Charles Brehm

[Charles Collins]

I animated JFK starting with a 10 degree lean forward and ending vertical over the period of the animation where JFK is hidden behind the Stemmons sign (Stemmons Zone). It seems to me that Brehm's JFK's stiffening observation is feasible. A more realistic modeling and positioning of JFK and Connally might obscure his view however. The DX and DZ display in the overhead view are feet north(x) and west(-z) from the position I have for Brehm. I can change the lean angle to whatever you choose.


Before this post I read your FBI report indicating Brehm could  see the President's face very well, apparently during the time JFK is stiffing in his seat. However, my animation and some variations fail to show JFK's face from the turn off Houston street until he is nearly in front of Brehm-well beyond the Stemmons Zone.  I don't know what to think about that.

Thanks James, excellent work as usual. I also noticed the face being obscured during this period. However, it does appear to me that JFK’s face would become visible to Brehm’s position very shortly (if the animation were to be continued). The human memory isn’t like a slow motion instant replay. So, some of the details can easily get mixed up. And we might be interpreting it a little differently than Brehm was trying to describe. We often don’t use precise language in our descriptions. Also, it appears to me that once JFK’s face became visible to Brehm and the look on JFK’s face indicated to Brehm that he had been hit, that the expression on JFK’s face is what stood out in Brehm’s memory. The main thing your animation shows is that Brehm’s vantage point did provide a view to JFK’s torso during the period of time he was obscured from Zapruder’s camera by the Stemmons sign. Also, the Zapruder film shows that Brehm appeared to be looking directly at JFK. So Brehm’s description does appear to me to be credible.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

I animated JFK starting with a 10 degree lean forward and ending vertical over the period of the animation where JFK is hidden behind the Stemmons sign (Stemmons Zone). It seems to me that Brehm's JFK's stiffening observation is feasible. A more realistic modeling and positioning of JFK and Connally might obscure his view however. The DX and DZ display in the overhead view are feet north(x) and west(-z) from the position I have for Brehm. I can change the lean angle to whatever you choose.


Before this post I read your FBI report indicating Brehm could  see the President's face very well, apparently during the time JFK is stiffing in his seat. However, my animation and some variations fail to show JFK's face from the turn off Houston street until he is nearly in front of Brehm-well beyond the Stemmons Zone.  I don't know what to think about that.

Good stuff.
Can u make a model of Hickey's eyeball view of JFK (Hickey sitting hi up in Queen Mary)(QM was say 6ft clear behind the jfklimo)(Hickey having moved over to nearer the center-line of QM).

[James Hackerott]

Good stuff.
Can u make a model of Hickey's eyeball view of JFK (Hickey sitting hi up in Queen Mary)(QM was say 6ft clear behind the jfklimo)(Hickey having moved over to nearer the center-line of QM).

Hi Marjan,
I'm not really sure what scene (Z frames) you are wanting, but I'm using the frames where JFK was hidden by the Stemmons sign (as above animations). For testing I put the camera at the midpoint of the Queen Mary model and may need to refine the height above pavement per your suggestion. It is obvious my QM model is little more than a box with a cutout for the cab. If a windshield is important to you I can't add one at this time.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Hi Marjan,
I'm not really sure what scene (Z frames) you are wanting, but I'm using the frames where JFK was hidden by the Stemmons sign (as above animations). For testing I put the camera at the midpoint of the Queen Mary model and may need to refine the height above pavement per your suggestion. It is obvious my QM model is little more than a box with a cutout for the cab. If a windshield is important to you I can't add one at this time.

Good stuff. The Z frame is not important (but Z312 is of course the frame of most interest), a critical thing is that QM is 6ft clear behind the jfklimo, & directly behind (ie in line).

Actually, the Z frame is important. Koz, Hickey's first shot of his 4 shots was at say Z304, & u will see that the alignment shows that this went to near Tague at the TUP.
The alignment of Hickey's shot-1 duz not have to be in accord with the center to center line of the 2 limos, the AR15 was free to aim anywhere it liked within reason, ie it aimed at a point just left of Tague (even if the center to center of the 2 limos aimed well right of Tague).
Hickey's 4th shot was the headshot at Z312.

And if its less of a problem for u, i reckon that u kan use your existing model for the jfklimo for the QM, & the existing model for the jfklimo already has a windshield.
The windshield of QM was i think 1 inch higher than the windshield of the jfklimo (ie if on level ground).

The upturned vizors on the jfklimo & QM are missing but are not needed, Hickey shot between or over the upturned vizors.

And the backseat of QM was (on that day) i think a few inches higher than the back seat of the jfklimo (ie if on level ground).

Re the camera representing Hickey's eyeball view, it is ok to have this on the centerline (tho i think that Hickey was a little left of center).

But re having the camera at midpoint, i think it would be better to have it more truly back near Hickey's pozzy in the back seat, ie Hickey was sitting hi up (on 2 cases) about one head height higher (say 10 inches) than when sitting low down.

Plus u could raise Hickey's head (in the jfklimo) koz az i said earlier the seat in QM would have been say 3 inches higher than in the jfklimo (alltho i have seen it said that it was i think 8 inches higher).

And jfk (ie his head) was near centerline in the jfklimo, & the top of his head was say 6 inches below the level of the windshield of his limo (ie if on level ground).

So, in this case, i suspect that Hickey would have been able to see say a half of jfk's head (ie above the windshield of QM).

In which case the AR15 would have to be at a level a little below the camera to see say 1 inch of jfk's head above the windshield of QM.

Which would mean that the barrel of the AR15 would have to be at about chin height on Hickey. Which as i have said is possible koz Hickey would have been raising & swinging the AR15 up & over O'Donnell's head.

Plus, the Bronson footage shows that Hickey at one stage raised up briefly a half head above his already high sitting pozzy, in which case he might have raised the AR15 higher (at least briefly)(before he stumbled forward)(& then he stumbled back down onto his hi-seat pozzy).

[Sean Kneringer]

Weird how he said he was standing on Palmer Street. Where the hell is that? Was he new to Dallas or something?

[Charles Collins]

Weird how he said he was standing on Palmer Street. Where the hell is that? Was he new to Dallas or something?

I think that Brehm just made a mental error regarding Palmer Street. Google Maps doesn’t indicate that there is a street by that name in Dallas. In “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, Brehm says his home state is Pennsylvania. However, it appears to me that he was not new to Dallas in 1963. Brehm also states in “No More Silence” that one of the FBI agents who interviewed Brehm, Joe Hanley, had a son who happened to be “keeping company” with Brehm’s daughter at that time. Also that Charles Brehm and Joe Hanley knew each other and went to the same church.

[James Hackerott]

Weird how he said he was standing on Palmer Street. Where the hell is that? Was he new to Dallas or something?

Maybe Lamar street, four blocks east of his Main/Houston location?

[Steve Barber]

Maybe Lamar street, four blocks east of his Main/Houston location?

 Mr. Brehm said "Commerce Street".  He confused Elm Street and Commerce Street.