Frame 317

As an imaging processing veteran with a keen observational eye, I sometimes forget that not everybody catches the same things I pick up on. For example, I consistently spot the neighborhood Kestrel at 200 yards – which most people never see. It is a small bird.

This is what I see. In frame 317, John Connally’s bald forehead is facing forwards and reflecting the sun.  The right side of Kennedy’s head looks very different.

Connally’s forehead shows a typical reflection off a convex surface. Elliptical, brightest near the middle, and the luminosity tails off towards the edges. His head is facing towards the sun. There is also a vertical shadow in the middle of the reflection, possibly a light pole.

The circle on JFK’s head, looks very different.  It is quite round, and has bright consistent luminosity across the entire circle. It is surrounded by dark hair which is shaded. There is no indication that side of his head is receiving direct sunlight. The luminosity is higher than anywhere on Connally’s forehead.

This is clearly a light source, not a reflection. And it remains consistent for a few dozen frames.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Frame 317

  1. charles nelson says:

    In the original Blade Runner movie there is a great scene where the detective takes a frame and magnifies it repeatedly…boring down into the image until he finally comes across a microscopic serial number…his next lead.
    Like wise, the image above is science fiction. It is not the raw original frame. It has been ‘enhanced’…’filtered’….’stabalized’…’cleaned up’…’focussed’…
    Analysing for evidence it is roughly the same as trying to figure out what’s happening to the climate by studying NASA climate data.

    • tonyheller says:

      Most people don’t have luminescent circles coming from their skulls. I hope you aren’t trying to suggest that is fabricated? Throwing out inconvenient data is what climate experts do.

      Looking at data is what I do. Listening to opinions of “experts” is what I don’t do, except to analyze their validity.

      Fascinating watching climate skeptics buying off on a fake government narrative about JFK.

      • charles nelson says:

        Fascinating watching climate skeptics buying off faked footage.
        Try taking a look at the original (as shown of Geraldo) film…and tell me that you still believe the image above could have been derived from it.

      • charles nelson says:

        What would cause ‘a luminescent circle’…and why would that ‘luminescent circle’ persist for ‘several frames’?
        Just curious.

      • Weylan McAnally says:

        I believe that the white circle is actually the sun reflecting off a piece of JFK’s skull that shattered from the hollow point round that hit from the rear.

  2. Gator says:

    Almost every issue concerning the assassination of President Kennedy is
    in dispute. From the number of shots fired, to the number of visitors at
    the rotunda. One aspect of the assassination that is not in dispute is the
    fact that a portion of Kennedy’s skull was blown away during the
    shooting, and recovered in Dealey Plaza the next day. A young man
    named Billy Harper found the skull fragment, and turned it over to his
    uncle. The fragment was given to a Dr. Cairns at Methodist Hospital, near
    Dallas. It was adequately photographed before it found its way to the
    White House and into the hands of Kennedy’s personal physician, Dr.
    Burkley. Shortly thereafter, the “Harper Fragment” disappeared. Its
    whereabouts are now unknown. That piece of skull bone is visible in the
    Zapruder film. It becomes visible in frame 313 and flies through the air
    before going out of view around frame 337.

    http://dealeyplazauk.org.uk/pdfArticles/Frank%20Caramelli%20Skull-Fragment.pdf

    • tonyheller says:

      The white circle is most definitely not the skull fragment, which flew up in the air.

    • sunsettommy says:

      Gator,

      your link has ZERO investigative evidence in it,just hearsay and opinions of something they don’t have any physical evidence of.

      I have posted many investigations that are using REAL forensic evidence and the appropriate people who have real education and experience to handle it.

      The The head wound has been officially investigated numerous times by qualified different people over a 40 year period,yet they come to the SAME conclusion every time. He was shot twice from BEHIND, that is what the EVIDENCE tells us.

      I predict someone in 25 years will drag out this dead horse again for another round of speculative opinions of a case that was closed 50 years ago,reopened twice in the 1970’s then closed again with the same basic conclusions. It will NEVER be reopened again,as the evidence is now overwhelming,using updated technology and investigative techniques.

      This Kennedy obsession needs to end.

      • Gator says:

        Tommy, my comment and link does not dispute your posts, in fact it agrees with them. I think I am the recipient of friendly fire.

      • charles nelson says:

        Tommy.
        I would respectfully ask you to check out the description of President Kennedy’s head wound as described by a dozen of the doctors who admitted him to Parkland Hospital.
        They are unanimous in their descriptions which were given in the hours immediately after the killing.
        What is your explanation of this?

        • sunsettommy says:

          Charles,

          TWO Autopsies and subsequent investigations made clear he was shot in the BACK of the head and neck.

          This one the Kennedy Family pushed,that concludes he was shot in the head and through the neck from BEHIND:

          “The gunshot wound in the back

          The Bethesda autopsy physicians attempted to probe the bullet hole in the base of Kennedy’s neck above the scapula, but were unsuccessful as it passed through neck strap muscle. They did not perform a full dissection or persist in tracking, as throughout the autopsy, they were unaware of the exit wound, at the front of the throat. Emergency room physicians had obscured it when they performed the tracheotomy.
          At Bethesda, the autopsy report of the president, Warren Exhibit CE 387[9] described the back wound as being oval, 6 by 4 millimetres (0.24 in × 0.16 in), and located “above the upper border of the scapula” (shoulder blade) at a location 14 centimetres (5.5 in) from the tip of the right acromion process, and 14 centimetres (5.5 in) below the right mastoid process (the bony prominence behind the ear).
          The concluding page of the Bethesda autopsy report,[9] states: “The other missile [the bullet to the back] entered the right superior posterior thorax above the scapula, and traversed the soft tissues of the supra-scapular and the supra-clavicular portions of the base of the right side of the neck.”
          The report also reported contusion (bruise) of the apex (top tip) of the right lung in the region where it rises above the clavicle, and noted that although the apex of the right lung and the parietal pleural membrane over it had been bruised, they were not penetrated, indicating passage of a missile close to them, but above them.
          The report noted that the thoracic cavity was not penetrated.
          This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea, and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck.
          The single bullet of the Warren Commission Report places a bullet wound at the sixth cervical vertebra (C6) of the vertebral column, which is consistent with 5.5 inches (14 cm) below the ear. The Warren Report itself does not conclude bullet entry at the sixth cervical vertebra, but this conclusion was made in a 1979 report on the Kennedy assassination by the HSCA, which noted a defect in the C6 vertebra in the Bethesda X-rays, which the Bethesda autopsy physicians had missed, and did not note. The X-rays were taken by Commander John H. Ebersole, Medical Corps, US Navy.

          Even without this information, the original Bethesda autopsy report, included in the Warren Commission report, concluded that this bullet had passed entirely through the president’s neck, from a level over the top of the scapula and lung (and the parietal pleura over the top of the lung), and through the lower throat.”

          and,

          The 1968 Ramsey Report

          “SUMMARY: Examination of the clothing and of the photographs and X- rays taken at autopsy reveal that President Kennedy was struck by two bullets fired from above and behind him, one of which traversed the base of the neck on the right side without striking bone and the other of which entered the skull from behind and exploded its right side. The photographs and X-rays discussed herein support the above-quoted portions of the original Autopsy Report and the above-quoted medical conclusions of the Warren Commission Report.”

          and,

          The Rockefeller commission 1975,

          “in the assassination of President Kennedy placed much stress upon the movements of the President’s body associated with the head wound that killed the President.”

          The Commission examined the Zapruder, Muchmore, and Nix films; the 1963 autopsy report, the autopsy photographs and X-rays, President Kennedy’s clothing and back brace, the bullet and bullet fragments recovered, the 1968 Clark Panel report, and other materials. The five panel members came to the unanimous conclusion that President Kennedy was struck by only two bullets, both of which were fired from the rear, including one that struck the back of the head. Three of the physicians reported that the backward and leftward motion of the President’s upper body following the head shot was caused by a “violent straightening and stiffening of the entire body as a result of a seizure-like neuromuscular reaction to major damage inflicted to nerve centers in the brain.”

          The report added that there was “no evidence to support the claim that President Kennedy was struck by a bullet fired from either the grassy knoll or any other position to his front, right front, or right side … No witness who urged the view [before the Rockefeller Commission] that the Zapruder film and other motion picture films proved that President Kennedy was struck by a bullet fired from his right front was shown to possess any professional or other special qualifications on the subject.”[14]”

          and,

          HSCA analysis (1979)

          “The pathology panel concluded that President Kennedy was struck by only two bullets, each of which entered from the rear. The panel further concluded that the President was struck by “one bullet that entered in the upper right of the back and exited from the front of the throat, and one bullet that entered in the right rear of the head near the cowlick area and exited from the right side of the head, toward the front” saying that “this second bullet caused a massive wound to the President’s head upon exit.” The panel concluded that there was no medical evidence that the President was struck by a bullet entering the front of the head and the possibility that a bullet could have struck him, and yet left no evidence has been extremely remote.

          Because this conclusion appeared to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President’s head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President’s head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have forced his head to move toward the rear. He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President’s head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear.[16]”

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy

          • tonyheller says:

            There is no question he was shot in the back. That isn’t where the kill shot came from though.

          • charles nelson says:

            Sixteen or so Medics from Parkland hospital describe (by gesture, so there can be no mistake about their intent) a large hole in the upper rear of Kennedy’s head.
            These include the doctors that tried to save his life.
            Do you think they were lying or confused?

        • sunsettommy says:

          Here is the FULL transcript of the Parkland Doctors statement,take note that this is NOT an Autopsy result.

          “Parkland Hospital Press Conference
          Dallas Doctors First Statements
          A little over an hour after declaring John Kennedy dead of gunshot wounds he received in Dealey Plaza, doctors Malcolm Perry and Kemp Clark faced fact-hungry reporters in a news conference at Parkland Hospital and tried as best they could to inform the journalists of the circumstances of Kennedy’s death.

          Some of the statements have been used ever since as evidence of a conspiracy. Note that Kemp Clark said the head wound was at the “back of [Kennedy’s] head” — although he didn’t know whether the wound showed the entrance or exit of a bullet. Perry described the wound in the throat as an “entrance” wound, although he later backed off a bit and said it “appeared to be an entrance wound.”

          But note also that the doctors had to speculate rather wildly about bullet trajectories. Perry said he didn’t know whether the two wounds were the result of one bullet or two, and Kemp Clark speculated that the head wound might be the exit of a bullet that entered at the neck. ”

          http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/press.htm

          • menicholas says:

            I have never and will never believe the magic bullet theory, that Oswald acted alone, or that Kennedy was killed from a shot from the window of the schoolbook depository.
            It has never made sense, and the sophistry used to try and justify the official story is very reminiscent of CACA.
            IMO, you have to have rocks in your head or just willingly have suspended disbelief to buy either of these bullshit stories.
            No offense meant, per se.
            Yes, our eyes can fool us.
            In this case, it is peoples brains that are fooling them.

          • menicholas says:

            The required marksmanship and timing alone make it almost but not quite mathematically impossible.
            All the dead people, Jack Ruby, Oswald sitting in the lunch room seconds later, his gun at the window…a mountain of oddities and nonsensical crap and sophistry…that is what I see.
            People do not want to know.

      • tonyheller says:

        Global warming is settled science. You can’t question it, because 97% of experts agree.

  3. kyle_fouro says:

    I don’t really expect film from back then to somehow amplify the whiteness of something like skull, but the brightness of that spot has always stood out to me and I always assumed that it was bone with any tissue and blood thrown off of it with the rest of the mist.

  4. McThag says:

    Could it be an eyeball popped out of its socket and tethered by the optic nerve?

    An eye is a lot more reflective than a forehead, and more spherical.

    • tonyheller says:

      No. A sphere would not have consistently luminosity. At least one half would be in shadow.

      • charles nelson says:

        So what do you think the light is?

        • RW says:

          The frame in which the ‘circle’ streaks due to motion blur is also interesting. The extent of motion blur is consistent with the extent of JFK’s head movement. If the blur was due to camera movement, there should be additional objects that show a similar extent of motion blur. If not, then we can be more confident that the blur is related to JFK’s head movement and not mere camera blur. Differences in depth affects this comparison of course. But looking for blur in and around the car should yield estimates that are at a compatable depth to JFK’s head.

        • RW says:

          Going back to that frame in the earlier post, i’d say jackie’s arm blurs a similar extent. So, if the shade rebuttal is moot, then the idea about the bright spot being a reflection off of a ring, bracelett, cuffling, or button on jackie’s hand/coat is still game as is the idea about it being a bullet lodged in JFK’s head (sonce his jead seems to shift a similar amount too).

  5. menicholas says:

    I wonder when the body will be exhumed.
    Dead people feel no insults or loss of dignity…but their memory does cry out for the truth and for justice.

  6. richard verney says:

    Someone must be an expert on ballistics, what type of bullet would cause such luminosity? Nothing that I am aware of, but I have no expertise on the subject.

    It appears to me that the bright circle is just below the right eye slightly to the side, say level with the upper cheek bone. If so, is that consistent with where JFK is said to be shot?

    I have 30 years experience of expert evidence in Court cases, and whilst the camera never lies, one is frequently forced to acknowledge that one can not read too much into photographs.

    In frame 317 there are 5 bright patches of light, two on Connally’s forehead, one level with his shoulder, one behind him possibly on a door armrest, and the one one on JFK. The bright mark level with Connally’s shoulder looks fairly parallel with the bright mark on the door armrest.

    To me, the most distinguishing difference between all of these is the circularity of the shape on JFK which is very large (in comparison to a bullet), and uniform in colour. If it was the result of some explosion, then one would not expect it to have an almost uniform hue, and one would expect variation in colour as the blast front expands. You state that the ” Elliptical, brightest near the middle, and the luminosity tails off towards the edges.” but I do not see any such clear pattern, and I have close to 50 years experience with developing and printing colour photographs, and am very used to looking at photographs, both in lab conditions, Court and otherwise.

    Have a look at frame 320 (on a previous post) and you will note that the bright spot on JFK has elongated/expanded to become more cigar shaped/pencil shaped, and now is beginning to be of similar size to the bright mark on the door armrest, and parallel to it with a similar downward slope from left to right. Materially, the bright mark on the door armrest has elongated between frame 317 to frame 320. These changes are consistent with a change in the angle of light (although I am not claiming that is the reason).

    Unfortunately, the film is not very clear, especially at this magnitude. It is therefore very dangerous to read too much into it, albeit that it is probably the most important single piece of evidence, and warrants deep scrutiny. Whether lab enhancing would shed further light on the matter is something that the agencies no doubt have explored, or at any rate ought to have explored. To date, no such enhanced images have been released.

    • richard says:

      The problem with that snippet is they have Connally seating position wrong . He was sitting slightly further in. The bullet would have passed through Kennedy and hit him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *