Dick Bullock USMC

[Jim Hargrove]

John,

For the EVOLUTION…. chart on the previous page, I doubt a screen capture will give good results.  For me, at least, just right-clicking on the image, selecting “Save image as….” from the drop-down menu and saving the file to my desktop creates a perfect copy of what I uploaded.  (I’m using Chrome browser on a Linux computer, but something similar to this should work on most setups.) The file should be about 905kB and when the view is enlarged enough, you should be able to read the captions for each of the 77 photos.  The full image should be 3064 x 4152 pixels.

Moving on, the minute I read the analysis presented in your post above the chart, it was obvious that you had put some serious work into studying images of “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  I can’t wait to start reading your project, which I’ll do ASAP, despite a rather difficult schedule this weekend. 

Your analysis is based solely or primarily on visual analysis of the images, correct?  It might be interesting to overlay the existing biographical data on images you find that don’t seem to match Classic Oswald (who we believe was Russian-speaking HARVEY Oswald—not the American born as LEE Harvey Oswald). 

Your conclusion that few photos survive of the young American born as Lee Harvey Oswald is not surprising.  You might be interested, though, in a pixel-counting biometric study conducted by a Dallas attorney in 2015 of a dozen facial images of “LHO.”  His study seems reasonably sophisticated, though he used only a subset of facial measurements used in more sophisticated algorithm’s such as Facebook’s.  Here, in his own words, are the points he used to create ratios for comparisons:

The ratios I will use are: “pupil-to-pupil / width of eye” (called P/W hereafter), “pupil-to-pupil / length of nose” (called P/N hereafter), “pupil-to-pupil / nose-to-top-lip” (called P/L hereafter) and “pupil-to-pupil / earlobe-to-earlobe” (called P/E hereafter). The use of ratios (instead of actual measurements) will make it unnecessary to know more about the distance from lens to face, or the type of camera, etc., since the proportions of the face of the same person should stay the same regardless of those other factors. 

He makes a number of caveats and disclaimers, but he concludes that there is some evidence that five of the photos are of one individual and seven of another.  To read his full report….

CLICK HERE

Again, I can hardly wait to start studying your analysis at jfkrunningthegauntlet.com!!

Edited June 29, 2018 by Jim Hargrove

[John Butler]

Jim,

Your right on the screen capture.  It didn't do what I wanted.  However, the saved image will work.  I can work with that and will.  I will send you the results if you give me an email. 

Send it to jrb8186@gmail.com.  With your email I can send you any MS Word files that you find on the site and that you can do whatever you wish with them.  Adding bio info to what I have posted will strengthen the analysis greatly.  I am sure I don't have everything in the best shape so comments and advice is welcome.

The analysis I made is generally based on photo image analysis using the traits I listed.  Other information was added to make the thing more interesting.  At first I totally rejected the HSCA analysis.  But, more rational thinking prevailed.  Because of the many instances of photo alteration one could say or claim that all of the photo record is Lee Harvey Oswald (Harvey).  That didn't quite match what I was seeing.  But, it did for the most part.  Harvey, Lee turned into Harvey, other folks claimed as Lee or Harvey and unknowns photo altered into Harvey. 

Mr. Drew Phipps' head and heart are pointed in the right direction.  However, his analysis may be flawed.  With using eye measurements, whose eyes are you measuring?  Many of the photos on the chart are composites made of Lee and Harvey.  Eyes from one are added to another.  And, then you have half faces of the two added together.  How you come up with any worthwhile measurement from a vertically split composite photo.  Phipps mentions chins, noses, and ears growing over time.  That's true and could mess up an analysis.  However, that is a phenomenon that is associated with older people.

That's why I used characteristics that don't change.  Earlobes or no earlobes is genetic and that doesn't change in a life time.  The characteristic ear trait of two bends in the upper left ear rim doesn't change either.  You can see this trait in baby Harvey and Harvey's mugshot the day or so before he died.  Other traits that I have listed help in combination with these two to give a better identification of Lee or Harvey. 

[Jim Hargrove]

Good point about Phipps’ study, John.  Would you agree, though, that at the very least, if his measurements are reasonably accurate it is yet more evidence that there is a serious problem with the historic mug shots of the ONE AND ONLY LEE HARVEY OSWALD®?  Of course, for you and me, this is preaching to the choir, but I doubt the public at large has ever heard this sermon.

To be honest, I’m still at your initial stage of disbelief re the HSCA on the identity of Oswald mug shots.  They devoted much of an entire volume (13, maybe?) trying to prove there was only one LHO.  Seems like they’re trying awfully hard here, but I’ve noticed that on the very issue of two Oswalds, the HSCA was willing to lie to the American people right between the eyes.

For example, faced with evidence that “Lee Harvey Oswald” was sailing for the South China Sea and had arrived in Ping Tung, North Taiwan at the very same time he was being treated for VD in Japan, Robert Blakey decided to believe the U.S. Navy’s pro forma excuse that Oswald didn’t sail on the boat at all, despite all the evidence that he did.  For a few of the details, see my post here:

TWO OSWALDS IN THE MARINES

Would LOVE to see the results of your initial analysis of Jack White’s Evolution of LHO poster.  My email address is at the very bottom of the HarveyandLee.net home page.

My review of your reports at jfkrunningthegauntlet.com is going way too slowly.  It is a cruel trick of fate that I am absolutely terrible with faces and find these kinds of analysis particularly difficult.  It seems to be so easy for some people it really ticks me off!   This will take some time, but your efforts in this aspect of the case are most appreciated. 
 

[John Butler]

Jim,

I will agree on Phipps.  To me the HSCA is another spelling of the Warren Commission.  I have emailed to your HarveyandLee site email my analysis of Jack White's chart.

Don't worry about face recognition.  A lot of people have problems with that.  I have a small talent in art.  I've done hundreds and hundreds of oil paintings over the last 35 years.  Artists are all about details.  Studying the details of objects so they can put those objects on canvas.  At 16, I thought the Backyard Photos were true and correct.  I could see no wrong there.  One look in 2015 and I could see their falsity at a glance.  That comes from the art training and experience over the years.

By using Jack's chart I have found several more pictures of Lee Oswald than previously confirmed.  The clearer images have given me the confidence to say yes this is Lee Oswald and not Harvey.

You guys have the written record covered in an expert fashion.  I hope to contribute by showing what I see in the visual record.  To be truthful what I see is entirely different than what most people see.  My website is radical, very radical as far as Lone Gunners and Conspiracy Theorists go.  I propose there things that nobody has proposed before. 

Hope you find the analysis interesting.

 

Edited June 30, 2018 by John Butler