The "Other" Zapruder Film

[Bernice Moore]

hey myra i got logged in again...below is some information from rich himself, god bless him, that he posted in reply to questions re the other film from a pretending neive pot stirring member imo.i have clipped some of the questionaires replies and his name, from such.....the replies shown posted to him were not by the man who was asking the questions but by a third party member..

aug.17th, 2006

The first thing to realize about analyzing the "other" film is that while I
viewed it on 3 occasions, I never had possession of it and unlike the Z film
I could not watch it in slo-mo or frame-by-frame. Certain things stand out and
are etched in my mind, but it has been at least 10 years since I last saw it.
The 2 head shots were nearly, but not exactly, simultaneous. First the
shot to the rear and then the tangential shot to the temple.

I do not recall much about the background as I was focused on the main
characters.

aug 21..2006 rich

Try not to be naive. You should ask why the extant Z film became
so readily available through numerous outlets and on various media.



I would gladly show the film -- but I never possessed it. Collectively we
know that at least 2 of the major TV networks have the film: CBS and
NBC.

But don't under-estimate just how dangerous a property it is. It is
one piece of evidence which lays the cover-up bare. It shows
triangulation of fire; surgically accurate shooting; participation of
various co-conspirators; complicity of the Secret Service; and
proof positive that the government has been lying about the
events for 43 years and counting.

One individual living in Europe allowed a researcher the opportunity to
view the film on multiple occasions. That researcher set out to
convince that person to allow a copy to be made of it. That person
felt his life was in jeopardy over that film. But the researcher began
to wear the guy down and he was considering making a copy.

A short time later while the researcher was travelling abroad the guy
with the film was found murdered. The guy was retired from French
Intelligence.

As I stated previously, if you haven't seen the film you are well within
your right to reserve judgement until such time that you can. But
try not to question its existence. A fair number of people have seen
it, some more than once, and no two ever saw it at the same time
in the same place.

Everything isn't about money. Sure that film could bring a lot of money
but would you risk your life to market it??

Rich;

this "other film" (as it has come
to be known) is certainly not the only missing evidence in the case. What about Beverly Oliver's
or Gordon Arnold's films? What about the Harper fragment? Where is that evidence,
Did it never exist, because we don't know more about it or can't see it? C'mon now! Are
you studying the same case that we are? There's also plenty of disappeared evidence in the
RFK case. Why has none of it surfaced? Because it was either destroyed, or because it is
being held as souveneirs by very wealthy individuals involved either directly or tagentially in those
crimes. Did you ever get to tour H.L.Hunt's mansions and view his private collections?
I didn't think so. The sicko's that still possess whatever missing evidence still exists don't need
the money. Why would they, when they're running the friggin world?!
----
other member's reply.

So how in the world can you write:
Quote
Yet we get no particulars on who showed the film, where it came from what was the camera angle, etc.

As for who showed the film, just curious when you go to the movies, do you
insist on getting the projectionist's name before you watch the film??

Over a number of years I have answered lots of questions asked of me
about the film.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2006, 12:38 AM by admin » Logged .

__/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

Rich DellaRosa

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains,
however improbable, must be the truth!"
-- A.C. Doyle: "A Study In Scarlet" (1887)



Perhaps in another thread we can start listing all the evidence that has
disappeared, but for which we have strong evidence that it once existed
in the JFK, MLK, and/or RFK cases. I would start off with those items that
I listed earlier, but I would not be suprised it we could collectively grow that
list to some 50-100 items. So what is the purpose of singling out
this other film as being questionable as to its past or present existence?
----
other members reply