Taken from the Education forum:

I could add discussion of the many examples of film distortions to
flesh out the argument--like the fact that the turn on to Elm Street
is entirely missing

People have been bringing up this point for years, without explaining
why the sight of a car turning left was so incriminating that it had
to be removed from a home movie. I mean, cars turn left sometimes.
There's really nothing remarkable about it.

Can anyone name this logical fallacy?

And there's a perfectly plausible explanation for the discrepancy in Zapruder's statement. If Zapruder recalled that he hadn't stopped
filming, but the film shows that he had stopped filming, it's vastly
more likely that he was mistaken than that anyone went to all the
trouble of removing the car's left turn from his home movie for no
obvious reason.

Of course, it's far more difficult to believe your theory when you
know that other people who viewed the original film describe the turn
on to Elm St. by the limo. This fact demolishes your theory that
Zapruder had simply forgotten. Now you have to explain why others saw something that didn't exist.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)