Some might think you are purposely

trying to goad me. :-)

'Nuf said. If people have any questions or doubts about the completeness or context of

anything you post from or about me ... they can e-mail me anytime.

EOS

All,

I found some of Barb's observations so extraordinary that I sent the below

post to several of those with whom I collaborate to make sure that there

wasn't something here I was missing. The passages that puzzled me include:

> You just leap to seeing that wound as proof of film alteration ...

> which is nonsense if you know the medical evidence. There was a gaping

> wound in the right rear of JFK's head ... jsut where Parkland said

> they saw it. Clint Hill saw it in DP when he was hanging over the back

> of the limo all the way to Parkland ... and the autopsy measurements,

> notes, and diagrams/drawings corroborate damage in precisely that area

> of JFK's skull ... as well as the gull extent of the damage to his

> skull.

>

> The Zfilm is not at odds with any of the damage known to have occurred

> to JFK's skull. The film captured fleeting fractions of seconds and

> the back of JFK's head, in shadow, was not exactly mugging for the

> camera.

This, of course, makes me wonder whether Barb has ever looked at frame

374, for example, where the blow-out is visible, reviewed John's studies

of the film, which I have highlighted many times now, or ever read HOAX.

I would place a considerable bet that she has never read HOAX, but since

it is so easy to look at frame 374 or watch John's studies of the film,

(1) The third gif:

http://www.assassinationscience.com/johncostella/jfk/intro/

(2) Frames 312, 313, and 314:

http://assassinationscience.com/johncostel...ntro/crater.gif

(3) The Wound Mistake:

http://www.assassinationscience.com/johnco...ntro/wound.html

I don't know what to make of her position, in light of the quantity and

quality of the evidence arrayed against here. In any case, John sent me

an extremely interesting suggestion about a possible relationship between

Mary's photograph and Zapruder's film, which I wanted to share with you.

Jim

----- Forwarded message from jpcostella@hotmail.com -----

Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:28:54 +1100

From: John Costella <jpcostella@hotmail.com>

Subject: RE: [jfk-research] Re: Josiah Thompson: Sloppy research or deliberate deception?

Jim,

I still sit on Tink's side when it comes to the extant Moorman and what camera position

it implies, so make sure that the issues are disentangled.

Re the head wound being inconsistent with the Z film, I think it's beyond doubt. The

explanation I like best is David Lifton's in Best Evidence about the time they got hold

of the clear frames in the early '70s. The GIF sequences of deblurred frames on my

website make it clear for the newcomer, but it really goes back to DSL.

The only argument that Tink and Miller and the others put forward against this is that

somehow JFK's head is massively rotated to the left in 313 and 314, and that we are

seeing the part of his head above his right ear. Ironically, the Moorman polaroid itself

dismisses this idea (if these were all genuine), as it lines up at about Z-315 or Z-316,

and shows that JFK's head is tilted but not spun around as would be required -- and as

you can see from Clip G on my website, his head starts to lift from 314 through to 318

but does not rotate left or right.

Indeed, maybe that's the point of all this Moorman guff. Forget about the pedestal

for the moment, and look at JFK. Place the Moorman next to Zapruder frame 315

or 316, and you have two (allegedly genuine) different views of the same instant

of time. That shows you that the "red blob" that explodes out the front of his head in

the Z-toon is indeed supposed to be coming out of his right temple. If his head had

been rotated massively to the left, we'd be able to see his face in the Moorman --

but we don't.

John

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 19:06:28 -0500

From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu

Subject: Fwd: Re: [jfk-research] Re: Josiah Thompson: Sloppy research or deliberate

deception?

David and David, Jack and John,

I especially need your opinions on this issue. Am I right or wrong that the

medical evidence, especially of the massive blow-out to the back of the head,

is inconsistent with the Zapruder, which shows a massive blow-out to the right-

front side of the head? You can even see it in frame 374 of the film itself.

Here is my basic argument, which I have been advancing for quite a while now:

Tink adopted the pose that there is a simple choice between accepting

Mary's testimony and the alleged consistency of all of the films and

photographs, when their consistency is not enough to establish their

authenticity. That would dictate, for example, discounting the

massive and detailed proof that the Zapruder is a recreation! He

talked as though Costella were on his side, when he is actually Tink’s

greatest nightmare. It was as though Tink hadn’t read "New Proof of

JFK Film Fakery" presenting John's latest proof, much less THE GREAT

ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX. None of what I have said here even reaches

to the mutually reinforcing deceptions of (a) the blow out to the

right-front in the Zapruder film, (B) the missing right-front in the

anterior-posterior X-ray, and © the publication of 313 in LIFE

magazine with a caption saying that the right-front of his head had

been blown out (which was rewritten twice after twice breaking the

plates). And it implicates Zapruder in the deception, when (d) he

described a blow-out to the right-front during an interview on

television that night (HOAX, page 435)! None of it was true. Jackie

herself reported that, from the front, he looked just fine but that

she had a hard time holding his skull and brains together at the back

of his head. None of the witnesses or doctors reported it. Not even

the mortician! It's not just that Tink’s little boat has sprung a

leak. It has sunk like a sieve into the ocean of truth!

Jim

----- Forwarded message from barbjfk@comcast.net -----

Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 23:25:04 +0000 (UTC)

From: Barb Junkkarinen <barbjfk@comcast.net>

Subject: Re: [jfk-research] Re: Josiah Thompson: Sloppy research or

deliberate deception?

You are preaching to the choir. I presented and exhibition ...

complete with gurney from a local hospital, JFK and Parkland personnel

stand-ins and a tasteful rubber wound made to the avg dimension

described at Parkland ... to show everyone there is NO doubt that with

JFK laying on his back on a gurney in TR1, the Parkland doctors could

without a doubt, see exactly what they said they saw ... and where

they saw it.

You just leap to seeing that wound as proof of film alteration ...

which is nonsense if you know the medical evidence. There was a gaping

wound in the right rear of JFK's head ... jsut where Parkland said

they saw it. Clint Hill saw it in DP when he was hanging over the back

of the limo all the way to Parkland ... and the autopsy measurements,

notes, and diagrams/drawings corroborate damage in precisely that area

of JFK's skull ... as well as the gull extent of the damage to his

skull.

The Zfilm is not at odds with any of the damage known to have occurred

to JFK's skull. The film captured fleeting fractions of seconds and

the back of JFK's head, in shadow, was not exactly mugging for the

camera.

Think before you leap ... and you can't really think about anything in

this arena, let alone promote leaps of fancy, until you know and

understand the evidence.

This woman is an ever bigger phony and fraud than I had imagined in my wildest dreams.

Well said Jim! By the way, I believe the "Umbrella Man" was in fact Mary Poppins.

Edited by Barb Junkkarinen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Lets start with this one,

What z frame would you expect to see this action by Jean Hill?

p. 22: "Hey, Mr. President", Jean shouted impulsively when teh car was almost abreast of

her. "Look over here. We want to take your picture." In her desperation and excitement,

she stepped off the curb into the street as she spoke, almost touching the front fender of the

limousine before she instinctively drew back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps she and Sloan should have collaborated a little more on what was published.

In the same book, we see this:

See paragraph on page with photo.

Edited by Kathy Beckett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps she and Sloan should have collaborated a little more on what was published.

In the same book, we see this:

See paragraph on page with photo.

Hi Kathy :

I do not understand what your meaning is, within your post.....? ......

The Knoll is to the left, in your photo, scan..from the book......The little hill, as Bill Newman called it..

.....the embankment..behind them..is the knoll.....Bill is seen below on the north side in photo below...

with the knoll behind him....

The area to the right where Jean & Mary stood, is considered the park area...

If that what you were getting at...I think you may have been thinking what was written below your photo from the book

was in error..??

B.....

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Bernice,

You are right on top of this, girl! In fact, the first paragraph on page 24, which Kathy posted, is extremely

important, because it reads as follows (for those who are not adept at turning their computers on their side

or at rotating images):

p. 24: There was no reaction from the officer. He gunned his roaring cycle, his eyes scanning the tops of

nearby buildings, obviously searching for snipers and oblivious to her presence. BOBBY HARGIS, THE

MOTORCYCLE OFFICER RIDING BESIDE MARSHALL AND NEAREST THE LIMOUSINE, WIPED AT THE BLOOD

AND BRAIN TISSUE THAT NEARLY COVERED HIS FACE AND HELMET, HALF-BLINDING HIM. He jumped off

his cycle and stumbled up the hill at a crouch, drawing his pistol as he went.

This, of course, is striking confirmation of the brains and gore blasted out to the left rear, where it hit him

with such force that he thought he himself had been shot. Barb Junkkarinen, among others, I think, really

needs to give the evidence a lot more thought.

Perhaps she and Sloan should have collaborated a little more on what was published.

In the same book, we see this:

See paragraph on page with photo.

Hi Kathy :

I do not understand what your meaning is, within your post.....? ......

The Knoll is to the left, in your photo, scan..from the book......The little hill, as Bill Newman called it..

.....the embankment..behind them..is the knoll.....Bill is seen below on the north side in photo below...

with the knoll behind him....

The area to the right where Jean & Mary stood, is considered the park area...

If that what you were getting at...I think you may have been thinking what was written below your photo from the book

was in error..??

B.....

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bernice,

The photo paragraph states that "Jean Hill stood in the grassy area to the extreme right when the fatal shot was fired." It does not say she was in the street.

I posted that to demonstrate that it is coming out of the same book that some are saying says that she was in the street when the fatal shot was fired.

Kathy

I've been lucky enough to go to DP a few times.

Edited by Kathy Beckett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bernice,

You are right on top of this, girl! In fact, the first paragraph on page 24, which Kathy posted, is extremely

important, because it reads as follows (for those who are not adept at turning their computers on their side

or at rotating images):

p. 24: There was no reaction from the officer. He gunned his roaring cycle, his eyes scanning the tops of

nearby buildings, obviously searching for snipers and oblivious to her presence. BOBBY HARGIS, THE

MOTORCYCLE OFFICER RIDING BESIDE MARSHALL AND NEAREST THE LIMOUSINE, WIPED AT THE BLOOD

AND BRAIN TISSUE THAT NEARLY COVERED HIS FACE AND HELMET, HALF-BLINDING HIM. He jumped off

his cycle and stumbled up the hill at a crouch, drawing his pistol as he went.

This, of course, is striking confirmation of the brains and gore blasted out to the left rear, where it hit him

with such force that he thought he himself had been shot. Barb Junkkarinen, among others, I think, really

needs to give the evidence a lot more thought.

Perhaps she and Sloan should have collaborated a little more on what was published.

In the same book, we see this:

See paragraph on page with photo.

Hi Kathy :

I do not understand what your meaning is, within your post.....? ......

The Knoll is to the left, in your photo, scan..from the book......The little hill, as Bill Newman called it..

.....the embankment..behind them..is the knoll.....Bill is seen below on the north side in photo below...

with the knoll behind him....

The area to the right where Jean & Mary stood, is considered the park area...

If that what you were getting at...I think you may have been thinking what was written below your photo from the book

was in error..??

B.....

Or striking confirmation that it was blood and brains from the right side of his head....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bernice,

The photo paragraph states that "Jean Hill stood in the grassy area to the extreme right when the fatal shot was fired." It does not say she was in the street.

I posted that to demonstrate that it is coming out of the same book that some are saying says that she was in the street when the fatal shot was fired.

Kathy

I've been lucky enough to go to DP a few times.

Hi Kathy:

I realize that you have been to Dealey, you are fortunate.

""Quote Kathy :I posted that to demonstrate that it is coming out of the same book that some are saying says that she was in the street when the fatal shot was fired.""

Please link thanks.

""Now that I have taken a look at Bill Sloan with Jean Hill, THE

LAST DISSENTING WITNESS (1992), I have discovered on p. 63 the following exchange

between Jean Hill and a person--identified by FBI AIC Gordon Shanklin--as a CIA agent:

"You said you were 'right at the curb' on Elm Street as the presidential

limousine approached", he began, "but weren't you actually in the street

itself for several seconds?"

"Yes", she replied, regaining some of her composure. "I jumped into the

street and called out to the president to look in our direction. We wanted

to take his picture".

"Is that the only reason you were in the street?"

She frowned. "Yes, of course", she said.

"And why did you suddenly jump back from the president's car at almost

exactly the same instant the shooting started?"

"I just realized I probably shouldn't be so close, and I decided I'd better

get back.

Notice how consistent this is with Mary's description of stepping into the street, taking

her picture, stepping back on the grass and getting down so she would not be shot and

tugging at Jean's leg, so she would get down, too.""

What I see as one of the main points in all this, that appears to be constantly averted is that none

of these actions of Mary & Jeans are seen within the Zapruder film, and should be.....

As what one has stated does verify the other's information.....

..Mary has stated and very clearly, she was in the street....3 times I believe down through the years....

..

Thanks B..

*********

The reel was an interview by Jay Hogan of Mary Moorman and Jean Hill at

3:30 pm...on KRLD RADIO excerpts, Tape 5B and 6A at NARA.

I am excerpting from the lengthy transcript several relevant parts of the

interviews. Decide for yourself the importance of this first day evidence:

HOGAN:

Q: Hello, Mrs. Moorman?

A: Yes.

Q You took the picture just after the shooting, or just before?

A: Evidently, just immediately, as the. . . Cause he was, he was looking, you know,

whenever I got the camera focused and then I snapped it in my picture, he slumped over.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

Q: About how close were you?

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

A: 10 or fifteen foot, I, no more . . . Because I fall behind my camera.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

Q: Were you up on that grassy bank there?

A: We stepped out in the street. We were right at the car.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

Q: How many shots did you hear? You say "shots rang out".

A: Oh, oh, I don't know. I think three or four is what I, I uh, that I heard.

Q: Uh huh.

A: (continuing) that I'm sure of. Now, I don't know, there might have been more.

It just took seconds for me to realize what was happening.

Q: Yeah, uh, what as your first thought?

A: That those ARE shots. I mean, he had been HIT.

And that they're liable to hit me, cause I'm right at the car,

so I decided the place for me is to get on the ground (laughs)

Q: So huh, how did the president respond to this shot. I mean, did he just

slump suddenly?

A: He grabbed his chest, and of course, Mrs. Kennedy jumped up immediately,

and fell over him; and she said: "My God, he's been shot."

Q: Did you notice any other reactions...

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

A: Uh, they hesitated just for a moment [referring, I believe, to the car itself,

rather than to the behavior of any particular individual--dsl] cause I think they

were like I was, you know--'Was that a shot," or was itj ust a backfire, or

just what? And then, course, he clutched himself and they immediately sped up,

real fast, you know, like--to get OUT of there. And, uh, the police, there were

several motorcycles around him; and, uh, they stopped, and uh--one or two must

of went with him, And one ran up the hill, and a friend that was with me ran up

the hill across the street from where the shots came from.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

Q: It (shots) seemed fairly close by?

A: Yes, uh huh.

Q And form what direction did they seem to be?

A: Oh, Lord? North. Just back there (at--laughs)

Q: Just just right at you?

A: Yes, sir.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

A: The sound popped, well it just sounded like, well, you know, there might

have been a firecracker right there in that car.

Q: And in your picture, uh, you uh took this picture just BEFORE the shot?

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

A: Evidently, at the minute (means "instant") that he, that it hit him because,

uh, we was we was looking, at me, or I mean, he was looking, you know, at the

people when my picture came out. They just slumped over, so I must have got it.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

A: Yes, uh huh. You could see he's clutched, he's bent over, and she's... and she

hadn't even gotten up in my picture, and she DID get up, STOOD UP, in the car.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

Q: Uh huh. And you and your friend Miss Hill, uh, were together there

at the scene. Was anybody else with you?

A No, uh uh.

Q: OK, well we sure thank you.

FROM HERE ON OUT, the interview continues with Jean Hill

Q: (continuing)

And also, here, we do have Miss Hill. Miss Hill, you were an

eyewitness, also?

A: Yes, I was . I suppose we were the people closest to the

President's car at the time.

Q: Uh, that as about 10 or fifteen feet, you'd say?

A: Not anymore than that at all.

Q: Uh huh. You were both looking right at the presidential car, then?

A: Yes, we were looking right at the President. We were looking at his face.

As Mary took the picture, I was looking at him. And he grabbed his hands across

his ch-when two shots rang out. He grabbed his hands across his chest. I have

never seen anyone killed, or in pain before like that but there was this odd

look came across his face, and he pitched forward onto Jackie's lap.

DSL NOTE: I believe this must mean: "to the side onto Jackie's lap" --because Jackie was

to the left of JFK, not in front of JFK. In my interview of the Newman's, circa 1971, in

person, and on tape, they talk of JFK falling to the side, or being thrust towards Jackie.

A: And uh, she immediately, we were close enough to even hear her, and

everything, and she fell across him and says "My God, he's been shot."

Q: ..... Did you notice particularly any of the other people around? At the time (she cuts in)

A: There was NO one around us on our side of the street. We had planned it that way;

we wanted to be down there by ourselves; that’s the reason we had gotten almost

to the underpass, so we’d be completely in the clear.

Q: Any other reactions form the other people in the motorcae, that you recall?

A: The motorcade was stunned after the first two shots, and it came to a momentary halt,

and about that time 4 more uh, 3 to 4 more shots again rang out, and I guess it just didn't

register with me. Mary was uh had gotten down on the ground and was pulling at my leg,

saying "Get , get down, they're shooting, get down, they're shooting; and I didn't even

realize it. And I just kept sitting there looking. And uh uh just about that time, well,

of course, some of the motorcycles pulled away. And some of them pulled over to the side

and started running up the bank; there's a hill on the other side (she is interrupted)

Q: Yes, Maam.

A: And the shots came from there. After they were momentarily stopped--after the

first two shots--THEN they sped away REAL quickly.

(DELETED FOR BREVITY)

Q: Well, thank you Miss Hill, and also Miss Moorman, for speaking with us about this.

A. Thankyou.

ANNOUNCER: That's two eyewitnesses to the murdered president, who saw on his face the

anguish of his very last hour alive. Before we go back to CBS, here again are some

announcements of special local importance.

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bernice!

The caption to the photo states that Hill

"stood in the grassy area" when the shot was fired.

It says she was on the grass when the shot was fired.

At odds with previously quoted text ... and the text on the page Kathy

included is Jean's much later ever changing story. Jean was a lovely and fun

woman, but one cannot ignore how her story grew from a guppy to a whale over the years.

Good pickup on Kathy's part.

Hope all is well with you!

Bests,

Barb :-)

Perhaps she and Sloan should have collaborated a little more on what was published.

In the same book, we see this:

See paragraph on page with photo.

Hi Kathy :

I do not understand what your meaning is, within your post.....? ......

The Knoll is to the left, in your photo, scan..from the book......The little hill, as Bill Newman called it..

.....the embankment..behind them..is the knoll.....Bill is seen below on the north side in photo below...

with the knoll behind him....

The area to the right where Jean & Mary stood, is considered the park area...

If that what you were getting at...I think you may have been thinking what was written below your photo from the book

was in error..??

B.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Craig commented:

"Or striking confirmation that it was blood and brains from the right side of his head...."

Indeed, Craig. But as I told Fetzer, at least a few times now, but from his commentary he seems to have conveniently

forgotten ... at least forgot to post those comments from elsewhere when he dragged parts of it over here...sigh ... is

that blood and gore was all over the place on and in the limo .... from the hood ornament to the trunk lid.

And we know Hargis, for one, was hit with gore. How much took flight from which opening? I don't know, no one can know for sure.

There was certainly a big burst from the right side when the flap opened up, but there was enough force to open up bone in

the back of the head too.... and the back seat had a great quantity of blood in it. There's also the tail end of the limo and the motorcycles and Queen Mary driving through/under where a great amount of matter had exited his head ... what goes up must come down and all that.

At any rate, there was lots of gore that just was not picked up on film/in photos ... in Dealey or at Parkland.

Robt Frazier's testimony to the Shaw trial was that:

"We found blood and tissue all over the outside areas of the vehicle from the hood ornament, over the complete area of the hood, on the outside of the windshield, also on the inside surface of the windshield, and all over the entire exterior portion of the car, that is, the side rails down both sides of the car, and of course considerable quantities inside the car and on the trunk lid area."

Bests,

Barb :-)

Bernice,

You are right on top of this, girl! In fact, the first paragraph on page 24, which Kathy posted, is extremely

important, because it reads as follows (for those who are not adept at turning their computers on their side

or at rotating images):

p. 24: There was no reaction from the officer. He gunned his roaring cycle, his eyes scanning the tops of

nearby buildings, obviously searching for snipers and oblivious to her presence. BOBBY HARGIS, THE

MOTORCYCLE OFFICER RIDING BESIDE MARSHALL AND NEAREST THE LIMOUSINE, WIPED AT THE BLOOD

AND BRAIN TISSUE THAT NEARLY COVERED HIS FACE AND HELMET, HALF-BLINDING HIM. He jumped off

his cycle and stumbled up the hill at a crouch, drawing his pistol as he went.

This, of course, is striking confirmation of the brains and gore blasted out to the left rear, where it hit him

with such force that he thought he himself had been shot. Barb Junkkarinen, among others, I think, really

needs to give the evidence a lot more thought.

Perhaps she and Sloan should have collaborated a little more on what was published.

In the same book, we see this:

See paragraph on page with photo.

Hi Kathy :

I do not understand what your meaning is, within your post.....? ......

The Knoll is to the left, in your photo, scan..from the book......The little hill, as Bill Newman called it..

.....the embankment..behind them..is the knoll.....Bill is seen below on the north side in photo below...

with the knoll behind him....

The area to the right where Jean & Mary stood, is considered the park area...

If that what you were getting at...I think you may have been thinking what was written below your photo from the book

was in error..??

B.....

Or striking confirmation that it was blood and brains from the right side of his head....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good pick up, Kathy ... thanks for posting that!

Barb :-)

Hi Bernice,

The photo paragraph states that "Jean Hill stood in the grassy area to the extreme right when the fatal shot was fired." It does not say she was in the street.

I posted that to demonstrate that it is coming out of the same book that some are saying says that she was in the street when the fatal shot was fired.

Kathy

I've been lucky enough to go to DP a few times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

Hi Bernice!

The caption to the photo states that Hill

"stood in the grassy area" when the shot was fired.

It says she was on the grass when the shot was fired.

At odds with previously quoted text ... and the text on the page Kathy

included is Jean's much later ever changing story. Jean was a lovely and fun

woman, but one cannot ignore how her story grew from a guppy to a whale over the years.

Good pickup on Kathy's part.

Hope all is well with you!

Bests,

Barb :-)

******

Hi Barb:Kathy ,

I have grave doubts that Jean was responsible for the insertion of any photos nor what comments may have or not been typed below..within the book...

.....Bill Sloan wrote the book with Jeans input......I believe perhaps from tapes ??..and as all writers do they do take some libertys.....there were some differences she noted with him.......

...I believe Jean mentioned such, on her Black Ops shows...not positive now, but well could be........

She was also trying to get the rights back to the book at the time, as the book was no longer available and out of print......I never did read or hear later

if she did.

Some witnesses stories grew down through the years, but this thread is about what was stated at the time of the assassination, not the changes they may have made years later....

And why their movements that day are not seen within the Zapruder film.....

Thanks B....

Edited by Bernice Moore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bernice,

"And why their movements that day are not seen within the Zapruder film..... "

I'd be interested in how two crazy ladies could jump into the street, being so close to the front bumper of the car,

and not have it even mentioned by...

... the two agents in the front seat of the limo

... the two motorcycle cops on the left rear of the limo

... not one bystander/spectator in the area

It's not on ANY films, or in ANY pictures, neither lady mentioned it in affidavits, FBI reports that day,

Hill didn't mention it in her WC testimony, in fact, testified they were on the grass and jumped to the curb

as the limo got close, and she marked on diagrams where she were standing. Moorman also marked

where she was in the Z film and on a diagram for the Shaw trial. They both put themselves on the grass.

And NO one reported it ... not Greer or Kellerman, not the motorcycle cops, no bystanders.

More likely, all those things didn't happen ... because the event never happened. We do know Moorman

stepped into the street earlier to take a different picture. Traumatized by the event, and given all of the above,

do you not find it conceivable that she just got the order of things mixed up as to where she was when?

Bests,

Barb :-)

Quote:

Hi Bernice!

The caption to the photo states that Hill

"stood in the grassy area" when the shot was fired.

It says she was on the grass when the shot was fired.

At odds with previously quoted text ... and the text on the page Kathy

included is Jean's much later ever changing story. Jean was a lovely and fun

woman, but one cannot ignore how her story grew from a guppy to a whale over the years.

Good pickup on Kathy's part.

Hope all is well with you!

Bests,

Barb :-)

******

Hi Barb:Kathy ,

I have grave doubts that Jean was responsible for the insertion of any photos nor what comments may have or not been typed below..within the book...

.....Bill Sloan wrote the book with Jeans input......I believe perhaps from tapes ??..and as all writers do they do take some libertys.....there were some differences she noted with him.......

...I believe Jean mentioned such, on her Black Ops shows...not positive now, but well could be........

She was also trying to get the rights back to the book at the time, as the book was no longer available and out of print......I never did read or hear later

if she did.

Some witnesses stories grew down through the years, but this thread is about what was stated at the time of the assassination, not the changes they may have made years later....

And why their movements that day are not seen within the Zapruder film.....

Thanks B....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I see as one of the main points in all this, that appears to be constantly averted is that none

of these actions of Mary & Jeans are seen within the Zapruder film, and should be.....

As what one has stated does verify the other's information.....

..Mary has stated and very clearly, she was in the street....3 times I believe down through the years....

Lets start with this one,

What z frame would you expect to see this action by Jean Hill?

QUOTE(James H. Fetzer @ Mar 22 2009, 01:18 AM)

p. 22: "Hey, Mr. President", Jean shouted impulsively when teh car was almost abreast of

her. "Look over here. We want to take your picture." In her desperation and excitement,

she stepped off the curb into the street as she spoke, almost touching the front fender of the

limousine before she instinctively drew back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...