I'm wondering what part of the man having Shelley's white shirt collar, black jacket, hair doo, and body shape you don't understand?...Or the other man having Lovelady's plaid pattern and bald spot...Or the pair being exactly where Lovelady & Shelley would be according to the other testimonies...Or Shelley pulling up and talking to Hicks as she ran by...The pair fast-walking up the extension just so happens to be where Lovelady & Shelley would be if they were going up the extension according to the witnessing...I consider doubting this to be research-damaging silly-ness...



When I first analyzed this with Thomas Graves 8 years ago the image I saw looked different and you could clearly see Molina's signature bald pate...Obviously the 6th Floor Museum's 1st generation copy should provide the best imagery once enhanced...Do you realize that copy has not been digitally enhanced?...It should yield impressive results...The JFK research community is uncredibly against obtaining that copy without any legitimate excuse...

Frazier was there, witnessed it, and said Lovelady & Shelley spoke to Calvery at the base of the steps...The Couch/Darnell clip backs this by showing that Calvery and Lovelady & Shelley are all at the correct distances for that meeting to have happened...There are strange characters in the research community who just like to cause trouble and muddy the waters...




If you time going up the extension and around the west side of the Depository, Lovelady & Shelley had too much distance to travel to get back in to the 1st Floor in time to meet Adams & Styles...Adams and Styles had a shorter route and most-likely got out the rear exit before Lovelady & Shelley got back in...

But, if you think about it, by conceding this you are admitting the men going up the extension are indeed Lovelady & Shelley (touche)...

Another surreal denial that simply ignores contrary evidence.

So never mind that Weldon demonstrated with a huge enlargement of Altgens 6 that the photo shows windshield damage? Never mind that Waldon also demonstrated that some subsequent printed versions of Altgens 6 were altered to conceal the damage? I mean, he proves this for all to see in his 1999 presentation. Did you even bother to watch the video of the presentation?

wCharles Brehm and Marrion Baker also offered the same opinon (London ABA trial - see Bugliosi at 492 and 494)

Mary Woodward said that the sound of the second had not died out before the third shot sounded.

 

That may be what they were referring to as one on top of the other. The reverberation in Dealey plaza would have lasted more than 2 seconds given the distances between reflecting surfaces (Houston St buildings on the east, Post office on the south, railway berm and overpass on the south, west and north and the structures on the north part of DP as well as the TSBD on the north).

I don't know anybody other than Nellie Connally who thought JFK clutched his throat. Why would anyone need technology to figure that out?
There's only so much modern technology can do to enhance the Z-film. It can enlarge it, sharpen the images, etc. but if the film didn't initially capture something, technology can't magically insert it with authenticity. There's a fine line between AI enhancements and AI alterations. AI has the capability of creating false versions of the Z-film. Things CTs have alleged for years are now possible with AI.

   Technology is making things clear with respect to the JFK Assassination. Steve Barber just proved this with his thread detailing that JFK NEVER Clutched at his throat.

The higher definition images on the Zapruder Film prove this. If there are now JFK Assassination Images of higher detail, we need to give these images our serious consideration.