JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: John Corbett on May 02, 2026, 04:17:45 PM
-
What if Zapruder hadn't filmed the assassination?
How would it have affected our knowledge of the assassination? Would the Single Bullet Theory have ever been developed? I have my doubts although there would be a dilemma for the finding that there were 3 shot and 3 hits, 2 on JFK and 1 on JBC. Why were there only 2 bullets recovered if three had struck the victims. Maybe somebody would have developed the theory but it would be much more difficult to support.
Of course other people were filming but none showed the shooting from start to finish and none had the vantage point Zapruder did.
What other mysteries would we now be facing if not for Zapruder?
-
Rosemary Willis would be a lot less famous.
-
Other people were filming but none showed the shooting from start to finish and none had the vantage point Zapruder did.
Zapruder didn't film the shooting "from start to finish," because Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot was at "Z-124," half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133.
-
Zapruder didn't film the shooting "from start to finish," because Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot was at "Z-124," half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming at Z-133.
You're entitled to that opinion but it doesn't make it a fact.
-
You're entitled to that opinion but it doesn't make it a fact.
Your saying Zapruder filmed the shooting from start to finish doesn't make it a fact -- even if Zapruder (mistakenly) said that he had.
-
What if Zapruder hadn't filmed the assassination?
How would it have affected our knowledge of the assassination? Would the Single Bullet Theory have ever been developed? I have my doubts although there would be a dilemma for the finding that there were 3 shot and 3 hits, 2 on JFK and 1 on JBC. Why were there only 2 bullets recovered if three had struck the victims. Maybe somebody would have developed the theory but it would be much more difficult to support.
Of course other people were filming but none showed the shooting from start to finish and none had the vantage point Zapruder did.
What other mysteries would we now be facing if not for Zapruder?
I could be wrong, but I don’t think there is any other photographic evidence that seems to clearly show a “back and to the left” JFK head movement. So, perhaps we might have avoided that controversy.
-
I could be wrong, but I don’t think there is any other photographic evidence that seems to clearly show a “back and to the left” JFK head movement. So, perhaps we might have avoided that controversy.
It is a myth that JFK went back and to the left. He was already leaning to his left, toward Jackie, when the headshot struck. From that left leaning position, he went straight back. When he hit the seatback, he was still on the far right side of the seat. His left lean gave the illusion he went back and to the left.
-
What if Zapruder hadn't filmed the assassination?
Oswald comes out guilty without the Zfilm, no question. The SBT would still have been considered because the neck bullet did not stop at JFK and the only thing in front of JFK that was hit were three places on JBC, a couple of points on the windshield and frame and the curb near James Tague.
How would it have affected our knowledge of the assassination? Would the Single Bullet Theory have ever been developed?
According to David Belin as he related in his book Final Disclosure, Specter came up with the SBT after Belin had found an expert witness (whom he does not name but appears to be FBI Robert Frazier) who said that JBC was turned too far to the right after z240 for him to have received his torso wounds. That presented a real problem because that didn’t leave much time for two shots to have been fired if JFK was hit no earlier, than z210. So it does appear that the zfilm was important in creating the SBT.
The original FBI models could have been based on witness evidence as far as the relative spacing is concerned, not necessarily on the Zfilm.
Without the zfilm the placement of JFK at the time of the first shot could be bracketed from witnesses and photos: eg as being between the Croft and Betzner photos and the Phill Willis photo.[Betzner gave a detailed statement on 22Nov63 and turned over his film. Croft turned his film over later and the FBI had it developed, but he never gave a statement. Neither photo was included in the WC exhibits.]
The location of the head shot could be fairly accurately determined from the witness and other photographic evidence (eg Nix film).
The second shot could then have been inferred as being between the first and third based on the shot pattern and without the zfilm the early FBI models would have been hard to refute.
However, there was the Altgens 6 photo that Altgens said was taken after just the first shot. The Belin expert could have used that photo to conclude that JBC must have been hit in the torso before then because of way he was turned. So, that may have led to suggest first shot SBT: that both men were struck on the first shot. But with all the problems that creates it may not have persuaded the WC.
I have my doubts although there would be a dilemma for the finding that there were 3 shot and 3 hits, 2 on JFK and 1 on JBC. Why were there only 2 bullets recovered if three had struck the victims. Maybe somebody would have developed the theory but it would be much more difficult to support.
I don't think the fact that not all the bullets were recovered plays much of a part in the SBT.
Ken Rahn spent a lot of time trying to prove the SBT by showing that the NAA data proved that all fragments came from the same bullet. That was until the Nation Academy of Sciences weighed in. The FBI eventually admitted that using metallurgical science to identify bullets by comparative bullet lead analysis was fundamentally flawed.
But even if were proved that all the fragments came from one bullet, that would not prove the SBT. The fragments add up to less than half a bullet. So we are missing at least large parts of two bullets.
-
"Moreover, we don’t need the Zapruder film at all to tell us what happened. Indeed, less than .01 percent of all murders, if that, are captured on film, yet law enforcement has done quite well, thank you, without such films in proving beyond a reasonable doubt exactly what happened. And here, even without the Zapruder film, there were well over a hundred witnesses to the murder in Dealey Plaza—here again, a fact that sets the assassination apart from nearly all other murders. The overwhelming majority of premeditated murders don’t even have one eye or ear witness, yet law enforcement normally is successful in proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is because virtually all authors of books on the assassination have had no background in law enforcement that a remark like the following, from anti-conspiracy author Gerald Posner, could be made: “To think that if the Zapruder film did not exist we would never be able to prove with any certainty what happened in Dealey Plaza.”6
So traditionally—and the Kennedy case is no exception—guilt (and the existence or nonexistence of a conspiracy) in a murder case is proved not by a film or eyewitnesses, but rather by other evidence. And in this case, the physical evidence isn’t just persuasive or even overwhelming, it’s absolutely conclusive that only three shots were fired, and that one of the two shots that hit Kennedy also went on to hit Connally. Hence, Connally was not hit by a separate bullet, which would have established a second gunman and a conspiracy.
Yet the Zapruder film remains the focal point for most conspiracy theorists who are drawn to this unique and grisly spectacle. Over the past forty years, the film, for many, has become the Holy Grail of the case for conspiracy. At first, the apparent backward snap of the president’s head at the moment of the head shot, and the alleged delayed reaction between Kennedy and Connally around the time the Warren Commission claimed they were hit by a single bullet, were touted as absolute proof of two assassins. Today, even though the overwhelming majority of evidence has shown that neither allegation is true, most conspiracy theorists, embracing the philosophy of “Don’t confuse me with the facts, I’ve already made up my mind,” still cling tenaciously to these arguments. However, some theorists, knowing that the evidence has obliterated their position, are now actually arguing that the film itself has been altered as part of a massive cover-up to hide the truth about the “conspiracy.” In this chapter, we’ll examine the facts and the myths surrounding the timing and number of shots, the single-bullet theory, the president’s head snap to the rear, the source of the gunfire, and allegations that the most famous home movie of all time has been altered to conceal the truth. We’ll also learn that the “magic” bullet was not magic and the “pristine” bullet (same bullet) was not pristine."
Reclaiming History Vincent Bugliosi
JohnM
-
It is a myth that JFK went back and to the left. He was already leaning to his left, toward Jackie, when the headshot struck. From that left leaning position, he went straight back. When he hit the seatback, he was still on the far right side of the seat. His left lean gave the illusion he went back and to the left.
I agree, that’’s why I used the phrase: “seems” to show.
-
"Moreover, we don’t need the Zapruder film at all to tell us what happened. Indeed, less than .01 percent of all murders, if that, are captured on film, yet law enforcement has done quite well, thank you, without such films in proving beyond a reasonable doubt exactly what happened. And here, even without the Zapruder film, there were well over a hundred witnesses to the murder in Dealey Plaza—here again, a fact that sets the assassination apart from nearly all other murders. The overwhelming majority of premeditated murders don’t even have one eye or ear witness, yet law enforcement normally is successful in proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is because virtually all authors of books on the assassination have had no background in law enforcement that a remark like the following, from anti-conspiracy author Gerald Posner, could be made: “To think that if the Zapruder film did not exist we would never be able to prove with any certainty what happened in Dealey Plaza.”6
So traditionally—and the Kennedy case is no exception—guilt (and the existence or nonexistence of a conspiracy) in a murder case is proved not by a film or eyewitnesses, but rather by other evidence. And in this case, the physical evidence isn’t just persuasive or even overwhelming, it’s absolutely conclusive that only three shots were fired, and that one of the two shots that hit Kennedy also went on to hit Connally. Hence, Connally was not hit by a separate bullet, which would have established a second gunman and a conspiracy.
Yet the Zapruder film remains the focal point for most conspiracy theorists who are drawn to this unique and grisly spectacle. Over the past forty years, the film, for many, has become the Holy Grail of the case for conspiracy. At first, the apparent backward snap of the president’s head at the moment of the head shot, and the alleged delayed reaction between Kennedy and Connally around the time the Warren Commission claimed they were hit by a single bullet, were touted as absolute proof of two assassins. Today, even though the overwhelming majority of evidence has shown that neither allegation is true, most conspiracy theorists, embracing the philosophy of “Don’t confuse me with the facts, I’ve already made up my mind,” still cling tenaciously to these arguments. However, some theorists, knowing that the evidence has obliterated their position, are now actually arguing that the film itself has been altered as part of a massive cover-up to hide the truth about the “conspiracy.” In this chapter, we’ll examine the facts and the myths surrounding the timing and number of shots, the single-bullet theory, the president’s head snap to the rear, the source of the gunfire, and allegations that the most famous home movie of all time has been altered to conceal the truth. We’ll also learn that the “magic” bullet was not magic and the “pristine” bullet (same bullet) was not pristine."
Reclaiming History Vincent Bugliosi
JohnM
I propose that, in this following snip, Vincent Bugliosi has succinctly defined the creed of most CTs:
“… most conspiracy theorists, embracing the philosophy of “Don’t confuse me with the facts, I’ve already made up my mind,”
A creed is a set of fundamental beliefs, principles, or convictions that strongly influence how individuals live, act, or view the world. It functions as a guiding philosophy—whether secular or religious—outlining core tenets that provide purpose, structure to life, and a framework for personal conduct.
-
It is a myth that JFK went back and to the left. He was already leaning to his left, toward Jackie, when the headshot struck. From that left leaning position, he went straight back. When he hit the seatback, he was still on the far right side of the seat. His left lean gave the illusion he went back and to the left.
The initial movement of JFK's head, as a result of the headshot, is forward and down (as seen in the slowed-down GIF below). The illusion is that this movement is so quick it can't be detected by the human eye and we are left with the so-called "back and to the left" movement (which is simply JFK's head rebounding off his chest as a result of the explosive force of the headshot):
(https://i.postimg.cc/tJF858sd/Head-Shot-close.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
As for the topic of this thread, I believe interest in this case would have fizzled out in the '70's if it wasn't for the Z-film being shown on Geraldo. The Z-film reignited interest in this case and has been the driving force of this interest for so many decades.
-
I believe interest in this case would have fizzled out in the '70's if it wasn't for the Z-film being shown on Geraldo. The Z-film reignited interest in this case and has been the driving force of this interest for so many decades.
Don't forget Comrade Stone's self-described mythological ("to counter the myth of the Warren Report") film "JFK," which was based on a book written by an overly ambitious, scandal-plagued, and revengeful New Orleans DA who, in March 1967, was duped by a KGB article published in a Communist-owned Italian newspaper into changing his theory against Clay Shaw from "He masterminded a homosexual thrill-kill assassination of JFK!" to "He organized it for the evil, evil CIA!!!"
-
Oswald comes out guilty without the Zfilm, no question. The SBT would still have been considered because the neck bullet did not stop at JFK and the only thing in front of JFK that was hit were three places on JBC, a couple of points on the windshield and frame and the curb near James Tague.
According to David Belin as he related in his book Final Disclosure, Specter came up with the SBT after Belin had found an expert witness (whom he does not name but appears to be FBI Robert Frazier) who said that JBC was turned too far to the right after z240 for him to have received his torso wounds. That presented a real problem because that didn’t leave much time for two shots to have been fired if JFK was hit no earlier, than z210. So it does appear that the zfilm was important in creating the SBT.
Without the Z-film, how would Frazier know JBC was turned too far to the right. There would have been no Z210 and no Z240.
The Z-film was the timepiece for the JFKA. Without it, the WC would have nothing to base the timing of the assassination on the sequence of the shots. They probably would have figured out the headshot was the final shot but would have nothing but conflicting eyewitness accounts on which to base much else. More unknowns would have given the CTs more opportunities to fill in the blanks.
-
The initial movement of JFK's head, as a result of the headshot, is forward and down (as seen in the slowed-down GIF below). The illusion is that this movement is so quick it can't be detected by the human eye and we are left with the so-called "back and to the left" movement (which is simply JFK's head rebounding off his chest as a result of the explosive force of the headshot):
(https://i.postimg.cc/tJF858sd/Head-Shot-close.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
As for the topic of this thread, I believe interest in this case would have fizzled out in the '70's if it wasn't for the Z-film being shown on Geraldo. The Z-film reignited interest in this case and has been the driving force of this interest for so many decades.
I think there would be less interest in the assassination without the Z-film and probably no HSCA. But the WC skeptics were out in force before the Z-film was made public so I'm not sure WC skepticism would have died out completely. CT bibles Six Seconds in Dallas had already been published and Ruby's killing of Oswald fueled much of the early belief in a conspiracy. Would the skepticsim have continued into the 1980s and beyond. Probably but not on the scale it did. I don't think Oliver Stone would have bothered making a movie about the JFKA.