The "Other" Zapruder Film

[Gil Jesus]

“It is difficult to understand why the [presidential limousine] came to a complete stop after the first shot. The natural inclination… would be to step on the gas and accelerate as quickly as possible. However, if the driver were under the impression that the shots were from the front, one could understand his hesitation in not wanting to drive closer to the sniper or snipers.”—Mark Lane


The Zapruder Film

Only one person filmed from start to finish the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which occurred in a matter of seconds at 12:30 p.m. on Nov. 22, 1963 on Elm Street in Dealey Plaza in downtown Dallas, TX. That person was a 58-year old Dallas dress manufacturer, Abraham Zapruder, who died in 1970. His silent color 8 mm film of JFK being shot to death in broad daylight while riding in an open limousine is the most historically momentous home movie in history.

Incredibly, the Zapruder film was withheld from the American public for nearly 12 years. The first opportunity Americans had to see it was on Mar. 6, 1975, when a bootleg copy of the film was broadcast on nationwide TV on ABC’s “Goodnight America” show, hosted by Geraldo Rivera.


 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGdM7ut-Kk4

The shocking revelation of Kennedy's head going backward and to the left resulted in a public outcry so great that Congress created the House Select Committee on Assassinations two years later.

 

Alteration of the Zapruder Film

Until a few years ago, the authenticity and reliability of the extant Zapruder film was accepted by almost all JFK assassination researchers, even the severest critics of the Warren Report, myself included. The provenance of the Zapruder film was firmly established and the film was regarded as the single most reliable piece of assassination evidence.

Today, however, things are different. There are serious doubts about whether the film is original and an accurate depiction of the assassination.

For years we were deceived about the chain of custody of the Zapruder film. What we now know but didn’t know previously is that for at least half a day during the weekend following the assassination the film was at a top secret CIA photo lab at the Kodak facility in Rochester, NY, where it may have been altered in various ways. This lab was so secret that even its code name (“Hawkeye Works”) was at the time highly classified. We also know that the CIA destroyed its records of the film’s stay at that lab.


 

http://assassinationofjfk.net/the-two-npic-zapruder-film-events-signposts-pointing-to-the-films-alteration/

At first glance, the notion that the Zapruder film might have been tampered with seems far-fetched. But critics have pointed out those things that make the film’s provenance suspect; its images are chock-full of unexplained anomalies as well as inconsistencies between the Zapruder film and Dealey Plaza eyewitness testimony.

In addition, the motion picture film experts who have had access to the Zapruder film in the past and pronounced it to be unaltered have all had connections to the suspected forger, the CIA.

Furthermore, it is indisputable that various official documents as well as other key assassination-related materials have been falsified, replaced or destroyed.

Under those circumstances, why should we not explore the possibility that government officials might also have altered the Zapruder film ?

When we contemplate the possibility the Zapruder film was altered, we tend to think first of the type of alteration accomplished by replacing authentic frames with forged or composite frames.

But a film can also be altered by simply deleting frames.

Some of the alterations in the Zapruder film, therefore, may have consisted of simply deleting certain frames, making copies of the edited version and renumbering the frames.

Such an act of forgery would be impossible to prove unless the original version or a copy of it was still in existance.


Evidence of film editing: the witnesses who claimed to have seen the original

Some years ago, the late JFK researcher/author Jim Marrs interviewed a man named William Reymond, a JFK author/researcher from France who claimed to have seen another version of the Zapruder film. In this version, claimed Reymond, the turn onto Elm WAS included as was the limousine stop for about 2 seconds.

Reymond also claimed that he had seen the version through a friend of his who was a member of a right wing group in France called ETEC. ( pronounced Itek ) He believed that this was a copy from an original film owned by H.L. Hunt, the Dallas oil man.

Verification of the existence of another version of the film comes through the revelation by the late JFK researcher Rich Dellarosa on an episode of Black Op Radio. Dellarosa claimed to have seen the same version and described what he saw in detail, that the limo had a difficult time navigating the turn from Houston onto Elm and that the limo completely stopped.

Dellarosa said that the limousine just didn't slow down, it stopped and driver William Greer was looking straight at JFK when the bullet hit him in the head.

Dellarosa was emphatic in his observation that the limo came to a complete stop.


The Turn Onto Elm St.

An example of this type of forgery would be to remove any frames depicting the limousine making the sharp turn from Houston Street to Elm Street.

Statements by Zapruder and Marilyn Sitzman, the woman who assisted him while he operated his camera, suggested that he DID film the turn onto Elm Street.

"I started shooting--- when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Elm St." ( Testimony of Abraham Zapruder, 7 H 571 )

Sitzman said that, "He ( Zapruder ) started filming....just before they came around the corner."


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/sitzman.mp4

Dellarosa described what the turn looked like in detail:


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Rich-Dellarosa-The-Turn-onto-Elm.mp4

Why do we now have a Zapruder film in which the first we see of the limousine is when it suddenly appears on Elm Street ?


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Z-film-no-turn.mp4

Abraham Zapruder was never asked by the Warren Commission why the film begins with the limousine already on Elm St.

In fact, during his testimony, Zapruder was shown individual frames of his film and asked to identify them, but never shown his film in its entirety in order to authenticate it as the film he took.

Why not ?



The Limousine Stop

Critics have offered a large number of credible reasons for concluding that the version of the Zapruder film now preserved in the National Archives is not the untouched camera original.

The extant Zapruder film shows JFK’s limousine gliding forward at a steady speed of about 11 mph, it definitely does not depict a stop or slow down.

However, numerous Dealey Plaza witnesses reported that during the time the limousine was under fire it came to a complete but brief stop. Some described it as a pause, a halt or a hesitation. These witnesses included Dallas police officers, news media personnel and civilian spectators.

Twenty-two minutes after the assassination, CBS correspondent Walter Cronkite broke into normal broadcasting with a news bulletin and said that "the car stopped momentarily."


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/cronkite.mp4

The first researcher to call attention to the possibility of a limousine stop was Mark Lane, who in his book A Citizen’s Dissent (1968) wrote: “A considerable body of testimony before the [Warren] Commission indicated that the limousine slowed abruptly and then accelerated rapidly when the shots were fired.”

In chapter 8 of his outstanding book Survivor’s Guilt: The Secret Service and the Failure to Protect President Kennedy (2013), Vince Palamera counted 59 witnesses who reported that the limo stopped or slowed down.

In his interview with the late Jim Marrs, William Reymond claimed that the limo came to a complete stop BEFORE the head shot and then took off.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/William-Reymond-The-Limo-Stop.mp4

This claim is significant, because if the limo had stopped AFTER the shooting sequence, it could be argued that it stopped because Jackie was on the trunk or to give agents on the followup car a chance to reach the limo.

But a stop DURING the shooting sequence, at a time when Jackie was neither on the trunk nor Clint Hill had started toward the rear of the limo, could either be a sign that the driver realized he was driving into an ambush in front of him, or more sinisterly, making it easier for the shooters to kill JFK.

The latter suggestive that there was Secret Service complicity in the assassination of President Kennedy.

Reymond's depiction of what he saw in the "other" Zapruder film is verified by Dellarosa, who described it in more detail:


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Rich-Dellarosa-The-Limo-Stop.mp4

But the reports of these two witnesses are not the only reports that the limousine stopped. There were several other reports made by witneses in or near Dealey Plaza during the assassination.

J.W. Foster was a Dallas policeman stationed on the railroad overpass at the corner of Elm, Main and Commerce Streets. In a statement to the FBI made on Mar. 26, 1964, he said: “Immediately after President Kennedy was struck with a second bullet, the car in which he was riding pulled to the curb …” ( CD 897, pg. 20 )

Foster testified before the Warren Commission but was never asked about what he told the FBI.

This movement of the limousine is verified by witness Roy Truly, who testified that, "I saw the President's car swerve to the left and stop." ( 3 H 221 )

Dallas police officer Marrion L. Baker, a Dallas police motorcyclist who was on Houston Street when the first shot was fired, testified to the Warren Commission that shortly after the assassination “Several officers said it stopped completely.” When then asked whether he had heard from other Dallas police officers that the limousine had stopped, he testified: “Yes, sir; that it had completely stopped, and then for a moment there, and then they rushed on out to Parkland.” ( 3 H 266 )

One of those officers who spoke to Baker was motorcycle officer James Chaney who told him that “from the time the first shot rang out, the car stopped completely, pulled to the left, and stopped.” ( ibid. )

Chaney was the inside rider at the right rear of the limousine. Two days after the assassination he was quoted in the Houston Chronicle as repeating what he had told Baker; that the limousine stopped immediately after the first shot.

Chaney was never called to testify before the Warren Commission.

Officer Bobby Hargis was the inside rider at the left rear of the limousine. According to an undated, unpublished transcript of an interview he had with the Dallas Times-Herald, Hargis told repeated: “I felt blood hit me in the face, and the presidential car stopped immediately after that and stayed stopped about half a second, then took off at a high rate of speed.”

Officer B.J. Martin was the outside rider at the left rear of the limousine. He was interviewed by researchers Fred Newcomb and Perry Adams and told them, as reported in their unpublished 1974 manuscript Murder from Within, that he observed the limousine stop for “just a moment.”

William Newman and his family were the closest to Kennedy when he was shot. Newman said in an interview with William Law and Ian Griggs that, "the car momentarily stopped. Now everywhere you read about it, you never read about the car stopping. And when I say stopped, I mean very momentarily, like they hit the brakes and just a few seconds passed and then they floorboarded and accelerated past." ( Dealey Plaza Echo, Volume 2, Issue 1, pg. 7 )

In his affidavit, Billy Lovelady, an employee of the Texas School Book Depository, said "I recall that following the shooting, I ran toward the spot where President Kennedy's car had stopped." ( 22 H 662 )

Hugh Betzner was taking pictures on Houston St. near Elm and tried to run after the limo to get more pictures as it proceeded down Elm. He was interviewed after the assassination in the Dallas County Sheriff's Dept. and told them that "I could see the President's car and another one and they looked like the cars were stopped. Then I saw a flash of pink like someone standing up and sitting down in the car." ( Decker Exhibit 5323, 19 H 467 )

Betzner's description indicates that the cars were stopped BEFORE the head shot.

Maurice Orr, a Wamix Ready-Mix Concrete employee was standing on the north side of Elm St between the lamposts, one of the last spectators on that side of the street. He indicated that the motorcade had stopped.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=40392#relPageId=82

Senator Ralph Yarborough ( D-Texas ), who was riding two cars behind Kennedy, was interviewed by Geraldo Rivera in 1975. Twice during that interview, he said that the car stopped.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/yarborough-car-stopped.mp4

The vagaries of eyewitness testimony are well known. But it's difficult to believe that all of these witnesses could have simply been mistaken about what they observed.

Were they all suffering from the same mass hallucination ?

This seems extremely unlikely, however, because the film itself may hold the answer to whether or not it was edited.

More evidence of editing: blurred vs. sharp frames




 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Rich-Dellarosa-blurred-vs-sharp.mp4

In his testimony before the Warren Commission, Zapruder said that the cause of the blurred frames was because he was moving the camera.

"..they weren't very clear, for the simple reason that on the telephoto lens it's good to take stills---when you move---did you ever have binoculars and every time you move everything is exaggerated in the move---that's why they are kind of blurred---the movement." ( 7 H 572 )

So if the blurred frames were caused by Zapruder moving the camera in order to keep up with the movement of the limo, by his own admission the "clear" frame ( 312 ) must have been caused by the camera taking a "still". And that clear frame could not have been created by the camera being still and the limo moving at the same time.

The limo would had to have been stopped as well.

I wondered if it could have been possible to edit out the stop and would the finished product look like the limo just slowed down ?
I decided to do an experiment using my home computer and editing software.
I recorded my index finger ( simulating the movement of the limousine ) from left to right. Part way, I stopped it for about two seconds, then resumed the movement.
I then copied the video and edited out the 2 second stop. I combined the two versions:


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/motion-edit.mp4

This editing out of the stop resulted in my finger looking like it just slowed down.

I believe that this experiment proves that the stop could have been edited out and the resulting film would show that the vehicle had only slowed down when it completely stopped.


More evidence of editing: missing frames

The extant Zapruder film is missing frames 208-211. These frames are significant because it is within these frames that the Warren Commission said the first shot was fired. ( Z-210 )

How did they know that the first shot was fired at Frame 210 when frame 210 isn't in the film ?


If the Zapruder film was altered, why for example, does it still show a headshot throwing JFK to the left and backward, indicating the shot came from the right front ?

It would have been impossible to alter the film in such a way as to depict the movement of the head as being anything other than what it was. For example, you couldn't have the head moving forward without running the frames in reverse.

That would have required starting with the wound and ending up with no wound. It just couldn't be done.

Under those circumstances, those responsible for the editing of the original Zapruder film ( CIA ) would have been forced to retain the headshot frames.

Keep in mind that this film was never intended to be released to the public.

However, the chance of a leaked version ever seeing the light of day showing images of the limousine stopping during the assassination would have been infinitely more devastating to the Secret Service and would have been proof of SS complicity.

What would Americans say or think about conspiracy theories if they were to watch a film showing the President’s car suddenly stopping to allow bullets to blow his brains out ?

 

Why would you alter the Zapruder film, but not the other films ?

There IS evidence that other films of the assassination have been tampered with as well.

Orville Nix was filming the motorcade from the plaza on the south side of Elm St., on the opposite side of the limo from Zapruder. He turned his film over to the FBI on December 1, 1963. In 1966, he was interviewed by attorney/author Mark Lane. He told Lane that his film "got lost in the processing plant" and that when he got it back, it was missing frames.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/nix-altered.mp4

The film being "lost in the processing plant" destroys its chain-of-possession. There's no telling who possessed it or for how long and leaves open the possibility that this film was indeed tampered with.

For decades, the Warrennati have cried out that the Zapruder film could not have been altered because it synchronizes with the Nix and Muchmore films.

But if the Nix film was missing frames, how could that be ?


Marie Muchmore filmed the motorcade from the same side as Nix, on the south side of Elm. Like Zapruder, her video has an interesting anomaly just before the head shot.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Muchmore-Film.mp4

This anomaly begins with a frame with two large black lines across the entire image.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/muchmore1.png

In a subsequent frame, the image then appears to separate into a top half and a bottom half.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/muchmore2.png

Then there is a following frame with the same two large black lines across the image.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/muchmore3.png

I found this very interesting, especially the frame that appeared to be split. I noticed that the motorcycle antennas on the top half were askew from the antennas on the bottom half.

 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/muchmore.png

I wondered what would happen if I lined them up so I did. The problem with lining up the images in the frame is that it leaves the edges of the frame itself misaligned.


 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/muchmore4.png

I believe that this proves that this frame is a composite frame, the top half from one frame and the bottom half of another. This is why the images don't line up in the frame and why the edges of the frame don't line up when the images do. I believe the top half is the limo stopped and the bottom half when they get going.

It's funny how the Warren Commission apologists have no problem believing ONE witness who says it was Oswald, but can't bring themselves to believe 10 or 20 witnesses who claimed to have seen the same thing.

Edited February 11, 2022 by Gil Jesus

[Pete Mellor]

Gil, Doug Horne's 5 volume set 'Inside the A.R.R.B.' counts among the top reads on the JFKA & Vol.IV contains his work on Zapruder's film over the assassination weekend.

The testimonies of Brugioni, McMahon & Hunter along with the chain of custody of the camera original & its Dallas copies are to me the 'rosetta stone' of JFKA conspiracy.

Why a sophisticated conjurers trick involving CIA/Kodak 'Hawkeyeworks in Rochester, New York and NPIC in D.C. over two nights with two independent film teams, ignorant of each other, and a copy 8mm film returning to its original out-of-camera 16mm 'double 8' film, delivered by the never identified Secret Service agent 'Bill Smith'. (Unless Mr. Palamara knows different.)

I doubt Hollywood could devise such a cynical, dastardly and devious plot line, yet these actions were completed within hours of the Dallas killing.  All for what?  A lone nut!

 

[Pat Speer]

7 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

Gil, Doug Horne's 5 volume set 'Inside the A.R.R.B.' counts among the top reads on the JFKA & Vol.IV contains his work on Zapruder's film over the assassination weekend.

The testimonies of Brugioni, McMahon & Hunter along with the chain of custody of the camera original & its Dallas copies are to me the 'rosetta stone' of JFKA conspiracy.

Why a sophisticated conjurers trick involving CIA/Kodak 'Hawkeyeworks in Rochester, New York and NPIC in D.C. over two nights with two independent film teams, ignorant of each other, and a copy 8mm film returning to its original out-of-camera 16mm 'double 8' film, delivered by the never identified Secret Service agent 'Bill Smith'. (Unless Mr. Palamara knows different.)

I doubt Hollywood could devise such a cynical, dastardly and devious plot line, yet these actions were completed within hours of the Dallas killing.  All for what?  A lone nut!

 

Except...a large percentage of those suspecting a conspiracy were swayed to do so after viewing the film, and the public viewing of the film led the public to call for a second investigation, which led to the HSCA. 

So, that's quite a conundrum. One can choose to believe the top piece of evidence convincing people there was a conspiracy was actually faked to suggest no conspiracy, or that people's memories are often in error. Hmmm...

[Benjamin Cole]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Except...a large percentage of those suspecting a conspiracy were swayed to do so after viewing the film, and the public viewing of the film led the public to call for a second investigation, which led to the HSCA. 

So, that's quite a conundrum. One can choose to believe the top piece of evidence convincing people there was a conspiracy was actually faked to suggest no conspiracy, or that people's memories are often in error. Hmmm...

I gotta say, when I line up Gov. Connally's testimony anywhere, and before the WC and especially before the HSCA, I conclude Connally was shot at ~Z-295 and JFK at 313.  

OK, call that a short one second, between gunshots. Ergo, a lone gunman with a single-shot bolt action rifle could not have accomplished both shots. 

I can understand why the Z-film was sequestered. Maybe someone blocked out the rear of JFK's head with black on some frames. 

But the Z-film record still stands. The Nix film is on record too. It looks like the limo slows, then accelerates. The driver hesitated after hearing gunfire from at least two directions, the way a human might. 

From HSCA: 

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)

The above happens at ~Z-295. 

Witnesses can make errors, earnest errors. I think people remember when they are struck in the back with a bullet that knocks them forward, and that memory is confirmed on film. 

Dudes, this is crux of everything. 

[Pete Mellor]

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Except...a large percentage of those suspecting a conspiracy were swayed to do so after viewing the film, and the public viewing of the film led the public to call for a second investigation, which led to the HSCA. 

So, that's quite a conundrum. One can choose to believe the top piece of evidence convincing people there was a conspiracy was actually faked to suggest no conspiracy, or that people's memories are often in error. Hmmm...

Pat, I'm sure the public viewing 313 with the backward head snap were seeing horrific images that didn't add up with the Warren conclusion.

It is impossible to know just what happened to the original film.  As for frame 313 Brugioni's recall states:- “…I remember all of us being shocked…it was straight up [gesturing high above his own head]…in the sky…There should have been more than one frame…I thought the spray was, say, three or four feet from his head…what I saw was more than that [than frame 313 in today’s film]…it wasn’t low [as in frame 313], it was high…there was more than that in the original…It was way high off of his head…and I can’t imagine that there would only be one frame.  What I saw was more than you have there [in frame 313].” He also described a white spray.

I sometimes wonder if the original film had images of JFK being hit from the front PRIOR to disappearing behind the Stemmons sign, and 'jumping up' as some witnesses described.

& as Benjamin conjectures

54 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Maybe someone blocked out the rear of JFK's head with black on some frames. 

or as Doug Horne thinks, 'the blob on the side of JFK's head was painted in to fit actions at Bethesda.

Whatever went on, it does seem we have missing images, the Elm turn and the limo stop and the obvious conclusion being dark arts were being practiced.

[Gil Jesus]

6 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Except...a large percentage of those suspecting a conspiracy were swayed to do so after viewing the film, and the public viewing of the film led the public to call for a second investigation, which led to the HSCA. 

So, that's quite a conundrum. One can choose to believe the top piece of evidence convincing people there was a conspiracy was actually faked to suggest no conspiracy, or that people's memories are often in error. Hmmm...

You're right, except that the headshot could not be edited.

It would have been impossible to alter the film in such a way as to depict the movement of the head as being anything other than what it was. It just couldn't be done. Under those circumstances, those responsible for the editing of the original Zapruder film ( CIA ) would have been FORCED to retain the headshot frames. Editing a stop out is easy. I proved that. Changing the direction of the head was not. Keep in mind that this film was never intended to be released to the public.

We KNOW the Nix isn't original.

We KNOW the Muchmore film has an anomaly at Z312-313.

We KNOW that Z-312 is blurred ( moving ) and Z-313 is in sharp focus ( still ).

Either: a.) all three of these films were altered, or

b.) all 10 of the witnesses listed above were wrong.

I guess it's all in what you choose to believe.

[Chuck Schwartz]

https://jfkfacts.org/rewinding-the-zapruder-film/-this is Doug Horne speaking on the Zapruder film. 

[Paul Brancato]

Gil - Very concise work and convincing enough to a Z film alteration skeptic like myself. I’ve always had the objection that the film clearly shows the back and to the left movement. Your explanation is logical. 
the biggest tragedy is that another version exists which none of us have seen. 

[Ty Carpenter]

Sorry if I missed it, but is there a list of people who claim to have seen the "other" film? The only two I am aware of are DellaRosa and Burnham.

[John Butler]

Gil Jesus- The “Other Zapruder” Film

 

“Only one person filmed from start to finish the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which occurred in a matter of seconds at 12:30 p.m. on Nov. 22, 1963 on Elm Street in Dealey Plaza in downtown Dallas, TX. That person was a 58-year old Dallas dress manufacturer, Abraham Zapruder, who died in 1970. His silent color 8 mm film of JFK being shot to death in broad daylight while riding in an open limousine is the most historically momentous home movie in history.”

And,

“Until a few years ago, the authenticity and reliability of the extant Zapruder film was accepted by almost all JFK assassination researchers, even the severest critics of the Warren Report, myself included. The provenance of the Zapruder film was firmly established and the film was regarded as the single most reliable piece of assassination evidence.

Today, however, things are different. There are serious doubts about whether the film is original and an accurate depiction of the assassination.”

The underlined statements may be true.  But, there are other things to consider.  In this context I would like to suggest it was the Elsie Dorman film that did just that.  Why Elsie Dorman?  This film is under most people’s radar.  It is a difficult film to look at and doesn’t really show that much.  Besides it shows Houston Street and everybody, I mean everybody, knows the assassination happened on Elm Street down in front of the Grassy Knoll.  The film is simply a badly distorted film which does not show the assassination.  I believe most folks would agree with that.  I recall one researcher saying that the Elsie Dorman was the worst photographer ever.

However, I don’t believe that is the case.  Get a copy of the film, use good software, and look at each frame of the film.  Magnify each frame until you have a large image on the screen and you will see something like this which is representative of most frames on Houston Street:

 

Can you visually identify anyone in the p. limo?  This film has been edited.  The people in the p. limo have been painted or blacked out.  This is representative of the frames on Houston Street.  There are 8 films in all that have been edited on Houston Street.

There are 108+ witnesses who say something different happened than the favored conspiracy theories based on the Zapruder Film, or the Official Story about what happened during the assassination.  That is about 20% of the witnesses in Dealey Plaza.

These witnesses directly contradict the Zapruder Film and all of the frames past Z 133.  Again, why Elsie Dorman?  Based on the Elsie Dorman film, here’s what I think really happened in the alteration of the Z film.  This is crudely done since I am not a film editor.

 

John Costella said the film was technically perfect except for small, technical changes in the film.  I struggled with this notion for years.  Costella was talking about the technical aspects of the film and not the content of the film.  There are many strange content images in the Zapruder Film.  I couldn’t reconcile those differences.

As I said earlier, this alteration method is based on the Elsie Dorman film.  One has a film of the p. limo traveling down Elm Street.  What needs to be changed to tell a different story?  Simply the scene content of the inside of the p. limo.  One can take imagery from another location, say the intersection of Elm and Houston, and in front of the TSBD, during what I call the Zapruder Gap.  You could even use film frames from Houston Street or Main Street.  A small number of witnesses said shooting happened there. 

This missing part of the film, the frames between Z 132 and Z 133, could contain frames for 21 seconds. Others, notably David Josephs think the time might be 15 seconds.  OBTW, that's plenty of time for a limo stop.  Let’s say 18 X 15 frames, or 270 frames are missing from the Zapruder Gap.  That gives one a lot of scenes to use elsewhere.  How many people were photographing the motorcade?  I believe more than we know.  The editors of the Zapruder Film had many sources to use in the construction of the Zapruder film.

Have you ever wondered why no one on Houston Street or on Elm Street, except Abe Zapruder, filmed the p. limo from the passenger side?  All of the films and photos are filmed from either the rear or the driver’s side of the p. limo.  The last view of the passenger side of the p. limo was Jay Skaggs at the intersection of Houston and Main.

I believe this is so you would not recognize anything in another film that would match the Zapruder Film or come even close to matching the Zapruder Film.

 

Edited February 12, 2022 by John Butler

[John Butler]

9 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

So, that's quite a conundrum. One can choose to believe the top piece of evidence convincing people there was a conspiracy was actually faked to suggest no conspiracy, or that people's memories are often in error. Hmmm...

If it is a small number of people as versus a large number, then folks are apt to go with the larger number using things like what is said above.  However, what if there were a large number of people saying something.  I recall that Vince Palarmara said something like 59 witnesses said the p. limo came to a stop.  I have 108+ witnesses who said that shooting occurred differently and mainly in the intersection of Elm and Houston and in front of the TSBD.  A small number of those witnesses said shooting occurred on Main Street and Houston Street.  This directly contradicts the Zapruder Film and others that show much the same imagery.

What do you do with that?  Throw out 20% of the witnesses because they said something different.  No.  Those witnesses introduce a large element of doubt.  There are a lot of people who would still like to believe the Zapruder Film is still the best source of information on the assassination.  It they accept that the Z film is fraud then that kills years or perhaps decades of work.  And, gives rise to the question "How could I have missed that?".

It is a conundrum.  

 

Edited February 12, 2022 by John Butler

[Chuck Schwartz]

Dino Brugioni said he saw the original Zapruder film.  This is from Wikipedia, "

Dino Brugioni says that he and his team examined the 8mm Zapruder film of the John F. Kennedy assassination the evening of Saturday 23 November 1963 and into the morning of Sunday 24 November 1963, when he was the weekend duty officer at the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center. Dino and his team projected the film for two members of the Secret Service several times, and they indicated which frames they wanted prints made from, which in turn should be included on the briefing boards. Dino indicated in the interview that he was positive that they had the original film, and that when they projected it for the two members of the Secret Service, it was the first time they had viewed the film. After creating the required duplicate negatives from the desired frames, the film was returned the two members of the Secret Service, and that at approximately 3 AM they left the NPIC facility. He and his team then made up two identical sets of briefing boards, one set for CIA Director John McCone and one for the Secret Service, but both were eventually delivered to the CIA Director who would in turn provide a set to the Secret Service. Each set was consisted of two boards, hinged in the middle, and contained between 12 and 15 prints of frames from the film, with the frame number indicated on the board. Brugioni prepared identical one sheet of notes that accompanied each set the briefing boards, which included the name of each person who had seen the film and worked on the production of the prints and briefing boards. When the work was complete, Dino Brugioni reviewed the briefing boards and notes with his superior, Arthur Lundahl, whom he had called and requested come to the facility. The briefing boards and notes were then turned over to Arthur Lundahl.^[10][11]

Brugioni said he was not aware of a second examination of the film at NPIC, the night of Sunday 24 November and the early morning of Monday 25 November, by a completely different team. Apparently the team that worked on the second examination was given 16mm film and made up another, and possibly larger, series of frame prints, and that another set of briefing boards was also created.^[10][12]

Brugioni thought the Zapruder Film in the National Archives today, and available to the public, has been altered from the version of the film he saw and worked with on November 23–24. Specifically, the version of the Zapruder Film Brugioni recalls seeing had more than one frame of the fatal head shot to Kennedy with its resulting "spray" of brain matter that he referred to as a "white cloud", three or four feet above Kennedy's head. The version of the Zapruder film available to the public depicts the fatal head shot on only one frame of the film, frame 313. Additionally, Brugioni is adamant that the set of briefing boards available to the public in the National Archives is not the set that he and his team produced on November 23–24, 1963.^[10][13]"

[Gil Jesus]

2 hours ago, Chuck Schwartz said:

 

Brugioni said he was not aware of a second examination of the film at NPIC, the night of Sunday 24 November and the early morning of Monday 25 November, by a completely different team. Apparently the team that worked on the second examination was given 16mm film and made up another, and possibly larger, series of frame prints, and that another set of briefing boards was also created.^[10][12]

If the film was edited, it had to have been enlarged to 16mm or 35mm.

"A key point in film editing is that it is very unlikely that the 8mm film would have been altered without first enlarging it to at least a 
16mm format or, preferably, 35mm. This was pointed out to me by George Kendall, retired chief engineer of Moviola Corporation, the leading 
manufacturer of film editing machines in 1963. Their standard machines were for 16mm and 35mm film.

Another key point is that the 8mm film used by Zapruder was Kodachrome II. I obtained this information from James Silverberg, attorney for 
the Zapruder family estate. His law firm has been responsible for all legal and contract matters concerning the film.

Silverberg told me he had established that the film was Kodachrome II by inspection of the markings on the "original" (now in preservation
in the National Archives) and after consulting with Eastman Kodak engineers. Also, close examination of the Zapruder frames shown in the 
Warren Commission Report in Volume XVIII show Kodachrome II identification markings. 

A third key point is that 16mm film or 35mm was not (and is not) available in Kodachrome II. I obtained this information from Dr. Rod Ryan, 
retired scientist from Eastman Kodak Company. Therefore the enlarged film for editing would not have been on Kodachrome II.

With these three basic parameters, it was obvious that the forgery process would have involved these minimal steps: (1) enlarge the 
8mm camera original to 16mm or 35mm; (2) edit the enlarged film on an editing machine, producing a work print which would show splice marks; 
(3) reduce back to 8mm on Kodachrome 11 camera stock, circa 1963, so that no splice marks were detectable."

Source: ( Noel Twyman, Bloody Treason, ( 1995 ) pg. 153

Who had the ability to do this ? Twyman continues:

"One company was George W Colburn Laboratories in Chicago, Illinois. Also there were Calvin Laboratories in Kansas City and Hollywood Valley 
Film Laboratories in Los Angeles, both of which were no longer in business. Dr. Ryan thought that Colburn Laboratories was still in business 
in Chicago, being run by George Colburn's brother, Robert Colburn. He also told me that the Technicolor Company in Burbank, California, at one 
time had the capability to process Kodachrome II film." ( pg. 156 )

"I called Mr. Coburn and he told me that his optical printers in those days could certainly capture all of the information on 8mm film, between the sprocket holes and even beyond the edges of the film if one wanted. I asked Mr. Coburn if his company enlarged the Zapruder film for Life magazine in the days following the assassination. He replied that he did remember that his firm enlarged an 8mm film for Life concerning the JFK assassination, but couldn't recall if it was the Zapruder film."  ( pg. 161 )

"I was surprised to learn from Dr. Ryan that no government facilities had Kodachrome II processing in 1963 or even today. Dr. Ryan was certain 
on this point. I had always assumed that the National Photographic Interpretation Center, the laboratories in the FBI, or other government 
agencies would have such equipment. But Dr. Ryan said that this was not so. Only Eastman Kodak and a few licensed private laboratories could 
have done the final step of development back to Kodachrome II film stock." ( p. 158 )

If the film was edited, the last step in the editing process, reducing it back from 16mm to 8mm, could only have been done at one of the commerical venues or, more likely, at the  "Hawkeye Works" lab at Eastman Kodak in Rochester, NY.

 

Edited February 12, 2022 by Gil Jesus

[David Andrews]

Not to split hairs on this fine piece of Gil's work, but, while the composite film (and the original Zapruder) were not meant to be seen by the general public, no one could have been certain as to who in government at any date after the JFKA would see the composite, and what their disposition toward the contents might be.  There would be a difference between the viewers desired and the viewers who could conceivably see the composite.  So decisions made as to what could be seen in the composite had to be across-the-board convincing of the cover story, at least within the limits of argument.

Also, if pains were taken to set up alternate photographers shooting from Zapruder's POV, then there would already be a plan as to where to do the composite work after the film(s) left Dallas.  It would not be left to circumstantial decision.  In that way, the film alteration mirrors the body alteration, perhaps not just metaphorically but physically - down to the bloody "flap" appearing on the right side of the head, unseen at Parkland but visible in the Zapruder composite and the autopsy photos suspected of being retouched to elide the rear blowout.  (With those autopsy photos being a third mirror, for an infinite reflection.)

It would seem that the composite film was made from a copy that had been reviewed in Washington while Dino Brugioni was printing stills and preparing briefing boards from the original.  Doug Horne's breakneck timeline aside, there would be no time to review the film after Brugioni finished, make the decision to send it to Hawkeye Works, and then get the composite back to NPIC for McMahon and Hunter to make new prints from and prepare alternate briefing boards.  The fact that Brugioni got the original points toward some error made in releasing the film to him prematurely.  I'm thinking an independent team of nominal Secret Service agents (actually CIA?) was put in play perhaps while Brugioni was still working, and carried the copy from Washington to Rochester, and then back to NPIC.

What exactly did McMahon and Hunter say about the version they received, in contrast to what Brugioni describes receiving in the Horne film?  Was that an unslit 16mm/8mm, or a 16mm single strip?

Edited February 13, 2022 by David Andrews

[Eddy Bainbridge]

I am pretty convinced the Z film has frames with the rear head-shot blacked out (before and after injury) and has had frames removed which coincidentally remove the brief stop. Lots of evidence attractively meets this theory (Gil Jesus has summarised a lot of it). Another piece of evidence is that we know the limo braked (brake lights came on) at the right time. 

Mark Tyler on a thread here looked into the ear witness testimony and that points to two shots around the time of the headshot. I have postulated on another thread that what we now see is the remainder of a rear headshot (Rydberg drawing) causing the side blowout and a subsequent frontal headshot causing the rear blowout (excised). I suspect the Presidents bodily movements make more sense as a function of braking and acceleration (with removed frames inbetween).

Gil Jesus has created a simple simulation to show the effect of frame removal. I suspect a more complex film simulation could be created to simulate the sequence I describe.