Couch Film

[Chris Davidson]

Part of Malcolm Couch's film, stabilized and contrasted somewhat.

What appears and disappears?

Would these area's be of interest to other's? Miles/Duncan

chris

[Thomas Graves]

Part of Malcolm Couch's film, stabilized and contrasted somewhat.

What appears and disappears?

Would these area's be of interest to other's? Miles/Duncan

chris

___________________

Chris,

I've always found this clip very interesting. Looks like a policeman behind the fence in the process of bending over to look at or pick up something. The thing that appears on the left might be the front of a car which is heading east up Elm Street. Do you know about how many minutes after the shooting this footage was taken by Mr. Darnell (as pointed out by Chris in post #4)? One minute, two,... ?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________

Edited May 11, 2007 by Thomas Graves

[Chris Davidson]

Thomas,

This clip contains 2 parts.

The footage I am showing was filmed by a local cameraman sometime prior to 12:39, according to Trask's POTP. ???

The second part where the park bench and more of the crowd are shown, is from Couch. Also

according to Trask. ???

STRANGE

In reality, the part that I show is 8 frames. The whole clip is 18 frames.

Someone filmed approx 1/2 second for each clip. If approx 18 FPS

Interesting

chris

[Chris Davidson]

The film clip was actually shot by WBAP-TV Jimmy Darnell.

Thanks to Trygve V. Jensen and Gary Mack for correcting me.

2nd half of clip stabilized.

chris

[Thomas Graves]

edited into oblivion..........

Edited May 12, 2007 by Thomas Graves

[Miles Scull]

The film clip was actually shot by WBAP-TV Jimmy Darnell.

Thanks to Trygve V. Jensen and Gary Mack for correcting me.

2nd half of clip stabilized.

chris

Chris!

Great work & thanks.

Trygve & Bernice have frames which are hazy from Darnell's hazy original. Mr. Connolly did an excellent job in colorizing 2 frames which tremendously enhanced their clarity.

In working with the Darnell frames did you enhance them? Your frames seem clearer, with greater contrast.

If so, could you post your individual frames?

Thx

Miles

[Robin Unger]

Nice job Chris.

[Thomas Graves]

Part of Malcolm Couch's film, stabilized and contrasted somewhat.

What appears and disappears?

Would these area's be of interest to other's? Miles/Duncan

chris

___________________

Chris,

I've always found this clip very interesting. Looks like a policeman, maybe, behind the fence bending over (looking at something or picking up something) then standing up and becoming more visible to the camera. That thing that appears on the left might be the front of a car which is heading east up Elm Street. Do you know about how many minutes after the shooting this footage was taken by Mr. Darnell (as pointed out by Chris in post #4)? One minute, two,... ?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________

_________________________

Folks,

When I watch, over and over again, the stabilized Couch clip posted by Chris on this thread, it's obvious to me that there was a dark "stain" or "wet spot" or "pool" of something, (soda pop?, blood?, pee-pee? lol)... on the left side of the walkway and slightly behind the bench. In the clip, it's interesting to note that the little boy and his mother(?) intentionally walk around this dark anomaly as they start walking down the walkway away from the camera and that the inquisitive dark-suited man (detective?) in the foreground seems to be homing in on it at the end of the clip...... The area in question is covered in general shade, cast by the nearby tree/trees, etc. and therefore, sorry, I don't think that the "stain" or "wet spot" or "pool" or "whatever" can be explained away as a simple shadow cast by the widdle boy.... Look for yourself, over and over again as I did, and I think you'll agree.......

It's interesting that the mother(?) actually seems to pull the boy's arm in such a way as to keep him from stepping in it.

If I remember correctly, Sitzman claimed that she heard "glass breaking" (a thrown-down soda pop bottle perhaps?) to her right. OK, well, gosh, so what...???

Yes, I also realize that it's been stated that a very rapidly-disappearing, mysterious, and oh-so-inconveniently-not-coming forth-after-the-assassination "Let's-get-the-Hell-outta-here-while-the-gettin's-good!" Afro-American couple, who had been sitting on the bench, eatin' their lunch and takin' in the passing of the motorcade, had allegedly thrown down one of their soda pop bottles and left the other on top of the "black dog" wall. so I wonder if it makes any sense that the alleged thrown-down (soda pop bottle?) glass object, the impact of which Sitzman heard, would/could have been thrown down by one of the Afro-American "couple" at the place indicated in the Couch film? Seems to me that it (a soda pop bottle) would have been thrown down more to the front and/or to the side of the bench, and therefore that the dark stain or pool visible in Couch's film was probably the pee or blood left behind by one of the shooters or witnesses when he or she realized the import and ramifications and/or implications of what he or she had just done or witnessed.

Comments please?

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________________

_________________________

Edited May 12, 2007 by Thomas Graves

[Chris Davidson]

Thomas,

I don't know what pops up and down behind the wall.

As for the protrusion coming from the fence, I wonder if there was an opening at that spot.

That object extends from the fence towards the gentleman approaching it. imo Take another look, I added one more frame and sharpened this version.

As for the pool of liquid, there is someone I believe more interested in that pool, than the gentleman you pointed out.

Briefly, to avoid any confusion:

When I said I added one more frame, there are in fact 10 total frames for the policeman segment. I used the first 8, in my first posting.

There is more camera movement in the last two, which was degrading the animation so I left them out.

I just added frame 9 to this latest animation. Frame 10 useless. imo

chris

[Thomas Graves]

Part of Malcolm Couch's film, stabilized and contrasted somewhat.

What appears and disappears?

Would these area's be of interest to other's? Miles/Duncan

chris

___________________

Chris,

I've always found this clip very interesting. Looks like a policeman, maybe, behind the fence bending over (looking at something or picking up something) then standing up and becoming more visible to the camera. That thing that appears on the left might be the front of a car which is heading east up Elm Street. Do you know about how many minutes after the shooting this footage was taken by Mr. Darnell (as pointed out by Chris in post #4)? One minute, two,... ?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________

_________________________

Folks,

When I watch, over and over again, the stabilized Couch clip posted by Chris on this thread, it's obvious to me that there was a dark "stain" or "wet spot" or "pool" of something, (soda pop?, blood?, pee-pee? lol)... on the left side of the walkway and slightly behind the bench. In the clip, it's interesting to note that the little boy and his mother(?) intentionally walk around this dark anomaly as they start walking down the walkway away from the camera and that the inquisitive dark-suited man (detective?) in the foreground seems to be homing in on it at the end of the clip...... The area in question is covered in general shade, cast by the nearby tree/trees, etc. and therefore, sorry, I don't think that the "stain" or "wet spot" or "pool" or "whatever" can be explained away as a simple shadow cast by the widdle boy.... Look for yourself, over and over again as I did, and I think you'll agree.......

It's interesting that the mother(?) actually seems to pull the boy's arm in such a way as to keep him from stepping in it.

If I remember correctly, Sitzman claimed that she heard "glass breaking" (a thrown-down soda pop bottle perhaps?) to her right. Yes? OK, well, gosh. That's interesting in-and-of-itself, isn't it?

Yes, I realize that it's been asserted that a very rapidly-disappearing, mysterious and oh-so-inconveniently-not-coming forth-after-the-assassination "Let's-get-the-Hell-outta-here-while-the-gettin's-good!" Afro-American couple, who had been sitting on the bench, eatin' their lunch and takin' in the passing of the motorcade, had allegedly thrown down one of their soda pop bottles (why?) and left the other bottle of soda pop on top of the "black dog" wall. So I guess what I'm sayin' here is that I doubt that the alleged thrown-down soda pop bottle was thrown down at the place indicated in the Couch film? Hmm.... Interesting. To spell it out, it seems to me that it would have been thrown down more to the front and/or to the side of the bench. In my mind, the dark stain or pool visible in Couch's film was pee-pee or blood left behind by an unwanted witness/victim. But then again, if the guy or gal drinkin' the soda pop realized that the soda was gettin' all over his or her clothing as he or she was runnin' for their life and was otherwise slowin' him or her down, then I suppose it makes sense that he or she would have thrown the bottle of soda pop down right there on the walkway with sufficient force for Sitzman to hear, right?

Comments please?

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________________

_________________________

________________________

Hi Chris,

I'm leapfrogging a bit here....

Yes, I agree that the detective(?) in the background is closer to and therefore, ostensibly, "more interested in" the stain/pool on the walkway than the detective(?) in the foreground. Fact is, they both seem to be quite interested in it, don't they?. They're just approaching it from different ends/angles. In my my mind, the important question is, "Was it cherry cola or blood or....?"

--Thomas

P.S. I still think it's a car coming into view on the left, but I could be wrong. It would be an exciting discovery if we could prove that there really was a gap in the fence at that point. But still, how do we explain the appearance of the object coming into view in the left? Someone sticking their hand through the gap?

--Thomas

P.S. Thanks for posting the great clips.

_________________________

Edited May 12, 2007 by Thomas Graves

[Trygve V. Jensen]

Thanks for your excellent work Chris.

I have never been to Dealey Plaza, but is and was not Elm street always a one way street westwards? If it were a car emerging behind the fence in this sequence,it would be driving eastwards.

If only all the footage Mr. Darnell took, were available. Bernice Moore posted excellent information from POTP I believe. Regarding his actions on the 22nd. In the topic 'Blood In Dealey Plaza' : http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9768

[Thomas Graves]

Part of Malcolm Couch's film, stabilized and contrasted somewhat.

What appears and disappears?

Would these area's be of interest to other's? Miles/Duncan

chris

___________________

Chris,

I've always found this clip very interesting. Looks like a policeman, maybe, behind the fence bending over (looking at something or picking up something) then standing up and becoming more visible to the camera. That thing that appears on the left might be the front of a car which is heading east up Elm Street. Do you know about how many minutes after the shooting this footage was taken by Mr. Darnell (as pointed out by Chris in post #4)? One minute, two,... ?

Thanks,

--Thomas

___________________

_________________________

Folks,

When I watch, over and over again, the stabilized Couch clip posted by Chris on this thread, it's obvious to me that there was a dark "stain" or "wet spot" or "pool" of something, (soda pop?, blood?, pee-pee? lol)... on the left side of the walkway and slightly behind the bench. In the clip, it's interesting to note that the little boy and his mother(?) intentionally walk around this dark anomaly as they start walking down the walkway away from the camera and that the inquisitive dark-suited man (detective?) in the foreground seems to be homing in on it at the end of the clip...... The area in question is covered in general shade, cast by the nearby tree/trees, etc. and therefore, sorry, I don't think that the "stain" or "wet spot" or "pool" or "whatever" can be explained away as a simple shadow cast by the widdle boy.... Look for yourself, over and over again as I did, and I think you'll agree.......

It's interesting that the mother(?) actually seems to pull the boy's arm in such a way as to keep him from stepping in it.

If I remember correctly, Sitzman claimed that she heard "glass breaking" (a thrown-down soda pop bottle perhaps?) to her right. Yes? OK, well, gosh. That's interesting in-and-of-itself, isn't it?

Yes, I realize that it's been asserted that a very rapidly-disappearing, mysterious and oh-so-inconveniently-not-coming forth-after-the-assassination "Let's-get-the-Hell-outta-here-while-the-gettin's-good!" Afro-American couple, who had been sitting on the bench, eatin' their lunch and takin' in the passing of the motorcade, had allegedly thrown down one of their soda pop bottles (why?) and left the other bottle of soda pop on top of the "black dog" wall. So I guess what I'm sayin' here is that I doubt that the alleged thrown-down soda pop bottle was thrown down at the place indicated in the Couch film? Hmm.... Interesting. To spell it out, it seems to me that it would have been thrown down more to the front and/or to the side of the bench. In my mind, the dark stain or pool visible in Couch's film was pee-pee or blood left behind by an unwanted witness/victim. But then again, if the guy or gal drinkin' the soda pop realized that the soda was gettin' all over his or her clothing as he or she was runnin' for their life and was otherwise slowin' him or her down, then I suppose it makes sense that he or she would have thrown the bottle of soda pop down right there on the walkway with sufficient force for Sitzman to hear, right?

Comments please?

Thanks,

--Thomas

_________________________________

_________________________

________________________

Hi Chris,

I'm leapfrogging a bit here....

Yes, I agree that the detective(?) in the background is closer to and therefore, ostensibly, "more interested in" the stain/pool on the walkway than the detective(?) in the foreground. Fact is, they both seem to be quite interested in it, don't they?. They're just approaching it from different ends/angles. In my my mind, the important question is, "Was it cherry cola or blood or....?"

--Thomas

P.S. I still think it's a car coming into view on the left, but I could be wrong. It would be an exciting discovery if we could prove that there really was a gap in the fence at that point. But still, how do we explain the appearance of the object coming into view in the left? Someone sticking their hand through the gap?

--Thomas

P.S. Thanks for posting the great clips.

_________________________

_______________________________________

Bump a bagel.

_______________________________________

[Bernice Moore]

Chris :

Thanks for the much better Darnell film clips.

Showing the corner of the fence.....all are from the Wilma Bond series

Thanks Trvqve.....wondered where that information I had typed out

had gotten to.

B...

Edited May 12, 2007 by Bernice Moore