Where did Zapruder say the he didn't recall stopping and re-starting the film?
You'd reject any transcript I provided a link to so I won't bother. Besides, we don't need Zapruder's testimony. There is a "First Frame Over-Exposure" effect that is missing in the jump cut that removed the turn onto Elm. This occurs when you stop and start film. Since this frame was not present, the jump cut at frame 132-133 was not the result of stopping/starting the camera and this was not the original film. QED.
Newsweek never had the film. The original (and a first generation copy) was owned/purchased by Time/Life magazine.
I was throwing Newsweek back at the poster who claimed this. Otherwise, who cares who received a COPY of the Z film? They certainly didn't receive nor damage the original.
Where did you get this information that over a hundred frames were damaged? And where is your information as to which frames were damaged?
I'm extrapolating how many frames must have been cut between frames 132-133 based on the position of the limo and its speed and the frame rate of 18 fps.
From what I've read, Time/Life said the ORIGINAL was damaged (a few frames but not over a hundred). So they took the frames from the first generation copy they had and added or spliced them to the original. Nothing was removed or taken out.
How would you or any of them know they were working with the original?