Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

It is an interesting puzzle. I think the young black kid may be standing behind the women in the coat to the right of the white shirt/ dark pants guy. I don't know where the cop is but he is larger than the people behind him in Alt5 so he would be right of ws/dp guy in Z. The only solid fact is ws/dp guy in Alt5 and in Z are standing within 1 or 2 feet of the same location. more to come. 

Chris,

Your right.  This is an interesting puzzle.  And, the more I look at it the more I confirmed in the notion of fraud in the very first part of the Zapruder film which is an indicator for the rest of the film.

Some back ground info:  Elm Street east of Houston and Elm has 4 lanes.  Elm Street west of the Houston and Elm intersection has 3 lanes.  These are by Texas highway department standards:

Change lane-  3.3 m or 10.8 ft

Travel lane- 3.6 m or 11.8 ft

Turning lane- 3.9 m or 13 ft

The turning lane has extra width adjustments for the gutter perhaps sidewalk.

With this info one should be armed and dangerous.  But, not so.  I don't think measurements can be made in the Zapruder film because of its distortions of reality. 

Let's look at what Dealey Plaza looks like in 1967.  This is the closest photo showing what we need to look at as I can find.  It is from 1967.  The last tree going east has grown but, is basically the same size as shown in Zapruder 002/Z 130.

Dealey-Plaza-1967-zapruder-line-of-sight

This line of sight cuts the second lane of east Elm in half roughly.  In the Zapruder frames we see there are cars in this lane.  Or, possibly cars are seen in the Turning lane going north.  I don't think that is right, but possible.  

If I had to choose between Altgens 5 or Zapruder as being the most realistic I would choose Altgens 5 for that area.  This is based upon the need to cover up something there.  And, it the area of the intersection of Houston and Elm there is no need to change anything there in Altgens.  This is based on who would normally look at that area and study it.  And, the changes to Altgens 5 involve the p. limo just off the intersection of Houston and Main.

Here are the two frames in question.  I use Z 130 as a comparison of Z 002 for change.

z002-z-130-compare-for-streets.jpg

As we see in these two frames the positions of the motorbikes change, but the position of the crowd in the crosswalk remains basically unchanged.  Your light shirt/dark trousers guy is basically the same position in both frames.  This places him in the 4th lane of East Elm and the 3rd lane of West Elm as seen here.  Z 130 shows the center of lane of West Elm is to the right of the ls/dt guy. (here I think the pavement and stripes have been repainted)  It is also apparent that the black youth is not there from Altgens.  In Z 130 there is a black mark to the right of ls/dt man and that is a bit suspicious.  Z frame 002 clearly shows the black youth not present.  Both frames show that the last tree in the row could be edited and not as large as seen in 1967.  

It is easier to make a tree larger than put more people in the crosswalk.  I can't see any people or vehicles in the crosswalk behind the tree.  

So, if all of this is true Officer Joe Marshal Smith should be seen in the 3rd lane of East Elm which corresponds to the center lane of West Elm.

cross-walk-elm-and-houston-altgens-5.jpg

From Altgens 5 perspective Officer Smith and the ls/dt man appear to be over by the turning lane or 2nd lane of Elm.  The van is not seen in Zapruder.  This tells us there is perhaps a time difference in the photo/frames comparison greater than just a few seconds or a minute of so.  Something is going on here.  Zapruder takes his film before Altgens.  

Could Zapruder have made two films or more?  Depending when Zapruder got upon his perch there may have been time to make more than one film.  One earlier with no motorbikes and a crowd in the crosswalk and a basic setup of the motorcade route in Dealey Plaza.  A second film showing a bare intersection with the motorbikes coming through.  Then everything is rearranged and the stage is set by painting in a new pavement and setting the crowd in the first film with the motorbikes of the second in the new modified film.  This is just speculation, but I feel something is going on there.

A second film showing a bare intersection with the motorbikes coming through?  A bare intersection would be necessary to avoid collateral damage if one planned to have people shooting from the Triple Underpass, the South Grassy Knoll, or the North Grassy Knoll.  This is contradicted by Altgens 5. 

Has anyone ever suggested two Zapruder films?  It is a crazy idea, but worth speculating about.

Edited by John Butler
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 204
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, John Butler said:

Let's look at what Dealey Plaza looks like in 1967.  This is the closest photo showing what we need to look at as I can find.  It is from 1967.  The last tree going east has grown but, is basically the same size as shown in Zapruder 002/Z 130.

Dealey-Plaza-1967-zapruder-line-of-sight

John, your red line is not on the Zapruder pedestal, the pedestal he stood on is at the other end or the pergola.  From his perspective he would had the left side of his view intercepted by the tree foliage of the tree which is out near the sidewalk on the north side of Elm St., (which you can see in the Z frames you posted).  The extreme left of Z's images would only include one (1) lane of travel and one parking lane on the south side of Elm St. east the intersection.  That would be the last two lanes in a direction (S) away from the Dal-Tex Building and nearest the County Records Building (I believe). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Richard Price said:

John, your red line is not on the Zapruder pedestal, the pedestal he stood on is at the other end or the pergola.  From his perspective he would had the left side of his view intercepted by the tree foliage of the tree which is out near the sidewalk on the north side of Elm St., (which you can see in the Z frames you posted).  The extreme left of Z's images would only include one (1) lane of travel and one parking lane on the south side of Elm St. east the intersection.  That would be the last two lanes in a direction (S) away from the Dal-Tex Building and nearest the County Records Building (I believe). 

Thanks Richard,

Thanks for pointing that out.  This isn't the first time I've made that mistake.  If I am recalling correctly, about 3 times.  Generally, I have to correct my thinking on what pedestal Zapruder was on.  It is a peculiar flaw.  Thanks again for pointing that out.  The photo should show the line approximating Zapruder's line of side with the longer red line:

Dealey-Plaza-1967-zapruder-line-of-sight

They are still pretty much the same.  The corrected line of sight moves slightly more northward.

Your are saying that the four lanes on east side of the Houston and Elm intersection are starting on the north side:

1. A turning lane or at times a parking lane?

2. A travel lane

3. A travel lane

4. A parking lane

I don't think that interferes too much with what I was thinking.  If so, let me know.  Zapruder still shows only two lanes in Z 002 and three in Z 130.  The pavement still looks unnatural and hand painted.  

Thanks Chris D,

Your Bell and Howell of the area points out many of the differences I'm trying to explain.

chris-d-compare-z002-and-bell-and-howell

These scenes are at the same time of day.  These scenes don't compare very well due to the more distance view of Chris' Bell and Howell shot.

Here's an attempt to make that clearer by enlarging slightly the Bell and Howell shot.

Chris-D-photo-Bell-and-Howell-from-Zapru

That didn't work out either.  Z002 looks like it was shot by another camera with a different angle.  The signs across Elm are two stories high in Z002 and 3 stories high in the later Bell and Howell shot.  The lamp pole in Z002 appears to be on the east Houston side and in the Bell and Howell on the west Houston side.  I understand things could of changed in Dallas over the years, whether that is intentional or not is debatable.    

Edited by John Butler
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I stood on the pedestal a few years ago and shot video myself.  It was plainly obvious that, as a skilled cameraman, Zapruder was capable of tracking the limo in the center of the frame (panning down while panning to the right) and that the motion captured in the Z film shows no such panning (it actually looks alot like the camera was mounted on a tripod and just panned left-to-right without any downward motion), but that's an artifact of film editing.  Don't forget, the Jamison installation in Dallas where the Zfilm was printed was advertising itself as "The Hollywood of the Midwest" or something along those lines in 1963, so all of the necessary equipment for professional film "special effects" editing was readily accessible to the plotters right there in Dallas.  I don't doubt that there was some chicanery going on at NPIC as well, but the film didn't need to go to Hawkeye Works in Rochester to achieve all of the special effects needed to manufacture the official history of what happened in DP on 11/22/63.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Senator Ralph Yarborough told me in 1988, "The first shot I heard I thought was a rifle shot. The second shot,

the motorcade almost came to a halt. They said later that the president‘s car slowed to something like

five miles an hour. I wondered what the hell they were stopping for when somebody is shooting. People were jumping

out of the car in front of me [the Secret Service followup car] and running

to the president‘s car. I thought maybe somebody had thrown a bomb in there. The third shot I heard

was a rifle shot."

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The first shot I heard I thought was a rifle shot. The second shot, the motorcade almost came to a halt. They said later that the president‘s car slowed to something like five miles an hour. I wondered what the hell they were stopping for when somebody is shooting. People were jumping out of the car in front of me [the Secret Service followup car] and running to the president‘s car. I thought maybe somebody had thrown a bomb in there. The third shot I heard was a rifle shot."

The above from Yarborough, reinforces my recent posts. I have Greer down as complicit. Greer stops or almost stops after the first intended kill shot. Greer did exactly the opposite of what a driver should have done. Greer ensured the wounded President was a stationary sitting duck. It was a fully loaded Presidential Limousine, a heavy car rolling down hill, which means you have to push that brake pedal hard. Then we are told the Greer mashed the accelerator when the flurry of shots came in. NO WAY! That lady dressed in all pink would have slid straight off the waxed trunk and onto the hard surface of Elm street. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2020 at 2:44 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Decipher the documentation:

Shot3 = Frame 89 = Z313
Shot2 = Frame 56 = Z280 - 6ft = Z273

Z273 occurs just before the hair flap occurrence.

btw, the hair flap is much more noticeable in this document.

Hairflap.gif

The limo slowing to close to if not a stop is so clearly visible in the video clip above. 

You can see Greer turned 180 backwards and looking straight at JFK after he is hit the first time ( as well as Connally ) and slumping leftward toward Jackie.

Then Greer is "still" looking back at JFK when he is hit again in the head and his skull is obliterated.

A split second after, a shocked Greer turns back to face frontward and begin the acceleration.

During Greer's 180 turn backward ( again so obvious) you see the Limo slow almost to a stop ( Jackie stated it did stop) and in the middle of this slowdown is when JFK is hit in the head.

What's the debate? 

In the video clip above there is "no question" as to Greer's 180 turn backward to see JFK hit in the head. And no question as to the limo slowing down while he did so.

As I have stated several times, when a driver of a car turns his or her's upper body ( shoulders and head ) 180 degrees backward they would instinctively let up on the accelerator while doing so. In my 50 years of driving I've never not done this myself,

In another video of the same scene, you also see the background grass on the drivers side and those standing on it going by at a speed that does look like at least 10 MPH.

But as Greer turns back to look at JFK in the back seat, that background visual of the grass movement slows to almost a stop.

It's all so clear imo.

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

As I have stated several times, when a driver of a car turns his or her's upper body ( shoulders and head ) 180 degrees backward they would instinctively let up on the accelerator while doing so. In my 50 years of driving I've never not done this myself,

I drive a heavy car with automatic transmission, and I live on a hill. If I were to maintain a steady speed of say 12 to 15mph while descending the hill, my foot would be nowhere near the accelerator, it would be hovering over or applying slight pressure to the brake pedal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the quotes from Thompson's new book mention the Limo turning in to the curb during the stop. Is there any artifact of that? It's also interesting from a frame removal perspective. If no artifact whatsoever exists, and the inward movement actually happened then sufficient frames must have been excised to hide it. That would need to be 1-2 seconds I would have thought. If its hidden by a zoomed copy then is there any way of measuring the distance of the limo accurately from the curb at each frame? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eddy, the Z film shows the limo already several yards past where the limos was supposed to have hit the kerb. (Frame 134)Maybe one of the reasons for the alterations the film itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a former cameraman, I wonder why the extant Zapruder film almost loses JFK at the bottom of

the frame at the time of the final shots, which is odd, since Zapruder did a generally good job

of panning and holding the camera steady under great duress. I wonder if this oddity

is one of the artifacts of alteration.

Edited by Joseph McBride
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Some of the quotes from Thompson's new book mention the Limo turning in to the curb during the stop. 

Eddy, can you elaborate what was said about "turning in to the curb during the stop". In my recent post below, I quoted Truly saying he witnessed the limo swerving left and stopping. I'd be interested if there are similarities.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...