Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ed Hoffman is incorrect


Recommended Posts

Lee, in regard to your "count" behind the fence, Edd Hoffman's count is pretty specific and would seem to include what Bowers saw. In "Eye Witness" Ed describes:

1) A man in a bule suit near the stockade fence, wearing a hat. This man walked around a good deal before the motorcade showed up, and at one point before the motorcade arrived was briefly joined by a man in a plaid shirt who had come around the north leg of the stockade fence. They were together only briefly and the "shirt" man went back behind the north leg - passing a uniformed police officer who was in that area and who followed him back on the north side of the fence. The "puff of smoke" Ed observed was in the area of the Hat man.

There is absolute photographic evidence of a man in a hat - well at least the hat - behind the fence at approximately the point Ed identifies, that was first brought out in Josia Thompson's six seconds. In addition there are multiple witnesses to the "puff" of smoke including Sam Holland. And of course Lee Bowers tried to talk about something like a flash or puff of smoke in the location of where he had seen two men together. It's possible to argue about that for a long time - and of course the WC did not take the time to have Bosers mark up a map as to the location of anything that he was describing in his testimony.

2) Ed describes the Hat man going down the fence line and pitching the rifle to a tall slender man in work clothes who ended up walking or running north through the rail yard where Ed lost sight of him behind the parked railroad cars. There is at least one other witness who describes a man running out to the north in the railroad yard.

Ed describes the hat man walking slowly around the north end of the fence after the shooting and encountering a policeman who confronted him.

So at the time of the shooting that places only two people behind the fence, the policeman who appears to have been playing a covering role was behind the north leg of the fence, possibly behind the pergola - in an idea position for blocking any last minute passers by who seemed inclined to go behind the fence.

Now having said all this I would still feel better about Ed's story if he had mentioned all the parked cards pulled up behind the fence which clearly show in photos of the day and said something about the cars blocking his view of the man when he was at the fence or made some mention of them at least.

In any event, as far as your count goes, based on Ed and Bowers statement I would put it at no more than two people behind the fence at the time of the shooting - of course that does not mean there could not have been people in vehicles or people concealed behind parked cars, etc. The Paschell film actually seems to show motion of someone moving behind the north leg of the fence, just west of the corner, only a short time after the limo has gone under the overpass.

-- Larry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello everyone,

I'd like to point out that Marcel Dehaeseleer has done some interesting analysis of the "Ghost Sequence" in the Zapruder film. Frames 466-476 seem to show three or four individuals and some suspicous activity behind Zappy along the fence.

See Marcel's analysis here:

http://users.skynet.be/copweb/labo/466-476.htm

Could this data add veracity to Ed Hoffman's observations? There's apparently one hatted person and maybe two. I had to look at the sequence a long time before I "saw" the "Ghost", it's like a mini-movie within the movie.

just a thought...

Chris Newtom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could this data add veracity to Ed Hoffman's observations? There's apparently one hatted person and maybe two. I had to look at the sequence a long time before I "saw" the "Ghost", it's like a mini-movie within the movie."

Hello, Chris. I wish that what you are talking about could help, but it doesn't for the simple fact that Marcel is in serious error and was told so several times in the past on another forum. I am somewhat surprised that he is still showing these images in a way that falsely leads one to think they may hold something sinister.

The first thing about his ghost images is that they are from previous frames, so they cannot show the RR yard behind the fence for Zapruder had not panned that far west at the time they were exposed. What puzzles me is that Marcel did notice some ghost images that showed the upper floor windows of the TSBD and Dal-Tex building as seen on beginning frames of the motorcade footage and he didn't seem to have trouble understanding where they had come from and when they were exposed. No one knew at the time Marcel first brought them up where they had come from until researcher Bill Miller pointed out that they were from the part of the film where Zapruder had shot some exposures of Sitzman standing near the Hesters before the Motorcade had arrived in the Plaza. Those ghost images from frames exposed while filming Sitzman were showing up much later around Z61/62 or so. This is why I am puzzled as why Marcel never corrected his web page for he had to now know that any ghost images were coming from earlier in the film. If the spacing remained true to form and they do, then Marcel's ghost images have nothing to do with the RR yard.

The hunched over image is the tree trunk that stood behind Emmett Hudson. It tends to appear to lean and starighten as Zapruder's camera jumps around, but nevertheless it is still nothing more than a tree trunk. These things were shown to Marcel when he was at Lancer by use of a stabization process that Bill Miller uses on almost all of his clips. Abraham Zapruder suffered from vertigo and his camera was all over the place. Often times this has given researchers the impression that they are seeing movement when actually they are not. Stabilization removes the illusion of movement when there was none to see in the first place.

The final point I would like to make is that Marcel also was shown that the things he thought were possibly people - were being seen in the tree foliage on the street side of the fence. So even if they had not been in the ghost images, they could not have been real because of the area of the film frame Marcel was seeing them in. When we cross reference this area in other assassination films and photographs, we find that there is no one up in the tree foliage on the south side of the stockade fence.

Below is opne of Marcel's own clips. The TSBD window was in the background when Zapruder had his camera pointed at Sitzman as she stood over by the east bench with the Hester's. Note the frame numbers this ghost image is showing up in. Marcel was made well aware of the timing issue. (please see the animation below) I hope the clip offers you an understanding as to why Marcel is in error about seeing people over the fence. According to Hoffman and by the looks of the Hat Man's position in Moorman's Polaroid, the man with the gun pulled back from the fence and commenced his march to the steam pipe at the time of the head shot. This means Hat Man has just left the area by the time Zapruder panned over the corner of the fence which may not have reached far anough along the back side of the fence to have seen Hat Man location anyway even if he had still been there.

Edited by Larry Peters
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good Day.... There is a internet-archived video interview with ED HOFFMAN (from mid-90's, replete with diagrams done by ED &/or his interpreter RON) available for all here:

http://www.freespeech.org/ramfiles/kennedy.ram

Don

CV-67, "Big John," USS John F. Kennedy Plank Walker

Sooner, or later, the Truth emerges Clearly

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/DP.jpg

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/ROSE...NOUNCEMENT.html

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/BOND...PINGarnold.html

http://members.aol.com/DRoberdeau/JFK/GHOS...update2001.html

T ogether

E veryone

A chieves

M ore

"(D)rehm (sic) seemed to think the shots came from in FRONT OF or BESIDE the President." (my EMPHASIS)

----CHARLES F. BREHM, a gunfire-battle experienced, WWII D-day, United States Army Ranger veteran, quoted just minutes after the attack, "Dallas Times Herald," 11-22-63, final edition

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Gentlemen,

YES, I WAS WRONG regarding Ed Hoffman! :angry:

That is why I removed my statement about it on my Homepage (since many month now).

I prefer to put this topic in "stand-by" for the moment.

I am still waiting eleven transparencies coming from NARA (ZF-467 to Zf-476).

My conclusions were erroneous, the captured area cannot come from the picket fence.

But I continue to say that there is a strange activity in this area...

...Where I see perfectly three or four guys!

I prefer not to increase the controversy on this topic!

I am still working on, and I promise that if I am wrong, I will admit publicly my mistake! :huh:

Best regards...

Edited by Marcel Dehaeseleer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I continue to say that there is a strange activity in this area...

...Where I see perfectly three or four guys!

I prefer not to increase the controversy on this topic!

I am still working on, and I promise that if I am wrong, I will admit publicly my mistake

I can certainly respect that, Marcel. I am somewhat confused about one things and maybe I misunderstood something. If the things you saw were in the ghost images and you know they came at an earlier time in the film, then how can that be referred to as suspicious activity in the area of the RR yard? Did I miss something here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Larry,

I have not an absolute certainty concerning where these guys come from. According to the recording process of Ghost Images...

They were probably (logically) somewhere (I think) in an area near the Triple Underpass ;)

But, as I wrote above, I cannot precisely tell you now, from where this activity comes.

I am just sincerely convinced than there is a human activity captured between the Zf-467 to Zf-476 (MPI-DVD).

What happens in this "Ghost Sequence" is described here after: http://users.skynet.be/copweb/labo/fb4.htm

Larry, do you see at least a human shape or activity in the clip hereafter? : http://users.skynet.be/copweb/labo/466-476.htm

Best regards...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, as I wrote above, I cannot precisely tell you now, from where this activity comes.

I am just sincerely convinced than there is a human activity captured between the Zf-467 to Zf-476 (MPI-DVD).

I know you have said this, but where on the film are you seeing it so I can look for it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright!

Larry, It is a very sensitive subject and I had decided to remain in stand-by on it, at least till I have the photo transparencies from NARA ;)

But, at your request, I will send some highlighted pictures of the "X-Crew" (in the next 36 hours) :D

Soon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, at your request, I will send some highlighted pictures of the "X-Crew" (in the next 36 hours)

I cannot wait to see them, Marcel. I am intrigued that the alleged Zapruder film alteration tech people would take out frames from place in the film at a time when there was nothing to see, but would leave in an entire "X-Crew" of assassins as you call them on the same film. Very interesting indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Larry,

I am very interested to see what Marcel has to offer. As per the photos I have seen thus far, and from zooming in on the full screen version [with sprockets] of my copy of "Image of an Assassin," there is definitely something worth analyzing. Perhaps it is only the reaction of some individuals in the street directly following the assassination, or perhaps it is something more.

I can't find the reference, but there's an analysis performed on the Bell & Howard possessed by Zapruder and how the plate captures light. IMO it would be interesting to understand where [location] these ghost images [located between the sprocket holes] come from.

A very valid way of testing this would be to reshoot the sequence, fully zoomed, from the pedestal, using the same camera, or at least the same model, with prelabled items of different colors, located at various positions in the plaza and knoll.

Also, as per the NPIC testimony, citing Murder in Dealey Plaza, page 315, the individual, Ben Hunter, performing the blow-up of certain frames doesn't recall seeing the sprocket holes. The geniuses leading any type of cover-up weren't photography experts.

I'm not attempting to prove that the film was faked - only that the 'intelligence' engaged in the initial exploration of the film wouldn't have known what to look for, other than the main action in the overall sequence. I think oftentimes people credit too much intelligence to the overall planning of operation, and subsequent cover-up, and create their own stumbling blocks.

Here's some questions - if the film was not compromised in any way - what was the purpose of engaging the NPIC to blow-up certain main frames of the Zapruder film to 8 x 10s, and where are these now? Why were frames 208 - 210 originally spliced out? You can see them now in detail on Fetzers Assassination Science page, the work of Costella.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/

Also, why does Ben Hunter recall 2 - 3 frames detailing the head explosion? I only see this in frame 313, and there's no 'halo' of material exiting the back of the head, as referenced by multiple witnesses. I forget what the speed is for one frame, 1/6th of a second? Is that really sufficient for the impact we see in the film, the knowledge of the scope of the wound, the witness accounts and the trauma that resulted? Where's the brain matter and the blood?

I'm on the fence as to whether the Z-film is a cartoon, but it certainly appears to be missing frames, and it bothers me a great deal that Zapruder, an amateur or a novice, fails to keep his subject in center. That strikes me as very odd.

Last, I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it. We can put the entire matter of the Z-film's having been compromised to a final resting place if someone can figure out a way to get their hands on the copy that 'allegedly' HL Hunt received day one [citing Murder in Dealey Plaza again, pg 33], or one of the copies that several individuals claim to have seen that demonstrate additional footage and a different sequence of events.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am very interested to see what Marcel has to offer. As per the photos I have seen thus far, and from zooming in on the full screen version [with sprockets] of my copy of "Image of an Assassin," there is definitely something worth analyzing. Perhaps it is only the reaction of some individuals in the street directly following the assassination, or perhaps it is something more.

I read an exchange Marcel had with Miller on Lancer over this and what Marcel appears to be doing is taking two images (one Zframe - one ghost image) that don't show anything and then seeing something when they are overlaid, thus forming new shapes. That's like pouring gas in water and stirring it so to see what funny shapes show up in it. The area Marcel is seeing things is out over the knoll and elevated above the street. I personally think he is wasting time on it, but it's his time to waste, I guess. See the attachment below.

I can't find the reference, but there's an analysis performed on the Bell & Howard possessed by Zapruder and how the plate captures light. IMO it would be interesting to understand where [location] these ghost images [located between the sprocket holes] come from.

Anthony Marsh has written about this and explains the ghost images quite well. A "Google" search will probably get his study on the ghost images to come up for anyone wanting to see it.

Also, as per the NPIC testimony, citing Murder in Dealey Plaza, page 315, the individual, Ben Hunter, performing the blow-up of certain frames doesn't recall seeing the sprocket holes. The geniuses leading any type of cover-up weren't photography experts.

MPI put out four views of the Zapruder film and I believe only the full frame view shows the entire sprocket holes. Naturally the zoom versions will not show the sprocket holes for they have been pushed out of the photograph, which is what each MPI film frame was - just a photograph of a single Zapruder frame. The four types of view of the Zapruder frames are Close-Up, Medium Frame, Full Frame and Wide Frame

Here's some questions - if the film was not compromised in any way - what was the purpose of engaging the NPIC to blow-up certain main frames of the Zapruder film to 8 x 10s, and where are these now? Why were frames 208 - 210 originally spliced out? You can see them now in detail on Fetzers Assassination Science page, the work of Costella.

The original film had been damaged in a couple of places if I remember correctly and it was those frames that were removed although I think it was Z208 to Z211. I believe what Costella has done is take the SS copy that Groden brought us that had the undamaged frames copied on it. Groden didn't have the means at the time he worked on the film to capture the entire frame and this is why we only see a partial image.

Also, why does Ben Hunter recall 2 - 3 frames detailing the head explosion? I only see this in frame 313, and there's no 'halo' of material exiting the back of the head, as referenced by multiple witnesses. I forget what the speed is for one frame, 1/6th of a second? Is that really sufficient for the impact we see in the film, the knowledge of the scope of the wound, the witness accounts and the trauma that resulted? Where's the brain matter and the blood?

MPI created Z313 from two frames. I recall hearing this from Robert Groden. There is debris coming off the back of the head - If I can find the enlargement Miller had posted on Lancer - I will try and show it here in another reply.

I'm on the fence as to whether the Z-film is a cartoon, but it certainly appears to be missing frames, and it bothers me a great deal that Zapruder, an amateur or a novice, fails to keep his subject in center. That strikes me as very odd.

I take it that most people have not met anyone with Vertigo. It's a wonder Zapruder didn't fall of the pedestal even with Sitzman trying to steady him. I saw a recreation film shot by researcher who used a camera and film just like Zapruders and without the sounds of gunfire, with having Vertigo, and without seeing an assassination folding before his eyes he didn't do any better than Abraham did as far as keeping the street in the center of the frame. I think Zapruder was panning OK, but forgetting that the street was going down hill. His constant adjusting of the camera just lead to more blur and jiggles, but what the heck - he did get the job done. James Altgens froze when he seen Kennedy's head explode and he was a professional.

Last, I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it. We can put the entire matter of the Z-film's having been compromised to a final resting place if someone can figure out a way to get their hands on the copy that 'allegedly' HL Hunt received day one [citing Murder in Dealey Plaza again, pg 33], or one of the copies that several individuals claim to have seen that demonstrate additional footage and a different sequence of events.

Let me say something here. Those who claim to have seen this so-called other film can't even get it straight amongst themselves what they seen. One person claiming to see the other film said JFK was reacting to being shot as he came around the corner and according to people who were there the shots didn't occur until after Betzner took his photo at Z186. Alleged other film witnesses failed to mention this in their recanting. Look at the Bell film - Kennedy looks OK to me as he starts doen Elm Street.

Another person said the other film he showed had the limo running close or over the north curbstone on Elm Street. (I wish I could recall which was said exactly?)But when we watch Tina Towner's film of the car turning off Houston Street and onto Elm, the car doesn't do what this person had said he witnessed on the other film. Other witnesses to the other film didn't mention the limo coming close to the curb or hitting it.

The same can be said about the limo stop, which also has been attributed to some versions of this other film. I read where Miller once blasted these other film people by asking just how many other film versions are there supposed to be? Miller said they are lumping all these different versions into one film so to make it appear that others have all seen the same thing. Miller believed as I do now - these people made up a tale about another film to add support to their desire to say the Zapruder film must be a fabrication.

Edited by Larry Peters
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Larry,

I dont want to force anybody to believe me! :huh:

As Lee has done at home, the best way to see what I saw,...

It is enough to watch closer the MPI-DVD (while looping between Zf-467 to Zf-476).

Sorry, I dont want to waste more time on this topic! ;)

Respectfully...

Addition: I say it again, I may be wrong or maybe I am right!

But... I am not yet sure! :D

Therefore, I maintain the amination on my Homepage till new developments... :ph34r:

Edited by Marcel Dehaeseleer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Lee has done at home, the best way to see what I saw,...

It is enough to watch closer the MPI-DVD (while looping between Zf-467 to Zf-476).

Maybe I didn't say it correctly and I apologize for that. The ghost images are what has been seen prior on the film and has nothing to do with the actual film frame now being viewed. It's little different than getting some printed papers wet and having one bleed ink onto the other. This was never more apparent than when you showed faded ghost images of the TSBD in frames where the TSBD was not even where Zapruder (Z069) was aiming his camera at that moment in time. At that time we seen people along Elm Street right up to the point they went off the screen and there was no X-Crew, as you called them. Then as the camera pans towards the fence - you apparently are taking ghost images that have nothing to do with the actual film frame(s) currently being seen nor the location on the knoll that we are currently looking at and claiming that you see a possible X-Crew of assassins out in front of the camera. At best - the images, if real people, can only be those individuals the camera passed over 60+ frames ago, just as the frame difference between when Zapruder filmed towards the TSBD as he looked in the direction of Sitzman near the Hester's - right up to Z069 or so when the ghost image showed the upper floors of the TSBD.

The issue at hand: The question isn't whether you think you see something when a ghost image is overlaid onto a film frame because you probably do. Someone can really think they see something in the dark because of dim lighting and shadows, but once the light is turned on and there is nothing there to be seen, then that should tell them that it was just an illusion. Another example would be like overlaying an image of a cat onto a bird and then seeing the shape of a new species of animal. The later product would be an illusion created by overlaying two known animals together which would have nothing to do with reality. I am certainly not saying to not search for shapes and what not. I am only saying that one should try and consider the most possible explanation first.

I seen it posted on another forum that the best approach to an investigation is by following a term called "Occams Razor." It's one that I try to live by, as other investigators do. I offer the definition below -

Main Entry: Oc·cam's razor

Pronunciation: 'ä-k&mz-

Function: noun

Etymology: William of Occam

Date: circa 1837

: a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities

Sorry, I dont want to waste more time on this topic!

I understand and hope you do not stop searching the assassination images for new evidence.

Edited by Larry Peters
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...