Charles Brehm

[David Von Pein]

Thank you very much David. That second interview (the one on radio) seems to answer my question about whether or not on 11/22/63 Brehm was saying there were two shots or three. He definitely said three in the radio interview. Do we know the circumstances of the radio interview? The time and place it was conducted, etc?

That radio interview with Brehm was taken (I think) from some of the network radio coverage I have in my collection. But since nobody else can be heard during the interview except Brehm himself, I can't pinpoint the network or station where it originated. I just don't remember.

Side note.....

One thing that has always had me scratching my head concerning Charles Brehm is.....

He claims to have grabbed his son and run away from the scene of the shooting by the time the third shot was fired, and yet we know from the photographic record that Brehm & Son are still standing in just about the same spot on Elm Street several minutes after the shooting (see photo below). So if he "grabbed the boy and ran" (as he claimed in some of his interviews), then it would have to mean he returned just a few minutes later to virtually the same spot on Elm Street where he had witnessed the assassination. Very curious.

[Charles Collins]

That radio interview with Brehm was taken from some of the network radio coverage I have in my collection. But since nobody else can be heard during the interview except Brehm himself, I can't pinpoint the network or station where it originated. I just don't remember.

Side note.....

One thing that has always had me scratching my head concerning Brehm is ...... He claims to have grabbed his son and run away from the scene of the shooting by the time the third shot was fired, and yet we know from the photographic record that Brehm & Son are still standing in just about the same spot on Elm Street several minutes after the shooting (see photo below). So if he "grabbed the boy and ran" (as he claimed in some of his interviews), then it would have to mean he returned just a few minutes later to virtually the same spot on Elm Street where he had witnessed the assassination. Very curious.

I noticed the difference between “grabbed the boy and ran” and what he reportedly said to the FBI on 11/24/63. Here’s a snip from the FBI report:

Immediately after the third shot rang out, BREHM pushed his son down on the grass and for the moment was more concerned with the safety of his son who might be hit accidentally by any wild gunfire which might follow.

Definitely curious, we should be on the lookout for any images that would show the Brehms in the first sixty seconds following the third shot. It might be that they just got up off the ground and were getting ready to cross the street when the photo you posted was taken.

[David Von Pein]

I noticed the difference between “grabbed the boy and ran” and what he reportedly said to the FBI on 11/24/63. Here’s a snip from the FBI report:

Immediately after the third shot rang out, BREHM pushed his son down on the grass and for the moment was more concerned with the safety of his son who might be hit accidentally by any wild gunfire which might follow.

Thanks for the snippet from the FBI report. Interesting. (That 11/24/63 FBI report on Brehm, BTW, can be found HERE.)

Definitely curious, we should be on the lookout for any images that would show the Brehms in the first sixty seconds following the third shot.

I think the photo below (taken by Wilma Bond) would qualify. It shows Brehm and son on the ground shortly after the shots rang out:

[Charles Collins]

Thanks for the snippet from the FBI report. Interesting.


I think the photo below (taken by Wilma Bond) would qualify. It shows Brehm and son on the ground shortly after the shots rang out:

Yes, that’s the Brehms. Good find, thanks!

[James Hackerott]

The Stemmons Freeway sign obstructs the view from Zapruder’s camera for about 1-second. When JFK emerges from behind the sign it appears that he is reacting to being shot. So JFK’s exact position when the bullet struck him in the back base of the neck cannot be seen in the Zapruder film. I think that Brehm should have had a good vantage point to see JFK during the time he is obstructed from Zapruder’s camera by the Stemmons sign. And sure enough, Brehm indicates he did when he says JFK was leaning forward when struck. Here’s a snip from the FBI report which I bolded and underlined for emphasis:



Here’s a snip from Brehm’s account on 11/24/63 as indicated in the FBI report:

After the President's automobile had rounded the corner into Houston Street, he picked up his five-year-old son and ran across the grass from Main Street over to the downhill curved portion of Elm Street which leads from Houston Street to the Stemmons Expressway. He and his son stood right at the curb on the grass and saw the President's car take a wide swing as it turned left from Houston Street into Elm Street.

When the President's automobile was very close to him and he could see the President's face very well, the President was seated, but was leaning forward when he stiffened perceptibly at the same instant what appeared to be a rifle shot sounded. According to BREHM, the President seemed do to stiffen and come to a pause when another shot sounded and the President appeared to be badly hit in the head. BREHM said when the President was hit by the second shot, he could notice the President's hair fly up, and then roll over to his side, as Mrs. KENNEDY was apparently pulling him in that direction.

BREHM said that a third shot followed and that all three shots were relatively close together. BREHM stated that he was in military service and he has had experience with bolt-action rifles, and he expressed the opinion that the three shots were fired just about as quickly as an individual can maneuver a bolt-action rifle, take aim, and fire three shots.



I think it is remarkable that Brehm provided these details shortly after the assassination (before the WC provided this type of detail in their report, or even existed). It is difficult for me to discern, but Don Roberdeaux’ map indicates that JFK turned his head sharply to the left (he was looking to his right prior to this) just before he disappears behind the Stemmons sign (as seen in the Zapruder film). I have an idea that the left turn of JFK’s head might indicate that he noticed JBC trying to turn around to see JFK and so JFK might have been turning towards JBC and starting to lean forward to be able to communicate better with him when they were both hit. (These things happening quickly while they were obscured from view by the Stemmons sign.) Then as we see JFK emerge from behind the sign he could be “stiffening up” as Brehm describes. It is just an idea of what might have happened, I am not trying to say that it did happen this way.

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.

[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.