PHOTO OF OSWALD IN TSBD WINDOW

[David Josephs]

I'm fairly convinced that Oswald was the man standing in the corner of the TSBD landing

You see, what is strange about Lovelady is that in HUGHES we see him to the WEST of the opening and the stairs yet moments later Lovelady is much further over to the East with the faint outline of another person deeper in the corner.

 

 

Wesley claims: 

Mr. FRAZIER - Well, see, I was standing, like I say, one step down from the top, and Mr. Shelley was standing, you know, back from the top step and over toward the side of the wall there. See, he was standing right over there, and then Billy was a couple of steps down from me over toward more the wall also. (in the image at bottom left Lovelady was down and to the left of Wesley - the tall man in the middle of the landing - Wesley is not in Altgens claiming he was back and in the dark)

Mr. BALL - We have got a picture taken the day of the parade and it shows the President's car going by. 
Now, take a look at that picture. Can you see your picture any place there? 
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't, because I was back up in this more or less black area here. 
Mr. BALL - I see. 
Mr. FRAZIER - Because Billy, like I say, is two or three steps down in front of me. 

 

Is Frazier referring to a later time when Lovelady is indeed a few steps below him...  but that is well after the motorcade goes by

 

 

Edited April 25, 2019 by David Josephs

[Jim Glover]

David,  Nice work. I always thought for years Prayer Man could be Lee.  

I never realized until you showed the last Photo that his friend and ride to work Tall, Wesley, is right there looking at him. Does that make out his friend a bad guy? Since the photo without enhancement and overlay is too fuzzy to be sure I am not ready to condemn someone on a possibility but you still might be fairly certain. This case has hurt too many innocent people already. But it is possible Prayer man is Lee, if alive in court that would be reasonable doubt. Yet I am not convinced because nobody there said Lee was there. Wesley defended Lee against pressure more than any witness saying the regular grocery bag did not contain a rifle and I found his rented room did need new curtain rods because the old ones were badly bent out of shape. I can send the photoos sometime but have to go now.  Thanks for your work.

[David Josephs]

30 minutes ago, Jim Glover said:

Yet I am not convinced because nobody there said Lee was there

... and there were three and only three shots fired.... 

Carolyn Arnold puts Oswald on the 1st floor walking by the double doors leading to the stairs out front... FBI simply changed what she said... So the idea that a potential item of Fact which conflicted with the pre-determined outcome would be buried, or not even asked by the FBI is no real stretch.

In an interview with the journalist Earl Golz in 1978, Carolyn Arnold claimed that “she saw Oswald in the 2nd–floor lunchroom as she was on her way out of the depository to watch the presidential motorcade …. She left the building at 12:25pm.”  (Arnold had some reason to remember having gone into the lunchroom. She was pregnant at the time and had a craving for water. She also recalled, in 1978, that this was “about 12:15. It may have been slightly later.”)

 

She was not the only witness who questioned the reliability of the FBI’s version of their statements. Arnold Rowland, for example, pointed out several errors to the Warren Commission and mentioned that the FBI agents “just didn’t seem interested at all” in evidence that contradicted the lone–gunman account (WCHE, vol.2, pp.182–185). Carolyn Walther, like Arnold Rowland, had seen another man standing near the gunman, and was similarly unimpressed with the FBI’s attitude to her evidence. She told Earl Golz that “I talked to them [FBI agents] and it seemed like they weren’t very interested. They were going to set out to prove me a xxxx and I had no intention of arguing with them and being harassed. … And if they didn’t want to believe it or had some reason not to, well, then, that was all right with me.” (Earl Golz, ‘Was Oswald in Window?,’ Dallas Morning News, 26 November 1978, p.13A.)

The Warren Commission treated Carolyn Arnold as it treated many other awkward witnesses. She was not called to testify before the Commission. Neither of her statements was published in the Warren Commission’s Report or in its 26 volumes of Hearings and Exhibits. The Commission discounted her evidence and that of Eddie Piper, and concluded that “Charles Givens … was the last known employee to see Oswald inside the building prior to the assassination … at 11:45am” (WR, p.143). Carolyn Arnold’s five colleagues from the Texas School Book Depository who stood with her as the motorcade passed, and who could have commented on the reliability of her account, were also ignored.  

 

FWIW, Wesley was a suspect for a while (While Shelley was actually arrested and released) and went thru a strange variety of activities the rest of the 22nd... as well as being questioned for hours and asked to sign a confession,   

 

“I was interrogated and questioned for many, many hours,” Frazier said. “Interrogators would rotate.”

Dallas police Capt. Will Fritz, who was in charge of the homicide department, came into the room with a typed statement. He handed Frazier a pen and demanded he sign it. It was a confession.

Frazier refused.

“This was ridiculous,” he said. “Captain Fritz got very red-faced, and he put up his hand to hit me and I put my arm up to block. I told him we’d have a hell of a fight and I would get some good licks in on him. Then he stormed out the door.”

 

Were you aware that Linnie Mae's husband BILL RANDLE was interviewed and stated he was personally acquainted with Oswald - but nothing more was learned.  Marvin Randle was in the hospital so Linnie Mae stayed with her mom and brother...

 

Guess all I'm saying is that this case is Alice in Wonderland: Thru the Looking Glass where up is down and everything you'd expect to follow established rules... doesn't.

 

31 minutes ago, Jim Glover said:

Thanks for your work

Thanks for your kind words....

DJ

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

On 4/10/2019 at 5:05 PM, David Josephs said:

Hey there Jim...

Pretty sure you can Google photographic manipulation and see many results created from layering glass plates with different pieces of the negative/positive on different sheets to create the final image.... 
https://www.colorexpertsbd.com/blog/darkroom-photo-manipulation-photoshop-walk-history

With Dillard's negative, one need only have or create a negative of the image you wish to superimpose.  It works exactly like Photoshop layers except it's done in the real world...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=59&v=_2mQsUIc97E  - Watch Konrad Eek work up a print using only darkroom techniques

Hi David,

Thanks for clarifying, did not think that the photo could have been modified in 1963 and it looks like it has.  Good job.

 

 

[Jim Glover]

OK Keyvan,

I wonder what the Photographer Dillard would say to his Photo being manipulated. He printed it when he got back from the Hospital so where would he get a negative of Oswald and If he had time to do what you think why would he or someone put in a photo of Oswald that is so faint nobody saw it? http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/dillard.htm

[David G. Healy]

On 4/16/2019 at 9:04 AM, Jim Glover said:

OK Keyvan,

I wonder what the Photographer Dillard would say to his Photo being manipulated. He printed it when he got back from the Hospital so where would he get a negative of Oswald and If he had time to do what you think why would he or someone put in a photo of Oswald that is so faint nobody saw it? http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/dillard.htm

here's how to get to the bottom of this: where is the original in-camera Dillard negative? Who owns it? Document the negatives lineage, acquire access to it, make arrangements for a thorough review of the negative-then print it! Then, compare with what is circulating today.

Just another useless rabbit hole till someone does.

[Jim Glover]

I agree David Healy,   

I could be wrong but I read recently that the original negative was lost somehow by a congressional investigation. One of our friends here has asked for the negative from the Paper in Dallas that published it. If someone could ask Tom Dillard, if alive, that would be great. And if someone could ask Wesley Frazier who he thinks Prayer Man is that might help with more puzzles of the case for us.  Thanks!

[Michael Cross]

On 11/8/2014 at 8:30 PM, David Von Pein said:

 

Notice how in the inset enlargement, the lines of the window become fuzzy due to the blow up, but the line of "Oswald's" chin is distinct.  Photoshop.  

[David G. Healy]

3 hours ago, Jim Glover said:

I agree David Healy,   

I could be wrong but I read recently that the original negative was lost somehow by a congressional investigation. One of our friends here has asked for the negative from the Paper in Dallas that published it. If someone could ask Tom Dillard, if alive, that would be great. And if someone could ask Wesley Frazier who he thinks Prayer Man is that might help with more puzzles of the case for us.  Thanks!

Imagine that, right along with the rest of them... It's of no use asking Dillard anything except where is the negative? If he can't deliver the original negative or the current owner can't/won't deliver it, it's a wasted exercise--I assume BS.

There is enough medical evidence right now to blow this case right out of the water. Have a nice Easter,  Mr. Glover...

[David Andrews]

Deleted - see revised post below.

Edited April 18, 2019 by David Andrews

[David Andrews]

On 11/8/2014 at 10:11 PM, David Von Pein said:

Tom,

The window sills in the TSBD were very low, as we can see in the photos below (CE 488 and 489). Someone of Oswald's height (5-feet-9), when standing, would definitely reach the upper windows, as seen here:

Logically, why would Oswald be standing there, staring, moments after the assassination, even if he had fired no shot?

At that moment, what was more important then than safety and invisibility? 

Was he looking at the police and the panic in the street?  He could have quit the sixth floor and gone downstairs to see that.

Why is the Oswald figure staring out past the crosspiece of the window frame?  That's the way you glance out when you hear a noise in the street.  People who really want to see something stand to the side of the crosspiece so they can have as much unobstructed glass as they can get. 

See the two men at the window in CE 489, posted above?  Even the third man standing behind them is trying to look through unobstructed glass, and is not staring out past the obstructing crosspiece.

Is the third man, above, taller than Oswald?  His eyes are at about the level of Oswald's in the Dillard photo.

Does Oswald's exact height matter when viewed from the street below, and would his face be seen as quartered by the windowpane?  Could the Sixth Floor Museum be persuaded to stage a recreation of this picture (using an adjacent window)?

Is the location of the image behind the crosspiece meant to hide its origin as a paste-in?

If it's a paste-in, is it a good paste-in?  Or are the size and proportions of the face changed when quartered behind that crosspiece?

 

Edited April 21, 2019 by David Andrews

[Jim Glover]

My possible explanation ~ Why would Oswald be standing in front of a window near the "Snipers nest" moments after the ambush crossfire? If he is a patsy why not show the world if anyone had a camera, '"Why would I be showing myself in plain site unless I was just a patsy?" (How would he have known the Photo would be so hard to make out?). Maybe nobody on that floor was supposed to hit anyone and Lee as a patsy was forced to go along to save his family as Judyth Baker wrote. So in court he could say "that is me (if someone saw him there or took a photo) and there were others up there watching me". (A few witnesses saw other men on the 6th floor).   If he was left on his own somewhere in the building or in the entrance could the plotters risk Lee who may have alerted the authorities about the plot in Chicago a few weeks earlier take the risk of Lee doing it again by running out ahead of the motorcade with a warning?

The photos that show him or his look-alike out clearly are enhanced or photo shopped, not the original Commission Exhibit. The original negative seems to have disappeared. So, if he was a patsy and being watched and lived to tell his side, the photo does not prove he shot anyone so maybe someone who knew about the plot made sure the negative was missing.

So was Lee a Patsy? Why was the Patsy killed by Ruby who asked an FBI informant to come watch the fireworks with him from a few blocks away.  If he lived he could have cracked the case and his photo or being seen in the window would make sense with the rest of his story (I didn't shoot anyone!).  Those who were up there could have told him there was a bad guy who was impersonating him who they wanted to catch and was going to kill Kennedy maybe for Castro and we have information He will be acting with your ID. So maybe Lee was trapped or wanted to help if he was told by handlers "This is a test or trap to catch the bad guys".   

Now I was also set-up (now workin' on my book, Born To Spy) And was told the day after by a couple of agents on Saturday near Point Blank Texas after the double Oswald was Shotgunned Friday night at the Pines Motel, Sam Houston National Forest where men were celebrating from the moment I arrived after dark. Later I was told not to go outside because there was a man with a shotgun going to shoot the guy who shot President Kennedy. The place got quiet after the shots (I'll bet he had a Hell of a story too). So one of the agents told me Saturday late afternoon that Hoover told them on Friday it was a Test that went Bad. By the way Hoover got on the extra Chartered Bus at the Air Port in Houston I was forced onto earlier that then picked up Hoover, the Bushes, and other operatives. I reported this to authorities in 91 and again last May.  

Witnesses saw Hoover in Texas including late Thursday Night. I haven't read one report where Hoover was seen in DC on Friday and Hoover leaves out completely where he was and what he did on Friday in his WC report until he gets the story straight on the Phone that night with LBJ. Yes, Summers reports Hoover called RFK immediately after the shots were fired told RFK he was getting more Information and will call back.  Hoover never called back Why? Why did he call in the first place if he thought he had no Jurisdiction in the case. Did he think RFK did not have a TV? And where was Hoover when he called? And why are all his phone logs of the months before and after missing from the FBI Vault?  I have a good idea and from first hand knowledge, this is My Possible explanation.

And whoever the figure was who can say he wasn't in the same place during the shooting?

Phil Ochs was right, Hoover was The Bad Guy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2019 by Jim Glover
Another thought

[Denis Morissette]

Dillard negative damaged by radioactive substance left too long on it. See page 2. http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/M Disk/Mack Gary Cover-up/Item 19.pdf

[Denis Morissette]

Someone here was saying that Blevins was a good man. Is that person still holding the same opinion knowing he faked it?

[Jim Glover]

Thanks Denis, Bad Idea to give anyone an important negative. This seems to be a pattern.

I don't use Blevin's enhancements.  The Commission Exhibit was printed more than a decade before the negative was ruined by someone at HSCA. And it does not show anyone in the "snipers window".

Edited April 23, 2019 by Jim Glover
English