Where is the Hughes film?

Research

unread,

Oct 7, 2012, 6:03:22 PM10/7/12

to

Yes we have seen the Hughes film in many links on U-tube. I ran across one
of the official WC maps of Dealey. As I studied it I saw it had correctly
placed Hughes at the corner of Main and Huston. His film is evidence of
that.

But the map shows Hughes had three other positions further down Main where
he filmed the motorcade going down Elm and the ambush site. So where is
the other three clips? WE the public have never been shown the REST of the
Hughes film. Is it hidden in the archives or what happened to the rest of
the Hughes film?

Anthony Marsh

unread,

Oct 8, 2012, 7:57:00 PM10/8/12

to

You have to do some actual research to find them. I don't see any way that
you can go out and buy them. You might find an old VHS tape if you still
even have a machine to play it. Some of the old Groden videos have been
released on DVD if you can play those. You might see some of the restored
footage on the Max Holland special The Lost Bullet. You might get lucky
visiting a local library.

markusp

unread,

Oct 8, 2012, 8:00:58 PM10/8/12

to

> But the map shows Hughes had three other positions further down Main where
> he filmed the motorcade going down Elm and the ambush site. So where is
> the other three clips? WE the public have never been shown the REST of the
> Hughes film. Is it hidden in the archives or what happened to the rest of
> the Hughes film?

The Hughes Film begins with his position near Main & Houston. He stopped
filming just prior to the shots, and then resumed filming right after the
shots. It's quite clear that he moved position between takes. I've not
heard about any missing footage regarding Hughes.

My initial search just now on Youtube shows these different scenes,
including the Main & Houston segment; he then moved into the grass area
just south of the TSBD to show people running toward the GK; then we see a
shot of cars parked in the Railroad terminal area behind the Stockade
fence; lastly, he's on the GK, and pans around DP.

You should be able to correlate the positioning of Hughes on the map you
mentioned with the corresponding locations. If they differ, please let us
know. A good source for most of the films taken in DP that day are
included in Groden's "Assassination Films".

~Mark

Anthony Marsh

unread,

Oct 8, 2012, 9:06:46 PM10/8/12

to

Why don't you guys read the appendix of Pictures of the Pain which tells
you the sequences and the frames? Oh, no one has Pictures of the Pain.
Only real researchers.

Ace Kefford

unread,

Oct 9, 2012, 9:54:24 AM10/9/12

to

Yes, any real student of the case should get Trask's "Pictures Of The Pain." Even if you can't find it cheap, just swear off the junk books that comes out practically weekly and save up your money for this one. Well, worth it.

markusp

unread,

Oct 9, 2012, 9:49:49 PM10/9/12

to

On Sunday, October 7, 2012 5:03:23 PM UTC-5, Research wrote:
> Hughes film. Is it hidden in the archives or what happened to the rest of
> the Hughes film?

Sitting in the dentist's chair this morning while having a temp filling on
the tooth I cracked Friday evening, I remembered to remind you that there
has been a bit of credible speculation that we have not seen all of the
16mm film footage shot that day by Tom Alyea. That also might be worth a
look for you. Thanks!

~Mark

Anthony Marsh

unread,

Oct 10, 2012, 3:11:17 PM10/10/12

to

We think that WFAA simply threw it away.

markusp

unread,

Oct 10, 2012, 9:21:31 PM10/10/12

to

On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 2:11:18 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:

> We think that WFAA simply threw it away.

Does the alleged disposal of these outtakes then clash directly with the
FBI's apparent efforts to notify local camera shops, etc., to watch for
images or films in order to investigate? It seems logical that they would
also have approached the very place that had all sorts of cameras and
recording gear. Thanks!

~Mark

Ace Kefford

unread,

Oct 11, 2012, 11:05:57 AM10/11/12

to

No conflict at all. The FBI used the camera shops to try to gather whatever film they could. While the separate businesses that were news organizations did what they always did which was cull through footage for what they could use or traffic to other outlets.

Now, with HINDSIGHT should the FBI and the Warren Commission have done more to try to gather film and photos, including from news organizations? Hypothetically of course, but especially in the case of the FBI there was a lot of other work they were doing. And should the news organizations have been more careful with what they had? Sure, but again they were busy -- very busy -- covering the breaking news.

markusp

unread,

Oct 11, 2012, 4:14:17 PM10/11/12

to

I understand completely about the news organizations hastily finding the
juicy stuff, with no chance of knowing how valuable even the outtakes
would become. That's quite reasonable.

I'm not so certain about the separation of the news outlets from the photo
shops in terms of FBI notificaton to be on the lookout. At this point, we
don't have the outtakes, and Tony Marsh is probably correct in summation
that WFAA discarded (note I did not say "destroyed") the unused portions.
I agree that applying today's norms for archival preservation is also
unfair, and some of the decisions made at that time were certainly
defensible, if not correct. Thanks, Ace!

~Mark

Anthony Marsh

unread,

Oct 11, 2012, 9:01:17 PM10/11/12

to

No, because the FBI knew they had the muscle and connections to get all
the professional films. They wanted a pipeline to get the amateur stuff.

Robert Harris

unread,

Oct 12, 2012, 5:38:28 PM10/12/12

to

Pictures of the Pain is indeed, a must have for anyone analyzing the
images and films of the assassination. But like other factually useful
books, such as Groden's, one should not pay much attention to the
author's analysis and conclusions.

Robert Harris

Ace Kefford

unread,

Oct 12, 2012, 9:13:12 PM10/12/12

to

Instead of "not pay attention to" the author's analysis and conclusions,
wouldn't it be better to say "do not accept as gospel truth"? I find
Trask's analysis and conclusions sensible and based in a reasonable and
rational assessment of all of the evidence. Now that doesn't mean that
everyone would accept each one of his conclusions -- often they are based
on a degree of judgment about what is likely to have actually happened
that day in Dallas (don't forget skeptics it only happened ONE WAY) -- but
I think it would not be wise to just "not pay attention to" them.

Saintly Oswald

unread,

Oct 13, 2012, 10:41:52 AM10/13/12

to

On Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:01:18 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:

> No, because the FBI knew they had the muscle and connections to get all
>
> the professional films. They wanted a pipeline to get the amateur stuff.

Which FBI memo says they knew they had the muscle and connections to get
all the professional films? Or are you just practicing your copyrighted
mind reading act again?

Anthony Marsh

unread,

Oct 13, 2012, 10:48:45 PM10/13/12

to

I didn't say it was in a memo. Not everything is put in a memo.
Sometimes you know from past patterns of events and behavior.