The Zapruder Film- The Grand Deception On Elm Street

The Zapruder Film- The Grand Deception On Elm Street

Or, How The Zapruder Film Was Rebuilt Into a Grand Deception

Z frame 157 exposes some techniques on how the Zapruder film was altered into a grand deception.

 

 

This frame has been marked with 8 red arrows indicating things that need to be looked at in order to understand how fraudulent the Zapruder Film is in its entirety. The things that are done in this frame exemplify the techniques used throughout the video. No. 3 is probably the most important but, we will take these in numerical order. There are other problems with this scene that are not discussed but, will be discussed later.

No. 1- This red arrow points to an area that is blocked out in the film. This area is just forward of the green lamppost. Starting from the very first frames this area cannot be seen. It is blocked by trees and the R L Thornton Freeway sign. The Thornton sign is to the rear of the lamppost perhaps 10 feet north and west of in the grassy area. At Z frame 61 we lose the Thornton sign and then it comes back in later frames.

After the Zapruder gap we begin to see imitation signs in front or, east of the lamppost. There are no signs there but, the imitation signs block the area from view. This goes on to Z frame 156 where is whole area is blocked. The area is still blocked in Z frame 157. What is there that we are not supposed to see? Who is there that we shouldn’t see? This is a good example of covering up what you don’t want seen.

No. 2- Is of particular interest in understanding how figures and data are moved from place to place and film to film by photo editors. The No. 2 arrow points to the Babushka Lady and the Lady in Blue. The two are discussed in the article The Babushka Lady- Fact or Fiction. If you have read that article you will understand these two were on the Northeast corner of Main and Houston Streets. The Muchmore Film and the Hughes film firmly placed them there.
The Lady in Blue’s blond hair is partially covered by a babushka. In some frames her hair is dark and in others light. Z frames 135 and 136 are a good example of her babushka covering light colored hair. There are actually 5 BB Ladies standing in Mannequin Row. This manipulation of dress or appearance is a standard editing technique.

Now, I am confused. That brings the number of BB Ladies up to 12 or 13?

This is really not the place for this but, here is a Skaggs photo showing another BB Lady.

 

 

What is the significance of this? This is to show you the BB Lady made it across the street while the motorcade was still on Houston. Mannequin Row is made up of some people who were not there at all. The BB Lady can’t be in Mannequin Row and on the NW and the NE corners of Houston Street and Main Street at the same time.

There will be argument over this suggesting these ladies in Mannequin Row have been identified and our known assassination witnesses. They are named as Betty Thornton and Jane Berry. But, in this frame we only have a backward view and cannot see their faces. And, we never get to see a forward view of all of these folks. Keep in mind there are 5 BB Ladies there.

We get to see who the black people are but, no where that I know of is its equivalent for the people further west toward the Stemmons sign. We don’t know who they are. Others have identified them based on I assume witness testimony. We don’t know who the black people are either. This is an Unger internet photo that I flipped to show the area more accurately and as it should be shown. The top part of this photo is Z frame 55 or something close to that.

 

 

The Betzner photo and the Willis slide 5 shows this area. The Willis Slide doesn’t show the people on the sidewalk well. Of all the people there none are wearing head scarves. Even the woman in Willis 5 standing near the Stemmons Freeway sign does not have a blue babushka. We don’t get to see the BB Lady or the Lady in Blue or other BB Ladies. Willis also shows there are less people there than in Z frame 154 or 157, about 10.

 

 

I can only count 4 Secret Service Agents in the security vehicle. Shouldn’t there be six? Where is George Hickey and Glen Bennet, the last two agents? Generally, in any scene you cannot see six agents in the car? Mostly, you can see 8 or 9 agents not 10. Unless you think the driver is an extra agent sitting in the 2nd row of seats, magnify the frame.

Then you will be able to see the steering wheel and dashboard instrumentation. The driver’s position behind the two Secret Service agents on the running board indicates this is a composite photo. Altgens 5 shows Clint Hill even with the driver and the 2nd agent behind the driver. In this photo the legs of Clint Hill are strange in appearance.

Z frame 157 shows 18 people from the Stemmons sign to the man in the hard hat. Here we get to see only 10 of the 18 people in Willis. The Betzner photo of the same scene shows about 9 people. It does not show the BB Lady with the blue scarf near the Stemmons sign. The Betzner photo shows what maybe 5 Secret Service agents, four visible and the driven not visible, in the vehicle.

 

 

As far as I can tell none of the women in this photo are wearing a head scarf. Particularly, none near the Stemmons freeway sign. In the Zapruder film there are five.

There is an interesting photo from the internet, labeled Robert Croft. Not much can be said about it because of its badly blurred in quality. It shows a group of people that are to the east of the group of black people photographed by Croft. Mannequin Row begins at the Stemmons Freeway sign and ends at the R L Thornton Freeway sign. East of the R L Thornton sign is a group of black people and east of them is the group that we see in the Croft photo. Croft’s photo of the black people is in color. This photo is black and white. This raises the question is this Croft or someone else? Is it a frame from the Wiegman film?

 

 

We can get a rough idea of the time of this photo by noting the Chevrolet vehicle is the number 12 car in the motorcade. We can see people looking down the street wondering what has happened. The woman in the street to the right with the babushka has had her high heels edited. We now have 15 BB Ladies. Why edit her high heels? Could it be because she is in the photo twice?

Can you find the Newman family in this photo? This is where they said they were before they changed that in later testimony. Gayle said she was holding the baby in her arms.

This discussion of the Croft, Willis, and Betzner photos indicates that one of the major photo editing techniques is changing the appearance of people by changing their clothing. The Lady in Blue in the Zapruder film, frames 275 to 296, has her clothing changed from a long sleeve coat or dress to a short sleeve dress. The short sleeves are one way to differentiate her from her other images in other places and films. The only problem is there are images of long sleeves and short sleeves in these frames. She has an extra set of bare arms painted below her real arms.

If you enlarge z frames 285 and 288 you will see that in z frame 288 an extra bare arm is painted just below her real arm. It is a neat trick you will never see without computers and frame enlargement. This bare arm is painted just enough in frames 275 to 296 so that your perception will catch bare arms for the Lady in Blue.

The best way to examine this issue or others is to download a copy of John Costella’s Zapruder frames so that you can enlarge and then take a look at particular frames for what is being said here.

 

 

No.3- Gives credence to the notion I have had on how the Zapruder Film was altered. We know that President Kennedy traveled down Main Street, turned onto Houston Street, and then traveled to the intersection of Elm and Houston Streets. From the intersection, the presidential vehicle then proceeded towards the Triple Underpass. That’s all we can say that is reliably truthful. Everything else needs to be scrutinized carefully for authenticity across all media.

The presidential limousine in No. 3 has the occupants cut out of the vehicle, its top part removed, and its passenger area painted over with multi-colored paint. There are no occupants visible in the vehicle. All you need to do here is insert new imagery taken from some other location where the president is well and alive.

There was a lot of film taken that day that you will never see. I am guessing well over 50 photographers if you count the military intelligence photographers and the more than 25 unknown but, photographed photographers seen on passenger side of the limousine along the motorcade route.

 

Z frame 157 magnified and cropped:

 

 

John Costella said the film is pretty much technically perfect with a few exceptions. In other words the “physics” works most of the time. John says the exceptions scream fraud. John doesn’t really get into content issues but, sticks to technical issues. Thanks goes to John since I am using his work on the Zapruder film.

John Costella said when he went to Dealey Plaza he was familiar with all the views of Dealey Plaza. He said he was surprised by seeing other views or angles of the Plaza that he had not seen before. He wasn’t clueless but, he didn’t quite put together what these other angles and views concerned.

What he was missing were views from other photographers that show the passenger side of the presidential vehicle on Main, Houston, and Elm Streets. Once the presidential limousine is on Main Street and begins to approach Houston Street you do not get any further views of the passenger side of the limousine. The Skaggs photos at the corner of Main and Houston are an exception. This, I believe is so you the viewer will not be confused by seeing something from Main or Houston Street portrayed on Elm Street in the alleged assassination kill zone where X marks the spot by the Grassy Knoll.

You can get this “pretty much technically perfect” film if you are not changing much and using the basic Zapruder or whoever’s film as a base. There may be as many as three films involved as one can see on the SW corner of Elm and Houston. You get this notion by comparing the Zapruder film with the Elsie Dorman film and 3 sets of women (who I believe are Mary Moorman and Jean Hill in disguise) visible there.

Then you can add extras in to enhance The Lone Gunman / Single Bullet Theory. Extras like Mary Moorman and Jean Hill taken from the Southwest corner of Elm and Houston and placed down in the area of the Grassy Knoll. You can take women from the Northeast corner of Main and Houston and place them in Mannequin Row. Do you see the possibilities?

People with distinctive appearances were moved about to different locations to act as markers for film editing of sections of the film. These distinctive characters such as the black man in the black apron are added to enhance the visual appearance of The Lone Gunman / Single Bullet Theory. These people with distinctive appearances seen in the various films help coordinate the activities in these films so that they don’t wander to far from the cover up script.

There were up to this point, 157 frames to edit. Think of these frames as 157 canvas panels about 10 X 20 inches or whatever size rectangular format these frames were magnified too. This is a lot of art and photo work. A team of people were responsible for this. So, they had to work from a script which would keep everyone on track. This coordination is where errors crept in.

No. 4, 5, and 6- The numbers exhibit poor artistry in Z frame 157. A related frame to Z frame 157 is Z frame 154. This frame shows these characters in better form. No. 4 shows a cartoon man about 8 feet tall weighing perhaps 400 pounds. In Z frame 154 he appears to be an actual person.

No. 5 is Phil Willis. A great deal will be said about Phil Willis in another discussion article. At the moment we will only concentrate on his giant, super leg which is anatomically impossible. In case you think shadows maybe involved check out the shadow of his leg on the pavement. Phil’s leg indicates he is a painted in character. Perhaps the photo insertion didn’t work well and he required artistic interpretation.

No. 6 is Robert Croft. We will skip the two women in black, even though one of the ladies, Mary Moorman, appears to have a thin stick leg. They will be discussed in other articles. Robert Croft is badly painted in the scene. If you look little Rosemary’s legs cuts his right leg in half. The photo editors didn’t quite superimpose their imagery correctly. To me, Robert Croft’s appearance in most frames appears to be painted.

Another thing about Robert Croft that has always bothered me is his location south of the intersection of Main and Houston on Houston Street. Could he make it from there to be on time to be at the Southwest corner of Elm Street in time to film the President on Elm Street?

Another point relating to Phil Willis and Robert Croft is they are not shown in the Elsie Dorman film on the SW corner of Elm while Linda and Rosemary Willis are. So, who took their photos? The two men identified as Pierce Allman and his friend are shown in the Elsie Dorman’s film in that location.

No. 7 concerns the 5th BB Lady with a blue scarf. She’s not shown in Willis 5 or Betzner’s photo. Robert Croft’s photo only shows the black people across the street and not the folks further down towards the Stemmons sign. Some people, Willis included, didn’t get there films and photos back from the FBI for years. Time was needed to coordinate various films and photos with others.

Willis 5 has the Secret Service men blocking the view of Mannequin Row and keeps one from being able to identify whose there. Coincidence or evidence manipulation! Then, I suppose we just have to take someone’s word based on witness testimony on who is there. Which brings up the question “Is witness testimony more reliable then the visual record”? There are too many examples of witness intimidation and evidence tampering by the FBI. There are far too many examples of that.

No. 8 concerns the security detail for Vice-President Lyndon Johnson. This vehicle is about in the position of where it is shown in Altgens 6. From its location in Z frame 154 it will be there is a second of less. This would put the security detail vehicle at about Z frame 170 where the security detail vehicle matches the location in Altgens 6. This area is under tree cover and not available for shooting from the Sniper’s Nest.

Nearly everyone says that Altgens 6 is equivalent to Z frame 255 in location for the president. This is based on Jackie Kennedy placing her hand on Jack Kennedy’s arm. Z frame 255 is about where the location of this event occurs. Some claim earlier or some later.

It does matter if Z frame 150 or 170 or so is the true location for Altgens 6. The presidential limousine would likely be under some tree cover from the Sniper’s Nest and allegedly Oswald shooting anyone. Can’t have that! President Kennedy must be located where he can he shot from the Sniper’s Nest and not earlier. But, it really doesn’t matter like so many other things in Zapruder you can’t count on any one particular thing being correct in which you can make an inference from it to something else.

No. 8A concerns another problem. The Vice-Presidents security detail vehicle is a Mercury Monterey Breezeway Design 54A 4 door sedan. Like the one shown below.

 

 

There are minor design differences such as the vents in the front fender.

There are a couple of things to notice here. First, the front wheel well slopes downward to the rear in the rear part. Secondly, the rear of the top has a wide slanting section in which a power window is housed. It is much wider than the front side vent window. Third there is a side vent window in the front.
In Z frame 157 we see that some editor / joker has mated the top part of the vehicle facing backwards to the bottom part of the vehicle facing forwards. This is better seen in Z frame 159.

I call this the Johnny Cash car. You know the old tune where the car gets assembled one piece at a time.

 

 

This frame has the bottom of the vehicle going north on Houston and the top of the car going south on Houston Street. My memory is hazy here. I think Jack White pointed this out long ago. You can tell it is the bottom because of the rear slanting wheel well. You can tell the top is in the wrong direction because you cannot see a side vent window. The part masquerading as the front shows the rear power window. The side support is much thicker than the support for the front in the area of the side vent window.

Can you believe that? How dumb? You know what is even dumber, check out Z frame 166? You have in that frame two back parts of the top of the vehicle on display. One back part of the top is pointing north on Houston and a 2nd back part of the top is pointing south on Houston in the same vehicle. I couldn’t make this up. There are people displayed in this whacky car.

 

 

Z frame 159 also tells you that the Johnson Security Vehicle, with its exaggerated perspective in Altgens 6 is also a fraud and an insert in the photo, Altgens 6. The vehicle seen in Z frame 159 and the vehicle in Altgens 6 are within feet of being in the same position. The presidential limo is about even with the R. L. Thornton sign and before the Stemmons Freeway sign. It looks like you will need to travel 60 or so feet to be in the Z frame 255 position.

I can’t believe that people have not seen this in 54 years. It tells me that people are not looking at things critically but, just accepting what other people tell them. Maybe, I shouldn’t be so hard on folks. Even with looking for oddities, I don’t know how many times I have looked at frame 157 until this just popped out. I wonder what’s going to pop up next and where?

It is possible these kind of things were placed into the Zapruder film in order to nullify the film. This is in case this film was used against one of the conspirators. Someone could point out “Hey, look at this!” and the film would be judged a fake and not allowed as evidence in court.
Most of the media I am working with from Dealey Plaza should never be allowed in court or used for any serious scientific work. All of the major films and photos one uses are in some way or form faked or a part has been faked. These are:

1.) Abraham Zapruder Film
2.) Mary Moorman’s Polaroid
3.) Altgens photos 5, 6, and 7
4.) Marie Muchmore Film
5.) Orvville Nix Film
6.) Charles Bronson Film
7.) Mark Bell Film
8.) John Martin Film
9.) Robert Hughes Film

There are other films like Elsie Dorman and Patsy Paschall I feel have edited. And, let’s not forget the Backyard Photos. The AMIPA film which shows the motorcade on Main Street I am not so sure about.

So, what’s the point? The Zapruder film is a fraud in part and in whole. It should not be viewed seriously or used for any legimate purpose except to point out its fraudulent aspect