Michael Morrow

Robert, I believe you are correct. It also appeared to me int he past that the shell stuck between the floor and the wall may be an unfired cartridge, but higher resolution close ups seem to indicate otherwise, at least to my eyes.

Does anyone know where the originals of these films showing "prayer man" are stored/who owns the rights to them?

My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty? His head is clearly tilted more downward in the right photo, which would make his ears appear higher. If you don't understand how perspective works, I'm afraid there is no helping you. Mr Morrow, you berate Ray here about perspective and you claim authority while measuring a 3d dimension on a 2d image by drawing some line... there is something called photogrammetry which is a complex method for measuring objects on a 2d space which results in 3d analysis. What you did can best be called "eye-balling" it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photogrammetry Photogrammetry is the science of making measurements from photographs, especially for recovering the exact positions of surface points. What you've actually done above, frankly, is a joke in relation to the comparison of two different images... personal opinions aside, this work doesn't prove your opinion, it only proves how little you know about measuring distance in photographs... Knowing something about perspective you'd also know your comment about why the ears appear "higher" is complete gibberish. (your pick line even proves the opposite of what your opinion is - it shows these people's faces are NOT the same at all... why exactly do you ignore the results of this work in the first place? You basically prove the images do not match at all, and then state the opposite as an opinion... and then get on Ray related to perspective which you completely fubar. http://commonsensephotography.com/what_is_camera_perspective/index.php Below are examples of a 24mm lens and a 200mm lens taken from the same position. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography) gives you a walkthru example of different focal lengths and photographer distances to the same object... You'd also know you'd need to know much more about the taking of these images to be able to compare them at all.... How far from each camera were these images taken? With what lens do you think each was taken - 35mm, 50mm, zoomed or not - the same for each or not? What is the scale of each image to the original negative? If the two images were taken with different settings or distances of any kind it is impossible to use lines, pixels or anything else for that matter to compare or measure what is seen on the images. Maybe read up alittle about measuring distance on a 2d representation of 3d space... It's nice you think it is so easy as to just draw a few lines... sadly, that's not at all how it works. By sizing and lining up the right ear we can at least see how the two images work with each other... no measurements, just starting with a feature that is sized to match each other which SHOULD result in the faces matching each other... What we also find is that no matter what we do we cannot get LEE's dropped shoulders to match Harvey's more straight shoulders But if there is something you can do to make them match... let's see what you got. There is that fact as well that the 1959 Passport image and the image of Harvey from a week or so later do not appear too similar David, Two simple questions for you. 1) Do you think it was me that created the "doppleganger" image above with the lines drawn on it? You comment seems to be suggesting I created it, which I did not 2) What do you assume my position is regarding the work in the doppleganger image?

My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty? His head is clearly tilted more downward in the right photo, which would make his ears appear higher. If you don't understand how perspective works, I'm afraid there is no helping you. Mr Morrow, you berate Ray here about perspective and you claim authority while measuring a 3d dimension on a 2d image by drawing some line... there is something called photogrammetry which is a complex method for measuring objects on a 2d space which results in 3d analysis. What you did can best be called "eye-balling" it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photogrammetry Photogrammetry is the science of making measurements from photographs, especially for recovering the exact positions of surface points. What you've actually done above, frankly, is a joke in relation to the comparison of two different images... personal opinions aside, this work doesn't prove your opinion, it only proves how little you know about measuring distance in photographs... Knowing something about perspective you'd also know your comment about why the ears appear "higher" is complete gibberish. (your pick line even proves the opposite of what your opinion is - it shows these people's faces are NOT the same at all... why exactly do you ignore the results of this work in the first place? You basically prove the images do not match at all, and then state the opposite as an opinion... and then get on Ray related to perspective which you completely fubar. http://commonsensephotography.com/what_is_camera_perspective/index.php Below are examples of a 24mm lens and a 200mm lens taken from the same position. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography) gives you a walkthru example of different focal lengths and photographer distances to the same object... You'd also know you'd need to know much more about the taking of these images to be able to compare them at all.... How far from each camera were these images taken? With what lens do you think each was taken - 35mm, 50mm, zoomed or not - the same for each or not? What is the scale of each image to the original negative? If the two images were taken with different settings or distances of any kind it is impossible to use lines, pixels or anything else for that matter to compare or measure what is seen on the images. Maybe read up alittle about measuring distance on a 2d representation of 3d space... It's nice you think it is so easy as to just draw a few lines... sadly, that's not at all how it works. By sizing and lining up the right ear we can at least see how the two images work with each other... no measurements, just starting with a feature that is sized to match each other which SHOULD result in the faces matching each other... What we also find is that no matter what we do we cannot get LEE's dropped shoulders to match Harvey's more straight shoulders But if there is something you can do to make them match... let's see what you got. There is that fact as well that the 1959 Passport image and the image of Harvey from a week or so later do not appear too similar That is a rather lengthy rebuttle, and I don't deny that there are several factors that can influence a photograph. However, I was talking about simple perspective shifts based on head orientation relation to camera lens being able to explain ear movement outside of "puberty" as Mr. Mitchem so eloquently put it. Below is a quick and dirty rendering of the exact same head in a 3d modeling program. The head on the right has a very slight shift downward in relation to the viewing angle. Amazingly, we see an upward shift in the ears relation to the "viewing lens" of this image. I don't really know how simpler to explain it, but that is what I was attempting to point out regarding the issue with ear height variation from photo to photo. Please let me know if you disagree.

My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men. When did his ears drop? Puberty? His head is clearly tilted more downward in the right photo, which would make his ears appear higher. If you don't understand how perspective works, I'm afraid there is no helping you.

My personal opinion is that these are clearly the same man, taken at different points in his life. Lighting, head tilt, pursing of the lips in the marine photo (edit: I mean photo on the right, I mistook that for a photo of Oswald in the marines) can easily account for many of the subtle differences between photos. I think there is some interesting evidence suggesting there were sightings of "Oswald" in more than one place at once, but this set of photos doesn't convince me we are looking at two different men.

I would have to agree with you. The more I look, the more it seems clear that prayer man is actually folding their arms and leaning to their right onto the wall there. http://imgur.com/a/WKQbP

I think it is very likely that Oswald, or whomever you think took the shots on the 6th floor, was on the West side of the 6th floor with the rifle while Williams was easting his lunch. There was quite a few places to hide and avoid Williams detection, so I believe when he says nobody else was up there with him that is what he believes, but it certainly does not mean for a fact nobody else was on the 6th floor. Upon him leaving, the shooter might have realized the East window would be a better shot, or perhaps the snipers nest was already completed and they simply returned to it after Williams leaves. As for Normans testimony, I don't find it unlikely that he could hear the shells. The floors and ceilings were not built like they would be in an office building. They were a single layer of wood, that you could visibly see through in spots. It is not beyond the realm that you could easily hear sounds such as shells being dropped on the single layer of wood above your head. It is certainly probable and I would say likely that you would hear a significant report from a rifle fired above you. To address DVP's claims earlier in the thread about ear protection and 650 yard shot with that rifle, I have one simple question. Have you ever fired a rifle? First hand experience would tell you two things. 1) Even well trained shooters would have a very difficult time with a 650 yard shot with even a more capable rifle/scope/ammunition. The carcano round was not meant to be a long distance round, but certainly is capable within the distances shot in Dealey Plaza. 2) Rifles in the caliber and grain size of the carcano are LOUD, and even with ear protection will produce a significant report to those firing. I can assure you, a persons ears would certainly be ringing (although not rendered deaf) after three shots without protection.

There has been incredible work dont to the Zapruder film over the years to digitize the highest quality versions possible. I am curious, would that efford be possible/worth doing on the films that show Prayer Man? This is honestly one of the most interesting new things I have seen in this case and would love to be able to see a clearer or higher resolution image from those films.

This has been an excellent thread, and I think it has some very (potentially) explosive information. I was curious if anyone here has a high resolution scan of Jack Weaver's polaroid photo. It is quite over-exposed, but that is a good thing for capturing our "prayer man" in the shadows. The only versions I've seen online are highly pixelated. Photo can be seen below, but please post if you have a HD scan or copy. Thanks. http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/1518/tuul.jpg My guess is thats about the best quality you're going to get from a polaroid, but I figured I'd pose the question. Keep up the great work guys! Also, while I'm not sure what I think actually occured, I tend to agree that the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter could still happen if Prayer Man is in-fact Oswald.

My name is Michael Morrow. I was born and grew up in northern New Jersey. I am 25 years old and have been interested in the JFK assassination since I was young. I have always been fascinated with learning new things, so even as a child I loved to read about new topics and watch TV channels like TLC, Discovery, and the History Channel. I recall catching some VERY interesting information from a series I knew little about, titled “The Men Who Killed Kennedy.” I was hooked ever since. I remember my first book was purchased shortly after that. I found an encyclopedia type reference book about the case, which was an A-Z catalogue of evidence, people, locations, and theories. I was perusing Barnes and Noble with my mom and found it in one of those discount sections. I read that book cover to cover more times than I can count, and drove my mom nuts with all of the “Did you know that ……” that I threw her way as I discovered new and interesting things about the case. I feel that I am a very passionate person when it comes to things I believe are true, however I am very open minded and willing to listen to dissenting opinions and evidence. If I hear a convincing argument to the contrary and come to the realization that my original opinion is wrong, I have no problems admitting to that fact. I have been reading this and other forums and websites for several years now. I am currently working in Connecticut as a Manufacturing Engineer after having attending Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, NY for Mechanical Engineering from 2004-2008. My background in engineering makes me approach problems and unknowns in a very methodical and logic based way. Theories and speculation are good for leading you in a direction of research, but I find it difficult to draw definitive conclusions without hard facts and evidence.