Jump to content
The Education Forum

Shooter Location


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The shot placement directly across(not 10.2ft west of z313) from Altgen's at Station# 4+96.16 is required by the time allotment given to one shooter.

The extant film as shown is missing two frames between the span of extant z313-z352.

That is a 39 frame span with 2 missing for a total of 41 frames.

What was the significance of 41/42 frames?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The camera operates at a speed of 18.3 frames per second. So that in two and a quarter seconds it would run through about 42--41 to 42 frames. 
Representative FORD. Then the firing of the rifle, repeat that again? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. As to the firing of the rifle we have been advised that the minimum time for getting off two successive well-aimed shots on the rifle is approximately two and a quarter seconds. That is the basis for using this 41 to 42 frames to establish two points in the film where two successive quick shots could have been fired. 

Once again, trying to tie all shooting back to the 6th floor snipers nest.

25468422257_bf52fb347d_b.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39443150515_768c0e6e7d_z.jpg

What's really hilarious here is that a simple error by the FBI in saying that the shots occurred in the above photo was just that - an error.  Big deal. Yet, we have a sync of two different films on YouTube (below).  All you have to do is watch it and it merely shows two things - the films match up perfectly, and two - that the FBI was wrong with this diorama that they made.  Fine.  It DOES NOT mean what Chris and Dave want it to mean - that some other mysterious and unseen Z film exists. In other words, because of an error in the above diorama Chris and Dave believe that a whole other Z film exists - haha! What a joke.

And this happens all of the time on this forum and elsewhere.  On another thread, other nutty CTers think that because someone wrote FAILED on Oswald's dental chart that it means there was a CLONE of Oswald without stopping to think that again it could be a more plausible and simpler explanation - a clerical error, two different people recording the records, etc.

Haha! But I'm sure Chris and Dave will keep plugging away with their calculators here thinking they've solved something - Haha!

What a disgrace to the JFK research community trying to get to the truth of the matter. Is it any wonder why people laugh at the JFK "research" community when they come across this kind of malarkey.

And go to the beginning of this thread - this all started when Chris says that the secret agents fired over the tops of spectators from the pavilion for crying out load. And Josephs disagreed with him and when I mentioned that he said he said that "...in jest." Haha!

 

Edited by Michael Walton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

MATH RULES!!!

:cheers

Where was the 30.86ft split applied to the Position A part of the ballfield:

Sprague designates JFK@ z133 to Station # 299.0, which is where I plotted him also.

I believe we were a slight bit off and JFK actually plots at 299.16 or 1.92 inches difference.

299.16 - 30.86ft = Station 268.3

Station# 268.3 + 10.2ft = Station # 278.5

Position A = Station# 278.5

This can be determined by using the WC data readily available:

z161 = 329.2 - 94.7 = Station C = 234.5

234.5 + 44 = 278.5 = Position A

The WC math-ical mystery tour.

P.S. Position A is not plotted on Robert West's path.

 

39636503924_03b2c8318d_b.jpg

 

40303016622_2ed11cf809_z.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Chris... what becomes apparent to me is the arbitrary location for STATION C...

As Shaneyfelt puts it, "The spot where the limo would have turned off Houston onto Elm"...  does this suggested it didn't?

I did this to show that STATION C can lead to either path... despite POSTION A not being on the limo's path and NOT the last place where the mark on the back of the stand-in can be seen... POSITION A is included and critical... z161, which was actually z168 in the final numbering of frames becomes THE spot... but only after May '64... before that it was 168

and the fabrication/alteration of material fact begins....

5a8c48014f247_168-171910thsofafoottraveled161-166changedto168-171inCE884.jpg.2f55151decbb23dd2e94455d08836a46.jpg

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The first position we established that morning was frame 161. 
Mr. SPECTER. Was there not a position established prior in sequence to frame 161, specifically that designated as position A? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That was actually established later. But the first one to be actually located was 161. And we went back later and positioned point A. 
Mr. SPECTER. Well, let's start with the position which is the most easterly point on Elm Street, which I believe would be position A, would it not? 
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes. 

5a469b6b8fe18_StationCCE875CE886andtheturnontoElm.thumb.jpg.3d531dde7811de7fba3f5a40b4b858ec.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2018 at 8:09 AM, David Josephs said:

So Chris... what becomes apparent to me is the arbitrary location for STATION C...

As Shaneyfelt puts it, "The spot where the limo would have turned off Houston onto Elm"...  does this suggested it didn't?

I did this to show that STATION C can lead to either path... despite POSTION A not being on the limo's path and NOT the last place where the mark on the back of the stand-in can be seen... POSITION A is included and critical... z161, which was actually z168 in the final numbering of frames becomes THE spot... but only after May '64... before that it was 168

and the fabrication/alteration of material fact begins....

 

 

5a469b6b8fe18_StationCCE875CE886andtheturnontoElm.thumb.jpg.3d531dde7811de7fba3f5a40b4b858ec.jpg

David,

I tend to treat StationC in sync relationship to the TSBD.

Two endpoints if you will.

StationC = Station# 234.5

TSBD = Station# 250.0

That is a distance difference of 15.5 ft

They should have advanced a distance of 15.25ft (10" drop) = 15.25ft

18.3 /18 = 1.0166.. - Conversion between determined frame rate and whole frames.

1.01666.. x 15.25 = 15.50ft

Just as 30.86ft was used as a retard and advance concept (shown previously), why not some form of that here.

Arbitrarily set. I agree.

Position A, still working on it.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2018 at 8:33 AM, Chris Davidson said:

West knew they were up to no good. Probably not all the specifics.

He documented and kept what he could or felt safe with.

 

 

 

This is how crafty the WC was in obtaining their desired goals:

Robert West's survey information for extant z207 lists a right triangle of:  base=162.34ft  height=65.05ft  hypotenuse = 174.88ft

It was determined(don't know by whom- see plat) that 61ft from the TSBD base, along that same extant z207 base measurement, the Elm St. slope of 3.13 degrees began.

The change in elevation would calculate like this:

162.34 - 61= 101.34ft / 18.3ft (1ft Vertical change) = 5.53ft vertical change.

Base to 6th floor window sill = 61.2ft

Rifle end to Window sill = 1.17ft

Total elevation above street = 67.9ft

67.9ft -3.27ft(CE884 -JFK determined back shot elevation) = 64.63ft

Do you see see the difference in vertical elevation?

JFK was shot in the back at physical location extant z207/z208.

 

Edited by Chris Davidson
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...