Richard Price

For a good look at how he leaned out the window, do a search for "Gerald Hill leaning out TSBD window".

The one thing I notice has nothing to do with this discussion. If Lovelady is standing straight and his head is straight (both appear to be true), in his face forward photo his left ear appears somewhat smaller and the top seems elevated above the level of the right ear. A straight line from the top (and bottom) across his face is slanted upwards to the left.

Jonathan, on the surface your reasoning seems (and is sound). My question would be, How many of these photos/films have been "passed through" various agencies (CIA ["Time-Life"]/FBI/HSCA), examined,studied or in other ways and out of the hands of the owners. I think all or virtually all were. If the CIA was involved (I think they were), those at the top of the conspiracy to kill would be the same ones who could oversee the gathering and censorship of the visual evidence. Those not involved would/could be manipulated by use of the "state secrecy" and internal classification. After all, you wouldn't want to start WWIII by revealing something told to you by the top members of the intelligence agencies (especially in the 1960's/cold war era). Once changes/edits/splices, etc. are in place you can't go back to the originals and no one has anything more than a memory that the photo/film somehow looks different than it did originally. I have seen, heard or read many accounts of the people having made the photos or films saying their memory of what they sent in is slightly different from what was returned. Also, many were simply returned "damaged" by those darn professionals that handled the materials while in "official hands". I feel this accounts for possible alteration in the (Keep It Simple Stupid/Ocams Razor) method. Just my opinion though.

No, Alan that is not it. In the slowed down clips, the figures appear in the most rightward panned frame. The Lovelady left profile is all the way against the edge of the frame 3/4 of the way up and the character who appears to me to be Oswald is the one who has been altered in other films to appear to be the "leaning Lovelady". The unknown individual being debated (about being a woman/Oswald) is to the left and behind in the shadows. I had never noticed the individual to the extreme right having the appearance of Lovelady and had assumed the figure in the center was B F Frazier. Your photo used to ask Andrej to explain the body orientation showed me that this figure was NOT Frazier, but Oswald, due to the Lovelady figure showing up only a few frames away in the extreme right had portion of the frame.

Alan and anyone else interested: The last clip in the above message shows Billy Lovelady in left profile on the extreme right (as viewing) near the top of the landing looking directly west from a position on the right side of the steps with what to me appears to be Lee Oswald towards the center (being represented as Lovelady) in the open top shirt with t-shirt showing.

Just a comment on Andrej's depiction: The Lovelady figure has the coloration for the shirt extending over the raised and outstretched arm and body of Carl Jones and even cuts under his (CJ's) chin. In my studies of this picture, I have found quality copies which show CJ's arm extends all the way up to the folded collar on "Lovelady's" left side and CJ's chin is almost touching his arm. This coloration causes undue distortion and confusion of the figure's posture/position. Andrej has done much to assist in understanding this photo, but this coloration of the shirt needs to be addressed.

Here is a link to a much better copy. Licensed image, however. https://www.gettyimages.fi/detail/uutiskuva/lee-harvey-oswald-passport-uutiskuva/576878118

This picture has always intrigued me. I have no idea who the woman is and have never really noticed her. The man, however looks to me to be the umbrella man. He appears to have a grip on an umbrella in his left hand which extends in a downward angle to the left and also towards his back at an upward angle.

Thanks, Denny. I made the comment out of respect for DSL. Since I always looked forward to reading his responses (or even better, his posts), I always chuckled to myself when I saw him doing the same to others and even coming back to check/correct his own posts. I think it was in his genes also. While I do not normally point out such errors to others posting/responding on the forum, (except to under my breath to myself), I thought it might be OK to do so in respect to a post about him when he doesn't have the ability to do so any longer. You took the comment the way I intended it, there was no malice intended.

Roger, nice post. I do have to say though, you need to go back and make a number of corrections of DSL's name. His name is given as Lipton quite a few times. Sorry, it's in my genes, I proofread/spellcheck constantly (a little OCD, I think).

Vince (and all), I will not debate Hill's foot as I do not have a position on what is going on at this point. You and others have, I hope realized that in the first two pictures of Hill splayed out over the limo his left leg/foot is across the trunk area. In the third picture it is now his right leg hanging across the trunk. Picture number four - where are his legs - either of them? It doesn't appear to be enough room for them between the seat and his visible torso, so how is he twisted into this position?

Thank GOD! It would have been a loooooong 6 years to be represented by a running back that doesn't even know what a pronoun is, much less the duties of a US Senator... And doesn't even live in GA. I was afraid that, like in an op ed penned by a fellow Georgian, I would have to watch "Deliverance" on auto replay until I could understand my fellow citizens. We still have MTG to try to live down for 2 more years. While I'm quoting you I'll chime in on your forum pic as well. I think it was an excellent idea to update the picture. I second the comments made by Kirk. Hope you are getting better each day and have renewed good health.

Forgive me if this has already been discussed, but all the talk of transfer of energy as it relates to the sudden movement of JFK's head at frame 313 has me wondering if the possible frame removal that has been discussed many times on the forum might apply here. I cannot recall the numbers off hand, but I know a number of the photo/film experts have weighed in on what was necessary to alter the speed (MPH) of the limo to get to the numbers used by SS/FBI/WC. If the frames were replaced into the film, would it not slow the speed of the head snap, thereby making it less drastic and more in line with what would be expected per the transfer of energy? I know the speed of the limo was being addressed and also the quick disappearance of blood spray/splatter, but I'm not sure if anyone addressed the slowing of the head snap. Many thanks to Chris Davidson, David Healey and all the others who have meticulously documented the frame removal, overlay processes, speed alteration and the math behind it all.

Thanks, David. I thought that might be the case. The ride from the hotel to the airport, I suppose?

Thanks, Vince. I don't believe I have ever really looked at the photos from San Antonio. At least not knowingly.