DID ZAPRUDER FILM "THE ZAPRUDER FILM"?

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Nice catch, Paul! Very funny. I can't email or post anything without one typo or another. Thanks!

I can't believe that Craig Lamson would be so dumb as to make a response to me WITHOUT BOTHERING

TO READ THE ARTICLE I CITED. It shows where the holes entered his jacket and his xxxx...

Someone has unquestionably made a stool of himself, but is it necessarily the blessed Craig Lamson?

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

David Mantik, an experienced physician, has told me that "left/right" misdescriptions are very common,

because of assuming one's own point of view as opposed to the patient's. To my knowledge, there is

no good reason to suppose the entry would was on the left and many to suppose it was on the right,

which I have illustrated before. Just assume that they meant "right" when they said "left" and ask, "Is

there any inconsistency that emerges from this simple terminological substitution. Try that and see.

As we've seen, the Newmans and Zapruder, standing on Kennedy's right side, all thought the bullet struck Kennedy on the right side of his head, by his right temple. But they weren't the only witnesses on the right side of Kennedy to note an impact on the side of his head.

The above is better than the below? Really?

i) Dr. Robert McClelland: "The cause of death was due to a massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple," Commission Exhibit 392. [‘Admission Note,’ written 22 Nov 1963 at 4.45 pm, reproduced in WCR572, & 17WCH11-12: cited in Lifton’s Best Evidence, p.55; and Meagher’s Accessories After the Fact, pp.159-160.]

ii) Dr. Marion Jenkins: "I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process," 6WH48. [Cited by Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After The Fact: The Warren Commission, The Authorities, & The Report (New York: Vintage Books, 1992 reprint), p. 40.]

iii) Dr. Robert Shaw: "The third bullet struck the President on the left side of the head in the region of the left temporal region and made a large wound of exit on the right side of the head" [Letter from Dr. Shaw to Larry Ross, "Did Two Gunmen Cut Down Kennedy?", Today (British magazine), 15 February 1964, p.4]

iv) Dr. David Stewart: “This was the finding of all the physicians who were in attendance. There was a small wound in the left front of the President’s head and there was a quite massive wound of exit at the right back side of the head, and it was felt by all the physicians at the time to be a wound of entry which went in the front,” The Joe Dolan (Radio) Show, KNEW (Oakland, California), at 08:15hrs on 10 April 1967. [Harold Weisberg. Selections from Whitewash (NY: Carroll & Graf/Richard Gallen, 1994), pp.331-2.]

It was not only Parkland staff who attested to a left-temple entrance wound.

Entirely independently of them, Father Oscar Huber, upon leaving the hospital after administering the last rites, said precisely that, an observation he reaffirmed in an interview with Shirley Martin in late 1964; and eyewitness Norman Similas told the Toronto Star the same thing on the afternoon of the assassination. The left-temple entrance, as Sylvia Meagher noted in Accessories After the Fact, was in fact plotted by both Humes & Boswell at Bethesda, the former before alteration, the latter after a brief (and aborted) attempt to expand the entrance wound so as to effect a complete, neat, straight reversal of bullet bath (from front-left, rear-right, to vice-versa).

Now why would you want to omit all mention of the above, Pat?

This would be hilarious if I didn't think you were serious. McClelland would insist he only mentioned the left temple because Jenkins said something to mislead him. Jenkins would later try to deny he'd made such a mistake, and would swear till the end there was no such wound. It's fairly clear Shaw never even saw Kennedy, and that he was just mis-reporting what he'd heard from others. And David Stewart's recollections in 1967 and Father Huber's recollections in 1964 have little bearing on anything, as they never inspected the wounds and took no notes on what they saw. If I recall it correctly, Similas was proven to be a fake.

As far as your last sentence, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you claiming Sylvia Meagher believed the body had been altered?

Edited April 6, 2011 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Nice point, Robin. The blood pattern supports a blow-out to the left/rear, not to the right/front nor from the top or the side.

On the shirt, if kennedy was hit in the back of the head WHY IS THERE SO MUCH BLOOD MAINLY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BODY ?

If there was a fist sized hole behind the ear on the right side shouldnt there be more blood on the right shoulder area. ?

[Guest Robert Morrow]

It appears to me that the kill shot on JFK was in his front right temple. And the blowout was to the back of his head. It could have very well been a blowout in the lower right rear area OR the lower left rear area ... remember when JFK is shot in the head he is leaning forward, he is being shot at an angle.

As for blood flow out - most of it seems to be coming from the back of his head and not from the shot into his back. JFK slumped over to his left onto Jackie, and gravity would have taken the blood out of his head to flow down on his left side, whether or not the blow out hole to the rear of JFK's head was the "right rear" OR the "left rear."

Also, regarding the blowout to the rear of JFK's head - it may NOT have been that big in the first few seconds. I imagine the bullet blew out part of his occipital bone - the Harper fragment, but is very possible the big blowout hole that became apparent LATER had not yet developed; thing of the back of JFK's head at that moment as a broken eggshell consistency with scalp skin still holding it *together* temporarily until the effects of gravity and outward blood flow eventually make the back blowout would more apparent.

Robert Groden has showed me a close up of the Zapruder film with a frame (when it is blown up) that clearly shows a volcano cone effect coming out the back of JFK's head. This is one reason I do not think the Zapruder Film was fake or fabricated. JFK's blowout wound on his rear - although there like a broken eggshell still clinging together, did not make itself strikingly visisble in the first few seconds after the JFK murder at 12:30 PM Central time. By the time they got to Parkland it was obviously apparent to all.

After a few minutes of gravity and blood outflow, the blowout rear wound on the head was much more apparent. And I think it was a blowout wound in the lower right REAR of the head.

[Mike Williams]

It appears to me that the kill shot on JFK was in his front right temple. And the blowout was to the back of his head. It could have very well been a blowout in the lower right rear area OR the lower left rear area ... remember when JFK is shot in the head he is leaning forward, he is being shot at an angle.

As for blood flow out - most of it seems to be coming from the back of his head and not from the shot into his back. JFK slumped over to his left onto Jackie, and gravity would have taken the blood out of his head to flow down on his left side, whether or not the blow out hole to the rear of JFK's head was the "right rear" OR the "left rear."

Also, regarding the blowout to the rear of JFK's head - it may NOT have been that big in the first few seconds. I imagine the bullet blew out part of his occipital bone - the Harper fragment, but is very possible the big blowout hole that became apparent LATER had not yet developed; thing of the back of JFK's head at that moment as a broken eggshell consistency with scalp skin still holding it *together* temporarily until the effects of gravity and outward blood flow eventually make the back blowout would more apparent.

Robert Groden has showed me a close up of the Zapruder film with a frame (when it is blown up) that clearly shows a volcano cone effect coming out the back of JFK's head. This is one reason I do not think the Zapruder Film was fake or fabricated. JFK's blowout wound on his rear - although there like a broken eggshell still clinging together, did not make itself strikingly visisble in the first few seconds after the JFK murder at 12:30 PM Central time. By the time they got to Parkland it was obviously apparent to all.

After a few minutes of gravity and blood outflow, the blowout rear wound on the head was much more apparent. And I think it was a blowout wound in the lower right REAR of the head.

There is absolutely not one shred of evidence of a shot from the front.

If you are to disagree please post what you consider to be evidence of a shot entering the front. I caution you, the old arguments of back and to the left are ridiculous.

[Mike Williams]

Nice point, Robin. The blood pattern supports a blow-out to the left/rear, not to the right/front nor from the top or the side.

On the shirt, if kennedy was hit in the back of the head WHY IS THERE SO MUCH BLOOD MAINLY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BODY ?

If there was a fist sized hole behind the ear on the right side shouldnt there be more blood on the right shoulder area. ?

Fetzer once again shows his inept powers of deduction.

The man is shot, and immediately falls left, where do you think the mass of blood, pulled by gravity, will go?

This is certainly no indication of a shot from the front exiting the rear left.

Jim if you really taught critical thinking, you need to be handing out some form of rebate.....

[Mike Williams]

Small GIF ( photo's not resized to fit exactly )

Bullit hole aligned ( place your mouse cursor on the hole )

Robin,

That is a pretty good gif, and useful as well.

It shows two separate patterns.

The pattern we see on the Jacket was from the backspatter of the bullet.

The blood on the shirt from gravity.

Nice work on that one buddy.

Mike

[Mike Williams]

Nice point, Robin. The blood pattern supports a blow-out to the left/rear, not to the right/front nor from the top or the side.

On the shirt, if kennedy was hit in the back of the head WHY IS THERE SO MUCH BLOOD MAINLY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BODY ?

If there was a fist sized hole behind the ear on the right side shouldnt there be more blood on the right shoulder area. ?

Fetzer once again shows his inept powers of deduction.

The man is shot, and immediately falls left, where do you think the mass of blood, pulled by gravity, will go?

This is certainly no indication of a shot from the front exiting the rear left.

Jim if you really taught critical thinking, you need to be handing out some form of rebate.....

Say what was it like to meet Ventura?

[Jack White]

JFK slumped over to his left. Gravity caused the blood to flow down to the left from the head opening.

People should use common sense...if they have any.

Jack

[Cliff Varnell]

idea how to handle it.

Any tailor would roll his eyes if you suggested that JFK's shirt had three or four times the amount of normal slack.

Tailors don't purposely destroy jacket lines.

Frankly, I can't think of anything more obvious.

No Cliff, TAILORS MAKE CLOTHING TO THE SPECS OF THE CLIENT.

So? How does that challenge my observation that tailors don't purposely destroy jacket lines?

What part of "tapered waist" don't you understand, Craig?

And how much fabric is needed to make a 3+ inch fold Cliff?

2.25+ inches of fabric more than a man needs to move comfortably and look sharp in a tucked in shirt. JFK's tucked-in custom-made dress shirt only had 3/4" of available slack -- enough for him to move comfortably and maintain his Updated American style jacket lines.

You are ignorant about how shirts fit, obviously.

And since CUSTOM means MADE TO THE CLIENTS SPECS, What is "normal"?

"Normal" is a term of art in clothing design that refers to casual movements of clothing and body. Normal body movement causes normal clothing ease -- which is invariably measured in fractions of an inch.

Your question doesn't make sense in this context.

Proper shirt fit is governed by very simple, iron-clad rules.

http://www.throughtherye.com/flusser/ch7part3.htm

Alan Flusser, CLOTHES AND THE MAN: The Principles of Fine Men's Dress (emphasis added):

The body of the shirt should have no more material than is necessary for a man to sit comfortably. Excess material bulging around the midriff could destroy the lines of the jacket. If you do buy a shirt with too large a body, a seamstress can take in the side seams or put darts in the back to reduce the size. The darts are actually a bit more practical, since if you put on weight they can be removed. The length of the shirt is also an important concern. It should hang at least six inches below the waist so that it stays tucked in when you move around. It should not be so long, however, that it creates bulges in front of the trousers.

Custom-made shirts are designed specifically NOT to bulge.

ibid.

It's quite simple, really: fine-quality dress shirts are made of 100 percent cotton. Naturally, they cost more than polyester blends, but what you pay for is unrivaled comfort and a look that bespeaks luxury and tradition. As a natural fiber, cotton respects the natural needs of the body. It breathes, allowing the body to cool itself when necessary, and its absorbs moisture when the body perspires. As the article of clothing most in contact with the body, the shirt needs to act almost as a second skin. Cotton performs this function best.

The shirt needs to act like a second skin. In other words, the shirt is designed NOT to bunch up. It needs

to act like a second skin so it won't ruin the lines of the jacket.

This is especially true for a suit style like Updated American -- which has a tapered waist.

The significance of a "tapered waist" should be obvious even to you, Craig.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Cliff Varnell

[Glenn Viklund]

Nice point, Robin. The blood pattern supports a blow-out to the left/rear, not to the right/front nor from the top or the side.

On the shirt, if kennedy was hit in the back of the head WHY IS THERE SO MUCH BLOOD MAINLY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BODY ?

If there was a fist sized hole behind the ear on the right side shouldnt there be more blood on the right shoulder area. ?

Fetzer once again shows his inept powers of deduction.

The man is shot, and immediately falls left, where do you think the mass of blood, pulled by gravity, will go?

This is certainly no indication of a shot from the front exiting the rear left.

Jim if you really taught critical thinking, you need to be handing out some form of rebate.....

Indeed, Mike.

Not only did JFK fell to his left, for all we know he stayed in a leftward position for several minutes while the limo was on it's way to Parkland.

Another fantastic Fetzer-conclusion, the man who is endlessly bullying everyone else about incompetence.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Glenn Viklund

[Robin Unger]

Bullit hole aligned ( place your mouse cursor on the hole )

The blood on the left shoulder and back is obviously from the head shot and the effect of gravity, as kennedy slumped to his left. ( That is a given )

as is the blood running down the middle of the back ( again gravity at work )

I assume there must have been a massive amount of blood on the left shoulder area of the coat, which then must have seeped right through the coat onto the shirt underneath it

Where i have the problem is this, assuming on the right side of the head we had the bone flap opening in the skull and the fist sized hole behind the right ear .

why hasn't the blood from those wouds, made a similar LARGE blood stain on shirt near the right shoulder and back area as the blood from the hinged skull opening and the fist sized hole seeped through the coat.

On the coat, we see the blood spread out in an even pattern, from the left shoulder to the right shoulder, no large concentration of blood just on the left shoulder.

but on the shirt we don't see the same thing, we see most of the blood stain on the left shoulder and back area, but very little on the right shoulder

The blood shown on the coat, and the blood shown on the shirt do not match

Edited April 7, 2011 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Blood should have streamed from the hinged bone flap opening.& the fist size opening behind the ear on the right

We should be able to see blood all over the right shoulder area. ( left looking from the front )

This area should have been soaked in blood, not almost clean looking as we see it here.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Robin Unger

[Mike Williams]

Blood should have streamed from the hinged bone flap opening.& the fist size opening above the ear on the right

If so shouldn't we be able to see it all over the right shoulder. ( left looking from the front )

This area should have been drenched in blood.

Robin,

No. Not at all.

Look at how far JFK is leaning left. Almost on his side.

I would think we would see very little blood on the right shoulder, and a mass on the left, just as we do see.

[Mike Williams]

Kamikaze Mike: There is absolutely not one shred of evidence of a shot from the front.

If you are to disagree please post what you consider to be evidence of a shot entering the front. I caution you, the old arguments of back and to the left are ridiculous.

1. Sam Holland's hearing shots from and detection of smoke form behind the grassy knoll and his finding of weird prints there.

2. Lee Bowers testimony about the cars coming into that area, the flash of light, and then the man shoving something back into the trunk of the car.

3. Joe Smith's testimony about the false SS men up on the knoll.

4.The testimony of Newman, Hudson and Zapruder about the shots coming form behind them.

5. J.C. Price's testimony about a man running toward the parked cars near the rail line with something in his hand that may have been a head piece.

6. The FBi report declassified in 1977 about a couple of men behind the picket fence who appeared to be aiming a wooden stick or something two days before the murder.

7. The gaping avulsive wound to the rear of Kennedy's skull.

8. The rocketing back of Kennedy's entire body in the Zapruder film therefore obeying the laws of physics and Newton's laws of motion. Plus the fact that the neuromuscular reaction, jet effect and goat films have all been exposed as being BS.

9. THe fact that there is simply too much brian damage as reported by Doug Horne and others to account for just one bullet. Plus the fact that John Stringer disowned the brain photographs in the Archives.

10. Tom Robinson's testimony before the ARRB.

11. The fact that in the Z film, the explosion near the front of the head resembles that of a frangible bullet.

12. Jackie crawling out the back of the car to pick up debris expelled from the exploding skull. Plus the fact of her uncensored testimony about the appearance of JFK's head to her right afterwards.

13. How David Mantik has fit the Harper fragment into the rear of the skull.

Not one shred of evidence huh? You are such a joke you make DVP look sophisticated.

1. Yet there is no evidence that what Holland says it true. There is nothing to support it.

2. Lee Bowers only says that he felt something had happened there. He was not certain of what happened. As for the people in the cars, is there any evidence that this was sinister?

3. Is there any evidence that this ever happened? Or is Smith being as presumptuous as you are Jimmy?

4. This one always gives me a laugh. You do realize that the TSBD is behind them, yes?

5. That may have been? What the hell is that? It may have been a transistor radio, or any number of other things. People were running all over the place. Only you Jimmy would consider this evidence.

6. Id love to see the source of that report. I can destroy it in 30 seconds.

7. Well here is a two fold doosey just for you. One I do not believe that wound exists. I believe the wound was to the side of the head. However even if it did exist, this would well have been an entrance of a full metal jacket bullet.

8. Ahhhhh Finally something we partially agree on. Those notions were BS. However, I fear you are in woefully over your depth if you really believe that the backward motion we see is justification of a shot from the front. But I will be happy to educate you.

We know that a bullet only transfers .1 to .3% of its energy to the target.  

This is generally less than 10 ft lbs of force in a transiting shot.  The human punch is 110 ft lbs on average.

So in order for a transiting bullet to transfer the same amount of force as a punch:

Lets take the Carcano as an example:

As we can see the impact energy at 90 yards is 1328 ft-lbs  since we are passing through skull we should use the higher end at .3%

So

1328*.003= 3.98 ft-lbs of energy to the target, and a human punch on average is 110 Ft. Lbs.

With the above considered how many Ft-Lbs of energy would a transiting bullet have to strike with in order to transfer 110ft-lbs to the target?

37,000*.003=111Ft.-Lbs.

How would we achieve this?

An 800 grain .50 cal BMG has an energy of 14,895 ft-lbs at the muzzle.

So lets grab 2 of those for a total of 29790 ft-lbs

which leaves us 7210 ft-Lbs.

7.62x51 nato (.308) is 175 grains and 2627 ft.-lbs at the muzzle.

so lets grab 2 of those and we are up to 35,044 ft lbs

We still need another 1956 ft lbs......hmmmm.....

how about the .45 acp in 230 grains as it has a muzzle energy of 352 ft lbs

so lets grab 5 of those

we are now at 36,804 ft lbs.

damn still short......by......196 ft lbs!

so lets go back shopping and get......

1 32 grain .22 cal with 191 ft lbs of energy

  

We are still short by 5 ft lbs, so I suppose we could shoot with a carcano as well which adds another 3.98 ft lbs....

So in order to hit a target with enough transiting shots to equal a human punch we need to hit them with:

2-.50 cals

2-.308cals

5-.45 acp's

1-.22 cal

and a carcano

all at the same time.

really now.........

Oh yes and your "frangible bullet idea"?

"Dr. Charles Petty of the HSCA forensic pathology panel

responded to Dr. Wecht's frangible-bullet theory in his testimony

before the committee. [Quoting Petty:] "I happen to be the coauthor of

the only paper that has ever been written about the wounding

capabilities of frangible bullets. .... Such bullets and the breakup

products of [these] bullets are easy to detect in X-rays. There are no

such fragments in the X-ray of the late president's head. There was no

frangible bullet fired. I might also add that frangible bullets are

produced in .22 caliber loads and they are not produced [for] larger

weapons."

9. This is comical. From what I have read, almost every single doctor who worked on JFK agree that the photos, and xrays are authentic, and resemble what they saw. I was not aware that Horne was a wound ballistics expert.

10. An Embalmer? Now thats rich. I think first you better settle the issues you have with the medical professionals.

11. No frangible bullet: See number 8.

12. Well then by all means, show me this material on the trunk.

13. Man you really are behind the times huh?

There is nothing of substance in any of your items here Jimmy.