Jump to content
The Education Forum

A Way to Tell if the Shots Came From Behind or the Side Front


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This forum is not what it used to be.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I am surprised at how little you people know about the "other" film. It's like the Z-film but it shows more. They wanted it to look like the shots came from the rear. With the Z film you're not shown the car stopping, or the turn onto Elm when a "firecracker" went off. They tried to hide the complicity of the Secret Service agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that Rather was lying about either seeing the film or what it showed. It strikes me how odd it was for him to be so emphatic that the car never stopped. I don't recall that it was an issue at the time and they wanted to get the idea out before some witnesses came forward and said it did stop, It reminds me of a friend I had as a kid and he was sneaking a cigarette in his bedroom. When his mom walked in and asked what the smell was, he answered, "I wasn't smoking a cigarette."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not that we aren't familiar with the "other film" idea;it's that we are concerned that information has been added, and we wanted to see some type of cite, or which of the folk who said they have seen it said it. You just can't throw stuff up, and expect us to believe it. If it is your opinion that Hill slapped her, that's one thing, but if someone else said it, it may be someone other that the folks we know who claimed to have seen it in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

"Some folks are born fabulists. The truth seems boring to them." -- Valenti

Valenti, I am not a xxxx. You have called me that. You will not get away with it. Check your friend Burnham's Forum.

Kathy C

I think you prefer larger-than-life fantasies over boring reality. That doesn't make you a xxxx.

Where did you get this from? Your attitude towards me. I told you everything Rich told me, but he never mentioned Jackie being slapped or pushed. I read that I think on Burnham's forum. Where do you get "fantasies" from? How do you know me? You don't. And if Burnham is involved with this there will be fireworks.

Kathy C

Kathy, apologies for being rude to you. I have been reading your posts for many years and I admire your energy and determination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is, MOST of us have NEVER seen any footage showing Clint Hill slapping Jackie.

To cite that he did, you must also be ready to produce a source for that. Otherwise, it comes off as someone's fantasy.

Where was it seen? Who saw it? Is there a written source, or was this someone's verbal statement? CAN IT BE VERIFIED?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of lack of blood & wound debris on the trunk of JFK's parade car in the z-film:

Josiah Thompson published some black & white Nix film frames in 'Six Seconds In Dallas' & pointed out what he interpreted to be JFK headshot wound debris moving back across the parade car's trunk in the direction of the Queen Mary. In later years, as clear versions of the Nix film became available to the public, Thompson's analysis was demonstrated in JFK forums to be wrong: what he actually was looking at was a reflection of the Bryan pergola's western retaining wall (where BDM was photographed by Phil Willis & Hugh Betzner).

There are several interviews & speaking engagements Clint Hill participated in posted online at YouTube & C-Span. In at least one of them, Mr. Hill indicates that his suit & the hood, fender & windshield of the Queen Mary were all splattered with gore when JFK received his fatal wound. If this thread stays up for awhile, I'll go through them & indicate which one to cite for that info.

Mary Moorman was asked in a fairly recent online interview posted at YouTube if she was splattered with gore when she snapped her famous polaroid photo & Mary replied that she was not.

I've not seen any visuals of either the JFK limo or Queen Mary, while parked at Parkland, having gore splattered on them.

Some film alterationists might argue that the gore was simply painted over in a process known as 'aerial imaging' on an optical printer. Reading an explanation from the person or persons that actually performed the alleged optical deception work has historically been missing in the JFK case. For example, in Doug Horne's Hawkeyeworks z-film alteration analysis, Mr. Horne tells us what was done to the z-film at Hawkeyeworks but as yet cannot provide names of those involved in the alleged optical deception. In the US judicial system, the burden of proof rests on the shoulders of the accuser.

I hope what I've offered here & previously keeps the thread going. The 'other' z-film is a topic of interest for a lot of people globally.

BM

Edited by Brad Milch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that Rather was lying about either seeing the film or what it showed. It strikes me how odd it was for him to be so emphatic that the car never stopped. I don't recall that it was an issue at the time and they wanted to get the idea out before some witnesses came forward and said it did stop, It reminds me of a friend I had as a kid and he was sneaking a cigarette in his bedroom. When his mom walked in and asked what the smell was, he answered, "I wasn't smoking a cigarette."

Hi Daniel

If you think Dan Rather was lying about what the film showed, but actually saw the film, what parts of the film do you believe rather was lying about, beside the limo never stopping?

Coincidentally, the way Rather describes Connally turning around and reaching out with his right arm is described almost identically by a witness atop of the Triple Underpass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of lack of blood & wound debris on the trunk of JFK's parade car in the z-film:

Josiah Thompson published some black & white Nix film frames in 'Six Seconds In Dallas' & pointed out what he interpreted to be JFK headshot wound debris moving back across the parade car's trunk in the direction of the Queen Mary. In later years, as clear versions of the Nix film became available to the public, Thompson's analysis was demonstrated in JFK forums to be wrong: what he actually was looking at was a reflection of the Bryan pergola's western retaining wall (where BDM was photographed by Phil Willis & Hugh Betzner).

There are several interviews & speaking engagements Clint Hill participated in posted online at YouTube & C-Span. In at least one of them, Mr. Hill indicates that his suit & the hood, fender & windshield of the Queen Mary were all splattered with gore when JFK received his fatal wound. If this thread stays up for awhile, I'll go through them & indicate which one to cite for that info.

Mary Moorman was asked in a fairly recent online interview posted at YouTube if she was splattered with gore when she snapped her famous polaroid photo & Mary replied that she was not.

I've not seen any visuals of either the JFK limo or Queen Mary, while parked at Parkland, having gore splattered on them.

Some film alterationists might argue that the gore was simply painted over in a process known as 'aerial imaging' on an optical printer. Reading an explanation from the person or persons that actually performed the alleged optical deception work has historically been missing in the JFK case. For example, in Doug Horne's Hawkeyeworks z-film alteration analysis, Mr. Horne tells us what was done to the z-film at Hawkeyeworks but as yet cannot provide names of those involved in the alleged optical deception. In the US judicial system, the burden of proof rests on the shoulders of the accuser.

I hope what I've offered here & previously keeps the thread going. The 'other' z-film is a topic of interest for a lot of people globally.

BM

We are victims of incessant brainwashing, Brad, and many of the things that all of us "know" to be true are often a result of this brainwashing.

Below is a link to Part 2 of an interview Mary Moorman gave in 2012.

Beginning at about the 1:00 mark, she describes taking her famous photo and how she heard a "sound" at the moment she snapped the photo. However, at about the 1:55 mark, she then tells the interviewer she heard two more of these "sounds" after the first one.

Of course, though, it is common knowledge that the fatal bullet hit JFK at the same moment she took her photo, but is this just more propaganda?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that Rather was lying about either seeing the film or what it showed. It strikes me how odd it was for him to be so emphatic that the car never stopped. I don't recall that it was an issue at the time and they wanted to get the idea out before some witnesses came forward and said it did stop, It reminds me of a friend I had as a kid and he was sneaking a cigarette in his bedroom. When his mom walked in and asked what the smell was, he answered, "I wasn't smoking a cigarette."

Several witnesses made statements over the first few days that suggested the limo stopped. Rather saw the film on the Monday after. It only makes sense then that among the things he would note while watching the film was that it did not show a limo stop.

Rather saw the film after the world had been told Oswald fired the shots from behind. He projected onto his viewing of the film that Kennedy went forward as a response to the fatal shot. I don't believe he consciously lied about what he saw.

He was a pretty sloppy journalist, however. His sloppiness is exposed by both his account of viewing the film when he saw it, and when he described it afterwards. He claimed he saw the film on the 23rd, and then reported on it just afterwards. OOPS! He must have run into a time warp, because he didn't get on air until the 25th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that Rather was lying about either seeing the film or what it showed. It strikes me how odd it was for him to be so emphatic that the car never stopped. I don't recall that it was an issue at the time and they wanted to get the idea out before some witnesses came forward and said it did stop, It reminds me of a friend I had as a kid and he was sneaking a cigarette in his bedroom. When his mom walked in and asked what the smell was, he answered, "I wasn't smoking a cigarette."

Several witnesses made statements over the first few days that suggested the limo stopped. Rather saw the film on the Monday after. It only makes sense then that among the things he would note while watching the film was that it did not show a limo stop.

Rather saw the film after the world had been told Oswald fired the shots from behind. He projected onto his viewing of the film that Kennedy went forward as a response to the fatal shot. I don't believe he consciously lied about what he saw.

He was a pretty sloppy journalist, however. His sloppiness is exposed by both his account of viewing the film when he saw it, and when he described it afterwards. He claimed he saw the film on the 23rd, and then reported on it just afterwards. OOPS! He must have run into a time warp, because he didn't get on air until the 25th.

Yeah, he must have made it all up, Pat, "subconscious projection" or some new fangled interpretation, right?

I never get tired of watching you do damage control. One of the few sources of amusement I have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, that 2012 Gary Stover interview of Mary Moorman link you provided is the best interview of a living JFK assassination witness I have ever seen since the event occurred 51 years ago. Mr. Stover did his homework & asked the hard questions other interviewers fail to ask Mary. He even asked her if the Z-film depicts what she saw: Mary's answer, "not really".

If all JFK assassination witnesses were asked the pertinent & controversial issues questions like Mary Moorman was in Mr. Stover's interview, there would be a far greater understanding of how the crime happened & less avenue for debates that lead nowhere IMHO.

BM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, that 2012 Gary Stover interview of Mary Moorman link you provided is the best interview of a living JFK assassination witness I have ever seen since the event occurred 51 years ago. Mr. Stover did his homework & asked the hard questions other interviewers fail to ask Mary. He even asked her if the Z-film depicts what she saw: Mary's answer, "not really".

If all JFK assassination witnesses were asked the pertinent & controversial issues questions like Mary Moorman was in Mr. Stover's interview, there would be a far greater understanding of how the crime happened & less avenue for debates that lead nowhere IMHO.

BM

Yes, I've watched the entire series twice now, and seemed to get more out of it the second time. Gary Stover is an excellent interviewer. I also like the fact that Ms. Moorman puts a great deal of thought into each answer, and does not try to embellish her answers at all.

Of course, the WC apologists will try to tell us she is aged, and that her memory is clouded by her advanced age. However, she seems to me to be very sharp, and in complete control of all her faculties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think that Rather was lying about either seeing the film or what it showed. It strikes me how odd it was for him to be so emphatic that the car never stopped. I don't recall that it was an issue at the time and they wanted to get the idea out before some witnesses came forward and said it did stop, It reminds me of a friend I had as a kid and he was sneaking a cigarette in his bedroom. When his mom walked in and asked what the smell was, he answered, "I wasn't smoking a cigarette."

Several witnesses made statements over the first few days that suggested the limo stopped. Rather saw the film on the Monday after. It only makes sense then that among the things he would note while watching the film was that it did not show a limo stop.

Rather saw the film after the world had been told Oswald fired the shots from behind. He projected onto his viewing of the film that Kennedy went forward as a response to the fatal shot. I don't believe he consciously lied about what he saw.

He was a pretty sloppy journalist, however. His sloppiness is exposed by both his account of viewing the film when he saw it, and when he described it afterwards. He claimed he saw the film on the 23rd, and then reported on it just afterwards. OOPS! He must have run into a time warp, because he didn't get on air until the 25th.

Yeah, he must have made it all up, Pat, "subconscious projection" or some new fangled interpretation, right?

I never get tired of watching you do damage control. One of the few sources of amusement I have.

There are plenty of liars about the case, both in the government and in the media. But I don't think Rather was knowingly one of them. There were a number of CBS specials on the assassination in the seventies and eighties in which CBS and Rather took a wait-and-see, well-maybe attitude toward the assassination and the possibility of a conspiracy. Today, Rather is one of those geezers who claims he's always been open to the possibility there was more to it than Oswald, and that he'd readily accept there was a conspiracy should any evidence emerge, but that nothing has ever emerged. He's full of malarkey, of course. I'd bet 10 to 1 he's read no more than five books on the assassination over the past 30 years, and thinks if the ARRB uncovered anything of importance someone would have told him about it. In other words, I suspect he's in a bubble when it comes to this issue.

Which makes him no worse than 90% of the journalists from his era.

P.S. Rather was shown the film twice, if I recall, and at full speed. He then ran over to the station to report what it portrayed. When one compares his account to others who were given a chance to study the film, it's remarkable he got as much right as he did. What? You think he was told to lie about the film?

Because he admitted that yes, he was told to lie about the film. But not about the head shot. He was told to downplay Mrs. Kennedy's climbing out of the car, as it made her look cowardly.

From chapter 1 at patspeer.com:

Wrong, Wrong, Rather

Meanwhile, in radio and TV land, a whole new reign of error was beginning. CBS newsman Dan Rather, after viewing the home movie of the assassination taken by Abraham Zapruder, rushed back to the studio to describe the film for CBS News' radio and television audience. His description was to have many unfortunate consequences. (This first transcript was published by Richard Trask in Pictures of the Pain.)

Dan Rather (Radio Take 1): "Well, let me tell you then, give you a word picture of the motion picture we have just seen. The President's automobile which was preceded by only one other car containing Secret Service Agents...the President's open black Lincoln automobile made a turn, a left turn off of Houston Street in Dallas onto Elm Street, this was right on the fringe area of the downtown area. This left turn was made right below the window from which the shot was fired...as the car made the turn, completed the turn--went below the window from which this shot was fired...went on past the building--keep in mind the window was on the sixth floor...it got about 35 yards from the base of the building...that is if you had dropped a plumb line from the window to the sidewalk to...the President's car was around 35 yards from that spot...President Kennedy had just put his right hand up to the side of his right eye. It appeared that he was perhaps brushing back his hair or rubbing his eyebrow. Mrs. Kennedy was not looking in his direction. In front of them in the jump seat of the Lincoln...were Governor and Mrs. Connally. The Governor, as was the President, was on the side of the car of the building in which the assassin was located. Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally were on the opposite side. Two Secret Service men on the front seat...At almost the instant the President put his hand up to his eyebrow...on the right side of his face, with Mrs. Kennedy looking away, the President lurched forward just a bit. Uh, it was obvious he had been hit in the movie but you had to be looking very closely in order to see it. Mrs. Kennedy did not appear to be aware that he was hit but Governor Connally in the seat just in front of the President, seemingly heard the shot...or sensed that something was wrong...Governor Connally, whose coat button was open, turned in such a way to extend his right hand out towards the President and the Governor seemed to have a look on his face that might say "What is it? What happened?" And as he turned he exposed his entire shirt front and chest because his coat was unbuttoned...at that moment a shot very clearly hit that part of the Governor. He was wounded once with a chest shot, this we now know...Uh, the Governor fell back in his seat...Mrs. Connally immediately fell over the Governor. Uh, I say fell, she threw herself over the Governor and at that instant the second shot the third shot total but the second shot hit President Kennedy and there was no doubt there, his head...went forward with considerable violence."

(Note: Rather's description here is quite controversial. As Kennedy's head actually goes slightly forward, and then back and to the left with considerable violence, many see his saying that Kennedy went forward with considerable violence as a deliberate lie designed to sell the American people that the fatal shot came from behind. If it is true that Rather was trying to sell the American people the single-assassin scenario, however, it back-fired, as he also claimed the film showed Connally being hit well after Kennedy had first been hit, which is in conflict with the single-bullet theory so central to the single-assassin conclusion.)

Rather then described the aftermath of the shooting: "Mrs. Kennedy stood up immediately her mouth wide open...The President slumped over against Mrs. Kennedy almost toppling her over as she was standing...Mrs. Kennedy then threw herself out of the back seat of the car onto the trunk of the car almost on all fours...stretched out over the trunk of the car...There was a Secret Service man standing on the back bumper. It would appear that Mrs. Kennedy was either trying to get herself out of what she knew instinctively was danger or perhaps was trying to grab the Secret Service man and pull him into the back seat of the car for help. At any rate Mrs. Kennedy was prone, uh face down on the back of the car on the trunk...The Secret Service man leaned over put his hands on her shoulders and shoved her back into the car. He seemed to be in danger of perhaps rolling or falling off the back. A Secret Service man in the front seat of the car uh was already on the telephone perhaps he had been on the phone all along it was not clear and the car sped away."

Rather then answered a few questions from his fellow newsmen Richard Hotelett and Hughes Rudd. When asked if the limo ever stopped, he replied "The car never stopped, it never paused." When asked the length of the film, he replied "Well, the complete scene that I just described to you covers exactly 20 seconds--that is from the time the car made the turn until the car disappeared onto an underpass." When asked if the President was hit twice, he then added: "It was very clear that the President was hit twice. He was hit, Governor Connally was hit and the Gov...uh the President was hit again." When asked the length of the shooting sequence itself, he then offered: "No more than five seconds and I...am inclined to think slightly less than that perhaps."

(Note: when all is said and done, this was perhaps Rather's biggest mistake. By assuming that the fatal head shot was the third shot, and timing the shooting sequence from the first hit to the final hit, without accepting that there could have been a miss--without studying the eyewitness testimony, moreover, to see that there very likely was a miss--Rather thoroughly misled the public.)

Rather was then rushed onto television to describe the film to Walter Cronkite during CBS News' ongoing coverage of the assassination and aftermath. The time was approximately 4:07 PM EST. (Transcript created from the video on Youtube.)

Dan Rather (TV Take 1): "We have just returned from seeing a complete motion picture of the moments preceding, and the moments of, President Kennedy’s assassination and the shooting of Texas Governor John Connally. Here is what the motion picture shows. The automobile, the black Lincoln convertible, with the top down - carrying, in the front seat, two secret service agents; in the middle, or jump seat, the Governor and Mrs. Connally; and, in the rear seat, President and Mrs. Kennedy – made a turn off of Houston Street, on the fringe of downtown Dallas, on to Elm Street. This was a left turn and was made right in front of the building from which the assassin’s bullet was fired. After making the turn, and going about 35 yards from the corner of the building – six stories up in which the assassin had a window open – and keep in mind here that President Kennedy and Governor Connally are seated on, both on the same side of the car, on the side facing the building. Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally are on the side of the car away from the assassin. About 35 yards from the base of the building, President Kennedy, in the film, put his hand up to the right side of his face, the side facing the assassin. He seemingly wanted to brush back his hair, or perhaps rub his eyebrow. Mrs. Kennedy at this moment was looking away, or looking straight ahead. She was not looking at her husband. At that moment, when the President had his right hand up to this side of his face (gestures), he lurched just a bit forward. It was obvious that the first shot had hit him. Mrs. Kennedy was not looking at him, nor did she appear to know at that instant that her husband had been hit. Governor Connally, in the seat immediately in front of the President, apparently either heard the shot or sensed that something was wrong because, Governor Connally, with his coat open, his button was undone, turned in this manner (turns back to his right with right arm extended), his hand outstretched, back toward the President; and the Governor had a look on his face that would indicate he perhaps was saying “What’s wrong?” or “What happened?” or “Can I help?” or something. But as Governor Connally was turned this way, his white shirt front exposed well to the view of the assassin, the Governor was obviously hit by a bullet, and he fell over to the side. Governor Connally’s wife, immediately, seemingly instantaneously, placed herself over her husband in a protective position, it appeared; and as Governor Connally fell back, President Kennedy was still leaned over. At that moment another bullet obviously hit the head of the President. The President’s head went forward, violently, in this manner (gestures). Mrs. Kennedy, at that instant, seemed to be looking right-square at her husband. She stood up. The President slumped over to the side and, I believe, brushed against Mrs. Kennedy’s dress. Mrs. Kennedy immediately turned and flung herself on the trunk of the automobile, face-down on the trunk, almost on all-fours. The First Lady appeared to be either frantically trying to get the secret service man who was riding on the bumper of the car - the single secret service man riding on that bumper - to come into the car or to tell him what had happened; or perhaps, from the picture, it appeared she might have been trying to get out of the car some way. The car never stopped. The secret service man in the front seat had a telephone in his hand. The car…its acceleration increased rapidly and it disappeared under an underpass. Three shots - the first one hitting President Kennedy, the second one hitting Governor Connally, the third one hitting the President – consumed, possibly, five seconds. Not much more than that, if any. That is the scene shown in about twenty seconds of film that the FBI has in its possession. The film was taken by an amateur photographer who was in a very advantageous position, and who had his camera trained on the President’s car from the time it made the turn in front of the assassin until it disappeared on its way to the hospital. This is Dan Rather in Dallas."

A short time later, he once again described the film to Cronkite. The time was approximately 4:21 PM EST. (Transcript created from the video on Youtube).

Dan Rather (TV Take 2): "We have just returned from seeing a complete motion picture of the moments immediately preceding, and the moments of, President Kennedy’s assassination. The motion picture shows the limousine carrying: in the front seat, two secret service men; in the middle, or jump seat, Governor and Mrs. John Connally of Texas; and, in the rear seat, President and Mrs. Kennedy; a single secret service man standing on the back bumper; the top of the black Lincoln convertible down. The car made a turn, a left turn, off of Houston Street, on to Elm Street, on the fringe of Dallas’ down-town area; that turn made directly below the sixth floor window from which the assassin’s bullets came. After the left turn was completed, the automobile, with only one car in front of it - a secret service car immediately in front – the President’s car proceeded about 35 yards from the base of the building in which the assassin was. President Kennedy and Governor Connally were seated on the same side of the open car, the side facing the building: Mrs. Kennedy and Mrs. Connally on the side of the car opposite the assassin. President Kennedy is clearly shown to put his right hand up to the side of his face as if to either brush back his hair, or perhaps rub his eyebrow. Mrs. Kennedy at that instant is looking away, and is not looking at the President. At almost that instant, when the President has his hand up to this side of his face (gestures), he lurches forward something in this manner (gestures): The first shot had hit him. Mrs. Kennedy appeared not to notice. Governor Connally, in the seat right in front of the President – by the way, the Governor had his suit coat open, his suit was not buttoned – perhaps either heard the shot or somehow he knew something was wrong because the picture shows just after that first shot hit the President, the Governor turned in something this manner, with his right arm stretched back toward the President, as if to say “What’s wrong?” or “What happened?” or say something. It exposed the entire white front shirt of the Governor to the full view of the assassin’s window; and as the Governor was in this position, and President Kennedy behind him was slumped slightly over, a shot clearly hit the front of Governor Connally; and the Governor fell back over toward his wife. Mrs. Connally immediately put herself over her husband in a protective position, and as she did so, in the back seat, this time with Mrs. Kennedy’s eyes apparently right on her husband, the second shot – the third shot in all – the second shot hit the President’s head. His head went forward, in a violent motion, pushing it down like this (leans forward, lowering his head as he does so). Mrs. Kennedy was on her feet immediately. The President fell over in this direction (leans to his left). It appeared his head probably brushed or hit against Mrs. Kennedy’s legs. The First Lady almost immediately tried to crawl on – did crawl on - to the trunk of the car, face-down, her whole body almost was on that trunk, in something of an all-fours position. She appeared to be either trying to desperately get the attention of the secret service man on the back bumper, or perhaps she was stretching out toward him to grab him, to try to get him in. Or perhaps even trying to get herself out of the car. But the car was moving all the time, and the car never stopped. The secret service man on the back bumper leaned way over and put his hands on Mrs. Kennedy’s shoulders – she appeared to be in some danger of falling or rolling off that trunk lid. He pushed her back into the back seat of the car. In the front seat, a secret service man was with a phone in his hand. The car speeded up and sped away. It never stopped, the car never paused. That’s what the film of the assassination showed. The film was taken by an amateur photographer who had placed himself in an advantageous position: eight millimeter color film. This is Dan Rather in Dallas."

And that wasn't the last of it. Several hours later (one source claims at 8:26 PM EST) Rather described the film to Cronkite for a third and final time, and compounded his mistakes. (Transcript created from the video on Youtube.)

Dan Rather (TV Take 3): "The films we saw were taken by an amateur photographer, who had a particularly good vantage point, just past the building from which the fatal shot was fired. The films show President Kennedy's open, black limousine, making a left turn, off Houston Street on to Elm Street on the fringe of downtown Dallas, a left turn made just below the window in which the assassin was waiting. About 35 yards past the very base of the building, just below the window, President Kennedy could be seen to, to put his right hand, up to the side of his head to, either brush back his hair or perhaps rub his eyebrow. President Kennedy was sitting on the same side of the car, as the building from which the shot came. Mrs. Kennedy was by his side. In the jump seat in front of him, Mrs. Connally, and Governor Connally, Governor Connally on the same side of the car as the president. And in the front seat, two Secret Service men. Just as the president put that right hand up to the side of his head, he, you could see him, lurch forward. The first shot had hit him. Mrs. Kennedy was looking in another direction, and apparently didn't see, or sense the first shot, or didn't hear it. But Governor Connally, in the seat in front, appeared to have heard it, or at least sensed that something was wrong. The Governor's coat was open. He, he reached back in this fashion, exposing his white shirt front to the assassin’s window, reached back as if to, to offer aid or ask the president something. At that moment, a shot clearly hit the governor, in the front, and he fell back in his seat. Mrs. Connally immediately threw herself over him in a protective position. In the next instant, with this time Mrs. Kennedy apparently looking on, a second shot, the third total shot, hit the president's head. He, his head can be seen to move violently forward. And, Mrs. Kennedy stood up immediately, the president leaned over her way. It appeared that he might have brushed her legs. Mrs. Kennedy then, literally went on the top of the trunk, of the Lincoln car, p-put practically her whole body on the trunk. It, it appeared she might have been on all fours, there, reaching out for the Secret Service man, the lone Secret Service man who was riding on the bumper of the car, the back bumper on Mrs. Kennedy's side. Uh, the Secret Service man leaned forward and put his hands on Mrs. Kennedy's shoulder to, push her back into the car. She was in some danger, it appeared, of rolling off or falling off. And when we described this before, there was some question about what we meant by Mrs. Kennedy being on the trunk of the car. Only she knows, but it appeared that she was trying desperately to, to get the Secret Service man's attention or perhaps to help pull him into the car. The car never stopped, it never paused. In the front seat, a Secret Service man was, was on the telephone. The car picked up speed, and disappeared beneath an underpass. This is Dan Rather in Dallas."

(Note: in this, his fourth and final description of the Zapruder film, Rather repeated his inaccurate claim Kennedy's head went forward in response to the fatal head shot, but retreated from his speculation Mrs. Kennedy climbed onto the back of the limo while instinctively running from danger. In his 1977 book, The Camera Never Blinks, in which he acknowledged his mistake about the movement of Kennedy's head, but mistakenly claimed that he viewed the film on Saturday the 23rd, Rather did shed some light on something of interest: the reasons for his retreat. He admitted that "an editor" in New York told him to "leave out the part about her trying to flee." And that he did.)

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, that 2012 Gary Stover interview of Mary Moorman link you provided is the best interview of a living JFK assassination witness I have ever seen since the event occurred 51 years ago. Mr. Stover did his homework & asked the hard questions other interviewers fail to ask Mary. He even asked her if the Z-film depicts what she saw: Mary's answer, "not really".

If all JFK assassination witnesses were asked the pertinent & controversial issues questions like Mary Moorman was in Mr. Stover's interview, there would be a far greater understanding of how the crime happened & less avenue for debates that lead nowhere IMHO.

BM

While I agree Stover did a good job, it should be acknowledged that his interview of Moorman was announced in advance and that numerous researchers submitted questions to Stover for the interview. This makes the interview unique in format as well as quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...