Backyard Photo Observation

[John Butler]

On ‎2‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 1:39 PM, John Butler said:

Michael Connelly’s detective Harry Bosch could usually find the answer to the crime by consulting the “Murder Book”, the record of the investigation.  One of the ways to tease that answer from the Murder Book was to make a timeline. 

Here’s my attempt at trying to make a timeline of the Backyard Photos.

March 31, 1963:  This is supposedly the date that Marina Oswald photographed Lee Harvey Oswald and the resultant photos became the Backyard Photos.

This is now disputed by the idea that the BYPs could have been taken in Sep., 1963 at or around the equinox so that shadows would duplicate conditions in March of 63 to match other evidence such as the gun and rifle purchase.

September 22,1963: Or, close to the equinox date:  Possible date for the filming of the BYPs by folks other than the Oswalds.

September, 1963:  Roscoe White joins the Dallas Police Force with the crime lab / identification bureau as a photographer.

November 22, 1963:  Te day of the assassination of President Kennedy.

November 22, 1963:  This is the day that Robert Hester and wife say they saw and developed photos that were the BYPs.  There was also a photo showing the back yard at 214 Neeley Street without figures in it.  This photo has never surfaced.  The Hesters claimed the FBI was aware of these photos and had them in their possession.

November 22, 1963:  Lee Harvey Oswald is shown a BYP by Captain Fritz of the Dallas force.  LHO said it was not him and it was faked which he would be able to prove later.  If he wasn’t under a death sentence that would have put him there.

November 22, 1963:  The night of the assassination Marguerite Oswald is shown a BYP of LHO holding a rifle over his head by Marina Oswald.  The photo is burned and the ashes are flushed.

November 23, 1963:  The BYPs are found at the home of Michael and Ruth Payne a day after Capt. Fritz showed a BYP to Oswald.

November 29, 1963:  This is the earliest time the second set could be made.  The second set of BYPs are allegedly made at this time.  The scene of the backyard and other photos do not match the first set in shadows suggesting different years, different seasons, and definitely a different time of day.  The shrub growth over time is different in size suggesting a time longer than months.

November 29, 1963:  Warren Commission established.

December 6, 1963:  Life Magazine publishes the Back Yard Photo of Lee Harvey Oswald.

December 8, 1963- Feb. 24, 1964:  Robert Oswald said he obtained the Imperial Reflex camera at the Payne’s home on Dec. 8, 1963,  This was after the authorities searched the home.  Later he turned this into the authorities on Feb. 24, 1964.

September 24, 1964:  Warren Commission Report presented to President Johnson.

1967:  George de Mohrenchildt has a BYP photo in his possessions, a copy of 133-A.

March 31, 1967:  This reproduction photo was made by CBS in March of 1967.  The shadows in this 1967 photo are a fair match for the shadows in the 1963 BYPs.  However, the foliage of the shrubs in the two do not match suggesting the two photos were taken at different times of the year.  This could only be accomplished by filming at the equinoxes or about a week close to the equinox.  These are the two times of the year when lighting conditions match.

September, 1976:  House Select Committee on Assassinations formed.

1976:  At the time of the HSCA hearings Roscoe White’s wife Geneva, later Mrs. Dees, had a photo 133-C she gave to the committee.  She said it came from Roscoe and would be valuable in the future.

1977: The second set of BYPs surface with the Ghost Photo being made public.  Mary La Fontaine said there were two photos of just the background of 214 Neeley Streets available and the backgrounds did not match. 

Can you add to this list or correct inaccurate statements?

I reposted this since I added several things to it.  Reading through this list one can get a view of strange happenings around the BYPs.

For instance, let us say that the saga of Lee and Marina creating these photos is true.  Then Lee and Marina would be the creators, owners, and possessors of these photos.  That leaves several questions unanswered.  The questions concern how others obtained photo copies or negatives:

1.  How did Capt. Fritz obtain his photo copy and confront LHO with it on the day of the assassination.  Where did he get it?  Which photo copy of the BYPs did he use?  Negatives of 133-A and 133-B were found the next day at the Paine's garage by Dallas detectives. 

2.  How did George de Mohrenschildt get his photo copy of 133-A?  Why did he hide it until 1967?  What was his source for the photo?

3.  Was Robert Oswald's camera really found by him in the Paine's garage on Dec. 8, 1963.  Or, did he make that up since the Dallas Police thoroughly searched the garage earlier.  His camera was used to make the photos or used to recopy the photos.

4.  The FBI and Dallas Police had negatives that they developed with Robert Hester and his wife on the night of the assassination.  Where did they obtain the negatives?  Negatives of 133-A and 133-B were not found until 12 hours later at the Paine's garage.

5.  Why was Marina Oswald unable to identify Lee's cameras?  Why was she unable to identify the Imperial Reflex until June, 1964.

6.  BYP 133-C was found in the possession of Mrs. Geneva Dees, formerly Mrs. Roscoe White.  How did Roscoe obtain the photo?  And, from where did he get it? 

7.  Why was the second set of BYPs really made?  Were they made to help the Secret Service understand the assassination and plot?  Were they really made on November 29, 1963?  They do not match in specific characteristics the first set of BYPs.  They are more amateuristc.

8.  On the night of the assassination Marina Oswald shows to Marguerite Oswald an unknown BYP with Oswald holding a rifle over his head.  They burn it and flush the ashes.  Why didn't Marina burn any other photos or negatives that she supposedly took and was in possession of that night.  Why wait for the Dallas Police to find those negatives?

9.  What there a controlling cabal overseeing LHO and ultimately responsible for his framing?

These questions suggest there may be a link between the principal characters mentioned here?  Is there a link between the FBI, Dallas Police, George de Mohrenschildt, Captain Fritz, Lt. Day, Roscoe White, George de Mohrenschildt and his crowd, and Marina Oswald?  Is Marina Oswald the key to understanding the BYPs?

Most of these copies magically appear in the possession of others after the arrest of LHO.  The sources must be those who were the possessors or others such as the Paines who were around the owners, Lee and Marina.  That is if you believe the official story that Lee and Marina created the BYPs. 

Edited February 10, 2019 by John Butler

[Jeff Carter]

FYI, I did a research project on the BYP which covers most of the topics listed above. It appears on the Kennedy and King website. For example, there’s a discussion of possible explanations for the deMohrenschildt BYP, which was discovered in a box of records on his return from Haiti. No one really knows who put it there or who wrote the inscription on the back. It did have the effect of unsettling deMohrenschildt, and that may have been the intention.

Robert Oswald was said to have received a box from Ruth Paine in December 1963, a box containing loose random items previously owned by Lee Oswald. The Imperial Reflex camera, identified as the camera which exposed the backyard photos, was allegedly in that box. That camera does not appear in the inventory of Oswald’s possessions drawn up by the Dallas police officers who searched the Paine household (but the other loose items handed to R Oswald did). It was later claimed by a Fort Worth police officer that he had seen the camera during the search, but felt it was too old and worn out to be of interest. The Dallas officers were adamant that no item missed their attention or was left off the list. Robert Oswald said that he paid no attention to the camera in the box, even while the FBI was asking many questions about his brother’s cameras through January and February. He then supposedly noticed or recognized the camera and realized it might be what the FBI was looking for. He said he never thought about it previously because it was too old and worn to be of interest. Does that give anyone confidence that the Imperial Reflex was “Oswald’s camera”? Good enough for the Warren Commission, but that camera was never located and identified until late February 1964, and its presence in the box before then cannot be verified.

I don’t believe it is helpful to describe the photos taken Nov 29, 1963 as a “second set” of BYPs. They are police re-creation photos. The backyard photos are best understood and identified as featuring an Oswald figure, which of course the Nov 29 photos do not.

Oswald was not shown a BYP until after the discovery on Nov 23. He was not shown a photo in its “drugstore print” form, but was shown a print created in the DPD lab from the discovered negative.

Roscoe White and Robert Stovall created their BYP prints at the Dallas Police photo lab, for the presumed purpose of retaining “souvenirs”. The Dallas police photo lab leaked BYPs to the media in February 1964, causing an extensive investigation by the FBI. More effort was put into that investigation than actually ID’ing the ownership of the camera.

Two crucial persons to understanding the BYP not on your list - Ruth and Michael Paine.

[John Butler]

Jeff,

The King and King series of articles are very well done and very informative.

My reference to the Nov. 29 Dallas Police reproduction photos as a second set of BYPs is just a convenience in separating the two.  They are related but at the same time not the same.  I don't buy Capt. Fritz explanation for their production.  I don't buy the time period of their production, either.  Fritz was a police captain in what has been called for the time the most corrupt police force in the United States.  He didn't get to be a captain of a division by being a good boy.  Can we take what he says as honest truth? 

According to Michael Payne there was a BYP at the Dallas Police on the night of the assassination.  Many have said Fritz showed Oswald a BYP the night of the assassination. 

What do you think of the point I am trying to make that there is some connection between the people who had BYPs or something related in their possession directly after the assassination and in some cases years afterwards? 

Particularly, Robert Oswald, Marina Oswald, George de Mohrenschidlt, the Paines, Roscoe White, the Dallas Police, the FBI, (maybe agent Hosty or at least the agents spoken of the Hesters).

 

[Jeff Carter]

I don’t think there is any evidence of connections or links between most of the persons/agencies on your list. Robert Oswald, for example, had little or no contact with any of those entities other than Marina, and that itself was limited to a brief period of time. Same could be said of de Mohrenschildt. Roscoe White had no connection to any of the Oswalds or Paines.

It seems to me the major points of interest, and of misconduct or bad faith on behalf of the investigating authorities, relate to 1) assigning “authorship” of the photos to Marina  2) establishing the Imperial Reflex as “Oswald’s camera”  and 3) suppressing the existence of 133-C.   I think the deMohrenschildt copy of the photo, and issues with the Nov 29 recreation, are interesting but not directly related to the three points above (other than suppression of 133-C which the recreation certainly underlines).

[John Butler]

How many BYPs were there?  5?  or a minimum of 5?

1.  133 A, B, and C

2.  The Hesters said they saw a BYP without a figure the night of the assassination as film was being developed for the FBI. 

3.  Marina and Marquerite say they destroyed one showing Oswald holding a rifle over his head.  That makes 5 mentioned in the record.

Why didn't Marina recall the issue of making the BYPs and then search and destroy the rest including negatives and photo copies?  Why stop at one?  If, as some believe, Marina didn't take the BYPs then where did she get the copy showing Oswald with a rifle held over his head?  When did she get it?

What was her motivation in showing Marquerite just one photo and then the two destroying that photo?  Let's assume she new about the whole set.  Her testimony of just taking one photo didn't hold up and then changed to two.  Would she have verified 5 photos if asked?

The real questions in the BYPs incident is that how various people and entities obtained there copies of the BYPs.  This is generally not discussed in the literature or very little. 

1.  How did Capt. Will Fritz obtain his copy of the BYPs before they were discovered the following day?  Did it come from the FBI or the Dallas Crime Lab.

2.   How did the FBI get their negatives to have developed by the Hesters on the night of the assassination?  Was Agent Hosty or, some other agent monitoring Marina involved?

3.  George de Mohrenschildt had a copy stored away and big surprise for him when it was found.  Believable or not?  Where did he get his copy to store away?  And, more importantly when?

4.  Mrs. Dees, formerly Mrs. Roscoe White, more than likely obtained her copy from Roscoe.  This was 133-C that was hidden for 13 years.  When and where did Roscoe get his copy.  It had to have been during the time he was employed by the Dallas Police.  He is my chief suspect for being the author or, at least one of the preparers of the BYPs.  That means he would have had a chance to obtain a copy before the assassination or as some believe that the BYPs were not made until after the assassination he could have obtained one when they were made.  The notion of the BYPs being made after the assassination does not fit well with the Equinox Theory based on the light and shadows in the BYPs.  There are two times of the year to obtain the lighting in the BYPs, the Vernal and Autumnal Equinoxes.  The second set of BYPs show different lighting patterns for Nov. 29, 1963.  That is if they were even made on 11-29-53.

5.  And, then there is Robert Oswald and the infamous Imperial Reflex that he either owned or LHO owned.  Would Oswald, a camera buff, waste time on an Imperial Reflex camera when he had much better equipment.  Can we trust Robert Oswald?  Probably not based on the family get together attended by John Pic, LHO, and Robert Oswald.  John Pic says he didn't recognize his brother but, probably kept quiet because Robert Oswald and others did.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by John Butler

[Jeff Carter]

10 hours ago, John Butler said:

How many BYPs were there?  5?  or a minimum of 5?

1.  133 A, B, and C

2.  The Hesters said they saw a BYP without a figure the night of the assassination as film was being developed for the FBI. 

3.  Marina and Marquerite say they destroyed one showing Oswald holding a rifle over his head.  That makes 5 mentioned in the record.

Why didn't Marina recall the issue of making the BYPs and then search and destroy the rest including negatives and photo copies?  Why stop at one?  If, as some believe, Marina didn't take the BYPs then where did she get the copy showing Oswald with a rifle held over his head?  When did she get it?

What was her motivation in showing Marquerite just one photo and then the two destroying that photo?  Let's assume she new about the whole set.  Her testimony of just taking one photo didn't hold up and then changed to two.  Would she have verified 5 photos if asked?

The real questions in the BYPs incident is that how various people and entities obtained there copies of the BYPs.  This is generally not discussed in the literature or very little. 

1.  How did Capt. Will Fritz obtain his copy of the BYPs before they were discovered the following day?  Did it come from the FBI or the Dallas Crime Lab.

2.   How did the FBI get their negatives to have developed by the Hesters on the night of the assassination?  Was Agent Hosty or, some other agent monitoring Marina involved?

3.  George de Mohrenschildt had a copy stored away and big surprise for him when it was found.  Believable or not?  Where did he get his copy to store away?  And, more importantly when?

4.  Mrs. Dees, formerly Mrs. Roscoe White, more than likely obtained her copy from Roscoe.  This was 133-C that was hidden for 13 years.  When and where did Roscoe get his copy.  It had to have been during the time he was employed by the Dallas Police.  He is my chief suspect for being the author or, at least one of the preparers of the BYPs.  That means he would have had a chance to obtain a copy before the assassination or as some believe that the BYPs were not made until after the assassination he could have obtained one when they were made.  The notion of the BYPs being made after the assassination does not fit well with the Equinox Theory based on the light and shadows in the BYPs.  There are two times of the year to obtain the lighting in the BYPs, the Vernal and Autumnal Equinoxes.  The second set of BYPs show different lighting patterns for Nov. 29, 1963.  That is if they were even made on 11-29-53.

5.  And, then there is Robert Oswald and the infamous Imperial Reflex that he either owned or LHO owned.  Would Oswald, a camera buff, waste time on an Imperial Reflex camera when he had much better equipment.  Can we trust Robert Oswald?  Probably not based on the family get together attended by John Pic, LHO, and Robert Oswald.  John Pic says he didn't recognize his brother but, probably kept quiet because Robert Oswald and others did.

hi John  - I appreciate you taking time to work through these issues. I have a few responses/clarifications:

I’m not sure it is accurate to assume the photo purportedly destroyed by Marina and Marguerite Oswald was actually a BYP. There were known photographs of Oswald on his infrequent hunting excursions, so what they may have destroyed was one of those. Unfortunately, unlike the witness statements of Paine and O’Leary, the LIFE Magazine cover had not been published yet when Marguerite Oswald talked to the WC, or so she could not say it was or was not similar, and the Warren Commission people did not think to get the description of the photo more precise. If, though, it was a backyard photo as understood (with an Oswald figure), then I would say this makes the authenticity of the BYP (i.e. that was actually Oswald posing) far more likely.

Again, I am not sure of the Hesters’ story. It would be helped if anything like the photos they described (empty backyard, color transparency) had showed up somewhere over the years. That said, on a hypothetical level, Hosty could be considered a candidate to have introduced the BYP on the Friday. The surveillance of Oswald, such as it was  through the postal service etc, was channeled through the FBI. There were rumours Oswald might have sent a BYP to The Militant (or similar), and an informant could have turned it in…but that is totally hypothetical.

George deMohrenschildt had nothing to do with the BYP other than finding it. Someone with access to the negative and good darkroom equipment was responsible for this particular print. People argue whether Oswald actually signed the back, but it can be determined that Marina did not write the other phrase, but someone who knew Marina’s way of talking did. Numerous persons had access to the box of records where the photo was discovered. This box, as an Oswald possession, was presumably searched by the DPD or FBI without finding it - so the insertion of the photo probably happened after Oswald had been killed.

Lee Oswald was not really a camera buff. The only photos tied to the Imperial Reflex camera were taken between March and May 1963. The photos taken in May were very possibly more tied to Ruth Paine than to Oswald. The camera was not listed as among Oswald’s possessions, and was probably not in the Paine house on Nov 22/63.

[John Butler]

Thanks Jeff,

Thanks for your help and assistance.  We vary on a few things, one such as what Rich Pope pointed out above.  I think we agree on much more and in overall have the same position, the BYPs are fraudulent and framed Lee Harvey Oswald in the public's mind.

I want to especially thank Tony Krome and Chris Bristow.  Tony for bringing up the topic and pointing out the real nature of the photos and for Chris clarifying what I call the Equinox Theory.  The Equinox theory says that the BYPs were not taken in March, 1963 but in September, 1963 around the date of the Autumnal Equinox.  Roscoe White joining the Dallas Police as a photographer in September is a good indication that Oswald was to be chosen as the Patsy, if that worked out on assassination day.  The barren shrub in the March 31, 1967 CBS re-enactment says, that due to the same shrub being in bloom the BYPs, the BYPs were taken at another time rather than March.  Jack White, I believe first brought this up, and has now been clarified.

I really don't have anything else to say then perhaps this last round of analyzing the BYPs has brought up new and important information on the photos.  Perhaps, someone in the future will bring up something that we all have missed.  That is what Tony and Chris have done. 

 

 

[Michael Cross]

On 2/6/2019 at 3:05 PM, John Butler said:

I need to do no such thing.  Ray and I have been at cross purposes for years on this issue and others.  He likes to prove that I am mistaken on this and other issues.  This is one of his milder emergences.  In actually, he is simply redirecting the conversation away from the topic at hand.

Willful ignorance.  Perfect.

[John Butler]

Attempting, but no.  That just prolongs the emergence of said individuals.

[Jeff Carter]

4 hours ago, Rich Pope said:

Oswald had a lot of camera equipment when they searched his room.  And some of this equipment was very expensive.  How can you say he's not a camera buff?  

On the basis that he did not seem to produce many photographs. Despite having equipment, and a young family, really just a small handful of photos in the Oswald collection could be directly attributed to his activity, and most of those were landscapes from Russia.

[Ray Mitcham]

4 hours ago, Michael Cross said:

Willful ignorance.  Perfect.

Even when they are proven to be wrong they never apologise.

[Michael Cross]

17 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Even when they are proven to be wrong they never apologise.

I believe that I did!

 

[Chris Bristow]

One thing I can't resolve is the date the BYP's were taken. On 3/31 the azimuth from 3pm to 4pm went from 194 to 220 and the elevation 61 to 55. Looking at the post shadow it sure looks like the azimuth was about 240. At 5pm the azimuth was around 240 but the elevation was so low that Oswald's shadow would be about 6 feet long. It isn't until about April 15th at 430pm that you get a 240 azimuth with an elevation of 51 which matches the BYP's.
The HSCA determined Marina's line of sight was 70 degrees East of North. An azimuth of 220 translates to 40 degrees East of North. This means from Marina's pov Oswald was standing 30 degrees away from the post. For that to be true she would have to be standing only 4 feet from Oswald which seems impossible, it should be more like 13 feet. (Azimuth can be determined by using North or South as the starting point and you can go clockwise or counterclockwise. for Neeley st. they use a clockwise movement starting with North as the starting point of zero azimuth).
 To test how many degrees away from the post Oswald is, take  Marina's distance to Oswald as 4 feet(Radius) x 2 = 8 feet(diameter) x 3.14 =  a 25 foot circle based on a 4 foot camera distance. 360 degrees divided by  a 25 foot circle results is 14.4 degrees per foot. Oswald is about 2 feet from the post so he would be about 29 degrees away from the post. If that were possible then Marina's pov at 70 degrees East of North(Per the HSCA) would be 29 degrees away from the post and everything would be fine. But Marina can't be just 4 feet away from Oswald so Oswald can't be 29 degrees away from the azimuth. This means the azimuth of 220 on 3/31 at 330pm can't be right or Marina's line of sight as 70 degrees East of North can't be right. 
 If Marina is 13 from Oswald then he would be about 9 degrees away from the post. If this is the case and the HSCA is correct about Marina's 70 degree line of sight to Oswald then the post's shadow represents an azimuth of about 240 or 60 degrees East of North. Oswald would be at 70 East of North, 9 or 10 degrees away from the post shadow. 
The post shadow points almost directly to the post under the landing at the top of the stairs( The post under the NorthWest corner of the landing). You could determine the azimuth if you know the distance from the post to the NorthWest landing post and the width between them. I measure the stairway to be from 30 to 36 inches wide.
    To get the distance from post to post I use the steps which I measure to be 10.28 inches each( 12 foot long stairway divided by 14 steps = 10.28 inches per step) the landing post is 51 inches East of Oswald's post. If you draw a box with the proportions based on 36' width and 51 inch length  and draw a line from the lower left corner to the upper right corner it shows the angle of the post shadow which aligns with an azimuth of around 235 to 240. 
 to make the azimuth come out to 220 the stairs would have to be 6 feet wide or 42 inches long from post to post. The width obviously is no more than 3 feet and the length can't be 42 inches or each step would be only 8 inches long, shorter than the average foot. So I can't see the photos being done before April 15th.
    I wish some  person in Dallas could take a picture of the yard this March 31st. That would solve a lot. 
 

 

Edited February 12, 2019 by Chris Bristow

[Tony Krome]

46 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

    I wish some  person in Dallas could take a picture of the yard this March 31st. That would solve a lot. 
 

Exactly what I was thinking the other day

[Ray Mitcham]

12 hours ago, Michael Cross said:

I believe that I did!

 

I didn't mean you, Michael. I meant the other two dissidents, David and John.

Edited February 12, 2019 by Ray Mitcham