JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Andrew Mason on November 15, 2018, 07:03:48 PM
-
In May 1964 the FBI did a recreation of the progression of the President's car down Elm St. Some parts of the results of that effort were included in the Warren Commission exhibits but it is difficult to determine how they related the positions of the car to the zfilm.
I have been looking at the Secret Service film recreating the assassination as seen from the SN. It was taken in early December 1963. The film can be viewed here (the President's car starts down Elm at about 10:20):
A few things are striking:
1. The foliage and branches are quite different than we see in the FBI recreation taken in May 1964
2. The film shows how easy it would have been for the shooter to have tracked the President as he passed under the tree.
3. The film shows the surrounding area so we can identify the location and the corresponding Zapruder film frame rather than relying on the FBI's determination which cannot be checked.
4, The car used in the Secret Service film (it appears to be a Ford Falcon) was lower to the ground than the car used by the FBI (the "Queen Mary" Secret Service car) and much closer to the height of the President's limo.
The Secret Service film shows that the President was clear of the tree at this position:
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/JFK_clear_perpendicular_lines.jpg)
The issue, then, is: to which Zapruder frame does this position of the President correspond?.
The first question is:
1. Where is the President in relation to the lamp post and the Thornton sign?:
The car is following the street direction so the parts of the car that are perpendicular to the car's direction (eg. the front, back, windshield) are perpendicular to the curbs. I have drawn the yellow lines to extend to points on the north side of Elm that can be identified in the zfilm such as the lamp post and the Thornton Freeway sign. The distance between the lamp post and the left-most Thornton sign post is about 13 feet according to the scale map.
Since the road-perpendicular line from the back of JFK's position in the photo (the lower yellow line) crosses the lamp post at a point that is a bit higher above the ground than the line is above the car, this means that the back of JFK is slightly AHEAD of the lamp post. Since it crosses below the foot of the Thornton Freeway sign, it is well before that sign.
The road-perpendicular line from the front of the car (the higher yellow line) crosses the Thornton sign at about the foot of the sign post.
The Ford Falcon length was 181 inches or 15 feet 1". The back of the back seat is approximately 2/3 of the car length from the front, so the distance between the two yellow lines is about 10 feet. The height of the Ford Falcon to the top of roof (of the non-convertible) was 54 inches so I estimate the top of the hood and trunk to be about 34 inches or just under 3 feet above the ground.
If the front of the car was opposite the Thornton sign, and assuming the top of the hood is about 3 feet above the road, that line should intersect the sign post at a height of about 3 feet above the road or about 2 feet above the bottom of the post. So the front of the car is just behind the Thornton Freeway sign (i.e. the line which passes just above the top of the hood crosses the sign at a point that is lower in relation to the sign).
JFK, therefore, is slightly ahead of the lamp post and at least 10 feet from the sign so he is at most about 3 feet past the lamp post.
The next question is:
2. To which Zapruder frame does this position correspond?
Projecting that onto a scale map of Dealey Plaza as I have done (http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/JFK_position_emerging_from_tree.pdf) shows that JFK was at that point when JFK was just coming up to or on a line from Zapruder to the edge of the round concrete wall of the north reflecting pool. Since that line corresponds to a sightline from Zapruder's camera, we just have to look at the zflim to find the frame in which JFK's head aligns with the edge of that wall. That frame is z195. If he was just approaching, frame 193 or 194 would fit as well.
Click here to see how the positions of JFK in the Secret Service film can be matched to the zfilm (http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/SS_1963_stills1.pdf)
So I must conclude as follows:
1. the FBI edid not conduct an accurate recreation.
2. the FBI/WC was not correct in finding that JFK was not clear of the oak tree until frame z210
3. we do not know how the FBI determined which frame corresponded to the positions in their recreation
4. we can conclude that JFK was easily trackable as he passed beneath the oak tree.
5. we can reliably determine from the Secret Service film where the President was when he emerged from under the oak tree and when the shooter in the SN had an unobstructed view of JFK's head.
5. JFK emerged from beneath the oak tree and the shooter had an unobstructed view of JFK's head between frames z193 and z195.
I invite your comments.
-
In May 1964 the FBI did a recreation of the progression of the President's car down Elm St. Some parts of the results of that effort were included in the Warren Commission exhibits but it is difficult to determine how they related the positions of the car to the zfilm.
I have been looking at the Secret Service film recreating the assassination as seen from the SN. It was taken in early December 1963. The film can be viewed here (the President's car starts down Elm at about 10:20):
A few things are striking:
1. The foliage and branches are quite different than we see in the FBI recreation taken in May 1964
2. The film shows how easy it would have been for the shooter to have tracked the President as he passed under the tree.
3. The film shows the surrounding area so we can identify the location and the corresponding Zapruder film frame rather than relying on the FBI's determination which cannot be checked.
4, The car used in the Secret Service film (it appears to be a Ford Falcon) was lower to the ground than the car used by the FBI (the "Queen Mary" Secret Service car) and much closer to the height of the President's limo.
The Secret Service film shows that the President was clear of the tree at this position:
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/JFK_clear_perpendicular_lines.jpg)
The issue, then, is: to which Zapruder frame does this position of the President correspond?.
The first question is:
1. Where is the President in relation to the lamp post and the Thornton sign?:
The car is following the street direction so the parts of the car that are perpendicular to the car's direction (eg. the front, back, windshield) are perpendicular to the curbs. I have drawn the yellow lines to extend to points on the north side of Elm that can be identified in the zfilm such as the lamp post and the Thornton Freeway sign. The distance between the lamp post and the left-most Thornton sign post is about 13 feet according to the scale map.
Since the road-perpendicular line from the back of JFK's position in the photo (the lower yellow line) crosses the lamp post at a point that is a bit higher above the ground than the line is above the car, this means that the back of JFK is slightly AHEAD of the lamp post. Since it crosses below the foot of the Thornton Freeway sign, it is well before that sign.
The road-perpendicular line from the front of the car (the higher yellow line) crosses the Thornton sign at about the foot of the sign post.
The Ford Falcon length was 181 inches or 15 feet 1". The back of the back seat is approximately 2/3 of the car length from the front, so the distance between the two yellow lines is about 10 feet. The height of the Ford Falcon to the top of roof (of the non-convertible) was 54 inches so I estimate the top of the hood and trunk to be about 34 inches or just under 3 feet above the ground.
If the front of the car was opposite the Thornton sign, and assuming the top of the hood is about 3 feet above the road, that line should intersect the sign post at a height of about 3 feet above the road or about 2 feet above the bottom of the post. So the front of the car is just behind the Thornton Freeway sign (i.e. the line which passes just above the top of the hood crosses the sign at a point that is lower in relation to the sign).
JFK, therefore, is slightly ahead of the lamp post and at least 10 feet from the sign so he is at most about 3 feet past the lamp post.
The next question is:
2. To which Zapruder frame does this position correspond?
Projecting that onto a scale map of Dealey Plaza as I have done (http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/JFK_position_emerging_from_tree.pdf) shows that JFK was at that point when JFK was just coming up to or on a line from Zapruder to the edge of the round concrete wall of the north reflecting pool. Since that line corresponds to a sightline from Zapruder's camera, we just have to look at the zflim to find the frame in which JFK's head aligns with the edge of that wall. That frame is z195. If he was just approaching, frame 193 or 194 would fit as well.
So I must conclude as follows:
1. the FBI did not conduct an accurate recreation.
2. the FBI was not correct in finding that JFK was not clear of the oak tree until frame z210
3. we do not know how the FBI determined which frame corresponded to the positions in their recreation
4. we can conclude that JFK was easily trackable as he passed beneath the oak tree.
5. we can reliably determine from the Secret Service film where the President was when he emerged from under the oak tree and when the shooter in the SN had an unobstructed view of JFK's head.
5. JFK emerged from beneath the oak tree and the shooter had an unobstructed view of JFK's head between frames z193 and z195.
I invite your comments.
On page 102 WR there is a photo that was allegedly taken through a rifle scope.... LBJ's Cover up committee labeled that as taken at frame Z 210
The photo that you present was taken BEFORE the photo that they said was taken at Z 210.....I would guess the photo was taken at about Z 188.
-
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/FBIreport%20of%20shots1.png)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/FBIreport%20of%20shots%202.png)
-
from
"The xxxxxx Bullet"
by Raymond Marcus
1966
~snip~
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/bbullet1.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/bbullet2.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/bbullet3.jpg)
~snip~
-
This is why all of the bunk about shots being fired way up right after the turn onto Elm are just that - bunk. The planners knew that you couldn't possibly get off a clean unobstructed shot earlier. Think about it - all of this planning and they'd leave something like this to chance? No.
They knew this and, therefore, the shots do NOT start until Kennedy reappears from the sign in the film. Which dovetails nicely with what Thompson has always said about the shooting sequence - 5.8 seconds from start to finish.
-
This is why all of the bunk about shots being fired way up right after the turn onto Elm are just that - bunk. The planners knew that you couldn't possibly get off a clean unobstructed shot earlier. Think about it - all of this planning and they'd leave something like this to chance? No.
They knew this and, therefore, the shots do NOT start until Kennedy reappears from the sign in the film. Which dovetails nicely with what Thompson has always said about the shooting sequence - 5.8 seconds from start to finish.
?? JFK does not completely reappear from behind the Stemmons sign until frame z225. The head shot was at 312/313. That is 88 frames or 4.8 seconds.
The vast majority of witnesses who recalled a shot pattern (40+) said that the last two were closer together. There were a few (6 by my count) who said that the first two were closer and about 10 who said that the shots were about equally spaced. If the first shot was as JFK emerged from under the oak tree at about z195 (possibly a few frames earlier), that would give 118 frames between the first shot being fired and last shot striking, which is 6.44 seconds. The car was 275 feet from the SN at z313 so the head shot was fired 275/2000 = 140 ms. or 2.5 frames earlier or at z310. So the time between firing the first and last shots (and, therefore, the time between shot sounds for a stationary observer) would have been 115 frames or 6.28 seconds.
The midpoint would have been z253 or so. If the second shot was perceptibly closer to the last than to the first, we should be looking for a shot after z265. Oswald could easily have done that by himself.
-
I don't put a whole lot faith in what witnesses said. They were not standing around saying "Wait! Here come the shots!"
There are so many inconsistencies and "he said that, she said this" that they pretty much cancel each other out. Not all of them but a lot of them.
Go by what you see in the Z film. Film doesn't lie. The timing is more closely to 5.8 - 6 seconds. But let's not argue milliseconds here - there's no way a shooter up on the 6th floor could have gotten all of those shots off, proving conspiracy.
Why quibble over it.
-
Go by what you see in the Z film. Film doesn't lie. The timing is more closely to 5.8 - 6 seconds. But let's not argue milliseconds here - there's no way a shooter up on the 6th floor could have gotten all of those shots off, proving conspiracy.
But people's interpretations of films can lie. For example, any attempt to pinpoint when the first shot occurred (if there even was a shot before JFK emerged from the sign) is subjective guesswork.
-
That's kind of sort of what I mean. For example, I've read people say that the reason his head goes quickly over to the right before the sign comes on is because he was reacting to shots.
But elsewhere, there's a more plausible reason why it happened - those group of clapping women over on the curb yelled out, "Mr. President...over here!" and that's what he did. He looked over there and then waved and then his arm kind of freezes in mid wave until the first shot.
Look through the footage of the parade before Dealey. The guy was was doing all manner of things - waving, turning, fluffing his his hair, leaning forward, talking to Connally, etc. There's even a clip where he waves and his arm stops in mid air just like it looks as he reappears from the sign.
Nothing violent starts until his hands snap up in front of face, which is where the first shot starts.
-
But people's interpretations of films can lie. For example, any attempt to pinpoint when the first shot occurred (if there even was a shot before JFK emerged from the sign) is subjective guesswork.
Not exactly "subjective" or "guesswork". We have evidence that bears on this issue. We see JFK reacting to his throat wound by z224/225 when he first appears from behind the sign, so the shot was before then.
We also have witnesses along Elm who identified the location of President relative to where they were standing at the time of the first shot. Those positions are all pretty consistent and fit with what witnesses in the motorcade said about where they were when the first shot occurred and consistent with where the photographers Hugh Betzner and Phil Willis put the first shot: Somewhere between z190 and z200.
-
Not exactly "subjective" or "guesswork". We have evidence that bears on this issue. We see JFK reacting to his throat wound by z224/225 when he first appears from behind the sign, so the shot was before then.
We also have witnesses along Elm who identified the location of President relative to where they were standing at the time of the first shot. Those positions are all pretty consistent and fit with what witnesses in the motorcade said about where they were when the first shot occurred and consistent with where the photographers Hugh Betzner and Phil Willis put the first shot: Somewhere between z190 and z200.
I'm talking about people who claim to be able to tell when the first shot occurred by looking at the film. I would also disagree that the witnesses are "pretty consistent", but that's a different issue.
-
That's kind of sort of what I mean. For example, I've read people say that the reason his head goes quickly over to the right before the sign comes on is because he was reacting to shots.
But elsewhere, there's a more plausible reason why it happened - those group of clapping women over on the curb yelled out, "Mr. President...over here!" and that's what he did. He looked over there and then waved and then his arm kind of freezes in mid wave until the first shot.
The turn to the right and the wave toward Mary Woodward is exactly what she described the President did immediately before that first "horrible ear-shattering noise". No a single person said he reacted to the first shot by smiling and waving let alone for 3 seconds. They said he reacted immediately in a way that suggested he was hit by it. There are over 20 such witnesses who said JFK reacted to the first shot.
Look through the footage of the parade before Dealey. The guy was was doing all manner of things - waving, turning, fluffing his his hair, leaning forward, talking to Connally, etc. There's even a clip where he waves and his arm stops in mid air just like it looks as he reappears from the sign.
Nothing violent starts until his hands snap up in front of face, which is where the first shot starts.
So you think he had a premonition of the first shot a few frames before it hit him?:
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/z225_JFK.jpg)
-
I'm talking about people who claim to be able to tell when the first shot occurred by looking at the film. I would also disagree that the witnesses are "pretty consistent", but that's a different issue.
Ok. I agree that one needs more than the zfilm alone to determine when either of the first two shots occurred.
On the issue of witnesses, witness testimony rarely matches perfectly and is rarely exact. The question is whether the witness evidence is consistent with a particular shot time or not.
According to Betzner and Hughes the first shot was after they exposed their film. They are consistent with a first shot after z186. The witnesses in the President's car, the President's security car, the VP car, VP security car, and the Cabell car put the first shot 1. after the president's car had gone some distance down Elm street 2. after the President's security car had finished the turn and was proceeding down Elm St. 3. just after the VP car had completed the turn 4. just before the VP security car was about to finish the turn 5. as the Cabell car was facing the TSBD. Those are all consistent with a first shot after z190 and inconsistent with a shot earlier than that. Witnesses along Elm St. such as Mary Woodward said the first shot was just as JFK went by. She was standing opposite the President at about z192. Others around her said much the same thing.
-
The turn to the right and the wave toward Mary Woodward is exactly what she described the President did immediately before that first "horrible ear-shattering noise". No a single person said he reacted to the first shot by smiling and waving let alone for 3 seconds. They said he reacted immediately in a way that suggested he was hit by it. There are over 20 such witnesses who said JFK reacted to the first shot.
So you think he had a premonition of the first shot a few frames before it hit him?:
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/z225_JFK.jpg)
Here are two other photos taken prior to the shooting. They look almost identical to that Z frame you have here.
https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/jfk-final-minutes-03.jpg
https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/john-f-kennedy-papers-assassination.jpg
Now tell me...
Why would anything in that Z frame tell you it's sinister and the other two are not?
As I said before, he was moving around throughout the parade just like the Z frame you have and just like the images above. It's only 1/18 of a second later that the first shot was fired, hitting him in the throat and then the next shot hitting him in the back pushing him slightly forward, that you see him change from a hanging wave to being injured.
As I said before, he was NOT hit earlier than that. The oak tree was blocking the view then and the planners, if they had started earlier, would have been the biggest dumb asses on Earth to blow the story by doing so earlier.
As for witnesses, there are too many to mention instances from that day where one person said they saw this while someone else next to them said they saw or heard something completely different.
The visual proof is in the film.
-
Here are two other photos taken prior to the shooting. They look almost identical to that Z frame you have here.
https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/jfk-final-minutes-03.jpg
https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/john-f-kennedy-papers-assassination.jpg
Now tell me...
Why would anything in that Z frame tell you it's sinister and the other two are not?
First of all, they are hardly 'identical'. Your two photos show a markedly different facial expression. He is not smiing in z224 (but was smiing z193, less than 2 seconds earlier). In your photos the hands look much more natural. Second, there is no evidence that JFK was shot before your photos were taken whereas there is not only evidence that there was a shot about a second or two before z225 but also evidence that he reacted to it by bringing his hands to his chest/neck and assuming a blank stare, just as we see in z224.
As I said before, he was moving around throughout the parade just like the Z frame you have and just like the images above. It's only 1/18 of a second later that the first shot was fired, hitting him in the throat and then the next shot hitting him in the back pushing him slightly forward, that you see him change from a hanging wave to being injured.
As I said before, he was NOT hit earlier than that. The oak tree was blocking the view then and the planners, if they had started earlier, would have been the biggest dumb asses on Earth to blow the story by doing so earlier.
The whole point of this thread was to show that the oak tree was NOT blocking the view from the SN. If you disagree then tell us what is wrong with my analysis (first post).
As for witnesses, there are too many to mention instances from that day where one person said they saw this while someone else next to them said they saw or heard something completely different.
Too many? Give us some examples. There are a few examples where one person said something that was different but invariably these oddball accounts are never corroborated by anyone else.
-
First of all, they are hardly 'identical'. Your two photos show a markedly different facial expression....
First of all, they are hardly 'identical'. Your two photos show a markedly different facial expression. He is not smiing in z224 (but was smiing z193, less than 2 seconds earlier). In your photos the hands look much more natural. Second, there is no evidence that JFK was shot before your photos were taken whereas there is not only evidence that there was a shot about a second or two before z225 but also evidence that he reacted to it by bringing his hands to his chest/neck and assuming a blank stare, just as we see in z224.
You're missing the point. The point is that here are other examples of his arm being raised from a wave like you see in the Z film.
Honestly, we don't know what his expression is in that Z film frame. As I said elsewhere, the Z film clarity is not great.
Regarding the blank stare - really? That's news to me. If you watch the film, nowhere do we see that happening. He's looking over to the left, the women yell out, he looks over to his right, he waves, and his arm just hangs there mid-air like the other two photos I posted above, and then the first shot hits. And you can certainly tell when he is hit the very first time too as it startles him and his hands are instinctively thrown up toward his face.
The whole point of this thread was to show that the oak tree was NOT blocking the view from the SN. If you disagree then tell us what is wrong with my analysis (first post).
This is confusing. I'm showing that the tree DID block the 6th floor view, then it did not. And where it does not block is actually when the first shot was taken, around Z225. As I stated above, if there's a conspiracy and they want their patsy to take the fall for it, they certainly would tell the real shooters to not start firing until the car clears the oak tree obstruction.
Too many? Give us some examples. There are a few examples where one person said something that was different but invariably these oddball accounts are never corroborated by anyone else.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/witnesses.htm
Read the Bill Newman one. He was mere feet from the limo.
***
I made this video almost a year ago. It makes no sense that he was hit before where this video shows he was first hit. And I don't care what the women down there say - they don't know what the hell they're talking about because none of them were expecting any of this to happen. And see other crazy witness "testimony" above...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc/view?usp=sharing
-
This is confusing. I'm showing that the tree DID block the 6th floor view, then it did not. And where it does not block is actually when the first shot was taken, around Z225. As I stated above, if there's a conspiracy and they want their patsy to take the fall for it, they certainly would tell the real shooters to not start firing until the car clears the oak tree obstruction.
It is confusing only if you didn't read my post. If you read it, you will understand why I am saying that you are wrong: JFK was clear of the oak tree by z195. In other words, your assertion that the tree DID block the 6th floor view until z225 is not correct. You seem to be just making that up.
Read the Bill Newman one. He was mere feet from the limo.[/b]
What is crazy about it? The use of the term "jumped up"? "standing up"? No one asked him what he meant by those terms so we really don't know what he was trying to say. I am not that familiar with Texas expressions, but I think I can smell what you're stepping in....
-
First of all, they are hardly 'identical'. Your two photos show a markedly different facial expression. He is not smiing in z224 (but was smiing z193, less than 2 seconds earlier). In your photos the hands look much more natural. Second, there is no evidence that JFK was shot before your photos were taken whereas there is not only evidence that there was a shot about a second or two before z225 but also evidence that he reacted to it by bringing his hands to his chest/neck and assuming a blank stare, just as we see in z224.
The whole point of this thread was to show that the oak tree was NOT blocking the view from the SN. If you disagree then tell us what is wrong with my analysis (first post).
Too many? Give us some examples. There are a few examples where one person said something that was different but invariably these oddball accounts are never corroborated by anyone else.
there is no evidence that JFK was shot before your photos were taken whereas there is not only evidence that there was a shot about a second or two before z225
Two seconds prior to Z 225 = Z 189..... The tree obstructed the view between the window and JFK at Z 189.....
-
there is no evidence that JFK was shot before your photos were taken whereas there is not only evidence that there was a shot about a second or two before z225
Two seconds prior to Z 225 = Z 189..... The tree obstructed the view between the window and JFK at Z 189.....
So what about z195? I have shown that JFK was visible from the SN clear of the oak tree at z195. That is 30 frames or 1.65 seconds before z225. There is evidence that the first shot was just before z202 (Phil Wilis) and a lot of evidence that it was after z190 (motorcade witnesses, Betzner, others along Elm). Rosemary Willis appears to react to something at z202 to 205 turning rapidly towrd the TSBD. She said she looked back when she heard the first shot. Jack Ready said he turned around immediately upon hearing the first shot. He begins turning at z199 when he releases his right hand from the right front handhold on the SSsecurity car.
-
So what about z195? I have shown that JFK was visible from the SN clear of the oak tree at z195. That is 30 frames or 1.65 seconds before z225. There is evidence that the first shot was just before z202 (Phil Wilis) and a lot of evidence that it was after z190 (motorcade witnesses, Betzner, others along Elm). Rosemary Willis appears to react to something at z202 to 205 turning rapidly towrd the TSBD. She said she looked back when she heard the first shot. Jack Ready said he turned around immediately upon hearing the first shot. He begins turning at z199 when he releases his right hand from the right front handhold on the SSsecurity car.
There is evidence that the first shot was just before z202 (Phil Wilis) and a lot of evidence that it was after z190
Have you seen page 102 WR? The Lincoln would have just emerged from behind the tree at Frame 210... Nobody could have aimed a rifle at JFK from that SE corner window prior to Z 210..... And that ignores the FACT that it requires several seconds to acquire the MOVING target and squeeze the trigger..... A rifle cannot be fired the very instant the target appears.... Do you understand?
-
There is evidence that the first shot was just before z202 (Phil Wilis) and a lot of evidence that it was after z190
Have you seen page 102 WR? The Lincoln would have just emerged from behind the tree at Frame 210... Nobody could have aimed a rifle at JFK from that SE corner window prior to Z 210..... And that ignores the FACT that it requires several seconds to acquire the MOVING target and squeeze the trigger..... A rifle cannot be fired the very instant the target appears.... Do you understand?
You obviously haven't read the first post in this thread. The whole point of this thread is to show that the WC was wrong and, more important, why it was wrong. I have demonstrated that JFK was clear of obstruction from the SN At z195. And JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree. If you disagree, read it and tell me where I have gone wrong. And tell me why the Secret Service film is not a better recreation than the FBI's.
-
You obviously haven't read the first post in this thread. The whole point of this thread is to show that the WC was wrong and, more important, why it was wrong. I have demonstrated that JFK was clear of obstruction from the SN At z195. And JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree. If you disagree, read it and tell me where I have gone wrong. And tell me why the Secret Service film is not a better recreation than the FBI's.
I have demonstrated that JFK was clear of obstruction from the SN At z195. And JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree. If you disagree,
OF course I disagree.... You clearly are not familiar with rifles or hunting.....JFK could NOT have been tracked through the scope of that rifle as the Lincoln traveled behind the foliage of the tree. LBJ's cover up committee shows a photo on page 102 of the Book of Lies that allegedly depicts the view at frame 210 of the Z film . That photo shows that JFK in the car has just emerged from behind the tree...it would have taken several seconds for an EXPERT rifle man to acquire the target and squeeze the trigger. AND even an EXPERT rifleman could not have hit JFK because the scope was mounted out of alignment.
You're right ...The Cover up committee was "wrong" (as in deliberately wrong) but you have disqualified your argument by making dumb statements like ..."JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree."
-
I have demonstrated that JFK was clear of obstruction from the SN At z195. And JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree. If you disagree,
OF course I disagree.... You clearly are not familiar with rifles or hunting.....JFK could NOT have been tracked through the scope of that rifle as the Lincoln traveled behind the foliage of the tree. LBJ's cover up committee shows a photo on page 102 of the Book of Lies that allegedly depicts the view at frame 210 of the Z film . That photo shows that JFK in the car has just emerged from behind the tree...it would have taken several seconds for an EXPERT rifle man to acquire the target and squeeze the trigger. AND even an EXPERT rifleman could not have hit JFK because the scope was mounted out of alignment.
You're right ...The Cover up committee was "wrong" (as in deliberately wrong) but you have disqualified your argument by making dumb statements like ..."JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree."
Walter, you are demonstrating again that you have not read or, in any event, understood, the first post in this thread. Read it and view the Secret Service film that I have provided for you. Watch from 10:20 as the car goes under the oak tree. This is the oak tree as seen from the SN a few days after the assassination so that is what was actually seen. The FBI did their recreation in May 1964 when the tree was in full foliage and all sorts of new growth. At the time of the assassination "JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree". Watch the film yourself. You can see the car and occupants all the time it passes under that two outer branches. Otherwise the car is completely clear. Don't take my word for it. See for yourself:
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/jfk_under_tree.jpg)
Anyone who knew how to shoot would be able to track JFK under that tree.
-
Walter, you are demonstrating again that you have not read or, in any event, understood, the first post in this thread. Read it and view the Secret Service film that I have provided for you. Watch from 10:20 as the car goes under the oak tree. This is the oak tree as seen from the SN a few days after the assassination so that is what was actually seen. The FBI did their recreation in May 1964 when the tree was in full foliage and all sorts of new growth. At the time of the assassination "JFK was easily trackablefrom the SN as he passed under the tree". Watch the film yourself. You can see the car and occupants all the time it passes under that two outer branches. Otherwise the car is completely clear. Don't take my word for it. See for yourself:
(http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/jfk_under_tree.jpg)
Anyone who knew how to shoot would be able to track JFK under that tree.
Andrew, You're being a sucker.... The photo WAS NOT taken from the TSBD window...Get your head out and LOOK at the angles in the photo....That photo was taken from the Dal Tex Building. That why I used the word "Allegedly" when directing you to the photo on page 102 of The Book of Lies ..... LBJ's liars presented the photo as having been taken from the TSBD but it clearly was taken from a location further south than the SE corner window of the TSBD....
I'm outta here Andrew..... I clearly can't help you.....
-
Andrew, You're being a sucker.... The photo WAS NOT taken from the TSBD window...Get your head out and LOOK at the angles in the photo....That photo was taken from the Dal Tex Building. That why I used the word "Allegedly" when directing you to the photo on page 102 of The Book of Lies ..... LBJ's liars presented the photo as having been taken from the TSBD but it clearly was taken from a location further south than the SE corner window of the TSBD....
I'm outta here Andrew..... I clearly can't help you.....
(https://i.postimg.cc/jjqByJN5/ss-photo-earth-cam.jpg)
JohnM
-
Andrew, You're being a sucker.... The photo WAS NOT taken from the TSBD window...Get your head out and LOOK at the angles in the photo....That photo was taken from the Dal Tex Building. That why I used the word "Allegedly" when directing you to the photo on page 102 of The Book of Lies ..... LBJ's liars presented the photo as having been taken from the TSBD but it clearly was taken from a location further south than the SE corner window of the TSBD....
I'm outta here Andrew..... I clearly can't help you.....
You just have to watch the film to see that it is taken from the TSBD. Not only that but you can watch as the car comes up Houston and see that Houston St. is to the east. If you aren't going to watch the film there is not much I can do.
-
You just have to watch the film to see that it is taken from the TSBD. Not only that but you can watch as the car comes up Houston and see that Houston St. is to the east. If you aren't going to watch the film there is not much I can do.
I agree with you, Andrew, Walt is incorrect.
-
I agree with you, Andrew, Walt is incorrect.
Ray, Do you believe that the Lincoln passed behind the tree ...... Witnesses ( Vicky Adams and Sandra Styles to name a couple) on the fourth floor had no idea what had happened because the tree blocked their view....
-
Ray, Do you believe that the Lincoln passed behind the tree ...... Witnesses ( Vicky Adams and Sandra Styles to name a couple) on the fourth floor had no idea what had happened because the tree blocked their view....
(https://i.postimg.cc/634mL9Sg/depository.jpg)
JohnM
-
Ray, Do you believe that the Lincoln passed behind the tree ...... Witnesses ( Vicky Adams and Sandra Styles to name a couple) on the fourth floor had no idea what had happened because the tree blocked their view....
This is what Andrew wrote, and what I agreed with.
"You just have to watch the film to see that it is taken from the TSBD. Not only that but you can watch as the car comes up Houston and see that Houston St. is to the east. If you aren't going to watch the film there is not much I can do."
As you said the witnesses were two floors lower than the sniper's nest, so the tree would probably have impeded their view.
-
(https://images2.imgbox.com/ce/43/DbkHV09t_o.jpg)
-
::) f
(http://ie63.tinypic.com/33nc9ya.jpg)
A few observations. 1. It looks like you are super-imposing the tree as it appeared in May 1964. There are significant differences. In the Secret Service film we can see both taillights, whereas in yours they are obscured, for example. 2. The position of the JFK stand-in in the recreation is farther inboard than JFK's position in the limo. 3. The difference between the positions of the car in your first and second sets of close-ups is about the length of the front wheel. That is about two frames.
-
::) fA few observations. 1. It looks like you are super-imposing the tree as it appeared in May 1964.
The tree is from the same film (the one referenced in the OP), just a later sequence with better resolution because it's filmed through a scope.
There are significant differences. In the Secret Service film we can see both taillights, whereas in yours they are obscured, for example.
I don't mind that much you wasting my time. My wife doesn't mind you wasting my time. But my cat ... my cat minds you wasting my time.
2. The position of the JFK stand-in in the recreation is farther inboard than JFK's position in the limo.
(http://i66.tinypic.com/viefqg.jpg)
Then I guess we're both working under the same handicap. But the sequence from the film you've been posting shows the reenactment car some distance from the lane stripe. The 1964 FBI reenactment shows the path of the car should be obstructing view of the stripe from the SN in that area. So the 1963 reenactment car is too far camera-right of the stripe in your film sequence (a bit less far away in the scope sequence).
3. The difference between the positions of the car in your first and second sets of close-ups is about the length of the front wheel. That is about two frames.
You seem to me to be measuring a vertical shift within the 2D camera plane and not an oblique passage through space in 3D.
Note the front of the car is short of the upper yellow line that you superimposed. By time Kennedy is clearing away from the foliage, the base of the windshield is at the yellow line. About 7 to 8 feet, which includes the space that was in front of the car and the length of the front of the car to the base of the windshield.