Proof of Motorcade Stopping?

[Pamela Brown]

As many of you know, for many years I worked as a police motorcycle escort officer for State Motor Patrol and later for California Motor Patrol. I was also a Certified Instructor for the California Highway Patrol's Motorcycle Safety Training Program. There is a very strong camaraderie that is shared among members of that rather elite (if I may say so myself) membership. During that time I became good friends with the late, Nick Prencipe. Nick had since retired from his job as lead Police Motorcycle Escort Officer for the [Washington] D.C. Park Police. Nick was the lead Police Escort Officer "point man" for all presidential motorcades in and around Washington, DC in support of the Secret Service Presidential Protection Detail. When he retired, the DC Park Police also retired his license plate with him, giving it to him as a memento. That license plate number reads: US Gov 1 --- IOW: It was the very first Federal Issue, "US Gov" plate ever produced. Hence the # 1.

I interviewed Nick Prencipe for "SS100X" in Car Crash Culture in 2000. I did my best to be objective about what he had to say, and I did confirm that he was on duty that night, though I was not able to find out where. I did not find his story credible. He did not know what time the limo returned. He thought Greer was with the limo. His story had many flaws. He had apparently been prepped by others ahead of time. Most telling of all, when I asked him where the t+t hole was that he thought he saw, he gave me a location other than that of Fetzer's spiral nebulae. As you can imagine, this caused great consternation in the Fetzer camp. Anyone who chooses to give any credence to what he says will find themselves going around in circles....and, well, Fetzered, imo...

[Pamela Brown]

A intentional shot thru the windshield does one other thing, in a true investigation the location of a shooter could be pinpointed.

If a hole in the windshield caused the frontal throat injury, tracing back to the rifle would be simple and absolutely proof of a conspiracy.

They would not have chanced this shot. IMO

Pamela, I agree with you that professionals would not create this evidence intentionally.

Thanks, Robert...I do think the shooters were smarter than that. They managed to kill one person, nearly kill a second, and narrowly miss a third (Jackie, who imo climbed out on the trunk to get away from them). The damage to the limo was minimal. A ding to the windshield, shown in CE350 and also Altgens 1-7, and perhaps a hit to the chrome molding, shown in CE 349.

LHO was using a $12 M/C with a misaligned scope. He had not had anything to do with the M/C that we know of from the time he put it in Ruth Paine's station wagon in NOLA for the trip to Dallas. He did not practice anywhere that we know of. I have spoken with SA Robert Frazier who did the reenactment and seemed convinced that LHO could have made those shots, but I am not convinced at all.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[Pamela Brown]

Hi Pamela

My question was for those people who believe a bullet went through the windshield.

Once again, how do we know which direction a bullet went through the windshield, if a bullet did indeed go through the windshield?

Well, you did mention my name, so I feel i just have to pitch in -- anyone who is truly Fetzered will claim it can only have come from the front and was the cause of the throat wound. They will claim that a bad copy of the Altgens 1-6 shows a 'spiral nebulae' and that this spot was agreed upon by numerous witnesses (that is false.) :-0

Edited January 23, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[Greg Burnham]

I interviewed Nick Prencipe for "SS100X" in Car Crash Culture. I did not find his story credible.

Of course you didn't. Your mind was already made up and you said as much on the Forum when you finally showed up there. Nick Prencipe was advanced in age by the time any of us interviewed him. He had no reason to make this up. It is quite understandable that he could have difficulty with some of his memories, but not with all of them. Nick told me his story BEFORE he had even heard of Jim Fetzer! And Fetzer didn't join the original JFKresearch Forum until much later.

You are persisting in utilizing various devices, all of which are fallacious, to dismiss Nick's account. You began with Guilt by Association (to Fetzer) and have now employed Poisoning the Well by suggesting that anyone who researches Nick's ORAL HISTORY of the events he witnessed is wasting their time.

No matter.

Nick was there. You were not.

[David G. Healy]

A intentional shot thru the windshield does one other thing, in a true investigation the location of a shooter could be pinpointed.

If a hole in the windshield caused the frontal throat injury, tracing back to the rifle would be simple and absolutely proof of a conspiracy.

They would not have chanced this shot. IMO

Pamela, I agree with you that professionals would not create this evidence intentionally.

Thanks, Robert...I do think the shooters were smarter than that. They managed to kill one person, nearly kill a second, and narrowly miss a third (Jackie, who imo climbed out on the trunk to get away from them). The damage to the limo was minimal. A ding to the windshield, shown in CE350 and also Altgens 1-7, and perhaps a hit to the chrome molding, shown in CE 349.

LHO was using a $12 M/C with a misaligned scope. He had not had anything to do with the M/C that we know of from the time he put it in Ruth Paine's station wagon in NOLA for the trip to Dallas. He did not practice anywhere that we know of. I have spoken with SA Robert Frazier who did the reenactment and seemed convinced that LHO could have made those shots, but I am not convinced at all.

and unfortunately YOU can't put LHO in a 6th floor window, ANY window. Unless of course he possessed a magic flute...

[Robert Prudhomme]

I guess, with the rifle shooting 22-32" high at 100 yards, Oswald would not have had to lead JFK at all. Right, Frazier?

[Pamela Brown]

I interviewed Nick Prencipe for "SS100X" in Car Crash Culture. I did not find his story credible.

Of course you didn't. Your mind was already made up and you said as much on the Forum when you finally showed up there. Nick Prencipe was advanced in age by the time any of us interviewed him. He had no reason to make this up. It is quite understandable that he could have difficulty with some of his memories, but not with all of them. Nick told me his story BEFORE he had even heard of Jim Fetzer! And Fetzer didn't join the original JFKresearch Forum until much later.

You are persisting in utilizing various devices, all of which are fallacious, to dismiss Nick's account. You began with Guilt by Association (to Fetzer) and have now employed Poisoning the Well by suggesting that anyone who researches Nick's ORAL HISTORY of the events he witnessed is wasting their time.

No matter.

Nick was there. You were not.

False claim. You were not present either.

With all due respect, you seem to have put the cart before the horse. I can't imagine what you mean by saying I 'finally showed up here' -- you must be referencing the thread, as I have been a part of the Ed Forum for quite a while. In addition, I was the first researcher to interview Nick Prencipe. I had no preconceptions. I was excited to find what I hoped would be new information that would add definition to my area of research. After that experience I weighed and evaluated Nick's statements and I even told him my concerns. I did my job. Please don't twist my words.

I did not realize until much later that Fetzer had been in the background all along, but that proved to be the case with Nick, as it was with Whitaker and also with Judyth. I have paid my dues trying to fight my way through Fetzer's false history. It is my intent to simply warn others of what they are in for if they bite into it. Apparently you have. Your choice.

Nick Prencipe was not there. Vaughn Ferguson was, however, and his chronology and insights define just what happened to the limo after the assassination. It is Ferguson that Fetzer was out to destroy imo. The moment I published the Ferguson Memo that NARA had sent to me by mistake at my website, everything turned upside down. And as far as Fetzer goes, I do take him personally. He put me under attack right from the start. Ironically, at that time he was teaching at UMD which was also where a family member was studying. That was a bit strange...

Edited January 26, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[Pamela Brown]

A intentional shot thru the windshield does one other thing, in a true investigation the location of a shooter could be pinpointed.

If a hole in the windshield caused the frontal throat injury, tracing back to the rifle would be simple and absolutely proof of a conspiracy.

They would not have chanced this shot. IMO

Pamela, I agree with you that professionals would not create this evidence intentionally.

Thanks, Robert...I do think the shooters were smarter than that. They managed to kill one person, nearly kill a second, and narrowly miss a third (Jackie, who imo climbed out on the trunk to get away from them). The damage to the limo was minimal. A ding to the windshield, shown in CE350 and also Altgens 1-7, and perhaps a hit to the chrome molding, shown in CE 349.

LHO was using a $12 M/C with a misaligned scope. He had not had anything to do with the M/C that we know of from the time he put it in Ruth Paine's station wagon in NOLA for the trip to Dallas. He did not practice anywhere that we know of. I have spoken with SA Robert Frazier who did the reenactment and seemed convinced that LHO could have made those shots, but I am not convinced at all.

and unfortunately YOU can't put LHO in a 6th floor window, ANY window. Unless of course he possessed a magic flute...

What do you mean 'unfortunately'? Quote me ever trying to put LHO in the TSBD. I got into hot water with Dave Reitzes on aaj because in my essay "SS100X" in Car Crash Culture (Palgrave/Macmillan 2001) I said I thought he was in the lunchroom waiting for a phone call. My position has changed since then. I don't know where he was, but he was not in the S/N.

And what is the quip about the magic flute? I stopped playing the flute by 1963 due to a family near-tragedy. Had I not, I would hope events might have been different. Part of the objective of my research is to do what I can to help get the truth out so everyone can be healed of the horror of these events.

Watching LHO, shot before my eyes was as traumatic for me than JFK's murder two days earlier. I determined to find every shred of evidence I could of his innocence.

I saw JFK at the Army-Navy game in Philadelphia in December, 1961. He came across the 50 yard line during half-time and sat on the Navy side, below me and to my right, for the rest of the game. I felt concerned that there was no protection for him in that large stadium.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[Greg Burnham]

I interviewed Nick Prencipe for "SS100X" in Car Crash Culture. I did not find his story credible.

Of course you didn't. Your mind was already made up and you said as much on the Forum when you finally showed up there. Nick Prencipe was advanced in age by the time any of us interviewed him. He had no reason to make this up. It is quite understandable that he could have difficulty with some of his memories, but not with all of them. Nick told me his story BEFORE he had even heard of Jim Fetzer! And Fetzer didn't join the original JFKresearch Forum until much later.

You are persisting in utilizing various devices, all of which are fallacious, to dismiss Nick's account. You began with Guilt by Association (to Fetzer) and have now employed Poisoning the Well by suggesting that anyone who researches Nick's ORAL HISTORY of the events he witnessed is wasting their time.

No matter.

Nick was there. You were not.

With all due respect, you seem to have put the cart before the horse. I can't imagine what you mean by saying I 'finally showed up here' -- you must be referencing the thread, as I have been a part of the Ed Forum for quite a while. In addition, I was the first researcher to interview Nick Prencipe. I had no preconceptions. I was excited to find what I hoped would be new information that would add definition to my area of research. After that experience I weighed and evaluated Nick's statements and I even told him my concerns. I did my job. Please don't twist my words.

I did not realize until much later that Fetzer had been in the background all along, but that proved to be the case with Nick, as it was with Whitaker and also with Judyth. I have paid my dues trying to fight my way through Fetzer's false history. It is my intent to simply warn others of what they are in for if they bite into it. Apparently you have. Your choice.

Nick Prencipe was not there. Vaughn Ferguson was, however, and his chronology and insights define just what happened to the limo after the assassination. It is Ferguson that Fetzer was out to destroy imo. The moment I published the Ferguson Memo that NARA had sent to me by mistake at my website, everything turned upside down. And as far as Fetzer goes, I do take him personally. He put me under attack right from the start. Ironically, at that time he was teaching at UMD which was also where a family member was studying. That was a bit strange...

I said: "When you finally showed up THERE..." -- (not here)

I am referring to the original JFKresearch Assassination Forum -- aka JFKresarch.com Forum -- aka: Rich DellaRosa's Forum -- which existed for quite a few years (about 6) PRIOR to this forum's birth.

Remember, we banned you from that forum for disruptive behavior in violation of Forum Policy when you persisted in arguing, without merit, the case--not so much against a T&T hole in the windshield, but rather with anything Doug Weldon wrote. You were not the first researcher to interview Nick Prencipe. He was actively posting on our forum (JFKresearch Assassination Forum) by then. Fetzer didn't show up on that forum until YEARS later.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Greg Burnham

[B. A. Copeland]

So here's an interesting thought: If the vehicle indeed slowed down to what some considered a halt, and if this is not present in the extant zfilm (if this "slowing" is in the film then I have a very poor understanding of the term "slowed", "halt", etc.)....then could this logically imply that the film most are familiar with today is not (or I should say "does not") somehow accurately record the shooting (or at the very least, the vehicle and driver's actions) as it actually occurred on that very tragic day?

Hi B. A.,

Good to see you here again.

My "take" on it is that the limo did not come to a complete stop but did slow down dramatically for a second or two. I think the witnesses who said that it came to a complete stop just noticed the red brake lights coming on as Greer braked, saw the limo slow down abruptly as Hill was running towards it, trying to climb aboard, and then saw the limo rapidly accelerate away, and due to the dreamlike and hectic "confusion of the moment", later thought they remembered seeing the limo actually stop, but it hadn't.

But then again, I'm probably wrong, and I'm just a "dumb cluck" who's suffering from a very severe case of "Cognitive Dissonance".

LOL

--Tommy

Hey there Tom. Thanks for the response. I didn't want any reader of my post to get caught up in the "slowed or stop" issue because I'm sure many of us agree that at the very least or minimum, the car certainly slowed before the fatal headshot. What I wanted to show was that, logically speaking, if the vehicle did indeed slow down from it's initial speed beginning at the turn onto Elm, that slowing is not shown in the film and if it isn't, we're back to the zfilm issue again whether we like it or not. The film "somehow" isn't giving us an accurate representation of the events which it was supposed to have recorded unmolested.

If you were the perps you would be downright stupid not to tamper with the greatest and most powerful "visual" witness (the film) if you're aiming for a coverup on such a grand scale, it's just common sense. It's great to see many of you here again and thanks again for your insightful response.

[Pamela Brown]

I said: "When you finally showed up THERE..." -- (not here)

I am referring to the original JFKresearch Assassination Forum -- aka JFKresarch.com Forum -- aka: Rich DellaRosa's Forum -- which existed for quite a few years (about 6) PRIOR to this forum's birth.

Remember, we banned you from that forum for disruptive behavior in violation of Forum Policy when you persisted in arguing, without merit, the case--not so much against a T&T hole in the windshield, but rather with anything Doug Weldon wrote. You were not the first researcher to interview Nick Prencipe. He was actively posting on our forum (JFKresearch Assassination Forum) by then. Fetzer didn't show up on that forum until YEARS later.

False and misleading. I felt that I was put in a very difficult situation. The Weldon witness made many bizarre statements about the limo in his initial interview (which was later suppressed in favor of the sanitized version)-- such as that what he saw was a "Ford convertible" he had seen at an assembly plant at the Rouge, and so on. I went to the Henry Ford Museum researchers and spent my own time and money for them to research those claims. I then presented the info to the group, and that effort was met with ridicule. But being treated badly in a false forum is a small price to pay to bring actual information and documentation to the research community. I learned that the hard way, if I may say so...

You are incorrect in regards to interviewing Nick Prencipe. I was not referencing his participation on the RDR forum. I was the first one to formally interview him by phone. Weldon did the second interview. I was there. You were not.

Ironically, your statement gives credence to the possibility that I was, in fact, lured into the RDR forum for the sole purpose of being discredited by Fetzer and Weldon and then 'blamed' when that agenda did not work as planned. Perhaps you can fill us in on that. That 'forum' was a bully playground from my viewpoint. It was also called the 'disinfo board'. That imo is largely because Fetzer was there. I was, at the time, considered something of a hero by others who had also been banned, so the experience, though painful, did have some positive value.

I felt that I was trolled and sandbagged by Weldon, who happened to be a prosecutor, and who treated me like a hostile witness, and Fetzer, a UMD prof -- two people I ought to have been able to respect. Had the forum been an honest place for research, none of that should have been allowed to happen in the first place. The final straw was when I detailed my conviction that it was the lack of damage to the limo, not a t+t hole through the windshield, that was the most persuasive proof to me that the assassination shooters had been professionals. Fetzer went balllistic and the next thing I knew I was out. Because Fetzer was using UMD email I contacted them to express my concerns at the harrassment I received from him. Although no action was taken at that time, my complaint may have been a factor in his being 'retired' from UMD over another harrassment complaint some years later.

Unfortunately, when researchers drink the Fetzer Kool-aid they have a tendency to try to kill the messenger...that seemed to happen with both Weldon and Della Rosa. I hope it doesn't happen with you.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[Greg Burnham]

Pamela,

I don't think it is appropriate for me to comment further about what transpired on that forum 15+ years ago beyond the following:

"Because the deceased (Principe, Dellarosa, Weldon) can no longer defend themselves they are easier targets for those who could not best them while they were still alive."

Having said that, let me reiterate how inappropriate it is for you to associate Fetzer with Nick. It is an abuse of logic.

I spoke with Nick on the phone in the summer of 1998 for the first time. Neither Nick or I had even met Fetzer (online or otherwise) as of then. Fetzer's first JFK book,"Assassination Science," was not published until the end of that year.

[Jon G. Tidd]

The fight here between Greg and Pamela serves the perps.

The perps killed Kennedy and got officers of the U.S. Government to pin the killing on Oswald.

[Robert Mady]

Jon, 'we' are not really looking for solutions 'we' may be just filling time while we wait to die.

'We' have served the perpetrators since 12:30 p.m. on November 22, 1963.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Pamela Brown]

Pamela,

I don't think it is appropriate for me to comment further about what transpired on that forum 15+ years ago beyond the following:

"Because the deceased (Principe, Dellarosa, Weldon) can no longer defend themselves they are easier targets for those who could not best them while they were still alive."

Having said that, let me reiterate how inappropriate it is for you to associate Fetzer with Nick. It is an abuse of logic.

I spoke with Nick on the phone in the summer of 1998 for the first time. Neither Nick or I had even met Fetzer (online or otherwise) as of then. Fetzer's first JFK book,"Assassination Science," was not published until the end of that year.

Greg,

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I don't suppose you might consider the possibility that you were unaware of some things that were taking place in the forum? I am disappointed that I was unable to persuade you to help stop what I felt was harrassment then, as I would wish that you might have some empathy for what happened to me in that forum now. However, I do accept your position and hope that you will also acknolwege my perspective on my experiences.

I must respectfully disagree with your limited opinion of Fetzer's influence on, at least, everything that involved the limo, in regards to the RDR forum. I am referencing Fetzer's influence regarding Nick in the sequence of events that culminated in my interviewing him. I do believe Nick was put in an odd situation. Whose idea was it for me to interview Nick before Weldon did? Do you know? I doubt that was Weldon's idea -- I do think it may have been Fetzers. Just my opinion. However, I was there, so I do have a unique perspective on this.

In addition, when I was involved with Judyth, she repeatedly made the odd statement, "I was told not to trust you." "By whom?" I would ask. I never received a response. It dawned on me at that point that someone had convinced Judyth to contact me in 2003 and that she may not have done so on her own initiative. When Fetzer became really outspoken here in his support for Judyth, I felt I had my answer...

From my perspective, Fetzer tried to insinuate three witnesses he knew had no credentials into my research -- the 'nameless' witness who was revealed as Whitaker in 2003, Nick Prencipe, and Judyth. I am speaking from my own perspective and I stand by my experiences with Fetzer.