Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Vitali Zhuk]

Nitrates on the hands can be accumulated in many ways... especially with all the ink and boxes that Oswald handled... there were none on his face as he did not fire a rifle.

The problem with the Tippit bullets are manyfold... but lead back to the delay in acquiring them from Oswald in the first place, that the different shell manufacturers don't match the # of bullets attributed to each..

That and these bullets all appear as if they've spent time in a leather ammo holster... the .38 he is accused of using is standard issue for the Dallas Police Department as well as most of ther PD's around the country.

The clip is definitely a problem in a number of ways. It was never seen or photographed in the TSBD - like the paper bag.

It would have to be loaded with only 4 instead of 6 bullets and for the story to be true it was either in the rifle as it was transported that way or loose in the bag...

Day wrote a note about what was found and added the clip as an after thought.. Every item of evidence was taken by the FBI Friday night - ALL of it... what was there before and after they took evidnece does not match...

As for many people being in on it... that really needn't be the case for the evidence to have been fashioned in such a way as to lead others down the wrong paths...

---------------

Think of it this way... The WCR defenders tell us to have faith in the commissioners, that you needn't read millions of pages of evidence to know Oswald did it.

Those who do not defend the WCR have to say that we MUST read thru millions of pages and STILL not know exactly what happened because the evidence does not support any of the conclusions and does not represent the actual conclusions of the investigation.

Not sure if you've seen this but it gives you some idea of what was possible... This testimony was simply crossed out and his answer provided for him. If you go read his testimony, the provided text is how the final printing looks...

This is but one page found... can you imagine how many changes could have made it into that Report and Evidence to materially change what we understand of the event?

Dulles here did not want the report to show that the FBI took everything on the 22nd and returned it the next week only to take it back again, and lose the photos that were taken in Dallas of all the evidence...

Amazing.. right?

Mr. CADIGAN. That is true.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know why Exhibit No. 820 was not reprocessed or desilvered?

Mr. CADIGAN. No, this is a latent fingerprint matter.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain why the signature, "Lee Oswald" or rather "L. H. Oswald" is apparent, while the signature "A. J. Hidell" is not?

David, thanks a lot for your discussion.

If we talk about the conspiracy, we have to take into account the following:

1. LHO work at TSBD was not a random accident. (If not why was LHO shot by Ruby?)

2. LHO was involved in conspiracy. At least his role was to be a patsy. (If not why was LHO shot by Ruby?)

3. Patsy was not supposed to have an alibi at the time of the shooting at JFK.

4. Therefore, the conspirators provided LHO isolation from eyewitnesses at the time of the shooting.

5. Therefore, no one saw LHO at 11:50 till 12:31 and LHO was not PM. Almost no one saw LHO.

6. Almost immediately after shots LHO was considered a main suspect among all TSBD workers (more than 70 persons).

7. CIA had not control LHO. Otherwise LHO had to be killed much earlier as a result of the chase.

Hypothesis

Нow could the conspirators to isolate LHO without LHO's suspicion? Maybe it was a meeting with a friend. LHO could say on interrogation that he had meeting with a 'Communist comrade' at 12:00 till 12:30. That was LHO alibi. And the rest 90% of LHO interrogation was about that 'Communist comrade'. Then LHO was asked to shut up. So we have no records of that interrogation.

Who was Johnson - http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62258#relPageId=18&tab=page?

Why did Ruby shot LHO?

Because LHO was a patsy and CIA didn't want anybody to come back to trial for LHO with LHO's alibi.

It was better to kill LHO and got discussion that maybe CIA assassinated JFK rather than

to let LHO talk and got discussion about nuclear war against USSR.

Why we should not exclude the nuclear war against USSR as a main motif?

A. Because JFK solved Cuban Missile Crisis and established a warm relationship with Soviet leader. A direct phone line was established between US and Soviet leaders to prevent any nuclear crisis and any misunderstanding in the future.

B. Because USA became more powerful after WWII and Europe wanted to restrain it.

C. Because Europe began to provoke http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62258#relPageId=26&tab=page

D. Because RFK was also involved in solution of Cuban crisis and RFK was also assassinated.

E. Because CIA was searching the hand of Europe http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=109805&search=Draft_Study#relPageId=5&tab=page

F. Because Cuban Missile Crisis started in Turkey and probably was also a European provocation.

G. Because Gus Russo said smth about European capabilities http://www.jfk-online.com/farewellrusso.html

It's a theme for a new topic.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Vitali Zhuk

[David Josephs]

Consider one main thing Vitali

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy...

Ponder it a bit. The EVIDENCE says no one sees Oswald... who wrote all the evidence? Who translated it for the Commissioners? Who took what it said in total and para-phrased it for the WCR? Who punished people who contradicted the evidence?

How does the evidence prove the conspiracy as opposed to telling us what actually occurred? http://www.ctka.net/2014/The%20evidence%20is%20the%20conspiracy.html is an essay I did assuming Oswald planned the assassination and what he would need to know and do to be successful... Tell me what you think.

One perfect example is what Rankin tells us he is reading in the autopsy report. "That's what they FIRST said"

Vitali - go to the autopsy in the records and see if you can find reference to "an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck" Since I know you wont find it - what was Rankin referring to in Jan 1964 that is no longer part of the existing autopsy report?

Mr. Rankin:

Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time.

We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent, since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through.

So that how it could turn, and --

Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went in a finger's length.

Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said

As to your conclusion assumptions

[Vitali Zhuk]

Consider one main thing Vitali

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy...

Ponder it a bit. The EVIDENCE says no one sees Oswald... who wrote all the evidence? Who translated it for the Commissioners? Who took what it said in total and para-phrased it for the WCR? Who punished people who contradicted the evidence?

How does the evidence prove the conspiracy as opposed to telling us what actually occurred? http://www.ctka.net/2014/The%20evidence%20is%20the%20conspiracy.html is an essay I did assuming Oswald planned the assassination and what he would need to know and do to be successful... Tell me what you think.

David, I read your article. I agree with many arguments.

Let's continue the discussion of Conspiracy version. Let's talk in terms of probabilities.

1. Were Official Investigators (OI: CIA, FBI, Police, ...) & Conspirators the same party or on the opposite sides?

There are 3 cases:

a. CIA and Conspirators were opposite sides;

b. CIA and Conspirators were opposite sides but Conspirators had their minor agents among OI; (Gus Russo said it was very possible for other Intelligence to have an agent in US Intelligence)

c. Somebody among OI was а main Conspirator (often talk about CIA).

a + b is more 60% probability. In the history of USA - more 90% probability. Very often the other country supports the conspirators. Therefore, first of all we have to investigate the most probable 90% a + b.

2. Who chose Oswald a patsy? CIA only or CIA & Conspirators?

CIA chose LHO a patsy. Maybe both.

3. Was that CIA choice an accident or was it provoked by Conspirators?

Only at first sight 50/50. But LHO in less than hour became the CIA main suspect with a communist background. This CIA choice was not an accident with 95% probability because it was very short time to analyze the background of all persons at TSBD and to choose LHO. To force this choice Conspirators shot a policeman. LHO was a patsy and LHO not shot Tippit. I don't think LHO paraffin test is appropriate revolver shots. 90% * 95% = 85% probability the choice was forced by Conspirators.

5% probability CIA wanted to get a nuke on its head because JFK was a guarantor of peace.

Maybe CIA wanted to take seats at the dock at The Hague Court. But CIA was not stupid and CIA know Sun Tzu. After the nuclear war USA should lost their top position in the world. Obviously it was not reasonably for USA and CIA. It is the last thing I could believe that CIA wanted USA lost the world top position.

4. When had CIA to choose Oswald a patsy?

85% probability it was on Nov 22-23 because CIA was not a Conspirator and this choice was forced by Conspirators. That's why reports dated Nov 22 are the most truthful instead of others.

5. When had Conspirators chose Oswald a patsy?

Much earlier than on Nov 22 - 99% probability. Because Conspirators was ready. It was not an improvisation. LHO was chosen by Conspirators beforehand. So Conspirators had a lot of time to prepare a patsy. Conspirators started this work and CIA was forced to continue and to finish.

6. What was happened on Nov 24?

Hypothesis: CIA detected Trojan Horse and erased LHO. CIA changed the scenario being imposed on. CIA already got enough information from LHO. But it was to late to release LHO. Ruby explained it allegorically. Conspirators had to react immediately to repair the broken scenario.

7. Why didn't CIA believe LHO was loner? Why was CIA not Conspirator?

CIA made a detail defector investigation http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=109805&search=Draft_Study#relPageId=5&tab=page in 1963-1967. CIA had 2 versions. Public version with LHO loner and a secret version with LHO a patsy.

I started a new topic to continue this discussion - http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22009

Edited June 18, 2015 by Vitali Zhuk

[Robert Prudhomme]

bump

[James R Gordon]

Bump

[Robert Prudhomme]

Hey James

Great minds think alike, eh?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Or is it, "Fools seldom differ"?

[James R Gordon]

Robert,

Important though this thread is, at present it is all over the place.

I really wish someone had the time to write a detailed summary to both remind us of the details of this issue as well as get us back on track.

I would love to see this thread re-focused and energised.

James

[Robert Prudhomme]

I think Sean Murphy would be the man for that job. When this thread was really rolling, he had me waiting with bated breath for each new post he posted.

Come back, Sean, we miss you!

Edited July 9, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme

[Mark Knight]

I think Sean Murphy would be the man for that job. When this thread was really rolling, he had me waiting with bated breath for each new thread he posted.

Come back, Sean, we miss you!

I second the motion.

[Thomas Graves]

I may have missed this in the thread.

Is that Truly standing to the left of the Doorway in the suit and hat ?

and did he enter the building prior to Baker reaching the front door.

AFFIDAVIT IN ANY FACT

THE STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF DALLAS

BEFORE ME, Mary Rattan, a Notary Public in and for said County, State of Texas, on this day personally appeared M. L. Baker, Patrolman Dallas Police Department who, after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes and says:

Friday November 22, 1963 I was riding motorcycle escort for the President of the United States. At approximately 12:30 pm I was on Houston Street and the President's car had made a left turn from Houston onto Elm Street. Just as I approached Elm Street and Houston I heard three shots. I realized those shots were rifle shots and I began to try to figure out where they came from. I decided the shots had come from the building on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston. This building is used by the Board of Education for book storage. I jumped off my motor and ran inside the building. As I entered the door I saw several people standing around. I asked these people where the stairs were. A man stepped forward and stated he was the building manager and that he would show me where the stairs were. I followed the man to the rear of the building and he said, "Let's take the elevator." The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.

s/ M. L. Baker

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME THIS 22 DAY OF November A.D. 1963

/s/ Mary Rattan

Notary Public, Dallas County, Texas

Robin, I'm almost certain this Roy Truly here:

Baker brushed passed him and Truly followed him up the steps to the front entrance.

Yes, Sean, I believe that's Truly. At the beginning of the clip, below, I think you can see him communicating from a distance with that "great big husky fellow," Jack Dougherty, the big, dumpy-looking guy who pivots and starts walking towards the TSBD. Is this possible Dougherty figure wearing some kind of a cap?

[Darnell clip. Stabilized by Gerda Dunckel.]

--Tommy

Edited June 28, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

Credit Gerda Dunckel

Enjoy the thread - Link Below

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,6724.0.html

Thanks, Duncan, marvelous gif by Gerda.

And what do you know, here's Roy Truly:

Watch the gif closely and you see Baker actually push him out of the way.

I think the big guy turning and lumbering towards the TSBD could be the elusive Jack Edwin Dougherty.

If you look closely, at the very beginning of the clip "Truly" has his head turned in his direction (see how much of "Truly's" white shirt you can see?) and they're looking at each other and I can imagine that "Truly" might be saying something to him like, "Get back in the building!"

In his WC testimony, Truly said that Dougherty was a "great big burly fellow" who liked to work and wasn't interested in girls. Well, fwiw, there's something about how the big guy is "broad in the beam" and has his pants pulled up real high that tells me he isn't a real big hit with the ladies.

Is he wearing some kind of cap? Glasses?

--Tommy

Edited June 29, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Morrow]

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.

[Thomas Graves]

Interesting perspective on Prayer Man that I'd not considered before, and that is we are looking at him at much more of an angle, just as we are with Buell Wesley Frazier. This is from Greg Parker's ROKC. If this somewhat sideways perspective is correct—and if Prayer Man has his arms crossed as some believe he has—then Prayer Man indeed looks even more "Oswaldish." Good work.

Just the other day Pat Speer said he thinks PM looks like a woman(!). It just so happens I'm reviewing the EDF PM thread where Sean Murphy responds to an opinion that PM might be a woman. He says the womanly appearance is due to the fact that PM's sleeves are rolled up and the eye confuses the back of a woman's head with part of Lee's torso. He then points out the woman's lower leg and foot.

In this contrast-enhanced image, I decided to roughly outline what I see as the woman. I may have made the head too small or positioned it too low – it's hard to tell – but based on the lower part of the body, the upper part is definitely there and it blends into Lee's torso, making his body appear to be broader at first glance.

Because I was looking again at this fresh, I also did a rough trace of PM's body. He is not facing directly south, but more toward the easterly direction. We're not looking at him squarely, but at an angle (just like we are with BWF). When you take this into account and consider the presence of horizontal blur due to camera panning, he actually looks thin here. Of course, the hairline is a giveaway to me.

I don't think his sleeves are rolled up. Note how his wrist is thinner than the light gray sleeve (on his lower arm) which stops right above his wrist.

Separate issue: How are we to know whether that's the "heater in the vestibule" or his left hand?

--Tommy

Edited July 2, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Greg Parker]

Interesting perspective on Prayer Man that I'd not considered before, and that is we are looking at him at much more of an angle, just as we are with Buell Wesley Frazier. This is from Greg Parker's ROKC. If this somewhat sideways perspective is correct—and if Prayer Man has his arms crossed as some believe he has—then Prayer Man indeed looks even more "Oswaldish." Good work.

Just the other day Pat Speer said he thinks PM looks like a woman(!). It just so happens I'm reviewing the EDF PM thread where Sean Murphy responds to an opinion that PM might be a woman. He says the womanly appearance is due to the fact that PM's sleeves are rolled up and the eye confuses the back of a woman's head with part of Lee's torso. He then points out the woman's lower leg and foot.

In this contrast-enhanced image, I decided to roughly outline what I see as the woman. I may have made the head too small or positioned it too low – it's hard to tell – but based on the lower part of the body, the upper part is definitely there and it blends into Lee's torso, making his body appear to be broader at first glance.

Because I was looking again at this fresh, I also did a rough trace of PM's body. He is not facing directly south, but more toward the easterly direction. We're not looking at him squarely, but at an angle (just like we are with BWF). When you take this into account and consider the presence of horizontal blur due to camera panning, he actually looks thin here. Of course, the hairline is a giveaway to me.

I don't think his sleeves are rolled up. Note how his wrist is thinner than the light gray sleeve (on his lower arm) which stops right above his wrist.

Separate issue: How are we to know whether that's the "heater in the vestibule" or his left hand?

--Tommy

If you look at a better quality frame than that, it becomes obvious that he has his arms folded and he is leaning against the wall. Once you can see that, then what everyone thought was his hand has to be a reflection (there was indeed a heater there) and he becomes more more Oswaldian in build. If what I think is a reflection, did turn out to be his hand, then I think he should be rechristened Boxing Man.

Edited July 2, 2015 by Greg Parker