Another proof the Zapruder film has been faked

[David G. Healy]

...

Opinions, thoughts and insults welcomed,

Thanks in advance,

C. A. Robertson.

...

search is your friend Mr. Robertson, your questions raise subject matter dealt with at least 20000 times, in 200 different venues. Perhaps you should explain to us your interest in this subject. Are you writing a book, doing a thesis, cable tv producer, concerned citizen wanting to see delayed justice served, another voice wandering in the democratic darkness or perhaps simply wanting Dr. Thompson's autograph and trying to impress?

This forum use to have a requirement that ALL participants post a biography. Did that requirement slide with you? Just curious. All without insult too! I amaze myself sometimes. So, Craig Lamson help C.A.Robertson out, let him know the lone nut, rules of the road... he's a newbie.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Prof. Fetzer, a couple of questions if you please :

1. As Chaney 'motoring forwards' no doubt happened before the limo reached the triple underpass, according to yourself, then surely an abundance of witnesses, if not each and everyone who were in the Plaza watching the motorcade, should be able to testify to this as fact, wouldn't you agree? If so, i'd appreciate it if you could point me in the direction of any witnesses, EXCLUDING the lead car occupants, who have made any statements, or suchlike, regarding a motorcycle pulling ahead of the limo whilst still in Dealey Plaza?

Sure--and for every other important aspect of the case, we can EXCLUDE the best witnesses to those events! Pretty soon, we will discover that what was actually going on was a circus parade--except we will have to EXCLUDE the witnesses to those events, too! In this case, the witness list is simply unimpeachable, since it includes persons who may well have been involved themselves!

Why would Secret Service agents, motorcycle patrolmen, and the Chief of Police have been wrong about this? There is no good reason to suppose they would have been. Next you will ask me to prove what Clint Hill has reported saying over the past nearly 50 years--but EXCLUDING CLINT HILL! Too much was going on. There is no reason to suppose everyone there noticed everything.

Anyone who is serious about getting to the truth of these matters has to take to heart what Clint Hill has been telling us for nearly 50 years now. Not only is there unimpeachable testimony of Officer Chaney motoring forward, but Clint Hill's testimony confirms it. That Tink and now Calli SHOULD BE IN SOME STATE OF DENIAL ABOUT ALL OF THIS is utterly beyond belief!

"As I approached the vehicle there was a third shot. It hit the President in the head, upper right rear of the right ear, caused a gaping hole in his head, which caused brain matter, blood, and bone fragments to spew forth out over the car, over myself. At that point Mrs. Kennedy came up out of the back seat onto the trunk of the car. She was trying to retrieve something that had gone off to the right rear. She did not know I was there. At that point I grabbed Mrs. Kennedy, put her in the back seat. The President fell over into her lap, to his left.

"His right side of his head was exposed. I could see his eyes were fixed. There was a hole in the upper right rear portion of his head about the size of my palm. Most of the gray matter in that area had been removed, and was scattered throughout the entire car, including on Mrs. Kennedy. I turned and gave the follow-up car crew the thumbs-down, indicating that we were in a very dire situation. The driver accelerated; he got up to the lead car which was driven by Chief Curry, the Dallas Chief of Police . . .”.

Not only does Clint's description of the wound contradict your characterization, but his account is consistent with what Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry have told us about about Chaney, which refutes the film's authenticity.

Tink has repeatedly claimed this happened AFTER the limo had already passed the TUP and that we have simply not been thinking about the temporal relationship here. My three favorites are Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry:

(1) Forrest Sorrels: "A motorcycle pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer replied in the affirmative, and Chief Curry immediately broadcast to surround the building. By that time we had gotten just about under the underpass when the President’s car pulled up alongside, . . ."

(2) Bobby Hargis: "I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chaney put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he [the President] was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off . . . .”

(3) Chief Jesse Curry: "at that time I looked in my rear view mirror and I saw some commotion in the President’s caravan and realized that probably something was wrong, and it seemed to be speeding up, and about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there . . ."

James Chaney, Bobby Hargis, and Clint Hill WERE NOT OCCUPANTS OF THE LEAD CAR, in case you have not noticed. And citing other alleged reports and later interviews, whose authenticity is open to question, is not a very persuasive way to argue your case. In fact, such a case as you are attempting to contrive appears to be superfluous. WE ALREADY HAVE SUFFICIENT PROOF AT HAND.

Others can address your questions about how the films and photos were faked or altered, but the agency certainly has the ability to do that, where most of the evidence in this case has been fabricated. Since Chief Curry called for the building to be "surrounded" when Chaney told him JFK had been shot, which he did at the TUP, there really is NO POINT in fantasizing about the entrance to the freeway.

If this isn't enough proof for you on this point, I can't imagine what it would take to convince you. Since only Tom Robinson and Ed Reed watched Humes take a cranial saw to JFK's head, I suppose you want me to prove that but EXCLUDING TOM ROBINSON AND ED REED? And then it will be the limo stop but EXCLUDING ALL THE LIMO STOP WITNESSES? How dumb are we supposed to be?

We are doing what we can to solve the case and you are doing something else. But the fact that someone like you has shown up tells me that we are making progress and that Tink has been outgunned. So they needed to send in the cavalry, which is why you are here. We all have better things to do, however, than to construct proofs WITHOUT THE MOST IMPORTANT EVIDENCE THAT PROVES THEM.

Edited January 24, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Karl Kinaski]

Prof. Fetzer, a couple of questions if you please :

1. As Chaney 'motoring forwards' no doubt happened before the limo reached the triple underpass, according to yourself, then surely an abundance of witnesses, if not each and everyone who were in the Plaza watching the motorcade, should be able to testify to this as fact, wouldn't you agree? If so, i'd appreciate it if you could point me in the direction of any witnesses, EXCLUDING the lead car occupants, who have made any statements, or suchlike, regarding a motorcycle pulling ahead of the limo whilst still in Dealey Plaza?

Sure--and for every other important aspect of the case, we can EXCLUDE the best witnesses to those events! Pretty soon, we will discover that what was actually going on was a circus parade--except we will have to EXCLUDE the witnesses to those events, too! In this case, the witness list is simply unimpeachable, since it includes persons who may well have been involved themselves!

Why would Secret Service agents, motorcycle patrolmen, and the Chief of Police have been wrong about this? There is no good reason to suppose they would have been. Next you will ask me to prove what Clint Hill has reported saying over the past nearly 50 years--but EXCLUDING CLINT HILL! Too much was going on. There is no reason to suppose everyone there noticed everything.

Anyone who is serious about getting to the truth of these matters has to take to heart what Clint Hill has been telling us for nearly 50 years now. Not only is there unimpeachable testimony of Officer Chaney motoring forward, but Clint Hill's testimony confirms it. That Tink and now Calli SHOULD BE IN SOME STATE OF DENIAL ABOUT ALL OF THIS is utterly beyond belief!

"As I approached the vehicle there was a third shot. It hit the President in the head, upper right rear of the right ear, caused a gaping hole in his head, which caused brain matter, blood, and bone fragments to spew forth out over the car, over myself. At that point Mrs. Kennedy came up out of the back seat onto the trunk of the car. She was trying to retrieve something that had gone off to the right rear. She did not know I was there. At that point I grabbed Mrs. Kennedy, put her in the back seat. The President fell over into her lap, to his left.

"His right side of his head was exposed. I could see his eyes were fixed. There was a hole in the upper right rear portion of his head about the size of my palm. Most of the gray matter in that area had been removed, and was scattered throughout the entire car, including on Mrs. Kennedy. I turned and gave the follow-up car crew the thumbs-down, indicating that we were in a very dire situation. The driver accelerated; he got up to the lead car which was driven by Chief Curry, the Dallas Chief of Police . . .”.

Not only does Clint's description of the wound contradict your characterization, but his account is consistent with what Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry have told us about about Chaney, which refutes the film's authenticity.

Tink has repeatedly claimed this happened AFTER the limo had already passed the TUP and that we have simply not been thinking about the temporal relationship here. My three favorites are Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and Chief Jesse Curry:

(1) Forrest Sorrels: "A motorcycle pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled ‘Is anybody hurt?’, to which the officer replied in the affirmative, and Chief Curry immediately broadcast to surround the building. By that time we had gotten just about under the underpass when the President’s car pulled up alongside, . . ."

(2) Bobby Hargis: "I remembered seeing Officer Chaney. Chaney put his motor in first gear and accelerated up to the front to tell them to get everything out of the way, that he [the President] was coming through, and that is when the Presidential limousine shot off . . . .”

(3) Chief Jesse Curry: "at that time I looked in my rear view mirror and I saw some commotion in the President’s caravan and realized that probably something was wrong, and it seemed to be speeding up, and about this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was Officer Chaney rode up beside us and I asked if something happened back there . . ."

James Chaney, Bobby Hargis, and Clint Hill WERE NOT OCCUPANTS OF THE LEAD CAR, in case you have not noticed. And citing other alleged reports and later interviews, whose authenticity is open to question, is not a very persuasive way to argue your case. In fact, such a case as you are attempting to contrive appears to be superfluous. WE ALREADY HAVE SUFFICIENT PROOF AT HAND.

Others can address your questions about how the films and photos were faked or altered, but the agency certainly has the ability to do that, where most of the evidence in this case has been fabricated. Since Chief Curry called for the building to be "surrounded" when Chaney told him JFK had been shot, which he did at the TUP, there really is NO POINT in fantasizing about the entrance to the freeway.

If this isn't enough proof for you on this point, I can't imagine what it would take to convince you. Since only Tom Robinson and Ed Reed watched Humes take a cranial saw to JFK's head, I suppose you want me to prove that but EXCLUDING TOM ROBINSON AND ED REED? And then it will be the limo stop but EXCLUDING ALL THE LIMO STOP WITNESSES? How dumb are we supposed to be?

We are doing what we can to solve the case and you are doing something else. But the fact that someone like you has shown up tells me that we are making progress and that Tink has been outgunned. So they needed to send in the cavalry, which is why you are here. We all have better things to do, however, than to construct proofs WITHOUT THE MOST IMPORTANT EVIDENCE THAT PROVES THEM.

@James Fetzer: I believe, Chaney did motoring forward: but after the TUP.

There is a psychological aspect in this topic: Why would the conspirators desire to cover up a harmless event like this, which has nothing to do with concealing the shoots, wounds, or a possible cooperation of the SS? (vanished Limo stop...)

Don't let me be misunderstood: I am an ardent Zappi-film -alteration-head. The Chaney-motoring forward thing is damaging our case. It's a foolish addition, supported by not a single piece of photographic, or movie-evidence.

KK

Edited January 24, 2012 by Karl Kinaski

[David G. Healy]

Uhhh, David, if you look at the bottom of Mr. Robertson's post, you will see a link to a biography.

good for you young lady, nice to see a bit of moderator magic coming to the rescue of a newbie.... carry on!

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Karl,

What possible purpose could it have served for Office Chaney to have motored forward AFTER THE HORSE HAD LEFT THE BARN (after the limo had passed the lead car)? And how can discovering the truth, which I have proven here, possibly "damage our causes"? If you want to fault my argument, you have to either reject one of my premises--the testimony of Clint Hill, Chief Curry, Bobby Hargis, Forrest Sorrels, and James Chaney--or fault my reasoning. You have done neither. The proof is important, sound and stands as is.

You want to know WHY IT WAS DONE. The answer is SIMPLIFICATION. Once the limo stop had been removed--and I TAKE FOR GRANTED you know the stop had to be removed--they had no time left INTERNAL TO THE EVENT SEQUENCE for Clint Hill's activities or for Chaney motoring forward. Like using the motionless spectators from earlier footage and freezing Jean and Mary on the grass, it made recreating the film much simpler. PLUS they did not have THE REAL TIME to cope with these intricate and specific details.

Either you are interested in the truth or your are not. You appear to have an agenda ("our cause"). I only want the truth. Since Chief Curry sounded the alarm to "surround that building"--and how in the world could he have possibly known A BUILDING or WHAT BUILDING was involved, had he not been informed in advance?--ONLY AFTER CHANEY INFORMED HIM THAT JFK HAD BEEN SHOT, how could it have happened AFTER THE TUP? The limo passed the lead car at the TUP and rocketed forward on to the hospital. The job was done.

@James Fetzer: I believe, Chaney did motoring forward: but after the TUP.

There is a psychological aspect in this topic: Why would the conspirators desire to cover up a harmless event like this, which has nothing to do with concealing the shoots, wounds, or a possible cooperation of the SS? (vanished Limo stop...)

Don't let me be misunderstood: I am an ardent Zappi-film -alteration-head. The Chaney-motoring forward thing is damaging our case. It's a foolish addition, supported by not a single piece of photographic, or movie-evidence.

KK

Edited January 24, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Calli Robertson]

...

Opinions, thoughts and insults welcomed,

Thanks in advance,

C. A. Robertson.

...

search is your friend Mr. Robertson, your questions raise subject matter dealt with at least 20000 times, in 200 different venues. Perhaps you should explain to us your interest in this subject. Are you writing a book, doing a thesis, cable tv producer, concerned citizen wanting to see delayed justice served, another voice wandering in the democratic darkness or perhaps simply wanting Dr. Thompson's autograph and trying to impress?

This forum use to have a requirement that ALL participants post a biography. Did that requirement slide with you? Just curious. All without insult too! I amaze myself sometimes. So, Craig Lamson help C.A.Robertson out, let him know the lone nut, rules of the road... he's a newbie.

Well, Mr. Healey, search has failed to produced the truth so far, and I still don't see it 'dealt with' anywhere in the supposed twenty-thousand venues you have alleged it to have been 'dealt with', in. Why do I need to explain my interest? A quick look at my biography you failed to notice, and it would tell you what you needed to know. No book, no thesis, no cable TV show. Concerned citizen? Absolutely. Concerned at the lack of effort put into understanding the timeline of events re: Chaney. Concerned, and worried, that younger folks, like me, will be forever under the impression that what Professor Fetzer is stating as fact, should, unfortunately, be written in history as fact, when, to me, and others, his scenario is patently wrong.

I've never communicated in any way, shape or form either with Craig or Josiah in my life, David, neither do I require their 'help' or 'autographs'. What is your point?

Is it a thinly veiled fishing expedition to work out whether I share the same opinions, or conclusions, of either, or that i've, somehow, been called upon for 'back up', etc?

I'll save you the time...

No.

So, maybe you'd like to have a shot at answering questions 2 and 3 and 4, seeing as Prof. Fetzer has deferred to 'others' to address my questions? You're obviously aware of the processes that would have to be involved, you obviously have the technical nous, so what's your take, David?. Quit with the 'he-said-she-said', have a look at the films mentioned, and tell me where i've got it wrong. Simple as. No need to rely on any WC witness statements, etc.

You up for amazing me, 'dude'?

Bell? Daniels? McIntyre?

Crack on.......

Calli.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

James Norwood has asked that I post this here, since he has been unable to obtain membership due to the backlog, which I am please to do. His crucial point is that Abraham Zapruder himself was the first to detect the fact that his film was a fake.

*************************

Vital testimony included in the Warren Commission exhibits has been ignored by students of the assassination. A close reading of the words of Abraham Zapruder in Volume 7 reveals that he had serious doubts about the authenticity of his own home movie during the testimony given on July 22, 1964.

When Zapruder was asked by Wesley Liebeler to identify still images from his own film, the Dallas dress manufacturer was clearly unable to recognize the photos. The individual numbers refer to the various frames of the Zapruder film. Here is the pertinent testimony on p. 573 of Volume 7:

“Mr. Liebeler: Yes, specifically, I first call your attention to No. 185. This is No. 185 on the back of it and will you look at the whole book and identify it if you can and tell us that those are the pictures that--that those appear to be the pictures or copies of the pictures that you took from your motion picture camera?

Mr. Zapruder: Well, I would say this, they look like--if they were taken from the film I had--these are the ones. I mean, I don't know how to express myself.

Mr. Liebeler: Well, they were.

Mr. Zapruder: Well, it looks like them--that's when they turned in from Elm Street. Is that it? I'm trying to visualize it. This is taking it from the opposite side of me, is it, where I would have been taking it, because I see this structure--I have been around there and--or these this couldn't be here--where did they get this in there--how did they get this in there, if I was taking the pictures where did they get this in there? That shouldn't be there.”

In this riveting testimony, it becomes apparent that Zapruder is completely confused by the images, especially in the early progression of the motorcade. The refrain of Zapruder's testimony is

“If I was taking the pictures where did they get this in there?”

"How did they get this in there?"

“That shouldn’t be there.”

In viewing frames 185 and 186, Zapruder is confused because he believed the first bullet to strike the President occurred prior to the limousine disappearing behind the Stemmons freeway sign. Long before the limousine is lost from view in the extant Z-film, Zapruder witnessed and recorded on film a shot to the President's back, and he heard the President speak, as he describes on p. 571: "For a moment I thought it was, you know, like you say, 'Oh, he got me,' when you hear a shot--you've heard these expressions and then I saw--I don't believe the preisdent is going to make jokes like this." When questioned about frames 185 and 186, Zapruder responded, as follows:

"Mr. Liebeler: And they are going down Elm Street now?

Mr. Zapruder: "Yes; this is before--this shouldn't be there--the shot wasn't fired, was it? you can't tell from here?...I believe it was closer down here where it happened."

Later in the testimony, on p. 575, Zapruder is shown a photo image of frame 249, and he does not recall the rowing motion of the President lifting his hands to his head. Zapruder: "No. 249--I just wonder if it was the motion that he went back with I don't remember seeing that. Of course the pictures would show." In reacting to the photograph of frame 230, Zapruder clearly did not recall the President's hands held so high in the throat area: "It looks to me like he went like this [holding both hands on the left side of his chest" (p. 574). This testimony reveals how the photographs fool Zapruder and instantly force him to formulate a new visual scenario of the assassination.

For Zapruder, the photos trump the reality of his memory of the event, instantly overriding his first viewing of the film on the weekend of the assassition. Those images have likewise confounded students of the assassination for nearly fifty years. For months after the tragic event of November 22, Zapruder informs us, he replayed the images of the assassination in his mind ("I have seen it so many times. In fact, I used to have nightmares. The thing would come to me every night." [p. 575]). But when shown the photos by Liebeler, Zapruder was being introduced to a completely new visual record of the assassination.

Even a casual reading of Warren Commission hearings reveals that Zapruder recognized at least subconsciously that the photos he was being shown by Wesley Liebeler were NOT replicas of those that Zapruder filmed and viewed in Dallas, prior to selling the film and relinquishing all copies on the weekend of the assassination. This testimony provides critical primary evidence suggesting alteration of the Zapruder film. It is unfortunate that during the hearings, the entire film was not projected in its true medium of a motion picture. In presenting only a set a still photos to Zapruder, he merely became flustered and confused. But it he had seen the film in its entirety with his memory still fresh from the previous November, he might have recognized the full extent of film alteration.

Still, the record of the Warren Commision provides an invaluable perspective into the topic of film fakery. In retrospect, the first person to recognize the alteration of the Zapuder film was Abraham Zapruder himself!

Edited January 24, 2012 by James H. Fetzer

[Daniel Meyer]

James Norwood has asked that I post this here, since he has been unable to obtain membership due to the backlog, which I am please to do. His crucial point is that Abraham Zapruder himself was the first to detect the fact that his film was a fake.

*************************

Vital testimony included in the Warren Commission exhibits has been ignored by students of the assassination. A close reading of the words of Abraham Zapruder in Volume 7 reveals that he had serious doubts about the authenticity of his own home movie during the testimony given on July 22, 1964.

When Zapruder was asked by Wesley Liebeler to identify still images from his own film, the Dallas dress manufacturer was clearly unable to recognize the photos. The individual numbers refer to the various frames of the Zapruder film. Here is the pertinent testimony on p. 573 of Volume 7:

“Mr. Liebeler: Yes, specifically, I first call your attention to No. 185. This is No. 185 on the back of it and will you look at the whole book and identify it if you can and tell us that those are the pictures that--that those appear to be the pictures or copies of the pictures that you took from your motion picture camera?

Mr. Zapruder: Well, I would say this, they look like--if they were taken from the film I had--these are the ones. I mean, I don't know how to express myself.

Mr. Liebeler: Well, they were.

Mr. Zapruder: Well, it looks like them--that's when they turned in from Elm Street. Is that it? I'm trying to visualize it. This is taking it from the opposite side of me, is it, where I would have been taking it, because I see this structure--I have been around there and--or these this couldn't be here--where did they get this in there--how did they get this in there, if I was taking the pictures where did they get this in there? That shouldn't be there.”

In this riveting testimony, it becomes apparent that Zapruder is completely confused by the images, especially in the early progression of the motorcade. The refrain of Zapruder's testimony is

“If I was taking the pictures where did they get this in there?”

"How did they get this in there?"

“That shouldn’t be there.”

In viewing frames 185 and 186, Zapruder is confused because he believed the first bullet to strike the President occurred prior to the limousine disappearing behind the Stemmons freeway sign. Long before the limousine is lost from view in the extant Z-film, Zapruder witnessed and recorded on film a shot to the President's back, and he heard the President speak, as he describes on p. 571: "For a moment I thought it was, you know, like you say, 'Oh, he got me,' when you hear a shot--you've heard these expressions and then I saw--I don't believe the preisdent is going to make jokes like this." When questioned about frames 185 and 186, Zapruder responded, as follows:

"Mr. Liebeler: And they are going down Elm Street now?

Mr. Zapruder: "Yes; this is before--this shouldn't be there--the shot wasn't fired, was it? you can't tell from here?...I believe it was closer down here where it happened."

Later in the testimony, on p. 575, Zapruder is shown a photo image of frame 249, and he does not recall the rowing motion of the President lifting his hands to his head. Zapruder: "No. 249--I just wonder if it was the motion that he went back with I don't remember seeing that. Of course the pictures would show." In reacting to the photograph of frame 230, Zapruder clearly did not recall the President's hands held so high in the throat area: "It looks to me like he went like this [holding both hands on the left side of his chest" (p. 574). This testimony reveals how the photographs fool Zapruder and instantly force him to formulate a new visual scenario of the assassination.

For Zapruder, the photos trump the reality of his memory of the event, instantly overriding his first viewing of the film on the weekend of the assassition. Those images have likewise confounded students of the assassination for nearly fifty years. For months after the tragic event of November 22, Zapruder informs us, he replayed the images of the assassination in his mind ("I have seen it so many times. In fact, I used to have nightmares. The thing would come to me every night." [p. 575]). But when shown the photos by Liebeler, Zapruder was being introduced to a completely new visual record of the assassination.

Even a casual reading of Warren Commission hearings reveals that Zapruder recognized at least subconsciously that the photos he was being shown by Wesley Liebeler were NOT replicas of those that Zapruder filmed and viewed in Dallas, prior to selling the film and relinquishing all copies on the weekend of the assassination. This testimony provides critical primary evidence suggesting alteration of the Zapruder film. It is unfortunate that during the hearings, the entire film was not projected in its true medium of a motion picture. In presenting only a set a still photos to Zapruder, he merely became flustered and confused. But it he had seen the film in its entirety with his memory still fresh from the previous November, he might have recognized the full extent of film alteration.

Still, the record of the Warren Commision provides an invaluable perspective into the topic of film fakery. In retrospect, the first person to recognize the alteration of the Zapuder film was Abraham Zapruder himself!

If I recall correctly, there was an account of Zapruder at the showing of the film during the Clay Shaw trial; Zapruder becoming emotional and covering his face looking at the film on the screen. (Sorry I can't recall where I read that -- anyone have anything on that?)

One interesting segment of the "Rush to Judgement" film is Mark Lane asks Orville Nix about his film after showing Lane his personal copy.

LANE: Is that copy the same as the original that you gave to the FBI on December First?

NIX: I would say, No. There is some films maybe missing, some, uh, frames, the, some of the frames were ruined.

LANE:Does the film which you have at the present time have the same number of frames as the film that you delivered to the FBI on December First ?

NIX: I would say no but its cause of losing, maybe a, a frame here and there.

Interesting both that Lane would ask these questions, and Nix's reply with a "no but" as if to apologetically admit the point but minimize it. (Subtext: my film was modified, but nothing sinister here, just some ruined frames or something, move along...) Did Nix expand on the point off camera?

[Bernice Moore]

Hi Daniel: Yes there is much more on Nix, including the fact, the last time i heard anything a few years back now, his grandaughter was still trying to obtain his original film, that had gone missing..?? for now, fwiw please excuse the extra figures etc within it is an old post from Rich's forum from 2006 but i believe holds some information you are looking for..take care b...

Orville Nix :

"Rush to Judgment "was the title of a book written by Mark Lane and =

published not long after the JFK Assassination..(1966)..=20

The book takes issue with the conclusions of the Warren Commission and =

suggests that there was a conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy.

(Video.also titled "Rush To Judgment.".Begins with the date.. Feb. 1964) =

a 1966 film documentary about the John F Kennedy Assassination that was =

directed by Emile de Antonio and hosted by Mark Lane. It is a black and =

white film, 122 minutes long. It has also been shown on BBC TV since =

1967 as part of the much longer (300 minutes) film entitled "The Death =

of Kennedy".

Included are several video clips showing Dealey Plaza how it existed in =

1963 and 1966, clips of Lee Harvey Oswald .Dallas Chief of Police Jesse =

Curry, Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, Jack Ruby and his defense =

attorney Melvin Belli..

Some of the assassination witnesses who present their observations =

on-camera include Abraham Zapruder, James Tague, Charles Brehm, Mary =

Moorman, Jean Hill, Lee Bowers,Sam Holland, James Simmons, Richard Dodd, =

Jessie Price, Orville Nix, Patrick Dean, Napoleon Daniels, Nancy =

Hamilton, Joseph Johnson, Roy Jones, and Cecil McWatters.

http://en.wikipedia....ush_to_Judgment

*************************

Orville Nix Verbatim from the Video....

Mark Lane: "Mr.Nix .Where were you on November 22nd ?.."

Orville Nix: "I was standing on the corner of Main and Houston "..(Sts).

Mark Lane: "And did you take any pictures of the Presidental Limousine =

as it went through Dealey Plaza ?.."

Orville Nix: "Yes, I had taken pictures before and after --before and =

during the assassination "..

Mark Lane: "And you know of course that your pictures were used by the =

Government to determine where the limousine was when some of the shots =

were fired ?"..

Orville Nix: "Yes "..

Mark Lane:"And did you deliver a copy of your film to the Federal =

Government ?"..

Orville Nix:"Yes, I delivered a copy of my film to the Federal =

Government about December 1st "..

Mark Lane:"About a little over a week after the assassination ?"..

Orville Nix:"Yes, my film got lost in the processing plant !"..

Mark Lane: "Where is the original film ?"..

Orville Nix: "The original film --uh--belonged to United Press =

International .The Government has a duplicate copy "..

Mark Lane: " Where is that copy ?"..

Orville Nix: " In the Archives"..

Mark Lane:"And is that the duplicate copy which was used by the Warren =

Commission determining along with other films, the Muchmore film and the =

Zapruder film where the Presidential limousine was when some of the =

shots were fired ?"..

Orville Nix: "I would say so"..

Mark Lane: "Well you now have a copy, of your film which you were kind =

enough to show to us this afternoon .Is that copy the same as the =

original that you gave to the FBI on December 1st ?"..

Orville Nix: " I would say, No--- there is some films maybe =

missing---some --uh--frames--uh--some of the frames were ruined "..

Mark Lane :"Does the film which you have at the present time ,have the =

same number of frames as the film that you delivered to the FBI on =

December 1st ?"..

Orville Nix: "--uh--I would say No--but its' cause of loosing maybe a =

--uh--frame --uh--here and there "..

Mark Lane :" At the time of the shots were fired ,did you look at the =

Book Depository building ?"..

Orville Nix :" No"..

Mark Lane : " Did you think ,at that time ,that the shots came from the =

Book Depository ?"..

Orville Nix : "No, I thought it came from a fence --uh--between the Book =

Depository and the Railroad Track"..

Mark Lane:"--uh--Did anyone else ,who you know, that you've spoken with =

,also believe that the shots came from there "..

Orville Nix: " Most everyone thought it came from the fence behind the =

Book Depository "..

Mark Lane :"Did you have the occasion to speak with Forrest Sorrels =

---who is of course a friend of yours ,and is the Secret Service agent =

in charge of Dallas that day ?"..

Orville Nix:" Yes, I did "..

Mark Lane : "Did he tell you where the thought the shots came from ?"..

Orville Nix : " He thought they came from the same place"..

Mark Lane : " Which is ?"..

Orville Nix: "Behind the fence"..

Mark Lane : " At the present time where do you believe the shots came =

from ?"..

Orville Nix : " Well they came from the Book Depository because there's =

proof it did come from there "..

Mark Lane :" I see---and this you've read in Newspapers and you've read =

the Report ?"..

Orville Nix :" Yes,--er-- I believe the Warren Report"..

*****************************************end of his interview on =

tape****

Orville Nix:

Conspiracy Beliefs (and Denials) In High Places..=20

By Vince Palamara=20

According to Orville Nix, a Dealey Plaza eyewitness who filmed the =

assassination and who was a good friend of Sorrels (Nix was an =

air-conditioning repairman for the General Service Administration in the =

Dallas Secret Service Building), Sorrels told him that the shots came =

from the grassy knoll. ["Rush To Judgment" film by Mark Lane; see also =

Who's Who in the JFK Assassination by Michael Benson, 1993, p. 314]

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/beliefs.htm

***************************************

Orville Nix..

JFK: How the Media Assassinated the Real Story...=2

http://www.realhisto...f-stone-JKF.htm

Although Salant asserts to this day that CBS was only after the truth, a =

recently released documentary indicates otherwise. Danny Schechter's =

"Beyond JFK: The Question of Conspiracy," features Walter Cronkite =

conceding that CBS News in 1970 censored Lyndon Johnson's own doubts =

about the lone-assassin theory. Cronkite tells Schechter that Johnson =

invoked "national security" to get CBS to edit out his remarks long =

after they had been captured on film. Cronkite and CBS, of course, =

reflexively complied.=20

But perhaps nothing revealed CBS's prejudice in the series more =

tellingly than the network's treatment of Orville Nix, a man who was =

wielding a movie camera across from the grassy knoll on that fateful =

day. Nix, who had worked for the General Service Administration as an =

air conditioning repairman in the Dallas Secret Service building, sold =

his footage to UPI for $5000 in 1963. But, according to his =

granddaughter Gayle Nix Jackson, the film only brought him heartache.=20

"The FBI had issued a dictum to all of Dallas's film labs that any =

assassination photos had to be turned over to the FBI immediately," =

recalls Gayle Jackson. "The lab called my granddad first and, like the =

good American he was, he rushed it to the FBI." Nix had to turn his =

camera over to the FBI as well. "They took the camera for five months. =

They said they needed to analyze it. They returned it in pieces," =

recalls Jackson. In 1967 Nix dutifully turned out for the CBS =

re-creation. Recalls his granddaughter: "His turn came to reenact what =

he saw. They said, 'Mr.Nix. where did the shots come from?' He said, =

`From over there on that grassy knoll behind the picket fence.' Then it =

would be, `Cut!' We went through this six or seven times and each time =

it was, `Cut!' And then a producer stepped forward and said, `Orville =

where did the Warren Commission say the shots came from?' My granddad =

said, `Well, the Texas Book Depository.' The producer said, `That's what =

you need to say.'" CBS producer Bernard Birnbaum, who worked on the =

documentary, denies the exchange. "We never tried to put any words in =

anybody's mouth, absolutely not," he told the "Voice." Birnbaum says CBS =

did give Warren Commission critics air time and cites a segment of the =

documentary where another eyewitness contends shots came from the grassy =

knoll. "We were looking to disprove everything," he insists.=20

According to Jackson, her grandfather also told CBS that there were four =

shots fired during the assassination, an observation subsequently =

endorsed by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1975, based =

on controversial acoustical evidence. But what did the CBS viewing =

audience hear from Nix? "Bang, bang, bang," as if to suggest that Nix =

also subscribed to the three-bang theory.=20

After being browbeaten by CBS, Orville Nix, a normally mild-mannered =

man, became furious. "He was hitting the steering wheel on the ride back =

home saying, `Why are they trying to make me feel like I am insane?'" =

Jackson recalls. She remembers that a year or so later, when District =

Attorney Jim Garrison called for Nix to testify, her grandfather =

wouldn't talk. He was afraid for his life.=20

How many other witnesses experienced the Orville =

you-never-heard/saw-that phenomenon we will never know. But one other =

was Kenny O'Donnell, a confidant and adviser to JFK who was in the =

motorcade. In Tip O'Neill's book Man of The House, O'Neill describes a =

conversation with O'Donnell, who told him he was sure that two shots had =

come from the fence behind the grassy knoll. O'Neill said to O'Donnell, =

"That's not what you told the Warren Commission." O'Donnell responded, =

"You're right, I told the FBI what I had heard, but they said it =

couldn't have happened that way and that I must have been imagining =

things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn't want to =

stir up any more pain and trouble for the family."=20

Since Orville Nix's death in 1988, his granddaughter, a former =

loss-prevention executive, has been waging a one-woman war to get the =

original film back from UPI. She wants it analyzed to reveal the details =

that a copy does not provide. "You know my granddad believed in the =

Texas handshake, and that is how he made his deal with UPI." According =

to Jackson, the rights to the film were to revert to Nix's estate in =

1988. After initially getting a green light from UPI for the return of =

the film, the then-media giant informed her that the attorney that =

granted her request was "no longer with the company." She was told to =

wait until 1991. Then on June 4, 1991, came a note from UPI's general =

counsel, Frank Kane. "UPI agrees that, in accordance with the oral =

agreement . . . UPI hereby releases all rights over the Nix Film to Mr. =

Nix's heirs and assigns." There was only one problem. UPI no longer had =

the film. Jackson received a letter saying the film had gone to the =

Warren Commission and was supposedly housed in the National Archives. =

With the Warren Commission out of business, she contacted the National =

Archives only to learn that the original was not there either.=20

The last official place the film was said to have been was in the House =

Select Committee on Assassinations files. That Committee was convened in =

1975 to investigate the assassinations of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, =

and Martin Luther King. The chief counsel for the HSCA, G. Robert =

Blakey, who has a penchant for gagging his staff via mandatory secrecy =

oaths, came clean with Nix's granddaughter about the fate of the family =

heirloom, says Jackson. "Blakey's the only one who takes full =

responsibility for the loss of the film because it was his committee =

that was supposed to assure that all evidence was returned to the =

rightful owner," Jackson says. So much for posterity's view of the =

grassy knoll on November 22, 1963. A former HSCA staff member, Gaeton =

Fonzi, recalls that back at the time of the hearings the staff "heard =

rumors that Blakey planned to classify all of the committee files, but =

we didn't believe them because that would be too reminiscent of what the =

Warren Commission had done." In fact many of the files were classified =

and this same man, Blakey, is the one who has been recently assigned to =

help draft legislation about what will be released from the original =

Kennedy assassination files.=20

***************************************

Orville Nix:

How Credible Is The Warren Commission..=20

From The John F.Kennedy Assassination=20

Homepage..=20

During the testimonies of the 395 witnesses, the examination went about =

300 times off the record, merely at crucial point and sometimes up to 7 =

and 8 times per witness. The most interesting case is the testimony of =

Patrick T. Dean. The counsel accused him of perjury and had threaten him =

with the loss of his job. Later, Dean requested to be heard before the =

Commission and told his story for the record, so we know about it today. =

Among the 489 witnesses, only 395 appeared to testify, less than a =

fourth (94) before the Commission itself. And during these testimonies, =

the Commission was never present as a body or throughout the full =

length. [5] Although the Chairman was present at least on all 94 =

examinations, the estimated numbers of the other members were:=20

Representative Ford 70=20

Mr. Dulles 60=20

Senator Cooper 50=20

Mr. McCloy 35=20

Representative Boggs 20=20

Senator Russell 6=20

Nobody of the Commission heard one of the witnesses who appeared before =

the Counsel (over 350), among them crucial witnesses such as Forrest V. =

Sorrels, Billy Lovelady, Abraham Zapruder, Domingo Benavides, George =

DeMohrenschildt, Jean L. Hill, James Tague (was wounded during the =

assassination!!!) and Sylvia Odio. Some witnesses never appeared before =

the Commission: James Chaney (saw JFK when he was shot at the head, saw =

him struck in the face), Bill and Gayle Newman (stood on Grassy Knoll, =

said shots came from behind), Charles Brehm (closest bystander when JFK =

was hit), J.C. Price (told he saw a man with rifle running behind the =

wooden fence on Grassy Knoll), Milton Jones (said the FBI sought for =

Oswald after he left the bus although nobody knew him yet), James =

Simmons (told the shots came from Grassy Knoll), Richard Dodd (told =

about shot and smoke behind the fence), Ray Rushing (told he saw Ruby 2 =

hours before Oswald shooting in the police headquarter although he was =

claimed to be at home), Marvin Robinson (saw Oswald left with a Rambler =

station wagon from the Texas School Book Depository), Ralph Yarborough =

(was next to LBJ and said he smelled smoke when passing the Grassy =

Knoll). [6]=20

Many witnesses told about alterations of her testimonies, such as Jean =

Hill, Phil Willis, Orville Nix, James Tague, Sam Holland, Roger Craig, =

Chester Breneman and Robert West (Reenactment figures), and Julia Ann =

Mercer. Mercer even told about the faking of her signature by the FBI. =

[7]=20

I hope this gives you a slight idea of the credibility of the Warren =

Report. A complete destroying of the report in comparison to the =

witnesses' testimonies can be found in Silvia Meagher's book =

"Accessories after the fact". A few of the arguments I will cite here to =

answer the other questions.

http://www.jfk-assas...tion.de/faq.php

*************************

In reply to a statement, in the previous thread (on the SF)..... that =

Zapruder was standing with his back to the TSBD, at the time Zapruder =

heard the shot behind him...and that behind him was not the corner fence =

area..where some believe shots came from.......the corner to my =

knowledge was not mentioned..?

In the WC testimony: Mr.Zapruder says......"then I started yelling, =

"They killed him, they killed him," and I just felt that somebody had =

ganged up on him and I was still shooting the pictures until he got =

under the underpass--I don't even know how I did it...... And then, I =

didn't even remember how I got down from that abutment there,...... but =

there I was, I guess, and I was walking toward--back toward my office =

and screaming,........ "They killed him, they killed him," ..excerpt =

continues below...

"At 9:55 p.m. Dallas time on November 22..United States PRS Special =

Agent Maxwell D. Phillips sent a hand-written memo (Warren Commission =

Document, CD87) to U.S. Secret Service Chief James Rowley that =

accompanied one of the first generation copies said of Zapruder's =

origins of at least one shot, "According to Mr Zapruder the position of =

the assassin was behind Mr Zapruder." Behind Mr. Zapruder was the Dealey =

Plaza grassy knoll However, (by the time) in his testimony to the Warren =

Commission Zapruder was less certain.."

From the Warren Commission:

Mr. LIEBELER - 313--you remember that one?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - That was--that was the horrible one.

Mr. ZAPRUDER - Well, as the car came in line almost--I believe it was =

almost in line. I was standing up here and I was shooting through a =

telephoto lens, which is a zoom lens and as it reached about--I imagine =

it was around here--I heard the first shot and I saw the President lean =

over and grab himself like this (holding his left chest area).

Mr. LIEBELER - Grab himself on the front of his chest?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - Right---something like that. In other words, he was =

sitting like this and waving and then after the shot he just went like =

that.

Mr. LIEBELER - He was sitting upright in the car and you heard the shot =

and you saw the President slump over?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - Leaning--leaning toward the side of Jacqueline. For a =

moment I thought it was, you know, like you say, "Oh, he got me," when =

you hear a shot--you've heard these expressions and then I saw---I don't =

believe the President is going to make jokes like this, but before I had =

a chance to organize my mind, I heard a second shot and then I saw his =

head opened up and the blood and everything came out and I started--I =

can hardly talk about it [ the witness crying].

Mr. LIEBELER - That's all right, Mr. Zapruder, would you like a drink of =

water? Why don't you step out and have a drink of water?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - I'm sorry--I'm ashamed of myself really, but I couldn't =

help it.

Mr. LIEBELER - Nobody should ever be ashamed of feeling that way, Mr. =

Zapruder. I feel the same way myself. It was a terrible thing.

Let me go back now for just a moment and ask you how many shots you =

heard altogether.

Mr. ZAPRUDER - I thought I heard two, it could be three, because to my =

estimation I thought he was hit on the second--I really don't know. The =

whole thing that has been transpiring--it was very upsetting and as you =

see I got a little better all the time and this came up again and it to =

me looked like the second shot, but I don't know. I never even heard a =

third shot.

Mr. LIEBELER - You didn't hear any shot after you saw him hit?

Mr. ZAPRUDER - I heard the second--after the first shot--I saw him =

leaning over and after the second shot--it's possible after what I saw, =

you know, then I started yelling, "They killed him, they killed him," =

and I just felt that somebody had ganged up on him and I was still =

shooting the pictures until he got under the underpass--I don't even =

know how I did it...... And then, I didn't even remember how I got down =

from that abutment there,...... but there I was, I guess, and I was =

walking toward--back toward my office and screaming,........ "They =

killed him, they killed him," and the people that I met on the way =

didn't even know what happened and they kept yelling, "What happened, =

what happened, what happened?" ....=20

http://jfkassassinat...ny/zapruder.htm

When Mr.Zapruder took the "horrible one" see Frame 313...he was almost , =

facing the limo, almost in line..is what he relates..""Well, as the car =

came in line almost--I believe it was almost in line"". his back would =

be towards the, pergola, the parking lot behind, and to his right, =

behind him was the wooden fence behind the Pergola.....see the camera =

alignment in frame 313 at the site below....it is not to the back of the =

limo when the head shot was received, it is almost in line of the =

Limo....as Mr.Zapruder stated..imo

""Mr. ZAPRUDER - Well, as the car came in line almost--I believe it was =

almost in line.""

At 9:55 p.m. Dallas time on November 22..United States PRS Special Agent =

Maxwell D. Phillips sent a hand-written memo (Warren Commission =

Document, CD87) to U.S. Secret Service Chief James Rowley that =

accompanied one of the first generation copies said of Zapruder's =

origins of at least one shot, "According to Mr Zapruder the position of =

the assassin was behind Mr Zapruder." Behind Mr. Zapruder was the Dealey =

Plaza grassy knoll However, (by the time) in his testimony to the Warren =

Commission Zapruder was less certain..

Below the "awful "one..is Zapruder frame 313.......if you open this site =

and have a look at the frames, please check..

Frame 317..in this one you will notice that the President has the top of =

his head, hair and a forehead,....and a large wound which appears to the =

side of his head...in the temple area.....

Then check frame 326... and imo you will see that the President no =

longer has ,a top to his head, nor forehead..

Then skip to frame 374 , and the side of his head is totally =

gone......IMO...I have no idea why ?, but that is what I see.....

http://www.assassina...arch.com/zfilm/?

Thanks for your time....

B.. The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link =

attachments:

Shortcut to: =

http://www.jfkresear...9&mode=3Dlinear=

Edited January 25, 2012 by Bernice Moore

[Bernice Moore]

Jim attached below are two copies of pages of a report made during the Garrison investigation, they were looking for two of the motorcylists to interview them, one was Chaney, the other Jean Hill's cyclist boyfriend, they apparently did not get to interview them, there was nothing more on a further search......fwtaw..

also a copy of the threat of assassination and a copy of the nix frames missing, fom the study done by john dolva and FRANK AQBAT made here on the e.forum.....and a gif from the nix film head shot......thanks for your time b

[Bernice Moore]

Here is further information, re the motorcyclists and witness from a past post.........fwiw...b

James L Simmons RR man on the overpass ..Re his testimony at the Clay Shaw trial..Garrison.

Upon being questioned by the defense that the President had fallen to the back as the limo lurched forward.

But as seen in the Zappy film he is propelled to the rear by the force of the head shot...then.....the

Asst D.A Alvin Osner asked : Did the car speed up ?

Simmons : No, in fact the car stopped or almost stopped.

Osner : Then did the car speed up ?

Simmons: Yes, after they got the motorcycle policeman out of the way...

It went right over the Asst.D.As.... head it went no further....

There were a total of 8 motorcycles ..in front of the President....3 abreast were some distance ahead.

a second line of five were a half a bock ahead..Some of these had orders to stop at the underpass

and hold the traffic while the motorcade proceeded to the Stemmons Freeway..on to the Trade Mart..

The names of these officers and numbers are in the WC Vol. XX, page 489..

The three out front were

Sgt.S.C Bellah---190,

J.B.Garrick---132

G.C.McBride---133

( The last I believe was Jean Hills boyfriend, that Mary Moorman took a photo of that day.?)

The five only being a half a block ahead were ,

L.E.Gray---156

E.D.Brewer---137

W.G.Lumpkin---152

H.R.Freeman---135

The five of the eight were instructed to fall to the rear at the underpass, and cover the limo from the rear

to the Trade Mart.

Only 3 were spoken to...at the time and they all repeated the same information..

" We have been instructed not to talk about it at all".

Simmons said he thought it was the motorcycle cop at the left front of the limo who got in the way, and

made it appear he was trying to find out what was going on....

In Jean Hils book, her motorcycle policeman boyfriend, and I think it was J.B.Marshall, if so, he also kept telling her to let it go,

and not get involved, and that he could not say anything,but that things at the station were very hushed.

BTW: The info comes originally from Penn Jones " Forgive My Grief 111"

http://jfkassassinat...y/simmons_j.htm

For a comparison for anyone interested, read how the FBI Reported his information also at the site....

http://jfkassassinat...bits/ce1416.htm

All witnesses:

http://jfkassassinat...et/russ/wit.htm

twisting in the wind......

B...

Edited January 26, 2012 by Bernice Moore

[Bernice Moore]

Whether you agree or not with Mr. Sprague's analysis of six shots or

Perhaps think there were more, the information on the Zapruder film he relates, I found very interesting.

The Zapruder Film

Excerpt from Richard E. Sprague's article of ""MAY 1970""

in "Computers and Automation".

Quote: "Of all the photographs taken in Dealey Plaza on November 22.1963, when President Kennedy was assassinated, the color movie sequence of some 480 frames taken by Abraham Zapruder is the most important.

It shows from the right hand side of the motorcade the entire sequence of events, from President Kennedy ROUNDING THE CURVE FROM HOUSTON ST. ONTO ELM ST. through all the shooting , until the big presidential limousine left with it's dead president going under the triple overpass. This film almost by itself, with careful, scientific analysis, establishes the times of five of the shots.

The Warren Commission received the original of the Zapruder film to look at, on loan from Life magazine which bought it from Zapruder.

From that time on the film was not publicly shown, but remained in the locked files of Life. But a direct copy of the original was subpoenaed and shown NINE times by Asst. District Attorney Alvin Oser in New Orleans in February 1969, at the trial of Clay Shaw. The judge, the jury, the newspaper reporters, and the spectators in the court room all became convinced that Oser and Garrison had demonstrated a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy.

When one sees and studies in detail the Zapruder film in its clear version and examines the other photographs showing the effects of the shots, one becomes convinced of two statements.

1: There were six shots, of which five hit persons in the Kennedy car: of these five the first went through the throat of President Kennedy: the second struck Kennedy in the back: the third struck Governor Connally in the right shoulder: the fourth and fifth hit President Kennedy almost simultaneously in the head and blew out his brains. The remaining shot missed and hit a curbstone on Main St.

2: The last of the five shots ( coming from the grassy knoll area) and one of the two fatal shots, struck Kennedy from the front and to the right, hurling his head to the left and backwards with great force, in accordance with the laws of physics.

Either one of these statements renders impossible the Warren Commissions Report's conclusion, that only three shots were fired, the second one missing entirely and striking the curb of Main Street.

Obviously, if there was a conspiracy, it becomes vitally necessary to prevent the American people from seeing the Zapruder film, clear and complete, and especially in motion. For over six years, except in New Orleans, this has been achieved...."" end of quote.

Now as we know bootleg copies were made from the one in Jim Garrison's possession…many…..they were distributed among college students and also sold from 10.00 to 50.00 in the U.S Mr.Sprague goes on to say." Many of these bootleg copies, because of lack of clarity, do not demonstrate the first statement, but they do demonstrate the second, the backward thrust.

Now Mr. Sprague mentions that The film shows the( CORRECTION LEFT (right) hand turn of the limo onto Houston from Elm St. in 1970 ,a matter of months after the showing in N.Os.…apparently within the copies of the Zapruder and what was seen back in 1969, the turn was there and included within the film. .Which has now completely disappeared from any copies that we see today..

Life magazine could have earned millions from showing the Zapruder film. Had they made it available, within three days, of showing widespread on Television, every person within the United States along with other Countries of the world, would have been able to have seen for themselves that more than three shots took place that dark afternoon in Dealey Plaza, which then would have shown the Warren Commission for what it was a cover-up..

So Life Magazine locked the film up, thereby creating for themselves the title of guilt by association in the interest of those involved within

the coup d'etat.

B..

''correction made...b

Edited January 26, 2012 by Bernice Moore

[Ray Mitcham]

"Simmons said he thought it was the motorcycle cop at the left front of the limo who got in the way, and

made it appear he was trying to find out what was going on...."

This seems to support Greer's comment that he "should have swerved " What else would have caused Greer to want to swerve? Would this seem to confirm that the limo stopped?

Edited January 25, 2012 by Ray Mitcham

[Daniel Meyer]

Bernice Moore -- thanks for posting the info on Orville Nix. However I'm asking about a more narrow point: Nix saying the his film was not the same as the original and "some films maybe missing, some, uh, frames, the, some of the frames were ruined".

Since the possibility of Zapruder film alteration seems not to have been a topic of first generation investigation, I find it especially interesting that Lane was taking a poke at Nix film alteration in the mid '60s. The "Rush to Judgement" film clip suggests to me that Nix had more on his mind than he was willing to state on film. Is there record of Nix expanding on the point elsewhere? Has Lane ever detailed what prompted his questions?

[David Josephs]

B -

Did you mean to say the LEFT HAND TURN from Houston to Elm

or

The RIGHT HAND TURN from Main onto Houston?

both are not in the film yet there could not be a right hand turn from Elm to Houston.. right?