Marie Muchmore and the See Through Man

[John Butler]

There's a lot more to Mary Moorman that meets the eye.  I think she was trying to tell the truth and this was the closest she could come to it and still maintain she was in front of the Grassy Knoll.

Maybe you can help me or some can.  I remember hearing an interview of Mary Moorman where at the end of the interview she said somewhat sullenly I wasn't wearing white slacks.  Maybe someone out there can help me with this or is this something I just imagined.  Whatever it was it is what started me thinking about Mary Moorman.

What type of shoes was Mary wearing that day?  This is a good question to determine how truthful Mary Moorman's appearance in Dealey Plaza is.

[Alistair Briggs]

The search funciton on the forum may be of help to you here John, as there are plenty of old threads that discuss these issues. For clarity it may be worth finding things of reference and linking to them so others can check for themselves, or quote things here so it is easier to follow along. I remember reading a lot of older threads from Jack White about the photos and the work he did on them.

Edited January 3, 2017 by Alistair Briggs

[John Butler]

The Weaver Photo,

Next on the list is the Weaver photo.  There is nothing to say about this photo that is meaningful.  It just has an interesting camera defect or film defect.  I’m sure that’s what this is.  It seems that President Kennedy is missing one fourth of his head in this photo.  What’s missing is about where the autopsy wound is.  I’m sure this is just some camera of film defect.  But, it is interesting.  I don’t think anyone has mentioned this anywhere.  I may be mistaken.  I'm putting this out here as an example of things people miss.

Sorry, I can post the photo.  I'm only allowed 10 kb.  That means I can't post on Altgens 5 either.

Is this usually the way things work?

 

[Alistair Briggs]

(From Robin Unger's collection)

[John Butler]

Alastair,

At one time Jack White was my hero.  That is until he developed feet of clay over the Altgens photos, Mary Moorman's photo, the identification of Richard Bothun, and the shadows in the backyard photos.

As far as uploading photos.  You are an old hand.  What am I doing wrong?

[John Butler]

Thanks Alastair,

Yeah, that's the photo.  A portion of Kennedy's head is missing above his hand.  That's got to be a defect of some sort just above his little pinky.  I mention it to show how easily things are missed in looking at photos.  Do you know of anyone who has see this or mentioned it?

A blow up would make it easier to see.  I had one prepared to post but can't at this point.

[Alistair Briggs]

The way this forum works is if you just link to the photo it automatically embeds it so one doesn't need to upload it from their computer.

Robin Unger's gallery is a great place to see images - http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/

[John Butler]

There is another interesting thing about the Weaver photo I just noticed.  It can be inserted into a sequence that shows Nellies window.  The sequence goes something like this:

Love Field Photo- Nellie's window- no shade

Weaver Photo-  Nellie's window- no shade

Altgens  4-  no shade

Altgens 5- shaded window

Altgens 6- shaded window

Altgens 7- no shade

I'm sure with the superior Mary Muchmore film one could track this issue well at the corner of Main and Houston and on into Houston Street.  It might be interesting if see what Mary Muchmore shows at about the time of Altgens 5 on the shade/no shade issue. 

This was one of the things I wanted to talk about involving Altgens 5. 

ps:  It appears that in Muchmore frames Nellie's window does not have a shade at about the same position or same position as Altgens 5.

Does this make Altgens 5 a fraud?  Or, the Weaver photo a fraud?  Or, does this make Muchmore a fraud?  The preponderance of the evidence so far indicates Altgens 5 is a fraud.

Once again, why all this tampering with the visuals down at the corner of Main and Houston?

 

Edited January 3, 2017 by John Butler

[Robin Unger]

3 hours ago, John Butler said:

There's a lot more to Mary Moorman that meets the eye.  I think she was trying to tell the truth and this was the closest she could come to it and still maintain she was in front of the Grassy Knoll.

Maybe you can help me or some can.  I remember hearing an interview of Mary Moorman where at the end of the interview she said somewhat sullenly I wasn't wearing white slacks.  Maybe someone out there can help me with this or is this something I just imagined.  Whatever it was it is what started me thinking about Mary Moorman.

What type of shoes was Mary wearing that day?  This is a good question to determine how truthful Mary Moorman's appearance in Dealey Plaza is.

http://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/digitalcollections_baylor11.jpg

[David Josephs]

deleted -

Edited May 23, 2017 by David Josephs

[John Butler]

Thanks Robin,

That is a wonderful photo.  You don't have any problem seeing what type of shoes she has on in that Polaroid taken by Jean Hill. 

There's some problems with her shoes.  In Zapruder she has flat black shoes similar to the Polaroid.  In some frames they don't show very well and you might suspect she has on white shoes.  Jack White did.  However, if you look close enough there is generally a shadow under what appears to be a white shoe indicating flat black shoes.

The problem comes from a Cancellare photo that show Jim Featherstone and Mary Moorman talking in the distance.  If you blow up that section of the photo Mary appears to be wearing high heels. 

She is holding a purse.  Neither She or Jean Hill have a purse in Zapruder or other films.

The length of her raincoat is variable.  In the Polaroid her coat comes down to her ankles.  In Zapruder and other films her raincoat is just below her knees.  In the Cancellare photo is raincoat is midcalf. 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't hold Mary Moorman responsible for anything she has done.  I believe she did the best she could in a very difficult situation.  She has been consistent with her testimony from then until now.  On the other hand I laud and curse Jean Hill.  She was not consistent with her testimony.  Mary and Jean's testimonies diverged the following day.  Jean said one thing Mary said what she has consistently said.

By looking at these things and reading the testimony of the two ladies and looking at the events in the Zapruder film concerning Mary Moorman and Jean Hill the film comes up as very suspicious.

Let me continue this by answering David Josephs.  I sent David by thoughts on Mary Moorman and Jean Hill.  If you want a copy send me an email address.   

[John Butler]

David,

I felt we weren't communicating.  Most of the reasoning behind what I was saying you were ignoring.  I thought you were trying to confuse me with a bewildering array of different arguments.  The work you sent on the Hill no. 5 exhibit I thought was over the line.  The bit about Mary's stance I thought was unreasonable.  Of course one person does not stand the say way all of the time. 

Thanks for putting together an image that says part of what I am trying to explain.  The wording is good.  If you compare the Cancellare photo Mary does have a purse.  She doesn't in Zapruder or other films.

I don't mind making trips over into Kook Land.  Sometimes you pick up interesting things. 

There is another set of women that you can include in this photo.  They are the woman in the tan coat with a white collar and her taller companion visible in Elsie Dorman.  They are visible in that spot where the grey haired woman in the flat black hat and her red haired companion are in Zapruder.  The pair in Zapruder are not shown in Elsie Dorman.  That makes 3 sets of women I'm testing to see if there appearance can be related to Mary's since what we are seeing of Mary in the Zapruder film is false.  The behavior of the two women in black in Zapruder more clearly matches their behavior as testified to in their FBI statements.

David is right I do love to talk about Mary and Jean.  They are the most fascinating characters.

I know talking about Mary and Jean puts me on thin ice.  Based on what I thought I heard in an interview and the differences between her Polaroid, the Zapruder film and others, and the Cancellare film one can be suspicious of what she was wearing that day. 

I might add here that one of Mary's relatives or people she knew was shot in the head when he testified that he did not see Oswald at the Tippitt murder scene.  Later, after surviving the shooting he did change his tune and say yes it was Oswald.  

[Robin Unger]

This thread has some of the worst photo analysis i have ever seen.

I tried to help bring it back from the edge of insanity, but it is a lost cause.

[Alistair Briggs]

Robin can I just take this opporunity to say a big thanks to you for your gallery, it is a great resource.

Regards

[John Butler]

Thanks Robin,

That is a wonderful photo.  You don't have any problem seeing what type of shoes she has on in that Polaroid taken by Jean Hill. 

There's some problems with her shoes.  In Zapruder she has flat black shoes similar to the Polaroid.  In some frames they don't show very well and you might suspect she has on white shoes.  Jack White did.  However, if you look close enough there is generally a shadow under what appears to be a white shoe indicating flat black shoes.

The problem comes from a Cancellare photo that show Jim Featherstone and Mary Moorman talking in the distance.  If you blow up that section of the photo Mary appears to be wearing high heels. 

She is holding a purse.  Neither She or Jean Hill have a purse in Zapruder or other films.

The length of her raincoat is variable.  In the Polaroid her coat comes down to her ankles.  In Zapruder and other films her raincoat is just below her knees.  In the Cancellare photo is raincoat is midcalf. 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't hold Mary Moorman responsible for anything she has done.  I believe she did the best she could in a vary difficult situation.  She has been consistent with her testimony from then until now.  On the other hand I laud and curse Jean Hill.  She was not consistent with her testimony.  Mary and Jean's testimonies diverged the following day.  Jean said one thing Mary said what she has consistently said.