ID?

[John Dolva]

hester?

[Bill Miller]

hester?

Mrs. Hester did wear sunglasses on 11/22/63, but the woman is not her ... not even close.

Bill

[John Dolva]

on what do you base 'not even close' on, Bill?

[J. William King]

To my eye, while the hairlines do seem somewhat different they also seem to possibly be the same person. The glasses mean nothing, as one can have several pair or get new ones. The shape of the head, chin, cheek and many other features are quite similar IMO. The angles of the head on two axes are different which could explain part of the difference in hair. I am NOT saying they are definitely the same person, but does anyone know where else AZ was at the time of that photo - or who the woman is? Also, how long after events was the TV interview...?..he could have lost more hair and gotten a bit more grey over the ears from all the stress if there were some months or years between.

Peter, I can now see why you get so caught up in the erred alteration claims. To start with - the interview of Zapruder was done the afternoon of the assassination. This means that unless Zapruder must have gotten a hair cut immediately following the shooting ... which hardly seems reasonable. You may also note that Zapruder's head was shaved from about midear forward. The other man's hair extends forward of the ear by several inches, thus neither man resembles the other with the exception that they both wore bow ties.

If the TV interview was the same day, then I would largely move over closer to the side of them being different, but look alike people. Anyway, who is he?

I didn't mean to open another can of worms with ID'ing that person as AZ. As for the interview on WFAA, I just watched it on a tape of "JFK, Breaking the News", and while it doesn't have a timestamp on it, I'm sure it was within an hour of the shooting. Maybe even before the official announcement of JFK's death.

He mentions that he has film of it in his camera, and has brought it with him to the studio. The commentator says that they will do their best to get the film processed asap.

While I know that WFAA did not process the film (I think the local Kodak center in Dallas, near Love Field, did that), it does give an idea of the time frame.

Unless the difference in hair length and coverage can be explained by shadows and/or lighting differences, I'll concede that it's a different person.

As for the woman, there are two boys that seem to be with her. Does that shed any light on her ID?

On final note, thanks to Bill for solving the Amelia Earhart mystery for us.

JWK

Edited August 10, 2006 by J. William King

[Bill Miller]

on what do you base 'not even close' on, Bill?

The woman is in a darker colored dress than Sitzman, their hair styles are different, the mystery woman has no chin whereas Sitzman has a squared jaw line, and Sitzman doesn't appear to have taken off her scarf for even when she went up by the TSBD - she still was wearing her black scarf.

Maybe someone can post the rest of the image so we can check her dress length and shoes against Sitzman's?

Bill Miller

[John Dolva]

ok.

is the woman in green there next to Sitzman Beatrice Hester?

EDIT:: what about this from Wiegman? is it the Hesters?

light colored shoes, possible coat and bag etc folded up in front of her, dress above knee

Edited August 10, 2006 by John Dolva

[Bill Miller]

EDIT:: what about this from Wiegman? is it the Hesters?

Yes - it is the Hesters.

[John Dolva]

I'd agree with that.

The man is not Zapruder. He's not as plump, the hair and so on are different.

"Shortly afterwards, local law enforcement officials - having been alerted by either Sorrels or his superiors - arrived to provide protection for Zapruder and the Film. During this time, Dallas Times Herald reporter Darwin Payne arrives at Zapruder's office, having been tipped off by other witnesses - possibly Sitzman or another Zapruder employee, payroll clerk Beatrice Hester. Payne conducts a brief interview with Zapruder just prior to the arrival of McCormack and Sorrels, and vehemently objects to McCormack's presence. Initially, Payne is given preference by Zapruder over McCormack on the grounds that Payne was "there first", but in short time Payne is himself removed from any involvement in the efforts to develop the film and secure copies, and McCormack becomes this event's main representative of the Fourth Estate.

Realizing the importance of the footage but still somewhat traumatized by the carnage he had witnessed, Zapruder agreed to turn the film over to Sorrels"

"Dallas Morning News reporter Harry McCormick got to the Plaza about ten minutes after the shooting and tried to talk to Zapruder. "Abe" said he would only talk to federal investigators. McCormick went off to find a federal investigator.

Dallas Times-Herald reporter Darwin Payne heard about Zapruder probably from Marilyn Sitzman and Beatrice Hester who were standing across from the Depository in front of the Dal-Tex Building. Payne went to Jennifer Juniors and briefly interviewed Zapruder and tried to get publication rights to Zapruder’s film. Rather quickly, McCormick showed up at Jennifer Juniors with Secret Service Agent Forrest Sorrels in tow. "

There are other more detailed accounts.

Possibly this is then Beatrice Hester talking to 'federal investigator' Harry D. Holmes

Edited August 11, 2006 by John Dolva

[John Dolva]

Departing then from the as yet inconclusive ID.

Some speculations.

Harry and Sorrels together form the early local 'federal' involvement in the ZFilm.

Harry also has a finger in the pie of the Bell film, and possibly the Nix film as well. He retrieves the PO Box key from the DPD. Supplies key receipts, magazine ads etc concerning the rifle. While Washington communications are down he maintains an unbroken connection. His interviewing of Oswald delays the transfer to just when Ruby is in position. He decides not to go downstairs to watch the transfer.

His direct involvement in all the key aspects of framing Oswald is remarkable, not least in the fact that it has slipped by under the radar for 43 years.

He and Sorrels thumb through the ZFilm that evening.

Who the hell is this guy?

[J. William King]

I'd agree with that.

The man is not Zapruder. He's not as plump, the hair and so on are different.

"Shortly afterwards, local law enforcement officials - having been alerted by either Sorrels or his superiors - arrived to provide protection for Zapruder and the Film. During this time, Dallas Times Herald reporter Darwin Payne arrives at Zapruder's office, having been tipped off by other witnesses - possibly Sitzman or another Zapruder employee, payroll clerk Beatrice Hester. Payne conducts a brief interview with Zapruder just prior to the arrival of McCormack and Sorrels, and vehemently objects to McCormack's presence. Initially, Payne is given preference by Zapruder over McCormack on the grounds that Payne was "there first", but in short time Payne is himself removed from any involvement in the efforts to develop the film and secure copies, and McCormack becomes this event's main representative of the Fourth Estate.

Realizing the importance of the footage but still somewhat traumatized by the carnage he had witnessed, Zapruder agreed to turn the film over to Sorrels"

"Dallas Morning News reporter Harry McCormick got to the Plaza about ten minutes after the shooting and tried to talk to Zapruder. "Abe" said he would only talk to federal investigators. McCormick went off to find a federal investigator.

Dallas Times-Herald reporter Darwin Payne heard about Zapruder probably from Marilyn Sitzman and Beatrice Hester who were standing across from the Depository in front of the Dal-Tex Building. Payne went to Jennifer Juniors and briefly interviewed Zapruder and tried to get publication rights to Zapruder’s film. Rather quickly, McCormick showed up at Jennifer Juniors with Secret Service Agent Forrest Sorrels in tow. "

There are other more detailed accounts.

Possibly this is then Beatrice Hester talking to 'federal investigator' Harry D. Holmes

I've been told that Zapruder's interview on WFAA happened at 2:30pm central time.

In the interview, which I have just watched from KERA's "Breaking the News", Zapruder tells his story, and the last part is as follows:

INTERVIEWER:

I understand that you have film (of the shooting) in your camera, and you have brought your camera with you here?

ZAPRUDER:

Yes, that's correct. I brought it to the studio. (points with his finger to the left of the camera)

INTERVIEWER:

Well, we'll certainly get that film processed as fast as possible.

When did officials get ahold of the film? According to Zapruder himself, it must have been after the WFAA interview.

JWK

[John Dolva]

William, is it known who the interviewer was? The implication is certainly that the film was in# the camera. But it's not conclusive. Does the rest of the interview clarify it. (I assume it would have been a cartridge? IOW easily removed safely without darkroom? Could this be the reason for going into the alcove*? If so, who had the cartridge? I'd imagine the significance of what Zapruder had would not have been lost on him at all, so safety would be a consideration. Taking the cartridge out and splitting responsibility perhaps to draw attention away from it's real location?)

I've read a number of accounts of the time line of events all of them different in some ways. Things moved very fast at this time.

EDIT:: * Chain of posession: could the film have gone out of the loop at this very very early moment?

#in? with?

Edited August 11, 2006 by John Dolva

[J. William King]

William, is it known who the interviewer was? The implication is certainly that the film was in# the camera. But it's not conclusive. Does the rest of the interview clarify it. (I assume it would have been a cartridge? IOW easily removed safely without darkroom? Could this be the reason for going into the alcove*? If so, who had the cartridge? I'd imagine the significance of what Zapruder had would not have been lost on him at all, so safety would be a consideration. Taking the cartridge out and splitting responsibility perhaps to draw attention away from it's real location?)

I've read a number of accounts of the time line of events all of them different in some ways. Things moved very fast at this time.

EDIT:: * Chain of posession: could the film have gone out of the loop at this very very early moment?

#in? with?

John... The interviewer's name was Jay Watson, and he was main reporter of the assassination for WFAA and the first one on the air with the news. The interview was done live, on the air. And yes, unless Zapruder was outright lying, he said the film was in his camera, and he had brought the camera with him to the studio. He even pointed to it offscreen. The reporter then said that they were going to work on getting the film processed asap.

Note: WFAA had no capability to develop 8 mm film and so it was taken to Eastman Kodak who agreed to process it immediately.

The camera/film comment came at the end of a very short interview with him where he described what he saw. I don't think the entire interview lasted 2 minutes, and took place at 2:30pm central time according to Gary Mack. Right after the interview, Zapruder and Sorrels left in a Dallas squad car for the Kodak labs near Love Field and had the film processed right away.

It's actually a pretty famous interview. Just Google "Zapruder interview" and you'll see.

EDIT: I just found the transcript at http://www.jfk.org/Research/Zapruder/Transcript.htm

JWK

Edited August 11, 2006 by J. William King

[John Dolva]

J. William:: Right after the interview, Zapruder and Sorrels left in a Dallas squad car for the Kodak labs near Love Field and had the film processed right away.

Ok, so the film is there and Sorrels is part of shepherding it through to where he gets a couple of copies, one of which goes to Washington and the other is thumbed by him and Harry.

Immediately post assassination Harry Holmes may or may not have a a hand in gathering and passing on info on the film, perhaps connected with Hester by Harry McCormick and passing info on to Sorrels who goes on to Zapruder etc. The fact that this is not clearly known and that Harry's role is shadowy also indicates that it could very well be him. It strikes me that as he has such a central role, yet is seldom mentioned by others who could do so, there is some reason for people to keep him in the shadows.

______________

(Another puzzling thing about Harry is the fact that he was in his office directly opposite the TSBD sixth floor window with 5 or so unidentified Postal Inspectors watching the motorcade through (bin)ocular. So about six pairs of eyes were turned in that direction at the time of the first shot. This is also when the Limousine would have been very hard for them to see. Yet not a one saw anytrhing in the sixth floor window. No movement, no flash, nothing.

I don't know how clearly a 7.5X ocular would see, but I imagine quite well over that distance.)

[Jack White]

Departing then from the as yet inconclusive ID.

Some speculations.

Harry and Sorrels together form the early local 'federal' involvement in the ZFilm.

Harry also has a finger in the pie of the Bell film, and possibly the Nix film as well. He retrieves the PO Box key from the DPD. Supplies key receipts, magazine ads etc concerning the rifle. While Washington communications are down he maintains an unbroken connection. His interviewing of Oswald delays the transfer to just when Ruby is in position. He decides not to go downstairs to watch the transfer.

His direct involvement in all the key aspects of framing Oswald is remarkable, not least in the fact that it has slipped by under the radar for 43 years.

He and Sorrels thumb through the ZFilm that evening.

Who the hell is this guy?

John...you are quite right in suspecting Harry Holmes. Ever since I read

the Warren proceedings I have wondered why Holmes was such an

ubiquitous and omnicient presence. What was a mere "postal inspector"

doing questioning Oswald, and why was he such a key figure? Who was

pulling his strings? How did he immediately trace the rifle to Klein's, or

was that part of the pre-arranged frameup? Why was he watching the

parade with binoculars, and did he ordinarily keep binoculars at his office?

Applying the NEGATIVE TEMPLATE principle...the less information about

someone, THE MORE SUSPICIOUS WE SHOULD BE ABOUT THEM!

Harry is a very suspicious suspect.

Jack

PS as I recall Holmes plays a significent role in David Belin's book,

but do not have it handy at the moment.

Edited August 11, 2006 by Jack White

[John Dolva]

Departing then from the as yet inconclusive ID.

Some speculations.

Harry and Sorrels together form the early local 'federal' involvement in the ZFilm.

Harry also has a finger in the pie of the Bell film, and possibly the Nix film as well. He retrieves the PO Box key from the DPD. Supplies key receipts, magazine ads etc concerning the rifle. While Washington communications are down he maintains an unbroken connection. His interviewing of Oswald delays the transfer to just when Ruby is in position. He decides not to go downstairs to watch the transfer.

His direct involvement in all the key aspects of framing Oswald is remarkable, not least in the fact that it has slipped by under the radar for 43 years.

He and Sorrels thumb through the ZFilm that evening.

Who the hell is this guy?

John...you are quite right in suspecting Harry Holmes. Ever since I read

the Warren proceedings I have wondered why Holmes was such an

ubiquitous and omnicient presence. What was a mere "postal inspector"

doing questioning Oswald, and why was he such a key figure? Who was

pulling his strings? How did he immediately trace the rifle to Klein's, or

was that part of the pre-arranged frameup? Why was he watching the

parade with binoculars, and did he ordinarily keep binoculars at his office?

Applying the NEGATIVE TEMPLATE principle...the less information about

someone, THE MORE SUSPICIOUS WE SHOULD BE ABOUT THEM!

Harry is a very suspicious suspect.

Jack

PS as I recall Holmes plays a significent role in David Belin's book,

but do not have it handy at the moment.

It's good you recognise this and are prepared to say so. Maybe we can begin to see some action. It's been a one year uphill struggle to get to this point and the picture I've cobbled together is from almost entirely web sources. So because the focus has been off him for so long it's going to be hard to redact what is now known. It's out there. It's just a matter of factoring him into the equation. To my mind many things can begin to make sense. Gaps filled in etc..

To take things a bit further, bearing in mind what you say about 'who pulls his string?'.

Since viewing the Nix film about a year or so ago, I saw reason to turn around and look south. As far as standard CT lore goes, the south doesn't exist. Looking for any further reason to look that way, lo:: there was Harry. As the picture of him as a pivotal character has developed, I began to see him as a 'gofer' or 'butler'. Focusing on him inevitably raises questions about the involvement of other shadowy characters, primarily local, and to the states clustered around Texas. I've been focusing on Mississippi, Oklahoma and some on Louisiana.

hence early questions about the membership lists of the DCC, KKK, connections to Walker etc.

There were possibly as many as five other people with him in his office viewing the assassination. None have ever been identified. Harry while describing himself as a 'trained suspicioner'* with a near photographic memory, has this to say about them:: "I can't remember who they were."

Who were they?

*he likes to play with words and there is possibly some creole(french) background, and I've wondered if this is his way of saying 'spy'.

Edited August 11, 2006 by John Dolva