The Assassination Chronicles Vol. 1. Issue 4 Winter
'95
(not all photos are included in this
reproduction.)
Best Witness: JFK's
Limousine
Anthony Marsh
The best witness to the JFK
assassination was the Presidential limousine.
As other JFK researchers have pointed out,
eyewitness testimony can be unreliable. Witnesses can be confused,
lie, misremember events, or can be susceptible to suggestion.
The damage to the limousine tells a story of its own, an accurate
and truthful account of the events in Dealey Plaza.
One of the most important points of damage
to the limousine was the dent of the chrome topping above the
windshield. Was it caused by a direct hit of a bullet or a bullet
fragment? Six Seconds in Dallas, (footnote 16 of chapter 5) cites
a letter from Chief of the Secret Service James Rowley, who claimed
that the dent was caused way in November 1, 1961, by routine
maintenance. The Warren Report was ambiguous about the dent.
It appears that the Warren Commission did not attempt to examine
any photographs to determine if the chrome topping was undented
before the assassination. They might have examined several photographs
which could have resolved the issue. Many photographs and films
were taken in Dealey Plaza before the shooting started. Several
were taken at Love Field which showed the limousine in its pristine
condition, such as the one by Tom Dillard (Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Dillard photo
Figure 2.
Powers
photo |
Unfortunately, the hand-hold
bar blocks our view of the chrome topping in this Dillard photo, but
other photos and films must have been taken showing it clearly from
the motorcade which have not yet been made public. In August,
1995, LIFE magazine published one photograph taken by Presidential
aide Dave Powers, who is believed to have taken several photos
and an earlier film of the motorcade at Love Field and before
the motorcade reached Dealey Plaza . (Figure 2.)Dave Powers'
vantage point was especially privileged, as he rode in the Secret
Service follow-up car, where the official White House photographer
would normally ride, but didn't that day.
Figure 3. Figure
4. |
Cecil Stoughton, the official White House
photographer, was stuck that day riding several cars back in
one of the camera cars. In fact, Stoughton was not even scheduled
to go on the Texas trip, but had to fill in for Robert Knudsen,
who had some slivers in his eye which needed to be removed. Supposedly,
Stoughton took only a couple of photos near Dealey Plaza, one
just before the motorcade reached the plaza, and one of the grassy
knoll about 30 seconds after the shooting. But he did take photos
of the limousine the day before when the President visited Kelly
Air Force Base in San Antonio. We can see in this photo that
he did occupy the normal position in the Secret Service follow-up
car (Figure 3). In the next photo we see that the chrome topping
was undented (Figure 4). The HSCA was seemingly unaware of, or
ignored, the Stoughton photos, and did not address the issue
of the dent of the chrome topping. However, HSCA photographic
consultant Robert Groden did state at a conference at Emerson
College a few years ago that he and a HSCA staff member had examined
the chrome topping at the National Archives and that the nose
of a Mannlicher-Carcano bullet like CE 399 fit perfectly into
the indentation in the chrome topping.And
here is a photograph taken by Robert Knudsen of an earlier motorcade in
1963 which shows that the chrome topping was undented (Figure 5).

Figure 5. |

Figure 6. |
Examining hundreds
of photos at the JFK Library, I found several showing the condition
of the limousine during previous motorcades. One "theory" which
those photos disprove is the notion that the rear seat was raised
as the limousine on November 22nd, in order to make JFK an easier
target. Those individuals who have proposed this idea have obviously
not seen what the limousine looked like when the rear seat was
actually raised. In one motorcade, the rear seat was raised about
5 inches (Figure 6). It is quite obvious from all angles, but
especially from the rear. Compare this position that in another
motorcade when the rear seat was not raised (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Seat is not raised

Figure 8. Seat is fully raised
|
CLICK FOR LARGER SIZED PHOTOS
In Mark North's Act of Treason, an even
more dramatic example shows former Chief of the Secret Service
Baughman sitting on the fully raised rear seat (Figure 8 above).The
best-known and most disputed point of damage to the limousine was the crack
of the windshield. In the Altgens 1-6 photo, which is approximate to Zapruder
frame 255, that the windshield is undamaged, yet in his next photo
the windshield is cracked. Frazier's CE 350 shows the condition
of the windshield taken about 14 hours after the assassination
(Figure 9). No hole in the windshield, only a crack. As we can
see in this blow-up of CE 350, it is a crack (Figure 10). I believe
CE 350 depicts the same windshield which was on the limousine
during the assassination: the location and pattern of the crack
and presence of blood spatters looks consistent from Dealey Plaza
to CE 350.Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman testified
(2H89) that when he first felt the windshield a few days after
the assassination, the inside felt rough and that when he examined
it on the day of his testimony, it felt smooth. I believe that
the reason for the difference in roughness is that when the windshield
was first examined on November 23, 1963, the roughness on the
inside was due to the presence of minute bullet fragments (CE
841) which were completely removed for testing, so that any later
examination of the glass would result in a feel of smooth glass.Some might
also argue that the theory of how glass fractures on the opposite side
of the point of impact would seem to indicate that the shot came from the
front and caused a fracture on the inside. Then, supposedly, the coverup
conspirators realized this mistake and switched windshields so
that the corrected windshield would exhibit fractures on the
outside to indicate that it was hit from the inside. But there
are a couple of problems with this theory.The windshield was composed of
laminated automobile glass, which consists of two layers of glass with
a layer of plastic between them. Thus it is quite common that
to have damage to the inside layer of the glass which does not
extend to the outside layer of the glass and vice versa. That
is its design purpose. I also doubt that anyone had the opportunity
and capability to switch the windshield before it was examined
and photographed by Frazier, and certainly trying to resolve
conflicting testimony by switching windshields would require
several switches.
Figure 11. CE350

Figure 12.CE49Z
|
Is there any other damage which would indicate
from which direction the windshield was struck? For the first
time the answer is yes. If you look carefully at CE 350, you
will see that the back of the rearview mirror is dented (Figure
11). This could only have been caused by a bullet ricocheting
off the inside of the windshield. The glass was therefore struck
on the inside by a shot from behind the limousine. No holes in
the glass. If a bullet had gone through the windshield, nothing
would have to ricocheted, striking the back of the rearview mirror.
What could a shot from behind have first struck to produce a
bullet fragment which would hit the inside of the windshield
and then ricochet to the right to hit the back of the rearview
mirror? I think the bullet which caused
the damage to the windshield, and most likely also the chrome topping (figure
12), was the last shot from the TSBD. It's highly unlikely that
this shot struck JFK after Z-313. He had already been struck
by a shot in the back from the TSBD at about Z-210. Connally
had already been struck in the back by a shot at about Z-230,
when Connally thought he was hit. But he did not remember being
struck in the wrist. Not only was the alignment of the two men
incorrect for a Single-Bullet Theory trajectory at either Z-190
or Z-210, Connally's wrist was also too high to have been struck
by a bullet exiting his chest just below his right nipple.I think the most
likely scenario is that the last shot from the TSBD hit Connally's wrist
after Z-313, either directly or indirectly, then broke up into many fragments
which caused all the damage to the limousine, Tague's cut, and
the fragments in Connally's thigh. I would suggest that a much
more detailed examination of the photographic record might pinpoint
the time at which the windshield, chrome topping and rearview
mirror were struck.We can determine a possible time for that
last shot from the TSBD from the acoustical evidence. The HSCA
acoustical studies give us the approximate spacing between shots.
We then need to match up the timing with the Zapruder frames.The last two
shots were separated by about. 744 of a second, or about 13.6 Zapruder
frames. So, if the last shot from the TSBD was after Z-313, we would expect
to see no damage before Z-327 and see damage within a few frames after
that. I would suggest that those who claim to have excellent
copies of the photographic evidence concentrate their focus on
frames Z-326 to Z-330 in looking for changes in the condition
of the limousine.During the 1994 COPA conference, I visited
the National Archives and in particular reviewed the newly-released
photos of the limousine. In the same folder were what appeared
to be photocopies of the original worksheets by the agents who
examined the limousine on November 23, 1963. I'm not sure who
wrote the sheets and exactly when they were written (the three
agent names appear to be Frazier, Killiam, and Cunningham), but
the sheets record the observations of the examination team that
night. They mark the exact locations of the fragments recovered.
Incidentally, these worksheets clear up one of the major controversies
about the limousine. Some people have speculated that the white
object seen in the photos was a white cloth hand puppet (which
they have affectionately dubbed Lambchop), which was given to
Jackie at Love Field. The worksheets note that the white object
was actually a bunch of chrysanthemums.Both major bullet fragments were
found on the right side of the limousine in the front compartment.
It appears logical to me that a ricocheting fragment landing
on the right side of the front seat must have come from the left
side of the limousine. JFK was never to the left of the midline,
nor was Connally's trunk when he was hit in the back. But Connally
had slumped into his wife's lap after he was shot and his wrist
was to the left of the midline after Z-313. Thus, I believe that
the damage to the limousine suggests that Connally's wrist was
struck by a different bullet than the one which went through
his chest. And I believe that the photographic evidence will
show that the limousine was not damaged by a shot from the TSBD
at Z-313, which would prove by inference that the headshot at
Z-313 must have been the grassy knoll shot. In conclusion, I
would urge all serious researchers to continue to look for new
evidence and strive to better understand the evidence we already
have. |