Mr. and Mrs. Hester...who were they

[Robin Unger]

Jack.

I have been looking at Beatrice Hester in Bronson.

I beleive that the white object she is holding in Bronson, which can also be seen lying on the ground in Weigman and Bell may be a white coat.

If you look at the clearer frame i posted from the start of the Zapruder film, there appears to be a coat behind Beatrice thrown across the back of the park bench.

coat in the shadow on her left, coat seen in sunlight on her right.

Also Sitzmans large black hand back can be seen sitting on the bench in front of Beatrice's right hand.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Robin Unger

[David Andrews]

What's that square thing, perhaps with a strap, in Mr. Hester's hand, and between his ankles in the still above? He carries that thing over to the pergola window openings in Weigman, then the film cuts to the Newmans on the grass...or does another version not cut away?

[Jack White]

What's that square thing, perhaps with a strap, in Mr. Hester's hand, and between his ankles in the still above? He carries that thing over to the pergola window openings in Weigman, then the film cuts to the Newmans on the grass...or does another version not cut away?

Looks like a camera.

[Dean Hagerman]

What's that square thing, perhaps with a strap, in Mr. Hester's hand, and between his ankles in the still above? He carries that thing over to the pergola window openings in Weigman, then the film cuts to the Newmans on the grass...or does another version not cut away?

Looks like a camera.

It could be

I wonder if Mr Hester was filming from his position then handed his camera through the pergola window to someone?

Interesting thought

[Doug Weldon]

What's that square thing, perhaps with a strap, in Mr. Hester's hand, and between his ankles in the still above? He carries that thing over to the pergola window openings in Weigman, then the film cuts to the Newmans on the grass...or does another version not cut away?

Looks like a camera.

That is what I mentioned before that he looks like he is handing to someone through the pergola.

Doug Weldon

It could be

I wonder if Mr Hester was filming from his position then handed his camera through the pergola window to someone?

Interesting thought

[Guest John Gillespie]

After looking at the Hester photos, I think we need to concentrate on the statement:

QUOTE

Mrs CHARLES HESTER, 2619 Keyhold Street, Irving, Texas, advised that sometime around 12:30 p.m., on November 22, 1963, she and her husband were standing along the street at a place immediately preceding the underpass on Elm Street, where President Kennedy was shot. Mrs HESTER advised she heard two loud noises which sounded like gunshots, and she saw President KENNEDY slump in the seat of the car he was riding in. Her husband grabbed then grabbed her and shoved her to the ground. Shortly thereafter they went across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. She stated that she believes she and her husband actually had been in the direct line of fire. She did not see anyone with a gun when the shots were fired and stated she could not furnish any information as to exactly where the shots came from. After the President’s car had pulled away from the scene, she and her husband proceeded to their car and left the area as she was very upset,” 24H523

Is it possible that the FBI agent garbled her statement?

Is it possible that the photos do not show the Hesters?

What was the Hester connection to Zapruder and Sitzman?

What was the sign she is seen holding?

What were the occupations of the Hesters?

Can anyone say?

Jack

___________________________________

"...at a place immediately preceding the underpass on Elm Street..." Glad you posted this. That quoted excerpt kind of jumps out. I wonder when this statement was made. One just might conclude they were trying to distance themselves in a couple of ways from Mr. Z and Ms S. The pergola is hardly where she described their position and, regardless, they were not in the line of fire. Did either one of them testify to the Warren Commission? They certainlly merit a peek into their backgrounds and relationship to Z and S. This is a terrific thread.

Thanks, JG

[Robin Unger]

Sitzman & Hesters GIF 3.5mb

May take a while to Load.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj306/q...nimation1-1.gif

Edited January 26, 2010 by Robin Unger

[Bernice Moore]

THANK YOU ROBIN FOR YOUR WORK APPRECIATED TAKE CARE..B.

[John Dolva]

what time is it? (frames 1,2,3)

[Karl Kinaski]

Gillespie: Did either one of them testify to the Warren Commission?

No

[Bernice Moore]

KARL IF YOU MEAN THE HESTERS, CHARLES OR BEATRICE OR MARILYN SITZMAN NO THEY WERE NOT CALLED.THEY DID NOT TAKE A STATEMENT FROM SITZMAN EITHER....OOPS SORRY SAW IT WAS TO GILLESPIE .B

Edited January 26, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Robin Unger]

THANK YOU ROBIN FOR YOUR WORK APPRECIATED TAKE CARE..B.

Thanks Bernice.

That was the only frames i could find of Sitzman turning around.

Not the best quality, but all we have to work with.

Cheers.

Robin.

[Todd W. Vaughan]

I think it is interesting that none of the anti-alterationists want to discuss

this study which shows alteration of the Bell film to insert "Sitzman", "Zapruder"

and the "Hesters"...all unidentifiable, of course.

Jack

Jack,

It appears that your Bell film still frame is of extremely poor quality. When seen in motion, clear copies of the Bell film clearly show Sitzman, Zapruder and the Hesters.

Further, the Weigman film clearly shows the Hesters in the same location. Weigman was one of the first films broadcast on TV that day, long before anyone could have possibly "altered" it.

Todd

Please address the frame shown (posted by Robin initially), not the film in MOTION. The retouchers

were careless about individual frames because they never dreamed that individual frames would be

scrutinized. The "Hesters" likely were added to Bell precisely BECAUSE they are seen in Wiegman,

which had already been shown on NBC.

Jack

Jack,

If the Hesters are genuine in Weigman, why in the world would they need to be "added" to Bell - Bell shows the same area at about the same time that Weigman does, so whatever is seen in Weigman will appear in Bell, i.e the Hesters!

Your claim that the Hesters were "added to Bell precisely BECAUSE they are seen in Wiegman' makes no sense.

Todd

If the Hesters were seen in Wiegman and not in Bell, it would arouse suspicions.

Jack

Yes Jack, but if Weigman is genuine (which you seem to agree with) and it shows the Hesters at a time and location that the Bell film is also covering, then it only stands to reason that the Hesters will show uop in the Bell film, as they do.

Another way of looking at this is why would the Hester's NOT show up in Bell if Bell is filming the same location at the same time as Weigman?

Wrong again. All films are suspect in some ways. I do not exclude Wiegman. For years I considered

Moorman, Altgens, and Wiegman had to be authentic. Now I consider all suspect. Bell was tampered

with to harmonize with Wiegman...but study shows Bell is retouched, so that may impeach Wiegman.

Some people just cannot grasp the concept that IF ONE IMAGE IS SUSPECT, ALL ARE SUSPECT.

But that's the way it is.

Jack

T

Let me get this straight - you think it's possible that the Weigman film, a film that was broadcast on NBC within a mere few hours or so of the assassination, might be altered, so significantly so that something like the Hester sequence might be fake? Is that correct?

Well Jack?

[Robin Unger]

what time is it? (frames 1,2,3)

]

It's Charles Hester's Lunch Time.

It's brown paper bag time.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Robin Unger

[Dean Hagerman]

Sitzman & Hesters GIF 3.5mb

May take a while to Load.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj306/q...nimation1-1.gif

Awesome GIF Robin!

Thank you, just saved it to my computer