Zapruder frame 317

[Michael Crane]

Yep,

The plotters are trying to convince the public that a shot hit in the back of the head,and continued on to exit forward.

[Kevin Balch]

How did a bullet fired from the right front strike nearly perpendicular to the right temple of a head turned to the left and facing slightly downward exit from the right rear with no damage to the left half of the skull?

[Ron Bulman]

On 5/8/2024 at 4:41 PM, Keven Hofeling said:

In my opinion, you are absolutely right. It is the only option we seem to have to counter the dark forces that continue to seek to conceal the truth, as exemplified by the following which has happened to Sydney Wilkinson and Thom Whitehead's efforts to make their documentary about the Zapruder film entitled "Alteration." To me, it appears that the Sixth Floor Museum, operating as a CIA front, is having some success suppressing the documentary, as outlined below:

____________

In November 2010, Sidney Wilkinson encountered a problem with the Sixth Floor Museum -- that should raise some eyebrows -- which derailed her production plan for her documentary. The short version of that story is told by Dr. David Mantik in the following video:

VIDEO IS QUEUED TO 27:46 WHERE DR. DAVID MANTIK TELLS THE STORY OF SYDNEY WILKINSON AND THEIR VISITS TO THE SIXTH FLOOR MUSEUM TO EXAMINE THE 5 x 7 TRANSPARENCIES FROM THE ORIGINAL ZAPRUDER FILM https://youtu.be/hlGaFMvZEI8?t=1666

____________

Doug Horne, Dr. David Mantik, and Sydney Wilkinson on apparent fraud in Zapruder film transparencies committed while in the custody of the Sixth Floor Museum:

'MASQUERADE AT THE MUSEUM'

Excerpt from 'THE JFK ASSASSINATION DECODED: Criminal Forgery in the Autopsy Photographs and X-rays' by David Mantik, MD, PhD.

April 15, 2013

Revised November 2021

David W. Mantik (DM) and Sydney Wilkinson (SW)

 

INTRODUCTION (DM)

 

Within several years of the JFK assassination, David Lifton had been captivated by the Zapruder images81 following frame Z-313 " ...because the back of the head seemed all blacked out."82 Curiously, this was several years before he began to suspect that the entire film had been (illegally) edited. He recalls that when Wesley Liebeler (in 1967) had ordered the 4x5 inch transparencies from LIFE magazine for his class (see further discussion of these below) the back of the head still lacked detail.83 In June 1970, under the ruse of a possible purchase, Time-Life permitted Lifton and colleagues to examine multiple film items at their Beverly Hills office. These included 4x5 inch transparencies, an 8 mm film, a 16 mm film and a 35 mm film.84 The back of the head still seemed blacked out to Lifton, which was also consistent with the LIFE magazine images.

 

On that occasion, Lifton viewed the frames after Z-334 (the last one published by the Warren Commission) and discovered that the supposed right facial wound of JFK (not seen by anyone at Parkland) was enormous-and that it appeared merely to be artwork. Provoked by this, Lifton then studied "Insert Matte Photography" and suggested that the "blacking out" effect might also be artwork.

 

The blacked-out posterior skull was radically inconsistent with the recollections of the Parkland physicians. More to the point, though, it was also thoroughly inconsistent with their contemporaneous notes, which are included in the Warren Report. These professionals uniformly recalled a right posterior skull defect about the size of an orange. These doctors also (uniformly) disagreed with the autopsy photographs, which, like the Zapruder film, showed no posterior skull defect. In fact, this disagreement (about the hole in the back of the head) was so scandalous that I listed sixteen Parkland physicians85 who stated that the autopsy photographs86) were distinctly different from what they recalled. On the contrary, no physician who saw the autopsy photographs (of the back of the head) immediately recognized them.

 

Based on my own viewing of the autopsy photographs and X-rays on multiple occasions at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and greatly assisted by optical density measurements made directly on JFK's X­ rays at NARA, I proposed a skull reconstruction87 with a large upper occipital defect. In addition, an adjoining site just to the right of this defect) appeared to be a bone flap that could swing open or closed, which was consistent with the recollections of Dr. Robert McClelland. In fact, McClelland had approved a sketch for Josiah Thompson, which was accompanied by his own pertinent quotation about the bone flap.88 Based on these considerations, even if one accepted an intact (or nearly intact) posterior scalp (i.e., just the soft tissue), a fairly large posterior skull defect could no longer be denied. Curiously enough, such a bony defect was in fact, also consistent with the drawings by autopsy pathologist J. Thornton Boswell.89

 

So now the question became obvious: How could the scalp appear so intact in the Zapruder film (and in the autopsy photographs), while an obvious defect was seen at Parkland Hospital (at least in the bone, but probably also in the scalp)? Actually, the problem lay even deeper than that: The ancillary autopsy personnel (at Bethesda) agreed with the Parkland witnesses-they also recalled a large hole in the posterior skull.90 Photographs of these witnesses--from both Parkland and Bethesda--consistently illustrated the hole and were compiled by Robert Groden.91

 

The issue of a posterior skull defect is not a mere curiosity--on the contrary, it goes to the very heart of the JFK assassination case. Such a defect clearly implies a frontal shot, and therefore unavoidably means conspiracy. If the forensic evidence had to be altered (to cover-up a conspiracy), then this posterior defect was an indispensable target for alteration.

 

The remainder of this essay is a first-person account of our mutual attempts to decipher this paradox of JFK s posterior skull especially as seen in the Zapruder film.

 

A BRIEF HISTORY OF OUR 35MM DUPLICATE NEGATIVE OF THE ZAPRUDER FILM (SW)

 

In 2008, my partner (and husband), Thom Whitehead, sold our startup editing company to Deluxe Film Labs. Thom was hired to oversee their newly created editorial department in Burbank, and I chose a new path. After spending over twenty years in sales and development in the post-production industry, I was ready for a new challenge.

 

I have been interested in the JFK assassination history for decades. In 1978, I spent a memorable college semester in Washington, D.C., working as a congressional intern and studying the activities of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). One of the key subjects that piqued my interest was the iconic Zapruder film. In 2008, I rekindled my interest and began to read about the film with a renewed vigor. I was surprised to discover there were serious concerns about its authenticity. Most notably, there had never been a truly independent, forensic, imaging study---one that was not connected to a government or private entity. It suddenly dawned on me that I might have a golden opportunity to delve deeper into the film imagery by utilizing the resources of Deluxe Labs92--one of the largest and most prestigious professional film labs in history. We knew they would allow us to use any/all of their state-of-the-art film and digital technology. Additionally, considering that Thom and I had spent years working with the top film restoration and post-production experts in the world, I felt confident we would be able to solicit their professional, unbiased guidance. With the absolute best technology and talent available at the time, all we needed was the best possible film element to study.

 

In November 2008, we purchased a 35mm duplicate negative (dupe neg) of the "forensic version' of the Zapruder "camera original" 8 mm film housed at NARA. It is a US government authorized and certified, third generation film copy. To our surprise, and to the best of our knowledge (as of 2018), it is the only third generation 35mm dupe neg acquired for the purpose of an independent, expert evaluation since NARA made such elements available to the public in 2003.

 

The following is a brief timeline of the steps I had to take to acquire our 35 mm dupe neg from NARA. It took eight months, and they certainly did not make it convenient, or cost effective in 2008. I hope they have simplified the process since then.

1. I called NARA in March 2008 and was referred to James Mathis, PhD Archivist, Special Access and FOIA Staff. I asked him about access to the original Zapruder film for a potential documentary film project, and what I needed to do in order to purchase the best possible film copy for research purposes. I was baffled when he informed me that the first step (for some forever unexplained reason) was to purchase a copy of the (Roland) Zavada Report93 that had been commissioned by the Assassination Records and Review Board (ARRB) during its tenure. He said NARA considered the report to be the definitive work on the authenticity of the Zapruder film and only after I had carefully read it, and still had questions would they consider moving forward with my request. I did not know any better at the time, so I paid $553.50 for a photocopy of the Zavada Report94 and read all of it--well, at least, the pages that were legible. (The black and white photographic prints of versions of the Zapruder film were useless.)

2. A few months later, I called Leslie Waffen, who at the time was Branch Chief of the Sound and Motion Picture Branch at Archives II, in College Park, Maryland. I introduced myself and told him I had read the Zavada Report and would like to move forward with purchasing a 35mm duplicate negative film copy of the original Zapruder film. To my surprise, he said he had no idea why I had been told I needed to buy, and read, the Zavada Report before moving forward. Really? He explained that my next step was to get written permission from the Sixth Floor Museum95 who owned the copyright to the Zapruder film.

3. In August, I contacted the Sixth Floor Museum and spoke with Gary Mack, who referred me to Megan Bryant. I explained to her that, presently, we were going to use the 35mn dupe neg for research purposes only but were hoping to eventually include it in documentary project sometime in the future. I understood that she would send me the licensing fees if that came to fruition. I followed her instructions on how to obtain their official authorization by completing the 'Formal Reproduction Request" form on their web site, followed by multiple phone conversations with Ms. Bryant.

4. In October, the Sixth Floor Museum approved my request and Ms. Bryant faxed an authorization letter directly to Mr. Waffen at NARA.

5. A few days later, Mr. Waffen96 gave me the names of three ARA­ authorized post-production facilities from which to order our film element directly. I contacted all three, but only one facility (Colorlab film transfers. I paid $795 directly to them and received our film via FedEx a few weeks later.

According to NARA, the film element used to complete my transfer was their 35mm Intermediate (or "reproduction") copy, which is an interpositive,97 silent, color film descended from the direct blow-up 35mm Internegative. NARA considered it to be a "preservation master." At that time, they offered two versions to the public: (1) a "forensic” version--a 35mm, direct optical blow-up Internegative (without any image improvement) from Zapruder's 8mm camera "original,"98 and (2) a “de-scratched" version--a 35mm film element that has been "cleaned up" to look visually appealing. The latter effectively removes dirt and scratches via "a diffused light source in analog printing instead of using a traditional wet-gate method.99 We chose the forensic version because we wanted to work with unadulterated images--as close to the "original" as possible--where nothing had been done to enhance or improve them in any way.

 

TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF OUR 6K SCANS (SW)

 

We scanned our 35mm dupe neg directly to 6k files using a Northlight film scanner. At the time, the Northlight scanner was instrumental in the production of Hollywood films and was considered state-of-the-art technology in post­ production.100 It created digital files from the optical image of a film. Great care was accorded to this process in a post-production environment because the introduction of any artifacts or discontinuities could ruin the day for a film director or director of photography. The digital file that is created must replicate exactly the image on the film and reveal all the information present on each film frame.

 

Due to the relatively small size of the original 8mm Zapruder film (when viewing the entire 35 mm frame on the dupe neg) we decided to scan at Northlight’s maximum available scan size of 6k. The 6k refers to a size of 6144 x 4668 pixels with an effective size of 114.7 Mb of digital data per frame. To put this into perspective, a home HDTV only presents 1920 x 1080 pixels with about 9.7 Mb per frame. Therefore, our scans have more than ten times the resolution and data size as an HD television image. This additional resolution allowed us to electronically zoom into the image without any apparent loss of detail or fidelity. Finally, we could see down to the grain of the 8mm film with complete sharpness and detail--including all of the inter-sprocket and edge areas. As far as we know, the Zapruder film had never been reproduced or studied at this level of digital resolution.

 

Another important aspect of our scanning process was the use of logarithmic color space, rather than linear color space. This is critical because the use of logarithmic color allows all the color information of the image to be present in the scans, preserving all of the highlight and shadow information. Linear color is what we are accustomed to seeing on TV and computer screens. Although linear color looks correct/normal and lifelike to our eyes, very bright and dark areas of the image must be "clipped" in order to make the majority of the image appear correctly. Logarithmic color, although looking to the untrained eye as "muddy" or "flat," is actually the best way to retain all of the color information in the film.

 

Finally we used the film industry standard "DPX" (Digital Picture eXchange)101 format to allow easy transfers between various professional workstations. One of the state-of-the-art workstations we continue to use is an Autodesk product called Smoke.102

 

THE MPI IMAGES (DM)103

 

In 1997 with Douglas Home of the ARRB staff serving as a neutral observer, MPI's designated film contractor, Mccrone Associates, photographed each frame of the extant Zapruder film at the NARA, using large format (4 x 5 inch) Kodak 6121 color positive transparency duplicating film. Those MPI transparencies constituted first generation copies of each frame in the extant film. The extant film is considered to be generation zero. This MPI process had its own shortcomings104 but following their creation these images should have been the best available to the public. (Later, MPI digitized, manipulated, and reassembled the in1ages as a motion picture, creating a product titled "Image of an Assassination" on both VHS tape and DVD, which has been available for purchase by the public since 1998.) The so-called “MPI transparencies" created by McCrone associates were physically transferred to the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas in January of 2000. This followed the donation and legal transfer of the film's copyright, and the LMH Company's film elements, from LMH Co. to the Museum in December of 1999. From 2000 through 2009, upon appropriate request, these MPI transparencies--true first-generation copies (of the extant film), in large format-were available for public viewing at the Museum.

 

INSIDE THE ARRB, A 5-VOLUME MASTERPIECE BY DOUGLAS HORNE (DM)

 

Appearing in late November 2009, this five-volume encyclopedic work by a former staff member of the ARRB contained images of several Zapruder frames--based on Wilkinson's 6k scans. In particular, Figure 88 in Volume I (an image of Z-317) showed a black geometric patch over the back of JFK's head. (See the image below.) Even in the low-resolution format of a paperback, its borders were preternaturally sharp and well defined, far more than would be expected of a normal shadow.

 

Several months before publication of his book, Home advised me that he planned to visit Thom and Sydney in Los Angeles, so in August 2009, he invited me to their joint viewing.105 While in the film laboratory for several hours, they explained their 6k scans to us. Horne had also viewed them on a prior occasion with three Hollywood professionals. I was particularly fascinated by how unnatural the black patch looked:

 

• After frame Z-313, this area was clearly darker than before Z-313; before Z-313, JFK's hair looked auburn.

 

• The edges of the patch were unnaturally sharp.

 

• Before and after frame Z-313, the back of Connally's head (in a similar shadow as JFK's head) did not show anything like a black patch.

 

SYDNEY SEES THE MPI TRANSPARENCIES AT THE SIXTH FLOOR MUSEUM (SW)

 

On Friday, November 20 2009, during the weekend of the annual JFK symposium meetings, David Mantik and I met for an appointment at the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas. I was very excited because we were going to view the first generation Ektachrome transparencies created by MPI in 1997. We were told they were made directly from Zapruder's 8mm camera "original," which meant they were first generation and should have been sharper than our 35mm dupe neg (third generation). According to the Museum, these MPI transparencies were included in a deed of gift from the Zapruder family in December of 1999, along with the copyright to the Zapruder film (and other important Zapruder film elements) from Time-Life, Inc. My primary goal was to determine if the MPI transparencies showed the same anomalies seen on our scans. I was prepared for either outcome.

 

David and I were given a loupe and light box to carefully look at each transparency. Words cannot describe how stunned I was when I viewed the head shot, frame Z-313, and the frames immediately following. The resolution was beyond anything I expected. Especially, in frames Z-317, Z-321, Z-323, Z-335 and Z-337, the solid, black' patch" that is clearly seen on our 6k scans--covering the right rear area of JFK's head--was even more egregious on the MPI transparencies. It was all I could do to muzzle my emotions. There was no doubt the MPI transparencies corroborated the obvious anomalies seen on our scans. Most importantly, they clearly depicted what should be on the extant Zapruder film housed at NARA.

 

DAVID REPORTS ON THE SAME VISIT (WITH SYDNEY) IN 2009 (DM)

 

While Gary Mack sat nearby, my first impression was the same as Sydney's--the resolution and color were so incredible that I felt as if I were seeing these frames for the very first time. But the greatest emotional impact came on seeing the black patch in Z-317. It was so blatant, so childishly done, that I almost laughed aloud. Whether I did or not is in some doubt, but I retain an image of clapping my hand over my mouth to prevent such a laugh.106 I was also easily able to verify the other abnormalities that Home had reported in his book, published just a week later in November 2009.

 

SYDNEY RETURNS TO THE MUSEUM IN 2010 (SW)

 

The following year, in November 2010, I returned to the newly finished Sixth Floor Museum reading room in order to view the same MPI transparencies. Thom was able to join me and I was excited to show him the stunning clarity of the back of JFK's head i.e., the "black patch," on the frames we had been studying for months. This time, I was definitely not prepared for what I saw when I looked through the loupe. Not only were the transparencies much larger in size physically, than the ones I had viewed the previous year with David, but none of them were as clear and sharp. Not even close. Most importantly, and suspiciously, the flagrant image of the black "patch" was gone. Instead, the back of JFK s head appeared to show a natural shadow--what Thom called "fuzzied up"--without the straight and well-demarcated edges I had seen in 2009. We were both stunned. Furthermore the black patch was not nearly so obvious in this supposed first generation copy as it was in our third generation 6k copy. That made no sense whatever to me. Despite being assured by the museum they were the same transparencies that David and I saw the previous year, there is absolutely no doubt that they were not. To this day, Thom and I wonder if those transparencies had been altered.

 

INTO THE FRAY: DAVID RETURNS TO THE MUSEUM IN 2012 (DM)

 

Shortly after her 2010 visit to the Museum, Sydney telephoned me, sounding anguished and upset. She described the overwhelming shock caused by her most recent visit. I assured her that I stood by the impressions we had both received in 2009, particularly of the black patch. I promised to visit again--to assess her most recent impressions. During this several-year hiatus (2009-2012) at least two other individuals visited the Museum and saw no black patch. The Museum will not disclose the names of any visitors, but Sydney had met retired Kodak film chemist Roland Zavada outside the viewing room on that same day in 2010. (Zavada had lectured at a JFK symposium that day.107) And author Josiah Thompson reported on his visit, which occurred at about that same time--if not the same day.

 

My second opportunity finally arrived during the annual JFK symposia meetings in November 2012. On the chance that the black patch might re-appear I asked author Peter Jaruley to accompany me on November 16, so that he could serve as another witness. (Sydney was not in Dallas at the time.) The verdict came quickly-the patch in Z-317, and conspicuously present in other frames such as Z- 321 and Z-323, had vanished. Neither Peter nor I saw it. The back of JFK's head appeared little different from all those images I had seen before (excepting for Sydney's 6k images). The powerful emotional response of 2009 did not recur. Furthermore, the back of JFK's head did not show the patently obvious patch I had seen on Sydney's 6k scans. Unlike Sydney, I did not perceive the transparencies I viewed in 2012 to be larger in size than those I viewed in 2009; my impression is that they were simply displayed differently, i.e., in different mountings. The important thing is that we both noted that the anomalies present in 2009 had disappeared in the MPI transparencies we viewed in 2010 and 2012. Before leaving the Museum, I pointedly asked Megan Bryant (Gary Mack was absent) if these were the same images that she had shown me in 2009. She claimed they were.

 

MPI SUMMARY (SW and DM)

 

It is most likely that the images shown to Josiah Thompson and Roland Zavada were the same ones that Sydney and Thom saw in 2010 and that David saw in 2012. If so, then neither of these men has ever viewed the images that Sydney and David saw together at the Museum in 2009. It would have been most enlightening if either Thompson or Zavada could have joined us in 2009.

 

Of course, the relationship between the release date of Horne's book (late November 2009), and our Museum visit in late November 2009 is most peculiar. Our 2009 visit had occurred about one week before the release of Horne's book! In retrospect, this timing appears noteworthy (if not ominous): Was the Museum caught off guard by our visit? Was the Museum's staff oblivious to the purpose of our visit-possibly because they were still unacquainted with Sydney and Thom's research and because they had not yet seen Figure 88 (Z-317) in Horne's book? Even more to the point: It is our impression that we were the first to see these MPI images at the Museum.

 

What strikes both of us as most anomalous is the wonderful clarity of Sydney's 6k scans--which are only a third generation--versus the (currently) less impressive "first generation" MPI images now housed at the Museum (but present only after our 2009 visit). This discrepancy makes no sense to either of us. It would be most useful if Sydney's 6k scans could be taken into the Museum viewing room to be compared side by side with the MPI images, but that is not allowed. Nor were we permitted to record any images of the MPI transparencies, either via camera or scanner--so we have only our memories.

 

A POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE -- THE TIME/LIFE TRANSPARENCIES (DM)

 

The Time-Life transparencies might resolve this paradox. Josiah Thompson had worked with these images and had photographed them while working for LIFE magazine. He used them as models for the sketches in his book, Six Seconds in Dallas. He was kind enough to loan these negatives to me, which I converted into prints. Oddly, Z-317 is missing from my set,108 although Thompson has posted an image of Z-317 online, presumably from his own set. The other images in my Thompson set do not show an obvious black patch.

 

On January 26, 2000, the Dallas Morning News published an article, "Zapruders Donate JFK Film, Rights," written by reporter Mark Wrolstad, who stated:

Gary Mack, the Museum’s Archivist, was all but whistling Tuesday as he examined what may be the gem of the bunch--oversized transparencies of each Zapruder film frame believed to have been made in 1963 or 1964.

The article notes that Mack was actually (contemporaneously) examining these images--not that he expected to do so at a later time. Mack also stated:

These may be in better condition than the original film is today. We may have something better or sharper, Who knows?

Now, however, we are left to wonder: Had Wrolstad merely invented this story?109 We are confronted with this bizarre question because the Museum (see e­ mail below) explains what supposedly happened: "From [a] misunderstanding, the Museum issued an inaccurate press release on January 25, 2000." Curiously, Mark Wrolstad has not responded to Doug Horne's two written attempts in 2011 to clarify this critical misunderstanding.

 

So here is the problem: the Museum now claims that they never received the 1963/1964 Time/Life transparencies--and also that they don't know where they are now. Here are responses that I received from Megan Bryant (at the Museum). It is my impression that the following statements are for public consumption.

Subject: Time/Life Transparencies

Friday, Nov 16, 2012, 12:59 PM, Megan Bryant<MeganB@jfk.org> wrote: Dr. Mantik,

After your visit today I checked my files to see if we had previously communicated regarding the question of the Time-Life 1963/64 transparencies. It does not appear that we have, so allow me to clarify our conversation from this morning:

The Sixth Floor Museum does not have-and never did have-4"x5" color transparencies prepared by Time-LIFE in 1963/1964 from the 8mm original Abraham Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination. The collection donated to the Museum in December 1999 by the Zapruder family did include the 4x5 color transparencies made in March 1997 for the MPI Media video project titled Image of an Assassination. Documentation from late December 1999 and early January 2000 confirms the Museum expected to, and did, receive these MPI transparencies from the Zapruder family.

Just prior to the December 1999 acquisition, an inventory provided to the Museum listed an additional 27 4x5 color LIFE transparencies. That, in combination with a verbal comment by Zapruder family lawyer Jamie Silverberg, was misinterpreted to mean the collection would include, simply, LIFE transparencies. From that misunderstanding, the Museum issued an inaccurate press release on January 25, 2000. Museum curator Gary Mack repeated the information to Dallas Morning News reporter Mark Wrolstad and his article appeared the next day. Soon after receiving the donation, but after the press release appeared, Mr. Mack confirmed that the Museum did in fact receive the MPI 1997 transparencies. They included unique reference numbers added by MPI photographers in 1997 to identify specific frames of the film.

Recently, with the assistance of retired Kodak scientist Roland Zavada, the Museum learned that the other 4x5 transparencies in the donation were made on film stock manufactured in 1965 or possibly 1966. Whether they were part of a complete series of frames is unknown, as the donation did not include any explanatory Time-LIFE records.

The whereabouts today of the 1963/1964 Time-LIFE transparencies is not known to The Sixth Floor Museum. Time-LIFE may have records indicating what happened to them.

I believe this should address your question on that particular matter. Thank you,

Megan

Megan P Bryant

Director of Collections & Intellectual Property The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza 411 Elm Street

Dallas, TX 75202-3308

Phone: 214.747.6660ext. 5519

Fax: 214.747.6662

Website: www.jfk.org

On 12/13/12, Megan Bryant<Megan8@jfk.org> wrote:

Dear Dr. Mantik,

While the information provided below regarding the Time-LIFE transparencies isn't intended as an official statement of any kind, by all means, if you can help clarify any misperceptions in the research community about the whereabouts of the transparencies, please do feel free to share the information with other researchers-but only in its entirety please. We, as much as you, are interested in knowing the whereabouts of the 63/64 Time-LIFE transparencies, and if clarifying that they are not in the Museum's holdings can help that along, we're all for it.

Regards,

Megan P Bryant

Director of Collections & Intellectual Property The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza 411 Elm Street

Dallas, TX 75202-3308

Phone: 214.747.6660 ext. 5519

Fax: 214.747.6662

DM: So today no one knows where these Time/Life transparencies are located. On April 10, 1997, Doug Home saw a large stack of 4 x 5-inch color positive transparencies of the Zapruder film (with each frame surrounded by a black border) in the office of Jamie Silverberg,110 while working for the ARRB. The transparencies sighted by Doug Home in 1997 were not on Silverberg's typed inventory list of film elements and were only produced after persistent inquiries by Home about their possible existence. But now none of these men--not Home, not Zavada, not Thompson, nor even Gary Mack--can point to their location. 111

 

Before surrendering, I wanted to ascertain whether or not the Time/Life transparencies had, after all, been donated to the Museum. So, I asked the Museum one last question: Could I see the Deed of Gift (circa December 30, 1999) or the complete inventory (or catalog), which was probably prepared in 2000-or any copies of these two items? The Museum, however, responded that these were private documents and were therefore not available for my review-nor could I see copies!

 

CONCLUSIONS (DM and SW)

 

Even if both of us had suddenly lost our senses (oddly at the same moment) in 2009 Sydney's 6k scans still exist--and so does the quite obvious "Mask of Death" in Z-317. Furthermore, anyone can still purchase their own copy via NARA. To our knowledge, at least two other documentarians have done so. Sydney has graciously shown her 6k scans to friend and foe alike. Alarmingly some foes have unexpectedly declined to view them saying that they already know what they will see! This reminds us of Galileo's enemies, who likewise refused to look through his telescope,112 but instead chose to believe that theological reasoning, based on texts of Scripture (a la the Warren Report), was the only road to reality. In effect, the truth was out there, but they preferred blindfolds.

 

In short, this mindset persists today--even though we oxymoronically (and self­ referentially) label ourselves as Homo sapiens.

-------------------------------------------------------

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

Douglas Horne 113

 

What is at stake here is nothing less than historical truth. When an institution that presents itself as a museum--purportedly a guardian of history-­ replaces vital film evidence of President Kennedy's assassination (which apparently contained prima facie evidence of that film's blatant alteration) with substitute evidence (in which the blatant alterations have disappeared), a willful attempt has been made to alter history. The authentic MPI transparencies were available to the public from 2000 until late 2009, a long interval during which the museum's staff was apparently oblivious to what they owned. Following the publication of my five-volume set, Inside the ARRB, in late November of 2009, just one week after David Mantik and Sydney Wilkinson examined the MPI transparencies, the public (and presumably key members of the Museum's staff) awoke to what was at stake here. Here is what likely triggered this aggressive Museum response: Just prior to publication, I had added an addendum to my Zapruder film chapter about the anomalies discovered in Sydney Wilkinson's scans and had actually included an image of Z-317 in my book, as well. (See this image below.)

 

Was the Sixth Floor Museum, the unapologetic and ardent defender of the Warren Commission's conclusions (that a lone malcontent murdered President Kennedy), going to keep on display powerful evidence of the alteration of the single most important assassination record, the Zapruder film? This was the operative question after my book was published. The implications of the obvious alterations found in the 6k scans, and in the MPI transparencies in 2009 were clear: the true exit wound on President Kennedy's head (in the right rear, just where the Parkland Hospital treatment staff had reported it) had been intentionally obscured in the Zapruder film (likely during 1963), in an attempt to hide evidence of crossfire in Dealey Plaza and therefore of conspiracy. (An exit wound in the rear of JFK's head pointed to a fatal shot from the front and therefore multiple shooters, i.e., conspiracy.) Powerful evidence that the Zapruder film had been altered for the purpose of hiding this exit wound-anomalies in the film that provided virtual proof of the Zapruder film's alteration-would also constitute evidence of a cover-up of major proportions soon after the assassination occurred, something almost as disturbing as the assassination itself.

 

Restating the question above, “Was this institution, the Sixth Floor Museum, willing to display powerful evidence that would invalidate the Museum's own conclusions about the assassination, or would they instead abandon the interests of historical truth and pursue their own longstanding bias?"

 

In 2010 and in 2012 Sydney Wilkinson and David Mantik received the answer to this question. The events described in this essay call into serious question the true purpose of the Museum, and cause us to ask "Is the Museum a repository of truth, or an agent of political and historical spin, i.e., a mere disseminator of propaganda?"

 

Two specific Museum employees (Gary Mack114 and Megan Bryant) were in charge of the Museum's film holdings and were in responsible positions when the MPI transparencies and other film elements from the LMH Co. were received in January of 2000 (as evidenced by the Mark Wrolstad article in the Dallas Morning News). Those same two employees were present in 2009 when Sydney and David both observed the same anomalies in the MPI transparencies that were present in the 6k scans. In 2010 and 2012, while Gary Mack apparently no longer felt a need to be present, after what I shall call the "big switch," Megan Bryant was again present.

 

Is it truly plausible that Gary Mack 'misunderstood' the contents of the Deed of Gift to the Sixth Floor Museum from the LMH Company, in addition to "misinterpreting" a verbal comment from Zapruder lawyer, Jamie Silverberg and then carelessly released an inaccurate press release? Sadly, it's unlikely we will ever know. This release had been exhibited on the Sixth Floor Museum website until Doug Home began questioning Mark Wrolstad in 2011 and David Mantik began corresponding with Megan Bryant about it in 2012.

 

What do the events described above say about these two Sixth Floor Museum employees and their integrity?

 

As each reader answers to this question for himself, keep in mind that the best evidence outside of NARA that corroborated the stunning image content in the 6k scans has now disappeared. It has been switched out. We don't know who switched if out, but we certainly know where the switch took place. Meanwhile, this substitute evidence has been shown to two of the foremost defenders of the Zapruder films authenticity: Roland Zavada and Josiah Thompson. And the sanitized images in the substitute MPI transparencies have reinforced the longstanding opinions of these two men-namely, that the film has not been altered. Now both Thompson and Zavada are more certain than ever, based on their viewing of the altered MPI transparencies, that nothing is amiss with the Zapruder film.

 

A former high-level official at Archives II in College Park, Maryland (Leslie Waffen) informed Sydney Wilkinson (circa 2008) that the extant film in cold storage "would never be removed from the freezer again" and there it sits today, further deteriorating with the passage of time. In view of the events described above this policy must change. There is only one way to definitively determine the authenticity of the 6k scans commissioned by Sydney Wilkinson and studied by so many in the Hollywood film industry: compare the 6k scans with the extant film at NARA.

 

A travesty has occurred in Dallas, and it has historical repercussions. The extant 8mm Zapruder film at NARA must be compared to both the 6k scans of the 35mm dupe negative in Hollywood and with the MPI transparencies (currently available for viewing) at the Sixth Floor Museum.

 

Sydney and David and I are not afraid to conduct this test--in fact, we insist on it. The American people should insist on it. Let's do the three-way comparison, with ample witnesses present, movie cameras running, and let the chips fall where they may. The American people deserve to know their true history not a falsified story. END

____________

As for when exactly Alteration will be released, I was very hopeful it would be soon when in 2020 I published the following as a Facebook post:

Technical analysis is on its way in Sydney Wilkinson and Thom Whitehead's documentary, "Alteration". I don't know the release date, but they provided a screening of a preview of the documentary at the 2019 CAPA Conference and at the 2019 Judyth Baker Conference which is described in this podcast interview of Doug Horne (there is about an hour of very fascinating information on the topic starting at 138:30 https://midnightwriternews.com/?powerpress_pinw=1749-podcast )

In short, the documentary contains the analyses of Hollywood professionals Paul Rotan, Garrett Smith and Ned Price who are "absolutely convinced that a black patch -- an overlay -- has been added to the back of JFK's head in frame 317 and in other adjacent frames" using an optical printer and aerial imaging process. I won't be able to do justice in a brief FB comment to all the fascinating information that is presented on the topic during the podcast, but for those who are interested in this subject matter I can definitely assure you that it will be worth your time to listen to it. I believe that with the release of the "Alteration" documentary we will be seeing the onset of a paradigm shift concerning the Zapruder film and the issue of authenticity, and am very much looking forward to the debate in the JFK research community that will ensue.

I had a brief text exchange with Tom Whitehead that same year, and he was keeping his cards close to his vest regarding a release date at that time.

My assumption is that they are still working on technical details, such as finding a distributor.

 

Keven, I often skip your long posts or sometimes scan them or parts of them.  Part of this one caught my eye.  I never knew Sydney Wilkinson was a Congressional Intern in 1978 during the HSCA.  A unique perspective on it and a historical background for her.  The disappearing patch at the Sixth Floor Oswald did it "Museum" is interesting as well.

[Nick Bartetzko]

4 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

How did a bullet fired from the right front strike nearly perpendicular to the right temple of a head turned to the left and facing slightly downward exit from the right rear with no damage to the left half of the skull?

I'm in the minority, but I think a storm drain shot is a good possibility. Newsman Sam Pate supposedly saw smoke coming from the storm drain. If I recall correctly, Pate was on the Stemmons freeway, quite a distance away though. The other reference to the storm drain was supposedly by Will Fritz to Francis Fruge (involved with the Rose Cheramie matter). Fritz allegedly told Fruge that the Dallas PD found maps of the sewer system in the apt of Sergio Arcacha Smith. Finally, the trajectory from the storm drain seems to fit the best/make the most sense as to the injuries and blood spatter on the left side police motorcycles. JFK's right arm and elbow seemingly flew upwards from the impact.

[Charles Blackmon]

13 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

How did a bullet fired from the right front strike nearly perpendicular to the right temple of a head turned to the left and facing slightly downward exit from the right rear with no damage to the left half of the skull?

I don't think anybody posting here is a ballistics expert. Are you?

Do you think the "black blob" is just a shadow? Please explain.

[Charles Blackmon]

9 hours ago, Nick Bartetzko said:

IFritz allegedly told Fruge that the Dallas PD found maps of the sewer system in the apt of Sergio Arcacha Smith. 

I have heard of this. Makes sense that there would be a shooter in the storm drain. 

[Keven Hofeling]

17 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

How did a bullet fired from the right front strike nearly perpendicular to the right temple of a head turned to the left and facing slightly downward exit from the right rear with no damage to the left half of the skull?

To explain the head damage that the bulk of the testamentary and documentary evidence from Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital and the Bethesda autopsy indicates was caused by the headshot at Zapruder frame 313, this is the trajectory we must have:

 

The team that conducted the assassination had trained to assassinate Cuban leader Fidel Castro by triangulated ambush gunfire, so the analysis of the trajectories must take into account that it was a triangulated fire team that shot at President Kennedy from multiple directions:

The following is the best information available about the paramilitary unit that carried out the triangulated ambush assassination of President Kennedy. There are multiple corroborating witnesses for this evidence. It also corroborates the revelations made by Santo Trafficante to his lawyers, In this article, Bill Kelly makes cryptic references to a living person knowledgeable about these events who Kelly does not name. My assumption is that he is referring to Carl Jenkins:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

'PATHFINDER - PARTS 1 - 5 THE PLAN TO KILL CASTRO REDIRECTED TO JFK AT DALLAS'

William Kelly | JFKcountercoup | Saturday, December 22, 2018 | https://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2018/12/pathfinder-parts-1-5-plan-to-kill.html

https://www.facebook.com/groups/politicalassassinationsresearchgroup/posts/6051134211609264/

"...As Bill Turner put it, “the mechanism was in place” to kill Castro, and they just switched targets, and instead of shooting Castro they redirected their fire to JFK at Dealey Plaza...."

"...[W]e have now narrowed down the covert operational plans to kill Castro to a few – including Pathfinder that may have been the specific plan that was redirected to “snuff” JFK in Dallas. If it wasn't Pathfinder, it was one very much like it. Now we will soon know the names of the shooters – the five first-class Cuban mechanic-snipers who were paid and trained by the CIA to kill Castro but one or two of whom shot JFK in the head instead...."

"...“I took high powered rifles with scopes to Cuba,” Eugenio Martinez said, “and they weren’t going to be used to hunt rabbits.” “Chi Chi” Quintero was a shooter, said Wheaton, who also names five or six other Cubans who were on that team, that maritime crew of anti-Castro Cuban commandos who were paid and trained to kill Castro. But when that mission was scrubbed – “disapproved” by “higher authority,” and they learned of the JFK- Castro backchannel negotiations at the UN (from Henry Cabot Lodge), they redirected the Pathfinder target to JFK at Dealey Plaza. And considered themselves patriots for doing so...."

"...The U.S. Army Rangers are called Pathfinders, and two U.S. Army Ranger Captains - Bradley Ayers and Edward Roderick were assigned to the CIA by USMC General "Brut" Krulak to train the Cuban Commandos at JMWAVE. While Ayers trained the Cubans in small boat maneuvering at Pirate's Lair, Roderick trained the snipers at Point Mary, off Key Largo. The original anti-Castro Cuban Pathfinders were the best of the lot sent to Guatemala to train for the Bay of Pigs, and were commanded by US Marine Captain Carl Jenkins, whose specialty was infiltration and exfiltration of commandos while John "I.F" Harper trained the Cubans in explosives and sniper tactics...."

 

The fire plan of the hit team probably looked something like the following: 

 

Immediately following the assassination, many witnesses (including DPD motorcycle patrolmen who had been flanking the limo, and Secret Service agents from the follow up cars [when the motorcade stopped]) ran up the grassy knoll chasing the sound of gunshots, but as you have pointed out, there are problems with this trajectory being the explanation for the right temple entry wound and large avulsive occipital parietal exit wound, and the trajectory from the sixth floor of the TSBD is even worse. However, note the trajectory from the South Knoll (lower left side of diagram), which appears more feasible:

 

Also immediately after the assassination, many witnesses (including a DPD police officer) ran up to the corner of the picket fence and triple overpass cement railing chasing the sound of gunshots, but there are also problems with this trajectory being the explanation for the right temple entry wound and large avulsive occipital parietal exit wound:

 

JFK assassination researcher Sherry Fiester, a former Certified Senior Crime Scene Analyst and court certified expert in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida, totaling in over 30 Judicial Districts and Louisiana State Federal Court https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B00B4TSUV2/about , has made a convincing case that the shot through the windshield of the Presidential Limousine, and JFK's right temple and occipital-parietal wounds were caused by gunshots from an assassin located at the South Knoll, as diagramed below:

 

As diagrammed in the following, a gunshot trajectory originating from the South Knoll appears to be a solution to the problems you have pointed out:

 

The following is a very helpful video which showcases Sherry Fiester's evidence for the gunshots which penetrated the limousine windshield and the headshot to the President having originated from the South Knoll:

 

In short, the existing evidence (much of which I have not presented here) to me strongly suggests that there was a triangulated fire team shooting from multiple directions, and that President Kennedy was shot in the throat (either by the limousine windshield bullet of a glass fragment from the windshield shot), and in the right temple (exiting from the rear right quadrant of JFK's head), and that numerous nearly simultaneous gunshots missed the mark, doing other damage to the limo and to Govenor Connelly.

 

Edited May 10 by Keven Hofeling

[Kevin Balch]

3 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said:

I don't think anybody posting here is a ballistics expert. Are you?

Do you think the "black blob" is just a shadow? Please explain.

No, I am not a ballistics expert. But for the “blob” to be covering up an exit hole of a bullet entering the right temple would imply a near ninety degree turn requiring that it struck a very hard object. I doubt that either brain matter or even the skull would do that. If you of any accounts from ballistic experts that can explain this, please share.

Wouldn’t a better approach be to determine if location supposedly covered up by the blob is really an exit hole and how an exit hole in such a location can result from a shot from the right front rather than declare it an exit hole and claim film alteration?

How different would a black blob be from a wound in shadow?

In the Horne interview with Dino Brugioni, every time (I think there were 3 instances) Brugioni describes the path of the ejecta of tissue from JFK’s head, his has his hand above and in front of his head., never above and behind.

In the first press conference within an hour of the emergency room treatment, Dr. Perry described a ‘tangential wound” to the head. That’s what I see in the extant Zapruder film.

[Kevin Balch]

33 minutes ago, Keven Hofeling said:

To explain the head damage that the bulk of the testamentary and documentary evidence from Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital and the Bethesda autopsy indicates was caused by the headshot at Zapruder frame 313, this is the trajectory we must have:

 

The team that conducted the assassination had trained to assassinate Cuban leader Fidel Castro by triangulated ambush gunfire, so the analysis of the trajectories must take into account that it was a triangulated fire team that shot at President Kennedy from multiple directions:

The following is the best information available about the paramilitary unit that carried out the triangulated ambush assassination of President Kennedy. There are multiple corroborating witnesses for this evidence. It also corroborates the revelations made by Santo Trafficante to his lawyers, In this article, Bill Kelly makes cryptic references to a living person knowledgeable about these events who Kelly does not name. My assumption is that he is referring to Carl Jenkins:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

'PATHFINDER - PARTS 1 - 5 THE PLAN TO KILL CASTRO REDIRECTED TO JFK AT DALLAS'

William Kelly | JFKcountercoup | Saturday, December 22, 2018 | https://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2018/12/pathfinder-parts-1-5-plan-to-kill.html

https://www.facebook.com/groups/politicalassassinationsresearchgroup/posts/6051134211609264/

"...As Bill Turner put it, “the mechanism was in place” to kill Castro, and they just switched targets, and instead of shooting Castro they redirected their fire to JFK at Dealey Plaza...."

"...[W]e have now narrowed down the covert operational plans to kill Castro to a few – including Pathfinder that may have been the specific plan that was redirected to “snuff” JFK in Dallas. If it wasn't Pathfinder, it was one very much like it. Now we will soon know the names of the shooters – the five first-class Cuban mechanic-snipers who were paid and trained by the CIA to kill Castro but one or two of whom shot JFK in the head instead...."

"...“I took high powered rifles with scopes to Cuba,” Eugenio Martinez said, “and they weren’t going to be used to hunt rabbits.” “Chi Chi” Quintero was a shooter, said Wheaton, who also names five or six other Cubans who were on that team, that maritime crew of anti-Castro Cuban commandos who were paid and trained to kill Castro. But when that mission was scrubbed – “disapproved” by “higher authority,” and they learned of the JFK- Castro backchannel negotiations at the UN (from Henry Cabot Lodge), they redirected the Pathfinder target to JFK at Dealey Plaza. And considered themselves patriots for doing so...."

"...The U.S. Army Rangers are called Pathfinders, and two U.S. Army Ranger Captains - Bradley Ayers and Edward Roderick were assigned to the CIA by USMC General "Brut" Krulak to train the Cuban Commandos at JMWAVE. While Ayers trained the Cubans in small boat maneuvering at Pirate's Lair, Roderick trained the snipers at Point Mary, off Key Largo. The original anti-Castro Cuban Pathfinders were the best of the lot sent to Guatemala to train for the Bay of Pigs, and were commanded by US Marine Captain Carl Jenkins, whose specialty was infiltration and exfiltration of commandos while John "I.F" Harper trained the Cubans in explosives and sniper tactics...."

 

The fire plan of the hit team probably looked something like the following: 

 

Immediately following the assassination, many witnesses (including DPD motorcycle patrolmen who had been flanking the limo, and Secret Service agents from the follow up cars [when the motorcade stopped]) ran up the grassy knoll chasing the sound of gunshots, but as you have pointed out, there are problems with this trajectory being the explanation for the right temple entry wound and large avulsive occipital parietal exit wound, and the trajectory from the sixth floor of the TSBD is even worse. However, note the trajectory from the South Knoll (lower left side of diagram), which appears more feasible:

 

Also immediately after the assassination, many witnesses (including a DPD police officer) ran up to the corner of the picket fence and triple overpass cement railing chasing the sound of gunshots, but there are also problems with this trajectory being the explanation for the right temple entry wound and large avulsive occipital parietal exit wound:

 

JFK assassination researcher Sherry Fiester, a former Certified Senior Crime Scene Analyst and court certified expert in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida, totaling in over 30 Judicial Districts and Louisiana State Federal Court https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B00B4TSUV2/about , has made a convincing case that the shot through the windshield of the Presidential Limousine, and JFK's right temple and occipital-parietal wounds were caused by gunshots from an assassin located at the South Knoll, as diagramed below:

 

As diagrammed in the following, a gunshot trajectory originating from the South Knoll appears to be a solution to the problems you have pointed out:

 

The following is a very helpful video which showcases Sherry Fiester's evidence for the gunshots which penetrated the limousine windshield and the headshot to the President having originated from the South Knoll:

 

In short, the existing evidence (much of which I have not presented here) to me strongly suggests that there was a triangulated fire team shooting from multiple directions, and that President Kennedy was shot in the throat (either by the limousine windshield bullet of a glass fragment from the windshield shot), and in the right temple (exiting from the rear right quadrant of JFK's head), and that numerous nearly simultaneous gunshots missed the mark, doing other damage to the limo and to Govenor Connelly.

 

I agree that a south knoll shooter location resolves some problems with a north knoll shooter but introduces other problems.

Here is an approximate view a south knoll shooter would have at frame 312. This was taken from the Discovery Channel show “Inside the Target Car”. Note that the documentary makers have failed to pose JFK as leaning down and to the left which would make him even harder to hit. From your posited location somewhat to the west of what was used here, the limo driver and other occupants likely would have been in the way. Further, there were people on the grass just south of Elm Street that might also have been in the way

Why would a plot intending to frame a lone nut firing from above and behind risk using several shooters from different directions, any one of whom could miss and leave indelible evidence contradicting the LN hypothesis?

 

 

 

[Keven Hofeling]

7 minutes ago, Kevin Balch said:

No, I am not a ballistics expert. But for the “blob” to be covering up an exit hole of a bullet entering the right temple would imply a near ninety degree turn requiring that it struck a very hard object. I doubt that either brain matter or even the skull would do that. If you of any accounts from ballistic experts that can explain this, please share.

Wouldn’t a better approach be to determine if location supposedly covered up by the blob is really an exit hole and how an exit hole in such a location can result from a shot from the right front rather than declare it an exit hole and claim film alteration?

How different would a black blob be from a wound in shadow?

In the Horne interview with Dino Brugioni, every time (I think there were 3 instances) Brugioni describes the path of the ejecta of tissue from JFK’s head, his has his hand above and in front of his head., never above and behind.

In the first press conference within an hour of the emergency room treatment, Dr. Perry described a ‘tangential wound” to the head. That’s what I see in the extant Zapruder film.

Kevin Balch wrote:

Quote

No, I am not a ballistics expert. But for the “blob” to be covering up an exit hole of a bullet entering the right temple would imply a near ninety degree turn requiring that it struck a very hard object. I doubt that either brain matter or even the skull would do that. If you of any accounts from ballistic experts that can explain this, please share.

It appears to me that the bullet trajectory calculated by former criminalist Sherry Fiester solves the problem you are highlighting:

 

Kevin Balch wrote:

Quote

Wouldn’t a better approach be to determine if location supposedly covered up by the blob is really an exit hole and how an exit hole in such a location can result from a shot from the right front rather than declare it an exit hole and claim film alteration?

You seem to be suggesting that there is uncertainty about the existence of the large avulsive head wound in the occipital-parietal region of the right side of the back of JFK's head, but as all of the earliest medical reports of the doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital (See in particular the first day Admittance Notes of Drs. Kemp Clark, Charles Carrico, Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, Robert McClelland, and Marion Jenkins [  https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/app8.htm ]) reported the occipital-parietal wound with extruding cerebellar brain tissue, and roughly a total of FIFTY witnesses attested to the existence of that wound (See Dr. Gary Aguilar's witness calculations below) it is, as JFK researcher @Sandy Larsen has demonstrated elsewhere, a mathematical impossibility that the large avulsive head wound was located anywhere other than in the right lower quadrant of the back of JFK's head:

This is a link to Dr. Gary Aguilar's compilation of the earliest testimony of the Parkland Hospital AND Bethesda autopsy witnesses -- http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm -- and the following chart is in part based upon the the witness accounts outlined in the article by Dr. Gary Aguilar:
--------------------------------------------------
DR. GARY AGUILAR'S APPENDIX - TABLES AND FIGURES:

https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_tabfig.htm

 

Kevin Balch wrote:

Quote

How different would a black blob be from a wound in shadow?

First of all, can you see that this supposed "shadow" is a D-max black hexagon shaped blotch with sharp edges? Does that really appear to be a "natural shadow" to you?

Secondly, are you able to see the pink color of Jackie's dress in the Z-317 below? If you can see pink in shadow, then why not the bloody occipital-parietal wound in "shadow"?

 

And finally, if we can see Jackie's red roses in the same images, then why are we not also vividly seeing the blood, brain and skull that was blasted out of the back of JFK's head?

 

Kevin Balch wrote:

Quote

In the Horne interview with Dino Brugioni, every time (I think there were 3 instances) Brugioni describes the path of the ejecta of tissue from JFK’s head, his has his hand above and in front of his head., never above and behind.

Dino Brugioni's hand gestures were very imprecise, and off hand.  The point he was trying to make is that he and the NPIC technicians saw brain matter flying through the air, and that they were all very shocked when seeing it. More particularly, he was describing something that no longer appears in the extant "original" Zapruder film today:

"...Brugioni's most vivid recollection of the Zapruder film was "...OF JFK'S BRAINS FLYING THROUGH THE AIR." (emphasis not in original)  He did not use the term 'head explosion,' but rather referred to apparent exit debris seen on the film the night he viewed it. Dino had no other specific recollection about content during the 2009 interviews..."

 

 

Furthermore, Dino Brugioni makes virtually the same statement while being interviewed by Doug Horne at 57:42 of the interview:

 

https://youtu.be/J_QIuu6hsAc?t=3463 (Video is cued to 57:42 in advance for you).

 

And note that the bulk of the witness testimony indicates that blood, brain and skull was blasted out the back of JFK's head, to the rear, and to the left:

__________
"...BLOOD, BRAIN MATTER, AND BONE FRAGMENTS EXPLODED FROM THE BACK OF THE PRESIDENT'S HEAD. THE PRESIDENT'S BLOOD, PARTS OF HIS SKULL, BITS OF HIS BRAIN WERE SPLATTERED ALL OVER ME -- ON MY FACE, MY CLOTHES, IN MY HAIR..."

Secret Service Agent Clint Hill (in his 2012 book "Mrs. Kennedy and Me: An Intimate Memoir").
__________
"...I HAD BRAIN MATTER ALL OVER MY WINDSHIELD AND LEFT ARM, THAT'S HOW CLOSE WE WERE TO IT ... IT WAS THE RIGHT REAR PART OF HIS HEAD ... BECAUSE THAT'S THE PART I SAW BLOW OUT. I SAW HAIR COME OUT, THE PIECES BLOW OUT, THEN THE SKIN WENT BACK IN -- AN EXPLOSION IN AND OUT..."

Secret Service Agent Samuel Kinney (3/5/1994 interview by Vince Palamara).
__________
"...WHEN PRESIDENT KENNEDY STRAIGHTENED BACK UP IN THE CAR THE BULLET HIT HIM IN THE HEAD, THE ONE THAT KILLED HIM AND IT SEEMED LIKE HIS HEAD EXPLODED, AND I WAS SPLATTERED WITH BLOOD AND BRAIN, AND KIND OF A BLOODY WATER...."

Dallas Motorcycle Patrolman Bobby Hargis (4/8/1964 Warren Commission testimony).
__________
"...I CAN REMEMBER SEEING THE SIDE OF THE PRESIDENT'S EAR AND HEAD COME OFF. I REMEMBER A FLASH OF WHITE AND THE RED AND JUST BITS AND PIECES OF FLESH EXPLODING FROM THE PRESIDENT'S HEAD..."

Dealey Plaza witness Bill Newman interviewed about the JFK assassination -- 0:13-0:27 -- https://youtu.be/EEhlbAwI7Zg?t=13
__________
"...THE HEAD SHOT SEEMED TO COME FROM THE RIGHT FRONT. IT SEEMED TO STRIKE HIM HERE [gesturing to her upper right forehead, up high at the hairline], AND HIS HEAD WENT BACK, AND ALL OF THE BRAIN MATTER WENT OUT THE BACK OF THE HEAD. IT WAS LIKE A RED HALO, A RED CIRCLE, WITH BRIGHT MATTER IN THE MIDDLE OF IT - IT JUST WENT LIKE THAT...."

Dealey Plaza witness Marilyn Willis from 24:26-24:58 of TMWKK, Episode 1, at following link cued in advance for you https://youtu.be/BW98fHkbuD8?t=1466 ).
__________
"...Charles Brehm: 0:21 WHEN THE SECOND BULLET HIT, THERE WAS, THE HAIR SEEMED TO GO FLYING. IT WAS VERY DEFINITE THEN THAT HE WAS STRUCK IN THE HEAD WITH THE SECOND BULLET, AND, UH, YES, I VERY DEFINITELY SAW THE EFFECT OF THE SECOND BULLET.

Mark Lane: 0:38 Did you see any particles of the President's skull fly when the bullet struck him in the head?

Charles Brehm: 0:46 I SAW A PIECE FLY OVER OH IN THE AREA OF THE CURB WHERE I WAS STANDING.

Mark Lane: 0:53 In which direction did that fly?

Charles Brehm: 0:56 IT SEEMED TO HAVE COME LEFT AND BACK...."

Dealey Plaza witness Charles Brehm interviewed about JFK assassination by Mark Lane for the 1967 documentary "Rush to Judgment": https://youtu.be/RsnHXywKIKs
__________
"...I SAW THE HEAD PRACTICALLY OPEN UP AND BLOOD AND MANY MORE THINGS, WHATEVER IT WAS, BRAINS, JUST CAME OUT OF HIS HEAD...."

Testimony of Dealey Plaza witness Abraham Zapruder -- who filmed the assassination -- at the Clay Shaw trial -- https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/zapruder_shaw2.htm
__________
"...I also asked him if he saw the explosion of blood and brains out of the head. He replied that he did. I asked him if he noticed which direction the eruption went. He pointed back over his left shoulder. He said, "IT WENT THIS WAY." I said, "You mean it went to the left and rear?" He said, "YES." Bartholomew then asked him, "Are you sure that you didn't see the blood and brains going up and to the front?" Schwartz said, "NO; IT WAS TO THE LEFT AND REAR...."

Excerpt from interview of Erwin Schwartz -- Abraham Zapruder's business partner -- who accompanied Zapruder to develop the camera-original Zapruder film, and saw the camera-original projected more than a dozen times. Bloody Treason by Noel Twyman.
__________
"...Brugioni's most vivid recollection of the Zapruder film was "...OF JFK'S BRAINS FLYING THROUGH THE AIR." He did not use the term 'head explosion,' but rather referred to apparent exit debris seen on the film the night he viewed it. "...AND WHAT I'LL NEVER FORGET WAS -- I KNEW THAT HE HAD BEEN ASSASSINATED -- BUT WHEN WE ROLLED THE FILM AND I SAW A GOOD PORTION OF HIS HEAD FLYING THROUGH THE AIR, THAT SHOCKED ME, AND THAT SHOCKED EVERYBODY WHO WAS THERE..."

Excerpt from interview of Dino Brugioni -- Photoanalyst at the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center -- who viewed the camera-original Zapruder film the evening of 11/23/1963. Douglas Horne, Inside the Assassination Records Review Board" , 2009, Volume IV, Chapter 14, page 1329.  

 

Yet we see none of that in the following slow motion Zapruder film footage of the head shot. Instead, we only see the D-max black hexagon shaped blotch with sharp edges:

 

Kevin Balch wrote:

Quote

In the first press conference within an hour of the emergency room treatment, Dr. Perry described a ‘tangential wound” to the head. That’s what I see in the extant Zapruder film.

Just what exactly is it, really, that you are seeing in the extant "original" Zapruder film headshot sequence? What I see depicted as the large avulsive headwound is a cantaloupe sized crater in JFK's forehead which is not present in the autopsy photographs, and which none of the witnesses at Parkland Hospital and at the Bethesda autopsy ever reported. And why exactly is it that in Z-335 and Z-337 we are seeing Jackie's pink shoulder pad where we should be seeing JFK's forehead?:

 

And why isn't the cantaloupe sized hole in JFK's forehead that we see in the extant "original" Zapruder film in the autopsy photographs? 

 

[Richard Bertolino]

On 5/10/2024 at 11:46 AM, Keven Hofeling said:

To explain the head damage that the bulk of the testamentary and documentary evidence from Dealey Plaza, Parkland Hospital and the Bethesda autopsy indicates was caused by the headshot at Zapruder frame 313, this is the trajectory we must have:

 

 

A shot

Edited Thursday at 02:47 AM by Richard Bertolino

[Kevin Balch]

35 minutes ago, Richard Bertolino said:

A shot from a bit lower, from the front and from the left. Well, who could have fired that?

It must have been Greer!

Or Nellie Connally.

Edited May 10 by Kevin Balch

[Keven Hofeling]

1 minute ago, Kevin Balch said:

It must have been Greer!

That's the stuff of batshit crazy, of course...

[Keven Hofeling]

43 minutes ago, Richard Bertolino said:

A shot from a bit lower, from the front and from the left. Well, who could have fired that?

The prime suspects for Dealey Plaza were: Felix ‘El Gato’ Rodriguez Mendigutia (AMHAZE-2718/AMJOKE-1), Nestor ‘Tony’ Izquierdo (AMHAZE-2586), Carlos ‘Batea’ Hernandez Sanchez (AMHAZE-2523), Antonio Soto, Jorge Navarro (AMHAZE-2536), Victor Espinoza Hernandez (AMHAZE-2766/AMHINT-24), Frank Barnardino (AMHAZE-2512), John Koch Gene (AMHINT-26), Jorge Giraud Leiva (AMHAZE-2524), and Gonzolo Herrara (Gorilla-2 pilot during the Bay of Pigs invasion).

These men, among others, were part of the CIA’s alpha team of anti-Castro commandos. They were the first recruits in what was to become Brigade 2506. They all lost friends and family members in the failed invasion. They had the crucial distinction of working directly under William ‘Rip’ Robertson, arguably the CIA’s top Special Activities Division commando. Rip’s men had his trust, and they had collectively risked their lives multiple times trying to liberate Cuba since 1961.

As best as I can tell most of the names put forward by conspiracy theorists do not fit in our names of interest nor did they have an asset type relationship with the CIA as do our list of Cuban CIA paramilitary assets. They show up in reports and documents but that’s something entirely different than the list of names we are connecting to Carl Jenkins and Rip Robertson… and Rafael Quintero and Manuel Artime for that matter.

At this point I am really interested in separating names that have been tossed around in JFK literature over the decades from those that we really can operationally tie to CIA paramilitary officers from 60-64.

The further we dig, the more real they become; we are now at the point where we can trace many of them from their very first volunteer days, to Panama with Jenkins, on to Guatemala and then later separated and taken to Belle Chase and Key West for infiltration (and Castro assassination) operations. We can timeline that month by month….and do so up to the early fall of 1963. Then they join AMWORLD and we lose them until February, until the appear in Guatemala or even in the Congo.

They become substantial, you can get the feel of how competent they were, how much they trusted each other and were trusted by people like Jenkins and Robertson – and that does not apply to all that many people.

One can visualize how a select few could have been committed enough, extreme enough and trusted enough to end up in the Plaza. Convinced that what they were doing was absolutely critical.

My view is being trusted by Robertson gets you in for Dallas and that means you have to have worked with him in actual missions. Having been trained by Jenkins and sent into Cuba on pre-Bay of Pigs missions gets you on the list of possible recruits. This is speaking to the actual shooter team, not any ancillary personnel.

 

The Mexico City nightclub photo reveals a mixed group of apparent Cuban exiles, Italian wise guys, and square-jawed military intelligence types. It was discovered among keepsakes kept in the safe of the widow of CIA pilot and drug smuggler Barry Seal (third from left). It appears on the cover of “Barry & ‘the boys:’ The CIA, the Mob & America’s Secret History” (MadCow Press, Eugene OR. 2001).

Goss appears second on the left. He is seated between notorious CIA pilot and drug smuggler Barry Seal (third left) and the equally-notorious CIA assassin Felix Rodriguez (front left), a Cuban vice cop under the corrupt Mob-run Batista regime who later became an Iran Contra operative and a confidant of the first George Bush.

The only one of the spook celebrants displaying any hint of tradecraft (seated on the other side of the table covering his face with his sport coat) is Frank Sturgis, most famous as one of the Watergate burglars.

Beside him sits (front right) William Seymour, New Orleans representative of the Double-Chek Corporation, a CIA front used to recruit pilots (like Seal), and a man who many Kennedy assassination researchers believe impersonated Lee Harvey Oswald on several occasions when the lone nut gunman was out of the country and so unable to impersonate himself.

As we saw it, the photo was in a yellowed frame, the kind used by nightclub photographers to create instant keepsakes. Seal’s widow Debbie Seal kept it in her safe, where it was overlooked by a 7-man team from the State Department which arrived at her house in 1995 to comb through her records.

It bears the name of a nightclub in Mexico City, and is stamped January 22, 1963, which, if you’re counting, was exactly ten months to the day before the Kennedy assassination.

 

[Richard Bertolino]

But how

Edited Thursday at 02:47 AM by Richard Bertolino