Andrej Stancak

Well, I see the question of Oswald's whereabouts during and after shooring and the question of who arranged the rifle and the spent cartridges or maybe even used the rifle to shoot from the sixth floor as on equal footing. If someone planted items of Oswald's guilt on the sixth foor, that person knew for whom he had worked or who had asked him. Proving that someone else than Oswald was on the sixth floor during the shooting is of equal importance, in my mind, to proving Lee Oswald was Prayer Man; one outcome strengthens the outher outcome. I would prefer commenting more on the sixth floor "evidence" or shooter(s) after somehow completing my research.

Roger: I am familiar and agree with your account on Dorothy Garner and the Stroud document. I did not have any email exchange with Barry for about a year or so which is related to the lack of time for JFK research over past two years. I retired from my job couple of months ago and hope to revive my JFK research in due time, which includes the modelling of movements of important players across the TSBD in moments following the final shot. I also wrote to Barry to let him know about the Mort Sahl interview in case he did not register it. As far as who first proposed the scenario of Lee Oswald as Prayer Man walking up the front stairwell to reach the 2nd floor lunchroom, I remember Greg took it from me just one day I posted it. It is not that important but I will send you a private message for you to see. However, I was not the one who invented this scenario. It has been discussed right at the start of the original Prayer Man thread ("Oswald leaving TSBD?"), around page 7 of that thread. Sean Murphy fleetingly touched upon this possibility and considered it tight from the timing perspective. It is this "tight" that requires further exploration. There is no realistic chance to reenact different scenarios in the Depository building any longer, and therefore what remains is a computer reconstruction with parametrically adjusted velocities and pauses in movements of individual people. I started this work during the Covid-19 lockdown periods but eventually was unable to complete due to so much load brought about by the new style of teaching at my University. There is one more catch in Vicki Adams story: if no one has used the stairs or any of the lifts to descend from the sixth floor right after the shooting, how comes that a rifle and spent cartridges were found on the sixth floor? This branch of JFKA case took the most of my time and efforts since I embarked on JFKA research in 2015 with results not strong enough, in my view, to be publicised.

Marjan: where did you get information about Adams and Styles going first to the lift before heading to the stairwell? This diversion was not mentioned either in her WC testimony or in her exchanges with Barry Ernest, or in the audio recording from 1966 which opened this thread. I am involved in reconstructing movements of Vicki Adams, alleged Oswald's movements, and the trajectories of Truly and Baker using a computer technology and realistic (measured) time estimates of individual nodes of movements such as opening the door leading from the stairwell to the 2nd floor or durations of descending/ascending a flight of stairs by a male or female. I have been consulting Barry on details of Vicki's and Sandra's departure. This is what Barry wrote to me in April 2021: "Vicki estimated she left the window between 15 and 30 seconds after the shots. Both she and Sandra told me they remembered seeing Clint Hill rush to the car, and they started away from the window before the car entered the Triple Underpass. This may be a rather imprecise way of figuring it, but if you look at the single frames of the Z-film, you'll see Hill reach for the limousine's rear hand-hold at about Z-342. The car is close to entering the Underpass at Z-462. That leaves 120 frames which, at an average speed of 18.3 frames per second, gives us 6.5 seconds. Since Vicki was not included in any of the timed tests, absolutes are difficult." This conversation led me to assume a 10-second interval between the time of the last shot and Vicki Adams leaving the window on the fourth floor. The two girls took the shortest possible route to get to the entrance to the stairwell and that route would be shorter than the presumed Oswald's route from the most east corner of the sixth floor plus the time required to stash the rifle among the books. Therefore, there was no chance that Lee Oswald, should he be on the sixth floor, could descend via the stairs ahead of Adams and Styles. In the SS reconstruction of Oswald's movements, agent Howlett (Oswald) was walking while moving from the sniper's nest window to the entrance of the stairwell. In contrast, Vicki and Sandra were running both to reach the stairwell and to descend to the first floor, which adds additional seconds to their advantage. I have also enquired with Barry about movements of Mrs. Garner. Dorothy Garner moved to the north-west part of the 4th floor immediately after Adams and Styles left. If Oswald would be following the two girls, both girls would hear his steps, and Garner would either see Oswald or for sure hear hist steps. Nothing of this happened. The only conclusion is that nobody was using the starirwell to escape from the sixth floor in the seconds or a minute elapsing after the last shot. However, I am not disputing a part of Baker's and Truly's encounter with Lee Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom, albeit in a different scenario. In my view, Lee Oswald went to the 2nd floor from the first floor via the front stairwell once he realised Kennedy has been shot. However, this is for a different thread.

Marjan: your timeline suggests that Adams' and Styles' descending followed Oswald's who already was on the second floor when Adams and Styles started their descend. But Adams and Styles left the 4th floor within about 10 seconds after the last shot and had a shorter path to the stairwell than Oswald who also needed to stash his rifle among the book boxes. Thus, Adams and Styles could only be ahead of Oswald. However, they would be able to hear Oswald if he followed him about three flights of stairs (one flight of stairs takes about 7 seconds to pass) as the stairs produced all kind of noises. Mrs. Garner moved to the vicinity of the stairwell right after Adams and Styles left and therefore, she was able to register Baker and Truly as they ascended the stairs; this is entirely all right. However, Garner did not hear or see anyone descending the stairs after Adams and Styles left and before Baker and Truly reached the fourth floor. The only solution to accommodate these circumstances is that nobody was descending through the stairwell after the shooting, neither Oswald nor anyone else.

There is no possibility in my mind that all Parkland staff, the doctors and nurses, would err in reporting the large gaping hole in the right parietal area. I wondered how could autopsy pictures of Kennedy's head not show a hole corresponding to Parkland staff's reports. The answer may be that the back of the head in autopsy pictures was manipulated to hide the gaping hole in the right back of Kennedy's head. This could have occurred by matte technology well known and often used for film tricks in 1963. However, a photographic manipulation may not be perfect and I therefore followed the possibility of residuals of the original head picture could still be retrieved from the altered image. Here is the method and the result:

Ben: when will we be able to see the film presenting Pugibet's story? Will the details (the datebook itself) be made public after the film is out?

On links between Rothman and Pugibet, and Pugibet's associations with Dallas and Dominican Republic. I apologise for repeated posting in case some has already posted the link to this 2017-release document. https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32299962.pdf

Joe: I was referring to this thread and Larry's posts within: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22417-real-evidence-for-a-change-–-what-is-it-with-these-pictures-of-oswald-leafletting/page/3/

A very impressive piece of work. I wonder if this advanced refutation of the single bullet theory will make any impact on main stream media or law enforcement. There seems to be a large gap between evidence that had been gathered by independent researchers over the years and the legal state of the case which remain the same from the day Lee Oswald was killed. (I see resemblance between Knott Lab's work and my digital reconstruction of the Depository doorway in using the original photographs as templates which a 3D model must match accurately. Any models not tested for goodness of fit with original image (s) have little value researchwise.)

Alan: I reduced the dark tones a bit, basically, increased the contrast, and I sharpened the cropped image very slightly, all using SmartPhotoFix procedure in CorelPainshopPro v. 7. The reason was to show the contour of the right side of Lovelady better. I see no problem with this procedure. The dark (black) version of Wiegman is of course of much worse quality than the one I downloaded from jfkassassinationgallery.com. In the one I brought, it is possible to see the details in the depth of the doorway which is a prerequisite for figuring out the orientation of Lovelady's body. This version even shows the faint figure of Prayer Man while the "black" copy, which obviously has been arranged by scanning some old print, does not show Prayer Man. It is a pitty that you cannot understand Lovelady's posture in the cropped views of his body I prepared. It is not that difficult, just try again. But if you think I will spend weeks modelling this Wiegman frame to satisfy you, you are very wrong. No doubt you really wish to have your blackened-out Oswald next to Lovelady in this frame and there is no reasonable argument that would change your view. So, the thread once again is all yours and I would really appreciate if you and Sandy stopped calling my name or quote me in this thread. If not, I will delete all my posts in this thread. Consider this: even if the area of this Wiegman frame would somehow be intentionally darkened (which it was not), how can one know who or what was in that area if there is nothing to be seen in there? And, why only this frame was blackened out and not the rest of Wiegman film frames? Maybe it now dawns on you what nonsense are you pursuing.

I feel sorry for you, Sandy. You are now in Alan's web of wild conspiracy. Of course, there was no blackening in Lovelady's figure.

It can; but the point really is that the posture is natural and entirely possible. No blackening of Lovelady's right side of the body.

Here is 3D model of the man shielding his eyes with his hands for everyone to see and judge how well or poorly it fits the original Altgens6. I cannot see any feminine features, obesity or dense grey hair in this figure justifying a consideration of Sarah Stanto as a candidate. Can you please highlight the features in Altgens6 which would compell people to accept Sarah Stanton being the man shielding his eyes?

You have no idea what you are talking about when categorising my work this way.

This is now for other people to say. I have laid my arguments, provided an explanation, found another picture of the "black" frame, drew lines around Lovelady's body. It is for everyone to see if Lovelady's right side of the body was masked by blackening to hide the figure of Lee Oswald passing by next to Lovelady.

I am using original pictures and draw any lines in separate panels for the reader to be able to verify the shapes I see. I have implemented a 3D modelling approach to test different hypotheses about the locations, postures and sizes of different people in the doorway. This is a quantitative, objective approach aimed to avoid dicsussion of the sort you fancy.

No, I retrieved two full-size images of the frame in question from the jfkassassinationgallery.com and compared them. The one you claim shows a painted-in shadow is of much worse quality than the one I posted today. Nothing has been painted in in any Wiegman frame - if any painting had to make any sense, all Wiegman frames would need to be painted over in the critical area of the doorway but no single one has been. You have no case.

The man shielding his eyes with both hands and wearing white shirt did not stand on the top landing in Altgens6. I am well aware of all types of shadows in the doorway since I modelled them using Google Earth engine as early as 2016.

Alan: you are some photo expert and researcher if you can ridicule me personally, my work and my views so thoroughly. If anyone reads your criticism, s/he would think that you are right and I am wrong, and the readers would not even wonder how can Sarah Stanton's hair be obstructed by her hands as she was allegedly shielding her eyes (not hair) in Altgens6. So far, you could not demonstrate one single Wiegman film frame showing Oswald passing by next to Lovelady. You were taught a lesson yesterday from hands of Mart Hall who clearly and calmly showed you a better version of a Wiegman frame which allegedly had been manipulated to hide Oswald. So you came up with another frame, a cropped view of a very poor-quality frame which clearly was copied from a paper medium. These copying steps automatically degrade information in a picture but you would not listen to it: the only truth is what you see at the moment, and if you cannot see the object which you think should be there, it was because of somebody painted it over. While I encouraged Sandy to try to find a better version of the Wiegman frame you like to challenge Forum members with, I saw no positive response either from him or you. Therefore, I made my search and found a better version of the image with black doorway on jfkassassinationgallery.com: And I cropped this picture to zoom on Lovelady, and brightened the cropped image a bit so that you and Sandy, two best image analysis experts, had a chance to check Lovelady's posture. The right inset shows the a few contours of Lovelady's body, in particular the right arm which turns into a partly visible shoulder. This Lovelady's posture is entirely plausible. I do not expect you to agree with me; I whote my answer for other Forum members and interested guests so that they do not need to spend time refuting your silly theories. Equally though, please do not expect me to be involved in your thread.

Sandy: I took the decision not to take part in this thread any longer after seeing the style of posting and the arguments used. I only respond to your post now because you are one of the administrators of the Forum, and you are bound to protect the standards of an educated debate, and also because you called my name. After I observed that oval shape between Lovelady's and Shelley's head in Altgens6 years ago, I worked for five years to get to the bottom of it, resulting in my Youtube video. It was up to me to figure out what that shape was. Thus, if anyone here thinks he/she just made a breaking discovery of seeing Oswald in the doorway walking through the dooraway with a paper bag and wearing a white shirt, please post the finding after checking all possibilities and after gathering strong evidence of support of such a claim. We have had enough of false claims in the JFK assassination case. It is not the role of the Forum members to refute false statements, especially if a poster does not care about the integrity of the photographic materials. As per the picture you and others in this thread challenged the Forum members and specifically myself to explain, I have already offered an explanation. The frame in question displays too strong contrasts in the depth of the doorway creating very sharp separation of Lovelady's figure from the background. It may be an overall bad quality of the source figure causing such sharp contrasts. For instance, if the cropped view of the doorway was from the picture below, I would not even bother analysing it as it is clearly something like a copy of a paper copy of Wiegman's frame. Subsequent steps fo copying via paper medium made this picture worthless as to the analysis of details in the doorway. It is a poor image and I would advise refraining from making any conclusions based on it. So, what was the source image you used to present the cropped view of the doorway? You may understand it is an important question. As per Lovelady's figure in the picture of interest, he stood with his shoulder at a an angle more parallel with than perpendicular to the western wall of the doorway, and as he was on his way down to the lower steps, he may have his left foot one step down relative to his right foot, causing his right shoulder to be a bit higher than his left shoulder. This configuration would cause his body to appear narrow and his right shoulder hidden behind his head. Add to this Lovelady's forward head posture (often causing unusual appearance of the location of his head relative to the trunk in 2D photographs), and you have an explanation of Lovelady's figure in this frame. Maybe there is a better version of this frame which could shed further light on Lovelady's posture in the picture above?

Your posts would be funny if not being damaging to the standing of this forum. You are now on your own with this thread; you would not hear to any arguments to the contrary of your views anyway. This thread and the one on Carl Jones's arm are the two biggest lows of Educational Forum.

Alan: the reality is that you spew your fantastic inventions in rapid succession and run away once confronted with data. Otis Williams was photographed by William Allen when standing behind the glass door at some point after the shooting. Therefore, we have good idea about his appearance: he wore a white shirt and dark (black?) tie, and he had a nice belly. There is only one candidate for a person with these features in Altgens doorway - the man standing close to the central railing and visoring his eyes. Here I have overlaid my reconstruction of Otis Williams's figure with Altgens6. You may agree it is a good match. At least I am not aware that anyone else has questioned it. After reconstructing Williams' figure, it is possible to check the colour of the trousers of the other man visoring his eyes and standing behind Williams. That small bit of trousers is below the bent left elbow of Otis Williams. It is difficult to spot such minute details by viewing Altgens6 picture without assistance of a 3D model. I would prefer if you called me Andrej instead of Mr. Stancak. The latter sounds polite but my impression is that it only hides your unnecessarily challenging and personal style of interacting in a debate.

Please check my video on Altgens6 for identification of Otis Williams - he was photographed on that day, so his identification was quite straightforward. This was the man also in white shirt and dark trousers and wearing a tie.

It seems there was some misunderstanding in Lovelady's identification of Sarah Stanton as you present it. The guy you highlighted has man's clothes - a white shirt with sleeves rolled up to the elbow (or short-sleeve shirt) and dark (black?) trousers. No trace of Sarah Stanton's blonde hair too. This man was most likely Joe Molina. He stood on one of the top steps as this man does. We have no photograph of Joe Molina from 1963, unfortunately, but his body height is known (5' 8''). Molina told the Warren Commission to have stood next to Otis Williams and Pauline Sanders. The location of the man under your green arrow would match this location. Also, there is simply no other man in the doorway besides Jones, Lovelady, Frazier and Shelley than Molina. As the locations of other male occupants are known, this guy could only be Joe Molina.

It is easy to be tempted into thinking Oswald was in the back and responsible for the shape you highlighted, and back then before I was able to analyse Altgens6 using a 3D model, I was considering this possibility too. Such ideas come from misunderstanding of the relationships in the doorway and from not linking vague photographic interprestations with witness testimonies. There was a huge lady, Mrs. Stanton, up there in the centre of the doorway, on the top landing, and it so happened that part of her face, some curles of her hair and her right shoulder can be seen as separate from Lovelady's body in Altgens6. I have studied this shape for years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0Hwt-cIGq4&t=367s&pp=ygUmdGhlIGNhc2Ugb2YgYSBtaXNzaW5nIGxhZHkgaW4gYWx0Z2VuczY%3D