HomeSubscribe Live FeedJFK Research Photo GalleryStoreJFK Youtube ChannelArticlesSearchLinksNotepadLoginRegister
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 19, 2012, 05:16:41 AM
News:

Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
Z film/ James Chaney  (Read 2530 times)

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 55


Hi, just wondered if I could have some opinions, please and thank you.
I've followed, with much interest, the current debate on other forums regarding whether or not Mr. Zapruder's film has been altered, and a few things have caught my attention, the first of which follows...
Regarding whether motorcycle officer James Chaney passed the limousine has left me with a bit of a head scratcher. In the first instance, the Zapruder film does not show this, but 'IF' said film was altered to remove this, then that would be understandable, but to me that seems a stretch. However, neither the Nix, Bell, Daniel or Paschall films show a motorcycle anywhere near Curry's car, or the limo, as it reaches the underpass. What are visible in the Bell film, are three motorcycle officers who seem to be at a standstill, or slow crawl, on the west side of the underpass near the Stemmons freeway sliproad, with another motorcycle officer parked side-on, to their left. I have included some photos, from Mr Unger's gallery, of three motorcycle officers taken from the west side of the underpass as the limo approaches (Mr. Unger, if you read this, I sincerely hope you do not object to me using images from your site, if so, I will cease and desist).

As you will notice, the caption states that one of the riders is officer Chaney, (personally I don't know if it is or not so I would need confirmation from someone who does). Now, I am no photographic or film expert, but i'm hard pushed to believe for an instant that either the Paschall or Bell films are altered in anyway, so how, and when, has Chaney managed to reach this point in the time frame alloted, especially as he stated he witnessed the head shot, and the fact that the Nix film shows the two bikes to the right rear of the limo, one of which i'm assuming to be Chaney, slowing or coming to a stop at the point in time when the limo has started accelerating?  Even allowing Chaney a stop/ slow rolling conversation to relay info to the lead car, he is in a position at the Stemmons entrance before the limo has cleared the underpass as seen here in a frame from Mark Bell's film.


Neither SA Kellerman nor SA Greer mention a motorcycle passing in front of them in their Warren Comission testimonies, and the statements or testimonies of the lead car occupants are, by my reckoning, also pretty vague as to the timing of this. Only Chief Curry has stated that the officer was Chaney, but his recollection of WHEN this happened, in my opinion, seems questionable. Here's a couple of examples :

 April 15th 1964 WCXII (page 28), Chief Curry : "...and at that time I looked in my rear view mirror and I saw some commotion in the President's caravan and realized that probably something was wrong, and it seemed to be speeding up, and ABOUT (emphasis mine) this time a motorcycle officer, I believe it was officer Chaney rode up beside us...."
He also reiterates this point in testimony, April 22nd 1964 WCIV (page 161) ....
Rep. Ford : 'Did you get this order over the PA system before the second and third shots'?
Curry : " I don't believe so, I am not sure. I am not positive. Because they (shots) were in rapid succession. But after I noticed some commotion in the President's car and a motorcycle officer ran up aside of me....I said "Has the President been hit...?" And he said "I am sure they have", I said "Take us to the hospital immediately." 'and I got on the radio and told them to notify Parkland'

At no point does Curry state where the limo is in relation to the motorcycle officer.

WCVII (page 346) ( Forrest V Sorrels, statement Nov 28th 1963) 
Sorrels : 'I noted that the President's car had accelerated it's speed and was fast closing the gap between us. A motorcycle officer pulled up alongside of the car and Chief Curry yelled "Is anybody hurt?" '....By that time we'd had gotten (unreadable) the underpass when the President's car pulled up alongside, and at that time Chief Curry's car had started to pick up speed...'

Sorrels states that a bike pulls alongside them, but, again, seems pretty vague as to when, in my opinion.

WCVII (page 548) Testimony dated May 7th 1964, Forrest V. Sorrels : 'Within about 3 seconds, there were two more similar reports. And I said. "Let's get out of here" and looked back, all the way back, then, to where the President's car was, and I saw some confusion, movement there, and the car just seemed to lurch forward. And, in the meantime, a motorcycle officer had run up on the right-hand side and the chief yelled to him, "Anybody hurt?"...'And by that time we had gotten almost in under the underpass, and the President's car had come up and was almost abreast of us. When I saw them get so close, I said, "Let's get out quick," or "Get going fast," or something to that effect. In other words, I didn't want them to pass us, because I knew we were supposed to be in front.'

Both the McIntyre pic, above, and frames from the Daniel film, however, show that the limo did overtake the lead car.

WCXVII (page 629) statement of Winston G. Lawson, 23rd Nov 1963, Lawson : ....'I believe I heard two more sharp reports and looking back saw people scurrying away from the route, as though they were taking cover. Almost immediately the President's car leaped ahead. We also rapidly accelerated'.

No mention of any motorcycle, but the first admission that the limo has overtaken the lead car as verified by McIntyre/ Daniels..

WCXVII (page632) statement of Winston G. Lawson, 1st Dec 1963, Lawson : ...'I heard the first loud, sharp report and in more rapid sucession two more sounds like gunfire...Both the President's car and our lead car rapidly accelerated almost simultaneously. I heard a report over the two-way radio that we should proceed to the nearest hospital'....'A motorcycle officer pulled alongside our lead car....''

Now mentions motorcycle, but no mention of JFK's limo overtaking the lead car. Now, the two cars have apparently accelerated in unison, and by the timeline of his statement, the bike has pulled up besides them AFTER the limo has started accelerating.

WCXIV (pages 353/4) testimony of Winston G. Lawson,                   
Dulles : What was the lead car doing at this time?
Lawson : The car that I was in, sir?
Dulles : I thought you were in the second car.
Stern : The pilot car
Dulles : The pilot car, not the lead car.
Lawson : The pilot car was up ahead of us, so appeared other things I recall noting a police officer pulled up in a motorcycle alongside of us, and mentioned that the President had been hit. When the President's car leaped ahead, although there was quite a distance, not quite a distance but there was some distance between the two cars, they came up on us quite fast BEFORE (emphasis mine) we were actually able to get in motion. They seemed to have a more rapid acceleration than we did.
Dulles : Did they actually pass you?
Lawson : No, sir ; they never did. We stayed ahead of them....

So, now Lawson testifies that the car leaped ahead before they could get going, but never actually passed them. What? The poor guy seems confused, like he can't remember what story he's been told to say, again, in my opinion. This also says the lead car had practically stopped at, or in, the underpass.

Secret Service Agent Sam Kinney (driver of the follow-up car behind JFK's limo) — indicates, via his report to Chief Rowley, that Greer hit the gas after the fatal head shot to JFK and after the President's slump to the left toward Jackie. [18 H 731-732]. From the HSCA's 2/26/78 interview of Kinney: "He also remarked that 'when Greer (the driver of the Presidential limousine) looked back, his foot must have come off the accelerator' Kinney observed that at the time of the first shot, the speed of the motorcade was '3 to 5 miles an hour.'"
No mention of a stop, just a slowing down. If anyone would notice brake lights on the limo, it would have been Kinney.

Interestingly, of all the witnesses cited as having seen the limo slow or stop, very few, if any, has said that Chaney rode forward at this time. No 'lay witnesses' mention anything of a motorcycle breaking away from the motorcade at the time of the head shot, how come? Am I missing something?

Thoughts?

Thanks, Calli.


-------------------------

-------------------------
'Jumping out of trees that tall is not an easy task, regardless of age (it’s easier to just fall out of it)' --- Keller Jackson

   ReplyReply

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 55


Dean, thank you for your reply. Firstly, I openly apologise for asking you to post to another forum on behalf of myself, especially points you may, or may not, personally disagree with, it is never my intention to deliberately offend anyone, so you have my apologies. My only defence being that i've read a lot of posts on the Ed forum where you seem to be in absolute agreement with Prof. Fetzer & Mr. White on just about every point, plus you were the only person to post in disagreement to this thread, so I assumed you may have evidence that rebuts what's on offer here.  If you would like to to respond to any of the questions, or pitch in with any thoughts, then i'm all ears.
Secondly, am I wrong in my assumption that you must be an educator/ tutor, to procure memebership to the Ed Forum? That's how I understand it at the present time, so If i'm wrong, then, my mistake. I didn't think they would entertain a young sound recording engineer-cum- p/t assassination student when backed against the, obviously, supreme intellect of learned Professors, teachers and lawyers, etc.

Regards the Z-film, yes, I see where Zapruder almost lost the limo occupants, but there is not one person that's going to convince me that a motorcycle passed the right hand side of that limo anytime after Z313, even IF the head wound has been altered. To me, the effort to conceal this alone would be tenfold that of the head wound, and one that I don't think would go undetected, especially when you take into consideration the amount of other films and photos to the contrary.

Regarding Prof .Fetzer's list, it must be awfully short as i've yet to find it, but i'll check again.

The big favour, to all of us really, would be an admission by Prof. Fetzer, and/ or Mr. White, that they are mistaken on the Chaney issue, and more than likely wrong that any of the films which do not show Mr. Chaney riding forwards, were altered to remove this act alone. I'm tempted to say that isn't an opinion, that is fact, but Mr. White seems to know that all of the photos are 'provably' altered, so who am I to state otherwise when pitted against Mr. White's decades of experience?

Once again, no disrespect to you, Dean.
                                                Calli.

Just as a quick add-on, when checking the Chaney thread on the Ed forum, the gif that Mr. Hinrichs has posted shows the limo dipping at the front, something i've never noticed until today, which could be an indication of brakes being applied, though i'm unsure whether i'm seeing lights. Just a thought. As you were....


-------------------------
« Last Edit: January 21, 2010, 02:45:40 PM by Calli Robertson »

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 567


Quote
Secondly, am I wrong in my assumption that you must be an educator/ tutor, to procure memebership to the Ed Forum?

Calli,

Used to be that way, but not any more.   Initially, that was the purpose of the Ed forum, but John had an interest in the assassination, as well as a few other things.  They began just a thread for it, and I believe it was called JFK Assassination Debate, but had no idea it would take off like it did.

They had to open up an entire area for JFK.

Registration is currently open.  You can apply but you need an avatar and a bio.

Kathy


-------------------------

-------------------------
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 555


Trust me you did not offend me nor did you need to give me an apology, but thanks for doing that

You do not need to be in education to join that forum, just send in a picture and a biography to John Simpkin

I agree with most of Fetzer and Whites theories, but not all

And they will not admit they are wrong on the Cheaney issue, that I can tell you for sure

Im off to work but will answer any questions you have about alteration when I get home tonight


-------------------------

-------------------------
"Pictures don't lie-unless they are made to" Harold Weisberg 1966

   ReplyReply

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 55


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Thanks, Kathy.
                      I caught your post just as I got a call out to work, sorry I didn't reply then. Thanks for the lowdown re: Ed forum, I sort of half mulled over it today, but I find myself questioning whether I possess the tenacious hate vibe/ hostility (optional crash helmet) required to jump in with arms a' swingin', and I don't know if it's worth it for a few questions to be perfectly honest. Dean has probably hit the nail on the head with the fourth line in his post below, as to the answers I could expect. How ever valid I think my questions are, methinks i'll be viewed by the forum cognoscenti as one of the 'goons' who has joined up solely to have a pop at Mr. White & Mr. Fetzer, which is, regretfully, not far from the truth. Not an attack on a personal level, you understand, for I am sure they are really fine and upstanding people, it's just that some of their claims leave me bewildered to a point just short of anger (coffee/ Cornflakes shrapnel on monitor, etc). Also, for a guy that's surrounded by computers most days, i'm almost embarassed to admit I don't even have a photo, although I do have one of my dog, would that do? :-)  Meantime, i'll ponder some more.
(Love yer avatar, btw)

Again, appreciate the info, thanks.
                                                Calli.


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Dean, thanks.
                    In my honest opinion, the apology was warranted, so we'll leave it at that. Thanks also for the Ed forum info. I understand what you are saying re: Mr. White's and Prof. Fetzer's take on Mr. Chaney. I, personally, do think they have some valid points in regards to certain areas of the Z-film, in it's various guises, it is mainly the Chaney claim/ multiple film alteration to conceal Chaney's movements, that has pushed the 'too much' button for me. I'll post a few questions in due course, i'm out of town and slightly pushed with work until the twenty-fourth all of a sudden, so bare with me.

 Thanks,
             Calli.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 555


Take your time Calli

I will always be around and I am always willing to discuss my thoughts and theories


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 55


I see it's not really going well for the defence on this front, is it? Sooner, rather than later, they are going to have to concede that Zap's film was not altered to remove Chaney, regardless of what other anomalies may, or may not, be apparent. There is too much conflicting evidence that proves otherwise.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Gallery

JFKForum.com

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines