Robert Prudhomme

Your swan song is getting old REAL quick, Carmine.

Shelley was all over the place. His statement and WC testimony are miles apart. If we follow his WC testimony, he and Lovelady remained on the steps of the TSBD for 3-4 minutes, heard the news of the assassination from Gloria Calvary (who loitered down by the Stemmons Freeway sign for some time before returning to the TSBD steps), then went for a stroll to the rail yard with Billy Lovelady before re-entering the TSBD by the rear door. Anything he has to say about Eddie Piper is old news.

Could it be that Baker did not enter the TSBD, or at least not by the front door?

I am sure this thread will raise howls of outrage, as soon as you all are aware of what it is about, but that is just how things have to be. Of course, everyone knows that the Malcolm Couch film shows Baker running into the TSBD but, does it? The version of the Couch film I viewed shows Baker parking his motorcycle and running toward the TSBD steps but he doesn't actually get to the steps. We are left to draw the conclusion, from his and Truly's evidence, that the two of them ran into the building together.

Who saw them enter the TSBD? There is one person who would have been standing directly in their way, and that is Buell Wesley Frazier. Let's see what he had to say about it:

"Mr. BALL - Were you able to see the President, could you still see the President's car when you heard the first sound?

Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I couldn't. From there, you know, people were standing out there on the curb, you see, and you know it drops, you know the ground drops, off there as you go down toward that underpass and I couldn't see any of it because people were standing up there in my way, but however, when he did turn that corner there, there wasn't anybody standing there in the street and you could see good there, but after you got on past down there you couldn't see anything.
Mr. BALL - You didn't see the President's car at the time you heard the sound?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I didn't.
Mr. BALL - But you stood right there, did you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. Stood right where I was.
Mr. BALL - And Mr. Shelley was still standing there?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - And also Billy Lovelady?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - The three of you didn't go any place?
Mr. FRAZIER - I believe Billy and them walked down toward that direction but I didn't. I just stood where I was. I hadn't moved at all.
Mr. BALL - Did you see anybody after that come into the Building while you were there?
Mr. FRAZIER - You mean somebody other that didn't work there?
Mr. BALL - A police officer.
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I stood there a few minutes, you know, and some people who worked there; you know normally started to go back into the Building because a lot of us didn't eat our lunch, and so we stared back into the Building and it wasn't but just a few minutes that there were a lot of police officers and so forth all over the Building there.
Mr. BALL - Then you went back into the Building, did you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right."

Not only did Frazier not see a motorcycle cop in a white helmet go by him on the top of the steps, he opens the possibility of Shelley and Lovelady still being on the steps of the TSBD, when they should be 25 steps down the Elm St. extension. It was from this vantage point they supposedly looked back (after someone hollered) and saw Truly and Baker entering the TSBD. Considering how quickly Baker was off his motorcycle and running up Elm St., I fail to see how Shelley and Lovelady managed to get off the steps and down the street so quickly.

Now, after polling the membership, it seems the only people that were on the 1st floor of the TSBD, and saw Truly and Baker heading for the stairs and elevator, were Oswald, supposedly in a storage closet near the front entrance, and Eddie Piper, at the coffee machine towards the NW corner of the 1st floor. Surely, Mr. Piper must have seen Baker. Here is what he would have been looking at, or at least something similar to this:

Granted, Baker left his motorcycle outside but, the uniform and helmet are quite distinctive, aren't they? Let's see what Eddie Piper had to say.

"Mr. BALL. You mentioned you saw Truly?

Mr. PIPER. I don’t know whether it was a policeman or FBI or who it was, but another fellow was with him.

Mr. BALL. And where were you?

Mr. PIPER. Standing right there where they make coffee."

Look at the photo above, and tell me how Piper could mistake this for an FBI agent unless, of course, the man with Truly wasn't wearing a uniform such as this.

Did Piper have bad vision? This composite photo of Piper shows him to be on in age, and wearing corrective glasses, but no mention is made of failing vision. Besides, this part of his testimony tells us his vision was quite good, as he was able to see things out in front of the TSBD from almost the back corner.

"Mr. PIPER. I heard one shot, and then the next shot went off-the one that shot him and I got on up and went on back, back where they make coffee at the end of the counter where I could see what happened and before I could get there, the third shot went off, and I seen the people all running and in a few minutes someone came in the building, and I looked up and it was the bossman and a policeman or someone."

Even if Baker took his helmet off, he would be carrying it in his hand, and it would still be conspicuous. However, it did not seem the norm for Dallas motorcycle cops to have removed their helmets in public. All the motorcycle cops photographed walking in front of the TSBD seemed to be wearing theirs, and Bonnie Ray Williams testified to the WC that he saw a helmeted police officer arrive on the 5th floor, via the elevator.

"Mr. BALL. Now, when you were questioned by the FBI agents, talking to Mr. Odum and Mr. Griffin, they reported in writing here that while you were standing at the west end of the building on the fifth floor, a police officer came up on the elevator and looked all around the fifth floor and left the floor. Did you see anything like that?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, at the time I was up there I saw a motorcycle policeman. He came up. And the only thing I saw of him was his white helmet.
Mr. BALL. What did he
Mr. WILLIAMS. He just came around, and around to the elevator.
Mr. BALL. Which elevator?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I believe it was the east elevator.
Mr. BALL. Did you see anybody with him?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I did not.
Mr. BALL. You were only able to see the top of his helmet?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. You could only see the top of his helmet
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir; that is the only thing I saw about it."

Note that Williams was only able to see the top of the helmet, and did not see anyone with the helmeted officer. It might still be possible for Williams' testimony to support the arrival of Baker on the 5th floor, except for one small detail. It seems that Williams established, with the two FBI agents, that this helmeted officer arrived on the elevator, not the stairs.

From the WC testimony of Roy Truly:

"Mr. BELIN. What did you see?

Mr. TRULY. I saw the officer almost directly in the doorway of the lunch-room facing Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. And where was Lee Harvey Oswald at the time you saw him?
Mr. TRULY. He was at the front of the lunchroom, not very far inside he was just inside the lunchroom door.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. TRULY. 2 or 3 feet, possibly.
Mr. BELIN. Could you put an "O" where you saw Lee Harvey Oswald?
All right.
You have put an "O" on Exhibit 497.
What did you see or hear the officer say or do?
Mr. TRULY. When I reached there, the officer had his gun pointing at Oswald. The officer turned this way and said, "This man work here?" And I said, "Yes."
Mr. BELIN. And then what happened?
Mr. TRULY. Then we left Lee Harvey Oswald immediately and continued to run up the stairways until we reached the fifth floor."

It seems Bonnie Ray Williams must have seen a different motorcycle cop than the one accompanying Roy Truly.

I will give you the WC testimony of one more eyewitness, present on the steps of the TSBD after the assassination. From the WC testimony of Joe Molina:

"Mr. BALL. Did you see Mr. Truly go into the building?

Mr. MOLINA. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where were you when you saw him go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I was right in the entrance.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a police officer with him?
Mr. MOLINA. I didn't see a police officer. I don't recall seeing a police officer but I did see him go inside.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a white-helmeted police officer any time there in the entrance?
Mr. MOLINA. Well, of course, there might have been one after they secured the building, you know.
Mr. BALL. No, I mean when Truly went in; did you see Truly actually go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I saw him go in.
Mr. BALL. Where were you standing?
Mr. MOLINA. Right at the front door; right at the front door.
Mr. BALL. Outside the front door?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, outside the front door I was standing; the door was right behind me.
Mr. BALL. Were you standing on the steps?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, on the uppermost step.
Mr. BALL. You actually saw Truly go
Mr. MOLINA. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. You were still standing there?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes.
Mr. BALL. How long was it after you heard the shots?
Mr. MOLINA. Oh, I would venture to say maybe 20 or 30 seconds afterwards."

Was Baker invisible?

I think the Prayer Man thread mentioned in this thread should be pursued as far as possible, in hopes that a definitive YES or NO answer can be arrived at, if it is possible. Anyone who wants to stop debate, discussion, and further inquiry on the topic either 1)has something to hide, 2)has a vested interest in NOT finding out the truth, or 3) a combination of 1 and 2...IMHO.

Otherwise, why would anyone at all have a problem with the pursuit of TRUTH?

Perhaps they tire of the lack of evidence. I would suggest that as well. IMHO. However, I do believe I have said all that needs to be on that. I wish you luck in your search.

How many times do we get to listen to you having your final say on this matter?

So far, after doing some hasty searching of statements and testimony from witnesses on the TSBD steps, the only one I can find who saw a helmeted motorcycle cop run up the steps of the TSBD is Pauline Sanders. Unfortunately, Ms. Sanders never testified before the WC, and the only information we have from her is contained in one of the FBI's famous "reports", written in the third person, and likely not seen or signed by the subject of the report. As we all know, many of these FBI reports show clear signs of evidence tampering on the part of FBI agents, and are deviations from the truth.

From Pauline Sanders' FBI report of 24/11/63:

"She advised she could not recall the exact time but immediately after the presidential parade passed she heard three loud blasts and she immediately realized that the shots or whatever it was came from the building above her. She said within a matter of ten seconds a uniform police officer in a white helmet ran into the building but she did not observe him any further and could not state where he went in the building."

Any other witnesses on the steps or in the TSBD recall seeing Baker?

Well, I've been asking this question on several threads for the last couple of days, and it seems that, by the lack of response, Oswald and Piper were the only people on the first floor that might have seen Baker and Truly come into the building.

I'm going to start a new thread about this and some observations I made, and I'm sure, within 5 minutes of posting it, someone will find a host of people that were on the first floor.

One last question. I've been going through statements and testimony to see how many witnesses on the steps of the TSBD saw Baker run into the TSBD. Aside from Shelley, Lovelady and Truly, is anyone aware of any other witness who saw Baker run up the steps into the TSBD?

Well, I've been asking this question on several threads for the last couple of days, and it seems that, by the lack of response, Oswald and Piper were the only people on the first floor that might have seen Baker and Truly come into the building.

I'm going to start a new thread about this and some observations I made, and I'm sure, within 5 minutes of posting it, someone will find a host of people that were on the first floor.

Thanks Randy. I read that post when Sean first put it up, but had forgotten about it.

Okay, so that's Eddie Piper, and possibly LHO in a storage closet (what was he doing in there?), on the first floor when Truly and Baker entered the TSBD. Was there anyone else on the 1st floor at the time of the shooting, or was Eddie Piper all alone?

I wasn't an EF member when this thread originally made its run & I am way back around page 22 in catching up. Not knowing just yet what is contained within the pages I haven't read yet & here, I'd like to offer some observations (just in case no one else has):

Prayerman is either wearing a short sleeve dark shirt or a long sleeve dark shirt with the arm sleeves rolled up to or above both elbows. I haven't seen a watch or rings on the person but I do see what looks like a typical soft drink bottle. His stance resembles someone holding a camera & waiting to take photos with it.

No one has suggested the possibility of a Oswald clone 'look-alike' in the early part of this thread being Prayerman. Purpose of the clone? Perhaps to offer an alibi for LHO (if he had been upstairs shooting at or in position to shoot at JFK).

In the Darnell footage someone is running towards the TSBD from the left side of the red brick road extension towards the TSBD entrance (west to east) at the same time Baker is sprinting towards the front door. It almost looks like the person is chasing after Baker. Someone in a dark suit or uniform is rapidly moving west by the parked cars while the rest ensues. This person may have been the officer that encountered the fake SS man behind the stockade fence.

Was a consensus reached in this thread in regards to Prayerman being Lee Oswald or not?

If Prayerman is indeed Oswald and he followed Baker & Truly into the building, what could that reason have been (if possession of a soft drink had been previously obtained)? Could Prayerman have been attempting to tell Baker/Truly that the shooting occurred outside the TSBD & NOT inside?

BM

Brad, there was a broad consensus among Warren Commission critics, but not total. Miracles only happen at Christmas. But then - a lot of disasters do too.

Coke bottle and camera have both been put forward. I am aware of work that was done measuring the distance between hands and obtaining data on dimension of certain cameras. There was a match to one that Oswald allegedly had access to.

I believe Oswald beat Baker and Truly back inside. They were reported in the NY Herald (quoting Ochus Campbell) as spotting Oswald near a store room on the first floor when they came in.

Hi Greg

I would be very interested in seeing the NY Herald article you refer to.

There is something else I have requested of the membership, but have not gotten a reply to yet. Beside Eddie Piper, were there any witnesses on the 1st floor that saw Baker and Truly enter the TSBD and make their way to the elevators and stairs in the NW corner? I know this is one of those basic things that every JK researcher should know, but there just doesn't seem to be anything on it.

Roger

If Connally was facing forward when he was shot, a shot from the west end of the TSBD is the only shot that would allow a bullet to traverse a right to left angle across the front of his chest.

As the Sniper's Nest at the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD was only 9° laterally separated from a longitudinal line, drawn down the centre of the limo at z224, a shot from this end of the building would have only grazed the outside of his 5th rib, and could not have exited to the left of his right nipple. Once again, we are assuming Connally was facing forward.

Okay, everyone responding is completely missing the point of this thread, some I suspect intentionally.

Look at the location of the entrance wound on the diagram.

According to this drawing, the bullet came about as close to hitting the scapula (shoulder blade) as is possible, without actually hitting it. I might point out here that this drawing depicts the most chicken-chested man I have ever seen, and that the torso is totally out of proportion to the arms and shoulder. Anyways, look at the entrance wound, and then look again at this diagram:

If the entrance wound was that close to the scapula, and if Connally was facing forward, it is quite plain to see that the bullet would have gone into Connally's pleural cavity, and entered his right lung. But, that is not what happened. According to Dr. Shaw, the bullet contacted the 5th rib at the mid axillary line.

In other words, it hit the 5th rib at the extreme outside right edge of the rib cage, actually some distance from the scapula, if you look at the previous diagrams.

This may seem like a small matter, until you read further, and see that Dr. Shaw described a bullet path that stayed on the OUTSIDE of the 5th rib for 10 cm., and never penetrated the pleural cavity. The bullet entered at the mid axillary line, and exited to the LEFT of Connally's right nipple. Therefore, Dr. Shaw describes a bullet path going from right to left across the front of Connally's chest at an angle of about 40°.

How could Connally have suffered such an angular wound if he had been facing forward?

Robert,

from what I can see on post 1 you did indeed suggest that Charles Gregory placed the wound there on the chart. Your actual words " where Dr. Gregory depicted it to be in the drawing."

It was Robert Shaw that both drew and labeled that wound.

If you never intended to suggest Gregory drew that wound, then your use of language was ambiguous in post 1.

Also when you say it makes no difference. I do not agree. It makes all the difference in the world. Robert Shaw was the authority for the chest wound whereas Charles Gregory was the authority for the wrist wound. Therefore the placing on the back wound in that position has all the authority of the surgeon who treated the wound.

James.

Wow, James, I deleted that part of my post within 30 seconds of posting it, after I realized my mistake. Makes me wonder how you and Mr. Murr were able to read that, as neither one of you were on the forum at that particular time.

In case anyone is wondering why I am asking this question, let me say that I am going to demonstrate that, if Connally was shot from behind, it had to have happened when he was turned at least 45° to his right. This, of course, makes the SBT an impossibility.

Are you for real?

Good find, Dave.

Makes no difference who placed it there, Gary. What path do you think the bullet would have taken?

P.S.

The intials "R.R.S.", seen on the Gregory diagram, stand for Robert Roeder Shaw.

P.P.S.

Besides, I never said Dr. Gregory placed the wound there. What exactly are you responding to, Gary?

Can anyone see what path the Magic Bullet would have taken, if Connally was facing forward at the moment he was struck in the back, and the bullet entrance wound was where Dr. Gregory depicted it to be in the drawing?

In lieu of an identifiable photo of Oswald in that corner we can and have looked at the other evidence and the statements of most everyone it COULD have been and none appear to equate themselves with that corner - the closest anyone comes is Shelley, yet Shelley is in a white shirt, tie & jacket.

I would remind you of Carolyn Arnold and the fact that the FBI did not publish either of her statements nor did they call her to testify.

Oswald was wearing a darkish brown button down button front shirt over a t-shirt, no glasses, bracelet on left hand and grey pants.

Since I too do not believe that Lunchroom scene ever happened - or at least not with Oswald - his being "out front with Shelley" and Bookout's explanation that it was after the fact may be a CYA on his part. It's not that Lovelady is really Oswald - it's that Oswald is set back, like Shelley.

The ONLY thing that keeps me from accepting it outright is that not a single person claims they said he was there in any of the 50 years of independent research that's been done.. While so many other areas of error have been pointed out by witnesses. Until we find a reasonable alternative to it being Oswald (aint it strange that we are doing everything we can to prove it was NOT him, just to cover all bases?) I think we have to start accepting the probability that it's really him out there and the lunchroom charade was to move him from these steps into the building. If it was Oswald coming down the stairs in Baker's affidavit - I'd think it would have said so.

Hi Dave

Carolyn Arnold told an interviewer years later that the time estimate of 12:00 to 12:15 is not what she told the FBI, and what she really told them was 12:25. She also told the FBI that she got a good look at Oswald, and there was no confusion in her mind about his identity.

Only in America could an unsigned "statement", as the WC has made the FBI reports out to be, written in the third person and likely never seen by the subject of the report, be passed off as any kind of evidence. I have lost track of the number of these reports that have been manipulated by the FBI to suit the needs of the WC. Each of these FBI reports should come with a disclaimer:

"The contents of this report may not necessarily be in accordance with the original words of the subject of the report."

Bob,

I don't care about PM or any other unproven claim, just the attacks on those who disagree for using evidence. Feel free to gather evidence, it would be a welcome change.

I have never attacked you on this forum, or any other forum. And I do not appreciate comments such as "Feel free to gather evidence, it would be a welcome change."

Methinks you are trying just a bit too hard to put the PM theory into a bad light. What is it about PM that really bothers you?

Carmine

Listen very closely. You seem to want to divide people into two distinct camps, those that believe PM is Oswald, and those that don't. I have always been highly suspect of those wishing to make every issue that comes along either black or white, as this tends to stymie further investigation into the issue. Is that what your intention is?

One more time, I do NOT believe PM is Oswald, as I have not seen conclusive proof to confirm this, but I believe it highly PROBABLE PM is Oswald. Do you see the difference?

For that reason, I wish this thread to have some sort of prominence, if only for the chance it may attract some brilliant SOB with the means to move the investigation into PM forward.

Bob, listen very closely, I use verifiable evidence. That is the divide. Try as you might this is not about me, but a bad idea that some claim is the truth.

Verifiable evidence is what we are seeking in the PM matter. Would you rather we not find it? You seem more eager to discourage anyone from looking for it than you are to see it.

Carmine

Listen very closely. You seem to want to divide people into two distinct camps, those that believe PM is Oswald, and those that don't. I have always been highly suspect of those wishing to make every issue that comes along either black or white, as this tends to stymie further investigation into the issue. Is that what your intention is?

One more time, I do NOT believe PM is Oswald, as I have not seen conclusive proof to confirm this, but I believe it highly PROBABLE PM is Oswald. Do you see the difference?

For that reason, I wish this thread to have some sort of prominence, if only for the chance it may attract some brilliant SOB with the means to move the investigation into PM forward.

I find the Prayer Man discussion the single most fascinating idea about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In no other place anywhere have I seen the case for Lee Oswald being Prayer Man so comprehensively and effectively captured as it is here in this thread. It's a signature product that the Education Forum should be proud of and it's worthy of special consideration.

If the simple act of pinning the thread creates too many challenges or is too disruptive, then consider creating a "Greatest Hits" or "Hall of Fame" category for threads that encapsulate significant bodies of work and thought. Recognize threads that have clearly risen above the rest in terms of quality of research, longevity, member interest, etc. It shouldn't be too difficult to figure out what the MVP threads are.

Since research in not a linear process—progress generally happens in spurts with longer dry spells—why allow an important topic currently in a quiet phase to drop off the radar screen and potentially be forgotten because it gets pushed into oblivion by here-today-gone-tomorrow discussion? Always look closely at the trees but never lose sight of the forest in the process.

FWIW.

Well said, Mr. Sorenson.

Of course I'm normal. My mother had me tested.

This, in my opinion, is the single most important thread contained on this, or any other forum, for a number of specific reasons:

1. The topic and most of the content contained here has the ability to attract new interest in this case. The combination of the thoughtful and meticulous research combined with the tantalising photographic evidence takes us almost to the point of completely and finally closing the case against Oswald once and for all. No if’s – no but’s – no maybe’s. Now, what self-respecting and honest person wouldn’t want that?
2. Only one thing will prove or dismiss the overwhelming possibility and probability that ‘Prayerman’ is Lee Harvey Oswald. High definition scans and technological analysis of the Darnell, Weigman and Towner films are necessary. Given that the captured frames, each and every time we have received better versions, have only made the figure look even more like Oswald I sincerely believe that technology will put the question of identity to bed. I, along with Vanessa, would certainly contribute financially to making this happen.
3. When Buell Wesley Frazier initially declined to identify himself as the person stood to the left of ‘Prayerman’ at the top of the steps, in the exact spot where BWF said he was stood - - even though every single seasoned researcher on the planet could identify him in the picture - - it told us all we needed to know about how unsettling this photograph was to an individual who still holds many secrets.
4. The thread has garnered over 200,000 views and more than 1,600 replies across more than 100 pages. Even the time wasters, nay-sayers and obfuscators couldn’t stop this juggernaut.

At this moment in time, the individuals and institutions with the ability and the resources to put this to bed do not seem the slightest bit interested in helping pave the way. Including Mr. JFK himself Robert Groden. That, from my perspective, is interesting, perplexing and quite telling. Perhaps when the issue is settled there will be less $100 books to sell on the knoll? The Sixth Floor Museum has the control and has the power to finish this debate and even though we finally got a confirmation from Buell Wesley Frazier that, yes, the individual stood next to the person who could be his friend Lee Harvey Oswald, was in fact Buell Wesley Frazier, the powers that be have been silent on providing HD film scans of the movies.

If ‘Prayerman’ is Oswald the information provided in this thread outlines the exact details of how the case against him was constructed, how witnesses were manipulated and coerced and how evidence was fabricated.

I hate to disagree with Bill Kelly here. This one issue is the game-changer.

The arguments about the second floor encounter and myriad of other evidence the critics have accumulated over the years will continue unabated. If the question of Prayerman is concluded, and is concluded the way I imagine it will be concluded, there is no debate. It ends. Period.

The efforts to work out the real who, how and why will no doubt go on but the vindication of the man who was set-up and accused of performing this heinous crime will be complete and the history books can be rewritten.

Hi Lee

In regards to No. 2, I read this interesting post from Stan Dane over at Greg's forum, ROKC.

"According to Tina Towner:

"Due to risk of copyright infringement, none of the photographs taken by my father or me on November 22, 1963, will be posted.

"Effective February 2015, The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza obtained the copyrights to the Towner film and photos. Please contact the museum regarding use of the images."

http://www.tinatowner.net/photographs

I guess that means Gary Mack is the gatekeeper for any of the Towner images.

Wonderful."

It seems very strange that the 6th Floor Museum would suddenly move on obtaining copyright to the Towner film, after all these years. I believe our chances of gaining further access to the Towner film are diminishing rapidly.

Dr. Frankenstein: Help me with the bags.

Igor: Certainly! You take the blonde and I'll grab the one in the turban!