Sean Murphy

I'm cherry-picking my way through a bunch of statements, Pat? All I did was quote, without omission, the relevant text from www.patspeer.com. If you now suddenly disagree with the following analysis-- Although Mrs. Saunders [sic] tells us almost nothing on how the shots were fired, her brief statements are at least of some assistance in clearing up some other mysteries. For one, she says she left the lunch room at 12:20, but has no recollection of seeing Oswald on the day of the shooting. This works against Oswald's being in the second floor lunch room at that time. For two, she says she stood on the east side of the top step, and worked on the second floor. This, along with Billy Lovelady's claim the woman shielding her eyes in the Altgens photo worked on the second floor, suggests the possibility Saunders was this woman. If not her, then Stanton. --then I suggest you take the matter up with yourself and the two of you work up an amended version of the text. I'm in a helpful mood so here's a first draft: Although Mrs. Saunders [sic] tells us almost nothing on how the shots were fired, her brief statements are of no real assistance in clearing up any other mysteries. For one, she says she left the lunch room at 12:20, but has no recollection of seeing Oswald on the day of the shooting. This works against Oswald's being in the second floor lunch room at that time. For two, she says she stood on the east side of the top step, and worked on the second floor. But can we believe her? Her statement, along with Billy Lovelady's claim the woman shielding her eyes in the Altgens photo worked on the second floor, may suggest[ ] the possibility Saunders was this woman. If not her, then Stanton. However, it is perfectly possible and cannot be disproven that Stanton herself got down on her hands and knees, crawled over to the west side of the front entrance in order to secure a lousier view of the motorcade's progress and was subsequently too embarrassed to mention this fact to anyone. ANALYSIS: There is no hard evidence on record that Stanton was a feminine female, but every possibility she was a masculine female. ** As for Sarah Stanton showing up in Altgens or Wiegman, why should she? Witness statements place her back in the shadows with Frazier and Pauline Sanders. This may well be her to Frazier's immediate left in Darnell: We have no earthly reason to believe that Sarah Stanton could possibly be Prayer Man. Yet you insist on raising this profoundly silly idea. Why? ** Prayer Man a "light-skinned Negro"? You cannot possibly be serious. What's next? Buell Wesley Frazier is a "dark-complected Caucasian"? ** Who's next on your list, Pat? Avery Davis Judy McCully Ruth Dean Madie Reese Carl Jones Roy Lewis Joe Molina Otis Williams Pauline Sanders Sarah Stanton Bill Shelley Billy Lovelady Buell Wesley Frazier Perhaps you'd like to make the case for Billy Lovelady again?

He and Lovelady are just at the 'island'. In a second or two they will turn around and notice Baker and Truly at the TSBD front entrance. Sean, OK. In his WC testimony, Shelley said that they ran out "on" (onto?) the island, but in the clip it appears that he and Lovelady are walking down the middle of Elm Street Extension, towards the railway yard / parking lot. At the very end of the clip, it looks like Lovelady starts running in that direction, leaving Shelley behind. Thanks, --Tommy Edit: I watched it frame-by-frame as my old computer was downloading the clip at a slowish wi-fi "hot spot," and I noticed that when the sun shines briefly on him a couple of times, one can see that the shorter, "Lovelady" figure has a white collar. Which leads me to believe that this isn't Lovelady after all. Tommy, Can you post the frame (or frames) where you believe you detect a white collar? There are numerous white artifacts that flash on the clip in the vicinity of Lovelady and the man next to him, and also on the TSBD in the background. That would explain why the white spot only appears "briefly on him". I believe that is probably what your are seeing. Exactly, Richard, it's a film artifact.

Bill, How exactly does your or Roffman's analysis of the second-floor lunchroom incident exclude the Oswald-behind-the-door-window scenario I have outlined? Please be specific. Are you still claiming that Oswald himself described the second-floor lunchroom incident in detail? Where are you getting this idea from? Please be specific by citing the relevant document(s). Bill, You have several times stated that Lee Oswald himself confirmed in detail the second-floor lunchroom story as told by Baker and Truly. You seem to be basing this claim on the two following sources: 1. "... I asked Oswald where he was when the police officer stopped him. He said he was on the second floor drinking a coca cola when the officer came in." (Captain Will Fritz, Interrogation Report) 2. "Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola from the soft-drink machine, at which time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there." (FBI Special Agent James Bookhout, Interrogation Report) In both instances, Oswald is reported as having claimed to have already bought a coca cola by the time the officer came in the lunchroom. Fritz even has Oswald state that he was actually drinking said coca cola at the time. This version of events is clearly irreconcilable with Baker's description in his WC testimony of the circumstances under which he caught his first glimpse of Oswald. Now: Do you maintain that Oswald really said those things under interrogation? If not, how can you possibly ask us to depend upon these interrogation report statements? If so, do you believe Oswald was lying?--Or, do you believe Baker was lying in his WC testimony? I would appreciate, in the interests of constructive and meaningful dialogue, direct answers from you to these simple questions.

Bill, How exactly does your or Roffman's analysis of the second-floor lunchroom incident exclude the Oswald-behind-the-door-window scenario I have outlined? Please be specific. Are you still claiming that Oswald himself described the second-floor lunchroom incident in detail? Where are you getting this idea from? Please be specific by citing the relevant document(s).

David, Baker didn't ask Oswald if he worked there because he was suspicious of him but because he needed someone to help him find the stairs to the top of the building.

You seem to have the thing topsy-turvy, Pat. If Wiegman or Altgens were showing us 20 people in the front entrance, then we would have to conclude that a number of non-TSBD employees must have gone unnoticed. But Wiegman & Altgens do no such thing, leaving any claim that the front steps may have played host to supernumerary persons not connected with the building arbitrary, gratuitious and extraordinary. If you want to press such an extraordinary claim, let's see what you have to offer in that line. Thus far anything you've had to suggest (Houston St TSBD warehouse) has come to naught. ** Sarah Stanton might be Prayer Man? I know one person who doesn't believe that extraordinary idea for a minute. His name is Pat Speer. From the large chunk of www.patspeer.com text you copied and pasted into a post a couple of pages back: Although Mrs. Saunders [sic] tells us almost nothing on how the shots were fired, her brief statements are at least of some assistance in clearing up some other mysteries. For one, she says she left the lunch room at 12:20, but has no recollection of seeing Oswald on the day of the shooting. This works against Oswald's being in the second floor lunch room at that time. For two, she says she stood on the east side of the top step, and worked on the second floor. This, along with Billy Lovelady's claim the woman shielding her eyes in the Altgens photo worked on the second floor, suggests the possibility Saunders was this woman. If not her, then Stanton. Now if you want to press an extraordinary claim, e.g. that-- Prayer Man is a woman there is a woman standing beside Prayer Man Pauline Sanders hallucinated the presence of Sarah Stanton beside her Pauline Sanders completely misremembered which side of the TSBD entrance she was on --then by all means let's see some extraordinary evidence to back it up. A photo of Sarah in her cross-dressing testosterone-injecting late-63 phase would be a good start. Until then... Sarah Stanton ** Who's next on your list?

No problem, Bill. There's no mention of a "door window" in Baker's 11/22 affidavit story. There's no mention of a door, There's no mention of a room. Instead we hear about a man Baker catches "walking away from the stairway" several floors up the building. According to Marvin Johnson, who took the affidavit, Baker even talked about searching the man. This is not the lunchroom story that Baker will tell the WC. ** As for Baker & Truly's WC story exonerating Oswald, all a WC defender has to do is argue the following: Oswald shoots JFK Oswald comes down the stairs Oswald on the second floor, hearing the noise of someone on the way up, hurries over to the second-floor landing door and goes through it Oswald looks through the door window as Truly crosses the landing Oswald is about to go back out onto the landing when he is surprised to see an officer hit the landing Oswald spins around to head for the lunchroom But the officer notices the movement. The scenario I've just outlined is pure crap. But that doesn't matter. The lunchroom story makes it possible. Just tweak the timeline here and there, invent extra seconds for Truly and Baker en route to the incident, and hey presto you have all the make-believe ambiguity you need to keep the fable of Oswald's guilt alive. That's what the second-floor lunchroom fiction achieves: it gets Oswald away from the front entrance. ** The lunchroom incident doesn't eliminate Prayer Man? Quite the reverse: Prayer Man eliminates the lunchroom incident. For it tells us where the real Baker-Oswald-Truly encounter happened: front entrance. This is what Darnell is telling us: Look! Here's Baker, Truly and Oswald--in the frame together! No need to bustle Oswald upstairs for a phoney second encounter.

He and Lovelady are just at the 'island'. In a second or two they will turn around and notice Baker and Truly at the TSBD front entrance.

What did he lie about?

1. Who? FBI, chiefly (though the Baker affidavit was surely a DPD-led gambit). 2. Please show me how Baker and Truly's WC testimony rules out the possibility that Oswald was the sixth floor shooter. 3. Which of Baker's detailed stories rings most true for you? His 11/22 story or his WC story?

I think Gerda Dunckel had it right when she identified these two men as Lovelady and Shelley-- --and that Buell Wesley Frazier is simply misremembering as to what Shelley was wearing that day: If the images were in colour we could of course verify that he has red hair...

Incorrect, Bill. We have Holmes hearing Oswald first-hand. And a vestibule is a front lobby. The lunchroom story is dead. Sean, why would anyone seeking to cover up the conspiracy to kill the president invent a false second floor lunchroom encounter that exonerates Oswald? And the three people who were three agree how it happened - and describe what happened in minute detail - and who is writing this script anyway? I want to talk to the script writer. BK The second floor lunchroom story doesn't exonerate Oswald, Bill, it cruelly robs him of his 100% watertight alibi. Their first idea was even crueller: transplant the front entrance Baker-Oswald-Truly encounter up to the rear stairway several floors up the building. But it didn't work. So they went with the only remaining option: the second-floor lunchroom. And it really was the only remaining option. Was it a lousy option? Sure. But it did the needful: allow a certain story to be told involving Oswald as the sixth floor shooter.

Incorrect, Bill. We have Holmes hearing Oswald first-hand. And a vestibule is a front lobby. The lunchroom story is dead.

Hi Steve, Just to clarify that Baker didn't single out Oswald because he was suspicious, he just needed someone to point him to the stairs. Hence his question, 'Do you work here?' And because Darnell's film ends just before Baker hits the steps, we don't know exactly where the Oswald encounter took place. My own belief is that it happened exactly where Prayer Man is standing, just outside the front door. From Harry D. Holmes's testimony re. what Oswald told Fritz on the Sunday morning about the cop encounter: Mr. HOLMES. He said it was in the vestibule. Mr. BELIN. He said he was in the vestibule? Mr. HOLMES. Or approaching the door to the vestibule. He was just coming, apparently, and I have never been in there myself. Apparently there is two sets of doors, and he had come out to this front part. Mr. BELIN. Did he state it was on what floor? Mr. HOLMES. First floor. The front entrance to the first floor. Prayer Man is ideally positioned to be singled out by Baker as a person who might be able to offer help.

Major development. Gary Mack has just emailed John Mytton, a LN poster at Duncan's forum: While the image is an interesting find, the Prayer Man question has probably been answered. I recently sent the Couch and Darnell frames to Buell Frazier and asked what he thought. First, he wouldn’t confirm himself being on the top step because the image isn’t clear enough. He then re-confirmed that Lovelady and Shelley were out on the steps with him, just as he has always said, but he couldn’t confirm Shelley, either, due to the image quality. Next I asked about Shelley’s appearance and learned he was a little taller than Lovelady (who was 5’8”), had red hair and a slender build. When I asked if Shelley usually wore a coat and tie to work Buell said no, he “dressed daily in slacks and sport shirts.” And he repeated that he, Lovelady and Shelley stayed on the steps for “a short time” after the last shot, but he didn’t estimate how long. So unless Buell Frazier is still part of the cover-up plot, TSBD “Miscellaneous Department” manager William Shelley, by elimination, must be Prayer Man. According to Shelley’s testimony, “I didn’t do anything for a minute” following the last shot, so the man was standing on the steps before, during and after the time Darnell and Couch filmed those brief scenes. Gary Mack ** This is a real breakthrough, and I for one am very grateful to Gary for taking the trouble to contact Buell Wesley Frazier. Why is it a breakthrough? Well, not because of the Shelley idea. For Shelley's own testimony, and that of the person with him Billy Lovelady, rules him out as Prayer Man: Mr. BALL - How did you happen to see Truly? Mr. SHELLEY - We ran out on the island while some of the people that were out watching it from our building were walking back and we turned around and we saw an officer and Truly. Mr. BALL - And Truly? Mr. SHELLEY - Yes. Mr. BALL - Did you see them go into the building? MMr. SHELLEY - No; we didn't watch that long but they were at the first step like they were fixin' to go in. Mr. BALL - Were they moving at the time, walking or running? Mr. SHELLEY - Well, they were moving, yes. Darnell shows Baker just a couple of seconds away from the building entrance. Prayer Man is still standing up on the steps. So Shelley is ruled out. Period. (Unless, that is, someone wants to accuse him and Lovelady of lying in their WC testimony about their run out on to the 'island'. Who wants to go first?) The reason Buell Wesley Frazier's response is a breakthrough is that Bill Shelley appears to be the only possibility BWF himself can offer when presented with the Prayer Man image. (Although it's not quite clear from Gary's message whether BWF himself nominated Shelley or whether that's Gary's own suggestion.) Given that he is not giving us some new revelation as to the presence of some hitherto unmentioned other person on the steps at that time (i.e. a stranger to the building), and given that Prayer Man cannot possibly be Shelley, we have just received startling confirmation that Prayer Man can only reasonably be Lee Oswald. BWF probably knows it's Lee but--for the most understandable reasons in the world--cannot say so. However, to give him credit, he's just done the next best thing.

Pat, The location of every single TSBD employee (bar Oswald) has been established for the time of the assassination. Of all the TSBD employees (bar Oswald) who turned up for work that day, the following place themselves on the front steps: Avery Davis Judy McCully Ruth Dean Madie Reese Carl Jones Roy Lewis Joe Molina Otis Williams Pauline Sanders Sarah Stanton Bill Shelley Billy Lovelady Buell Wesley Frazier It has already been safely established that none of the above can possibly be Prayer Man. If you disagree, perhaps you could a ) identify who in the above list you believe Prayer Man might be and b ) support that claim with evidence. In the likely event that you cannot support any such claim with evidence, will it then be your argument that Prayer Man is at least as likely to be a non-TSBD employee as to be a TSBD employee? In order to claim these people can not possibly be Prayer Man, you need to be able to identify each and every one of them in the films and photographs. But we can't do that with any authority because we don't know what most of these people looked like. We can do a head count, however. Thirteen TSBD employees claimed they were on the steps. So, how many people are on the steps in Wiegman? Or Altgens? On quick glance, I count eight or nine. Which means three or four of these employees could be Prayer Man. Okay, Pat, so you should have no trouble giving me the names of three or four employees from this list who could be Prayer Man: Avery Davis Judy McCully Ruth Dean Madie Reese Carl Jones Roy Lewis Joe Molina Otis Williams Pauline Sanders Sarah Stanton Bill Shelley Billy Lovelady Buell Wesley Frazier Actually let's make this easier, shall we? Can you please give us even one name from the above list who, in your view, could be Prayer Man?

Pat, The location of every single TSBD employee (bar Oswald) has been established for the time of the assassination. Of all the TSBD employees (bar Oswald) who turned up for work that day, the following place themselves on the front steps: Avery Davis Judy McCully Ruth Dean Madie Reese Carl Jones Roy Lewis Joe Molina Otis Williams Pauline Sanders Sarah Stanton Bill Shelley Billy Lovelady Buell Wesley Frazier It has already been safely established that none of the above can possibly be Prayer Man. If you disagree, perhaps you could a ) identify who in the above list you believe Prayer Man might be and b ) support that claim with evidence. In the likely event that you cannot support any such claim with evidence, will it then be your argument that Prayer Man is at least as likely to be a non-TSBD employee as to be a TSBD employee?

It's impossible to pinpoint with exactitude the moment that Lee Oswald was brought to his feet in the second-floor lunchroom, but it seems to have happened on either the 27th or 28th of November. From The Evening Star, Nov 29: Again one notes the impression given that the lunchroom was simply a room--one of several here--passed by the officer en route to the rear stairway. But what I wish to focus on here is the "counter" detail. Note that Truly is the obvious and sole source of the "counter" detail. How does the reporter know there is indeed a counter in the lunchroom? Because Truly has told him. He has given the reporter a clear picture of Oswald leaning in all brazen nonchalance against the counter just inside the door. Truly cannot possibly be inferring this image from having himself come on the scene just seconds after this, when Oswald is (as per his and Baker's WC testimony) at the door with Baker holding his revolver up to him. Nor can he have learned it from the officer, whom he "has not seen [ ] since". No--just like the now discarded "sitting at one of the tables" image, this is an invention that Truly is giving or has been directed to give. ** But why has Oswald been brought to his feet? The answer comes in two parts. Part one is: timeline. It has becoming increasingly evident that Oswald, the sixth floor assassin, needs to be made appear as though he has only just arrived in the lunchroom. ** Part two is: motivation for Baker to check out the lunchroom in the first place. By the first of December, this last becomes that bit clearer as Oswald is moved from the "counter" over to the coke machine. Again, bear in mind that Truly (as he will later tell the WC) is not supposed to have had any contact with Baker since they parted ways on 11/22. Yet he is 'guessing' with uncanny accuracy what Baker will months later testify to as to the location of Oswald in the lunchroom when he caught his first sighting of him in there. From the Sunday Bulletin of Philadelphia Dec 1: From the Washington Post Dec 1: Why is Oswald now being put over by the coke machine? In order to push the explanation that Baker took his significant detour over to the lunchroom because of a noise he heard: the noise of a coke machine in operation.

Exactly, Steve. That's the only part of the Baker-Truly interaction that couldn't be rewritten as it had happened in front of lots of people--and had been caught on film.

We will never be able to reconstruct exactly when and by whom each tweak to the second-floor lunchroom story was effected. The broad evolution of the story is however fairly clear, and it centres around the problem of explaining why Marrion Baker 'popped his head' into the lunchroom in the first place. ** Roy Truly's first on-the-record statement (his FBI interview given late 11/22) simply states that the officer saw Oswald in the lunchroom. No details are given as to what exactly he saw Oswald doing: ** This same vagueness marks Truly's affidavit statement the next day (click to enlarge): Someone unfamiliar with the layout of the second floor would come away from reading this with the distinct impression that the lunchroom must have been straight off the landing, if not indeed in the officer's path as he made his way to the next flight of stairs--a scenario fitting not the rear stairway story but the very first story of Baker and Truly's having come up the front stairs and then taken a path through the office or corridor leading right by the lunchroom. ** The FBI report on Truly's affidavit statement--they sat in on the affidavit-taking!--studiously maintains the vagueness necessary to collapsing the earlier version (front stairs) on to the new version (rear stairs): Lee Oswald was in the lunch room: that's all we need to know. And we certainly don't need to be informed that the door leading off the landing was not the lunchroom door but an automatically self-closing door leading into a small connecting passage off which there was another door belonging to the lunchroom. Again the reader is left with the erroneous impression that the officer needed only to take a peek through one door--a door which he was passing in any case--in order to see into the lunchroom. A very large incompatibility between two stories is being evaded here, and it will take more than a few days to sort it out. ** It is our friend Jesse Curry who will fill in the gap in the meantime as to what exactly the officer did supposedly see when he looked into the lunchroom: Oswald sitting at one of the tables, the very picture of post-assassination nonchalance. Truly himself will endorse this detail: And it will be reflected in the culminating action of the Oswald stand-in in the Secret Service reconstruction film made within days of the assassination: ** As far as I have been able to ascertain, this little tableau will survive until nearly the end of the month, along with its supporting fiction of the officer's just having--in a moment of inspiration--happened to have popped his head into the lunchroom. By the start of December, however, Oswald will have been brought to his feet. For, if the translation of the front-stairway-to-lunchroom story to the rear-stairway-to-lunchroom story is to be completed successfully, the officer needs to be given a reason for interrupting his flight upstairs, going all the way over to the door to the passage way to the door to the lunchroom and checking out what's in that lunchroom.

Hi Steve, Yes--the Wiegman film, taken in the middle of the assassination:

The true incident at the front entrance involved Marrion Baker's asking Oswald if he worked there. Later that evening, the DPD (through Jesse Curry and Detective Ed Hicks) openly talked to the press about this incident, only they gave it a definite spin: Oswald had been 'stopped' as he was 'leaving' the building. In reality he had been standing on the steps for the assassination itself, having (as the Hughes film suggests) slipped out just as the President was approaching the turn on to Elm St. It is possible, indeed likely, that not a soul had noticed Oswald there and that he had only been noticed when Baker ran up to the entrance and addressed him. ** Thus we have Phase One of the suppression of Oswald's alibi: Pretend he was exiting the building and had the good fortune to be 'let go' by the officer. ** This story collapsed, and quickly. It soon became apparent that too many people had witnessed Baker and Truly's extraordinarily early dash into the building. The timeline just didn't work. So the incident had to be relocated to the rear area of the building. ** Phase Two: Baker's phoney affidavit story of having caught a man "walking away from the rear stairway" on the "third or fourth" floor. That story collapsed too, and quickly, for reasons that have already been laid out (Vicki Adams & Baker himself). It gets buried, and not a word of this rear stairway encounter is ever breathed to the press. ** Cue Phase Three: the second-floor lunchroom story. It first comes into being in Roy Truly's FBI interview given late on 11/22: One notes four things: 1. The impression given that the officer had to go through only one door off the landing in order to access the lunchroom. 2. The indication that Oswald was "apparently alone". 3. The lack of any description of Oswald's position in the lunchroom: was he sitting or standing? 4. The heavy emphasis on the lunchroom's lack of windows facing the outside: what a peculiar place for someone to be in when everyone else had been watching the motorcade. #1 marks what will be an intractable problem at the heart of the lunchroom story. #2 and #3 marks the hedging of bets as the details are still being worked out. # 4 discloses the game plan: The second-floor lunchroom is the only available place anywhere near the rear stairway to which the incident can possibly be relocated, and we're going to make the very best of it. Oswald's mooching around in the belly of the building will be portrayed as incongruous and suspicious, precisely the kind of place an assassin would take cover and try to act 'normal' in. ** And this line will be taken up with enthusiasm by the constitutionally defensive Curry on the Saturday, as he tries to make up for his gaffe of the day before. No, folks, one of our men didn't let Oswald go as he was leaving the building. For Oswald, cunning killer that he was, took the kind of clever cover that no police officer could have been blamed for being fooled by. And not alone that, he managed to blend in where there were other people present. From the New York Times 11/24 (click to enlarge): The point of course is that Curry is telling the truth in this regard: He had been told, quite accurately, that Oswald had been 'stopped' by the officer at the front entrance in front of other people. Now he's clumsily and/or cynically importing this detail up to the second-floor lunchroom in order to deflect criticism of the decision by his officer to let Oswald go. ** It would be tempting to write this off as Curry's singular error or embellishment. However the factoid lingers in an FBI report from Dec 10: Interestingly, the original draft of this 'answer' shows that the "other individuals" was not a carelessly included detail but something considered worthy of definite mention: All of this is symptomatic of a story that stubbornly refuses to stabilise.

Thank you, Sean. I must seem a bit anal asking for documentation but, I don't believe in giving skeptics and LN's any more reasons than they already have for taking cheap shots at your research. Keep up the good work. You're very welcome, Robert. S.

There was a second powerful reason why, in the immediate aftermath of the assassination, Billy Lovelady had to be artificially kept on the front steps: he resembled Oswald. We underestimate at our peril the sheer panic that must have been abroad at DPD HQ and at FBI Special Branch. The suspect in custody was claiming to have been out front at the time of the assassination. He was describing events that only someone who had actually been there could have known. And there was every danger that a photo or film would emerge showing him at the front entrance. The sum of all fears seemed to come true when people started looking closely at the doorway area in the Altgens 6 photograph which had gone out on newswire. Cue an immediate investigation by the FBI. They made a beeline for Billy Lovelady, as he would recall for Dom Bonafede several months later: The relief of the agents tells us all we need to know: Oswald's being out front at the time of the shooting was an all too live scenario, for it was the scenario that he himself was claiming in custody. If Oswald himself were placing himself far from the front entrance--such as in or around the second-floor lunchroom--then there would be no earthly cause for worry about what the assassination-time visual record might thrown up. But he wasn't, so there was. The authorities lucked out in a big way on its being Lovelady in Altgens, but what guarantee was there that another Oswaldian image would not show up over the coming days? And what better way--what other way--to indemnify themselves against this eventuality than to keep Lovelady on the steps for a good 3 minutes should he be needed to explain away any such image? (That Lovelady has been seriously proposed as Prayer Man by several researchers over the past couple of weeks has shown, this time rather farcically, the continued explanatory power he still holds for those intent on keeping Oswald away from that front entrance.)