The lapel flip -- what did i miss?

[Dan O'meara]

JohnM

There is no point saying this to those who have already made their mind up over this issue... but for those who haven't...
Look at the above Z-Film clip, in the very first frame notice how composed JBC looks, then look at how both men are suddenly flailing around.
Ask yourself this - does it look as though both men been shot through at the same time or not?

LATER EDIT:

On the issue of JBC's arm movement causing the so-called 'lapel flip'.
It is clear from the clip above that his arm does not come up again until after the 'lapel flip', negating any notion that this arm movement is the cause of the 'lapel flip' (the 'lapel flip' is actually the whole right side of JBC's jacket being blown out as a result of the shot passing through him. It is this blowing out of the right hand side of the jacket that causes the lapel flip)

[Andrew Mason]

There is no point saying this to those who have already made their mind up over this issue... but for those who haven't...
Look at the above Z-Film clip, in the very first frame notice how composed JBC looks, then look at how both men are suddenly flailing around.
Ask yourself this - does it look as though both men been shot through at the same time or not?

I can see that JFK is reacting to being shot through the neck.  I can see that JBC is also reacting.  But I can't tell for sure that JBC has been shot.  The reason I can't tell is:

1.  the evidence says that this was the first shot
2.  JBC said he was not hit in the back on the first shot.
3.  Nellie said JBC was not hit in the back on the first shot but JFK was.
4.  JBC said he reacted immediately to the first shot by doing exactly what we see him doing after z223: turning around to try to look at JFK.  Nowhere else do we see any attempt whatsoever to look at JFK, let alone when he is showing concern over hearing a rifle shot.
5.  JBC said he was hit in the back on the second shot.
6.  The evidence is overwhelming that the second shot was followed in close succession by the third shot that struck JFK in the head.  Greer, Altgens, Gayle Newman, Powers, Hickey all corroborate this.  So the second shot striking JBC in the back occurred after the midpoint between the first and third, which is some time after z256.

Now you say I am stuck on a "theory" because I am unable to see reason?  That's the reason.  I am just following the evidence. Your "you see he is hit in the back at z224" is not reason. It is a complete and abject failure to follow the evidence.

LATER EDIT:

On the issue of JBC's arm movement causing the so-called 'lapel flip'.
It is clear from the clip above that his arm does not come up again until after the 'lapel flip', negating any notion that this arm movement is the cause of the 'lapel flip' (the 'lapel flip' is actually the whole right side of JBC's jacket being blown out as a result of the shot passing through him. It is this blowing out of the right hand side of the jacket that causes the lapel flip)

Saying something is clear does not make it so. It is anything but clear that JBC's arm is not moving.  It doesn't have to be visible to Zapruder!!  What kind of an analysis is that based on?  I could just as easily say the forearm/wrist is not aligned with the exit wound from the chest because we can't see it. 

The forearm/hand/wrist moved down from z222 to z223 and the jacket moved (the jacket may simply have opened if he took his arm off of it, so we cannot tell that the jacket moved because it was dragged by the arm).  From z223 to z224 the jacket moved back similar to a position it was in in z222. From z224 we can see the forearm was moving.  What we can't see is whether the forearm was moving before z224.

Now you agree that the forearm was moving from z222 to z223 and from z224 to z231, but you can tell it was stopped from z223 to z224?  How on earth can you determine that from the zfilm when you cannot see the forearm at all between z223 and z224?  And you are supposedly the "reasonable" one and I am not!!

[Dan O'meara]

I can see that JFK is reacting to being shot through the neck.  I can see that JBC is also reacting.  But I can't tell for sure that JBC has been shot.  The reason I can't tell is:

1.  the evidence says that this was the first shot
2.  JBC said he was not hit in the back on the first shot.
3.  Nellie said JBC was not hit in the back on the first shot but JFK was.
4.  JBC said he reacted immediately to the first shot by doing exactly what we see him doing after z223: turning around to try to look at JFK.  Nowhere else do we see any attempt whatsoever to look at JFK, let alone when he is showing concern over hearing a rifle shot.
5.  JBC said he was hit in the back on the second shot.
6.  The evidence is overwhelming that the second shot was followed in close succession by the third shot that struck JFK in the head.  Greer, Altgens, Gayle Newman, Powers, Hickey all corroborate this.  So the second shot striking JBC in the back occurred after the midpoint between the first and third, which is some time after z256.

Now you say I am stuck on a "theory" because I am unable to see reason?  That's the reason.  I am just following the evidence. Your "you see he is hit in the back at z224" is not reason. It is a complete and abject failure to follow the evidence.

The Zapruder footage is, by far, the best, strongest evidence we have of what happened at this moment. I put the Z-Film before witness statements. You do not. As you have so amply demonstrated time after time, if witness statements are contradicted by what we see in the Z-Film you go with the witness statements. I do not.

Saying something is clear does not make it so.

I agree. But if something is clear then it's clear.

It is anything but clear that JBC's arm is not moving.

And here we have the craziness.
Who said JBC's arm isn't moving? Are you implying I've said that?
Provide the quote please.
JBC's arm is in constant motion during the clip.

It doesn't have to be visible to Zapruder!!  What kind of an analysis is that based on?  I could just as easily say the forearm/wrist is not aligned with the exit wound from the chest because we can't see it. 

The forearm/hand/wrist moved down from z222 to z223 and the jacket moved (the jacket may simply have opened if he took his arm off of it, so we cannot tell that the jacket moved because it was dragged by the arm).  From z223 to z224 the jacket moved back similar to a position it was in in z222. From z224 we can see the forearm was moving.  What we can't see is whether the forearm was moving before z224.

Now you agree that the forearm was moving from z222 to z223 and from z224 to z231, but you can tell it was stopped from z223 to z224?  How on earth can you determine that from the zfilm when you cannot see the forearm at all between z223 and z224?  And you are supposedly the "reasonable" one and I am not!!

Wow!
For anyone interested there is a detailed analysis of these frames in "The First Shot" thread.
As far as Andrew's rant is concerned -
In z222 (not shown in the clip below) the white cuff of JBC's sleeve can be seen just above the top of the door.
In z223 (the first frame of the clip below) the cuff has disappeared below the top of the door frame - this is the bullet strike.
In z224, JBC's forearm is still below the top of the door.
And this is the problem Andrew is struggling with because it is in this same frame that the 'lapel flip' occurs, while JBC's forearm is still below the top of the door.
As the clip rolls on we see JBC's hand and forearm emerge from beneath the top of the door.
The problem for Andrew's latest doomed theory is that he imagines the 'lapel flip' is caused by JBC's arm moving across the front of his jacket. As can be seen in the clip below, the 'lapel flip' occurs before JBC's hand emerges from beneath the top of the door frame.
That is to say, it occurs before JBC's hand has moved across his jacket.
This means JBC's hand movements could not have caused the 'lapel flip'.
Andrew's argument that - just because we can't see JBC's hand, therefore we don't know what it's doing, therefore it could be doing anything - is really as sh*t as it sounds.

[Andrew Mason]

The Zapruder footage is, by far, the best, strongest evidence we have of what happened at this moment. I put the Z-Film before witness statements. You do not. As you have so amply demonstrated time after time, if witness statements are contradicted by what we see in the Z-Film you go with the witness statements. I do not.

They are not contradicted by the zfilm. They are contradicted by what you think is happening in the zfilm.  There is a big difference. 

I agree. But if something is clear then it's clear.

It is far from clear.  We cannot see any definitive, unequivocal evidence that JBC is hit in the torso there.  It is just not there.  And the evidence says it is not there.

And here we have the craziness.
Who said JBC's arm isn't moving? Are you implying I've said that?
Provide the quote please.
JBC's arm is in constant motion during the clip.

I have obviously misunderstood your position. So if the arm is in constant motion from z222, why can the arm not be moving across his front prior to z224?  Just because YOU cannot see that it is moving across his front?  All we can tell is that the wrist dropped below the car door from Zapruder's point of view from z222 to z223 and that it was moving across his body from right to left from z224 to z231.  You conclude from that that the arm was not moving across his body from right to left before z224!!  You can see that?

Wow!
For anyone interested there is a detailed analysis of these frames in "The First Shot" thread.
As far as Andrew's rant is concerned -
In z222 (not shown in the clip below) the white cuff of JBC's sleeve can be seen just above the top of the door.
In z223 (the first frame of the clip below) the cuff has disappeared below the top of the door frame - this is the bullet strike.
In z224, JBC's forearm is still below the top of the door.
And this is the problem Andrew is struggling with because it is in this same frame that the 'lapel flip' occurs, while JBC's forearm is still below the top of the door..
As the clip rolls on we see JBC's hand and forearm emerge from beneath the top of the door.
The problem for Andrew's latest doomed theory is that he imagines the 'lapel flip' is caused by JBC's arm moving across the front of his jacket. As can be seen in the clip below, the 'lapel flip' occurs before JBC's hand emerges from beneath the top of the door frame.
That is to say, it occurs before JBC's hand has moved across his jacket.

Your "logic" escapes me.  You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!  Yet we see it moving from right to left in z224-231.  Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur?  Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it? Simple question....

[Dan O'meara]

Your "logic" escapes me.  You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!  Yet we see it moving from right to left in z224-231.  Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur?  Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it? Simple question....

Nobody, at any point has disputed whether JBC's hand is moving left to right.
It hasn't been brought up at any time.
You've introduced it, as you often do, to argue a point that never existed.

"You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!"

That's an untruth (I know I've got to be careful using the word 'lie' with you).
Nowhere have I said anything even remotely like that.

"Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur?"

Do you have any idea how crazy you're coming across? In the post you are responding to I've said his hand was in constant motion. Can't you remember? It was the post you were responding to.

"Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it?"

WTF are you talking about? Even for you this off the charts.

It has been your contention that the 'lapel flip' is caused by JBC's hand moving across the front of his jacket.
We can see the front of his jacket in the Z-Film.
We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame.
When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred.

WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
HONESTLY, WHAT IS IT YOU ARE STRUGGLING WITH?

[Chris Bristow]

What data does Lattimer provide to document his lapel test? Can someone point me to it?

[Andrew Mason]

Nobody, at any point has disputed whether JBC's hand is moving left to right.
It hasn't been brought up at any time.
You've introduced it, as you often do, to argue a point that never existed.

"You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!"

That's an untruth (I know I've got to be careful using the word 'lie' with you).
Nowhere have I said anything even remotely like that.

"Why does the motion have to be seen by Zapruder in order for it to occur?"

Do you have any idea how crazy you're coming across? In the post you are responding to I've said his hand was in constant motion. Can't you remember? It was the post you were responding to.

"Why can it not be moving when we cannot see it?"

WTF are you talking about? Even for you this off the charts.

It has been your contention that the 'lapel flip' is caused by JBC's hand moving across the front of his jacket.
We can see the front of his jacket in the Z-Film.
We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame.
When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred.

WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
HONESTLY, WHAT IS IT YOU ARE STRUGGLING WITH?

I don't understand the difference between you saying:  "We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame. When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred."

AND me saying:  "You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!"

Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224). 

If so, how is that ruled out as a possible cause of the jacket movement?

If not, how can you tell it is not moving across the front of his jacket?  Just because we can't see it?

[Dan O'meara]

I don't understand the difference between you saying:  "We can see that the lapel flip occurs while his hand is still down below the top of the door frame. When his hand comes into view and moves across the front of his jacket the lapel flip has already occurred."

AND me saying:  "You are saying that his hand must emerge from beneath the top of the door before it can be moving from right to left!"

Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224). 

If so, how is that ruled out as a possible cause of the jacket movement?

If not, how can you tell it is not moving across the front of his jacket?  Just because we can't see it?

"Are you agreeing with me that his hand/arm were moving across the front of his jacket from right to left when the "lapel flip" occurred? (ie between z223 and z224)."

  Quality



Look closely at JBC's arm movement and tell me what you really see.