Chapter 02

Chain of Custody

From a Kodak processing sink in Dallas to a climate-controlled vault in College Park, Maryland — the documented movement of the camera-original and its earliest copies.

Why the chain matters

The camera-original is a unique physical object: a single strip of exposed reversal film with no negative. Every argument about alteration, missing frames, or "second-day" editing turns on whether the object held today by the National Archives is the same strip that ran through Zapruder's camera. The record below is drawn from the ARRB's 1998 chain-of-custody report, sworn testimony, and contemporaneous invoices from Kodak and Jamieson.

Timeline

  1. Nov 22, 1963 · ~6:30 p.m.

    Kodak Processing Lab, Dallas

    Camera-original developed under Zapruder's supervision. Kodak techs Phil Chamberlain and Tom Nulty processed the film; Zapruder retained the original.

    ARRB Final Report

  2. Nov 22, 1963 · ~8:00 p.m.

    Jamieson Film Company, Dallas

    Three first-generation contact copies made from the original. Numbered #0185, #0186, #0187 by Kodak.

  3. Nov 22, 1963 · night

    Zapruder's office

    Two copies given to Secret Service agent Forrest Sorrels. Sorrels forwarded them to Chief James Rowley in Washington and to the FBI's Dallas field office.

    Warren Commission testimony, Sorrels

  4. Nov 23, 1963

    Zapruder's office

    Richard Stolley of Life magazine negotiates print rights for $50,000. Zapruder donates the first $25,000 to the widow of Officer J. D. Tippit.

  5. Nov 25, 1963

    New York

    Life acquires all rights (motion-picture and print) for a total of $150,000 in six installments. Time Inc. takes physical custody of the camera-original.

    Stolley, 'What Happened Next,' Esquire 1973

  6. Nov 29, 1963

    Life offices, Chicago

    Life publishes 31 frames as still photographs. Frame Z-313 is not published in this issue.

  7. 1969

    New Orleans

    Life licenses a bootleg-suppressed copy to DA Jim Garrison for the Clay Shaw trial; the film is shown publicly for the first time.

  8. 1975 · March 6

    ABC's Good Night America

    Robert Groden and Dick Gregory air the film in motion on U.S. network television for the first time. Public reaction leads directly to formation of the HSCA.

  9. 1975 · April 9

    New York

    Time Inc. returns all rights and the camera-original to the Zapruder family for a symbolic $1.

  10. 1978

    National Archives, College Park, MD

    The Zapruder family places the camera-original on deposit with NARA for preservation. Legal ownership remains with the family.

  11. 1998 · Aug 1

    National Archives

    Under the JFK Records Act, the Assassination Records Review Board declares the camera-original an 'assassination record' and takes it by eminent domain. Compensation is deferred to arbitration.

    ARRB Determination, Aug 1998

  12. 1999 · Aug 3

    Federal arbitration panel

    Panel awards the Zapruder heirs $16,000,000 plus interest for the camera-original. Copyright to the images is retained by the family and later donated to the Sixth Floor Museum in 2000.

    In re Zapruder, Arbitration Award

  13. 2000 · Dec 30

    Dallas

    The Zapruder family donates the film's copyright and all first-generation copies to the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza. The camera-original remains at NARA in cold storage.

What is genuinely disputed

Two gaps in the chain are noted by serious researchers. First, the movement of the film between the Kodak lab and the Jamieson copy house on the evening of November 22 is documented only by later testimony from Zapruder and Kodak employee Richard Blair. Second, the ARRB's 1997 interviews with NPIC (National Photographic Interpretation Center) analysts Homer McMahon and Ben Hunter describe a briefing on the night of November 23 involving a Secret Service courier and a film they were told came from a lab in Rochester, not Dallas (ARRB interview memoranda, 1997). These accounts are contested, decades-old, and unsupported by contemporaneous documents; researchers Doug Horne and David Lifton treat them as significant, while the ARRB itself declined to draw any conclusion.