Case Closed: a letter to Gerald Posner (re: Kennedy assassination)

AMNation.com ^ | 11/23/03 | Lawrence Auster

[nolu chan]

EYEWITNESS FROM PARKLAND AND BETHESDA IDENTIFY THE LOCATION WHERE THEY OBSERVED A MASSIVE BLOWOUT TO THE BACK OF THE PRESIDENT'S HEAD.

TOP ROW (left to right)

Beverly Oliver: "The whole back of his head went flying out the back of the car."

Phillip Willis: "It took the back of his head off."

Marilyn Willis: "A red 'halo' [was] coming out the back of his head."

Ed Hoffman: The rear of his head was gone, blasted outward."

Dr. Robert McClelland: "It was in the right back part of the head -- very large .. a portion of the cerebellum fell out on the table while we were doing the tracheotomy."

SECOND ROW

Dr. Paul Peters: "... right there, occipital parietal."

Dr. Kenneth Salyer: "The wound extended into the parietal area."

Dr. Charles Carrico: "There was a large -- quite a large -- defect about here [pointing] on his skull."

Dr. Richard Delaney: "It was up in this area."

Dr. Charles Crenshaw: "The wound was the size of a baseball."

THIRD ROW

Dr. Ronald Jones: "My impression was there was a wound in this area of the head." When shown the faked autopsy X-ray, Parkland Hospital's Dr. Jones said, "There was no damage to the face that was visible... The X-Rays are incompatible with the photographs which show no injury to the face."

Nurse Audrey Bell: "There was a massive wound at the back of his head."

Theron Ward: "It was right back here."

Aubrey Rike: "You could feel the sharp edges of the bone at the edge of the hole in the back of his head."

Frank O'Neill: "...a massive wound in the right rear."

BOTTOM ROW

Jerrol Custer: "From the top of his head, almost to the base of the skull, you could see where that part was gone."

Paul O'Connor: "[There was] an open area all the say across into the rear of the brain."

Floyd Reibe: "...a big gaping hole in the back of the head."

[angkor]

For those who say that the Zapruder film shows the fatal shot came from the front have not had much, or any shooting experience - nor do they understand the energy of a bullet passing through something. Plus, I have been a recreational shooter for over 35 years.

ummm... Lifetime Member, NRA.

[Az Joe]

Man, I wish I had been in Dealy Plaza that day. I would never have had to work another day in my life.

I'd have just gone around the country giving speeches and seminars about how I saw a blind guy, with a German Shepard on the grassy knoll, with a white cane, that turned into a sniper rifle and having my picture taken with fans, for a fee of course.

[BigBobber]

Right.

Now go to the Zapruder film and you will see that every one of these witnesses was mistaken. It's as clear as day. Why rely on notoriously undependable eyewitnesses when we have a MOVIE of what happened?

[nolu chan]

Now go to the Zapruder film and you will see that every one of these witnesses was mistaken. It's as clear as day. Why rely on notoriously undependable eyewitnesses when we have a MOVIE of what happened?

In 1976 it was revealed that the Zapruder film was in the CIA National Photo Interpretation Center within days of the assassination, possibly on the night of the assassination. I consider the veracity of all those hospital workers more dependable than whatever comes out of the CIA photo lab. But that's just me. I'm sure some folks swear by the CIA photo lab.

We have a movie.
We do not necessarily have a movie of what happened.
We do not have a chain-of-custody for that movie.
What is your offer of proof that the movie is authentic and unaltered?

It should be noted that the Zapruder film not only disagrees with all those eyewitnesses, including hospital staff and autopsy doctors and witnesses, it also disagrees with other images of what should be identical scenes.

For example, frame Z-369 and the Nix film very closely coincide and each shows Jackie climbing out of the seat toward the rear of the limo. The people in the background appear different in quantity and attire. At least one film would appear to be phoney.

WHY are all the medically trained personnel at Dallas and Bethesda considered "notoriously undependable?"

If ALL the eyewitnesses, including the attending physicians, nurses, and hospital staff, as well as the people at the autopsy are notoriously undependable, WHY is the Z-film, after passing through the CIA photo lab, considered notoriously reliable?

The most reliable evidence is CE-399. No bullet ever smashed a bunch of bones and ended up looking like that one.

Why depend on a movie of dubious authenticity when we have PHYSICAL EVIDENCE less susceptible to tampering?

We have the aforementioned magic bullet.

We have the jacket which contained, per WR p.92, "a roughly circular hole approximately one fourth of an inch in diameter on the rear of the coat, 5 3/8 inches below the top of the collar and 1 3/4 inches to the right of the center back seam of the coat.

We have the shirt which, per WR p.92, "contained a hole on the back side 5 3/4 inches below the top of the collar and 1 1/8 inches to the right of the middle of the back of the shirt."

From Crossfire, by Jim Marrs, pp. 68-9.

The American public finally got the opportunity to view the Zapruder film only because of the Clay Shaw trial in New Orleans during 1967-69. During that turbulent trial (See THE GARRISON INVESTIGATION), New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison attempted to prove there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy and that New Orleans Trade Mart director Clay Shaw was a member of that conspiracy.

As part of Garrison's attempt to prove the existence of a conspiracy, he subpoenaed the Zapruder film from Time-Life Corp. Time-Life fought this subpoena all the way to the Supreme Court, which finally ruled that the corporation had to comply with the legal subpoena. Time-Life grudgingly turned over to Garrison a somewhat blurry, copy of the film - but that was enough. Soon, thanks to the copying efforts of Garrison's staff, bootleg Zapruder films were in the hands of several assassination researchers. Finally in March 1975, a copy of the film was aired nationally about midnight on ABC's "Goodnight America". At long last, the American public was able to see for themselves the assassination of their 35th President.

Within a few years clearer copies of the Zapruder film became available to the public. From the beginning, researchers have used the Zapruder film as the cornerstone of assassination evidence - a virtual time clock of the events in Dealey Plaza based on the known average camera speed of 18.3 frames per second. However, today the Zapruder film itself has been called into question.

In 1971, author David Lifton was permitted to view an exceptionally good quality copy of the Zapruder in Time-Life Los Angeles office. He said the rear of Kennedy's head in the critical moments following the head shot appeared to have been "blacked out" and he discovered "splices on the film which had never been mentioned by Time-Life."

His suspicion that the film may have been tampered with by persons with access to sophisticated photographic equipment was heightened in 1976 with the release of CIA item 450. This group of documents, pried from the Agency by a Freedom of Information suit, indicated the Zapruder film was at the CIA's National Photo Interpretation Center (NPIC) possibly on the night of the assassination and "certainly within days of the assassination". One of the documents tells of the existence of either a negative or a master positive of the film and calls for the production of four prints - one "test print" and three duplicates. Interestingly, this number of prints is exactly what existed in Dallas the day after the assassination - one original and three copies.

Lifton wrote:

"In my view, previously unreported CIA possession of the Zapruder film compromised the film's value as evidence: (1) the forward motion of Kennedy's head, for one frame preceding frame 313 might be the result of an altered film, and if that was so, it made the theory of a forward high-angle shot...completely unnecessary; (2) an altered film might also explain why the occipital area (of Kennedy's head), where the Dallas doctors saw a wound, appears suspiciously dark, whereas a large wound appears on the forward, right-hand side of the head, where the Dallas doctors saw no wound at all."

Photographic analyst and researcher Jack White concurs with Lifton, stating he detected evidence of photographic retouching in some Zapruder frames.

If the CIA indeed tampered with the Zapruder film after the assassination, this piece of evidence - long considered one of the best pieces of evidence - becomes less credible. And like so much else in the assassination case, it is the suppression and deception involved with the Zapruder film which may eventually reveal more than the film itself.

[Maestroh]

You know what is amusing about the "conspiracy buffs?" They never stop to think how ridiculous some things they say are. While some of them ask good questions, most of them simply change the subject to other things.

For example:

if the CIA was going to do this, don't you think they'd have had enough sense to have the Zapruder film blocked or to say, "No cameras?" Jeez, that's ridiculous.

As far as some other things:

1) Those who spout about the "magic bullet" have never done their homework. The WC did not say this is the linchpin of the entire thing. They talked about probabilities. You really need to read it before you say this stuff.

2) David Lifton concocted a "stolen body theory" way back in the 70s that Wecht dismissed as "crap," so I wouldn't put much stock in him. He also came out with the "fake trees" theory, which only goes to show that you CAN fool some of the people ALL of the time.

3) Quote: "The most reliable evidence is CE-399. No bullet ever smashed a bunch of bones and ended up looking like that one."

You've been reading too many Jim Garrison note cards. The bullet DIDN'T hit a bunch of bones from close range. It hit MUSCLE and tore through it, sir.

The final question, of course, is this:

Since all physical evidence that points to anyone points to Oswald, please give me - by name - the person who the other evidence points to. If your theory is correct, it shouldn't be that difficult.

[nolu chan]

[nc] 3) Quote: "The most reliable evidence is CE-399. No bullet ever smashed a bunch of bones and ended up looking like that one."

[m] You've been reading too many Jim Garrison note cards. The bullet DIDN'T hit a bunch of bones from close range. It hit MUSCLE and tore through it, sir.

Warren Commission Report, page 56, "The fracture was set, and a cast was applied with some traction utilized."

Must have been a fractured muscle. What is truly amazing is how they put a cast on that fractured muscle.

[thesummerwind]

THEY blew his head off....period.

[thesummerwind]

What is truly amazing is how they put a cast on that fractured muscle.

LOL!

Sometimes I think the government boys hire a number of these Warren Commission promoters to monitor websites like this to challenge folks who know that Oswald wasn't the true story.

It's amazing, they never go away. Steady work. At least they've managed to still keep about 10% of the population on the 'Pristine Bullet/Arlen Sphincter Train'.

Oswald was either a patsy, as he suggested, or he was a minimal player.

Mr. X

[StoneLaughter]

Well, I'm neither a conspiracist nor a Warren supporter; I'm just really interested in it. I viewed the Zapruder film (and the frames link shown above). I agree that a first shot hit Kennedy in the throat, and a second hit Conally as he turned to the right; that much is clear from the frames. The frames, however, seem to show a "zoomed in" view which omits some critical detail. Watch the film, at the point when the third shot hits Kennedy's head. The debris from Kennedy's head (excuse the graphic detail) very clearly blows FORWARDS. Now watch it again, but watch CONNALLY. As Kennedy takes his fatal hit, Connally very clearly takes a hit from behind; bouncing off the seat in front of him and slumping into his Wife's lap. See this snap of film to see what I'm talking about. This conclusively proves to me that Kennedy was shot from BEHIND. If he had been shot from in front, the BACK of his head would have blown off. Also, Connally would not have moved the way he did. I can only conclude that Kennedy's movement upwards and backwards (clear in the film) results from some sort of muscular spasm in his legs and abdomen; perhaps understandable considering the brain trauma.

[StoneLaughter]

Oh, and was the technology available in 1963 to effectively turn this around from a film of a shot from the front, to a film of a shot from the rear?