Jump to content
The Education Forum

Zapruder Film Alteration Synopsis


Recommended Posts

On 5/8/2022 at 3:06 AM, Michael Crane said:

When I brainstorm,I often wonder what kept the temple & the shot in the back from bleeding?Temple shot could have bled into the hairline,but I would expect to see some blood running down the forehead.The back shot......now that is a complete mystery.Lifton suspects that it was man made,but didn't a Secret Service man claim to see it?

When President Kennedy's car was about ten feet from us, I heard a noise that sounded like a firecracker going off.  President Kennedy kind of jumped like he was startled and covered his head with his hands and then raised up.  After I heard the first shot, another shot sounded and Governor Connolly kind of grabbed his chest and lay back on the seat of the car....Just about the time President Kennedy was right in front of us, I heard another ring out and the President put his hands up to his head.  I saw blood all over the side of his head.  -Gayle Newman.

Michael, Gayle Newman's statement taken at the Dallas Sheriff's Dept., on Nov. 22nd., & she and husband Bill were, as we know, two of the nearest witnesses to the kill shot(s).  These witness statements are what keep us debating this topic! 

The Secret Service agent who claimed to see the back wound shot was Glen Bennett. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 170
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

When President Kennedy's car was about ten feet from us, I heard a noise that sounded like a firecracker going off.  President Kennedy kind of jumped like he was startled and covered his head with his hands and then raised up.  After I heard the first shot, another shot sounded and Governor Connolly kind of grabbed his chest and lay back on the seat of the car....Just about the time President Kennedy was right in front of us, I heard another ring out and the President put his hands up to his head.  I saw blood all over the side of his head.  -Gayle Newman.

Michael, Gayle Newman's statement taken at the Dallas Sheriff's Dept., on Nov. 22nd., & she and husband Bill were, as we know, two of the nearest witnesses to the kill shot(s).  These witness statements are what keep us debating this topic! 

The Secret Service agent who claimed to see the back wound shot was Glen Bennett. 

 

 

Good call Pete thank you.

You would think that nurse Diana Bowron would have seen the wound bleeding or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Andrej.  I've never seen the black patch quite this clearly.  As Paul Bacon asks, where did you find it?  As Horne notes, it's no wonder film experts find it not only altered, but poorly altered.

Frame-317-HD-First-Version-Sent-1024x576

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Frame-317-HD-First-Version-Sent-1024x576

Count me as the third person in this thread to question the providence of this frame, which is clearly not frame 313. That black patch is not evident on any copy of the film I have ever seen, and I fail to comprehend how it could be so clear in this and only this iteration of the frame in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

Andrej, I’m not sure this is 313, it seems to resemble 317 more. Whichever frame it is, it seems a clumsy attempt at alteration, one I can’t find anywhere else? Is this pic a still or did you capture it from film footage - I visited MWN but couldn’t find it.

799BBD53-CE2A-403A-B2E9-C81F253C5CF1.thumb.jpeg.92eb303a44cb108ef17965914084f8a9.jpeg
 

Pic from John Costella’s site showing 313 and the forward motion before the head shot.

Sean, I think your right about Andrij's post is a high quality blow up of 317 vs 313.  You can see the black patch in 317 on Costella's version.  But this is much clearer.  Probably what the Hollywood film experts saw when they concluded, poorly done.

z317.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Michael Crane said:

A little off topic,but I was just watching Youtube & Josiah Thompson admitted to stealing a copy of the Zapruder film that he made while he was working for Time Life.

I think you might mean Robert Groden.  The frame by frame copy he made, then shown on Goodnight America by Geraldo Rivera in 1975(?).  ?

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I think you might mean Robert Groden.  The frame by frame copy he made, then shown on Goodnight America by Geraldo Rivera in 1975(?).  ?

 

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I think you might mean Robert Groden.  The frame by frame copy he made, then shown on Goodnight America by Geraldo Rivera in 1975(?).  ?

No Ron it was Tink.I'll look for it on Youtube.He was one of a few speakers that were talking about what to do with the Zapuder film.Might have been on CSPAN but don't quote me on that.

Edited by Michael Crane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

I think you might mean Robert Groden.  The frame by frame copy he made, then shown on Goodnight America by Geraldo Rivera in 1975(?).  ?

 

2 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

No Ron it was Tink.I'll look for it on Youtube.He was one of a few speakers that were talking about what to do with the Zapuder film.Might have been on CSPAN but don't quote me on that.

See Thompson's 'Last Second in Dallas' chapter 6 "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt" pgs 85-90.  Tink photographed Zapruder transparencies of individual frames in Time's office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul Bacon writes:

Quote

His head actually moved forward before the back and to the left.  The rest of that forward movement was excised, per Doug Horne.  This is what Dan Rather saw in the unaltered version.

I'm not aware of Rather saying anything about JFK's head moving forward before moving backward. John Kelin's article, 'Forward with Considerable Violence', includes transcripts of Rather's first two interviews. Neither transcript includes any mention of the forward head movement occurring before a backward head movement:

http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/d_rather.html

Kelin points out that Rather included two pieces of information that he cannot have got from watching the film, but which just happened to reflect the official non-conspiracy explanation: there was one gunman, and he was shooting from the book depository. Rather also has Governor Connally being shot in the chest, not in the back as everyone except David Lifton accepts.

I don't see any good reason to believe that Rather genuinely saw JFK's head move violently forward:

  • Rather's description included things that he couldn't have seen.
  • He claimed to have seen one event that didn't happen.
  • Part of his description is accurate: JFK's head does in fact move forward, though not violently.
  • Very few other people, whether witnesses in Dealey Plaza or early viewers of the film, described what Rather claimed to have seen.
  • None of the home movies or photographs show what Rather claimed to have seen.

Maybe Rather was honestly mistaken about what he saw. Maybe he was exaggerating what he saw. Maybe he was making stuff up. Each of those explanations is more plausible than the self-contradictory idea that a home movie was altered to support the lone-gunman theory, only for the film to end up seriously undermining the lone-gunman theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan Cohen writes:

Quote

That black patch is not evident on any copy of the film I have ever seen

Indeed. If that patch doesn't exist in other copies, that particular copy is worthless.

Copies several generations removed from the original are likely to contain all sorts of weird marks that aren't present in the original. If anyone wants to demonstrate that a black patch exists, the first thing you need to do is to show that it clearly exists in the best quality copy that's available. Those Hollywood experts we've been hearing about for years: have they published anything yet?

This is one more example of uncritical believers seeing what they want to see. It's just like believers who see the image of their preferred deity in a piece of toast.

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...