Newseum displays "Oswald's shirt": Proof that he was Doorman!

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

OK, ROBIN. YOU ARE THE GAME PLAYER HERE, NOT LOVELADY:

IS DOORMAN WEARING A SHORT-SLEEVED SHIRT?

IS DOORMAN'S SHIRT BUTTONED UP TO THE TOP?

MAYBE THESE TWO WON'T BE TOO DIFFICULT FOR YOU! UNREAL!

I AM TRANSFIXED ON TRUTH AND EXPOSING PHONIES AND SHILLS.

LOVELADY WAS TELLING THE TRUTH WHEN HE WENT TO THE FBI.

NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD "PLAY GAMES" ABOUT THIS.

BUT HE MIGHT HAVE LATER LIED TO SAVE HIS LIFE. WOULDN'T YOU?

Is Doorman wearing a red-and-white short-sleeved shirt? YES or NO

Is the shirt Doorman is wearing buttoned up to the top? YES or NO

you are transfixed on the black and white FBI image, if i apply the same two questions using Groden color photo's above as the reference image, we then get a completely different set of answers to what you are looking for.

so when is Lovelady lying, and when is Lovelady telling the truth

To me the Doorman seen in Altgens6 looks most like the bob Jackson color photo of lovelady shown in the groden scan above

Edited March 3, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Robin Unger]

Now lets clear up that BLACK HOLE MYSTERY.

Look at this Murray image taken on 22/11/63

Good god man, do you really think that the man on the steps head, has disappeared into a " Black Hole" ?

Note the mans standing position on the steps

This is the exact same TSBD doorway shadow effect, that appears in Altgens6

which you and the O,I,P prefer to label as a "black hole"

Click on image to view FULL SIZE

Edited March 3, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

Martin / Hughes film sync TSBD doorway Credit: Gerda Dunckel

Give the Gif time to load

Edited March 3, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Robin Unger]

My scan BEFORE Hooke and Cinche degraded it.

In this version the Caption at the bottom conveniently missing from the O,I,P VERSION says it all

Edited March 3, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Craig Lamson]

Here's an example of Lovelady fakery. I can't wait to hear Robin Unger "explain it away":

I may be the last one left to say it, but I find Jim Fetzer's contributions to always be interesting. He stimulates discussion like no one else, on this forum and any other he's been a part of. I think that's a very good thing.

BUT APPARENTLY LEE FARLEY WANTS TO STEP IN. LEE, TELL US, HOW THE SHADOWS

ARE ON DIFFERENT SIDES OF HIS NECK DURING THE SAME PHOTO SHOOT? AND HOW

THE SLEEVE OF HIS RIGHT ARM IS CUT AND PASTED? AND THE USE OF A PHONY ARM?

TELL US, LEE. YOU ARE A SMART GUY. WE KNOW FROM EARLIER POSTS. SO TELL US?

Good grief...he MOVED from one shot to the next and changed his orientation to the sun.

And there is no cut and pasted shirt sleeve, rather , once again we have very poor photo analysis skills from Fetzer and crew.

[Thomas Graves]

Elbow man

side on right profile, arm up in a salute, elbow facing directly towards altgens camera

Nice work, Robin.

Could "Elbow Man" have been William Shelley? Lovelady testified to the Warren Commission that he was standing on the steps with Shelley and Sarah Stanton. Have Stanton and/or Shelley ever been identified on the steps? We know what William Shelley was wearing that day. What about Sarah Stanton?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

From the Spartacus website article about Billy Lovelady:

" [THERE ARE TWO] PRIMARY SOURCES:

(1) WARREN COMMISSION (1964)

Joseph Ball: You ate your lunch on the steps?

Billy Lovelady: Yes, sir.

Joseph Ball: Who was with you?

Billy Lovelady: Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton....

Joseph Ball: Were you there when the President's motorcade went by?

Billy Lovelady: Right.

Joseph Ball: Did you hear anything?

Billy Lovelady: Yes, sir: sure did.

Joseph Ball: What did you hear?

Billy Lovelady: I thought it was firecrackers or somebody celebrating the arrival of the President. It didn't occur to me at first what had happened until this Gloria came running up to us and told us the President had been shot.

Joseph Ball: Who was this girl?

Billy Lovelady: Gloria Calvary...

Joseph Ball: Where was the direction of the sound?

Billy Lovelady: Right there around that concrete little deal on that knoll.

Joseph Ball: That's where it sounded to you?

Billy Lovelady: Yes, sir; to my right. I was standing as you are going down the steps, I was standing on the right, sounded like it was in that area.

Joseph Ball: From the underpass area?

Billy Lovelady: Between the underpass and the building right on the knoll.

(2) HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS (1979)

A widely publicized photograph taken by Associated Press photographer James W. Altgens within a few seconds after President Kennedy was first shot shows a spectator who bears a strong physical resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald standing at the west end of the Texas School Book Depository entrance way. Altgens has stated that he took the picture of the presidential limousine, with the Texas School Book Depository entrance way in the background, just after he heard a noise "which sounded like the popping of a firecracker."

In evaluating the evidence that Oswald was in the sixth floor, southeast corner window of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the shooting, the Warren Commission considered the allegation that the man shown in the doorway in the Altgens photograph was Oswald. The Commission concluded that the spectator was not Oswald, but rather another Texas School Book Depository employee, Billy Nolan Lovelady. This conclusion was based upon Lovelady's identification of himself in the Altgens photograph and upon statements of other persons who were present in the Texas School Book Depository entranceway at the same time.

Warren Commission critics have charged that there was insufficient basis for this conclusion, and have faulted the Commission for presenting " no supporting visual evidence by which one can appraise the resemblance between Lovelady and the man in the doorway, or Lovelady and Oswald, although nothing less hangs on the accurate identification of the doorway man than Oswald's possible total innocence of the assassination".

This issue has also persisted because of reported discrepancies in connection with the clothing worn by the Altgens figure and Billy Lovelady on November 22, 1963. In media prints of the Altgens photograph, the man appears to be wearing a long-sleeved shirt similar to the one in which Oswald was arrested.

According to a memo written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to the Warren Commission after Lovelady had been interviewed and photographed in 1964 by FBI agents, Lovelady was reported [by the mistaken FBI agents who assumed that Lovelady had worn the same shirt on 11/22/63 that he was wearing when they interviewed and photographed him. --T.Graves] to have been wearing a short-sleeved red and white, vertically striped shirt. Lovelady later explained that when he was interviewed and photographed by the FBI, he had not been told to wear the same shirt he had worn on the day of the assassination and that, in fact, he had been wearing a long-sleeved, plaid shirt when he was standing in the Texas School Book Depository doorway.

This contradiction was partially resolved by photo-optical work performed by Robert Groden, a Warren Commission critic and photographic consultant to the committee. During his work with the committee Groden made photographically enhanced enlargements of the original 35 millimeter black and white Altgens negative and frames of the Bell, Martin, and Hughes color motion picture films, which also showed the spectator in the doorway, and detected a pattern of lines that correspond in pattern and color more closely to Lovelady's plaid shirt than to Oswald's tweed-patterned shirt.

Even so, in an effort to resolve the issue even more definitively, the photographic evidence panel's board of forensic anthropologists were requested to study the photograph of the spectator shown standing in the doorway.

Is it possible to identify positively as either Lee Harvey Oswald or Billy Lovelady, the man, shown in the Altgens photograph standing by the doorway entrance to the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the President's assassination?

In order to produce the clearest possible photographic images of the spectator in question, the Photographic Evidence Panel had black and white prints made from the original Altgens 35 millimeter negative at various contrasts, density levels and enlargements. They included various enlargements of the spectator's face such as that shown in the photograph. The anthropologists were furnished with a number of these prints.

A series of photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald, ranging from the time of his ILS. Marine Corps enlistment in 1956 to his arrest in Dallas in 1963, were provided to the anthropologists. While all were examined, those taken on the day of Oswald's arrest in Dallas received the closest scrutiny.

Photographs of Lovelady were furnished which varied in date from 1959 to 1977. Of most interest were those taken near the time of the assassination.

Due to the blurred quality of the enlargements of the spectator's image in the Altgens photograph, it was not possible either to identify or exclude positively Lovelady, or Oswald. Based on a subjective assessment of the facial features of the spectator, however, it was determined that the man in the doorway bears a much stronger resemblance to Lovelady than to Oswald. Thus, assuming it is either Oswald or Lovelady, and not a third party, it appears highly improbable that the spectator is Oswald and highly probable that he is Lovelady.

In comparing the photographs of Oswald and Lovelady, the general similarities in facial configuration between the two men were initially noted. Closer examination of the photographs revealed significant differences in the two men's facial proportions:

(a) Facial length.- Relative to facial breadth across the cheekbones, Lovelady's face is longer than Oswald's.

( b ) Lower jaw breadth.- Relative to facial breadth, measured across the cheekbones, Lovelady's lower jaw is narrower than Oswald's.

( c ) Chin length.- Relative to facial length, Lovelady has a somewhat longer chin than Oswald.

(d) Forehead breadth - Relative to the breadth of the face measured across the cheekbones, Lovelady's is broader than Oswald's.

(e) Nasal breadth.- Relative to nose length, Lovelady's nose is broader than Oswald's.

(f) Nasal tip - Oswald's nasal tip is somewhat, small and sharply contoured, whereas that of Lovelady is rounder and more bulbous.

(g) Forehead height - Due to hairline recession, Lovelady has relatively higher forehead than Oswald.

(h) Hairline contour - Photographs of Lovelady and Oswald taken at a time close to the assassination indicate that, overall Lovelady's central hairline had receded more than Oswald's, resulting in Lovelady's higher forehead, as noted above; in addition, the recession on both sides of Lovelady's temple is more sharply advanced than Oswald's. Lovelady's recession was not uniform, and he has a downward projection in the hairline about one inch to the right of the center of his forehead. This eccentrically placed "widow's peak" was not observed in any of Oswald's photographs.

In summary, Lovelady's face is relatively longer than Oswald's its length accentuated, in part, by more advanced balding and also by his narrower lower jaw and deeper chin. The asymmetry in his hairline is also a distinctive trait.

The enlargements of the spectator's face are not of sufficient quality to permit accurate measurements. However, several features corresponding to Lovelady's traits can be discerned and subjectively assessed:

(a) A relatively broad, high forehead;

( b ) Advanced recession of the hairline on each side of his head;

(e) Interruption of the central hairline by a downward extension located slightly to the right of the center of the forehead;

(d) A relatively long face with narrow jaws and a deep chin: and

(e) A rather bulbous nasal tip."

--Tommy

(emphasis added)

Edited March 3, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Well, I guess by Thomas Graves reasoning, since THE WARREN REPORT (1964)

tells us it was Lee Oswald on the 6th floor with the Mannlicher-Carcano, what in

the world are we doing wasting our time with a JFK research forum? If this is the

level of intelligence that pervades this community, then there is no need to explain

why these issues have not been solved. The objective of disinformation (not that

I am suggesting anyone is engaged in it here), as Marty Shotz explained long ago,

is not to convince anyone of one side or the other but to leave everything up in the

air where everything is believable and nothing is knowable. In this case, we know

that Billy went to the FBI and showed them the shirt he had been wearing that day,

which they photographed and duly forwarded to FBI Headquarters. There are some

here who suggest that Billy was a joker and was "playing games" about the death of

JFK. If I have ever heard a dumber or more feeble attempt to dismissing damning

evidence, I can't imaging what that would be. I have distilled the case to its basics:

(1) Doorman's was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Oswald was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Therefore, Oswald's shirt makes him a strong candidate for Doorman.

(2) Doorman was not wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Lovelady was wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Therefore, Lovelady was not Doorman.

(3) Doorman had a shirt that was splayed open.

Checkered Shirt Man was not splayed open.

Therefore, Checkered Shirt Man is not Doorman.

(4) Doorman was Oswald or Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

But Doorman was not Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

Therefore, Doorman was Oswald.

We know what shirt Billy was wearing. It was photographed and documented

by the FBI. This is one of those cases--like the reports of Chief Jesse Curry,

Forrest Sorrels, Winston Lawson, James Chaney, Bobby Hargis, and Marrion

Baker--where we have testimony that contradicts the government's "official

account" from government officials themselves. And in this case, Lovelady

confirmed that that was the shirt he was wearing to Jones Harris. Of course,

the government has gone to desperate lengths to conceal it, which some may

be inclined to think has been aided and abetted by members of this forum. I

can only observe that the evidence is clear and compelling and that even the

latest image posted by Robin Unger has the flaws that Richard Hooke noted:

the sleeve has been altered and the left arm appears to be from a mannequin.

Apparently, they had to "fix it" and Billy wasn't available, so they faked it. Each

of you is going to have to make up your own mind, but if you can't figure this

out, given the proof that we have presented, don't bother with JFK in general.

This is about as obvious as it gets, once you see through the smokescreen.

(1) The Altgens6 has OBVIOUSLY been altered (where we have Obfuscated Man (with his face obscured), Black Tie Man (both in front of and behind Doorman at the same time), Doorman (with a missing left shoulder), and the anomalous appearance of the profile of a black man.

(2) The shirt and undershirt on Doorman bears striking similarity to the shirt and undershirt Oswald was wearing. In other articles on this subject, Richard Hooke has established more than 27 features of both shirts that make their identity beyond doubt (which I will gladly recommend).

(3) The shirt that Billy Lovelady shows the FBI was a red-and-white, vertically striped short-sleeved shirt. They took photos of it, they described it in their letter to J. Edgar, and Billy confirmed it was the shirt he had been wearing to Jones Harris. It is not even remotely like Doorman's shirt.

(4) The only other candidate is a man filmed in front of the Book Depository wearing a black-and-white checkered shirt, which is not even a close match. He is bulging at the seams; Doorman is not. His shirt is buttoned up to the top; Doorman's is not. And he does not look like Lovelady.

(5) The dispute is whether Doorman was Oswald or Lovelady. There are massive similarities between Oswald and his shirt and the shirt of Doorman. There are blatant dissimilarities with Lovelady's shirt and with the checkered shirt. It cannot have been Billy or Gorilla Man. It was Lee.

The discrepancy between a person's professed beliefs and those that are rational, given the available evidence, is a measure of their degree of irrationality. In this case, the divergence between Robin Unger's professed beliefs and what is rational under the circumstances is staggering.

I have been trying to keep the argument as simple as possible. The reasons for excluding Checkered Shirt Man are extensive and go far beyond that his shirt is buttoned to the top. He is also too robust to be Doorman and his shirt itself is not the same. All these are grounds to exclude him.

The reason I have pressed Robin Unger on this is because it constitutes a litmus test of research integrity. Not only do we have proof that Doorman resembles Oswald and his shirt (given they made some tweaks) but that Doorman is clearly not Lovelady or Gorilla Man. Yet he is unwilling to admit it.

Edited March 4, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Craig Lamson]

In this case, we know

that Billy went to the FBI and showed them the shirt he had been wearing that day,

which they photographed and duly forwarded to FBI Headquarters.

You don't know that at all and of course this is the major flaw in your presentations..you simply make things up and call them fact.

What we do know is that Lovelady TOLD the FBI that was the shirt he was wearing. We don't know if he told the truth but the many different pieces of pictographic evidence says other wise.

You have tried in vain to impeach the photos but you work is childish at best. Your guesses and 'interpretations" are really quite poor.

[Greg Burnham]

You can't bring yourself to answer simple questions. This is beyond belief!

But then, I know, you are doing the best that you can. It is dumbfounding.

The degree of disregard for logic and evidence on this forum staggers the

mind. So few are willing to even acknowledge the most elementary proof:

(1) Doorman's was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Oswald was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Therefore, Oswald's xxxx makes him a strong candidate for Doorman.

(2) Doorman was not wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Lovelady was wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Therefore, Lovelady was not Doorman.

(3) Doorman had a shirt that was splayed open.

Checkered Shirt Man was not splayed open.

Therefore, Checkered Shirt Man is not Doorman.

(4) Doorman was Oswald or Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

But Doorman was not Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

Therefore, Doorman was Oswald.

Why are so many here AFRAID OF THE TRUTH? Logic and evidence

establish that Oswald was Doorman, that he was out with Bill Shelley

in front, just as he told Will Fritz, and that desperate measures were

taken to conceal that fact, which blows the cover-up out of the water.

---OR---

5. Doorman was none of the above (logically)

---------->

But, a few steps further are in order...

6. Oswald was not wearing the same shirt during the assassination because he changed it before questioning by the police (as he told Captain Fritz) and was later photographed in it

7. The shirt doorman is wearing is not the same shirt Oswald was wearing after his arrest

8. Therefore, Oswald is not doorman

--

.

Edited March 3, 2013 by Greg Burnham

[Thomas Graves]

Elbow man

side on right profile, arm up in a salute, elbow facing directly towards altgens camera

Nice work, Robin.

Could "Elbow Man" have been William Shelley? Lovelady testified to the Warren Commission that he was standing on the steps with Shelley and Sarah Stanton. Have Stanton and/or Shelley ever been identified on the steps? We know what William Shelley was wearing that day. What about Sarah Stanton?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

From John Simkin's Spartacus Educational website article about Billy Lovelady:

" [THERE ARE TWO] PRIMARY SOURCES [FOR THE ARTICLE]:

(1) WARREN COMMISSION (1964)

Joseph Ball: You ate your lunch on the steps?

Billy Lovelady: Yes, sir.

Joseph Ball: Who was with you?

Billy Lovelady: Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton....

Joseph Ball: Were you there when the President's motorcade went by?

Billy Lovelady: Right.

Joseph Ball: Did you hear anything?

Billy Lovelady: Yes, sir: sure did.

Joseph Ball: What did you hear?

Billy Lovelady: I thought it was firecrackers or somebody celebrating the arrival of the President. It didn't occur to me at first what had happened until this Gloria came running up to us and told us the President had been shot.

Joseph Ball: Who was this girl?

Billy Lovelady: Gloria Calvary...

Joseph Ball: Where was the direction of the sound?

Billy Lovelady: Right there around that concrete little deal on that knoll.

Joseph Ball: That's where it sounded to you?

Billy Lovelady: Yes, sir; to my right. I was standing as you are going down the steps, I was standing on the right, sounded like it was in that area.

Joseph Ball: From the underpass area?

Billy Lovelady: Between the underpass and the building right on the knoll.

(2) HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS (1979)

A widely publicized photograph taken by Associated Press photographer James W. Altgens within a few seconds after President Kennedy was first shot shows a spectator who bears a strong physical resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald standing at the west end of the Texas School Book Depository entrance way. Altgens has stated that he took the picture of the presidential limousine, with the Texas School Book Depository entrance way in the background, just after he heard a noise "which sounded like the popping of a firecracker."

In evaluating the evidence that Oswald was in the sixth floor, southeast corner window of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the shooting, the Warren Commission considered the allegation that the man shown in the doorway in the Altgens photograph was Oswald. The Commission concluded that the spectator was not Oswald, but rather another Texas School Book Depository employee, Billy Nolan Lovelady. This conclusion was based upon Lovelady's identification of himself in the Altgens photograph and upon statements of other persons who were present in the Texas School Book Depository entranceway at the same time.

Warren Commission critics have charged that there was insufficient basis for this conclusion, and have faulted the Commission for presenting " no supporting visual evidence by which one can appraise the resemblance between Lovelady and the man in the doorway, or Lovelady and Oswald, although nothing less hangs on the accurate identification of the doorway man than Oswald's possible total innocence of the assassination".

This issue has also persisted because of reported discrepancies in connection with the clothing worn by the Altgens figure and Billy Lovelady on November 22, 1963. In media prints of the Altgens photograph, the man appears to be wearing a long-sleeved shirt similar to the one in which Oswald was arrested.

According to a memo written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to the Warren Commission after Lovelady had been interviewed and photographed in 1964 by FBI agents, Lovelady was reported [by the mistaken FBI agents who assumed that Lovelady had worn the same shirt on 11/22/63 that he was wearing when they interviewed and photographed him. --T.Graves] to have been wearing a short-sleeved red and white, vertically striped shirt. Lovelady later explained that when he was interviewed and photographed by the FBI, he had not been told to wear the same shirt he had worn on the day of the assassination and that, in fact, he had been wearing a long-sleeved, plaid shirt when he was standing in the Texas School Book Depository doorway.

This contradiction was partially resolved by photo-optical work performed by Robert Groden, a Warren Commission critic and photographic consultant to the committee. During his work with the committee Groden made photographically enhanced enlargements of the original 35 millimeter black and white Altgens negative and frames of the Bell, Martin, and Hughes color motion picture films, which also showed the spectator in the doorway, and detected a pattern of lines that correspond in pattern and color more closely to Lovelady's plaid shirt than to Oswald's tweed-patterned shirt.

Even so, in an effort to resolve the issue even more definitively, the photographic evidence panel's board of forensic anthropologists were requested to study the photograph of the spectator shown standing in the doorway.

Is it possible to identify positively as either Lee Harvey Oswald or Billy Lovelady, the man, shown in the Altgens photograph standing by the doorway entrance to the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the President's assassination?

In order to produce the clearest possible photographic images of the spectator in question, the Photographic Evidence Panel had black and white prints made from the original Altgens 35 millimeter negative at various contrasts, density levels and enlargements. They included various enlargements of the spectator's face such as that shown in the photograph. The anthropologists were furnished with a number of these prints.

A series of photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald, ranging from the time of his ILS. Marine Corps enlistment in 1956 to his arrest in Dallas in 1963, were provided to the anthropologists. While all were examined, those taken on the day of Oswald's arrest in Dallas received the closest scrutiny.

Photographs of Lovelady were furnished which varied in date from 1959 to 1977. Of most interest were those taken near the time of the assassination.

Due to the blurred quality of the enlargements of the spectator's image in the Altgens photograph, it was not possible either to identify or exclude positively Lovelady, or Oswald. Based on a subjective assessment of the facial features of the spectator, however, it was determined that the man in the doorway bears a much stronger resemblance to Lovelady than to Oswald. Thus, assuming it is either Oswald or Lovelady, and not a third party, it appears highly improbable that the spectator is Oswald and highly probable that he is Lovelady.

In comparing the photographs of Oswald and Lovelady, the general similarities in facial configuration between the two men were initially noted. Closer examination of the photographs revealed significant differences in the two men's facial proportions:

(a) Facial length.- Relative to facial breadth across the cheekbones, Lovelady's face is longer than Oswald's.

( b ) Lower jaw breadth.- Relative to facial breadth, measured across the cheekbones, Lovelady's lower jaw is narrower than Oswald's.

( c ) Chin length.- Relative to facial length, Lovelady has a somewhat longer chin than Oswald.

(d) Forehead breadth - Relative to the breadth of the face measured across the cheekbones, Lovelady's is broader than Oswald's.

(e) Nasal breadth.- Relative to nose length, Lovelady's nose is broader than Oswald's.

(f) Nasal tip - Oswald's nasal tip is somewhat, small and sharply contoured, whereas that of Lovelady is rounder and more bulbous.

(g) Forehead height - Due to hairline recession, Lovelady has relatively higher forehead than Oswald.

(h) Hairline contour - Photographs of Lovelady and Oswald taken at a time close to the assassination indicate that, overall Lovelady's central hairline had receded more than Oswald's, resulting in Lovelady's higher forehead, as noted above; in addition, the recession on both sides of Lovelady's temple is more sharply advanced than Oswald's. Lovelady's recession was not uniform, and he has a downward projection in the hairline about one inch to the right of the center of his forehead. This eccentrically placed "widow's peak" was not observed in any of Oswald's photographs.

In summary, Lovelady's face is relatively longer than Oswald's its length accentuated, in part, by more advanced balding and also by his narrower lower jaw and deeper chin. The asymmetry in his hairline is also a distinctive trait.

The enlargements of the spectator's face are not of sufficient quality to permit accurate measurements. However, several features corresponding to Lovelady's traits can be discerned and subjectively assessed:

(a) A relatively broad, high forehead;

( b ) Advanced recession of the hairline on each side of his head;

(e) Interruption of the central hairline by a downward extension located slightly to the right of the center of the forehead;

(d) A relatively long face with narrow jaws and a deep chin: and

(e) A rather bulbous nasal tip."

http://www.spartacus...JFKlovelady.htm

--Tommy

(emphasis added)

PS: If anyone looks very closely at end of this clip they will see that Lovelady's shirt was unbuttoned. See that very white, vertical "stripe" closer to his belly than his neck? That's his T-shirt!

--Tommy

Edited March 4, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

In this version the Caption at the bottom conveniently missing from the O,I,P VERSION says it all

But what Urger posts here supports my side, not his. This photograph shows

(although its submerged in dim light) is that the left arm of Lovelady is decidedly

shorter than his right arm (which was not true of the real Lovelady) and that the

sleeve has been altered in both of these images with some kind of cut-and-paste.

Why would anyone be taken in by this? The sleeve has been altered above

the wrist on the left-hand image and whole left sleeve and hand look artificial

in the image on the right-hand side. IF BILLY LOVELADY REALLY HAD BEEN

WEARING A RED-AND-BLACK CHECKERED SHIRT, WHY WOULD THERE

HAVE BEEN ANY REASON TO MESS WITH IT? THIS IS BEYOND ABSURD.

Edited March 4, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

You can't bring yourself to answer simple questions. This is beyond belief!

But then, I know, you are doing the best that you can. It is dumbfounding.

The degree of disregard for logic and evidence on this forum staggers the

mind. So few are willing to even acknowledge the most elementary proof:

(1) Doorman's was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Oswald was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Therefore, Oswald's shirt makes him a strong candidate for Doorman.

(2) Doorman was not wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Lovelady was wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Therefore, Lovelady was not Doorman.

(3) Doorman had a shirt that was splayed open.

Checkered Shirt Man was not splayed open.

Therefore, Checkered Shirt Man is not Doorman.

(4) Doorman was Oswald or Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

But Doorman was not Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

Therefore, Doorman was Oswald.

Why are so many here AFRAID OF THE TRUTH? Logic and evidence

establish that Oswald was Doorman, that he was out with Bill Shelley

in front, just as he told Will Fritz, and that desperate measures were

taken to conceal that fact, which blows the cover-up out of the water.

---OR---

5. Doorman was none of the above (logically)

---------->

But, a few steps further are in order...

6. Oswald was not wearing the same shirt during the assassination because he changed it before questioning by the police (as he told Captain Fritz) and was later photographed in it

7. The shirt doorman is wearing is not the same shirt Oswald was wearing after his arrest

8. Therefore, Oswald is not doorman

Signs of life. Even the Warren Commission concluded that Oswald had not changed his shirt.

And if you want to believe what Lee told Fritz, then it is certainly more reasonable to accept

his statement that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front". Plus what is the probability that, had

he changed his shirt, it would correspond in so many respects with Doorman's shirt? ZERO.

Now you said that you would answer my two simple questions after I had answered yours.

I have answered yours. So I would appreciate (less speculative) answers to these of mine:

(1) Is Doorman wearing a short-sleeved shirt?

(2) Is Doorman's shirt buttoned up to the top?

They are very simple questions and the answers are obvious. So what are your answers?

Edited March 4, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Craig Lamson]

You can't bring yourself to answer simple questions. This is beyond belief!

But then, I know, you are doing the best that you can. It is dumbfounding.

The degree of disregard for logic and evidence on this forum staggers the

mind. So few are willing to even acknowledge the most elementary proof:

(1) Doorman's was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Oswald was wearing a long sleeved shirt with distinctive features.

Therefore, Oswald's xxxx makes him a strong candidate for Doorman.

(2) Doorman was not wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Lovelady was wearing a short-sleeved shirt.

Therefore, Lovelady was not Doorman.

(3) Doorman had a shirt that was splayed open.

Checkered Shirt Man was not splayed open.

Therefore, Checkered Shirt Man is not Doorman.

(4) Doorman was Oswald or Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

But Doorman was not Lovelady or Checkered Shirt Man.

Therefore, Doorman was Oswald.

Why are so many here AFRAID OF THE TRUTH? Logic and evidence

establish that Oswald was Doorman, that he was out with Bill Shelley

in front, just as he told Will Fritz, and that desperate measures were

taken to conceal that fact, which blows the cover-up out of the water.

---OR---

5. Doorman was none of the above (logically)

---------->

But, a few steps further are in order...

6. Oswald was not wearing the same shirt during the assassination because he changed it before questioning by the police (as he told Captain Fritz) and was later photographed in it

7. The shirt doorman is wearing is not the same shirt Oswald was wearing after his arrest

8. Therefore, Oswald is not doorman

Signs of life. Even the Warren Commission concluded that Oswald had not changed his shirt.

And if you want to believe what Lee told Fritz, then it is certainly more reasonable to accept

his statement that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front". Plus what is the probability that, had

he changed his shirt, it would correspond in so many respects with Doorman's shirt? ZERO.

Now you said that you would answer my two simple questions after I had answered yours.

I have answered yours. So I would appreciate (less speculative) answers to these of mine:

(1) Is Doorman wearing a short-sleeved shirt?

(2) Is Doorman's shirt buttoned up to the top?

They are very simple questions and the answers are obvious. So what are your answers?

Doorman's shirt looks nothing like Oswalds.

[Thomas Graves]

by Ralph Cinque, Richard Hooke and Jim Fetzer

The Newseum in Washington, D.C., has announced a new JFK exhibition in honor of the 50th anniversary, "Three Shots were Fired". That is already grossly misleading (since eight, nine or ten shots appear to have been fired; see

on YouTube). The exhibit is going to include Oswald’s shirt, allegedly the one in which he was arrested. That makes it of special interest to those of us who have done extensive research on Oswald as "the man in the doorway". Here is how it was reported in USA Today:

The Newseum in Washington, D.C., will allow visitors a rare opportunity to view never-before-displayed artifacts tied to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy as part of an exhibit, "Three Shots Were Fired," marking the 50th anniversary of the tragic event.

From April 12 through Jan. 5, 2014, the public will be able to see for the first time four items belonging to Lee Harvey Oswald, the presumed gunman who shot JFK in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963 and was later killed himself two days later. More than 100 other pieces will also be on display. USA TODAY offers an exclusive look at the exhibit, including the four Oswald items.

In light of all the lies that have been told and all the claims that have been fabricated in the JFK case, we can’t accept the authenticity of this shirt without reservations. The distinctive features of the shirt as they appear in the Altgens6 have been among the most important of our proofs that the man in the doorway was Lee Harvey Oswald. (See "JFK believe it or not: Oswald wasn't even a shooter!" and "JFK Special: Oswald was in the doorway, after all!") But what matters most is that the Newseum shirt is inconsistent with arguments against Oswald as Doorman and--in what could be considered to be a monumental blunder--confirms that he was Doorman.

Consider this close-up of the crucial area of the most famous photo taken in Dealey Plaza at the time, which focuses on the area of the doorway of the Texas School Book Depository, where the man who is extending himself to see what's going on is known as "Doorman":

Taken by James "Ike" Altgens and technically known as "Altgens6" as the sixth of a series of seven photographs purportedly taken by him on that occasion, this close-up shows the man in the doorway at the center left, where his left shoulder is mysteriously missing. The man beside him, wearing a black tie, is simultaneously both in front of him and behind him, which is physically impossible. His torso and shirt are partially obscured by the extremely strange image of the right profile of a black man's head. And the face of a man to his left/front (right/front as we view the image) has been crudely obscured.

There would have been no reason to have altered the photograph unless someone had been there who should not have been there, where the only candidate is Lee Oswald. These oddities are so blatant that, once they have been remarked, it is rather difficult to imagine why anyone would persist in denying that Altgens6 was altered. But one could still deny that Lee Oswald was in the doorway by insisting it was someone else, where the shirt that Oswald was wearing is crucial evidence. By altering the shirt in subtle ways, they could set up arguments to claim it was not the shirt on Doorman.

(continued)

The title of this thread should be changed to:

AD NAUSEAM DISPLAYS OF (SO-CALLED) PROOF...

--Tommy

Edited March 4, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

(2) HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS (1979)

A widely publicized photograph taken by Associated Press photographer James W. Altgens within a few seconds after President Kennedy was first shot shows a spectator who bears a strong physical resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald standing at the west end of the Texas School Book Depository entrance way. Altgens has stated that he took the picture of the presidential limousine, with the Texas School Book Depository entrance way in the background, just after he heard a noise "which sounded like the popping of a firecracker."

In evaluating the evidence that Oswald was in the sixth floor, southeast corner window of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the shooting, the Warren Commission considered the allegation that the man shown in the doorway in the Altgens photograph was Oswald. The Commission concluded that the spectator was not Oswald, but rather another Texas School Book Depository employee, Billy Nolan Lovelady. This conclusion was based upon Lovelady's identification of himself in the Altgens photograph and upon statements of other persons who were present in the Texas School Book Depository entranceway at the same time.

Warren Commission critics have charged that there was insufficient basis for this conclusion, and have faulted the Commission for presenting " no supporting visual evidence by which one can appraise the resemblance between Lovelady and the man in the doorway, or Lovelady and Oswald, although nothing less hangs on the accurate identification of the doorway man than Oswald's possible total innocence of the assassination".

This issue has also persisted because of reported discrepancies in connection with the clothing worn by the Altgens figure and Billy Lovelady on November 22, 1963. In media prints of the Altgens photograph, the man appears to be wearing a long-sleeved shirt similar to the one in which Oswald was arrested.

According to a memo written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to the Warren Commission after Lovelady had been interviewed and photographed in 1964 by FBI agents, Lovelady was reported [by the mistaken FBI agents who assumed that Lovelady had worn the same shirt on 11/22/63 that he was wearing when they interviewed and photographed him. --T.Graves] to have been wearing a short-sleeved red and white, vertically striped shirt. Lovelady later explained that when he was interviewed and photographed by the FBI, he had not been told to wear the same shirt he had worn on the day of the assassination and that, in fact, he had been wearing a long-sleeved, plaid shirt when he was standing in the Texas School Book Depository doorway.

THIS IS SUCH A BLATANT COVER-UP FROM THE EMBARRASSMENT THEY WERE CAUGHT WITH A

FORMAL REPORT AND PHOTOGRAPHS THAT CONTRADICT THE 'OFFICIAL ACCOUNT' THEY HAD TO

DO SOME FANCY FOOTWORK TO OBFUSCATE THE BLUNDER. DOES ANYONE ON THIS THREAD

ACTUALLY BELIEVE THIS? THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW AMATERURISH THEY WERE AND YET IT

LOOKS AS THOUGH THEY CAN STILL TAKE IN GULLIBLE SAPS--OR, AT LEAST, THOMAS GRAVES:

This contradiction was partially resolved by photo-optical work performed by Robert Groden, a Warren Commission critic and photographic consultant to the committee. During his work with the committee Groden made photographically enhanced enlargements of the original 35 millimeter black and white Altgens negative and frames of the Bell, Martin, and Hughes color motion picture films, which also showed the spectator in the doorway, and detected a pattern of lines that correspond in pattern and color more closely to Lovelady's plaid shirt than to Oswald's tweed-patterned shirt.

Even so, in an effort to resolve the issue even more definitively, the photographic evidence panel's board of forensic anthropologists were requested to study the photograph of the spectator shown standing in the doorway.

Is it possible to identify positively as either Lee Harvey Oswald or Billy Lovelady, the man, shown in the Altgens photograph standing by the doorway entrance to the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the President's assassination?

In order to produce the clearest possible photographic images of the spectator in question, the Photographic Evidence Panel had black and white prints made from the original Altgens 35 millimeter negative at various contrasts, density levels and enlargements. They included various enlargements of the spectator's face such as that shown in the photograph. The anthropologists were furnished with a number of these prints.

A series of photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald, ranging from the time of his ILS. Marine Corps enlistment in 1956 to his arrest in Dallas in 1963, were provided to the anthropologists. While all were examined, those taken on the day of Oswald's arrest in Dallas received the closest scrutiny.

Photographs of Lovelady were furnished which varied in date from 1959 to 1977. Of most interest were those taken near the time of the assassination.

Due to the blurred quality of the enlargements of the spectator's image in the Altgens photograph, it was not possible either to identify or exclude positively Lovelady, or Oswald. Based on a subjective assessment of the facial features of the spectator, however, it was determined that the man in the doorway bears a much stronger resemblance to Lovelady than to Oswald. Thus, assuming it is either Oswald or Lovelady, and not a third party, it appears highly improbable that the spectator is Oswald and highly probable that he is Lovelady.

BUT WE KNOW THAT THEY ALTERED THE FACE TO MAKE OSWALD RESEMBLE LOVELADY. WHAT IS

CRUCIAL IS NOT THE FACE BUT THE SHIRTS THAT THEY WERE WEARING. DOES ANYONE WHO HAS

READ THIS THREAD NOT REALIZE THIS KIND OF OBJECTION IS A FARCE? WE KNOW THE FACE IS

AMBIGUOUS AND YOU CAN ARGUE EITHER WAY BASED ON THE FACE, WHICH IS WHY THE SHIRT IS

THE KEY. THIS IS THE GENIUS OF RALPH CINQUE'S PERCEPTION, WHICH RESOLVES THE DISPUTE.



In comparing the photographs of Oswald and Lovelady, the general similarities in facial configuration between the two men were initially noted. Closer examination of the photographs revealed significant differences in the two men's facial proportions:

( a ) Facial length.- Relative to facial breadth across the cheekbones, Lovelady's face is longer than Oswald's.

( b ) Lower jaw breadth.- Relative to facial breadth, measured across the cheekbones, Lovelady's lower jaw is narrower than Oswald's.

( c ) Chin length.- Relative to facial length, Lovelady has a somewhat longer chin than Oswald.

( d ) Forehead breadth - Relative to the breadth of the face measured across the cheekbones, Lovelady's is broader than Oswald's.

( e ) Nasal breadth.- Relative to nose length, Lovelady's nose is broader than Oswald's.

( f ) Nasal tip - Oswald's nasal tip is somewhat, small and sharply contoured, whereas that of Lovelady is rounder and more bulbous.

( g ) Forehead height - Due to hairline recession, Lovelady has relatively higher forehead than Oswald.

( h ) Hairline contour - Photographs of Lovelady and Oswald taken at a time close to the assassination indicate that, overall Lovelady's central hairline had receded more than Oswald's, resulting in Lovelady's higher forehead, as noted above; in addition, the recession on both sides of Lovelady's temple is more sharply advanced than Oswald's. Lovelady's recession was not uniform, and he has a downward projection in the hairline about one inch to the right of the center of his forehead. This eccentrically placed "widow's peak" was not observed in any of Oswald's photographs.

In summary, Lovelady's face is relatively longer than Oswald's its length accentuated, in part, by more advanced balding and also by his narrower lower jaw and deeper chin. The asymmetry in his hairline is also a distinctive trait.

The enlargements of the spectator's face are not of sufficient quality to permit accurate measurements. However, several features corresponding to Lovelady's traits can be discerned and subjectively assessed:

( a ) A relatively broad, high forehead;

( b ) Advanced recession of the hairline on each side of his head;

( e ) Interruption of the central hairline by a downward extension located slightly to the right of the center of the forehead;

( d ) A relatively long face with narrow jaws and a deep chin: and

( e ) A rather bulbous nasal tip."

http://www.spartacus...JFKlovelady.htm

--Tommy

(emphasis added)

bumped

Edited March 4, 2013 by James H. Fetzer