Bill Miller

13 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Alistair:

if you keep viewing your GIF or an individual still from this GIF for a while you may realise that Prayer Man stood  at the very front part of the top landing. Please note how close his right elbow is to the brick column.

 

The right column hides a small section of the wall.

15 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Understood.  So it is possible that PM is halfway down that step?  Off the bat, PM looks like he's back in the corner.  With respect to the argument that we see something shiny in his hand, that doesn't necessarily negate that he's entirely in the shadows because sunlight can be indirectly shining into that entrance vestibule but deflected back off of a reflective surface.*

*(I recall those silly faked-moon landing arguments about artificial stage lights, which were debunked with simple table-top experiments, showing that an astronaut in a shiny suit can reflect sunlight even though he still might be in the shadows).

You are correct - there is direct light and indirect light. There in no mistaking the direct sunlight in the Darnell film.

Andrej says there are no measurements of the depth of the top platform, but what has he really done to find out?  I would bet that Dale Myers who made a 3D model of the plaza will know the measurements of the landing/steps/doors/wall/etc -  and if he doesn't know them - the TSBD Museum will have them archived somewhere.

This is where Gary Mack is truly missed for he would go out of his way to get this kind of information of a researcher.

50 minutes ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Yet, the deeper the doorway is and the closer you place Prayer Man to the glass door, the bigger is your problem as Prayer Man's right elbow will be still further away from the brick column.  Also, should he stand right in the corner he would not hit any sun light with the back of his hand or with an object held in his right hand.

Part of the out-copping hides a portion of the wall from view.

And there is no sunlight hitting PM's hand as it takes computer generated lighting to see his hand at all.

21 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

 

 

 

I have a problem with your cartoon landing. Having been on the landing myself on several occasions - I find it deeper than your cartoon image has it. Prayer Man is further back in the corner and couldn't be located at that location and have his right foot on the first step down from the landing. The doors open to the outside and they do not hang out over the steps when open from what I remember. See below ....

There are seven steps to take before reaching the landing ...

The front entrance door demonstrates just how deep the landing is ...

In the cartoon model - PM is too far out from the corner so to have the appearance that he is standing with a straight leg on the first step down. However, the real world image of PM shows him backed up in the shade in my opinion.

Occams Razor to me and many others who I have heard and read using the term is telling us that the solution is most often the simplest one and not one that has to be complicated. In the case of Prayer Man being LHO - one could find that had Oswald been standing next to Frazier - Molina - Shelley - Lovelady - etc., that any one or all of them would have said so regardless if Lee was later said to have been involved in some way or another with the shooting of the President before entertaining that so many witnesses decided to lie about his whereabouts so to become involved in a plot to frame him as the assassin who killed the President.

And how can I say this with such confidence one may ask? I say this because had Lee Oswald been standing with fellow workers who knew him and some photograph or film became known in the days, weeks, and months following the assassination that proved he was standing there as Prayer Man .... anyone who withheld that information would be looking at a list of federal charges because no one would believe that those witness all forgot that Lee was standing there with them. That would have been all it took to become seen as part of a conspiracy to assassinate the President by conspiring to mislead a federal investigation with an effort to frame someone as the shooter so to allow the real gunman to go free. One image whether it been a still photo or a movie showing Oswald anywhere but on the 6th floor during the shooting - the alleged mass intimidation plot would become exposed to the point there wouldn't have been enough jail cells in Dallas to have housed everyone. That would have been as reckless as having the gunmen use machine guns when the plan was to blame the murder on one man with a bolt action rifle and only four shells. Those who were involved in the assassination and cover-up had to be careful to not overplay their hand or else a whole house of cards would have collapsed to the likes that no one ever imagined. I believe before any of that happened - someone  else would have gotten the blame for JFK's murder.

PM is in the corner and cannot be there and have his left foot on a lower step because he never moves and is a half a head taller than Lovelady when Billie went down a step as demonstrated in the Gif animation.

Someone here brought to my attention the following statement by a guy named Doyle -  " ............ Miller has now stolen my height argument without attribution ................. over on the Education Forum with it. That's pretty dirty and dishonest."

For the record - I do not know "Doyle", nor am I aware of his thoughts on the JFK assassination. If he has said the same thing as I, then all I can say is that we agree that PM is too short to be Oswald. Until coming back to the ED forum - I had never heard of Prayer Man. The equation I used in my inquiry was simple ....... If Prayer Man = Oswald, then Prayer Man should be taller than Lovelady when both are standing on the landing atop of the stairs leading into the TSBD. I then laid out how I reached my conclusion. At best - my conclusion may have been the same as someone named Doyle and counless other researchers who have looked into this matter.

I see no stroke of genius on my part in the way I approached this. It was as simple as checking if 2 + 2 = 4 - then 4 - 2 = 2. I also don't know the name of the first person was who ever came up with this method of checking one's work, but I am reasonably certain that it was established long before Mr. Doyle was born. I can say there were three JFK Assassination researchers who I sought information from so to apply the method I chose to use and none of them were named Doyle. I will add that there were two other things that I looked at in this inquiry and one was the hairline on the right side of PM's head and the physical appearance of of him compared to Lee Oswald on the day of the assassination. I don't know if Mr. Doyle looked at this as well, nor do I know who was the first investigator on record who ever thought to compare physical appearances of suspects to one another.

So I wish to say thanks to all those people who assisted me which would include the person who typed the report that detailed Lovelady's height - the individuals who took the photos of Oswald's measured height - those researchers who supplied me with the information I had requested - the individual who built the laptop I used to type my posting - the person(s) who created the software for me to apply images to my post - the individual who came up with the method on how to check one's work - and all those who are responsible for there being a forum where I and others can work together on these various issues. And last but not least - I wish to give credit to any and all petty glory seekers who I was not aware of that feel they deserve credit for any findings mirroring their own. 

11 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Not sure if you're applying your definition of OR to your example for Prayer Man.  I think what you're referring to, is the evolved version of OR, which is the Law of Parsimony.

See => http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/occam.html => the law of parsimony, or the rule of simplicity.

To begin with, we used Occam's razor to separate theories that would predict the same result for all experiments.  Now we are trying to choose between theories that make different predictions.  This is not what Occam intended. 

What OR should be => The most useful statement of the principle for scientists is "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."

Example for OR:   Prediction or result => The wounding of JFK & JBC      Competing Hypotheses => SBT or Conspiracy    Choice using OR => Conspiracy (or separate shooters)

However, when explaining Prayer Man, I can't apply OR but I think I can use the Law of Parsimony: 

"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations."

"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."

Example for Law of Parsimony or Rule of Simplicity:

Phenomenon or Explanation 1. => Prayer Man is Lee Harvey Oswald.

Assumption or explanation => A bunch of people are lying or equally coerced into silence forever, that only the photo blur makes him look bigger and shorter, that when he said he was out with Shelley at the front, it meant the same time as the extant films or photo, etc., etc.

Phenomenon or Explanation 2. => Prayer Man is not Lee Harvey Oswald.

Assumption or explanation => Nobody saw him there because he was elsewhere.

Correct Answer under the LOP => Prayer Man is someone else other than LHO.

 

P.S.  I'm not arguing against Prayer Man above (I haven't ruled out PM as Oswald yet).

My use of Occams Razor applied to the single question as to whether Oswald was standing next to Frazier or not around the time of the shooting. I had two choices - one was to believe Frazier when he said he had not seen Lee during the parade because Lee wasn't really standing outside the main entrance to the TSBD beside him or Frazier didn't mention seeing Lee outside the main entrance to the TSBD because he was immediately intimidated/threatened by sinister individuals who not only got to him, but others as well, to frame Lee as Kennedy's killer.

I found that the simplest of the two competing theories made more sense than believing that so many witnesses conspired to frame an innocent man while not caring that the real killer(s) of the President went free.

4 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

I agree 100%, as too many assumptions or conditions are required.

(BTW, Occams Razor is not a legal principle nor is it a substitute for evidence).

The way I see it ... Occam's Razor is a principle that says that if a handful of witnesses standing on the TSBD stairway claim they did not see Oswald as the shots rang out - then one should consider they are telling the truth before believing they all, as well as others, all joined into a conspiracy to allow Oswald to take the blame for a murder they knew he did not do. 

5 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Thank you, but I don't think this is a case about Occam's Razor since we aren't talking about two competing theories for the same explanation here (sometimes Occam's Razor is stated for the Rule of Parsimony as in the simplest explanation or solution to a problem is the correct one).

Occam's Razor can be applied to the SBT (to me, it takes too any assumptions to make it viable such that the alternative explanation that CE 399 was likely a plant is more plausible).

When one breaks down the evidence by studying the Zapruder film frame by frame along with Conally's  statement - not to mention the near pristine condition of 399 - Occams Razor in my view points away from the SBT.

3 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Thanks for your last two responses.  You're a scholar and a gentleman!

I wouldn't go that far.         

However, the more we look at Prayer Man - the more we start finding out that there are plenty of reasons why he could not be Oswald. And those reasons do not need for us to call all the witnesses liars or conspirators in wanting to hide Lee's innocence. We start to understand why Buell Frazier wasn't able to say that he was standing next to LHO as the motorcade passed by.  Prayer Man was simply not Lee Oswald.

I have often said that anyone can make something out of nothing when using such poor faceless images. His height compared to others around him - his mid-section looking rather well fed were red flags. It was true that we couldn't see if Prayer Man had Oswald's face, but there were other comparisons that could be made with the information we had to work with. In the end it was Occams Razor that stands tall. The simplest theory that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities teaches us an important lesson and reminds us that it is a tool that should be introduced more often in our search for the truth. 

19 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Guilty as charged!  (Thank you very much - now do we have something or Billy Lovelady?  I do have one of Harold Weisberg's book Whitewash which covers the BL issue, but it's stored in a box right now. He may have something in there about Lovelady's height.)

It was Robin who had this document ... he sent it to me again ...............  This was how I knew for certain that PM wasn't tall enough to be Oswald. To think that all the smack talk about PM being Lee was just nonsense.

15 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Guilty as charged!  (Thank you very much - now do we have something or Billy Lovelady?  I do have one of Harold Weisberg's book Whitewash which covers the BL issue, but it's stored in a box right now. He may have something in there about Lovelady's height.)

I have been kicking myself the past couple of days as I have been searching my files to see if I could find that info because it wasn't a couple of weeks ago that someone I was chatting on facebook with had attached Lovelady's height information. I have not found it yet, but it seems to me that he was 5'7" or 5'8". What I do remember was that he was shorter than Oswald.

5 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Just throwing this out there...

... Oswald was 5ft 9...

A solid 5'9" I would say.

6 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

I couldn't find a photo demonstrating that (the one I have of PM and BL on the landing has PM in the shadows except for a white or bright coffee cup or mug that he seems to be holding at the level of his chest). 

PM raises both hands in the animation and as I said - I know of no adult that needs to drink from a cup with both hands - that is something toddlers do a lot. I still think it is highly probable that PM took LBJ's photo when his car turned the corner and then lowered it after getting the pic.

On 4/4/2017 at 7:00 PM, Gerry Simone said:

All fair comments Paul, although I still feel that Prayer Man's hairline resembles Oswald's. 

Oswald was 2" or so taller than Lovelady. Yet when Lovelady is on the landing - he is a half of a head taller than PM.

22 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

I agree that Frazier can help us resolve many minor issues -- like, was Prayer Man Oswald -- and what was the depth of your relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald?

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

I believe you and I, as well as many others, believe that Oswald was not Prayer Man. It is only those who have invested many man hours who hang onto the notion that PM was LHO. So Buell stating publicly that Lee was not standing there outside the front entrance to the TSBD with everyone else will cause those who want him to be PM will just say that Buell is now lying. That is a common position taken by people who first come up with a possible theory and then dismiss everyone and everything else who says or demonstrates otherwise.

3 hours ago, Gerry Simone said:

Bill, I wish I could see the photos you posted.

Someone here went into my Photobucket and deleted the images concerning my Prayer Man work. The deed was done immediately after I posted them. The good news is they were only copies, so I will soon send you the images via private message.

1 hour ago, Bart Kamp said:

And the hits kept on coming

Cropped, auto levels applied and turned vertical.

Now compare that to this

That ear looks rather extended as well.....

Hmmmmmm, what do you say Bill Miller?

 

My money is still on Oswald being Prayer Man.

Come back when you are really ready.

 

Bart,

The image distortion you demonstrate has nothing to do with the method of enhancement that I implemented.

To start with, you first show an image that is grossly distorted with motion blur. The reason for that image not being of any value is that the Darnell image I offered is not distorted with motion blur. If that image was, then everything within the frame would also be blurred in the same manner. All you have done for what ever reason is to show a form of distorted blurring that does not apply to Prayer Man. I too know all about motion blur and its distortion capabilities. (see below)

The next image you offered was of Prayer Man's upper torso. There you have blurred the image and added light to the point of moving and blurring borders that would otherwise be visible if you had not purposely ruined the image. Before you altered the image of Prayer Man ... you had posted that you could see Prayer Man with such clarity that you could tell that he was wearing long sleeves. So why you would distort his image to this extent is anyone's guess because it is something that I did not do.

I contend that the hairline of Prayer Man recedes high on the right side of his head while Oswald's shows hair in this area.

11 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

Show us the girth!

In time you will see the difference in girth just as you saw the difference in hairlines.

On 4/2/2017 at 8:36 PM, Gerry Simone said:

I never considered the girth of the Prayer Man to eliminate him as Oswald since a blurry image may stretch a body but when I look at the images (credit FB Oswald page or Bart Kamp's website) I've attached for comparison , I can't help to think that it's Oswald (and it's not Lovelady), and BWF is to PM's left.  (Incidentally, BWF never said that LHO was next to him but was he asked?  Counsel for the WC were selective in their questioning.  I saw BWF speak at the Lancer Conference in 2015.  He said that Oswald came from around the back of the TSBD along it's north side to the front.)

As far as Fritz' late-arriving notes, not sure if that alone constitutes a chain of evidence problem (like CE 399!), but it sure seems like the issue with those notes is that very little was recorded or omitted (if not destroyed) from the interrogation.  

  

By studying some of the Prayer Man images ... I have felt for some time that he is too big to be Oswald. At the time of the assassination - photos of Lee show him to be exceptionally thin with a very narrow waist. The problem so far has been that it was too difficult to separate Prayer Man from the background, but I think I have been somewhat successful in accomplishing that goal. I would like to show you these various filtered images for you to look at and tell me if you see them as well. None of these versions have altered the outline of Prayer Man.

I am particularly interested in the following observations -

1 -  Prayer Man is cocked at an angle in the corner and is not quite square with the camera.

2 -  That Prayer Man's left side can be seen against the dark background of the glass behind him.

3 -  That Prayer Man's mid-section seems wider than Lee's. That there is no white T-shirt seen, thus the shirt is most likely closed.

4 -  That if Prayer Man in angled in the corner, then he most likely is on the landing and not standing on the steps. That if this is true, then Prayer Man is short in stature.

5 -  That Prayer Man's hairline remains consistent in all the  images.

6 -  That Prayer Man appears to have a deep receding hairline on the right side of his head.

7 -  That this receding hairline when compared to Lee's at the time of the assassination ... that they do not look to be the same. I found that Lee's hairline was fuller on his right side when compared to his left side.

Prayer Man seems a bit wide in the stomach area whereas Lee Oswald was thin

Hairline Views of Lee Oswald:

The hairline of Prayer Man appears to me to recede higher up on the side of his head and is void of hair where Oswald's is not. Furthermore the hair on the top of Prayer Man's head looks fuller than Lee's - especially so in the top front part of the head.

And lastly is the movements of Prayer Man as the parade passed by. As Johnson's car is finishing its turn onto Elm Street - Prayer Man appears to be holding something in both hands. There is a reflective appearance in front of his eye as if he is looking into a view finder. However, once the VP's car has passed, Prayer Man looks to have lowered the object from in front of his face as shown below. While someone has suggested he was drinking a coke ... I find that theory not to be very probable as I have only seen toddlers hold a bottle or glass with both hands when taking a drink. The position of Prayer Man's hands when the object is in front of his face mirrors that of someone holding a camera (left hand) and using the right hand to press the shutter of a camera. I believe the latter scenario to be the more probable.

It is also worth noting that Billy Lovelady is quite a bit taller than Prayer Man in one frame and lower than Prayer Man when stepping down one step. If Prayer Man is Oswald, then should he not be as tall as Lovelady before Billy moved down a step. And if Prayer Man (who hasn't moved) was standing on the next step down from the landing, then should he and Billy be close to the same height - which they are not.

I am of the opinion that Prayer Man was a short and stocky individual.

3 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

In my words:

 "Upon hearing the last shot and people screaming, Shelley and Lovelady ran across Elm Street Extension as far as the concrete "Island" to get a better view of the limo as it continued down Elm Street and disappeared through the Triple Underpass.  On the "Island" they encountered a running, crying, Gloria Calvery, who told them what she'd seen about 45 yards down Elm Street.  Shelley immediately left them and ran inside the TSBD to call his wife, while Calvery and a dressed-in-white colleague accompanied Lovelady back to the TSBD steps *where his partially-eaten lunch was still waiting for him) and Calvery continued talking to him there and was "caught" doing so in Couch-Darnell."

--  Tommy

  

So you have Shelley going from the Island and into the TSBD ... so what happened to the 3 - 4 minute excursion to the Island - then to the RR yard - to then entering the back of the TSBD?  Does all that time get scrapped now?? 

Perhaps the statements given to the FBI are just general references and not meant to be a total accounting of an event.

3 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

How much longer do you need Miller????

If you see it so clearly then it must be a piece of piss to show everyone else, surely you do not need three days to do so.

Show us all the girth!!!

 

You have been all this time with not caring to do a physical size comparison - waiting a little longer isn't going to hurt you.

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Again, Tommy, it's a question of remembering the minute-to-minute TIMING of the event.   It remains unclear.   (Bill Miller raises a valid point -- that during periods of crisis and chaos, some people have a distorted perception of time lengths.)

The sworn record for the EVENTS themselves continues to tally well -- Shelley and Lovelady saw Vickie and Sandra on the 1st floor of the TSBD some 6-10 minutes after the JFK shots were fired.

No wonder Vickie and Sandra saw nobody else on the stairs with them.

Also, Truly and Baker were up on the TSBD roof, furiously looking around during that time.

Meanwhile -- LHO slipped out of the TSBD -- probably by one of the rear exits.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

It can be as simple as asking one's self why does time seem to go bay faster when being busy over not doing anything. Has not everyone at one time or another gotten side-tracked doing something only to look at the clock to find time had gotten away from them.

Then there are phrases like 'I will be there in a minute' which in reality ended up being five minutes. I reason some Commission testimony where a witness was asked to give an amount of time and the witness replied with words to the effect 'about a minute'.