+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-Deep-Politics-Forum)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-JFK-Assassination)
+--- Thread: Nix Film (/Thread-Nix-Film)
Nix Film - Tracy Riddle - 23-06-2014
Peter Lemkin Wrote:The man in black certainly vanishes; then the woman in tan suddenly appears.
Peter, that's because we're watching a loop of the same segment of the film. The tan woman is at the beginning, and the man in black is at the end. Then it stops and instantly starts over again.
Nix Film - Tracy Riddle - 23-06-2014
It does look like the Connallys, Greer and Kellerman are all lurching forward suddenly, which is consistent with the car briefly stopping.
The back-and-to-the-left movement of JFK is really visible here.
Nix Film - Bob Prudhomme - 23-06-2014
So, any comments from anyone about the Mary Ann Moorman interview?
Nix Film - Bob Prudhomme - 23-06-2014
Tracy Riddle Wrote:It does look like the Connallys, Greer and Kellerman are all lurching forward suddenly, which is consistent with the car briefly stopping.
The back-and-to-the-left movement of JFK is really visible here.
Odd that Jackie and JFK are not lurching forward at the same time as the other four occupants of the limo, wouldn't you say? Especially if one considers that JFK is virtually comatose at this point, and Jackie appears to be perched on the edge of her seat.
Nix Film - Lauren Johnson - 23-06-2014
Quote:Odd that Jackie and JFK are not lurching forward at the same time as the other four occupants of the limo, wouldn't you say? Especially if one considers that JFK is virtually comatose at this point, and Jackie appears to be perched on the edge of her seat.
Even if, for example, Jackie had a foot braced hard against the seat in front, her upper body would have lurched forward. I say Kellerman made a "business decision" and ducked.
Nix Film - Bob Prudhomme - 23-06-2014
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Quote:Odd that Jackie and JFK are not lurching forward at the same time as the other four occupants of the limo, wouldn't you say? Especially if one considers that JFK is virtually comatose at this point, and Jackie appears to be perched on the edge of her seat.
Even if, for example, Jackie had a foot braced hard against the seat in front, her upper body would have lurched forward. I say Kellerman made a "business decision" and ducked.
If you watch one of the enhanced versions of the Zapruder film, you will see that Kellerman and Greer rebound from "ducking" almost as fast as they "duck". Does this seem normal? If you felt you were under fire and ducked, would you not stay down for at least a few seconds, or until you felt it was safe to come back up?
Nix Film - Drew Phipps - 23-06-2014
I personally think that Mary M, bless her heart, is just wrong about the order and sequence of the shots, and the movement of the limo? If I recall she also said something about hearing conversation from the car, which I suspect is much her own thoughts as anything she heard, inasmuch as the car moved off pretty fast afterwards. Her story does have the benefit of being fairly consistent for 50 years.
Regional note: In the south part of the US, you can say anything bad about any female, so long as you include the phrase, "bless her heart," and get away with it.
Nix Film - Bob Prudhomme - 23-06-2014
Drew, have you or any of the others read James Altgens' testimony to the WC? There are things in there which would go a long ways to support Mary Ann Moorman's recollection of the shot sequence and timing.
Just because a witness's recollection of events contradicts the official story does not mean they are automatically:
a) Mistaken
b) Confused
c) Lying
d) Seeking fifteen minutes of fame
e) Seeking to get rich quick
f) "Mis-remembering" (my personal favourite)
g) Not professionally qualified to make an observation or understand what was observed
h) All of the above
Nix Film - Lauren Johnson - 23-06-2014
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:Drew, have you or any of the others read James Altgens' testimony to the WC? There are things in there which would go a long ways to support Mary Ann Moorman's recollection of the shot sequence and timing.
Just because a witness's recollection of events contradicts the official story does not mean they are automatically:
a) Mistaken
b) Confused
c) Lying
d) Seeking fifteen minutes of fame
e) Seeking to get rich quick
f) "Mis-remembering" (my personal favourite)
g) Not professionally qualified to make an observation or understand what was observed
h) All of the above
Another possibility is the use of silencers and other means to influence the perception of the shots fired.
Bob, would you mind terribly putting up a link to your favored enhanced version of the Z film so we're on the same page?
Nix Film - Drew Phipps - 23-06-2014
I'm not suggesting that contradicting the "official" story means anything at all about a person. Based on what I've read, seen, heard, and studied for the last 50 years (not full time), and logic and common sense, I come to a different answer than Mary Moorman.