Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Woman Who Brought The Z Film to Hoover


Recommended Posts

I ran across this story recently about a play that was put on called 'Frame 312'.

http://thevillager.com/villager_31/womanhaunted.html

But the interesting part was that the playwright claimed that this was based on a real story:

<I wrote Frame 312 around two years ago, after Id met an actual woman who had indeed worked at Time/Life in the 1960s. She was one of the first people who, with her editor, watched the Zapruder film, and, yes, when the FBI asked to see the film, it was she who took it, in her handbag, by train, to Washington and J. Edgar Hoover.

Its all true. An amazing story. And in fact shes a relative of mine, a distant relative whom I did not know. She lives somewhere in the South, thats all I should say, and is a housewife and does have children. I told her I might want to write something about this someday. I did a lot of research, and then when I sent her the finished play, she said: Its good that these questions are being raised.>

Has anyone ever heard of this woman? And how did the Z film get to Time in NY? One would presume this all happened relatively quickly after the assassination. But who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a huge amount of time has been spent tracing the movement of the Z film and in particular how the FBI got its copy. I'm looking forward to some posts on this as this story adit certainly does not match my memory of the research and the thought of Hoover waiting for a secretary coming on a train rather than having his agents hand carry it is interesting - especially since other items of evidence were being hand carried or hand delivered by airline crew members.

As a matter of fact by now somebody must have posted a flow chart showing the movements of the original and each copy....would be nice to see a link to that for reference.

What do you say Z film gurus, its this really a true story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris / Larry / Ron:

The flow chart that Larry refers to is one I created back in 2010, in conjunction with my presentation for the JFK Lancer Conference in November of that year (as I was unable to travel, it was presented on my behalf by Randy Owen). The flow chart in question, and the slides from my presentation, are still available on-line at http://www.jfklancer.com/zapruder/Tabular_Z%20Film_Chronology.html

My research into the history of the film continued after 2010, so I can fill in a few more details of how the film got to the FBI on the Saturday evening.

On Saturday morning, one of the two copies of the film given by Zapruder to the Secret Service on Friday night was loaned by Secret Service Inspector Kelley to SA Jim Bookhout of the Dallas FBI office, and Bookhout, in the company of SA Robert Barrett (as far as I can determine) took the film back to the Kodak plant in Dallas for an hour long "viewing". Bookhout was also trying to get the film copied in Dallas but failed, so he gave the film to Gordon Shanklin, the SAIC of the Dallas office. just before 5pm, Shanklin phoned FBI HQ in Washington, and (to make a long story short), Shanklin was told to send the film to Washington "immediately". As Ron noted, the film was sent in the personal care of the pilot (who may have been a Capt. Motley) on American Airlines Flight 20 which departed Dallas for Baltimore at 5:20 pm. The flight was met in Baltimore by FBI agents, who brought the film by car to FBI headquarters, a journey of probably less than one hour, which would have put the film in the hands of the FBI in D.C. at approximately 10 pm at the latest.

There is also something of a paper trail for at least part of this sequence of events. Sometime after he got the film from Inspector Kelley that morning, Dallas FBI agent Bookhout completed an official FD340 Receipt Form for “one roll - 8mm color film taken by Abraham Zapruder – 11/22/63”, which was “Sent to FBI Lab” on the same date. Along with a copy of the FD340 form, the National Archives (NARA) also holds what purports to be a photograph of the actual spool of film and the box in which it was held.

So where does this leave Keith Reddin's story of "Lynette Porter"? On the face of it, it doesn't seem to stand up to close scrutiny, but I guess it could refer to a later event, in which Hoover perhaps asked Time-Life for another 'off-the-record' copy of the film for himself - is that possible, or even likely? The article Chris brought to our notice says this event happened "only a few hours" after Oswald was shot - that was Sunday, November 24. By that time, the FBI Lab (and therefore Hoover) already had the film for almost 24 hours. Thoughts, anyone else?

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That JFK Lancer link above does not work for me.


I'm putting together a web article with video clips and so forth about the Zapruder film. The "lady takes the film to DC" story seems to be one of those fascinating side stories of the case, but nothing more than that.


For what it's worth, I believe the Z film, seen as it can be today on the internet, is authentic. Anthony Marsh wrote a good story about why he thinks it's authentic (his is based on how the film gate works and it would have been impossible to fake it). I agree with his assessment, plus I have my own reasons for why it's authentic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Larry.

I've looked for contact info for Keith Reddin, but without any success yet. "Frame 312" is a "dramatization of a conspiracy theory", which was also produced in book form in 2002, so I don't know if it is anything other than a good fiction story - I suspect not. However, if anyone can get any further information about the real story behind the book/play, I do have a contact who might be able to tell me if the woman on whom the "Lynette Porter" figure is based was ever an "assistant editor" (or even a very senior secretary) at Life back then.

Edited by Chris Scally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Larry.

I've looked for contact info for Keith Reddin, but without any success yet. "Frame 312" is a "dramatization of a conspiracy theory", which was also produced in book form in 2002, so I don't know if it is anything other than a good fiction story - I suspect not. However, if anyone can get any further information about the real story behind the book/play, I do have a contact who might be able to tell me if the woman on whom the "Lynette Porter" figure is based was ever an "assistant editor" (or even a very senior secretary) at Life back then.

Chris, I couldn't find any contact info for Keith himself, but I did find his literary agent:

http://www.doollee.com/Agents/sBuchwald.htm

Best,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ran across this story recently about a play that was put on called 'Frame 312'.

http://thevillager.com/villager_31/womanhaunted.html

But the interesting part was that the playwright claimed that this was based on a real story:

<I wrote Frame 312 around two years ago, after Id met an actual woman who had indeed worked at Time/Life in the 1960s. She was one of the first people who, with her editor, watched the Zapruder film, and, yes, when the FBI asked to see the film, it was she who took it, in her handbag, by train, to Washington and J. Edgar Hoover.

Its all true. An amazing story. And in fact shes a relative of mine, a distant relative whom I did not know. She lives somewhere in the South, thats all I should say, and is a housewife and does have children. I told her I might want to write something about this someday. I did a lot of research, and then when I sent her the finished play, she said: Its good that these questions are being raised.>

Has anyone ever heard of this woman? And how did the Z film get to Time in NY? One would presume this all happened relatively quickly after the assassination. But who knows.

As I saw a copy of the Zapruder film in NYC in 1964 I am particularly interested in this play. It is my thinking that the copy I saw was from Time-Life. As I have tried to track down information on the copy I saw I have found people willing to provide a bit of information her or there but then they shut up and will say no more. Someone went to a great deal of trouble to get a copy of the Z-film on a movie screen at that time. The insiders know the details. I don't (yet).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Pamela

From what you posted here & what I've read of your experience with the Z-film in the past, I highly suspect you were a victim of a marketing strategy when you first were unexpectedly shown the Z-film at a movie theatre.

From what I remember from marketing professors from my college days (many moons ago), slipping something out to the public that then disappears is a strategy gimmick to generate interest. My guess would be that someone at Time-Life was kicking around the idea of putting out an early version of 'Image Of An Assassination' (or something along those lines). 1964 was just a year from the mega-bucks deal Time-Life had made with Abraham Zapruder. I suspect corporate heads were looking for a way to recover their expense losses or possibly already planning the single-bullet theory dispute team that launched into the 'Matter Of Reasonable Doubt' issue of 1966 that re-ignited the controversy over the WC's 1964 report & launched the JFK researcher career of Josiah Thompson & his 'Six Seconds In Dallas' in 1967. As James DiEugenio has demonstrated in his 1967 CBS JFK Cover-up expose, MSM (particularly CBS) began responding to criticism of the WC by airing rigged & deceptive JFK TV News Specials (usually teamed by Walter Cronkite & Dan Rather). Dan's still around to enjoy the millions he was paid, Uncle Walter dropped out of life many years back. Marketing strategists were involved in all of it.

Speaking of marketing strategies, I can remember quick TV & radio soundbites announcing 'The Beatles Are Coming! following the JFK assassination. At the time it seemed weird, but when the Beatles & their media blitzkrieg finally did hit the USA in early Feb 1964 all the doors were open for them to become fast superstars. In fact, there was a year's backlog of Beatles songs awaiting release before the group ever set foot on American soil.

The older I get, the more brazen marketing types seem to become. Today, when a celeb releases a sex tape or starts showing up in public flashing themselves shamelessly, it's a good bet a new album, movie or concert tour is about to be released for some really big breadwinner in the entertainment world.

In many ways, I envy you, Pamela. Until the public sees JFK's limo make the turn from Houston Street on Elm Street (as Zapruder described to Jay Watson on live Dallas TV before his film was developed), you are one of the select few that actually 'saw' the Z-film. The rest of us have seen something that was monkeyed around with by visuals specialists in an attempt to deceive the global public (reference the collective works of David Lifton & Doug Horne).

FWIW. I doubt the CIA was pulling some type of MKULTRA operation on you in that theatre. In 1964, the company was probably too busy flying in tons of weed that eventually would start showing up at the Middle & Jr. High Schools I attended or was about to attend during that time frame.

Best wishes,

Brad Milch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In many ways, I envy you, Pamela. Until the public sees JFK's limo make the turn from Houston Street on Elm Street (as Zapruder described to Jay Watson on live Dallas TV before his film was developed), you are one of the select few that actually 'saw' the Z-film. The rest of us have seen something that was monkeyed around with by visuals specialists in an attempt to deceive the global public (reference the collective works of David Lifton & Doug Horne).

Brad Milch

I know of others who saw the original film. They are Greg Burnham, Rich Dellarosa (3 times).

Robert Morningstar claims to have the real film. From an old copy he found the turn onto Elm St. It's probably on youtube.

Kathy C

Edited by Kathleen Collins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's Kathleen!!!

Hi again, lady.

May I add a few comments below your parking spot on this thread concerning the Zapruder & other amateur ambush films & still (static) photos Time-Life flashed their big bucks & got their hands on (before other means introduced those films to the public) that a lot of visual specialists now believe have been altered in some way, shape or form & how that alleged alteration took place? I'll toss in a few thoughts about collectors (of all kinds of things) that sometimes die unexpectedly & permit an escape route for what they were hoarding in life that allowed public access, offer Pamela some more speculative possibilities on what may have been transpiring behind the scenes that led to her viewing of the original, unaltered z-film she tells us she saw at a movie theatre in 1964, plus whatever other good stuff may pop into my head along the way (I'm listing all these good things in advance because I forget things easily as the end of my runway approaches, Kathleen). As John Lennon might promise, 'A Splendid Time Is Guaranteed For All' (well....maybe, hopefully)....

First & foremost, a tip of the hat & a salute to the two ladies this thread is fortunate to have visited it so far. A lot of men may not realize it, but not only did a woman suffer unimaginable pain to place them here on Earth, in almost all cases men's survival in life depends on the guidance & help they received from women. In the Animal Kingdom, the survival of the lion pride depends on the hunting skills of the lionesses in that pride that do most, if not all the hunting. They have to be good; if they don't catch prey, the pride doesn't eat. To top that off, the lionesses also raise the cubs & tolerate the lion when he's in a mood to rhumba. It's not easy being a lioness. If the pride had to depend on the King of the Jungle to feed them, the pride most likely would starve.

Those that watch a lot of nature shows on TV or computer screens will note that at times, the lioness will beat the daylights out of her lion, sometimes driving him away from the pride & daring him to return to it. This happens in the human species too. Women sometimes call the police on their mates & insist they make them leave their home. All I will comment about this is that often both (male lions & male humans) did something to incur the wrath, fear or disgust of their mates. Then again, several things might be agitating a female lion or a female human. The lioness may simply want a new lion. Maybe the old lion she has sleeps too much. Something like that. Smart men (like smart lions) will quietly leave & not fight with their mates. She usually (but not always) cools off in time.

Note: This isn't 'playing the woman card'; this is giving credit to where it is due.

It was a woman who first shaped my personal views of JFK's suspicious demise. She was my 5th grade teacher, Mrs. Rodgers. Some time in the past I took David Von Pein back in time in other threads to sit in Mrs. Rodgers' class with me to hear some of what she told us immediately after President Kennedy was ambushed & killed in Dallas and each school day that followed in the weeks & months after the assassination (I have no doubt Mr. Von Pein did not appreciate this trip to the past, but I took him back there anyway to give him a taste of what I experienced in Mrs. Rodgers class...). If the JFK assassination, something she felt was 'fishy', wasn't enough stress for Mrs. Rodgers to handle with a room full of adolescents wondering just what was going on in the adult world with all these shootings & murders in Dallas, the Beatles got dropped into her lap just a couple months later. Now, she had small transistor radios playing Beatle songs in her class & kids not wanting to cut their hair to deal with.....lots of hands being spanked by her ruler & radios being confiscated too. Life wasn't easy for Mrs. Rodgers.

Like the ocean, the subject of the JFK assassination visuals record is a deep subject that takes a long time to reach the bottom of, particularly when considering areas that many believe contain photographic fraud. Fortunately, the Education Forum has some distinguished visuals experts as members (David Healy, David Lifton, Robin Unger being among others) that can add their expertise to anything I may get incorrect in what I am about to comment on in this thread, which is primarily from what I remember seeing around the time the visual was initially released to the public. In addition to notable JFK visuals experts that are EF members or visitors, those interested in the subject are encouraged to refer to some books many consider 'definitive' (such as Richard B. Trask's 1994 book, 'Pictures Of The Pain' or his 1996 book, 'Photographic Memory'), magnificent visuals websites such as those belonging to Pat Speer & David Von Pein & other online resources, such as Mary Ferrell Foundation & The Sixth Floor Museum.

From what I remember & a quick comment before I start:

Education Forum member Douglas Caddy posted a link to a YouTube video not long ago that I checked out & downloaded. I was surprised to see a brief scene in the collection of JFK pre & post ambush films of a man stretched across the back seat of JFK's limo. The limo appears to be traveling fast towards its destination. If this is a scene of Clint Hill guarding the bodies of JFK & Jackie, it is the only video that I know of that depicts JFK & entourage enroute to Parkland other than the Jack Daniel film the HSCA located in the late 1970's before it disbanded. Email inquiries to the film company that posted the video asking for info on the source have not been responded to so far.

What is lost today when one uses the Internet to locate JFK ambush visuals is that most of those visuals were not available to the public immediately following the assassination of JFK. Initially, very little of the visual evidence investigators & news editors were seeing behind closed doors was released to the public in a timely manner. I can still recall what I remember seeing published in newspapers & magazines post-assassination: (note: Researcher & author Pat Speer has a magnificent collection of these visuals assembled in a time-line type display as they were initially released at www.patspeer.com within the chapters he authored & posted online).

At first it was some of the James 'Ike' Altgens photos, the Miller photo (aka the 'Corham photo), the Mary Moorman photo & just a couple more that appeared on TV or in newspapers. That was primarily all there initially was. Other early photos consisted primarily of JFK's limo briefly parked at Parkland hospital, Tom Dillard's series of photos & the series of Zapruder frames released to newspapers & appearing in early issues of Life Magazine, Time or Newsweek. A few frames from the Orville Nix film appeared in the 1964 book 'Four Days' (I believe some Marie Muchmore frames might have been included as well, correct me if I am wrong, please). Films shown to the public besides JFK's arrival at Love Field consisted primarily of NBC cameraman Dave Wiegman, WFAA-TV cameraman Malcolm Couch, WBAP-TV cameraman James Darnell (occupants of one or another of the 3 motorcade camera cars approaching the TSBD on Houston Street during the ambush). Bob Jackson & Presidential aid Dave Powers had both run out of film when the shooting began. Dave Wiegman's film held a clue that sharp eyed visuals analysts noticed many years later suggesting that film had been edited. More on that a bit later...

Some select Orville Nix, Marie Muchmore & Abraham Zapruder frames as well as Phil Willis slides & Robert Croft photos were published in the WC volumes in Sept 1964.

The quality of much of this visual material left a lot to be desired, to put it mildly.

For those following researcher & author James DiEugenio's exposes on CBS TV specials cover-ups here at the Education Forum & CTKA (plus associated links), neither CBS nor NBC released much, if anything, of JFK ambush visuals to the public after films that ran the assassination weekend. The Dave Wiegman film caught a couple frames of JFK's parade car rounding the corner at the same time Zapruder & Sitzman are missing from their filming pedestal in front of the Western shelter (Cupola) of the North Pergola (more on this when I get to the alterations allegations segment) A portion of the joint SS/FBI filmed ambush re-enactments made its debut on the 1st CBS TV special report in late Sept 1964. The re-enactments all excluded the SS follow-up car & occupant stand-ins for them.

In late 1966, public attention exploded to & on Life magazine's 'A Matter Of Reasonable Doubt' issue that challenged the WC's single bullet theory & called for a new investigation into the murder of President Kennedy. That issue was everywhere. It had to have been a blockbuster money maker for Time-Life Before the dust settled & just around the corner, several things were about to happen in 1967:

Josiah Thompson, former Yale professor & member of Life's team that created the 'A Matter Of Reasonable Doubt' issue, would release his blockbuster book, 'Six Seconds In Dallas', Sylvia Meager would release 'Accessories After The Fact', Henry Luce, owner of Life Magazine, would pass away on Feb 28, 1967. A quick visit to Wikipedia will detail what Henry Luce, C.D. Jackson (the man in charge of the Zapruder film purchase & CIA/Henry Luce go between) & their association with the CIA was about. Life magazine would release another issue in 1967 that introduced the public to frames taken from amateur film makers in Dealey Plaza during & after the ambush: Robert Hughes, Tina Towner & Jim Towner, F.M. 'Mark' Bell, Elsie Dorman & Patsy Paschall plus still photos from Wilma Bond.

Keep in mind that most, if not all of this 'new' photographic record slipped right past the WC, the Presidential Commission created by LBJ to gather & analyze all the available evidence in the JFK case. All of this missed photo evidence screams loudly today just how sloppy a job the WC did back in 1964.

CBS responded to this interest & assault on the W.C. by conducting another CBS Special TV Report that ran for 4 consecutive nights that researcher & author James DiEugenio is currently exposing as rigged, deceptive & deceitful in another thread here at the Education Forum.

Coming up: ''Did Time-Life create the birth of the CT'er movement in 1966?' plus 'Who is the father of the Zapruder film alteration allegations?'

Over the years there's been hundred of thousands of words over the subject of the Zapruder film being a victim of tampering or not. Opinions vary as to who started this train of thought in the first place. Some may give the credit to famed researcher & author Mark Lane who brought attention to the splices in the z-film visible in the black & white frames published by the WC in Sept 1964 in his best selling book 'Rush To Judgement'. I'm going to assign the credit to another famed researcher & author: David Lifton & his 1981 blockbuster book, 'Best Evidence'. Those that do not agree with my assessment can comment on it in their own comments in this or other threads if they so desire. For me, Mr. Lifton was the original grand analyst.

One can trace the initial discussion of z-film alteration in depth back to Mr. Lifton in his 1981 book, 'Best Evidence'. The subject was not discussed in the late '70's TV special series, 'The Men Who Killed Kennedy', 1988's PBS Walter Cronkite narrated, 'Who Shot JFK', the early '90's monumental film 'JFK', or the CBS 1992 TV special (featuring Deadpan Dan Rather once again) attempting to debunk the film, 'JFK'.

Online comments & debates over Z-film alteration allegations eventually would make their way to the defunct JFK Lancer Forum (currently being rebuilt), here to the Education Forum and beyond to Mr. Doug Horne expanding on the subject in his book series, 'Inside The ARRB'.

It was those comments & debates that led me to the Education Forum & occasional visits to the Lancer Forum in the first place. One of the visuals analysis experts that contributed much here at EF was the late Jack White. Jack had a large following that appreciated his observations & analysis as well as a few that stalked him & routinely attacked him like hungry sharks. Jack White wouldn't post at Lancer because the website stated repeatedly that it did not believe in Z-film alteration. There was a constant barrage of contributors that DID believe the Z-film was altered in constant battle with webmaster Debra Conway & her assistants. Some of those battles may surface again when the Lancer Forum is returned to life.

I believe every one that believes the Z-film was altered (or not altered) owes a debt of gratitude to Mr. Lifton. He was there first.

How can a person tell if an amateur or professional JFK film has been altered or not?

Film & photo analysis & interpretation can be a lesson in frustration for both the analyst and the person attempting to 'see' what the analyst is pointing out as evidence of tampering. People don't see things exactly the same. Some will 'get it' while others wouldn't see the ocean if they fell into it face first.

With several visuals experts in the house, I'm going to cover this topic very briefly & invite the curious to look at the Dave Wiegman film that is available all over the Internet. Download the best copy of the film you can find, slow it down & perform a frame by frame analysis.

Notice while Mr. Wiegman is on Elm Street (having just jumped out of a motorcade camera car) with his camera activated (running) it catches a couple of frames of JFK's parade car rounding the S-shaped curve on Elm Street (near the pergola sidewalk steps) & a frame or two later to the right the Zapruder pedestal is visible. Neither Abraham Zapruder or receptionist Marilyn Sitzman are seen standing on the concrete block.

As Mr. Wiegman advances towards middle of the North Pergola & focuses on the Hestor couple, more frames of the Zapruder pedestal can bee seen at a closer distance to the camera. Neither Zapruder nor Sitzman can be seen.

We know Mr. Zapruder continuously filmed the JFK parade car on Elm Street until it disappeared into the dark tunnel of the triple overpass by watching his film. So, how can he be missing from the pedestal along with his receptionist there to steady him (Zapruder suffered from vertigo)?

Photo analyst Jack White believed Zapruder & Sitzman were never on the pedestal & their images were added later to a multitude of films & still photos. Other analysts believe Mr. Wiegman's film was edited on an optical printed & that whatever he caught on camera between the last frame depicting JFK's parade car rounding the corner of the curve & the first frame depicting Zapruder & Sitzman missing from the pedestal was edited out of the Wiegman film before it was broadcast on national TV Nov 22, 1963. How else can you explain the anomaly you see?

Next up: Kathleen & I put ourselves in the Robert Hughes film to illustrate some simple alteration techniques most people won't notice in a visual they see. (hint: Kathleen & I will appear in the sniper's nest window visible in the Hughes film. Kathleen will be in the left side of the window because she refused to be at the right side. She thinks spiders might be there, so I had to go there instead)....

It's make believe time. Let's pretend Kathleen & me got on the '11.22.63' film set in the sniper's nest window back in time. Let's say I scared whoever was really there in that window away (we can't say Kathleen scared them away because she might think we're making fun of her. Safer to keep it on me as the culprit....)

Stephen King finishes his filming & looks at the day's 'rushes' & notices me & Kathleen looking out of the TSBD sniper's nest window in his re-enactment of Robert Hughes filming his amateur home movie back in time. Mr. King is very unhappy. It will cost a fortune to re-shoot that scene. How can he quickly & cheaply get rid of either Kathleen, me (or both of us) in his re-enactment footage?

Simple: hand the film footage to an optical printer specialist & instruct him/her to remove me (let's say Mr. King thinks Kathleen is cute & wants to keep her in the footage, but definitely not my ugly mug). The optical printer specialist loads the film, locates the frames that contain my image, extracts his black tip felt marker & colors in a black circle in each frame that depicts my image. Then he/she copies the alteration on the optical printer, trashes the original footage & I am history. When the footage is run in motion a black 'blob' resembling an amoeba squirming around is visible (but not me) in the right side of the window next to Kathleen.

That's basically what one sees when they view the original Robert Hughes film: a couple of black 'blobs' moving around in both sides of the sniper's nest open window, suggesting that whoever was originally there was optically removed by someone who darkened their image.

Look for this technique in other JFK ambush visuals. Most of them have been accused by visuals analysts of being optical tampering victims by either sophisticated techniques or simple ones like I just illustrated. Good examples would include the people standing in the TSBD doorway in the Towner film or the North Pergola roofline in the Charles Bronson film that depicts several black rectangles that don't appear in other visuals. Whatever was originally there in that film was removed by possible simple optical tampering.

Both are indications of possible optical tampering.

As I wrap things up, I'd like to thank Mr. Bennett for allowing me the space in his thread to toss these issues into the food for thought for his readers to consider. Hats off to you, good Sir!

Those interested in the filmography history of the JFK photographers I didn't mention in this post can probably find many examples of their efforts at Robin Unger's photo gallery or my simply Googling their names:

Cecil Stroughton, Thomas Atkins, James Powell, Jay Skaggs, George Jefferies, Dave Powers, Bert Shipp, John Martin, Ernest Mentesana, Jack Daniel, James 'Ike' Altgens, William Allen, Wilma Bond, Frank Cancellare, Henry Burroughs, Tom Dillard

The first researcher to gather & make available to the public a lot of the JFK assassination visuals was Robert Groden.

Finally, I left the question of 'Did Time-Life create the CT movement with it's 1966 special issue 'A Matter Of Reasonable Doubt?' open for the readers of this thread to ask & answer for themselves. Several of my former college professors in the early 1980's felt that Time-Life did just that in order to make money from their ownership of The Z-film that the magazine's upper management had paid an awful lot of money for (close to 1 million dollars in today's money value). Was Time-Life mimicking the strange 'The Beatles Are Coming!' soundbites I can recall hearing unexpectedly on TV & radio shortly after the assassination of JFK in an effort to stir up interest in the z-film that might bring them big revenue? Could that be the reason Pamela Brown got to see the actual z-film & most of the rest of us did not?

The readers decide....

Sincerely,

Brad Milch

Edited by Brad Milch
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...