Mary Moorman Tells Story

[kenmurray]

From May 24, 2011:http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/in ... 666.0.html

[Davyjones]

Suprised no one has commented about the Moorman hour. She seems to say she was not on the road for her famous pic. So that is That? The missing photo seems to have been given to a cop and got lost,how convienant? My feeling is she was set up as what to say and what not to say. I suspect the whole reason for her contribution was to sell the poleriod for the most bucks. There is one gleam of light...her photo sequence does not seem to match up with the numbers on the known surviving poleriods? She says she only heard 3 shots so so much for those who claim 8 or more. Not a waste of time but a dissapointment.

[Davyjones]

I think we have a problem Mary Ann!Mary says the first two photos of her and Jean getting out of the car were the last on the roll.She inserted a new roll of film.(its a flat pack not a roll)We should have the next photos in a sequence 1 to 3They are marked as in JD Thomas post on this thread 3 to 5She is clear that SHE CHANGED FILM after her two car pics so where and what was on pic1 and 2 in the new sequence!You guys help me out on this?

[Deborah]

The May 24th, 2011 1.5 hour Gary Stover interview with Mary Ann Moorman is posted on www.iantique.comCannot download the video though you can sign in and watch and listen to it.

[Davyjones]

Thanks for the link DeborahAs we are a research based forum I can understand intuative opinion being ignored.Looking at her interview again I noticed the followingShe states only 3 shots ,the last two being close together.That alone makes the Lone Nutters story a none starter.It takes 2.5 secs at best to reload and aim the Carcarno.Mary Ann at no point confirms that she is standing where the Zapruder film says she was. It would have been so easy to show her the still and say "Is that were you stood when you took the famous pic" Never happened!!!She has a pop at Jean Hill without being specific. In view of her poor performance on this interview I am inclined to say I would put more credence to Jeans version.

[Deborah]

Davyjones wrote:Thanks for the link DeborahAs we are a research based forum I can understand intuative opinion being ignored.Looking at her interview again I noticed the followingShe states only 3 shots ,the last two being close together.That alone makes the Lone Nutters story a none starter.It takes 2.5 secs at best to reload and aim the Carcarno.Mary Ann at no point confirms that she is standing where the Zapruder film says she was. It would have been so easy to show her the still and say "Is that were you stood when you took the famous pic" Never happened!!!She has a pop at Jean Hill without being specific. In view of her poor performance on this interview I am inclined to say I would put more credence to Jeans version. In the posted May 24th, 2011 webcast on http://www.iantique.com, between approximately 16 minutes and 22 minutes, Mary answers questions about where she was standing when she took the first, second and third photographs on the second roll of new film which she had loaded into her camera when she got to Dealey Plaza that morning. Below is a summarized version of Mary's interview with respect to this portion. The following is not verbatim, it is a summary of a portion of the interview. (There is no conflict between what Mary Moorman is saying in this May 24th interview and what she said in radio and television and media interviews which she gave on November 22, 1963. There is however a more detail in this May 24th, 2011 interview because the interviewer is drawing it out through his questioning technique.) The following is my summary of a portion of the May 24th interview webcast. I hope it helps.Two pictures were left on first roll of film in Mary's poloroid camera. These last two poloroids were used to take the pictures which Jean and Mary took of each other on the morning of November 22nd. Mary Ann purchased a new roll of film at a store on the way to find their spot to watch the motorcade that morning in Dealey Plaza. Mary Ann did not know anything about how to set the camera to any certain speed or if the camera was set to any certain speed. She said she knew how to put the film in, point and shoot and how to take the photographs out of the camera. Photographs in each poloroid roll of film have numbers on them. With the new roll of film, they went to Dealey Plaza and looked for best place to get a look at the President. They arrived about 10.30. It was misting rain. Mary Ann had gone to school with many of the Dallas policemen. A police escort was riding by where Mary Ann was standing 15 or 20 minutes ahead of the President's motorcade. Motorcyle Officer Glen McBride was one of three VERY advanced motorcycle policemen. Mary Ann knew Officer Glen McBride and she took his picture. "I did step out into the street to take his picture." Then a while later, there was another lead car coming by. Following that lead car there were two or three other policemen that came down the street and one of them was Motorcycle Officer George Lumpkin. Mary Ann stepped into the street and took her second photograph on the new roll of film. Later, she gave this picture of Lumpkin to him because she thought he would want to have it. Officer Lumpkin moved to East Texas later and she never saw the photograph again. She knew Officer Lumpkin because he directed traffic at her church. Mary Ann confirmed she stepped out into the street to take this picture of Lumpkin. He was riding on his motorcycle.After taking the picture of Office Lumpkin, she could see that the President's car was getting close. She just wanted a really good picture. "I had been in the street taking a picture of Lumpkin." Mary Ann was looking into the camera watching the President's car as it approached. She said she stepped back and up onto the curb and onto the grass as the President's car was going to approach and before she took the photograph of the President's car. She did not specifically try to take a picture of J.B. Marshall, motorcycle policemen, who was riding behind the President's car. She was specifically trying to take a photograph of the President. Mary Ann took only three photographs on the new roll of film. One photo of Motorcyle Officer Glen McBride, 15 or 20 minutes before the President's car arrived. One photo of Motorcyle Officer George Lumpkin who was riding behind a lead car many minutes following the first photo she took and before the Presidents car approached. Mary Ann Moorman stood in the street when said she took each of these first two photographs of motorcyle policemen on the new roll of film. Mary Moorman said she was not standing in the street when she took the third photograph on the second roll of film, which is the photograph she took of the President's car and was the last photograph which she took that day. Mary Ann has in her possession from the second roll of film, two original photographs, the photo of Motorcyle Officer Glen McBride and the photograph she took of the President's car. Mary Ann Moorman, took only five poloroid photographs on November 22nd. Two on the first roll of film which was still in her camera on that morning, and three on the second roll of film which she purchased on November 22nd just before walking to the location in Dealey Plaza where she was standing to watch the motorcade starting from approximately 10.30 am. Deborah Fairbanks

[Davyjones]

Deborah...Please explain why The pics she took on the new film (the ones that count) are marked 3-5 not 1-3 as they should be?

[Deborah]

Davyjones wrote:Deborah...Please explain why The pics she took on the new film (the ones that count) are marked 3-5 not 1-3 as they should be?I will respond as to what seems reasonable in this regard. Though I have never owned a poloroid camera or purchased poloroid film, it may make sense that a roll of poloroid film for the camera which Mary Ann Moorman used in 1963 would take more than 2 pictures per roll or more than 3 pictures per roll of film. If that is the case, then the two photographs taken of Jean and herself as the last of roll she already had in her camera on the morning of November 22nd, were two of other pictures which she had taken on that particular roll previous to November 22nd. The camera apparently did not make negatives and I do not know that Mary Ann was ever asked what other photos, if any, she had taken on the first roll of film prior to November 22nd. Because these first two November 22nd photographs were photographs which were offered as evidence to the media and FBI on November 22nd, they were each conceivably marked by the media and FBI persons as photographs 1 and 2 in a series of 5 which she offered as evidence on that day. Based on what Mary Ann Moorman has stated about buying a brand new roll of film just before arriving at her location on Dealey Plaza to await the motorcade, the next three photographs which she took that day were photographs 1, 2 and 3 of the new and second roll of film and conceivably became identified as photographs 3, 4, and 5 by the media/FBI persons to whom she offered the total of five poloroid photographs which she had on her person and offered into evidence. I am not knowledgeable about how poloroid film manufacturers number photos and how the number identification can be seen once the photo is taken out of the camera. I imagine that seeing the original poloroid photographs which Mary Ann Moorman still has in her hand would still show the manufacturer's numbering of the photographs. In essence, from what I have seen on many websites showing the Moorman photographs, the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are written in pen or digitally added by the author or researcher of the website to identify the series. I personally have never thought these numberings of the series had anything to do with the manufacturers' numbering of photographs on the respective rolls of film but more that it is an evidence numbering. I have joined the http://www.iantique.com JFK forum and can and will ask Mary Ann Moorman/Gary Stover to respond to this question. If they respond to me on this question, I will post that response here for you. I will ask if the manufacturers' numbering of the photographs is still evident on the originals.

[Davyjones]

Deborah...I was using polariods way back then,but whateverIf you look at JD Thomas post early on on this thread(I am lousy at cut and paste) you will see the backs of the Moorman pics marked 3,M/C cop,4 missing,5 the famous pic.Unless JD has got it wrong its self evident Mary has a big problem.She forgot to mention 2 photos she must have taken?I remain open minded until the facts are confirmed or otherwise

[Deborah]

Davyjones wrote:Deborah...I was using polariods way back then,but whateverIf you look at JD Thomas post early on on this thread(I am lousy at cut and paste) you will see the backs of the Moorman pics marked 3,M/C cop,4 missing,5 the famous pic.Unless JD has got it wrong its self evident Mary has a big problem.She forgot to mention 2 photos she must have taken?I remain open minded until the facts are confirmed or otherwiseThe point I am making is that #3, #4 missing, #5 are evidence markings not manufacturer's numbering of photographs. This #3, #4 and #5 marking is not that it is wrong, it is just that #1 and #2 in the series of five photographs are from two separate rolls of film and have nothing whatever to do with the manufacturer's numbering of photographs on the two separate rolls of film. It is not that JD has it wrong, this numbering is being misinterpreted. Anyway, I've asked for a response from Mary Ann Moorman and will post it when I receive it.