Arlen Specter's "SBT" Notebook (DVP's Tongue-In-Cheek Version)

[Denise Hazelwood]

8 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

My take is JBC is shot about Z-295, when he is pushed forward. JBC testified that the slug that hit him pushed him forward, which makes sense as it was taking out five inches of rib, meeting resistance the whole way. 

Connally’s stated actions also support his being hit a few frames later. I contend that it was Connally who was hit at Z313 in the (altered) Z-film. When you remove the highly distracting Z313 fake headshot from the sequence, as Keven Hofeling did in his .gif that I posted, it actually looks like Connally was hit, not Kennedy. Mary Moorman saw Kennedy’s “hair lift” with the next shot following her picture. This all matches the FBI “Visual Aid” model scenario for their shot 2 (my shot 3). See my article “What Happened—Shot 3” at https://www.a-benign-conspiracy.com/what-happened---shot-3.html.

[Denise Hazelwood]

8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Then please explain why Gov. Connally jerked his right arm upward at Z226 (which just happened to be the same right arm/wrist that was struck by a bullet in Dealey Plaza, even though you say it won't be hit by that bullet for another 3.7 seconds)?

So, is it your opinion, Ben, that this arm-jerking is merely an odd coincidence that has nothing to do with a bullet striking the Texas Governor?

It’s my opinion that the Connally arm jerk or “hat flip” or whatever you want to call it—like the impossibly fast head turning by Greer, and impossibly fast jumping of Brehm’s son from behind Brehm, and JFK’s  “back, and to the left” head snap, and even the Z313 ”head shot,” are the product of frame removal and other alterations, done to hide the slowing and stopping of the limousine and the subsequent SS AR-15 slam-fire head shot. I don’t have the same faith in the Z-film’s authenticity that you apparently have.

 I would like to acknowledge, however, your incredibly excellent collection of videos from contemporaneous broadcasts and photos and other source materials that have been invaluable to researchers and that you have freely shared. So even though I disagree with your conclusions about the SBT and Z-film authenticity, I am grateful for your other work, which is quite impressive.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

Connally’s stated actions also support his being hit a few frames later. I contend that it was Connally who was hit at Z313 in the (altered) Z-film. When you remove the highly distracting Z313 fake headshot from the sequence, as Keven Hofeling did in his .gif that I posted, it actually looks like Connally was hit, not Kennedy. Mary Moorman saw Kennedy’s “hair lift” with the next shot following her picture. This all matches the FBI “Visual Aid” model scenario for their shot 2 (my shot 3). See my article “What Happened—Shot 3” at https://www.a-benign-conspiracy.com/what-happened---shot-3.html.

DH--

Thanks for your collegial style of commenting. 

Well...we are just on different pages on this one, which is one reason I have not commented on your posts. 

I certainly encourage you to participate and express your views. 

1. I suspect the Z-film, if altered at all, was only modestly monkeyed with. 

2. I have seen no images or witness statements that a Secret Service man shot JFK with an AR-15. 

3. The RFK1A strikes me as a follow-on assassination to the JFK. That is, whoever perped the JFK, had to make sure RFK did not gain control of the levers of government. If the JFK was just an accident and a lone nut acting together, then there would be no reason for a snuff job on the investigations into the two assassinations. 

Just IMHO as usual. 

[Denise Hazelwood]

23 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

1. I suspect the Z-film, if altered at all, was only modestly monkeyed with. 

Glad to see you're open to at least some monkeying having been done to the film. However, any monkeying means its value as evidence is questionable.

25 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

2. I have seen no images or witness statements that a Secret Service man shot JFK with an AR-15. 

No, of course not, for 2 reasons:

1. The SS man did not deliberately shoot JFK. No one saw him take aim, because he didn't. It was a freak accident.  The gun, which had a slam-fire flaw in its too-heavy firing pin, inadvertently fired when he fell over due to his car stopping suddenly as he prepared to try to return fire, and then the car (with the agent) immediately left Dealey Plaza. Even though no one saw him deliberately shooting, and no one saw the speeding bullet, the accident can be pieced together by the clues. There are early erroneous reports of "A SS man (being) killed, too" (which Sam Holland later clarified as his having fallen over like he was killed, too). There is an early newspaper account that "Treasury agents" (SS men) "returned fire to the building." There are the nose witnesses who smelled gun smoke at street level (or in one case, as the motorcade was passing beneath him), one (right behind the SS follow-up car) who smelled gun smoke all the way to Parkland Hospital, and a nurse inside the hospital who still smelled the smoke lingering near the gun. There are the ear witnesses who heard a shot that sounded as if it came "from right there, in the car." There are eye witnesses who saw a "flash of light" and "puff of smoke." (The early AR-15's had a way of producing a "puff of smoke.") There was the AR-15 being removed from the SS arsenal immediately after the assassination (and despite criticisms from other agencies, the SS did not adopt assault style weapons until fairly recently--although they seemed more than happy to keep the Thompson submachine gun in their arsenal). 
2. The SS collected as much film and photographic evidence immediately after the assassination as they could get their hands on. Some of that came back altered. Linda Willis asserted that at least one of her father's pictures had been "physically altered" because "something showed (in it) that the Secret Service did not want known." Z-film alteration is in line with this. Robert Croft was certain that he had taken a picture "right at the instant of the fatal shot." Croft willingly gave his undeveloped film to the SS, but when he got his pictures back, he was told that his "camera must have malfunctioned" as the reason the one picture was not included. 

49 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

3. The RFK1A strikes me as a follow-on assassination to the JFK. That is, whoever perped the JFK, had to make sure RFK did not gain control of the levers of government. If the JFK was just an accident and a lone nut acting together, then there would be no reason for a snuff job on the investigations into the two assassinations. 

Well, I have not really studied the RFK1A in great detail (whereas I have spent a lot of time studying the JFKA). However, I do understand that the "fatal bullet" could actually be traced back to Thane Eugene Cesar, who had been hired as a security guard. So there might have been a great similarity between the two deaths--a good guy with a gun, who made the situation worse, and whose actions were covered up. There's even rumors that Huey Long was actually accidentally shot by his own bodyguard. When guns are involved, accidents are bound to happen. Unintended victims are reported killed in the news every day. Extremely ironic, if true, but I don't see that as outside the realm of possibility.

But again, I can't speak definitively on the RFK1A. It's just a possibility I've come across in some casual reading.

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

Glad to see you're open to at least some monkeying having been done to the film. However, any monkeying means its value as evidence is questionable.

No, of course not, for 2 reasons:

1. The SS man did not deliberately shoot JFK. No one saw him take aim, because he didn't. It was a freak accident.  The gun, which had a slam-fire flaw in its too-heavy firing pin, inadvertently fired when he fell over due to his car stopping suddenly as he prepared to try to return fire, and then the car (with the agent) immediately left Dealey Plaza. Even though no one saw him deliberately shooting, and no one saw the speeding bullet, the accident can be pieced together by the clues. There are early erroneous reports of "A SS man (being) killed, too" (which Sam Holland later clarified as his having fallen over like he was killed, too). There is an early newspaper account that "Treasury agents" (SS men) "returned fire to the building." There are the nose witnesses who smelled gun smoke at street level (or in one case, as the motorcade was passing beneath him), one (right behind the SS follow-up car) who smelled gun smoke all the way to Parkland Hospital, and a nurse inside the hospital who still smelled the smoke lingering near the gun. There are the ear witnesses who heard a shot that sounded as if it came "from right there, in the car." There are eye witnesses who saw a "flash of light" and "puff of smoke." (The early AR-15's had a way of producing a "puff of smoke.") There was the AR-15 being removed from the SS arsenal immediately after the assassination (and despite criticisms from other agencies, the SS did not adopt assault style weapons until fairly recently--although they seemed more than happy to keep the Thompson submachine gun in their arsenal). 
2. The SS collected as much film and photographic evidence immediately after the assassination as they could get their hands on. Some of that came back altered. Linda Willis asserted that at least one of her father's pictures had been "physically altered" because "something showed (in it) that the Secret Service did not want known." Z-film alteration is in line with this. Robert Croft was certain that he had taken a picture "right at the instant of the fatal shot." Croft willingly gave his undeveloped film to the SS, but when he got his pictures back, he was told that his "camera must have malfunctioned" as the reason the one picture was not included. 

Well, I have not really studied the RFK1A in great detail (whereas I have spent a lot of time studying the JFKA). However, I do understand that the "fatal bullet" could actually be traced back to Thane Eugene Cesar, who had been hired as a security guard. So there might have been a great similarity between the two deaths--a good guy with a gun, who made the situation worse, and whose actions were covered up. There's even rumors that Huey Long was actually accidentally shot by his own bodyguard. When guns are involved, accidents are bound to happen. Unintended victims are reported killed in the news every day. Extremely ironic, if true, but I don't see that as outside the realm of possibility.

But again, I can't speak definitively on the RFK1A. It's just a possibility I've come across in some casual reading.

I studied the Hickey did it theory intensely, and learned a lot from reading Meninger's book on Donahue. 

But here's the problem.

Donahue was correct in realizing that the WC trajectory made no sense. 

Donahue was correct in realizing the WC presumed exit when tracked back to the cowlick entry tracked back to Hickey. 

But it was GIGO. 

The cowlick entry was not the entry. Fisher and his gang had conjured up an entry in this location to counter Thompson's argument the WC trajectory made no sense.

Donahue had made the classic mistake. He trusted an "expert." He trusted Fisher when common sense should have told him better. 

So, in short, the whole Hickey did it argument falls apart when one realizes the cowlick entry was a hoax. 

[Denise Hazelwood]

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

So, in short, the whole Hickey did it argument falls apart when one realizes the cowlick entry was a hoax

It doesn’t fall apart if you consider that the Z-film was altered.  I agree that the cowlick was not an entry, but a shot tracking from the EOP to the WC exit would have had an upward trajectory—I.e., from a rear trunk of a car—which of course is a ridiculous notion. That’s why when Dr. Russell Fisher told Donahue “cowlick, not EOP,” Donahue was willing to believe it. But Fisher had a history of probably working with the CIA, as I noted in my documentary. 

So given that you don’t believe in the cowlick entry and the EOP doesn’t work with the Z-film, what is your trajectory? Since I contend that the Z-film is altered, I can have any trajectory I want. Mine is EOP to above the right ear—same as WC but without the blowout exit, aligning wounds with witness accounts rather than the Z-film.

So again, what is your trajectory? And why?

[Pat Speer]

10 minutes ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

It doesn’t fall apart if you consider that the Z-film was altered.  I agree that the cowlick was not an entry, but a shot tracking from the EOP to the WC exit would have had an upward trajectory—I.e., from a rear trunk of a car—which of course is a ridiculous notion. That’s why when Dr. Russell Fisher told Donahue “cowlick, not EOP,” Donahue was willing to believe it. But Fisher had a history of probably working with the CIA, as I noted in my documentary. 

So given that you don’t believe in the cowlick entry and the EOP doesn’t work with the Z-film, what is your trajectory? Since I contend that the Z-film is altered, I can have any trajectory I want. Mine is EOP to above the right ear—same as WC but without the blowout exit, aligning wounds with witness accounts rather than the Z-film.

So again, what is your trajectory? And why?

It is not true that you can make up any trajectory you want if you believe the Z-film is fake...and still believe the Donahue theory.

The Donahue theory is built upon the cowlick entry. Without the cowlick entry, there is no Donahue theory. 

You have an EOP entrance and an explosion from the top of the skull. It does not work, unless you want to argue these were separate shots (which is my theory). And the supposed experts knew the only way to have both the EOP entrance and the explosion from the top fo the head was to find an entrance higher on the skull, and that is why they proposed the cowlick entrance. 

So...I'm confused. Are you pushing a cowlick entry, or are you by-passing Donahue's theory to have Hickey fire the shot without any trajectory evidence to back it up? 

 

 

Edited June 14 by Pat Speer

[Denise Hazelwood]

20 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

So...I'm confused. Are you pushing a cowlick entry, or are you by-passing Donahue's theory to have Hickey fire the shot without any trajectory evidence to back it up? 

I’m saying that Donahue’s theory is NOT completely correct. He was on the right track with the AR-15 accident idea, but he got everything else wrong. His mistakes were because he relied on the (altered) Z-film rather than witness accounts. He only attended to a few accounts— enough to get the smell of gun smoke at street level, but not enough to get the whole picture. He mistakenly, as you pointed out, listened to Russell Fisher, who (having likely lied regarding the autopsy of John Paisley, was probably a CIA asset and was willing to lie again in order  to protect a SS agent who was handling a defective weapon). My scenario is different from Donahue’s, but it does require a willingness to accept that the Z-film was altered and that government agencies were willing to go to great lengths in order to avoid the embarrassment of a terrible friendly fire accident.

[Denise Hazelwood]

As I said, my scenario is different from Donahue’s, although they both involve an AR-15 accident. If you’re interested in learning more about my work, watch my documentary series or check out my articles. I am currently working on  an article describing the 4th shot of my scenario, which is the AR-15 shot. But it’s largely a reiteration of what’s in my videos. A ”benign cover-up,” which CIA director John McCone basically admitted to participating in, in accordance with the agreement between the CIA and the Secret Service that was apparently in place.

[David Von Pein]

11 hours ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

I would like to acknowledge, however, your incredibly excellent collection of videos from contemporaneous broadcasts and photos and other source materials that have been invaluable to researchers and that you have freely shared. So even though I disagree with your conclusions about the SBT and Z-film authenticity, I am grateful for your other work, which is quite impressive.

Thank you, Denise.

Edited June 15 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

Today, BTW, is the 17th anniversary of the Bugliosi vs. Wecht debate [below]. The debate focused primarily on the SBT....

 

Edited June 15 by David Von Pein

[Denise Hazelwood]

Re: the radio debate:

1. No one has been able to pin point the Z-film frame for the SBT. Of the images shown as potential SBT frames, JFK is already in the "chest grab." But he is not trying to "cough up a bullet." He is in the "decorticate posture" position, indicative of severe head trauma (from the first head shot).
2. Of the argument that "if the SBT is not true, then the bullet that went through Kennedy must have 'disappeared into thin air'"--No, it didn't. The nose and tail of this bullet were found at the front of the car. the fragments that caused the (shored) throat wound were found under the left jump seat. The "king-size" fragment that made up the largest portion of the bullet fell out of the back during the autopsy when the body was lifted for x-rays. Bugliosi and Wecht are wrong when they assume it was an intact bullet that passed out through Kennedy's throat--it was a fragment, which left metal fragments in the C3/C4 region of the neck The bullet didn't "vanish into thin air"-it was largely recovered (although in pieces). I explain how all that occurred in my Shot 1 article.
3. Again, the image of the Arlen Specter rod trajectory fails to take into account that the back wound was lower in the back than that, somewhere close to 6 inches below the neck line (per Clint Hill, reporting under oath). Kennedy may have been bent over slightly in the Zapruder film, but he wasn't bent over enough that a bullet entering his back six inches below the neck line could exit from the front of the throat on a downward trajectory. Kennedy would have to be laying down on his stomach for that to happen. 
4. Regarding oval-shaped entrance wound into Connally--it wasn't due to a "tumbling" bullet: "Oval shape: suggests an acute angle of fire with respect to the skin" (https://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/forensicsgunshotwounds.html)
5. Bugliosi's point about who would hire Oswald for a conspiracy--Not applicable when the other shooter was by accident, not a conspirator.

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, Denise Hazelwood said:

No one has been able to pin point the Z-film frame for the SBT.

I think I have. It's Z224.*

* But, as some LNers prefer to say, the bullet was actually fired by Oswald from his sixth-floor sniper's perch at around Z222 or Z223. But I prefer to utilize Z224 as the "SBT frame" because it represents the first visual signs on the film of the bullet's impact upon the victims, via the Connally lapel bulge/flip....

I believe we're seeing the immediate signs of physical reaction on the part of both JFK and John Connally at precisely Z225 (below) -- via the various things that are happening to Governor Connally in that frame (shrugging shoulders, opening his mouth into what I'd call a grimace, and his head seems to drop down slightly too, which would be indicative of a normal type of "startled" kind of response). Plus, at Z225, we see JFK's open mouth....

Unfortunately, however, due to that damn Stemmons sign, we'll never ever know for sure whether Mr. Kennedy's mouth was open or closed at Z224, but I'd wager the farm that his mouth is probably closed in that frame. Which would mean, if I could prove it (which is impossible), that we'd then have the mouths of BOTH victims being closed in Z224 and then open just one frame later in Z225, which would most certainly be strong evidence of both men initially reacting to being hit by gunfire at the exact same moment in time.

Plus, there's the fact that John Kennedy's right hand appears to still be moving DOWNWARD between Z224 and Z225. (My thanks to researcher John Corbett for pointing out that interesting fact a few years ago.)

So that would indicate that Kennedy's hands have not even begun their upward swing toward his throat as late as Z225. We don't see the upward movement of JFK's hands until Z226, which is exactly the same frame we also see Connally's right arm raise up (which is easily identifiable by his white Stetson hat that's rising into the air)....

I challenge anyone (even a staunch conspiracy believer) to watch the real-time Z-Film clip below a few times in a row and then come back in here and try to tell me there's no way in the world this clip shows the two limo victims reacting to bullet wounds at the exact same time. If anyone does want to still tell me that after viewing this clip 12 times consecutively, I think they're only fooling themselves....

 

Edited June 15 by David Von Pein