New thread on Officer Chaney's ride forward

[Jack White]

The activities of Chaney right after the shooting have

become mired down in other discussions. This thread

is to separate this important issue.

To disbelieve Officer Chaney, one must refute these statements:

CHANEY: I went ahead of the president's car to inform Curry;

I then went ahead to the lead car.

HARGIS: Chaney immediately went forward.

SORRELS: The president's car speeded up and a motorcycle

pulled alongside us. By that time we had reached the underpass

and the president's car pulled alongside.

LAWSON: A motorcycle escort officer pulled alongside.

BAKER: Chaney moved up and told the chief during the time

that the SS men were trying to get into the car

HARGIS: The presidential car slowed down and Officer Chaney

put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the lead car.

CURRY: We were near the railroad yards and I looked in my

rear view mirror and saw some commotion in the caravan, and

about that time a motorcycle officer, Chaney, rode up beside

us.

LAWSON: A police officer pulled up in a motorcycle alongside

of us.

SORRELS: I looked back and saw some confusion and the

car seemed to lurch forward. In the meantime, a motorcycle

officer had run up on the right hand side, and the chief yelled

to him.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Good post, Jack. The one thing Tink and Jerry and Lamson and the rest cannot abide is honest to god evidence!

The activities of Chaney right after the shooting have

become mired down in other discussions. This thread

is to separate this important issue.

To disbelieve Officer Chaney, one must refute these statements:

CHANEY: I went ahead of the president's car to inform Curry;

I then went ahead to the lead car.

HARGIS: Chaney immediately went forward.

SORRELS: The president's car speeded up and a motorcycle

pulled alongside us. By that time we had reached the underpass

and the president's car pulled alongside.

LAWSON: A motorcycle escort officer pulled alongside.

BAKER: Chaney moved up and told the chief during the time

that the SS men were trying to get into the car

HARGIS: The presidential car slowed down and Officer Chaney

put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the lead car.

CURRY: We were near the railroad yards and I looked in my

rear view mirror and saw some commotion in the caravan, and

about that time a motorcycle officer, Chaney, rode up beside

us.

LAWSON: A police officer pulled up in a motorcycle alongside

of us.

SORRELS: I looked back and saw some confusion and the

car seemed to lurch forward. In the meantime, a motorcycle

officer had run up on the right hand side, and the chief yelled

to him.

[Josiah Thompson]

Good post, Jack. The one thing Tink and Jerry and Lamson and the rest cannot abide is honest to god evidence!

Post by Robin Ungar today: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15281

As Chief Curry told me in 1979, he spoke with Chaney on the access ramp to Stemmons. At that time, the McIntire photo was unknown, but now I know that the area to which Curry referred was past McIntire's location. And Mel McIntire's photos were never out of his possession at any time. They were first published in 1983 in a Dallas Times Herald 20th anniversary special.

Gary Mack

It is now clear to me that Chaney didn't catch up to the Currie car until AFTER they reached the Stemmons access ramp.

After the McIntire photo's were taken.

Robin Ungar

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15281

Post by Chris Scally today: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15281

Robin:

You beat me to it. An ISP connectivity problem prevented me posting this a few days ago:

- DPD Officer Earle Brown, on the railway overpass above Stemmons, told Earl Golz in March 1980 that he saw the limo and 4 other cars stop on the Stemmons on-ramp for at least 30 secs. Brown later repeated his story for Gary Mack;

- Officer Doug Jackson told Mack in 1981 that he and Chaney raced after lead car, caught up with it after about 30 secs, and Chaney spoke through window to Curry;

- Curry told another researcher (whose name I cannot recall at this moment) in 1979 that Chaney caught up with him as they began climbing the Stemmons on-ramp;

- Curry told Mack that he slowed down in order to find out if anyone had been hit, as he was unaware that anyone had been hit until Chaney told him. He also said he then had to tell the limousine driver, Secret Service agent Bill Greer, how to get to Parkland Hospital, before issuing “Go to hospital” order;

- Curry told the Warren Commission that he did not transmit on Channel 2 until after he spoke to Motorcycle Officer Jim Chaney;

- DPD Officer Courson said lead car had slowed sufficiently for him to catch it on the Stemmons access road, and Courson was 100-120 feet behind McLain in the motorcade, and McLain was himself about 140 feet behind the Presidential limo when the shots were fired. (Courson was appprox. 80 yds behind JFK at Z-313);

- Chaney is in the extreme left edge of the Daniel film (in the inter-sprocket images, I believe) , and in the Mel McIntire photo - in both cases, he hasn't yet caught up with Curry;

It is therefore highly unlikely/improbable that his conversation with Curry was excised from the Zapruder film.

Chris

[Jack White]

Altered photos do not trump witnesses.

Jack

[Jack White]

Altered photos do not trump witnesses.

Jack

I note that there is widespread reluctance to comment on the witness testimony.

Jack

[Chris Scally]

Jack:

My slow response is due to time differences, and not a reluctance to discuss this important issue (and I sincerely hope you were not referring to me in the other "Martin & Chaney" thread as one of "the know-nothings" !).

We can argue back and forth about "who said what" for ever and a day - and we'll never really achieve anything, especially when quoting press reports, which we all know are not the most reliable.

Josiah Thompson has already quoted what Robin and I said in the other "Chaney/Jackson" thread, so I won't repeat it all again here. However, you said over on that other thread that "[A]ll the movies in DP are altered. All were in the hands of the FBI." Ok, they were in the hands of the FBI, but when (on what date) did all the alterations occur?

I might be willing to believe that the films were all altered if the originals (and any copies which existed at that same time) were ever in the same place at the same time, or if we can have a timeline of when all this happened, but - while I have great respect for you as one of the "original" researchers - I have a problem if you are asking me to accept it just because you say so.

Can you come up with such a timeline?

Chris.

[Jack White]

Jack:

My slow response is due to time differences, and not a reluctance to discuss this important issue (and I sincerely hope you were not referring to me in the other "Martin & Chaney" thread as one of "the know-nothings" !).

We can argue back and forth about "who said what" for ever and a day - and we'll never really achieve anything, especially when quoting press reports, which we all know are not the most reliable.

Josiah Thompson has already quoted what Robin and I said in the other "Chaney/Jackson" thread, so I won't repeat it all again here. However, you said over on that other thread that "[A]ll the movies in DP are altered. All were in the hands of the FBI." Ok, they were in the hands of the FBI, but when (on what date) did all the alterations occur?

I might be willing to believe that the films were all altered if the originals (and any copies which existed at that same time) were ever in the same place at the same time, or if we can have a timeline of when all this happened, but - while I have great respect for you as one of the "original" researchers - I have a problem if you are asking me to accept it just because you say so.

Can you come up with such a timeline?

Chris.

Chris, you know that "such a timeline" is held secret in the "interest of national security" as are

many FBI records. If the FBI was complicit in the alteration of the films they rounded up, we

know that alterations done certainly would not be part of any public record.

Thanks.

Jack

[Jonathan Cohen]

>Chris, you know that "such a timeline" is held secret in the "interest of national security" as are

>many FBI records. If the FBI was complicit in the alteration of the films they rounded up, we

>know that alterations done certainly would not be part of any public record.

Jack, isn't the burden of proof incumbent on you in this case? You are alleging that the movements of motorcycle officers were altered in MULTIPLE films shot in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963. Chris asked if you can back that up with proof that the FBI had these films within a timeline that would make it possible for them to be altered. And your answer is that they did, but that the details are "secret." So we're left with accepting it, just because you say so. That doesn't work for me, and I suspect it does not for a lot of other researchers.

[Jack White]

>Chris, you know that "such a timeline" is held secret in the "interest of national security" as are

>many FBI records. If the FBI was complicit in the alteration of the films they rounded up, we

>know that alterations done certainly would not be part of any public record.

Jack, isn't the burden of proof incumbent on you in this case? You are alleging that the movements of motorcycle officers were altered in MULTIPLE films shot in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963. Chris asked if you can back that up with proof that the FBI had these films within a timeline that would make it possible for them to be altered. And your answer is that they did, but that the details are "secret." So we're left with accepting it, just because you say so. That doesn't work for me, and I suspect it does not for a lot of other researchers.

1. The FBI had ALL of the movies and photos

2. Many photos and movies are PROVABLY altered

3. No records exist of how the images were altered WHILE IN FBI CUSTODY

4. There is NO ALTERNATIVE except to deduce what happened.

Demanding a citation when no citations are known to exist is obfuscation. It is NOT "just because I say so."

It is because there IS NO RECORD.

Jack

[Jonathan Cohen]

>1. The FBI had ALL of the movies and photos

>2. Many photos and movies are PROVABLY altered

>3. No records exist of how the images were altered WHILE IN FBI CUSTODY

>4. There is NO ALTERNATIVE except to deduce what happened.

>Demanding a citation when no citations are known to exist is obfuscation. It is NOT "just because I say so."

>It is because there IS NO RECORD.

Jack, Jerry Logan asked you in the other thread discussing the motorcycle officers to provide documentation about whether the Paschall and Daniel films and the McIntire photos were ever in the hands of the FBI. If they were not, can you outline a scenario by which they could have been altered in the way you claim?

[Jack White]

>1. The FBI had ALL of the movies and photos

>2. Many photos and movies are PROVABLY altered

>3. No records exist of how the images were altered WHILE IN FBI CUSTODY

>4. There is NO ALTERNATIVE except to deduce what happened.

>Demanding a citation when no citations are known to exist is obfuscation. It is NOT "just because I say so."

>It is because there IS NO RECORD.

Jack, Jerry Logan asked you in the other thread discussing the motorcycle officers to provide documentation about whether the Paschall and Daniel films and the McIntire photos were ever in the hands of the FBI. If they were not, can you outline a scenario by which they could have been altered in the way you claim?

As far as I have been able to determine, ALL films were in the hands of the FBI. I would appreciate

any verifiable information to the contrary.

I do not respond to absurd theoreticals. I have better ways to spend my time. I have a life.

Jack

[Robin Unger]

>1. The FBI had ALL of the movies and photos

>2. Many photos and movies are PROVABLY altered

>3. No records exist of how the images were altered WHILE IN FBI CUSTODY

>4. There is NO ALTERNATIVE except to deduce what happened.

>Demanding a citation when no citations are known to exist is obfuscation. It is NOT "just because I say so."

>It is because there IS NO RECORD.

Jack, Jerry Logan asked you in the other thread discussing the motorcycle officers to provide documentation about whether the Paschall and Daniel films and the McIntire photos were ever in the hands of the FBI. If they were not, can you outline a scenario by which they could have been altered in the way you claim?

Warren Commission Hearings: Vol. V - Page 140

(Testimony of Lyndal L. Shaneyfelt)

Mr. Shaneyfelt.

The Nix film was obtained as a result of a notice that the FBI gave to processing plants in the Dallas area, that the FBI would be interested in obtaining or knowing about any film they processed, that had anything on it, relating to the assassination.

And, as a result of this, we learned of the Nix film and arranged to obtain a copy of it.

Mr. Specter.

Did you analyze any other film in connection with this inquiry?

Mr. Shaneyfelt.

Yes. I analyzed a film that was 8-mm. motion picture film taken by Mrs. Mary Muchmore of Dallas, Tex.

Mr. Specter.

How did you obtain a copy of that film?

Mr. Shaneyfelt.

Our first knowledge of this came as a result of a review of the book "Four Days" which covers the assassination period, in which representatives of the FBI noted a colored picture taken from a motion picture film that did not match either the Nix film or the Zapruder film.

Once we established that, then we investigated and learned that it was made by Mrs. Mary Muchmore, and was at that time in the possession of United Press International in New York, and made arrangements for them to furnish us with a copy of the Muchmore film. That is the copy that I used for examination.

I assume that UPI retained possesion of the ORIGINAL ?

Edited January 18, 2010 by Robin Unger

[Jack White]

Thanks, Robin. Some films and photos apparently did escape the initial dragnet.

For instance, Similas from Canada did not have his films developed here but

when he returned home. I think that Croft's may also have missed the initial

dragnet. Many were intercepted BEFORE THE DRAGNET. (See Marrs Crossfire,

Hesters photo lab)

Gordon Arnold, shooting a movie from the knoll, presented a problem. Even

though his film was destroyed on 11-22, it is my belief that ARNOLD was

captured on film by several, notably Betzner and Willis...and that these images

were obscured by painting over him with the Blackdogman. It would have been

very inconvenient to have an unknown soldier shooting an unknown movie from

the knoll.

Thanks for the color image of the FBI photo shop insert.

Jack

Edited January 18, 2010 by Jack White

[Robin Unger]

Thanks Jack.

Credit: to John Woods for the color FBI image.

[John Dugan]

Altered photos do not trump witnesses.

Jack

No disrespect....

but why is it that anytime there is a photo or video that disputes something you believe or claim, your response is that its been altered or tampered with? That reasoning is so lame. It's like you can never be wrong or incorrect about anything you believe in. You and Fetzer are the same way. Any theory that's not your own, HAS to be backed up by altered evidence.

That photos taken from in front of the motorcade as it passed underneath the overpass were altered to make the motorcycle cops appear further away then they really were is laughable. The cops say what they did, not where on the motorcade route when they said it.

And go ahead and say one of your other favorite lines:

1. You are so misinformed

2. You need to do more research

3. I've been researching the assassination for 40 years......

4. You need to read this article/essay/10,000 word chapter.

You have great knowledge and insight but playing the "Altered Card" so many times makes you sound uninfomed........which you are not.