Ray Mitcham

A diagram of the second floor:

http://mffprodos5.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=139038

Diagrams for the entire building, complete with pictures:

http://mffprodos5.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10896&relPageId=1

Thanks, Pat.

If Prayer man is Oswald, then Altgens 6 shows that he would be unable to see the first or subsequent shots as he is hidden inside the North corner of the doorway. As he can't see what is going on, (even Lovelady in the middle of the doorway is leaning forward to see what is going on) he is not aware that the President has been shot and fatally injured, so, after Baker runs past him, he decides to go upstairs for a Coke. Baker and Truly have to get across the first floor try the elevators which aren't working and the run up the stairs, by which time Oswald has walked up the front stairs and reached the dining area. They had to travel across the first floor, try the elevators, then run up the stairs. Os had to walk up the front stairs and across maybe two thirds of the floor. Time line seems quite plausible.

Just my 2 cents.

Anybody got a plan layout of the second floor?

Any better?

Can the photos and still frames of the man in the doorway - aka "Prayer Man" be further isolated and enhanced to determine if he has a v-neck t-shirt, a coke in his hand or any other specific fact that can help identify him further?

There does seem to be a glint here. A bottle?

Sean, I think Tommy wll be on shortly to say he can read the label on the bottle

Thanks Tommy. Stupidly, I didn't think to google it. And thanks to you, Larry, for the pdfs.

Anybody know of a photo of John Thomas Masen?

Quote:

"Mack also says that no one who worked at the TSBD saw Oswald on the steps, or said they did, and the man is too short to be the 5' 9" Oswald, and that by the time the frame is filmed Oswald is on or waiting for the bus, which doesn't make any sense if Baker runs into Oswald on the second floor about a minute later. I think Gary will alter that statement after reflection."

How many TSBD employees were still on the steps when this person would have stepped out the door? How many of them would have been looking behind them, instead of down the street towards where the shots were heard?

Also, how does one establish the height of the person in the photo at under 5'9"?

Gary informs me that he was referring to another film clip, and will not change his mind.

Did he say which film clip, Bill?

Looks as though it could be. Correct dark shirt and looks like Oswald's build.

Yes, and I can see his crooked front tooth. LOL

--Tommy

By Jove, Thomas, I believe you are correct. Curiouser and curiouser....

Looks as though it could be. Correct dark shirt and looks like Oswald's build.

Ian, maybe it's because the site doesn't allow aliases, that we don't see a lot of the "characters" who appear on other web sites on here.

I see Tink is mentioned in the article. What does he have to say about the production? Tink ?

Thank you, John. I hope contributors take note of your comments. We have an invaluable resource here, and we all must ensure that posters remember their manners.

Just a a matter of interest, I visit Portugal regularly, and trying to understand the language. When I am back home, I occasionally say "obrigado" instead of "thankyou", when thanking somebody. so i can well understand Judy thanking somebody in Russian if she was learning the language.

Don't you ever wish you had been given better materiel to work with?

Nah. Not really. I rather enjoy watching you conspiracy buffs trying to deny the obvious. Like the oh-so-obvious S.B.T., Oswald's guilt, and the location of the entry wound in the above autopsy photo.

But you can just pretend all the photos are fakes. That usually works pretty well for you guys.

Whilst you continue to pretend they aren't.

In deciding which view is is correct, how could anybody prefer to believe photos which are fakes over the forty witnesses who saw the hole in the rear of the President's head at Parkland? Were they all mistaken, David?

(on second thoughts - no need to reply as we already know your answer.)

Mr Hornberger forgot to mention the third type- the professionals, those who are either paid to spout government thinking or those in government who are protecting the government line.

Apologies, guys. Meant to put Wiiliam. Message still stands.

Well said, Jim. Completely agree.

Howard L. Hunt stood to lose billions of dollars if the changes to the oil depletiation allowances had gone through as JFK wanted.

The Fed stood to lose the interest it charged on lending non existent money to the U.S. government as JFK wanted to issue money backed by silver.

The Mob were losing billiions because of Castro's takeover of Cuba.

And it wasn't about money?

Funny how the witness testimony is always unreliable when it shows a problem with the Warren Commission.

Pat, Rather says this:

Hemmings told Noel Twyman the same story. ("Bloody Treason" Noel Twyman Chapter 28- "Gerald Patrick Hemming and Interpen."

Hi Bob, Feeling fine. Good to hear from you again. Herb Blenner has posted an interesting comment on Duncan's site.

"Mr. SPECTER. I have just one other question, Governor. With respect to the films and the slides which you have viewed this morning, had you ever seen those pictures before this morning?

Governor CONNALLY. I had seen what purported to be a copy of the film when I was in the hospital in Dallas. I had not seen the slides.
Mr. SPECTER. And when do you think you were hit on those slides, Governor, or in what range of slides?
Governor CONNALLY. We took - you are talking about the number of the slides?
Mr. SPECTER. Yes.
Governor CONNALLY. As we looked at them this morning, and as you related the numbers to me, it appeared to me that I was hit in the range between 130 or 131, I don't remember precisely, up to 134, in that bracket.
Mr. SPECTER. May I suggest to you that it was 231?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, 231 and 234, then.
Mr. SPECTER. The series under our numbering system starts with a higher number when the car comes around the turn, so when you come out of the sign, which was -
Governor CONNALLY. It was just after we came out of the sign, for whatever that sequence of numbers was, and if it was 200, I correct my testimony. It was 231 to about 234. It was within that range.

Governor Connally set a clever trap when he identified frames of the 130's as showing when he was shot. Specter took the bait and suggested 231 as showing the shot. Apparently shaken by his mistake, Specter mindlessly acknowledged that the numbering system starts when the car comes around the turn before leading Connally to relate the time of his wounding to emergence from behind the sign. This turn of the car is not seen in our copy of the Zapruder film. "

What happened to the hundred frames?

from the thread here http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2243&page=25#entry274525

I've seen over the years a number of people claiming to be "experts". From both sides, the nutters and the non nutters.

Reading their theories and methodology, looking at the way they handle the information and resulting critiques, I have yet to see that many "professionals".

A lot of basement researchers, dogmatic dilletantes, opinionated nutters (ct or ln regardless) goin on about what they know, how they know it and how they are more interested in "winning" and argument than being factual, correct or logical.

I'm curious as to how many PHD's and proffessionals in the fields thay are discussing are actually participating here and in other places... actual doctors, actual forensic folks, actual ballistics types...

A history teacher with a degree in Spanish literature doesn't count and retired spooks don't count either...

I mean people talking about ballistics with a job in that field and related scholarly accolaides accredations and the like...

can anyone get me a list?

just curious...

Maybe you could start the ball rolling, Blair. Who are you and what are your qualifications?

...I think that [McClelland's drawing] pretty much corresponds to what I said, occipitoparietal. It looks a little further down in the occiput in this picture, I think, but it was pretty far posteriorly because you had to be able to see the cerebellum -- " (Peters, ARRB Parkland doctors interview)

Pat, are you saying that the doctors who all said the wound was in the occipitoparietal area of the head were wrong?

What makes you think she was lying, Pat?