At least 1 of the actual Dan Rather CBS broadcasts done that weekend is posted on You Tube. This is no secret.

Ok that's great. If we can get the youtube link in here to bolster CIA employee Dino Brugioni's testimony that the film has been tampered with then this supports that fact.
So where do we stand at the moment?
We have arguments in the thread concerning where heads were facing on a film which CIA operative Dino Brugioni who worked on it on November 24th 1963 says is not admissible because it has been tampered with.
Now, Dino Brugioni testified that the fatal head shot has a lot of frames missing and that the spread of brain matter was much more on the original and he says the original was a much clearer copy. If there are frames missing and the spread of brain matter has been altered I think its safe to say not only are there frames missing, its safe to say the film has undergone editing of the frames.
If this is the case, not one single frame of the film is admissible no matter where you go in the sequence from the first until last frame.

   You neglected to mention the Zapruder Film that CBS Dan Rather viewed/described to the World during his multiple broadcasts the very weekend of the JFK Assassination. Rather was even intro'd by CBS News Anchor Walter Cronkite. The Dan Rather broadcasts were highly regarded at the time they were made. Rather described the Zapruder Film showing the JFK Limo turning onto Elm St along with his describing other things on the film that are Not on the Current Zapruder Film.

Some good points. But you'd need testimony from Rather to establish if that is the case. If you could find that, it would be helpful.
....James.

You said: "You're not an expert in this field."

What "field" are you referring to, Slater?

Anyone with an open mind will discern that Jackie is looking to her left in, for example, Z-161, that she's looking straight ahead or a little to her right in Z-180, and that she's looking to her far-right in Z-190.

The reason Jackie's testimony didn't "tally" with what we see her doing in the Zapruder film right before her husband was struck in the lower neck/upper back by CE-399 is due to her very human "failure" to remember that, although she'd been looking to her left for a long time, she had turned to her right around Z-175 to look at, and probably smile and wave to, Mary Woodward and her three journalism colleagues.

In 1963 the CIA had a department called the National Photographic Interpretation Center. Dino Brugioni was the first CIA employee to examine the Zapruder film and he has testified on tape that the Zapruder film has been tampered with.
You on the other hand are not trained in the same field as Dino Brugioni, you have no expertise as to whether the frames are genuine or not. At this juncture in time I'm inclined to take Dino's word for it since he was a government employee with no reason to lie. I don't know who you are and I don't care how you interpret the Zapruder film or anything on it.

You gave me your interpretation of why Jackie's testimony doesn't tally with the Zapruder film and that's all it is - an interpretation since you are not an expert in this field. The real reason for the two not tallying and for JBC's testimony not tallying with the Zapruder film as far as I'm concerned remains unknown.
You will never be able to determine if the Zapruder film is admissible because the chain of command is questionable. I'd watch the link I've provided to determine that for yourself. OK I'll thank you for your interpretation if that helps.
But.......if the film cannot be verified and Dino Brugioni who first worked on the film is certain it is different from the original then we've got a problem on our hands haven't we? The hypothetical I provided is valid in terms of comparison but you side tracked it. The reason you side tracked it is because if you answer it honestly then you've by default destroyed the credibility of the Zapruder film.

   You neglected to mention the Zapruder Film that CBS Dan Rather viewed/described to the World during his multiple broadcasts the very weekend of the JFK Assassination. Rather was even intro'd by CBS News Anchor Walter Cronkite. The Dan Rather broadcasts were highly regarded at the time they were made. Rather described the Zapruder Film showing the JFK Limo turning onto Elm St along with his describing other things on the film that are Not on the Current Zapruder Film. 

You gave me your interpretation of why Jackie's testimony doesn't tally with the Zapruder film and that's all it is - an interpretation since you are not an expert in this field. The real reason for the two not tallying and for JBC's testimony not tallying with the Zapruder film as far as I'm concerned remains unknown.

You said: "You're not an expert in this field."

What "field" are you referring to, Slater?

Anyone with an open mind will discern that Jackie is looking to her left in, for example, Z-161, that she's looking straight ahead or a little to her right in Z-180, and that she's looking to her far-right in Z-190.

The reason Jackie's testimony didn't "tally" with what we see her doing in the Zapruder film right before her husband was struck in the lower neck/upper back by CE-399 is due to her very human "failure" to remember that, although she'd been looking to her left for a long time, she had turned to her right around Z-175 to look at, and probably smile and wave to, Mary Woodward and her three journalism colleagues.