The Head Moved Forward

[claviger]

Z312 - Z313
https://www.keepandshare.com/photo/487192/jfk?ifr=y
https://www.keepandshare.com/userpics/r/i/c/k/off/2013-11/sm/zapruder_film_frame_312_313-82285670.jpg?ts=1384913643

Analysis Of JFK Zapruder Film Frames 312 and 313
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0d6LG27hQM

The headshot: "Back and to the the left"
http://users.skynet.be/mar/Eng/Headshot/back&left-eng.htm
http://users.skynet.be/mar/Headshot/Images/Closeup_312-313.gif

[Anthony Marsh]

EVERYONE moved forward. Because the limo suddenly slowed down. It's
called inertia. I guess you never studied that in college.

[Grizzlie Antagonist]

JFK's head is unquestionably driven forward by the impact at Z313.

[claviger]

You were proved wrong about that a long time ago. Nothing has changed.
We can plainly see only the President's moves forward, not Jackie and not
the Connally's. You inertia scam is busted again.

[claviger]

We can plainly see only the President's head and shoulders move forward,

[Anthony Marsh]

False. What drove everyone else's heads forwards?

[Anthony Marsh]

How come you never even tried to rebut my essay?


Circumstantial Evidence of a Head Shot From The Grassy Knoll
(c) - Copyright 1993 by W. Anthony Marsh
Presented at The Third Decade conference June 18-20, 1993

As much as we would like to have direct evidence of a head shot from
the grassy knoll, such evidence may be missing, inconclusive, or suspect.
However, there may be a body of circumstantial evidence which would
indicate that the fatal shot which struck President Kennedy's head at
Z-313 came from the grassy knoll. This paper will not present conclusive
proof of a head shot from the grassy knoll, but it will cite examples of
circumstantial evidence which strongly suggest that the head shot came
from the grassy knoll. Some of the examples are well known, but need to be
reexamined.
The Zapruder film is the most well-known evidence of the head shot.
Various studies and interpretations of it have been made. Some studies,
such as the one done by Itek, have analyzed the movement of President
Kennedy's head around the time of the head shot. They note that President
Kennedy's head moves forward significantly from Z-312 to Z-313 and cite
that as proof of a shot hitting the head from behind. What they and
everyone else has failed to do is analyze the movements of all the
occupants of the rear compartment of the limousine, including the
Connallys. That is what I have done.
My analysis of the movements of the Kennedys and the Connallys is
not, unfortunately, based on the same reproductions of the Zapruder film
as used in other studies, due to cost considerations. I made measurements
in 1/60th of an inch increments on a photocopy set of prints from Zapruder
frames 312 to 321, as reproduced by Robert Cutler in his dividend to The
Grassy Knoll Gazette of X-79. Bob's reference line is drawn through the
center of the window knob. I made all measurements starting at the front
edge of his reference line. However, I noticed that the distance from the
reference line to the rollbar is not constant. This means that we can not
use unadjusted measurements from these prints to calculate precise
positions, but can estimate relative movements. This may be due to a
variety of factors, such as variations in printing and copying each frame,
changes in perspective, mismeasurements, or blurring. Some Zapruder frames
are too blurred to allow accurate measurements. Each measurement of Nellie
Connally's position is to the front edge of her hair. Each measurement of
John Connally's position is to the front edge of his forehead. Each
measurement of Jackie Kennedy's position is to the front edge of her
pillbox hat. Each measurement of JFK's position is to the edge of his hair
at the rear of his head. All measurements were lined up against the chrome
strip in the background for better contrast. Be sure to remember that
increasing measurements for the Connallys represent forward motion, while
increasing measurements for the Kennedys represent rearward motion. Notice
the direction and amount of movement of each person listed in Figure 1.
Between Z-312 and Z-313, all the occupants of the rear compartment of the
limo moved forward by about the same amount. Unless all four were hit by
bullets (a practical impossibility), their forward movement must be caused
by something else. The most likely cause is inertia due to the limousine
having suddenly slowed down. Dr. Luis Alvarez noted in his study [1] that
the average velocity of the limousine going down Elm Street sharply
decreased just before the head shot. Some researchers have theorized that
Secret Service agent Bill Greer jammed on the brakes or took his foot off
the accelerator. Whatever he did, the limousine very quickly changed from
an average velocity of about 12 MPH to about 8 MPH just before the head
shot. Obeying the law of inertia, passengers in the limo were thrust
forward in relation to their previous positions in the limousine. Further
evidence of this effect is the fact that the Connallys continued to move
forward while President Kennedy was being thrust backwards. I have not
done a similar analysis of previous Zapruder frames to pinpoint the start
of the occupants' forward movement, so I would urge others to do so
themselves, in order to verify my results and observations. Figure 1.





Z-frame rollbar Nellie Connally Jackie JFK
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
x/60" Z312 136 106 77 44 159
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 9 forward 5 forward 10 forward 6 forward 7
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z313 145 111 87 38 152
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 2 forward 2 forward 1 rearward 1 forward 1
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z314 147 113 88 39 151
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 4 0 forward 4 forward 6 rearward 6
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z315 151 113 92 33 157
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 3 forward 2 forward 1 rearward 1 rearward 9
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z316 148 115 93 34 166
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 2 forward 2 forward 7 forward 4
rearward 11
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z317 150 117 100 30 177
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 3 forward 5 forward 2 rearward 5
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z319 153 122 NA 28 182
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 0 forward 4 forward 3
rearward 14
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z320 153 126 130 25 196
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
difference 4 rearward 1 forward 1
----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
Z321 157 NA NA 26 195


Perhaps the most controversial evidence produced by the House Select
Committee on Assassinations would be the acoustical studies. In my
opinion, the conclusion that there was a conspiracy should not rest
entirely on the acoustical studies. But the acoustical studies are useful
for establishing the time between shots. All times are measured in seconds
after the microphone became stuck open for several minutes. BBN found 4
shots on the tape, 3 of which came from the TSBD at 137.70, 139.27, and
145.61 respectively. The grassy knoll shot was found by Weiss and
Aschkenasy to be recorded at 144.90. There was a fifth set of impulses
which was rejected by HSCA as being a false alarm at 140.32. I have looked
at the waveforms more closely to try to determine when the muzzle blast of
each shot was recorded, to a greater degree of accuracy. My best estimate
for each shot is 137.702, 139.268, 140.339, 144.895, and 145.608. You can
get a general idea of the spacing between shots by subtracting one time
from another. But there is an additional variable which must be taken into
account. BBN found that the recorder used that day was running about 5%
slow, so all times must be multiplied by about 1.05 in order to restore
the original spacing. A more accurate correction factor might be borrowed
from the work which W&A did on the grassy knoll shot. They found that a
correction factor of 1.043 produced the best fit for echo delays compared
to their predicted model. Another possible corroboration for the 1.043
correction factor is the 'bell' sound found by BBN at 152.5. Although Todd
Vaughan believes that it is only electrical interference, if we can
determine its true frequency, we can derive the most accurate correction
factor. That holds true for many other sounds on the tape, such as car
horns, tire squeals, police sirens, etc. BBN found that the 'bell' sound
had a nominal pitch of 420 Hz. This is close to the note A, which is
usually 440 Hz. If the sound is really a bell, it might have been tuned to
A=440. We do not know for sure what type of bell it was. Most people have
assumed that it is a carillon bell, but it could be a train bell, a ship's
bell, or a victory bell on a college campus. There are a couple of other
possible tunings which would produce a correction factor close to 1.043.
If the bell had been tuned using a mean-tone temperament scale, it might
have a real pitch of 438.075 Hz. Dividing that by 420 would give us a
correction factor of 1.0430357. If the bell had been tuned to an old
English standard of A=438.9, dividing that by 420 would give us a
correction factor of 1.045. Applying the correction factor to the spacing
between shots as found by BBN will give us the true spacing between muzzle
blasts picked up by McLain's cycle. If we want to then translate those
into Zapruder frames, we must multiply each interval by 18.3 frames.
Figure 2 is a rough approximation of how many frames there were between
all 5 muzzle blasts.
Matching these times to the Zapruder film is more complicated and
depends on making several real-world assumptions such as the speed of the
bullets. We can be fairly confident in ruling out the first three shots as
matching the head shot at Z-313, as such a match would place the first
shot after Z-255, when we can clearly see in Altgens 1-6 that President
Kennedy and Governor Connally have already been hit. The HSCA matched the
last shot with Z-313, because their medical evidence indicated that the
head shot came from behind. My alternative matchup tests the idea that the
head shot came from the grassy knoll.



Figure 2.
origin tape time spacing *1.043 *18.3 Z-frame Z-frame
TSBD 137.702 162 176
> 1.566 1.633 29.89
TSBD 139.268 192 206
> 1.071 1.117 20.44
TSBD 140.339 212 226
> 4.556 4.752 86.96
Knoll 144.895 299 313
> 0.713 0.744 13.61
TSBD 145.608 313 327

The first problem we notice with the HSCA version is that the first
shot is much too early. No other evidence supports a shot that early and
clearly President Kennedy was not hit by a bullet close to that frame. The
first shot was probably a miss. The HSCA places the hit to JFK's back at
around Z190- 192. The problem with that is that we can see President
Kennedy in the Zapruder film during the range Z-190 to Z-210. He does not
yet appear to be reacting to being hit by a bullet. There is absolutely no
indication that Governor Connally was struck by a bullet at about that
time, nor at about Z- 210 to Z-212, if we accept the fifth shot which HSCA
rejected.
My matchup would indicate a hit to JFK's back somewhere in the range
of Z-206 to Z-210, and a hit to Connally's back somewhere in the range of
Z-226 to Z-230. I believe this is more consistent with previous studies of
the Zapruder film and eyewitness testimony. If there is some way to prove
exactly when either President Kennedy or Governor Connally received their
back wounds, that would force us to choose between the HSCA version and
mine, regardless of other evidence.
Just as Altgens 1-6 helps us eliminate the first three shots as
matches with Z-313, it may also help us eliminate the last shot from the
TSBD as matching Z-313. Everyone is familiar with the fact that CE350
shows a crack on the windshield and that it is not seen in Altgens 1-6,
but is seen in Altgens 1-7. There has been some doubt about which shot
from which direction caused that crack. I believe that I am the first
person to notice something in CE350 which would resolve the doubt. If you
look carefully at CE350, you will notice that the back of the rearview
mirror is dented, but you can see that it was not dented in Altgens 1-6.
This damage was caused by a bullet fragment which struck the windshield
from the inside and ricochetted into the rearview mirror. Many people
believe this fragment came from the head shot, which would been fired from
the TSBD. I tend to feel that all the damage to the limousine, consisting
of the crack in the windshield, dented rearview mirror and dented chrome
topping, was done by the same shot. If we can find evidence which
pinpoints when that damage was done, we may be able to show that it came
several frames after Z-313. Photographic enhancement of the Zapruder film,
Muchmore film or the Bronson film might reveal that the windshield was not
cracked by Z-314. If that turns out to be true, then the last shot from
the TSBD must have missed JFK's head and hit the windshield. In turn, that
would mean that the fatal head shot came from the grassy knoll. I
seriously doubt that there is any photograph which would show exactly when
the rearview mirror was dented, but perhaps some as-yet-undiscovered
photograph would show when the chrome topping was dented. That dent could
only have been caused by a shot from behind the limo. If it was undented
at Z-314, that would prove that the head shot came from the grassy knoll.
Another factor which might influence our choosing the HSCA version
or mine would be the jiggle analysis of the Zapruder film. Even the HSCA
admitted that the jiggle analysis matched better when the grassy knoll
shot was lined up with Z-313. [2] Figure 3 compares the timing of the
impulses to the Zapruder film. The HSCA rejected the shot which is
indicated in brackets as being too fast for Oswald to have fired. The
jiggle analysis measured the amount of panning error by Zapruder. To
simply and clarify, I have put the groups into ascending order. The group
with the largest amount of blur is marked 'A', the second largest 'B',
etc. I have chosen the Hartmann figures to be representative, as his are
usually midway between Alvarez or Scott's figures. Zapruder's camera ran
at 18.3 frames per second on average.

Figure 3. Two comparisons of jiggle analysis to acoustical data
Frames Group
158-159 D
191-197 B Note that the start of a jiggle group may not
227 C coincide with the firing or impact of a bullet.
290-291 E In most cases, it takes several frames before
313-318 A1 Zapruder reacts to a stimulus.
331-332 A2

HSCA Z-# hit? origin jiggle Marsh Z-# hit? origin jiggle
137.70 161 miss TSBD D 137.702 179 miss TSBD VI#1 B
139.27 191 JFK/JBC TSBD B 139.268 209 JFK TSBD VI#1
[140.32] 140.339 230 Connally TSBD VI#10 C
144.90 297 miss knoll E 144.895 312.6 JFK knoll A1
145.61 312 JFK TSBD A1 145.608 328 Connally TSBD VI#1 A2


The jiggle analysis can not be used as absolute proof of when a shot
occurred, but it matches up better for the head shot from the grassy
knoll.
Could eyewitness testimony help resolve the question of which shot
hit what? Secret Service agent Clint Hill testified (2H144) that the last
shot he heard sounded as though it had hit some metal place. If he in fact
had heard the last shot from the TSBD hit the chrome topping, that would
not, in and of itself, prove that the TSBD shot missed JFK's head, as the
dent could have been caused by a fragment from the head shot. But it would
narrow the range during which the chrome topping was dented to between
Z-313 to Z-331 and make it more likely that the chrome topping was dented
at the same time that the windshield was cracked, rather than much earlier
as some have speculated.
On pages 126-129 of Six Seconds in Dallas, Josiah Thompson cites the
statements of several witnesses who thought that a shot came from the
grassy knoll. William Newman felt that he and his family were in the
direct path of gunfire. Given their position, it seems more likely that
the head shot came from behind the fence on the grassy knoll than from the
TSBD. Emmett Hudson, who was standing on the steps leading up to the
pergola, said that the shots sounded as if they came from behind him,
above his head and to his left. That would place the origin near the
fence. Zapruder felt that the head shot had come from behind him and
whistled past his right ear. Between these two witnesses and behind them
is the corner of the fence. W&A found a probable shockwave at 24 ms.
before the muzzle blast of the grassy knoll shot. Assuming the weapon was
aimed at the limousine, we can make a rough calculation of the velocity of
the bullet and the resultant angle of the shockwave. Although the
calculation for the decay of the shockwave is too difficult for me, a
rough calculation yielded an exit velocity of the bullet at about 1564.5
fps. This would create a shockwave of at least 45 degrees on either side
of the flightpath of the bullet. All three witnesses were within the cone
of that shockwave and would have felt it very strongly.
How can we know whether the weapon was aimed at the limousine? If it
had been aimed in some opposite direction, the open microphone would have
been outside the cone of the shockwave and thus the shockwave would not
have been recorded. Another indication of where the weapon was aimed can
be found in the statement that Sam Holland made to Josiah Thompson when he
was shown a very clear copy of the Moorman 2 Polaroid. He felt that the
viewpoint was looking right down the barrel of the gun. Given Mary
Moorman's position, the gun would have been aimed at the limousine. In
Moorman 2 we can see the head of a man peering over the fence, about 9
feet from the corner. Interestingly, this is the same spot where W&A
located the origin of the grassy knoll shot, unaware of the existence of
Moorman 2. In Moorman 2 we do not see a side view of any weapon as we
might expect if it was not aimed at the limo. Whoever this man was, he
moved from that position very quickly after the head shot. There is no one
there in later Zapruder frames or in the Stoughton photograph, taken
shortly after the head shot. The Stoughton photograph has never been
analyzed. The Warren Commission and the House Committee were unaware of
its existence. I believe that no one had ever studied it before I found it
at the JFK Library. Unfortunately, I do not have the resources to properly
analyze it and obviously the government will not, as it might reveal the
presence of a gunman on the grassy knoll. One independent researcher, Dale
Meyers, has done some computer analysis which suggests that there is a
person behind the fence, several feet to the right of the corner.
Many witnesses can be seen reacting to the shots in various films.
Some fell to the ground very quickly while others did not seem to realize
the danger. We would expect those witnesses closest to the gun on the
grassy knoll to react very quickly and dramatically to the shockwave
whizzing past them from the grassy knoll. One of the best films to observe
their reactions was taken by Marie Muchmore. In Muchmore frame 42 we can
see Hudson and his two companions on the steps leading up to the pergola.
They do not seem to be reacting to any gunshots. In frame 55 we can see
that two of the men are reacting. It seems inconceivable that these men
would not have reacted to the sound of a shockwave coming from so close
behind them. If the grassy knoll shot was the miss before the head shot,
we would expect to see these men react before the head shot. The fact that
they did not react until after the head shot would seem to indicate that
the head shot came from the grassy knoll.
Based on the circumstantial evidence we have now, I believe it is
more likely that the head shot came from the grassy knoll. Existing
evidence can and should be examined further. More information can be
gleaned from existing data by novel analyses. The release of withheld data
could provide new clues and allow us to verify certain methods, such as
the acoustical studies. I urge other researchers to look for new evidence
and perform new analyses.

------
1. W. Peter Trower, ed., "Discovering Alvarez", (Chicago: The University
Press, 1987), pp. 210-224. Also HSCA Vol. I, pp. 428-442.
2. House Select Committee on Assassinations, Report, p.80, footnote 16

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/20/2019 12:33 PM, claviger wrote:
> On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 1:17:25 AM UTC-5, claviger wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 10:43:48 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2019 9:15 PM, claviger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Z312 - Z313
>>>> https://www.keepandshare.com/photo/487192/jfk?ifr=y
>>>> https://www.keepandshare.com/userpics/r/i/c/k/off/2013-11/sm/zapruder_film_frame_312_313-82285670.jpg?ts=1384913643
>>>>
>>>> Analysis Of JFK Zapruder Film Frames 312 and 313
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0d6LG27hQM
>>>> The headshot: "Back and to the the left"
>>>> http://users.skynet.be/mar/Eng/Headshot/back&left-eng.htm
>>>> http://users.skynet.be/mar/Headshot/Images/Closeup_312-313.gif
>>> EVERYONE moved forward. Because the limo suddenly slowed down. It's
>>> called inertia. I guess you never studied that in college.
>
> You were proved wrong about that a long time ago. Nothing has changed.

By wom? Not by you. You were not at the conference and you did not
challenge my work. No one did.

> We can plainly see only the President's head and shoulders move forward,
> not Jackie and not the Connally's. You inertia scam is busted again.
>
>

You keep blabbing, but you never prove anything.

[claviger]

On Saturday, April 20, 2019 at 3:28:56 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 4/19/2019 2:17 AM, claviger wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 17, 2019 at 10:43:48 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 4/16/2019 9:15 PM, claviger wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Z312 - Z313
> >>> https://www.keepandshare.com/photo/487192/jfk?ifr=y
> >>> https://www.keepandshare.com/userpics/r/i/c/k/off/2013-11/sm/zapruder_film_frame_312_313-82285670.jpg?ts=1384913643
> >>>
> >>> Analysis Of JFK Zapruder Film Frames 312 and 313
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0d6LG27hQM
> >>> The headshot: "Back and to the the left"
> >>> http://users.skynet.be/mar/Eng/Headshot/back&left-eng.htm
> >>> http://users.skynet.be/mar/Headshot/Images/Closeup_312-313.gif
> >> EVERYONE moved forward. Because the limo suddenly slowed down. It's
> >> called inertia. I guess you never studied that in college.
> > You were proved wrong about that a long time ago. Nothing has changed.
> > We can plainly see only the President's moves forward, not Jackie and not
> > the Connally's. You inertia scam is busted again.
> How come you never even tried to rebut my essay?

All anyone needs to rebut your gobbledygook is eyesight good enough to get
a driver's license. The Dr. Fritz Fassbender shtick and Jedi Mind Trick
only works in the Movies, not on this Newsgroup with real people not
actors. Except for you of course. Your Number One fan is Professor
McAdams, he get's a kick out of your razzmatazz.

[redhair...@gmail.com]

You make assumptions in your essay which are not true, though it is
reasonable to think that a decelerating (or stopping) car would cause
everybody's head to move forward. But that does not explain the apparent
motion of JFK's head relative to the others. It moves forward relative to
Jackie's, for example. It also moves downward somewhat. I'm not saying
that the Official Story explains it, either, but it does look as though
something more than a slowing car is causing this JFK motion in a
direction different than you would expect from your beloved Grassy Knoll
shot. Any explanation I could offer would only send you into an abusive
fit, so I will pass on correcting you here. Still, your essay is very cute
in its seriousness, and I'm sure is well appreciated by those who already
agree with you.

[Anthony Marsh]

You can't refute anything I wrote.
All you can do is make personal attacks.
You are so lucky that I don't stoop to your level and point out that no
one else here buys your Donahue theory.

[Anthony Marsh]

That has been proven by thousands of crash test dummy experiments.

> motion of JFK's head relative to the others. It moves forward relative to
> Jackie's, for example. It also moves downward somewhat. I'm not saying
> that the Official Story explains it, either, but it does look as though
> something more than a slowing car is causing this JFK motion in a

So, again, answer the damn question. What caused everyone else to move
forward? Were they ALL shot in the back of the head simultaneously?

[David Von Pein]

A Golden Oldie (but still appropriate)....

From 2009....


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

If a bullet (entering President Kennedy's head from behind) didn't cause
this forward movement of JFK's head between Zapruder Film frames Z312 and
Z313, what did cause it?:

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m1Jj7UQ0w0U/UolhSNdHzQI/AAAAAAAAw5Q/dJ6Z4NCchbA/s1600/107.+Zapruder+Film+(Head+Shot+Sequence+In+Slow+Motion).gif


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

The limo suddenly slowing down as Alvarez found. We've been over this
hundreds of times, but you never pay attention.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh, sure. That massive and violent "slow down" from 11.2 MPH (approx.) to
8 MPH (approx.) was enough to practically throw every limo occupant
through the windshield, I'm sure!

It's a wonder everybody in the car wasn't killed as a result of Bill
Greer's sudden 11 MPH to 8 MPH braking action!

I ask -- Can conspiracy theorists get much sillier than this with respect
to their incredibly inane attempts to avoid the obvious?


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

So, what do you think caused all the other passengers to move forward
between frames Z-312 and Z-313? Do you think they were all simultaneously
shot from behind?

[...]

How do YOU explain the fact that everyone in the limo was moving forward?
You can't see the obvious?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yeah, right...it just so happens that President Kennedy's head is
exploding and moving rapidly forward at the exact INSTANT he was hit in
the head with the assassin's bullet....but some CTers want to think that
the BULLET striking Kennedy WASN'T the cause of the rapid forward movement
of Kennedy's head between Z312 and Z313.

Now THAT'S true-blue denial, kids. And a really bad case of it, too.

Can you just hear the defense attorney trying to get a jury to swallow
this nonsense? It'd be a scream. Let's listen in to a sample of it:


“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury....we all know that President
Kennedy was shot in the head at Zapruder frame #313...and we can easily
see his head moving very rapidly FORWARD between frames 312 and 313 (i.e.,
the exact INSTANT that JFK is hit in the head with a bullet)...we all know
this...but we here on the defense side of the courtroom want you 12 good
men and women of the jury to believe that something ELSE caused John
Kennedy's head to snap forward very rapidly at the EXACT SAME
ONE-EIGHTEENTH OF A SECOND when he was ALSO being hit in the head with a
rifle bullet....and we think you jurors should seriously consider this
'strawman' argument I'm going to introduce to you now....

And that strawman is this -- It wasn't the assassin's bullet that caused
the forward movement of John Kennedy's head. It was, instead, the
automobile's SLOWING DOWN from 11 or so MPH to about 8 MPH that caused
JFK's head to pitch forward very quickly between Z312 and Z313! That's
obvious, isn't it?!

Forget about that bullet hitting him at that EXACT SAME 1/18th of a
second! That's unimportant here! The important thing to remember, ladies
and gentlemen, is this -- We MUST find ways (any way will do!) to AVOID
THE OBVIOUSNESS OF WHAT WE SEE IN THE ZAPRUDER FILM! And we also must (at
all costs!) avoid soiling the skirts of the defendant, Lee H. Oswald!

Because ANY evidence that leads toward the notion that the defendant in
this case could have possibly fired the shots that killed John F. Kennedy
MUST be automatically turned on its head, and such evidence MUST always be
considered faulty in some manner -- just like this "head going forward"
business.

Sure, his head moves forward at the EXACT INSTANT he's being killed with a
rifle bullet! But that doesn't have to mean that the BULLET caused that
forward head snap AT THAT EXACT SAME INSTANT, does it? Of course it
doesn't!

Rule 1A applies in this courtroom of silliness, ladies and
gentlemen....and that rule is this --- THERE'S NO ROOM FOR OCCAM'S RAZOR
WHEN IT COMES TO THE INVESTIGATION OF THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN
F. KENNEDY!

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. .... We'll now need a 5-minute bathroom
break, Your Honorable Judge Ito....because I can see that jurors #3 and
#10 are about to split a gut with laughter, and their bladders are also
notoriously weak ones.” -- JOHNNIE COCHRAN, ESQ.

David Von Pein
April 1-4, 2009

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/1ASXZL16zC8/rx14EtPzd9cJ

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/no-room-for-occam.html

[David Von Pein]

I find it interesting that this topic of "JFK's Forward Head Movement" has
spawned two decidedly different sets of "Denialists" from the "CTer" side
of the table over the years.

First, there's the "Everybody's Head Moved Forward Because Of The Slowing
Down Of The Limo" deniers (like Anthony Marsh).

And then we've got the other set of Deniers, who insist that the forward
movement of Kennedy's cranium at Z313 was caused by a "blur" or a "smear"
in the Zapruder film. [See my 2018 post reprinted below.]

So, once again, JFK conspiracy theorists can't even agree amongst
themselves as to which type of "Denial" they'd prefer to accept. (Reminds
me of the SBT.)

From 2018....

JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

The whole thing about the 1-2 frame forward movement was misrepresented by
DVP and Ayton in their book.

[Josiah] Thompson was the first guy to write about it. But he was not the
first guy to point it out. That was Ray Marcus, and Thompson would admit
that as the case. In other words, it was the critics who first pointed out
that almost undetectable forward bob.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

DiEugenio is, as usual, dead wrong. This topic was not "misrepresented" by
Mel Ayton or myself in our book at all. Jimmy just doesn't want to believe
the Itek Corporation's findings, that's all.

And to think that the forward motion of JFK's head at Z313 is *ONLY* being
caused by the "blur" [or a "smear"] in the film is another example of
"Ultimate CTer Denial In Action" --- especially since we know (and can
SEE) that the President is being hit in the head WITH A BULLET at that
***exact moment in time on the Zapruder Film!***

And yet, even though we know a high-speed bullet is definitely crashing
into his skull at that EXACT instant, I'm supposed to believe that the
ONLY thing that is causing the apparent "forward movement" of
Kennedy's head is the "blur"???

Jim and Josiah are too funny for words!


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Von Pein and Ayton misrepresented this issue in two ways.

First, they tried to insinuate that this bob forward was somehow ignored
by the critical community. What a bunch of malarkey. Thompson's book was
on the cover of the Saturday Evening Post. It had a large impact and sold
well. Second, they ignored Thompson's later discoveries with physicist Art
Snyder about the smear on the film. I don't know if Davey is deliberately
ignoring this, or if he just does not understand it. I actually think it's
both.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Jim,

Just keep looking at this super-slo-mo clip over and over a few times....

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m1Jj7UQ0w0U/UolhSNdHzQI/AAAAAAAAw5Q/dJ6Z4NCchbA/s1600/107.+Zapruder+Film+(Head+Shot+Sequence+In+Slow+Motion).gif

....And then try to convince yourself that the obvious forward motion of
President Kennedy's head that you are seeing is being caused ONLY by a
"smear" in the film. Good luck in convincing yourself of that fairy tale.

DVP
May 2018

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2018/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1285.html

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/24/2019 3:39 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> A Golden Oldie (but still appropriate)....
>
> From 2009....
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> If a bullet (entering President Kennedy's head from behind) didn't cause
> this forward movement of JFK's head between Zapruder Film frames Z312 and
> Z313, what did cause it?:
>
> https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-m1Jj7UQ0w0U/UolhSNdHzQI/AAAAAAAAw5Q/dJ6Z4NCchbA/s1600/107.+Zapruder+Film+(Head+Shot+Sequence+In+Slow+Motion).gif
>
>
> ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
>
> The limo suddenly slowing down as Alvarez found. We've been over this
> hundreds of times, but you never pay attention.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Oh, sure. That massive and violent "slow down" from 11.2 MPH (approx.) to
> 8 MPH (approx.) was enough to practically throw every limo occupant
> through the windshield, I'm sure!
>

Straw man argument. I never said violent. The movements I noted were
small.

> It's a wonder everybody in the car wasn't killed as a result of Bill
> Greer's sudden 11 MPH to 8 MPH braking action!
>

I don't think Greer braked.
Where do you get an 8 MPH braking action?
Pull it out of you ass? Alvarez estimated that the limo suddenly slowed
down from about 12 MPH to about 8 MPH.

> I ask -- Can conspiracy theorists get much sillier than this with respect
> to their incredibly inane attempts to avoid the obvious?
>
>

Can WC defefenders possibly tell more lies? Always.

> ANTHONY MARSH SAID:
>
> So, what do you think caused all the other passengers to move forward
> between frames Z-312 and Z-313? Do you think they were all simultaneously
> shot from behind?
>
> [...]
>
> How do YOU explain the fact that everyone in the limo was moving forward?
> You can't see the obvious?
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Yeah, right...it just so happens that President Kennedy's head is

Everyone was moving forward BEFORE frame 313.

> exploding and moving rapidly forward at the exact INSTANT he was hit in

Not the exact instant, Mr. Straw Man. For several frames before the
bullet hit JFK.

> the head with the assassin's bullet....but some CTers want to think that
> the BULLET striking Kennedy WASN'T the cause of the rapid forward movement
> of Kennedy's head between Z312 and Z313.
>

Some WC defenders just always lie.
BTW, you are forgetting Tink's confession that he, like Itek was
measuring the amount of blur in frame 313 so the actual forward movement
was smaller. See Doug Weldon's study.

> Now THAT'S true-blue denial, kids. And a really bad case of it, too.
>

Yes, you are a bad case.

> Can you just hear the defense attorney trying to get a jury to swallow
> this nonsense? It'd be a scream. Let's listen in to a sample of it:
>
>

> ???Ladies and gentlemen of the jury....we all know that President

> Kennedy was shot in the head at Zapruder frame #313...and we can easily
> see his head moving very rapidly FORWARD between frames 312 and 313 (i.e.,

I know that JFK was shot in the head at Z-312.6.

> the exact INSTANT that JFK is hit in the head with a bullet)...we all know
> this...but we here on the defense side of the courtroom want you 12 good
> men and women of the jury to believe that something ELSE caused John
> Kennedy's head to snap forward very rapidly at the EXACT SAME
> ONE-EIGHTEENTH OF A SECOND when he was ALSO being hit in the head with a
> rifle bullet....and we think you jurors should seriously consider this
> 'strawman' argument I'm going to introduce to you now....
>
> And that strawman is this -- It wasn't the assassin's bullet that caused
> the forward movement of John Kennedy's head. It was, instead, the

Well, again I ask and you are too much of a coward to answer:
What caused the other passengers to move forward?

> automobile's SLOWING DOWN from 11 or so MPH to about 8 MPH that caused
> JFK's head to pitch forward very quickly between Z312 and Z313! That's
> obvious, isn't it?!
>

You keep misrepresenting what I say because you can't debate honestly.

> Forget about that bullet hitting him at that EXACT SAME 1/18th of a
> second! That's unimportant here! The important thing to remember, ladies
> and gentlemen, is this -- We MUST find ways (any way will do!) to AVOID
> THE OBVIOUSNESS OF WHAT WE SEE IN THE ZAPRUDER FILM! And we also must (at
> all costs!) avoid soiling the skirts of the defendant, Lee H. Oswald!
>
> Because ANY evidence that leads toward the notion that the defendant in
> this case could have possibly fired the shots that killed John F. Kennedy
> MUST be automatically turned on its head, and such evidence MUST always be
> considered faulty in some manner -- just like this "head going forward"
> business.
>
> Sure, his head moves forward at the EXACT INSTANT he's being killed with a
> rifle bullet! But that doesn't have to mean that the BULLET caused that
> forward head snap AT THAT EXACT SAME INSTANT, does it? Of course it
> doesn't!
>
> Rule 1A applies in this courtroom of silliness, ladies and
> gentlemen....and that rule is this --- THERE'S NO ROOM FOR OCCAM'S RAZOR
> WHEN IT COMES TO THE INVESTIGATION OF THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN
> F. KENNEDY!
>

Occam's Razor hoax.

> Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. .... We'll now need a 5-minute bathroom
> break, Your Honorable Judge Ito....because I can see that jurors #3 and
> #10 are about to split a gut with laughter, and their bladders are also

> notoriously weak ones.??? -- JOHNNIE COCHRAN, ESQ.

[David Von Pein]

Nobody's head in that car moves forward violently and sharply the way
JFK's head does at Z313. And you damn well know that fact. ONLY Kennedy's
head does that. And we know he's being hit WITH A BULLET at that EXACT
instant in time.

Doesn't that strike the "Limo Slowdown" Denialists as a rather amazing
coincidence? Or is it even a coincidence AT ALL to those "LSD" members? If
not, why not?

Or, to throw your own words that you tossed at me right back at you ----
Are you "too much of a coward to answer" my last question truthfully (and
logically), Tony?

[Anthony Marsh]

And again Mr Straw Man, I never said they did. You can't even admit
that they moved at all.

> Doesn't that strike the "Limo Slowdown" Denialists as a rather amazing
> coincidence? Or is it even a coincidence AT ALL to those "LSD" members? If
> not, why not?
>
> Or, to throw your own words that you tossed at me right back at you ----
> Are you "too much of a coward to answer" my last question truthfully (and
> logically), Tony?
>

You don't have any questions.
You spew nonsense.

[David Von Pein]

OK. Good. Now we're getting somewhere.

So you will readily admit that President Kennedy's head in Z-Film frames
312 and 313 was UNIQUE and DIFFERENT in its movement when compared to all
of the other five occupants of the limousine....correct?