Martin Hinrichs Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Blame me for what, Martin? Refresh my memory please, as I don't remember ever having a conversation with you about the greyish area that can be seen in these frames. I mean the Nix film conversation, Duncan. I blamed you for that somehow i admit. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Hinrichs Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 No problem, Martin. Do you mean this long thread where I claimed that Rick's shooter behind the fence is probably a car? The Nix Parking Lot Cheers Duncan Sure, that was it, Duncan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Costella Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Most fascinating discussion I've seen for a long time. I'd be interested to talk in person to the Wilkinsons at some time. (I'm only in LA for a few hours tomorrow, unfortunately.) I'm perplexed by who's on whose side in all of this. It hasn't been this interesting since I was on Tink's side on the Moorman in the Street controversy! (I'm still trying to figure out if I'm on his side on the Wilkinson issue ...) John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) Thanks Greg... this is facinating... In what you saw, during the limo stop... how much more possible is the storm drain shot... UP doesn't happen when the shooters are above the target, right? There is absolutely no question as to whether or not the limo came to a complete and FULL stop. The car stopped. Completely. No motion whatsoever. The limo remained motionless for approximately 2 seconds. I'm surprised the Queen Mary didn't rear-end it. The head shot most obviously came from the right front. A detail that is missing from the motion of JFK in the extant film has to do with the difference between: "back and to the left" --and--"up, then fall to the left".My recollection is that he was "lifted up" from his seat to a discernible degree before falling to his left. This "body motion" appeared to be much slower than the jerky, abrupt, "snap" seen in the extant film. Edited March 26, 2011 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) I learned from Len Osanic that John Costella was featured on BlackOpRadio last night. John has just informed me that he spent his time talking about "Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?" http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/01/whos-telling-truth-clint-hill-or.html and "DID ZAPRUDER FILM 'THE ZAPRUDER FILM'?" http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011/03/did-zapruder-film-zapruder-film.html and that he agrees the discussion here, as he remarks, is indeed extraordinary: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17516 The show has been archived and can be heard and downloaded at http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2011.html Edited March 26, 2011 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 btw - you're dead on with zapruder... can't even make out his glasses... not in ONE image ...if the angle of the film you saw was "basically" zapruder's, and we know if a camera is not on the same plane the image has to look different, and the vast amount of panning the scene entails, dont we have to conclude THE film was taken on that pedastal from which all films were ultimately made? and you got to see a film much closer in generation to the film made that day, than anyone else... "no matter how paranoid you are, what the government is really doing is much worse than you can imagine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Costella Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Interesting point. You also have to remember that we have no idea where the final head shot occurred -- there is good evidence that it was further down near the steps, rather than where the Zapruder/Nix/Muchmore fiction puts it, which knocks out some of the historical objections to the storm drain theory, as far as I understand them. Thanks Greg... this is facinating... In what you saw, during the limo stop... how much more possible is the storm drain shot... UP doesn't happen when the shooters are above the target, right? There is absolutely no question as to whether or not the limo came to a complete and FULL stop. The car stopped. Completely. No motion whatsoever. The limo remained motionless for approximately 2 seconds. I'm surprised the Queen Mary didn't rear-end it. The head shot most obviously came from the right front. A detail that is missing from the motion of JFK in the extant film has to do with the difference between: "back and to the left" --and--"up, then fall to the left".My recollection is that he was "lifted up" from his seat to a discernible degree before falling to his left. This "body motion" appeared to be much slower than the jerky, abrupt, "snap" seen in the extant film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Jack... if the storm drain is even more possible, the "covering up" of the fence area in Cabluck... the obvious alteration... takes on a bit more meaning {I cant upload either... if you look at cabluck, the gray box covering the fence in front of the storm drain "entrance" if you will.. is comical. could be our copies, but Jack has been aware for a while it seems... cheers to you John C, btw... Keep the wind at your back DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Thanks Michael Quote: -Robinson said that Ed Stroble (now deceased) had cut out a piece of rubber to cover the open wound in the back of the head, so that the embalm~ing fluid would not leak; the piece of rubber was slightly larger than the hole in the back of the head, and Robinson estimated that the rubber sheet was a circular patch about the size of a large orange Robin this is similar with added info, best b Spencer was a Petty Officer and Photographer’s Mate at the Naval Photographic Center. She developed JFK autopsy photos, and is perhaps the most important witness regarding the autopsy photos. She actually saw an autopsy photo showing the back of the head wound. Her deposition was taken June 1997 by the ARRB: Q: Did you see any photographs that focused principally on the head of President Kennedy? A: Right. They had one showing the back of the head with the wound at the back of the head. Q: Could you describe what you mean by the "wound at the back of the head"? A: It appeared to be a hole, inch, two inches in diameter at the back of the skull here. Q: You pointed to the back of your head. When you point back there, let's suppose that you were lying down on a pillow, where would the hole in the back of the head be in relationship to the part of the head that would be on the pillow if the body is lying flat? A: The top part of the head. Q: When you say the "top of the head," now, is that the part that would be covered by a hat that would be covering the top of the head? A: Just about where the rim would hit. Q: Are you acquainted with the term "external occipital protuberance"? A: No, I am not. Q: What I would like to do is to give you a document or a drawing, and ask you, if you would, on this document, make a mark of approximately where the wound was that you noticed. MR. GUNN: We will mark this Exhibit No.148. THE WITNESS: Probably about in there. Q: And you have put some hash marks in there and then drawn a circle around that, and the part that you have drawn, the circle that you have drawn on the diagram is labeled as being as part of the occipital bone, is that correct? A: Yes. Q: Did you see any biological tissue, such as brain matter, extruding from the hole that you saw in the back of the head? A: No. Q: Was the scalp disturbed or can you describe that more than just the hole? A: It was just a ragged hole. Q: And it was visible through the scalp, is that correct? A: Yes. Thomas Robinson Mr Robinson was a mortician employed by the Gawler Funeral home, and was part of the team that performed the embalming and cosmetic work on the President in the early morning of November 23, 1963 at Bethesda Naval Hospital. He described a three inch circular ragged wound in the rear of the President’s head. The morticians closed this hole with a piece of heavy duty rubber. His HSCA interview in 1977 by HSCA staffer Andy Purdy was never released until 1992 by the ARRB(marked MD63). Excerpts from that interview: Purdy: Could you tell me how large the opening had been…? Robinson: …I would say about the size of a small orange Purdy: Could you give us an estimate of inches and the nature of the shape? Robinson: Three(inches) Purdy: And the shape? Robinson: Circular Purdy: Was it fairly smooth or ragged? Robinson: Ragged Purdy: Approximately where was this wound located? Robinson: Directly behind the back of his head Purdy: Approximately between the ears or higher up? Robinson: I would say pretty much between them. Purdy: Were you the one responsible for closing those wounds in the head? Robinson: We all worked on it…They brought a piece of heavy duty rubber, again to fill this area in the back of the head… Purdy: You had to close the wound in the back of the head using the rubber? Robinson: It had to be all dried out, packed, and the rubber placed in the hair and the skin pulled back over…and stitched into that piece of rubber. James Sibert Sibert was an FBI agent from the Baltimore office assigned to stay with the President’s body from Andrews AFB through the autopsy. His 1997 ARRB deposition is critical: Q: Could you give the best description of the wounds to the head? A: Well, there was a massive wound…right back in this part of the head Q: You’re touching the cowlick area of the head? A: Yes Q: And the size would be? A: It was difficult to see, because the hair was so matted…it was so bloodsoaked…it was difficult to see any distinct outline of where these bones had been literally blown out of the skull Q: At the time you observed those wounds, the photographs had already been taken? A: Yes Q: Were you able to tell whether any part of the scalp was actually missing? A: Well, there was a big cavity there. I mean that you could look in to. The skull wasn't’t intact, the bones weren't’t in place Q: So both scalp and bone were missing at the back part of the head? A: Well, there was tissue of course, but there definitely was a large cavity. It was just that apparent that there was so much skull missing The "MD" medical exhibits are available here: http://www.history-m...et/contents.htm An interview with Spencer can be read in William Law's "In the Eye of History". Cheers. Thanks B Robin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 btw - you're dead on with zapruder... can't even make out his glasses... not in ONE image ...if the angle of the film you saw was "basically" zapruder's, and we know if a camera is not on the same plane the image has to look different, and the vast amount of panning the scene entails, dont we have to conclude THE film was taken on that pedastal from which all films were ultimately made? and you got to see a film much closer in generation to the film made that day, than anyone else... "no matter how paranoid you are, what the government is really doing is much worse than you can imagine" If the z film is animated, as we believe, and if based on previously exposed guide films to get perspective from pedestal correct, then the "z film" was not shot by Zapruder, but created by animators from accurate data. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) the side of the head not the back of the head that shows red. I'am wondering why so many professional reseachers got it wrong. I'am not picking you in particular Josiah but Duncan was for enough time my target and will not blame him again. JFK's head is not a cube. What we see in the unaltered Zapruder film is a human rounded head which is captured slightely from behind at Z372-375. We see the right side and also portions of the backside of Kennedy head in this frames, Robin has posted. Not just the right side. I think it's very clear. No offense but it's very obvious. My very best to you Martin Martin. I agree with your post I see the grey patch on the right side of the skull continuing down to the back of the skull ( Above and behind the ear on the right side continuing down to below the ear lobe at the back of the skull ) Edited March 26, 2011 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) This is where i see the grey area in Zapruder. I also see what appears to be a scalp " Hair Piece " apparently used to patch over the open skull cavity. Either that or someone has given him a VERY BAD haircut. Edited March 26, 2011 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) Yes, the Z-film helps us understand what is going on. Starting a little after frame 300, one can see the heads of all the occupants of the lmousine begin to move forward. I'm talking here of JFK, Mrs. JFK, Connally, Mrs. Connally, Kellerman and Greer... all of them. Either their heads pivot forward or they slide forward in their seats as the limousine slows. And why did the limousine slow? Greer turned around in his seat and looked in the back seat. In doing so, he either took his foot off the accelerator or tapped the brake. The limousine loses about one third of its speed but never comes to a stop. The importance of this (as Wimp as shown) is that the forward movement of JFK's head between 312 and 313 is consistent with its forward movement earlier... about an inch. This means that the forward movement of JFK's head at this time cannot be ascribed to the impact of a bullet. I would point out that I didn't figure all this out. David Wimp is the bright guy who did. JT Not to obfuscate - but is the slowing, stopping, and speeding away of the limo - as we see it in the extant Z-film. or as we might posit them - factored into any study of JFK's head movement, Zapruder's camera jerks, etc? Can we learn anything about the motion of the limo from either JFK or Zapruder? Small GIF i created from JFK movie frames. Kennedy's head showing a slight nod forward and then the jump to the left where his right arm lifts up, Also you can clearly see the greer & Kellerman head turn, in Greer's case a "DOUBLE" head turn Occupants of the limo either "duck for cover" after the head shot, or are thrown forward due to sudden braking ? Click on image to view full size: Edited March 26, 2011 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 (edited) Occupants of the limo either "duck for cover" after the head shot, or are thrown forward due to sudden braking ? I've seen it questioned as due to sudden acceleration after the stop during the head shot, meaning I suppose that the stop occurs while Connally is turning and writhing, then he flies forward as Greer hits the gas. But I wasn't there and can't judge. Good thread. Edited March 26, 2011 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted March 26, 2011 Share Posted March 26, 2011 Occupants of the limo either "duck for cover" after the head shot, or are thrown forward due to sudden braking ? I've seen it questioned as due to sudden acceleration after the stop during the head shot, meaning I suppose that the stop occurs while Connally is turning and writhing, then he flies forward as Greer hits the gas. But I wasn't there and can't judge. Good thread. You have it backward. Brakes throw people forward (Newton). Gas (acceleration) throws people backward (Newton). Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now