Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?  (Read 19944 times)

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #56 on: February 02, 2020, 05:50:01 PM »
Advertisement
Stop with the umbrella man stuff please.

Before his head went back and to the left it moved forward as the bullet hit. Explain that please.

Prove it.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #56 on: February 02, 2020, 05:50:01 PM »


Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #57 on: February 02, 2020, 06:36:34 PM »
Stop with the umbrella man stuff please.

Louie Steven Witt was thought to be the umbrella man and he said that he brought the umbrella simply to heckle Kennedy, whose father, Joseph, had been a supporter of the Nazi-appeasing British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain. By waving a black umbrella, Chamberlain's trademark fashion accessory, Witt said he was protesting the Kennedy family appeasing Adolf Hitler before World War II.

So you believe his ridiculous story? Why would JFK look at Witt pumping his umbrella and have a fricken clue what he was on about? Protesting the Kennedys for appeasing Hitler in WW II with an umbrella my ass.

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #58 on: February 02, 2020, 10:30:23 PM »
Prove it.

It's been publicly known since Six Seconds in Dallas came out in the mid-60's. You can see it for yourself with publicly-available Zapruder film frames and the right software tools.



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #58 on: February 02, 2020, 10:30:23 PM »


Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #59 on: February 03, 2020, 12:18:16 AM »
It's been publicly known since Six Seconds in Dallas came out in the mid-60's. You can see it for yourself with publicly-available Zapruder film frames and the right software tools.

Nope, a revisited study concluded there was too much motion blur on the limo to ascertain whether the head went forward. Have another look.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the explosive forces inside JFK's head and a jet effect pushed it in the opposite direction of any blow outs. However, you don't get this jet effect from a FMJ bullet, only a frangible one.  It looks like you can see the plasma jetting out of JFK's right temple and since his head is turned slightly to the left, you will get a vector component force pushing his head back and to the left.

Just look at the damage done by a frangible bullet.



The shot from the overpass was probably a FMJ bullet that created a small entry wound at JFK's hairline and  blew out a fist-sized hole from his right occipital region. How it affected the motion of JFK's head is unknown since the explosive forces from the frangible bullet likely dominated.

If the Z film was spliced and altered it was to remove any signs of a shot from the front. That means individual frames of the back of JFK's head after frame 313 might have been touched up. It stands to reason that the autopsy photos had to remove the hole in the occipital region, as well. But those edits are easier than speeding up the limo, which involves systematically removing frames, unless you are splicing out an entire sequence of frames, such as the turn onto Elm. There are several unexplained splices on the film returned to Zapruder. So why did the FBI return an edited copy and where is the original Z film? It would tell all.

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2597
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #60 on: February 03, 2020, 05:02:45 AM »
Louie Steven Witt was thought to be the umbrella man and he said that he brought the umbrella simply to heckle Kennedy, whose father, Joseph, had been a supporter of the Nazi-appeasing British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain. By waving a black umbrella, Chamberlain's trademark fashion accessory, Witt said he was protesting the Kennedy family appeasing Adolf Hitler before World War II.

So you believe his ridiculous story? Why would JFK look at Witt pumping his umbrella and have a fricken clue what he was on about? Protesting the Kennedys for appeasing Hitler in WW II with an umbrella my ass.

   Witt also said during his HSCA Testimony that he was Moving DOWN the knoll while struggling to open his umbrella as the JFK Limo passed by him. This is Not what the assassination images show. Either the alleged Umbrella Man/Witt is Wrong, or the Images are Wrong.  Both can Not be correct. 

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #60 on: February 03, 2020, 05:02:45 AM »


Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #61 on: February 04, 2020, 12:59:27 AM »
Nope, a revisited study concluded there was too much motion blur on the limo to ascertain whether the head went forward. Have another look.

Your "revisited study" is just an assertion made by a guy named David Wimp, and it's nothing more than some wishful thinking on his part.  If you actually look at frames 312 and 313, you will see Kennedy's head translate forward rotationally, with a center of rotation somewhere in JFK's neck. Exactly where you'd expect it to be if JFK's head suddenly nodded forwards due to a blow from behind. If this were due to blurring --if Zapruder suddenly rotated his camera about the line of sight-- the the amount of blur would increase the further you get away from the center of rotation. Were that true, the left and right edges of the image would be a mostly-vertically streaky mess. But they aren't. The blurring in frame 313 is actually horizontal and linear, and linear blurring can't be responsible for the rotational motion of the image of JFK's head.


That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the explosive forces inside JFK's head and a jet effect pushed it in the opposite direction of any blow outs. However, you don't get this jet effect from a FMJ bullet, only a frangible one.  It looks like you can see the plasma jetting out of JFK's right temple and since his head is turned slightly to the left, you will get a vector component force pushing his head back and to the left.

Just look at the damage done by a frangible bullet.



The shot from the overpass was probably a FMJ bullet that created a small entry wound at JFK's hairline and  blew out a fist-sized hole from his right occipital region. How it affected the motion of JFK's head is unknown since the explosive forces from the frangible bullet likely dominated.

If the Z film was spliced and altered it was to remove any signs of a shot from the front. That means individual frames of the back of JFK's head after frame 313 might have been touched up. It stands to reason that the autopsy photos had to remove the hole in the occipital region, as well. But those edits are easier than speeding up the limo, which involves systematically removing frames, unless you are splicing out an entire sequence of frames, such as the turn onto Elm. There are several unexplained splices on the film returned to Zapruder. So why did the FBI return an edited copy and where is the original Z film? It would tell all.

That's quite a segue. Someone actually paid attention to you, so you proudly unpacked everything from your crank-box to show it off.  But it's beside the point here, and most of it is a lot of baseless assertion on your part, and not worth anyone else's time. If you want to go into JFK's motion in the films, I'm in. If you're just going to assert clouds of side issues, then you'll just be wasting everyone's time, including yours. 

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2597
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #62 on: February 04, 2020, 01:31:56 AM »
Your "revisited study" is just an assertion made by a guy named David Wimp, and it's nothing more than some wishful thinking on his part.  If you actually look at frames 312 and 313, you will see Kennedy's head translate forward rotationally, with a center of rotation somewhere in JFK's neck. Exactly where you'd expect it to be if JFK's head suddenly nodded forwards due to a blow from behind. If this were due to blurring --if Zapruder suddenly rotated his camera about the line of sight-- the the amount of blur would increase the further you get away from the center of rotation. Were that true, the left and right edges of the image would be a mostly-vertically streaky mess. But they aren't. The blurring in frame 313 is actually horizontal and linear, and linear blurring can't be responsible for the rotational motion of the image of JFK's head.


That's quite a segue. Someone actually paid attention to you, so you proudly unpacked everything from your crank-box to show it off.  But it's beside the point here, and most of it is a lot of baseless assertion on your part, and not worth anyone else's time. If you want to go into JFK's motion in the films, I'm in. If you're just going to assert clouds of side issues, then you'll just be wasting everyone's time, including yours.

   Regarding your viewing, "center of rotation somewhere in JFK's neck", let's Not forget that JFK had Just been Shot in this same Neck.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #62 on: February 04, 2020, 01:31:56 AM »


Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
Re: Who was the "agent" patrolman Joe Smith encountered behind grassy knoll?
« Reply #63 on: February 04, 2020, 03:48:01 AM »
Your "revisited study" is just an assertion made by a guy named David Wimp, and it's nothing more than some wishful thinking on his part.  If you actually look at frames 312 and 313, you will see Kennedy's head translate forward rotationally, with a center of rotation somewhere in JFK's neck. Exactly where you'd expect it to be if JFK's head suddenly nodded forwards due to a blow from behind. If this were due to blurring --if Zapruder suddenly rotated his camera about the line of sight-- the the amount of blur would increase the further you get away from the center of rotation. Were that true, the left and right edges of the image would be a mostly-vertically streaky mess. But they aren't. The blurring in frame 313 is actually horizontal and linear, and linear blurring can't be responsible for the rotational motion of the image of JFK's head.

This isn't rocket science. I revisited the study myself and found the film speed created too much motion blur to claim the head moves forward. Also, any detectable forward motion is minuscule if it only transpires over 2 frames @ 1/18 frames/sec and can't be attributed to anything. Besides, are you claiming that a tiny bit of forward motion negates back and to the left? All the head motion could have been caused by the frangible bullet, which did not come from behind. MCs don't fire dumdum bullets.

Go ahead and post the animated GIF of frames 312 and 313 and show us the forward head motion over .05 secs and back up your claim that only 1 shot came from behind. I will show you why you are FOS.

Quote
That's quite a segue. Someone actually paid attention to you, so you proudly unpacked everything from your crank-box to show it off.  But it's beside the point here, and most of it is a lot of baseless assertion on your part, and not worth anyone else's time. If you want to go into JFK's motion in the films, I'm in. If you're just going to assert clouds of side issues, then you'll just be wasting everyone's time, including yours.

LOL. An amateur says what?