New Proof of JFK Film Fakery: "Conclusive Evidence", Experts Claim

[Len Colby]

Dear Dr. Fetzer,

In case you haven't noticed in our posts over the years, Dolva and I (and I think Unger, too) believe that JFK's assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Yes! A conspiracy! (Not sure about Lamson and Colby. LOL)

[...]

Lamson is an LNT, I don't believe LHO could have done all the shooting with that MC in the requisite time. It should be noted that Fetzer's most vocal critic has been 'Tink' Thompson and that other well know CT researchers like Barb. 'Junk', Martin Shakleford, Tony Marsh etc. have been very critical of his claims regarding the Z-film and other DP images.

[Robin Unger]

zavada's open letter response to Doug Horne 2010

Thanks for posting that Robin, it pretty clearly demonstrates Horne's agenda took precedence over his credibility.

No problem.

I actually found it a very interesting read

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Everyone knowledgeable about the Zapruder film knows that Rollie Zavada was an expert on celluloid and testified that the extant copy was done on authentic Kodak film. He did not address the contents of the film, so citing him in this context is a deception.

Kelly Ruckman, by contrast, has written me about "an interesting anomaly . Compare the driver side tail-light in Z-376 (Z-382 is closer to Alt-7, but obscures it) to Altgens7. It’s bright red in Zapuder and black as midnight in Altgen’s." Altgens7 is a fake photo.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Clint Hill said he pushed jackie back into her seat.

Is that what we start to see in Nix as the film ends. ?

Click on image to view FULL SIZE:

But this is not what we see in the Zapruder. So you have produced

yet another proof that the home movies have been changed. Notice

that none of Clint's activities--climbing onto the trunk, pushing Jackie

down, lying across their bodies, peering into a fist-sized hole at the

back of JFK's head, and giving a "thumb's down" to his colleagues--

all of which occurred BEFORE REACHING THE TUP, are shown in

the Zapruder film. So thanks for this confirmation of his testimony.

Edited February 27, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[David Von Pein]

...none of Clint's activities--climbing onto the trunk, pushing Jackie down, lying across their bodies, peering into a fist-sized hole at the back of JFK's head, and giving a "thumb's down" to his colleagues--all of which occurred BEFORE REACHING THE TUP...

How can any sensible person possibly believe that Clint Hill performed all of those actions by the time the car reached the Triple Underpass? It's just plain silly.

If Clint Hill ever said he did ALL of the above things BEFORE the car ever reached the underpass, he obviously was merely a little off on his timing of when he performed all of those actions. And all reasonable people, of course, have the capability and the ability to evaluate Mr. Hill's statements in a reasonable way.

The same can be said of another one of Mr. Fetzer's claims:

On March 27, 2009, James Fetzer said:

"I advance an 11-page study of Jean's [Hill] interview with Len Osanic and thereby establish a convergence in her testimony with that of Mary Moorman, which not only indicates they were in the street at the same time but that, if the Zapruder [Film] were authentic, it would show ( a ) Mary handing her photos to Jean, ( b ) Jean coating them with fixative, ( c ) the limo moving to the left (toward them), ( d ) Mary and Jean both stepping off the curb and into the street, ( e ) Jean calling out, "Mr. President!" and all that, ( f ) Mary taking her picture, ( g ) both stepping back onto the grass, ( h ) Mary getting down and tugging at Jean's leg, but ( i ) Jean remaining upright, because she didn't think they would shoot her, none of which is shown in the film."

In response to the above hilarity, David Von Pein (that's me) said the following on January 8, 2010:

"For those who want the exact statistics on this, here they are:

Assassination eyewitnesses Jean Hill and Mary Moorman first become visible in Abraham Zapruder's home movie in frame #287, when the right half of Hill's body comes into view:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z287.jpg

The very last frame that shows any portion of either of the two women is Z316, which is a frame that depicts a very small part of Moorman's left arm:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z316.jpg

This means that the two ladies are visible (either individually or together) for a total of only 30 frames of the Zapruder Film (inclusively; Z287 through Z316), which in "real time" equals 1.639 seconds.

But Jim Fetzer, incredibly, seems to think that an unaltered version of the Zapruder movie should show ALL of the events he mentioned above--even the post-assassination event of Moorman tugging on Hill's coat or leg (as Mary encourages Jean to get down on the ground to avoid the gunfire, which is an event that obviously did not occur until Mr. Zapruder had panned his camera further to his right and well out of the view of either of the two women).

Does Dr. Fetzer believe that the "real" and "unaltered" Zapruder Film is focused on Jean and Mary for more than just 1.64 seconds? Fetzer must certainly believe that is the case, because otherwise how could ALL of his laundry list of Hill's and Moorman's actions have possibly been captured in just 1.64 seconds by the CONSTANTLY-PANNING motion of Mr. Zapruder's Bell & Howell camera?

There's only one truly accurate word to describe such nonsensical and impossible beliefs on the part of James H. Fetzer --- Crazy!"

Edited February 27, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Chris Davidson]

Everyone knowledgeable about the Zapruder film knows that Rollie Zavada was an expert on celluloid and testified that the extant copy was done on authentic Kodak film. He did not address the contents of the film, so citing him in this context is a deception.

Kelly Ruckman, by contrast, has written me about "an interesting anomaly . Compare the driver side tail-light in Z-376 (Z-382 is closer to Alt-7, but obscures it) to Altgens7. It’s bright red in Zapuder and black as midnight in Altgen’s." Altgens7 is a fake photo.

Jim,

I do believe the film is altered.

But, some of the examples you provide are highly subjective. imo

Here are a few for comparison with the brakelight anomaly.

chris

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Von Pein writes:

Posted Today, 08:59 PM

Jim Fetzer said:

...none of Clint's activities--climbing onto the trunk, pushing Jackie down, lying across their bodies, peering into a fist-sized hole at the back of JFK's head, and giving a "thumb's down" to his colleagues--all of which occurred BEFORE REACHING THE TUP...

How can any sensible person possibly believe that Clint Hill performed all of those actions by the time the car reached the Triple Underpass? It's just plain silly.

But of course it is only "silly" if you beg the question by ASSUMING that the film is authentic, when we have (1) more than 60 witnesses who report the limo slowing dramatically or coming to a complete halt; (2) reports from Jesse Curry, Forrest Sorrels, Winston Lawson, Bobby Hargis, and James Chaney that he motored forward; (3) reports from at least a half-dozen others who have seen "the other film", in which these things occur; (4) the impossible head turns, the "blob" and blood spray painted in, and the back of the head wound painted over in black; (5) Frame 374, which shows the wound at the back of the head and by itself (in comparison with those painted over frames) proves the film has been altered; and (6) Clint Hill's own description, which was even confirmed by Roy Kellerman during his testimony before the Warren Commission that he had seen Clint "lying across the trunk".

Who’s telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?

Agent’s reports contradict JFK film, autopsy X-rays and other crucial photographs

Jim Fetzer

“In the midst of the mayhem the agents were calm, but ready to react in a

millisecond if anything got out of hand.”—Jerry Blaine, THE KENNEDY DETAIL

According to Jerry Blaine, the author of THE KENNEDY DETAIL (2010), his purpose in writing this book was “to set history straight, to leave a book for [his] grandchildren that they could read and know the truth beyond any measure of doubt.” What Blaine has actually done, however, moves us further toward the truth by revealing that the words of Clint Hill, the only agent to respond during the assassination, contradict his actions as shown in the Zapruder film, in which his efforts to protect Jackie Kennedy are among its most indelible features. They also impeach autopsy X-rays and other photographs. We therefore have in Clint Hill’s own words stunning new proof that the extant film has been faked. The book—and presentations to promote it—thus contributes to “setting history straight”, but not in the sense its author intended.

Clint Hill was not the only agent to attempt to respond after shots rang out. Secret Service agent John Ready, who was on the right running board whereas Clint was on the left, began to respond but was called back by Emory Roberts, Agent in Charge of the Presidential Protection Detail. This is stunning in itself, but is only one of more than fifteen indications that the Secret Service set up JFK for the hit, which include that two agents were left behind at Love Field, that the vehicles were in the wrong order, that the 112th Military Intelligence Unit was ordered to “stand down” rather than provide protection throughout the city, and that the motorcycle escort was reduced to four, who were instructed not to ride forward the rear wheels. Open windows were not covered and the crowd was allowed to spill out into the street.

When I discovered that Jerry and Clint had made presentations at book signings, I sent out a notice to several of my closest collaborators, all of whom contributed to the three JFK books I edited, ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), and THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003). I had reported there that we had found multiple indications the film had been reconstructed, where rather important events, such as the driver, William Greer, bringing the limo to a halt, had been removed and the film redone. An expert on special effects, Roderick Ryan, had told Noel Twyman, BLOODY TREASON (1997), that the “blob” of brains exploding to the right/front had been painted in, while, as Doug Horne, INSIDE THE ARRB (2009), has explained, a new group of Hollywood experts has found that a massive defect to the back of JFK’s head had been concealed by being (crudely) painted over in black.

The Costella Response

John Costella, Ph.D., the leading expert on the film in the world today, who earned his doctorate in physics with a specialization in electromagnetism, the properties of light and images of moving objects, responded almost immediately. “Forget about the book”, he wrote. “That YouTube video [of Blaine and Hill at a book signing, which can be found here:

] is worth its weight in gold!” A few years ago, after he did a compilation of eyewitness reports from Dealey Plaza [ http://assassination...5n1costella.pdf ] and created a stabilized version of the Zapruder film, in which the limousine does not move vertically within frames (below), John recognized that what Clint has described from the days after the assassination, to his testimony to the Warren Commission and right up to his last public interviews in the 1970s or 1980s, was consistent but contradicts the film. At the book signing,

24:30: "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 . . .”.

This is completely consistent with every account Clint has ever given. He insists that he reached Mrs. Kennedy, pushed her down into the back seat, and was lying over the President, close enough to view the exact wounds, before the driver accelerated away—and certainly before they got to the lead car. The problem is that the extant Zapruder film—together with the less familiar Nix and Muchmore films—has Clint never actually touching Mrs. Kennedy; indeed, the extant Zapruder shows that he never got further than the rear foothold until the time that the limo passed the lead car and went under the Triple Underpass. Instead, it shows him stuck there on the rear foothold (below).)

According to Clint Hill (shown here on the rear foothold of the limousine as the vehicle is about to enter the Triple Underpass), he had already reached Mrs. Kennedy and pushed her down in the back seat. JFK had fallen to the left into her lap, where the right side of his head was exposed to Clint, who was lying over them. This photo is supposed to have been taken by Ike Altgens and corresponds with late Zapruder frames. Clint’s testimony not only falsifies the Zapruder film, but also shows that this photograph was faked to agree with it.

Lest there be any doubt on this crucial point, in Clint Hill’s written statement dated 30 November 1963, which was published as Commission Exhibit CE 1024, he wrote: “As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President’s head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lying on the seat” [18H742]. And in his testimony to the commission on 9 March 1964, “The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the middle of the car. His brain was exposed.” [2H141]. Since he has told us he made these observations before the limousine had reached the pilot car drive by Chief Curry (shown above), this photo has to have been faked. Clint could not have made these observations from the rear foothold as it represents. (His descriptions of the wound to the right rear of JFK’s head are discussed below.)

The Limo Stop

Not the least fascinating aspect of Clint Hill’s latest remarks is his observation that he was covered with brains and gore as he ran forward from the left running board of the Secret Service Cadillac—called “The Queen Mary”—which, according to Emory Roberts (THE KENNEDY DETAIL, page 215), was 15 feet back. This is consistent with the report of Officer Bobby Hargis riding to the left/rear of the limousine, who was hit so hard by the brains and debris that he thought he himself might have been shot. Agents who saw JFK’s brains splattered across the trunk in Washington, D.C. would be nauseated by the sight, as I explained in HOAX, page 27. But it is not in the film. So John wrote to Clint—and he got it, because John has the signed Registered Mail receipt card—urging him to be certain to record his version of events for posterity. Now he is on the road, participating in book signings and talking publicly again, for the first time in decades. His story is still exactly the same and, most important, still does not agree with his actions as seen in the film.. Here is a clip featuring what is shown of his actions in the film:

The film itself thus demonstrates that the Zapruder version of Clint Hill’s actions up to the Triple Underpass is not consistent with Clint Hill’s words describing what he actually did.

John’s collation of eyewitness reports about the assassination includes dozens and dozens about the limo stop. Some reported seeing it slow dramatically and others that it came to a complete stop, which makes sense since, from different positions, different witnesses would have seen it slow dramatically as it came to a complete stop. Among them is Toni Foster, who was interviewed by Debra Conway in 2000. As Daniel Gallup has observed, Foster seems to have no idea that her recollections contradict the official record. Toni told Debra, "For some reason, the car stopped. It did stop for seconds. I don't even know why it stopped and all of a sudden it sped up and they went under the underpass. I could never figure out why the car stopped." “The way she delivers these lines,” Gallup observed, “I doubt Toni had ever seen the extant Z-film, and had no idea her recollections contradicted that film.” He said he was reminded of David Lifton's early (1971) interviews with the Newmans who also said the limo had stopped. “They had no way of knowing at the time that the Z-film showed no such stop. All of this is to say, the earliest recollections of individuals are likely to be the most significant,” he added, “especially if there is evidence of a lack of exposure to contrary viewpoints that might influence memory”. For a few more:

Billy Lovelady (on the steps of the Texas School Book Depository), 19 March 1964: “I recall that following the shooting I ran toward the spot where President Kennedy’s car had stopped.” [FBI statement: 22H662]

Roy Truly (on the north side of Elm Street in front of the building), 24 March 1964: “The car—I saw the President’s car swerve to the left and stop somewhere down in this area” [Later:] (Mr. Belin: “When you saw the President’s car seem to stop, how long did it appear to stop?) Mr. Truly: It would be hard to say, over a second or two, something like that. I didn’t see—I just saw it stop. I don’t know. I didn’t see it start up.” [Warren Commission testimony: 3H221]

Mrs. Earle Cabell (four cars behind the Presidential limousine, at the top of Elm Street at the time of the shots), 13 July 1964: “I was aware that the motorcade stopped dead still. There was no question about that.” [Later:] “As I told you, the motorcade was stopped.” [Later:] (Mr. Hubert: “That was when your car at least had come to a standstill?”) Mrs. Cabell: “Every car in the motorcade had come to a standstill.” [Later:] “… we were dead still for a matter of some seconds—“ [Warren Commission Testimony” 7H486-7]

These reports are significant from multiple points of view. Roy Truly was Oswald’s supervisor in the Book Depository and would reassure Officer Marrion Baker, when he confronted Oswald in the 2nd floor lunch room 90 seconds after the assassination, that he was an employee and belonged there. Billy Lovelady was another employee who looked enough like Oswald to be mistaken for him. And Earle Cabell, the Mayor of Dallas at the time, was the brother of Lt. Gen. Charles Cabell, USAF (ret.), whom JFK removed as a deputy director of the CIA after the disastrous Bay of Pigs fiasco.

The limo stop—during which JFK was hit twice in the head, once from behind and once from in front—was such an obvious indication of Secret Service complicity that it had to be taken out, which is undoubtedly the principal reason for fixing the film. But it had other ramifications. What Clint Hill has consistently described is not in the Zapruder film: he describes several actions in those seconds around the limo stop that were deleted from the extant film. In editing the timeline of the extant film, it was necessary to delete his pushing of Mrs. Kennedy back into the seat—there just wasn't enough time left in the film once the limo stop had been deleted. There is no possible way in which Clint could possibly have seen what he claims to have seen before the car accelerated away and passed the lead car when he was stuck on the back of the speeding limo as he is shown doing in the extant film. And from his initial reports right up to his latest “book signing” interview, he has insisted that that was when he saw those things, that he did reach Mrs. Kennedy and that he did push her down into the car, unlike what the film shows. Which means that the film is a fake.

PART II (below)

Edited February 27, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[David Von Pein]

~Big Yawn, Jim~

Edited February 27, 2013 by David Von Pein

[David Josephs]

* James Chaney (motorcycle patrolman on right rear of the Presidential limousine): “I went ahead of the President’s car to inform Chief Curry that the President had been hit. And then he instructed us over the air to take him to Parkland Hospital and that Parkland was standing by.”

Chief Curry instructs Chaney to take him to Parkland... and then Chaney rode up to the lead cycles to tell them the news...

Jim... just point out Chaney in this photo for us... LEADING the way to Parkland after talking to Curry in that little white car...

and gaining on the three lead cycles....

If he's not there... where is he?

Edited March 24, 2017 by David Josephs

[Robin Unger]

[Thomas Graves]

Yep. And in this frame he's probably just starting to "gun" his Harley up to road towards the camera.

--Tommy

Edited February 28, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jim makes some nice points, which Kathy dismisses as "shadow". I have a

question for Kathy. Are Mantik's X-ray studies and Frame 374 shadows, too?

Here is David Mantik's study of the lateral cranial X-ray, where the "Area P" is

for where the blow-out had been "patched"; and part of Frame 374, which

confirms that location and BY ITSELF proves the Zapruder film is inconsistent

and has been "fixed" when you compare earlier frames, such as those that Jim

has presented, where it has been blacked out. And of course a group of flim

restoration experts has confirmed that the wound was "painted over in black":

So is it Kathy's position that the massive wound seen in this frame is also "shadows"?

Edited February 28, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Robin Unger]

If this LIFE blow up indicates damage to the back of the head.

Then why didn't the fixers ( fix it )

If these conspiritors were smart enough to sync all the assassination films so they match.

why did they leave these frames UNTOUCHED

Click on image to view FULL SIZE

[Don Jeffries]

I respect Robin Unger a great deal. Thus, I'm disappointed to see yet another valued researcher at odds with Jim Fetzer. Having read Robin's posts for a long time, I know he's not normally a combative sort of guy. So...once again, we find that Jim Fetzer's personality seems to be able to fire up nearly everyone.

Imho, the animosity so many feel towards Jim Fetzer stems from his initial forays into the world of film alteration. I have said that I don't feel qualified to really comment on the issue of alteration, but I still feel that intepreting these photos and film frames is a highly subjective business, and is influenced by the bias of the observer. I think that Josiah Thompson's obsessiveness in opposing film alteration, conveying it as a personal-Fetzer-issue in the process, swayed a lot of people in the early stages of the debate. A lot of us read Six Seconds in Dallas as youngsters, and Thompson was an iconic figure in the research community. However, I didn't understand then, and don't understand know, why Jim Fetzer attracts such vitriol from so many people.

Is it the cocksure nature of his conclusions? If so, there are others on this forum who are just as confident they are always right. Is it his condescension towards others? Again, he is not alone there. In all these debates, Jim Fetzer takes at least as many, if not more, punches than he gives out. Certainly, he has never produced anything as offensive as the post Lee Farley aimed at him on another recent thread here. He remains a lightning rod in our little community.

I may be the last one left to say it, but I find Jim Fetzer's contributions to always be interesting. He stimulates discussion like no one else, on this forum and any other he's been a part of. I think that's a very good thing.

[Len Colby]

Don

Where's your outrage at Fetzer labelling Robin and others he is at odds with 'liars'?