Michael G. Smith Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Thank you Jack. Just to clear up one possible cause for misunderstanding. I wouldn't have seen it as conclusive, so I wonder if you mean my animation? If so, it's a suggestion or a manufactured before, derived from various images posted, and overlaid on the real damage. IMO it helps to better see the damage. I think it's possible to see that the right visors rod sits lower than the left one as if it's support (the bracket ) has indeed been damaged. The gif doesn't show that drop as I didn't see it before making the gif, but the image Robin posted does (IMO). (perhaps because of the possibility of confusing the issue I should pull the gif.)The visor seeming more upright after the sign is not conclusive IMO. But it could be heading that way if one of the earlier good photos definitely shows the passenger side visor lower (say for example a houston st photo) because the later ones as the limo passes Zapruder seem (to me) definitely with the two visors the same. This would mean that something has pushed the visor up. I like the part where he says " the slight damage may have gone unnoticed"!!! It is not "slight" in the least! I have restored quite a few classic cars over the years, and I can tell you from experience that window trim chrome [especially on a convertible] is pretty heavy stuff. You arent going to just "dent" it slightly by banging it with something that just broke off. To cause a dent like that, it would have to have been hit with alot of force, like say..............a bullet! thanks-smitty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Am I the only one who noticed the major difference in the visor's cosmetic mirror? Take a look. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 In the montage below I've put a cropped section of Bernice's "Nellie's Head" photo in the upper left corner, repeated it, and processed it in various ways to bring out what appears to be some kind of anomaly in the chrome strip that has features that could be analogous to the post-assassination damage: I've put an arrow pointing to a round feature that could be the round "center" of the dent visible in the post-assassination photos. To the left and right of the round feature are other visual indications of something other than an uncompromised chrome strip, but given the resolution and the vagaries of the play of light and shadow on chrome, it's difficult to tell with any certainty how they relate to the central round anomaly. I think this is an important issue and not one to be dispensed with hastily. In addition to what is visible in the images above, several things are of persistent interest to me on this question: Attempting to determine any motive for the garage mechanic to have lied about a crank having broken off there. The omissions in questioning other occupants of the limo about the anomaly of the hole in the chrome strip. The absence of photos that would dispositively settle the question. The centered location of the round hole, consistent with where a crank would have been placed. The possibility that the broken crank was sabotage done by a person or persons unknown to prevent any possibility of the convertible top being put into place. It would be in the interests of any co-conspirators to perpetuate a myth—if it were one—about the chrome "damage" being a bullet hole. This would be particularly true if the breaking of the crank was, in fact, pre-assassination sabotage. That would lead to a short list of persons who might have had opportunity. Perpetuating a myth of a bullet hole obviates any investigation along those lines, and also multiplies the number of bullets to have to consider in assessing what happened in Dealey Plaza, introducing another level of confusion. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) I have restored quite a few classic cars over the years, and I can tell you from experience that window trim chrome [especially on a convertible] is pretty heavy stuff. Based on your experience, can you think of any plausible reason why the Secret Service wouldn't try to repair this damage to a presidential limo? Too much work? Too expensive? You'd have to junk the whole car? What? Edited January 14, 2007 by Ron Ecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I have become confused. It appears to me that this is an "indentation" and it is at an irregular and upward angle. Is someone suggesting that this was a "hole" into which a crank handle was inserted, or did I misinterpret something ? If this were not due to a bullet or another type of accident, this designed indentation should have been centered in the chrome strip and equidistant to the ends. Has anyone the capability to make such a measurement ? The upward angle is also not indicative of an engineering modification. Charlie Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 (edited) I have restored quite a few classic cars over the years, and I can tell you from experience that window trim chrome [especially on a convertible] is pretty heavy stuff. Based on your experience, can you think of any plausible reason why the Secret Service wouldn't try to repair this damage to a presidential limo? Too much work? Too expensive? You'd have to junk the whole car? What? As I understand the relevant testimony, the broken crank was something that happened when there was pressure to get the limo elsewhere. If that actually were the case, there might have been time required to get a replacement part and dissasemble the housing, and it could have been a complicated job for which there simply wasn't time. If it were in fact sabotage specifically for the assassination, that would be consistent: it would have been effected when the perpetrators knew there would not be time to repair it prior to Dallas. I think it worth adding just as an aside here that the timeline has James McCord attached to the Manhattan office of the CIA in 1963. Ashton Edited January 14, 2007 by Ashton Gray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 If it were in fact sabotage specifically for the assassination, that would be consistent: it would have been effected when the perpetrators knew there would not be time to repair it prior to Dallas. The alleged crank damage occurred on November 1, 1961, over two years before the assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Agbat Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I have restored quite a few classic cars over the years, and I can tell you from experience that window trim chrome [especially on a convertible] is pretty heavy stuff. Based on your experience, can you think of any plausible reason why the Secret Service wouldn't try to repair this damage to a presidential limo? Too much work? Too expensive? You'd have to junk the whole car? What? The only thing that comes to mind is that parts were not available - perhaps they needed to be ordered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 If it were in fact sabotage specifically for the assassination, that would be consistent: it would have been effected when the perpetrators knew there would not be time to repair it prior to Dallas. The alleged crank damage occurred on November 1, 1961, over two years before the assassination. Thanks for the correction, Ron. Yes, and he says they were doing repairs to the crank in 1961 (unless I still have this confused)—but no crank is apparent there in any photo at all. So I wonder what the visual anomaly is in the "Nellie's Head" photo. I can't find any other similar visual artifact in the photo to lend credence to the idea that it is photo-processing related. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 What kind of "crank" for what purpose? Makes no sense. Check limo records and specs. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 From my personal experience with military and government VIP vehicles.....NONE would have gone unrepaired from 1961 thru 1963....much less "The Presidential Vehicle". It would have been immediately repaired if even it required that one part to be "remanufactured" by Ford. It would have been immediate ! "OLD DAMAGE" is another fairy tale ! Charlie Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael G. Smith Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 From my personal experience with military and government VIP vehicles.....NONE would have gone unrepaired from 1961 thru 1963....much less "The Presidential Vehicle". It would have been immediately repaired if even it required that one part to be "remanufactured" by Ford. It would have been immediate !"OLD DAMAGE" is another fairy tale ! Charlie Black Exactly Charlie! If the damage was claimed to have occured in 61', it surely wouldnt have taken almost 2 years to make the repairs! Even if the trim was unique to that vehicle only, it wouldnt have been any big deal to replace the trim. It is painfully obvious from all of the posts by all involved, that the damage was done during the shooting. All indications show no damage to the trim before starting the motorcade. The damage was from a direct bullet strike, in my opinion. Even if they claimed a bullet fragment hit it, im sure that a small fragment would most likely just "ding" the trim if that. You can plainly see a direct "center" hit from the nose of a bullet. Any damage that was brought to everyones attention at the time, was dismissed as being there previously. Im surprised that they didnt claim that the windshield damage wasnt from a "wiper" malfunction back in 62'! Just my opinion FWIW. thanks-smitty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Agbat Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 From my personal experience with military and government VIP vehicles.....NONE would have gone unrepaired from 1961 thru 1963....much less "The Presidential Vehicle". It would have been immediately repaired if even it required that one part to be "remanufactured" by Ford. It would have been immediate !"OLD DAMAGE" is another fairy tale ! Charlie Black Completely agreed. I could see it if damage happened in transit the morning of the event, and parts were not available within a few hours.... But from 1961 - 1963??? No... That's another dog that don't hunt... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 The trim appears to be firmly anchored enough so that the top of it has bulged up slightly. What I mean by that is that the energy that went to produce the dent also transferred to the windshield frame and possibly thence to the wind shield. So to check this here's a tracing of the cracks onto a Powers photo. It looks like two sets of cracks, one set of straight cracks(red) associated with the bullet/fragment strike on the windshield that would have been created instantly, and one set wiggly ones(yellow) like progressive stress cracks. Of the two sets, two of the cracks from the wiggly set seem to radiate from the chrome dent. Unfortunately the very areas one wishes to see are the least visible or completely hidden in the pics (deja vu?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 John: This is FBI..WC...CE 350........photo of the cracks in the windshield, after the assassination... The others were made when Arlington Glass personal had to place their feet against the inside of it to push it out... B.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now