Oliver Stone and Judyth Baker

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

Thanks, everybody for their input.  I apologize for misstating that Frazier has never been questioned by researchers on this.

Yeah look what you unleashed 

[Larry Hancock]

What Bart said...grin..   For the record though, I was only confirming that Frazier had been asked some questions about the doorway photo and repeating what I had heard him say.  Personally I think there are things that he knows that he is not telling us...could be any number of things, some of them quite serious.  I doubt it wold be to his advantage to say such things at this point in time and am skeptical that we will ever hear more from him than he has said up to this point.

[Andrej Stancak]

I agree that we will not hear anything from Mr Frazier that would help us to clear Prayer Man's identity.

We are left with pictures which I believe can still reveal some more information that would help us to decide if that man was Lee Oswald or not. A great possibility is the shirt, CE151, which have dark specks in specific regions and the dark speck pattern on Prayer Man's  shirt could be decisive if matched with CE151.  I did some work along this line in the thread Prayer Man is a Man' in June but since the issue is critical, I am working on extracting layers of information from Prayer Man and his shirt using Tom Wilson's method.

It would be very significant for this part of the JFKA research to obtain the high-resolution digital copy of Darnell which is currently on display at the Sixth Floor Museum. Does anyone has an idea as to how to make this happen? 

[Andrej Stancak]

Here are the dark specks on CE151, a version obtained by Pat in 2016 and  the original version as shot in 1963/1964 which I was able to obtain from NARA this June:

 

My point is that Prayer Man's shirt appears to show dark specks at identical regions as CE151-WC (the one which is in the Warren Commission report).

Here is a shirt-by-shirt comparison of Prayer Man's shirt and CE151. Of course, one would like to see Prayer Man's shirt at a finer resolution and with some better gradation of dark tones.

 

 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Andrej Stancak

[Joe Bauer]

1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Here are the dark specks on CE151, a version obtained by Pat in 2016 and  the original version as shot in 1963/1964 which I was able to obtain from NARA this June:

 

My point is that Prayer Man's shirt appears to show dark specks at identical regions as CE151-WC (the one which is in the Warren Commission report).

Here is a shirt-by-shirt comparison of Prayer Man's shirt and CE151. Of course, one would like to see much Prayer Man's shirt at a finer resolution and with some better gradation of dark tones.

 

 

 

Interesting.

[Pat Speer]

5 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Here are the dark specks on CE151, a version obtained by Pat in 2016 and  the original version as shot in 1963/1964 which I was able to obtain from NARA this June:

 

My point is that Prayer Man's shirt appears to show dark specks at identical regions as CE151-WC (the one which is in the Warren Commission report).

Here is a shirt-by-shirt comparison of Prayer Man's shirt and CE151. Of course, one would like to see Prayer Man's shirt at a finer resolution and with some better gradation of dark tones.

 

 

 

Wait a second... Are you saying that the CE 151 in the top left corner is a color photo provided you by the archives? I went through hell and high water to get the archives to take and then sell me the color photo in the right corner. My initial ask was if the WC's photo of CE 151 was originally in color, and if they could provide me a color copy. They told me they did not have the original photos presented as exhibits in the 26 volumes, and that I would have to ask the Kennedy Library. The Kennedy Library then told me they were insane. So I went back to the archives. They then admitted they had the original exhibit photos, but insisted they were all in black and white. I then had to write up a proposal as to why I thought there should be color photos of CE 151. This then got approved at the highest levels of the archives. I then had to pay them for the taking of the photos. My contact then went on vacation and failed to get back to me upon his return. After a few weeks I wrote him a series of emails to find out what was going on. Then and only then--after about 4 months of back and forth--was I able to get a color photo of CE 151. And yet you wrote them and they sent you a color version of the original exhibit? This is confusing to say the least. 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Pat Speer

[Andrej Stancak]

Pat:

you may remember that I wrote you an email about the coloured CE151 about in March saying that I would wish to see more pictures of CE151 you may have for the purpose of 3D modelling of Lee Oswald's figure including the shirt he wore during the shooting. I followed the issue because I realised that the black-and-white CE151 differed from the CE151 you were sent in the distribution of dark and light spots. Since I was not certain what was going on and since the black-and-white copy of CE151 was of pretty bad quality and the issue of the dark spot was of such importance, I have contacted NARA about end May. 

After receiving the picture, I posted it without delay on this Forum as this is a photograph which was never showed to the public in good quality before.

Here is the link to my June 15 post referring to my contacts with the NARA.

And here is the photograph itself again, for those who overlooked it when I first posted it.

 

 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Andrej Stancak

[Douglas Caddy]

It is my understanding from a posting on Facebook that Oliver Stone will be engaged in filming his three hour JFK documentary through the end of March.  I have heard of no  proposed release date.

Edited December 7, 2019 by Douglas Caddy

[Sandy Larsen]

 

 

Andrej,

These photos are all of the same shirt, right? And yet the dark stain is in different locations on the right versus left photos. And the stains appear to be much worse in the B&W photos.

Do you know of any explanations for these inconsistencies? Also, do you know what it was that stained the shirt?

One more question. If I understand correctly, the photo below is identical to the photo above. And yet the stain appears to be even fainter on this one. Is that because you tweaked the photo so that the stain could be more easily seen?

 

 

[Andrej Stancak]

Sandy:

the colour shirt CE151 from the Warren Report shows a yellowish tint due to ageing of the photographic material. Actually, the NARA officer was apologetic  about it in his email from June. Therefore, I removed the yellow tint as well as I could and the shirt looks, of course, more natural and light red. However,  I have posted the original photograph in the first place as this is the untouched original and it should never be altered without making sure that it is not confused with the original picture.

The dark spots on CE151 can be explained by the job of the person who wore the shirt. Lee Oswald was lifting quite large and heavy book boxes during his work day. He lifted a box and carried it a bit just to place it on a trolley. When you lift a box, the chest offers an opportunity to relieve a bit of weight if one or two corners of the box rest on the chest or even hip. About this way:

 

And so a dusty box would leave smudges diagonally across the shirt. If Lee Oswald had his work shirt CE151 pulled out of slacks, the left front facing of his shirt and the upper right chest just below the clavicle would smear the dust from the box and would appear dark. 

You have a good eye to spot that there are differences between CE151-2016 (the one which Pat obtained) and CE151-WC (coloured or black-and-white). The dark spot just below the right clavicle appears weak or missing in CE151-2016 and that dark spot is very prominent in Prayer Man's shirt. There are also some problems with the texture of the photograph in the front facing of the shirt; ageing may be a problem but there may have been also some cleaning done on that shirt and this is reflected in the 2016 version. How innocent it is? I do not know but I wonder why the things are always made in such a way that it is just more difficult to get to the truth. Just think that the high-res Darnell is in the possession of the 6th floor museum but it is not available for independent research. A new railing is placed into the doorway and the top pole of the railing prevents to reproduce the most likely Prayer Man's stance. And the shirt CE151 which can actually prove the identity of Prayer Man is not accessible to researchers for 56 years (although I was lucky to obtain it by some miracle). Of course, it all can be completely random and unintended. Or not?

 

 

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

 

 

Andrej,

These photos are all of the same shirt, right? And yet the dark stain is in different locations on the right versus left photos. And the stains appear to be much worse in the B&W photos.

Do you know of any explanations for these inconsistencies? Also, do you know what it was that stained the shirt?

One more question. If I understand correctly, the photo below is identical to the photo above. And yet the stain appears to be even fainter on this one. Is that because you tweaked the photo so that the stain could be more easily seen?

 

 

 

Thanks for posting this. I must have missed it the first time around.

 

FWIW, I don't believe that's a color photo. I believe the exhibit sign is actually black and white. If true, it would mean the whole photo has been given a reddish tint.

If it is a color photo, of course, there's another problem...WHY did the archives insist for months and months that the WC exhibit photos were all black and white, and that I would need to cough up some cash to see the actual color of the shirt?

Weird.

[Ron Bulman]

On 12/4/2019 at 6:11 PM, Bart Kamp said:

Yeah look what you unleashed 

No sh!t David.  I posted this on a different thread.  Frasier  on the 50th gave a talk at the Irving, Tx library, as did Hugh Aynesworth.  I've read they were previously acquainted.  

That Aynesworth was in Dealy Plaza, at Parkland and the TT.  That he  befriended Marina and managed to obtain Lee's diary.  Then he shows up in New Orleans  for the defense of Clay Shaw  against Garrison  volunteering his services to the CIA.

Someone on this site a few years back I believe mentioned the possibility that Hugh was shepherding Wesley.  Or Odd coincidences over 50 years? 

[David Andrews]

I'm an agent provocateur...but for our side...accidentally.

OK, it was a Don Knotts moment.

Edited December 7, 2019 by David Andrews

[Ron Bulman]

4 hours ago, David Andrews said:

I'm an agent provacateur...but for our side...accidentally.

OK, it was a Don Knotts moment.

Yet Dave, your no Judy Baker...

What does she have in common with a Studebaker?  

[Guest]

The other day I was looking at a FB group where LNers and CTers were united in talking about her (not in the most positive way mind you). But it is amazing how she manages to unite two opposite sides.

I thought I had seen it all...... 

Edited December 7, 2019 by Bart Kamp