Guest Mark Valenti Posted January 24, 2007 Posted January 24, 2007 I've been to DP but I don't recall how much room is on the pedestal -- but if Zapruder was filming a moving car, it's likely he turned his body. As he turned, Sitzman most likely also turned her body. So it's conceivable that she is momentarily seen "to the side" of him. That's my best guess.
Chris Davidson Posted January 24, 2007 Author Posted January 24, 2007 I've been to DP but I don't recall how much room is on the pedestal -- but if Zapruder was filming a moving car, it's likely he turned his body. As he turned, Sitzman most likely also turned her body. So it's conceivable that she is momentarily seen "to the side" of him. That's my best guess. Mark, I got up on the pedestal with my B/H 414 and shot about 5 rolls of film. At no point did I ever move my feet. The tendency is to set your feet in a comfortable position, then pivot from the waist which allows you to cover the top of Elm St. to the underpass. Is Sitzman the one showing leg in the frame? If she is, who is holding her in a white top and black bottom? And, if that is not his shoulder/arm which forms a human V shape in the color WHITE, what or who is that? Pretty easy to replicate that arm position. chris
Bernice Moore Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 (edited) ....She was taller than Zapruder, and it is said she had on high heels, no woman is going to wear high heels and climb on that pedestal, ask one,and none are going to run down the grassy slope after and across the street as she says, after,when she looked around and saw that she was alone, and left standing on the pedestal alone and Zapruder had gone, disappeared.....these are things she says, not me... with heels on, they would stick into the grass, and she would any woman, go flying and break her ruddy neck, just ask ask one.... I am not going to waste too much time on this for one's interpretation of the evidence is only as reliable as one's ability to follow it. However, Sitzman did wear her high heels and is caught in several photos or flim captures wearing them. Going from memory here ... open the first few pages of Groden's book "TKOAP" and he shows a small crop of Sitzman wearing those high heels, so to take the position that no woman wears them on slopes or pedestals is simply not accurate. In fact, there are post assassination photos showing women all over the knoll in high heels. The Paschall film shows Zapruder hopping off the pedestal after Sitzman dismounted it. Altgens 8 shows both of them together at that moment and Sitzman is taller because of her wearing those heels. The Bell film as I recall shows Zapruder walking away from Sitzman as she is standing at the pedestal. If Sitzman said that Abe walked away as she tood on the pedestal, then she misspoke or the interviewer heard it incorrectly. *********************************************** As Usual Bill Miller in his typical, kind, pleasant condescending attitude..post ...states that ""I am not going to waste too much time on this for one's interpretation of the evidence is only as reliable as one's ability to follow it."" To which I agree in spades...Where's yours?? in regards to Marilyn Sitzman...and why is it, that your interpretation is, in your opinion the only....?? There are no clear photos of Marilyn Sitzman on the pedestal wearing high heels, that you assume she had on, there are no clear photos of her on the pedestal, period...and neither are there in the Trask's book, that I have come upon.....that you say are there...??.and seeing that I do not think you have ever worn high heels, you would not know anything about running up and down knolls and or grassy hills, or on grass, for that matter, wearing such ,so do not try to tell a woman, who did wear them for many years, about them...... you are assuming again......and in error.. I did not say there were No women ,Not wearing high heels, on the knoll area, we all wore them back then..we wrecked our feet, but we wore them.....and also we wore flats... I said no woman with high heels on, would run up or down a grassy knoll hill with such on their feet, as the heels would stick into the grass, especially running down...and that is something you would not know about......if you are going to imply what I said and or did not say, make sure you are correct and not simply inserting your suppositions..again. .No one knows if she wore such on the pedestal, positively, as no clear photo exists that she is or did......Did it ever occur to you or any man, within the research world, that she especially in a straight skirt, climbing up on a pedestal ,would have slipped them off....IF she was wearing them..which is questionable.......But.... there is a BIG IF about it, as there is seen in Trasks, which you refer to, and others do own... a photo of her at the corner of Houston and Main, it appears that the shoe on her left foot, which is on the sidewalk, as she takes a step with her right, does Not have a High Heel...it appears to be what we called a flat....so from this crop of Trask's photo, lightened, it appears that she was wearing flats......it is not a positive as yet, but that is the way it appears to me right now....I will attach and please, all, have a look at her left foot.... On the MWKK.......as far as the Zapruder film is concerned.......Marilyn says.... Quote " He started filming about .....oh....just before they came around the corner......and then we heard what to me sounded like two firecrackers...it was starting to get a little confusing because you could see things happening in the car..." and on.....So she does in her own Quotable words, state that he did start to film the motorcade as they just started to turn the corner....so where is the film showing it.?? That is another question .. On the video "Image of an Assassination: Another Look at the Zapruder Film " Marilyn says. "when they started making their first turn, turning into the street, he said, o.k. here we go, or something to that effect "..so again where is the rest of the film...?? Not only did she, Not mispeak, Nor was she Quoted incorrectly.....Nor was she Misquoted by the interviewer, there are enough who have done that for her.... since day one. She is also quoted by Life in an article ,see below.."Mr.Z was gone"..So she not only speaks for herself on the TMWKK, and then also on Image of an Assassination, .but also on a tape to her Doctor under hypnosis.....in which, she states under hypnosis, that she is left alone, and Zapruder has gone....he has gotten down.. ""My boss is gone I looked around he's gone., he's gone""....and she is scared.......etc.... She speaks of being left standing on the pedestal, alone, by Zapruder, of him being gone, and not seeing him again,( until she gets back to the office) that she was looking in the direction of the underpass, and when she turned, he was gone, and she was left standing there by herself...she looked around, and saw all the people....She then mentions about getting down, and going down the hill to the other side of the street, where she spoke to whom she thinks were FBI men.... She leaves and the men follow her back to Mr.Zs office and she was afraid, they continued to follow her into the waiting area, of the office, they wanted to see Mr.Zapruder but he wouldn't see them, he was in his office...she mentions she is still afraid.... By all this she has made it very clear that she was left by Zapruder alone. Marilyn had these several contacts with others about what occurred on the pedestal, and she was well aware of where she was, and what did and did not take place..so it does seem not logical to think that Marilyn did not comprehend. Also,I did not state that Zapruder did not hop down off the pedestal..did I.?? another supposition on your part, so stop deliberately trying to misqote people, it does not work.. Marilyn was dying of Cancer when she gave this statement on the taped interview, to her Doctor, she died three months later...on August 11, 1993. .....so stop trying to impose the what you think she wore, said and did, you are trying to use her to your own ends, within your own research.. Her story does not comply with Zapruder's, his does not with hers, the Hesters story does not comply with either..seems to me that someone is very interested in Marilyn and trying to manipulate what she has stated in the past....or perhaps all of them, what little they did express that is...which in some cases may have been disgarded....which imo may not be abe to be..straighten out, it has been muddled up to that extent.....there are no pat answers...neither yours nor anyones....yours is simply your opinion and in some areas, no better nor worse than anyone elses.....no matter whose given information you follow within the area of the Pergola, or whom you may talk to, as you well know, none gives the others any backup....they all differ. Some day when I have all the information related to Marilyn finally all together, I shall make it available, till then... If you do know something and have done studies within the Marilyn Sitzman subject, then I would appreciate hearing it , so that I may add it to the information I have acquired, pertaining to the Sitzman issues. If not......As you seem to enjoy so often, saying to other members, I will now tell you the same thing...as far as Marilyn Sitzman is concerned .... Bill Miller....Do Your Own Research.... B.. Edited January 25, 2007 by Bernice Moore
Jack White Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 It was supposedly Abe Zapruder who was on the pedestal. Let's see what he says: ................... Mr. Liebeler: "Then, you can actually see yourself in this picture, can't you?" Mr. Zapruder: "Well, I can't distinguish myself being-I know I was there." Mr. Liebeler: "Do you recognize that this picture was taken at the time you were there?" Mr. Zapruder: "Yes; I was there and I would say this couldn't be anybody else, unless-if this is an authentic photograph and isn't composed now or changed-I would say that's me. That's the first time I have seen that. Were these pictures ever published in a magazine-there were pictures like that I suppose-actually?" (NOT AN AUTHENTIC PHOTOGRAPH?) Mr. Liebeler: "This picture here is in fact one of a series of pictures that is being sold down here in Dallas by a fellow named Willis, I believe his name is Phil Willis. He has a series of slides that are available and it's picture No. 5 of those slides in which you can see yourself back there." Mr. Zapruder: "That must be it because there's another couple back there-I took some from there and I was shooting some of the pictures to start my roll from the beginning. I didn't want to have a blank and I shot some, in fact, they have it-the Federal Bureau of Investigation have those pictures." Mr. Liebeler: "As you stood there on this abutment with your camera, the motorcade came down Houston Street and turned left on Elm Street, did it not?" Mr. Zapruder: "That's right." Mr. Liebeler: "And it proceeded then down Elm Street toward the triple underpass; is that correct?" Mr. Zapruder: "That's correct. I started shooting-when the motorcade started coming in, I believe I started and wanted to get it coming in from Houston Street." HE STARTED SHOOTING WHEN IT CAME IN FROM HOUSTON! ............... Mr. Liebeler: “One thing I would like you to do now—we have a series—a little book here that is Commission Exhibit No. 885 and it consists of a number of frames from motion pictures and I want to show you certain numbers of them which are important to our work and ask you if those look like they were taken from your film and if in fact you could recognize it as you look through this book that these are individual frame-by-frame pictures that you took.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes, they are frame by frame and they weren’t very clear, for the simple reason that on the telephoto lens it’s good to take stills—when you move—did you ever have binoculars and every time you move everything is ex-aggerated in the move—that’s one reason why they are kind of blurred—the movement. Now, you want me to identify whether these are my pictures?” Mr. Liebeler: “Yes, specifically, I first call your attention to No. 185. This is No. 185 on the back of it and will you look at the whole book and identify it if you can and tell us that those are the pictures that—that those appear to be the pictures or copies of the pictures that you took from your motion picture camera?” Mr. Zapruder: “Well, I would say this, they look like—if they were taken from the film I had—these are the ones. I mean, I don’t know how to express myself.” WELL...THEY LOOK LIKE THE ONES I TOOK. Mr. Liebeler: “Well, they are.” Mr. Zapruder: “Well, it looks like them—that’s when they turned in from Elm Street. Is that it? I’m trying to visualize it. This is taking it from the opposite side of me, is it, where I would have been taking it, because I see this structure—I have been around there and—or these—this couldn’t be here—where did they get this in there—how did they get this in there, if I was taking the pictures where did they get this in there? That shouldn’t be there.” LIEBELER SHOWS SOMETHING THAT ABE DOES NOT RECOGNIZE, AND CONFUSES HIM. SOMETHING "SHOULDN'T BE THERE". Mr. Liebeler: “This is the thing back up behind on Deal[e]y Plaza, I think, isn’t it?” Mr. Zapruder: “They have one there, too?” Mr. Liebeler: “Yes, I think there is. Now, if you will look at Hudson Exhibit No. 1, you will see that there is some kind of concrete structure there and is a different kind from that figure. It has bigger holes in it.” Mr. Zapruder: “That’s right—in the back of this here, that’s where it is—that’s what I thought it was—that’s where I got mixed up.” ABE IS CONFUSED, DOESN'T RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN. Mr. Liebeler: “You thought that the concrete latticework on the individual pictures in Commission Exhibit No. 885——” Mr. Zapruder: “Now I see it—that’s where they have moved now the flowers and all that.” Mr. Liebeler: “Yes—I have to state this for the record—so they can understand what we are talking about—you confused it with the concrete latticework shown in the background in the individual photographs in Commission Exhibit No. 885, with the larger and obviously different concrete structure in the background of Hudson Exhibit No. 1?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes, that—there is Elm Street there—this is a corner.” Mr. Liebeler: “Now, specifically here—let me show you the ones that have been numbered 185 and 186 and see if you can recognize those. This is 185 that we are looking at now—of Commission Exhibit No. 885.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; this is before—this shouldn’t be there—the shot wasn’t fired, was it? You can’t tell from here?” AGAIN, ABE DOES NOT RECOGNIZE WHAT HE IS BEING SHOWN. (Mr. Liebeler: no response.) Mr. Zapruder: “I believe it was closer down here where it happened. Of course, on the film they could see better but you take an 8 millimeter and you enlarge it in color or in black and white, you lose a lot of detail. I wish I had an enlarger here for you.” OH-OH...ABE SAYS THE SHOTS WERE FARTHER DOWN ELM. DAMAGE CONTROL NEEDED. LIEBELER IGNORES HIM. Mr. Liebeler: “In any event, frame No. 185 does look like it’s one of the frames, sir?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” Mr. Liebeler: “And 186 is similar also?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” Mr. Liebeler: “Now, I’ve got a list of them here that I want to ask you about—picture 207 and turn on over to this picture. It appears that a sign starts to come in the picture—there was a sign in the picture.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; there were signs there also and trees and somehow—I told them I was going to get the whole view and I must have.” WHOA, NELLIE...ABE IS ABOUT TO SPILL THE BEANS! "I TOLD THEM"...JUST WHO IS THEM?" HE THOUGHT THE GOT "THE WHOLE VIEW" AND HAS JUST LEARNED HE DID NOT. Mr. Liebeler: “But the sign was in the way?” LIEBELER IGNORES ABE'S REFERENCE TO "THEY". Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; but I must have neglected one part—I know what has happened—I think this was after that happened—something had happened.” THE FRAMES ARE NOT AS ABE REMEMBERS THEM. Mr. Liebeler: “Do you remember when you looked at your pictures yourself, do you remember that there was a sign that does appear be-tween the camera and the motorcade itself and you can see the motorcade for a while and the sign comes in the view?” LEADING THE WITNESS. Mr. Zapruder: “That’s right.” Mr. Liebeler: “And the motorcade comes in behind it. Now, what about picture No. 210—however—there is no No. 210 in here.” Mr. Zapruder: “No.” Mr.Liebeler: “How about No. 222? Now, in No. 222 you can see the President’s car coming out from behind the sign.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” Mr. Liebeler: “And you can see Governor Connally right there in that center seat, I believe?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; Governor Connally—yes—these are all the same pictures—I remember the car was kind of buried and I was kind of low and I don’t know how I got that view—I didn’t get just the full view of the shot.” ABE DOES NOT REMEMBER FRAMING THE SCENE SO LOW...HE THOUGHT HE GOT A FULL VIEW. Mr. Liebeler: “Let’s turn to 225 and there the car is coming further out from behind the sign.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” Mr. Liebeler: “Is that still the same part of the sequence?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” Mr. Liebeler: “You can now see the President for the first time.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; that’s the President.” Mr. Liebeler: “The President appears to have his hand up by his throat as he is just coming from behind the sign.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; it looks like he was hit—it seems—there—somewhere behind the sign. You see, he is still sitting upright.” Mr. Liebeler: “Yes; he’s sitting up and holding his hand up.” Mr. Zapruder: “Do we have the sequence—the next frames?” Mr. Liebeler: “Yes; it will be No. 227 and his hand comes up even more and he starts to move a little to his left.” Mr. Zapruder: “Apparently. And they started speeding the car then to—but he is still sitting up here. Is that still the President here?” ABE OBJECTS...THE PHOTO IS DIFFERENT THAN HE REMEMBERS. Mr. Liebeler: “Yes; in pic-ture No. 228—he still appears to have his hand up and in No. 229 it’s even more pronounced.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” Mr. Liebeler: “As the car keeps coming up from behind and in picture 230 he has raised both hands up.” Mr. Zapruder: “It looks to me like he went like this—did he go to his throat—I don’t remember—I thought he went like this [holding both hands on the left side of his chest]. Did it show?” ABE REMEMBERS JFK'S HANDS GOING TO HIS CHEST, NOT HIS THROAT. LIEBELER IGNORES ABE'S COMMENT. Mr. Liebeler: “Let’s turn over to picture 231 here—these still appear to be the same sequence of pictures, do they not?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; you get about 16 per second and I think my camera was moving a little fast, maybe 18 frames per second. You see, we have a lot of pic-tures on there.” Mr. Liebeler: “And 235 is there.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; we’ve got that.” Mr. Liebeler: “In 235 both hands are up by his throat there or up to the top of his chest and Mrs. Kennedy is looking at him.” Mr. Zapruder: “To me it looks like it.” ABE AGREES THAT IS WHAT THE PHOTO SHOWS. Mr. Liebeler: “You mean it looks to you as though he moved a little more sharply perhaps?” Mr. Zapruder: “Toward her—there are so many frames, of course, this is probably his first reaction, but he leaned over—it would be after the shot was fired, after I heard the sound, he went like this [leaning to his left and holding both hands to the left side of his chest].” THE PHOTO DOES NOT SHOW WHAT ABE REMEMBERS, SO HE AGAIN DEMONSTRATES. Mr. Liebeler: “He moved over to his left and pulled his hands there?” THIS TIME LIEBELER CANNOT IGNORE HIM. Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; he moved to the left and pulled his hands somewhat in this direction.” Mr. Liebeler: “Does picture 235 appear to be one of the pictures that was taken from your sequence?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” IF YOU SAY SO. Mr. Liebeler: “How about 240—let’s turn over to 240 and there he has turned his head toward the left a little but more.” Mr. Zapruder: “There’s only about 100 frames—they are so close.” Mr. Liebeler: “Five frames?” Mr. Zapruder: “Five frames is nothing—I believe.” Mr. Liebeler: “How about 249?” Mr. Zapruder: “No. 249—I just wonder if it was the motion that he went back with that I don’t remember—it looks like he has got his hand on his head—I don’t remember seeing that. Of course, the pictures would show.” THAT IS NOT WHAT ABE REMEMBERS. Mr. Liebeler: “Yes; when you pick one o them out it’s hard to break it down and pick them out.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; it’s hard. We run them in single frames—and to get the main shot—it’s hard.” Mr. Liebeler: “Now, let’s turn over to picture 255—these all do look like they are from your film?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; they are—I know this—I have seen it so many times. In fact, I used to have nightmares. The thing would come every night—I wake up and see this.” Mr. Liebeler: “What about 255—what about that one?” Mr. Zapruder: “That’s still the same series.” Mr. Liebeler: “That’s still the same series—they keep moving along.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes” WHATEVER YOU SAY...LET'S GET THIS OVER WITH. Mr. Liebeler: “And let’s look at No. 213 [sic: 273?]—as we go along here—then he does start moving sharply to the left.” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes; when you take it frame by frame, it could have been just 2 or 3 seconds, but the impression was that he was lean-ing over and not just sitting there and looking over that and grabbing himself at the left side.” Mr. Liebeler: “Yes; moving toward Mrs. Kennedy.” Mr. Zapruder: “That’s what impressed me. Now, what number are you on?” ABE WAS IMPRESSED THAT JFK FELL TO HIS LEFT, NOT BACK. Mr. Liebeler: “313—you remember that one?” Mr. Zapruder: “That was—that was the horrible one.” Mr. Liebeler: “It appears to you then, that this book of pictures here as you look through it, are your pictures?” Mr. Zapruder: “Yes.” YES, IF YOU SAY SO. I GOT LOTS OF DOUGH TO SAY THAT I TOOK THE FILM, AND I CAN'T NOW SAY THAT THESE ARE NOT WHAT I REMEMBER.
Chris Davidson Posted January 25, 2007 Author Posted January 25, 2007 Jack is simply wrong. Zapruder does not have his left hand on his hip. This is about as silly as someone posting that Clint Hill had three legs in an earlier thread. If one follows the Bronson film and /or the Nix film ... they will see that Zapruder has both hands on his camera as he turns his body so to track the President. Zapruder has the same posture in Moorman's photo.Zapruder cast a shadow onto Sitzman's dress and if one lightens the photo - they will see that what looks like a dark arm belonging to Zapruder in a heavily contrasted Betzner image - is now gone with only Sitzman's dress to be seen. I know that Jack understands these things because when I did the same thing to show that Badge Man's image separated from the overhanging tree foliage - Jack understood the process I used to check his work. The Zapruder camera is a somewhat heavy instrument to have to hold to film with. I personally wouldn't try getting a good smooth pan by only holding the camera with one hand. I certainly would think it to be impossible to do with one hand if you were someone who had vertigo to the point of feeling dizzy when standing on a pedestal. If one would simply apply a little logic when looking at these images - lighten them - cross reference them - then not so much time would be wasted on foolishness. How many joints does a person have between their shoulder and wrist? The answer is "one" at the elbow. There are two separate bends between Zapruder's shoulder and wrist if we accept the shading of Sitzman's dress to be Zapruder with his left hand on his hip. Furthermore, if you measure the distance of the shadow and apply it to Zapruder's height and then apply that measurement in a straight vertical line starting from Zapruder's shoulder, you will see if that was Zapruder's left arm, then Abe's left hand would be practically on the ground. (See image #2 from an earlier post) ] Why not measure the top of Zapruder's hat with Sitzman's face, and then figure out why his body is not connected to his head, unless he is a giraffe. chris
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 (edited) Mark, I got up on the pedestal with my B/H 414 and shot about 5 rolls of film. At no point did I ever move my feet. The tendency is to set your feet in a comfortable position, then pivot from the waist which allows you to cover the top of Elm St. to the underpass. Chris, there is an important thing you are missing because you do not think in terms of the 'angle of perspective'. From the view that someone like Betzner had - Zapruder will appear side by side with Sitzman. Bronson and Nix have a different angle of view to the pedestal, so Zapruder will be more between Sitzman and the Bronson or Nix cameras. So many times I have witnessed these types of mistakes made because you guys never think about the angle at which any particular camera is filming from. Look at the photo posted in response #63 which shows Sitzman on the pedestal. Look towards the corner of Elm and Houston in that photo - can you not see how Zapruder and Sitzman would look to be standing side by side from that angle. Now consider the angle at which Zapruder would have rotated his body to so to see Nix - cannot you not see how from that LOS that Sitzman would appear to be more behind Zapruder than beside him. This is not rocket science, but thin gs that we all should have learned in a grade school art class when discussing "perspective". Also, if you watch a good copy of the Nix film ... you can see Zapruder twisting his body just as you did. in fact, if you had given any thought to have done it - you would have had someone take a photo of you on the pedestal with a Sitzman stand-in and at the same time had two photos of you taken - one from the Betzner location and the other from the Nix location and then compared that to the images being discussed here. peoples inability to carry out an in-depth test study when given the chance does not equate alteration. Bill Edited January 25, 2007 by Bill Miller
Chris Davidson Posted January 25, 2007 Author Posted January 25, 2007 Mark, I got up on the pedestal with my B/H 414 and shot about 5 rolls of film. At no point did I ever move my feet. The tendency is to set your feet in a comfortable position, then pivot from the waist which allows you to cover the top of Elm St. to the underpass. Chris, there is an important thing you are missing because you do not think in terms of the 'angle of perspective'. From the view that someone like Betzner had - Zapruder will appear side by side with Sitzman. Bronson and Nix have a different angle of view to the pedestal, so Zapruder will be more between Sitzman and the Bronson or Nix cameras. So many times I have witnessed these types of mistakes made because you guys never think about the angle at which any particular camera is filming from. Look at the photo posted in response #63 which shows Sitzman on the pedestal. Look towards the corner of Elm and Houston in that photo - can you not see how Zapruder and Sitzman would look to be standing side by side from that angle. Now consider the angle at which Zapruder would have rotated his body to so to see Nix - cannot you not see how from that LOS that Sitzman would appear to be more behind Zapruder than beside him. This is not rocket science, but thin gs that we all should have learned in a grade school art class when discussing "perspective". Also, if you watch a good copy of the Nix film ... you can see Zapruder twisting his body just as you did. in fact, if you had given any thought to have done it - you would have had someone take a photo of you on the pedestal with a Sitzman stand-in and at the same time had two photos of you taken - one from the Betzner location and the other from the Nix location and then compared that to the images being discussed here. peoples inability to carry out an in-depth test study when given the chance does not equate alteration. Bill Bill, since Nix and Bronson were somewhat close to each other while filming the pedestal, let me know where Zapruder is in this photo, compared to what you supplied earlier. Once again, I guess my perspective just sucks. But then again, show me Zapruder filming and Sitzman holding onto him. chris
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 (edited) To which I agree in spades...Where's yours?? in regards to Marilyn Sitzman...and why is it, that your interpretation is, in your opinion the only....?? Because I have studied these images - gone to the plaza and filmed from each camera location - and have a great understanding of angles and how they apply to the plaza. There are no clear photos of Marilyn Sitzman on the pedestal wearing high heels, that you assume she had on, there are no clear photos of her on the pedestal, period...and neither are there in the Trask's book, that I have come upon.....that you say are there...??.and seeing that I do not think you have ever worn high heels, you would not know anything about running up and down knolls and or grassy hills, or on grass, for that matter, wearing such ,so do not try to tell a woman, who did wear them for many years, about them...... you are assuming again......and in error.. Bernice, another reason why I say my opinion is more accurate than yours is because you seem to not follow-up on the things you have been told and you certainly so not know xxxx about the photographical record. If you knew anything - you would notice the high instep on the woman on the pedestal ... that is because she is wearing heels. The image you posted below is a joke and if you search the archives when this was discussed once before, I think you will see one hell of a much better copy of Sitzman near the TSBD in her heels that I believe Robin had posted. And because you are too damned lazy to get Groden's book and look at the images I spoke of - I will take the time to come back in a bit and cite the page and source for you to see Sitzman standing next the pedestal in those heels. Also, if you get out I believe Trask other book "That Day in Dallas", I believe you will see photos of the knoll with women scattered among it in their heels as well. So you can call a rock a tree if you like, but you are simply wrong because you have not studied the evidence enough to know any better. I might also add that there are no clear pictures of Moorman, Hill, Brehm, Little Joe, Phil Willis, Rosemary Willis, James Altgens, Toni Foster, Beverly Oliver, Hugh Betzner, Linda Kay Willis, and a list of other witnesses that were filmed during the assassination ... so are you going to wish to argue that none of them were where they claimed to be during the shooting? Your position is ridiculous and what's even more silly is that at least Sitzman's black scarf, dress, and heels can be seen in assassination images, especially the Bell film showing her and Zapruder just starting to walk away from the pedestal immediately after their dismount. I said no woman with high heels on, would run up or down a grassy knoll hill with such on their feet, as the heels would stick into the grass, especially running down...and that is something you would not know about Sure I would know about it for I have watched women do just that on the knoll every year that I have been there for the memorial. You seem to be talking about something that you assume would not happen and I am telling you that I have witnessed and some of the assassination photos and film show that it did happen. .No one knows if she wore such on the pedestal, positively, as no clear photo exists that she is or did......Did it ever occur to you or any man, within the research world, that she especially in a straight skirt, climbing up on a pedestal ,would have slipped them off....IF she was wearing them..which is questionable Bernice, you need to do a time study cross referencing the assassination films and photos. The Wiegman film shows Sitzman's legs hanging over the pedestal. The Paschall film shows Zapruder hopping down from the pedestal just behind Sitzman. Altgens 8 is a photo of them two just as Zapruder had gotten to the ground and Sitzman is still taller than Zapruder and has had no time to put shoes on. The fact alone that their post assassination height difference is exactly the same as it was during the assassination should tell you all you need to know as to whether Sitzman had her heels on while on the pedestal, but then again you'd have to stop and study the photographical record to know these things. Here is a simple rule that even you should be able to follow ... If Sitzman with heels on in a post assassination image shows the same height difference to Zapruder as during the assassination, then she must have had on her heels at both time intervals - PERIOD! She is also quoted by Life in an article ,see below.."Mr.Z was gone"..So she not only speaks for herself on the TMWKK, and then also on Image of an Assassination, .but also on a tape to her Doctor under hypnosis.....in which, she states under hypnosis, that she is left alone, and Zapruder has gone....he has gotten down.. ""My boss is gone I looked around he's gone., he's gone""....and she is scared.......etc.... She speaks of being left standing on the pedestal, alone, by Zapruder, of him being gone, and not seeing him again,( until she gets back to the office) that she was looking in the direction of the underpass, and when she turned, he was gone, and she was left standing there by herself...she looked around, and saw all the people....She then mentions about getting down, and going down the hill to the other side of the street, where she spoke to whom she thinks were FBI men.... She leaves and the men follow her back to Mr.Zs office and she was afraid, they continued to follow her into the waiting area, of the office, they wanted to see Mr.Zapruder but he wouldn't see them, he was in his office...she mentions she is still afraid.... Bernice, you are trying to pick pepper out of nat xxxx! Altgens took his photo just as soon as Zapruder got onto the ground and Sitzman is not on the pedestal, so anything said to the contrary is in error ... unless you are going to say someone altered Altgens 8 by removing Sitzman from the pedestal and placing her on the ground. GIVE ME A BREAK! By all this she has made it very clear that she was left by Zapruder alone. This is true ... the Bell film shows Zapruder walking away from the pedestal while Sitzman stands there alone. Later, I think either Bond or Rickerby take a photo showing people in the shelter and Sitzman is walking that way to join them. Your inability to correlate the photographical record to Sitzman's statements is your problem and no one elses. Also,I did not state that Zapruder did not hop down off the pedestal..did I.?? another supposition on your part, so stop deliberately trying to misqote people, it does not work.. As Judge Judy would ask, "ARE YOU THICK ... OR WHAT!" I mention Zapruder hopping down because the Paschall film shows Sitzman already off the pedestal when Zapruder hits the ground.Marilyn was dying of Cancer when she gave this statement on the taped interview, to her Doctor, she died three months later...on August 11, 1993. .....so stop trying to impose the what you think she wore, said and did, you are trying to use her to your own ends, within your own research.. The photographical record over rules your poor interpretation of the witnesses statements IMO. Her story does not comply with Zapruder's, his does not with hers, the Hesters story does not comply witheither.. Supposed you tell us the Hester's story Bernice and how that relates to this thread. I am looking forward to hearing it. I have taken the liberty to post what they had to say ... is there something more that you would like to share with everyone? Bill VOLUNTARY STATEMENT. Not Under Arrest Form No. 86 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF DALLAS, TEXAS Before me, the undersigned authority, on this the 22nd day of November A.D. 1963 personally appeared Charles Hester, Address 2616 Keyhole, Irving Age 28 , Phone No. None Deposes and says: My wife, Beatrice and I were sitting on the grass on the slope on Elm Street where the park is located. When President Kennedy's car got almost down to the underpass, I heard two shots ring out. Thye [sic] sounded like they came from immediately behind us and over our heads. We did [not?] see the shooting. I immediately turned and looked at the Texas Book Depository building and did not see anyone. The shots sounded like the [sic] definitely came from in or around the building. I grabbed my wife because I didn't know where the next shot was coming from and dragged her up next to the concrete imbankment [sic] and threw her down on the ground and got on the ground with her. Then there was utter confusion. The Police rushed toward the railroad tracks and I finally found an officer to go to the Texas Book Depository Building. The officer I contacted was Officer Wiseman [sic: Weitzman] of the Dallas Sheriff's Department. /s/ Charles Hester Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 22nd day of Nov A. D. 1963 /s/ Aleen Davis Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date 11/25/63 CHARLES HESTER, 2610 Mayhold Street, furnished the following information: At approximately 12:30 p.m., November 22, 1963, HESTER and his wife, BEATRICE, were standing along the street at the point immediately preceeding the underpass on Elm Street where President JOHN F. KENNEDY was shot. HESTER stated he saw the President slump in the seat of the car and that he heard two shots fired drom what appeared to be a building located on the corner of Elm Street and Houston Street. He Stated he and his wife were almost in a direct line of the fire and he immediately grabbed his wife and shoved her to the ground. He stated hethereafter immediately escorted his wife across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. HESTER stated he did not see anyone with a gun at the time the shots were fired and that after the President's car had pulled away from the scene and officers started toward the aforementioned building, he and his wife proceeded to their car and left the area. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on 11/24/63 at Irving, Texas File # DL 89-43 By Special Agent DOYLE WILLIAMS and HENRY J. OLIVER Date Dictated 11/25/63 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date November 25, 1963 Mrs. CHARLES HESTER, 2619 Keyhole Street, Irving, Texas, advised that sometime around 12:30 p.m., on November 22, 1963, she and her husband were standing along the street at a place immediately preceding the underpass on Elm Street, where President KENNEDY was shot. Mrs. HESTER advised she heard two loud noises which sounded like gunshots, and she saw president KENNEDY slump in the seat of the car he was riding in. Her husband then grabbed her and shoved her to the ground. Shortly thereafter they went across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. She stated that she believes she and her husband actually had been in the direct line of fire. She did not see anyone with a gun when the shots were fired and stated she could not furnish any information as to exactly where the shots came from. After the President's car had pulled away from the scene. she and her husband proceeded to their car and left the scene as she was very upset. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on 11/24/63 at Irving, Texas File # DL 89-43 By Special Agent J. DOYLE WILLIAMS and HENRY J. OLIVER Date Dictated 11/25/63 Edited January 25, 2007 by Bill Miller
Jack White Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 To which I agree in spades...Where's yours?? in regards to Marilyn Sitzman...and why is it, that your interpretation is, in your opinion the only....?? Because I have studied these images - gone to the plaza and filmed from each camera location - and have a great understanding of angles and how they apply to the plaza. There are no clear photos of Marilyn Sitzman on the pedestal wearing high heels, that you assume she had on, there are no clear photos of her on the pedestal, period...and neither are there in the Trask's book, that I have come upon.....that you say are there...??.and seeing that I do not think you have ever worn high heels, you would not know anything about running up and down knolls and or grassy hills, or on grass, for that matter, wearing such ,so do not try to tell a woman, who did wear them for many years, about them...... you are assuming again......and in error.. Bernice, another reason why I say my opinion is more accurate than yours is because you seem to not follow-up on the things you have been told and you certainly so not know xxxx about the photographical record. If you knew anything - you would notice the high instep on the woman on the pedestal ... that is because she is wearing heels. The image you posted below is a joke and if you search the archives when this was discussed once before, I think you will see one hell of a much better copy of Sitzman near the TSBD in her heels that I believe Robin had posted. And because you are too damned lazy to get Groden's book and look at the images I spoke of - I will take the time to come back in a bit and cite the page and source for you to see Sitzman standing next the pedestal in those heels. Also, if you get out I believe Trask other book "That Day in Dallas", I believe you will see photos of the knoll with women scattered among it in their heels as well. So you can call a rock a tree if you like, but you are simply wrong because you have not studied the evidence enough to know any better.I might also add that there are no clear pictures of Moorman, Hill, Brehm, Little Joe, Phil Willis, Rosemary Willis, James Altgens, Toni Foster, Beverly Oliver, Hugh Betzner, Linda Kay Willis, and a list of other witnesses that were filmed during the assassination ... so are you going to wish to argue that none of them were where they claimed to be during the shooting? Your position is ridiculous and what's even more silly is that at least Sitzman's black scarf, dress, and heels can be seen in assassination images, especially the Bell film showing her and Zapruder just starting to walk away from the pedestal immediately after their dismount. I said no woman with high heels on, would run up or down a grassy knoll hill with such on their feet, as the heels would stick into the grass, especially running down...and that is something you would not know about Sure I would know about it for I have watched women do just that on the knoll every year I have been there for the memorial. You seem to be talking about something that you assume would not happen and I am telling you that I have witnessed and some of the assassination photos and film show that it did happen. .No one knows if she wore such on the pedestal, positively, as no clear photo exists that she is or did......Did it ever occur to you or any man, within the research world, that she especially in a straight skirt, climbing up on a pedestal ,would have slipped them off....IF she was wearing them..which is questionable Bernice, you need to do a time study cross referencing the assassination films and photos. The Wiegman film shows Sitzman's legs hanging over the pedestal. The Paschall film shows Zapruder hopping down from the pedestal just behind Sitzman. Altgens 8 is a photo of them two just as Zapruder had gotten to the ground and Sitzman is still taller than Zapruder and has had no time to put shoes on. The fact alone that their post assassination height difference is exactly the same as it was during the assassination should tell you all you need to know as to whether Sitzman had her heels on while on the pedestal, but then again you'd have to stop and study the photographical record to know these things. Here is a simple rule that even you should be able to follow ... If Sitzman with heels on in a post assassination image shows the same height difference to Zapruder as during the assassination, then she must have had on her heels at both time intervals - PERIOD!She is also quoted by Life in an article ,see below.."Mr.Z was gone"..So she not only speaks for herself on the TMWKK, and then also on Image of an Assassination, .but also on a tape to her Doctor under hypnosis.....in which, she states under hypnosis, that she is left alone, and Zapruder has gone....he has gotten down.. ""My boss is gone I looked around he's gone., he's gone""....and she is scared.......etc.... She speaks of being left standing on the pedestal, alone, by Zapruder, of him being gone, and not seeing him again,( until she gets back to the office) that she was looking in the direction of the underpass, and when she turned, he was gone, and she was left standing there by herself...she looked around, and saw all the people....She then mentions about getting down, and going down the hill to the other side of the street, where she spoke to whom she thinks were FBI men.... She leaves and the men follow her back to Mr.Zs office and she was afraid, they continued to follow her into the waiting area, of the office, they wanted to see Mr.Zapruder but he wouldn't see them, he was in his office...she mentions she is still afraid.... Bernice, you are trying to pick pepper out of nat xxxx! Altgens took his photo just as soon as Zapruder got onto the ground and Sitzman is not on the pedestal, so anything said to the contrary is in error ... unless you are going to say someone altered Altgens 8 by removing Sitzman from the pedestal and placing her on the ground. GIVE ME A BREAK! By all this she has made it very clear that she was left by Zapruder alone. This is true ... the Bell film shows Zapruder walking away from the pedestal while Sitzman stands there alone. Later, I think either Bond or Rickerby take a photo showing people in the shelter and Sitzman is walking that way to join them. Your inability to correlate the photographical record to Sitzman's statements is your problem and no one elses.Also,I did not state that Zapruder did not hop down off the pedestal..did I.?? another supposition on your part, so stop deliberately trying to misqote people, it does not work.. As Judge Judy would ask, "ARE YOU THICK ... OR WHAT!" I mention Zapruder hopping down because the Paschall film shows Sitzman already off the pedestal when Zapruder hits the ground.Marilyn was dying of Cancer when she gave this statement on the taped interview, to her Doctor, she died three months later...on August 11, 1993. .....so stop trying to impose the what you think she wore, said and did, you are trying to use her to your own ends, within your own research.. The photographical record over rules your poor interpretation of the witnesses statements IMO.Her story does not comply with Zapruder's, his does not with hers, the Hesters story does not comply witheither.. Supposed you tell us the Hester's story Bernice and how that relates to this thread. I am looking forward to hearing it. I have taken the liberty to post what they had to say ... is there something more that you would like to share with everyone? Bill VOLUNTARY STATEMENT. Not Under Arrest Form No. 86 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF DALLAS, TEXAS Before me, the undersigned authority, on this the 22nd day of November A.D. 1963 personally appeared Charles Hester, Address 2616 Keyhole, Irving Age 28 , Phone No. None Deposes and says: My wife, Beatrice and I were sitting on the grass on the slope on Elm Street where the park is located. When President Kennedy's car got almost down to the underpass, I heard two shots ring out. Thye [sic] sounded like they came from immediately behind us and over our heads. We did [not?] see the shooting. I immediately turned and looked at the Texas Book Depository building and did not see anyone. The shots sounded like the [sic] definitely came from in or around the building. I grabbed my wife because I didn't know where the next shot was coming from and dragged her up next to the concrete imbankment [sic] and threw her down on the ground and got on the ground with her. Then there was utter confusion. The Police rushed toward the railroad tracks and I finally found an officer to go to the Texas Book Depository Building. The officer I contacted was Officer Wiseman [sic: Weitzman] of the Dallas Sheriff's Department. /s/ Charles Hester Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 22nd day of Nov A. D. 1963 /s/ Aleen Davis Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date 11/25/63 CHARLES HESTER, 2610 Mayhold Street, furnished the following information: At approximately 12:30 p.m., November 22, 1963, HESTER and his wife, BEATRICE, were standing along the street at the point immediately preceeding the underpass on Elm Street where President JOHN F. KENNEDY was shot. HESTER stated he saw the President slump in the seat of the car and that he heard two shots fired drom what appeared to be a building located on the corner of Elm Street and Houston Street. He Stated he and his wife were almost in a direct line of the fire and he immediately grabbed his wife and shoved her to the ground. He stated hethereafter immediately escorted his wife across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. HESTER stated he did not see anyone with a gun at the time the shots were fired and that after the President's car had pulled away from the scene and officers started toward the aforementioned building, he and his wife proceeded to their car and left the area. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on 11/24/63 at Irving, Texas File # DL 89-43 By Special Agent DOYLE WILLIAMS and HENRY J. OLIVER Date Dictated 11/25/63 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date November 25, 1963 Mrs. CHARLES HESTER, 2619 Keyhole Street, Irving, Texas, advised that sometime around 12:30 p.m., on November 22, 1963, she and her husband were standing along the street at a place immediately preceding the underpass on Elm Street, where President KENNEDY was shot. Mrs. HESTER advised she heard two loud noises which sounded like gunshots, and she saw president KENNEDY slump in the seat of the car he was riding in. Her husband then grabbed her and shoved her to the ground. Shortly thereafter they went across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. She stated that she believes she and her husband actually had been in the direct line of fire. She did not see anyone with a gun when the shots were fired and stated she could not furnish any information as to exactly where the shots came from. After the President's car had pulled away from the scene. she and her husband proceeded to their car and left the scene as she was very upset. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on 11/24/63 at Irving, Texas File # DL 89-43 By Special Agent J. DOYLE WILLIAMS and HENRY J. OLIVER Date Dictated 11/25/63 "Miller" is so dumb he does not even recognize that the Hester statements CONFLICT with each other and with EXTANT PHOTOS WHICH TELL A DIFFERENT STORY. In Willis 5, for instance, Beatrice is seen standing and waving AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PERGOLA, and husband CHARLES IS SITING ON THE BENCH READING A NEWSPAPER, not even looking at the motorcade. This is also seen in other photos. So what do we believe...the photos or their sworn statements? If "Miller" says we should believe the affidavits, he is admitting the photos are faked. If he says the photos are accurate, then he is saying the Hesters lied under oath. Give it up, "Miller"...you can't win. Jack
Bernice Moore Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 (edited) VOLUNTARY STATEMENT. Not Under Arrest Form No. 86 SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF DALLAS, TEXAS Before me, the undersigned authority, on this the 22nd day of November A.D. 1963 personally appeared Charles Hester, Address 2616 Keyhole, Irving Age 28 , Phone No. None Deposes and says: My wife, Beatrice and I were sitting on the grass on the slope on Elm Street where the park is located. When President Kennedy's car got almost down to the underpass, I heard two shots ring out. Thye [sic] sounded like they came from immediately behind us and over our heads. We did [not?] see the shooting. I immediately turned and looked at the Texas Book Depository building and did not see anyone. The shots sounded like the [sic] definitely came from in or around the building. I grabbed my wife because I didn't know where the next shot was coming from and dragged her up next to the concrete imbankment [sic] and threw her down on the ground and got on the ground with her. Then there was utter confusion. The Police rushed toward the railroad tracks and I finally found an officer to go to the Texas Book Depository Building. The officer I contacted was Officer Wiseman [sic: Weitzman] of the Dallas Sheriff's Department. /s/ Charles Hester Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 22nd day of Nov A. D. 1963 /s/ Aleen Davis Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date 11/25/63 CHARLES HESTER, 2610 Mayhold Street, furnished the following information: At approximately 12:30 p.m., November 22, 1963, HESTER and his wife, BEATRICE, were standing along the street at the point immediately preceeding the underpass on Elm Street where President JOHN F. KENNEDY was shot. HESTER stated he saw the President slump in the seat of the car and that he heard two shots fired drom what appeared to be a building located on the corner of Elm Street and Houston Street. He Stated he and his wife were almost in a direct line of the fire and he immediately grabbed his wife and shoved her to the ground. He stated hethereafter immediately escorted his wife across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. HESTER stated he did not see anyone with a gun at the time the shots were fired and that after the President's car had pulled away from the scene and officers started toward the aforementioned building, he and his wife proceeded to their car and left the area. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on 11/24/63 at Irving, Texas File # DL 89-43 By Special Agent DOYLE WILLIAMS and HENRY J. OLIVER Date Dictated 11/25/63 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date November 25, 1963 Mrs. CHARLES HESTER, 2619 Keyhole Street, Irving, Texas, advised that sometime around 12:30 p.m., on November 22, 1963, she and her husband were standing along the street at a place immediately preceding the underpass on Elm Street, where President KENNEDY was shot. Mrs. HESTER advised she heard two loud noises which sounded like gunshots, and she saw president KENNEDY slump in the seat of the car he was riding in. Her husband then grabbed her and shoved her to the ground. Shortly thereafter they went across to the north side of the street on an embankment in an attempt to gain shelter. She stated that she believes she and her husband actually had been in the direct line of fire. She did not see anyone with a gun when the shots were fired and stated she could not furnish any information as to exactly where the shots came from. After the President's car had pulled away from the scene. she and her husband proceeded to their car and left the scene as she was very upset. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- on 11/24/63 at Irving, Texas File # DL 89-43 By Special Agent J. DOYLE WILLIAMS and HENRY J. OLIVER Date Dictated 11/25/63 "Miller" is so dumb he does not even recognize that the Hester statements CONFLICT with each other and with EXTANT PHOTOS WHICH TELL A DIFFERENT STORY. In Willis 5, for instance, Beatrice is seen standing and waving AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PERGOLA, and husband CHARLES IS SITING ON THE BENCH READING A NEWSPAPER, not even looking at the motorcade. This is also seen in other photos. So what do we believe...the photos or their sworn statements? If "Miller" says we should believe the affidavits, he is admitting the photos are faked. If he says the photos are accurate, then he is saying the Hesters lied under oath. Give it up, "Miller"...you can't win. Jack ********************************** I came to post the separate errors in Charles statements......but I see Miller has done so for me.. ..but thanks Bill.... I see no need now to reply to your tirade to my post above, as you have not said anything...and apparenty you cannot read straight nor comprehend......and it is very obvious you have not done your research into Marilyn nor the Hesters, other than what you say you have in regards to the photos, sorry Bill but they are only a part of it all.. From "Six Seconds in Dallas" (pg259) The Hesters both stated they heard 2 shots, with no bunching. Charles also said the source direction of the shots were, quote on "Immediately behind us and over our heads." quote off Beatrice states.. quote on "Thinks she and husband were in the direct line of fire." quote off Additional deposition info about them can be found in Decker 5323, 19H478, 22H841, 24H523 Photo from Jack.. B.. Edited January 25, 2007 by Bernice Moore
Bill Miller Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 (edited) "Miller" is so dumb he does not even recognize that the Hester statements CONFLICT witheach other and with EXTANT PHOTOS WHICH TELL A DIFFERENT STORY. In Willis 5, for instance, Beatrice is seen standing and waving AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PERGOLA, and husband CHARLES IS SITING ON THE BENCH READING A NEWSPAPER, not even looking at the motorcade. This is also seen in other photos. So what do we believe...the photos or their sworn statements? If "Miller" says we should believe the affidavits, he is admitting the photos are faked. If he says the photos are accurate, then he is saying the Hesters lied under oath. Give it up, "Miller"...you can't win. Jack Jack, you are such a bone head. The Hester's were sitting on a bench that was located on the sidewalk at the grasses edge. Proof of this can be seen in the Zapruder film before the motorcade sequence. When the President rounded the corner and started down Elm Street - Beatrice obviously got up off the bench. Befoe the limo left the plaza and when Wiegman started filming - the Hester's were on the ground in the grass. As far as Beatrice waving and the alleged newspaper being read by Charles ... that I would like to see. Groden has the best enlargement I have seen and I cannot make out those things that you speak of. I am reminded that you can't look at a photo and tell a white woman from a black one, so I will have to ask that you be more specific as to how you reached your interpretations. I hope to hell that you are not calling that sunspot on the colonnade wall a newspaper - are you? BTW, Jack ... there is only one affidavit. The other two are FBI reports and not the Hester's own words. Edited January 25, 2007 by Bill Miller
Jack White Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 "Miller" is so dumb he does not even recognize that the Hester statements CONFLICT witheach other and with EXTANT PHOTOS WHICH TELL A DIFFERENT STORY. In Willis 5, for instance, Beatrice is seen standing and waving AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PERGOLA, and husband CHARLES IS SITING ON THE BENCH READING A NEWSPAPER, not even looking at the motorcade. This is also seen in other photos. So what do we believe...the photos or their sworn statements? If "Miller" says we should believe the affidavits, he is admitting the photos are faked. If he says the photos are accurate, then he is saying the Hesters lied under oath. Give it up, "Miller"...you can't win. Jack Jack, you are such a bone head. The Hester's were sitting on a bench that was located on the grass. Proof of this can be seen in the Zapruder film before the motorcade sequence. When the President rounded the corner and started down Elm Street - Beatrice obviously got up off the bench. As far as her waving and the alleged newspaper being read by Charles ... that I would like to see. Groden has the best enlargement I have seen and I cannot make out those things that you speak of. I am reminded that you can't look at a photo and tell a white woman from a black one, so I will have to ask that you be more specific as to how you reached your interpretations. I hope to hell that you are not calling that sunspot on the colonnade wall a newspaper - are you? BTW, Jack ... there is only one affidavit. The other two are FBI reports and not the Hester's own words. Miller is the bonehead. Not the sunspot dummy...look at the corner of the pedestal. And I suppose the GRASS is cement colored...look again. Read the Hester statements again and compare them to the photo...tell us what you find. The newspaper is in another image also; I will look. I don't know why researchers put up with such a revolting guy as this. Jack
Jack White Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 The Bronson MOVIE shows Hester on the bench with what appears to be a newspaper. However, Beatrice, who was dressed in green has become a woman in a gray skirt wearing a white hooded jacket and running north. The Bronson movie shows Zapruder just over four feet tall, and omits the two curbside ladies by the lamppost in Bronson's slide taken only seconds before. Jack
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now