Documentary on ‘Last Second in Dallas’

[Michaleen Kilroy]

Didn’t see this posted yet.

Incredible documentary by a Bay Area ABC news affiliate on Josiah Thompson and his recent book, but it’s really on the entire JFKA case.

With docs like this and of course JFK Revisited, maybe there’s still hope we can get to a resolution in our lifetimes: 

https://abc7news.com/feature/jfk-assassination-unsolved-documentary-conspiracy-theory/11268602/

 

[Michaleen Kilroy]

Looks like it was posted previously. Apologies. Can’t seem to delete posts or topics on this site. 

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

it is fabulous. The two debris field analysis helps explain why experts had different opinions about the blood splatter. 

[Vince Palamara]

It is not only excellent, it is going viral: in just a few short days, it is over 216K views!!!

[Steven Kossor]

The Thompson documentary is phenomenal, but I think it may have a little bump in it.  Fluid debris fields have to form a symmetrical "cone" that can't have any bends in it, based on fluid dynamics.  I think you'll see what I mean in the annotated frames from the documentary I have attached.  It appears that the documented debris cones indicate that two shots came from the right front, not just one. Food for thought, for sure, submitted with great appreciation for the terrific work done on this documentary.

[Vince Palamara]

I concur--fantastic documentary. One thing that does bother me (that Tink duly notes in his book) is the fact that ABC's Bill Lord interviewed DPD James Chaney and said that "his uniform was splattered with blood." Tink says that he can't see any blood, so it can't be true...I am not convinced. In any event, Chaney having blood on his uniform is even more evidence of a frontal shot (in addition to Chaney's comment that JFK was "struck in the face" by a bullet):

 

[Vince Palamara]

Interestingly, ABC'S BILL LORD HIMSELF commented on my version of the video above:

[Ron Bulman]

27 minutes ago, Steven Kossor said:

The Thompson documentary is phenomenal, but I think it may have a little bump in it.  Fluid debris fields have to form a symmetrical "cone" that can't have any bends in it, based on fluid dynamics.  I think you'll see what I mean in the annotated frames from the documentary I have attached.  It appears that the documented debris cones indicate that two shots came from the right front, not just one. Food for thought, for sure, submitted with great appreciation for the terrific work done on this documentary.

Thank you Steven.  This is excellent, and it meshes well with the analysis of Mantick/Chesser/Horne.  Two shots from the front, one from the back to the head.  Obviously coordinated imho.  It all begins to finally make sense.

[Vince Palamara]

remastered video I just posted: 

 

 

[Steven Kossor]

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

Thank you Steven.  This is excellent, and it meshes well with the analysis of Mantick/Chesser/Horne.  Two shots from the front, one from the back to the head.  Obviously coordinated imho.  It all begins to finally make sense.

You don't know how long I've hoped to see those words in print ("It all begins to finally make sense")!  I think you're RIGHT!!!

[Steven Kossor]

A shot from farther West along the fence line hitting JFK in the hairline above the right eye (and fragmenting inside his head) would also account for the appearance of a "shoulder pad" on JFK's right shoulder that David Lifton noticed in the Moorman photo if it dislodged skull/hair a split second before Moorman snapped her photo, and a split second before the other shot from the front right struck JFK near the right ear and exited from his head through a hole at the right rear (he would have been facing toward the GK at that moment so that the debris cone would be pointing in the right direction).  The fact that we don't see his head turned toward the GK n the Zfilm is further evidence of the Zfilm having been doctored. 

One last thing still has me confused: I thought the engine noise of the motorcycle with the stuck microphone was that of a 3 wheeler, and there is no 3 wheeler in any film showing the headshot sequence.  That means that, unless Hargis or someone else had their mic stuck (not likely), the only other live mics that could have picked up the sound of gunshots would be Kellerman's mic or a mic in the Queen Mary.  That's not likely to have been recorded on the DPD dictabelt, so it seems to me that anything resembling gunshots on a DPD dictabelt has to be an acoustical artifact, rather than a ballistic event.  What am I missing?

[Steven Kossor]

By the way, I think my brother-in-law, Steve Zampana, is the sound engineer that Robert Groden worked with to synchronize gunshot sounds with the Zfilm.  I recall his talking about being involved in a sound recording project related to the Zapruder film some time ago, and I believe he said that the producer was Robert Groden.  I noticed a reference to an "audio" version of the Zapruder film in the Thompson documentary; that must have been my brother-in-law's work.  Small world....

[Stu Wexler]

So is there new material in the doc beyond what was in Tink's book?

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

it is fabulous. The two debris field analysis helps explain why experts had different opinions about the blood splatter. 

It's GIGO. It is a forensic fact that blood spatters from the entrance as well as the exit, and if there's only one spatter it's presumed to be an entrance. And yet here we have a large section of the program based around the non-fact the blood and brain matter ALL went towards the left of the limo, and that this indicates a shot from the knoll. It does nothing of the sort. But even if it did, it would indicate the shot came from the left of the limo, not right.

There were numerous other non-facts in the program as well. It was so bad I had to speed through it. But the program pretended the Harper fragment was found to the left of the limo's location at 313, when Harper showed numerous researchers where he found the fragment, and it was 100 feet or so in front of the limo's location at 313. 

There was also of course the misrepresentation of what Lee Bowers said. In the transcripts for his filmed interview for Rush to Judgment, it is made clear the men he saw "behind the fence" were behind the fence from his location, i.e. Emmett Hudson and the man with him on the steps, who I've concluded is F. Lee Mudd. To continue pretending he said the men were on his side of the fence at this point in time is embarrassing, IMO. 

In short, this program was a long-overdue presentation of an old theory that has since been largely debunked. In that way it's not much better than another rehash of the Warren Report. 

[Benjamin Cole]

40 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

It's GIGO. It is a forensic fact that blood spatters from the entrance as well as the exit, and if there's only one spatter it's presumed to be an entrance. And yet here we have a large section of the program based around the non-fact the blood and brain matter ALL went towards the left of the limo, and that this indicates a shot from the knoll. It does nothing of the sort. But even if it did, it would indicate the shot came from the left of the limo, not right.

There were numerous other non-facts in the program as well. It was so bad I had to speed through it. But the program pretended the Harper fragment was found to the left of the limo's location at 313, when Harper showed numerous researchers where he found the fragment, and it was 100 feet or so in front of the limo's location at 313. 

There was also of course the misrepresentation of what Lee Bowers said. In the transcripts for his filmed interview for Rush to Judgment, it is made clear the men he saw "behind the fence" were behind the fence from his location, i.e. Emmett Hudson and the man with him on the steps, who I've concluded is F. Lee Mudd. To continue pretending he said the men were on his side of the fence at this point in time is embarrassing, IMO. 

In short, this program was a long-overdue presentation of an old theory that has since been largely debunked. In that way it's not much better than another rehash of the Warren Report. 

Pat S.-

You make many valid points. Personally I am agnostic on whether there was a shot from the knoll that struck JFK, and have posited such a shot or shots may have been a diversion---which is, of course, still a conspiracy.  I also suspect more than one gunman from the rear. 

That said, Thompson's work in finding the anomaly in the Morrman photo is interesting.  His theory of a second shot from behind, and striking JFK in the head is interesting, and might explain the lower wound to the skull and the blow-out wound up higher.  I have no idea about the audio evidence. 

I also think Thompson gets the timing off on the shot that strikes JBC, which I contend is likely Z~295.

We have Connally's testimony about turning to his right after the first shot that struck JFK, then trying to turn to his left, and  then getting shot. 

But even more telling is this testimony given the HSBC:

Connally: I was knocked over, just doubled over by the force of the bullet. It went in my back and came out my chest about 2 inches below and the left of my right nipple. The force of the bullet drove my body over almost double and when I looked, immediately I could see I was just drenched with blood. (1 HSCA 42)

In other words, JBC says he was immediately incapacitated by the back wound, a very believable statement. He looks to be incapacitated at Z-295. 

Of course, it is beyond controversy that JFK was struck at Z313. So, the math is about one second between those two shots. 

I may also feel some reservations about the direction of bodies after getting shot.  People who hunt or have seen war times say anything can happen when a bullet strikes, and often little or nothing visible. As with the first shot to JFK---he hardly budges, judging from the Z film. 

That said, at least a mainstream media outlet, ABC, gave Tink Thompson an entirely fair hearing.  And Thompson is earnest, even if he come to different conclusions than you or I might.