JFK Assassination Forum

Photographic Film Video & Audio Discussion & Debate => Photographic Film Video & Audio Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Florient Roy on August 13, 2018, 05:33:26 PM

Title: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Florient Roy on August 13, 2018, 05:33:26 PM
I am new on this forum, and i am not a English speaker. But i will do my best. I didn't read all the post on each subject, but maybe someone can guide me to find an answer to this question: How can we explain that we clearly saw the impact of the bullet on the right side of the head of JFK on the Z. film, and the apparently contradiction with the witnesses of many personnals of the Parkland hospital who talked about a back head wound? Also, the photo of the autopsy didn't show the bruse on the side of the head like the film seems to show. I am probably talk about someting already discusse pr?viously, but maybe someone can tell me where i can find some reliable informations. Thank you.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Barry Pollard on August 15, 2018, 10:42:23 PM
Hi,
you clearly see an impact of a bullet on the right side in the Zfilm?  You mean coming from the front?  Are you sure?
Could it be because you see the head go back, you are assuming it came from the front?
Anyway, a front shot and the alledged big wound at the back of head, is that what you mean?  Those two would compliment each other, so I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly.

You could do a lot worse that read what Pat Speer has to say, on these issues and many others.
http://www.patspeer.com/chapter18b%3Areasontobelieve (http://www.patspeer.com/chapter18b%3Areasontobelieve)
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Florient Roy on August 15, 2018, 11:50:59 PM
Thank you for your answer. I was not clear in my first post. I Don't really care about the origin of the bullet. The point is the emplacement of the wound. The Z film showed a wound on the right side of the scull. The autopsy photo are little different and the doctor of Parklane hospital talked about a rear wound on the scull. It just doesn't seems to match up the film. Single bullet, from rear or front, two shooter or more? I think that the only important question is: Yes or no, the gouvernement was involved. If it is not, then it's just a case of bag guy killed there enemy. I now go to read the link that you gave me.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Barry Pollard on August 16, 2018, 12:06:48 AM
Ahh yes I think I did read you correct the first time then ty.
Pat Speer talks more on these issues than anyone else, you should also search David Lifton too.

Do you believe the "back of the head" doctors got it correct? Then that's all that matters.
Or do you consider the possibility that they all made similar mistakes when recollecting what they saw that day?
I made my choice clear with a vote.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Florient Roy on August 16, 2018, 12:18:11 AM
There are not many witnesses that no one contest. These doctors and the driver of the ambulance who carried the body of Kennedy where clearly unanimous on the fact the the back of the head was severly injured, bones totally missed. Nobody came to said they are wrong on this issue. Some people think that the Z film was modified by CIA or FBI. It's hard to Believe, but i send you this link. Maybe you have already seen this film. It is interesting theory, like all theories i guess?


Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Barry Pollard on August 16, 2018, 02:15:50 AM
^I watched that just the other week specifically for a reminder of what Dino told Doug. :)

Anyway, are doctors better than average witnesses?  One assumes they naturally are but I don't think so.
They make mistakes all the time and when it comes to their own memories and recollections? No better, no worse than the rest of us.
The brain works the same, memory collection is not perfect.

In my own theory of how it all went down, I believe they were mistaken.
Life is short, make a choice and live with it.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Florient Roy on August 16, 2018, 04:33:55 AM
I just read and look what Pat Speer said about it. I am sure about one  thing, nobody is lying or ?ven being wrong. It?s just that th? film and the photos of the autopsy don?t seemed  to match. This  is m?y only questionning.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Barry Pollard on August 18, 2018, 01:24:02 AM
The Zfilm does match the autopsy photos in at least one regard and that's that the Zfilm shows no visible damage to the back of the head and if you believe the Zfilm to be "untouched" then that's pretty major.
The shot through the neck/throat, that also matches JFK's reaction in the film.
Were you thinking of something else, specifically?

Someone has to be lying and/or just plain wrong.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Florient Roy on August 18, 2018, 01:48:58 AM
As i said before, you can find  all kind of th?ories and There opposite, and they are all possible. But this apparently illogical misse match between th? film and th? photos and witnesses leave me unsatisfied. And tout right, it is th? wound  at th? back of the head That leave unanswerded question. My on this event is that  some pe?ple  in th? gouvernement hiearchy knew that a assassination plan was un progress and they ordered to stand back and bot interfere. After, secret service realised it Will not be do easy to cover up, and they worked With  th? mafia after the m?rder, not before.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Barry Pollard on August 18, 2018, 02:16:55 AM
If you haven't already, I highly recommend you read David Lifton's "Best Evidence", it's just the best read, the best journey and the best experience, nothing else comes close to it.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Florient Roy on August 18, 2018, 02:25:10 AM
This is my next move.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Chris Bristow on October 14, 2018, 04:39:07 AM
Multiple doctors, nurses and staff saw a wound in the back of the head. several doctors closely inspected the wound noting the Cerebellum and when it fell out they saw the Cerebrum. One Doctor  saw it from inches away for several minutes while helping to hold instruments for Dr Perry. Even Dr Carrico who claimed he only filled out the report stating it was in the back of his head due to laziness and he actually meant it was on top of the head. Yet photos taken of him showing where the wound was have him placing it at the back of the head. Some strange inconsistent testimony. FBI agent Siebert who was at the autopsy said the photos are fake and he clearly saw a huge hole in the back when they took JFK out of the casket.
 It is important to take the time to read all of the witness statements made from Parlkand staff because people will lie their ass off as to what the witness' said. To me it is the most convincing evidence that something was covered up. You can't have all those doctors working on specific wounds and have them all get it so completely wrong and even be consistent in their mistake.
Title: Re: Zapruder film vs doctors
Post by: Royell Storing on October 14, 2018, 04:34:31 PM


    The Z Film was under lock-n-key inside the Time/Life Vault for its' initial 12 years of existence. It could have been spindled, folded, and mutilated untold countless times. This makes what we Today call the Zapruder Film to have absolutely No Credibility. The Parkland Professionals know what they saw inside Trauma Room 1 on 11/22/63. Their Professional observations have consistently stood the test of time.