Robert Prudhomme

This song is dedicated

to Robin Unger and all the great Aussies

who have contributed so much

to the JFK inquiry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFCekeoSTwg

So they gave me a tin hat

and they gave me a gun,

and they sent me away to the war.

Written by a Scotsman

and sung by an Irishman,

an Australian song!

A tribute to the brilliant leadership of the British in the First World War. As former British Prime Minister David Lloyd George said in those dark days, "God protect us from the British Army Officer Corps." We Canadians suffered mightily under their direction, too, in well planned debacles such as the Battle of the Somme in 1916.

In that spirit, here is a fine version of another old classic by the Clancy Brothers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Cxw9fMl0M

This could be a long night.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgQCPifM-p8

Lovely rendition of an old classic. Almost brings tears to the eyes when the lad hits the high notes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utfkGocmCiE

I have taken a renewed interest in Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney, the man who discovered the sniper's nest on the 6th floor of the TSBD. I began asking questions about his testimony to the WC on another thread and realized I was distracting attention away from the topic of that thread. Therefore, I will begin a new thread.

Below is a portion of Mooney's WC testimony describing his ascent to the 6th floor via elevator and stairway. Most notable is his encounter on the stairway, at the level of the 4th floor, with two men he believed to be plainclothes deputy sheriffs, the same as himself.

"Mr. Mooney - We shut the back door--there was a back door on a little dock. And then we went in through the docks, through the rear entrance.

Officer Vickery and Webster said, "We will take the staircase there in the corner.

I said, "I will go up the freight elevator." I noticed there was a big elevator there. So I jumped on it. And about that time two women come running and said, "we want to go to the second floor."

I said, "All right, get on, we are going."

Mr. BALL - Which elevator did you get on?

Mr. MOONEY - It was the one nearest to the staircase, on the northwest corner of the building.

Mr. BALL - There are two elevators there?

Mr. MOONEY - I found that out later. I didn't know it at that time.

Mr. BALL - You took the west one, or the east one?

Mr. MOONEY - I would say it was the west elevator, the one nearest to the staircase.

Mr. BALL - Did it work with a push button?

Mr. MOONEY - It was a push button affair the best I can remember. got hold of the controls and it worked. We started up and got to the second. I was going to let them off and go on up. And when we got there, the power undoubtedly cut off, because we had no more power on the elevator. So I looked around their office there, just a short second or two, and then I went up the staircase myself. And I met some other officers coming down, plainclothes, and I believe they were deputy sheriffs. They were coming down the staircase. But I kept going up. And how come I get off the sixth floor, I don't know yet. But, anyway, I stopped on six, and didn't even know what floor I was on.

Mr. BALL - You were alone?

Mr. MOONEY - I was alone at that time.

Mr. BALL - Was there any reason for you to go to the sixth floor?

Mr. MOONEY - No, sir. That is what I say. I don't know why. I just stopped on that particular floor. I thought I was pretty close to the top.

Mr. BALL - Were there any other officers on the floor?

Mr. MOONEY - I didn't see any at that time. I assume there had been other officers up there. But I didn't see them. And I begin criss-crossing it, round and round, through boxes, looking at open windows---some of them were open over on the south side."

I have a host of questions regarding this testimony but will limit myself to just a few, at the moment.

1. In November, 1963, how many plainclothes deputy sheriffs were employed by the Dallas Sheriff's Dept.?

2. Were these two "officers" ever identified? Was any effort ever made to ID them?

3. Did Deputy Sheriffs Vickery and Webster, assuming they were ascending the staircase ahead of Mooney, encounter these "officers", as well? Did they give statements or testimony? Was an encounter with these two "officers" mentioned in their accounts?

4. Assuming he was hunting for an unidentified assassin, and he was unsure as to the identity of these two "officers", would it not be appropriate to challenge them and ask for ID? Might it even be appropriate to detain these men?

Deputy Sheriff Mooney testified to the WC that he believed the two men coming down the stairs were also plainclothes deputy sheriffs. He does not identify who they were, nor does he say whether he asked them for credentials.

Were these two men ever identified?

No, Robert, they haven't, and their presence coming down the stairs a few minutes after the shooting makes a nonsense of the WC-defender idea that it would have been impossible for a stranger or strangers to exit the building from the sixth floor undetected or unchallenged.

Hello Sean

Very interesting. In all the years I have been studying the assassination, I have only given Deputy Mooney's story of his ascent to the 6th floor a passing glance. However, reading his WC testimony again has most definitely aroused my suspicions.

"Mr. Mooney - I said, "I will go up the freight elevator." I noticed there was a big elevator there. So I jumped on it. And about that time two women come running and said, "we want to go to the second floor."

I said, "All right, get on, we are going."

Mr. BALL - Which elevator did you get on?

Mr. MOONEY - It was the one nearest to the staircase, on the northwest corner of the building.

Mr. BALL - There are two elevators there?

Mr. MOONEY - I found that out later. I didn't know it at that time.

Mr. BALL - You took the west one, or the east one?

Mr. MOONEY - I would say it was the west elevator, the one nearest to the staircase.

Mr. BALL - Did it work with a push button?

Mr. MOONEY - It was a push button affair the best I can remember. got hold of the controls and it worked. We started up and got to the second. I was going to let them off and go on up. And when we got there, the power undoubtedly cut off, because we had no more power on the elevator. So I looked around their office there, just a short second or two, and then I went up the staircase myself. And I met some other officers coming down, plainclothes, and I believe they were deputy sheriffs. They were coming down the staircase. But I kept going up. And how come I get off the sixth floor, I don't know yet. But, anyway, I stopped on six, and didn't even know what floor I was on.

Mr. BALL - You were alone?

Mr. MOONEY - I was alone at that time.

Mr. BALL - Was there any reason for you to go to the sixth floor?

Mr. MOONEY - No, sir. That is what I say. I don't know why. I just stopped on that particular floor. I thought I was pretty close to the top."

Right off the top, Deputy Mooney is taking an elevator up to look for an armed killer, and he agrees to drop two women off on the 2nd floor? Strange.

Then he meets two men coming downstairs at the 4th floor (busy place, that 4th floor landing) and he "believes" they were plainclothes deputy sheriffs? Not only do I find it odd that he does not challenge two unidentified strangers and ask for ID's, I also find it odd he was unable to recognize them if they worked out of the Dallas Sheriff's Dept., as he did. How many deputy sheriffs were there in Dallas in 1963? Possibly one hundred? Or less? For comparison, I live in a somewhat isolated village of 300 people. While I may not be on a first name basis with everyone here, I know everyone here to see them and can spot a stranger in town immediately. It might be understandable if he did not recognize newly hired recruits to the Sheriff's Dept., but these were plainclothes officers; suggesting these were men of some seniority. I find it extremely odd that Deputy Mooney would simply let these people pass without challenging them, if he did not recognize them. Even odder, the WC lawyer made no attempt to pursue the subject.

And then he just happened to stop on the 6th floor without even knowing which floor he was on. Right...Pull the other one, Mooney, it plays Jingle Bells.

For Oswald to be Prayer Man,

and

for the second-floor lunchroom incident to have really happened as described by Baker and Truly to the WC,

there is only one realistic scenario available....

Why would the Oswald of this scenario want to keep tabs on Baker & Truly's progress? The answer hardly needs spelling out.

Since I am the class dunce,

who naively believes in the complete innocence of Prayer Man Lee

you will have to spell it out for me.

Ray,

I think Sean has described one reasonable scenario: LHO saw Baker and Truly run by and goes to the 2nd floor to check their progress.

I disagree with Sean that there is only one realistic scenario.

As I described a few posts above there is at least one other possible scenario. Roughly during the same time interval that Oswald is seen upstairs near the lunchroom/ or by Reid's desk, Officer Mooney encounters the two unidentified men coming down the stairs to the 2nd floor. There are a couple possibilities here:

1. Oswald is supposed to rendevous with these two men. Use your imagination to think of a reason why.

2. Oswald is freaked out by what he witnessed out on the steps and is seeking out these two men to find out what the hell happened up there.

But for either #1 or #2, Lee would have to have known in advance that something was going on.

I am not claiming that I believe these are anything more than possibilites, at least for now.

Deputy Sheriff Mooney testified to the WC that he believed the two men coming down the stairs were also plainclothes deputy sheriffs. He does not identify who they were, nor does he say whether he asked them for credentials.

Were these two men ever identified?

Just to add to my proposed theory, we cannot assume that, just because Oswald may have believed he was being set up, he believed he was being set up as the actual shooter. Nor can we assume he would have been the only conspirator in the building. In fact, my theory of shooters in the Dal-Tex Building and the County Records Building would also have included backup shooters on the 6th floor of the TSBD and the Grassy Knoll. Obviously, to make this theory work, Oswald would have been told these backup shooters would only commence firing IF something went drastically wrong with the assassination plan for the corner of Elm and Houston. Considering that all involved may have been quite surprised to have shots come from the TSBD, given the apparent ease of shooting JFK on the corner of Elm and Houston, things may have changed very quickly for Oswald, whose original plan may have been to stay in the TSBD and observe the activities in other buildings.

I theorize that the key thing that may have prompted him to lay low on the 2nd floor and then leave the TSBD a few minutes later would have been his worry that his fellow conspirator (and possible shooter), who was stopped on the 3rd or 4th floor by Baker and ID'ed by Truly, would have revealed Oswald under interrogation.

I think that, as well as ID'ing Prayer Man, we would be wise to ID the man who was stopped on the 3rd or 4th floor. This should not be that difficult, if he was indeed an employee at the TSBD.

Hello Sean

It is encouraging to see that you are a researcher who maintains an open mind on the degree of involvement Oswald had in the assassination. While I do not think it likely, it is entirely possible Oswald knew all about the assassination and, while he might not have been a shooter, he might have had other roles to play. For that matter, I am even willing to entertain he was a federal agent engaged in infiltrating groups involved in whatever.

With this in mind, let us take your last scenario about Prayer Man/Oswald and go a bit further. To do so, it must be assumed Prayer Man is holding a camera, likely a movie camera.

If he is filming, is he not in the worst possible place, deep in the shadows, to catch the assassination on film? Maybe so, but what if there was a glitch in the operation and the assassination took place in the wrong spot? Let me explain.

If I was planning an assassination with rifles at a moving target, and I wanted to assure its success, I would concentrate the rifle fire at the place where my target was slowed to an absolute crawl. Between Houston St. and the Triple Underpass, where would that spot be? There is only one answer, the 120° turn from Houston St. onto Elm St. By the time the limo has reached the Stemmons Freeway sign, it is on a relatively straight stretch of road, picking up speed going downhill and, most important, able to make a quick getaway. No, that great sled of a Lincoln was completely vulnerable and almost at a standstill while making the turn.

Now, if we look at Prayer Man as an observer and recorder of this event, it makes much more sense. From deep in the shadows on the steps, he has a ringside seat of any event taking place on the corner.

So, what happened to the plan and when did Oswald know he was set up? To answer this, we have to assume Oswald was told all of the shots would be coming from the Dal-Tex Building and the County Records Building. In the time it took Baker to run to the TSBD, Oswald may have heard witnesses speaking about seeing a rifle on the 6th floor above him plus witnesses speaking of JFK being shot so much further down Elm St. If he was the only conspirator in the TSBD, and as intelligent as it is claimed he was, it may not have taken him very long to realize he had likely been set up to take the fall, especially so if he had any inkling there was a rifle in the TSBD.

Why did he go to the 2nd floor? It is possible he felt exposed on the 1st floor and needed somewhere more secluded to get his thoughts together and come up with a new plan. That plan, I believe, was for him to walk out the front door a few minutes later.

The other scenario that qualifies is:

Baker and Truly run inside and head for the rear elevators.

While they are trying to call an elevator, meanwhile

Prayer Man has gone up the front steps to the second floor

and has reached the lunchroom, about to get his coke

when Baker spots him.

There is one variant scenario whereby Oswald could be Prayer Man and could still have a second-floor lunchroom encounter with Baker & Truly:

-Oswald is at the front entrance at the time of the shooting

-A few minutes after the shooting he goes up to buy a coke

-As Baker and Truly make their way down from the roof, Baker does a quick sweep on each floor

-On the second floor he pops his head into the lunchroom and sees Oswald standing there drinking a coke

Mr. Carroll

This is also a definite possibility, one I have put a great deal of thought into. Oswald would have proceeded up the narrow hallway and entered the southern of the three vestibule doors of the 2nd floor lunchroom. This would put Oswald going across Baker's field of view, as he proceeded to the lunchroom door, rather than merely going away from it.

The only problem I see with this scenario is whether or not Oswald had to obtain change from Geneva Hine prior to purchasing his Coke.

As for Prayer Man's behaviour being no different from that of others near his location, that is true, at least up to a point. But it stops being true up to any point the instant he quits the spot in urgent quest of a coke.

For all we know, Sean, some or all of the others in the Geneva Hines group

also got cokes.

Can you prove they did not?

Is it a certainty that Geneva Hines gave Oswald change for the Coke machine that day?

I would say the 6th floor of the TSBD. However, knowing my luck, there would be a Twilight Zone type turn around of events and I would end up altering history and my picture would be in all of the history books; identified only as the "unknown vagrant who assassinated JFK".

Of course, a plea of insanity would be entered on my behalf at my trial, following my repeated attempts to explain to investigators that I was from the year 2013.

Gents, the man in that video has nothing to do with Prayer Man--completely different timeframe.

I was just about to say, after an additional viewing, that I thought I could see this man raising his left hand to his face.

Sean, do you see, in the first segment of this film, what appears to be a hand drawn arrow pointing down to something on the left side of the screen? Any idea what this was about?

...

Hello Richard

I have watched the film three or four times now and I must admit, it is a bit difficult to make out details in this film. Is that Prayer Man or Lovelady that seems to dominate the top of the steps in this film?

Robert,

I should have qualified my original statement better to say the "man who appears to be Prayer Man".

This clip was certainly filmed later than the Weigman clip we have been viewing in this thread. There are more police arriving at the front entrance of the TSBD. So it's safe to say Lovelady would be long gone by now.

The resolution is bad, but I have no problem seeing the right arm and hand.

The left hand is the one I am more interested in.

Hello Richard

Yes, there does seem to be a greater police presence in this film.

I was looking in the shadows at our top left of the stairway for P.M. I will watch it again and look for movements in the hands of the man we can see.

I believe there is an aspect ratio issue with the Darnell frames we have been looking at, with width being flattered somewhat.

This may be making Prayer Man look a little bulkier than he really is.

Look for instance at how brawny the man in the white cowboy suit (back to camera) looks in Darnell (look at those big arms!):

Now look at the same man in Wiegman--he looks so much more slight:

Aspect ratio really does matter in these things. It was for instance the reason some people thought the rather gorilla-esque 'Lovelady' in the Martin film couldn't possibly be the real Lovelady.

Here is what happens to Prayer Man with a 10% reduction in the width of the Darnell frame (without corresponding reduction in height):

**

Would anyone here--Robin? Martin?--have the know-how to look at this aspect ratio issue in a more systematic fashion?

Hello Sean

If that is a bottle of Coke that Payer Man is holding, it still bothers me that, in both pictures, he appears to be holding it with both hands. Does this seem normal?

As I stated earlier in this thread, the posture reminds me of the stance my late father used to assume after he bought his first 8 mm home movie camera in the early 60's and he was out in public looking for something to film. We used to say he looked like a vulture waiting for something to die.

Robert, The YouTube film clip that William Kelly linked to shows Prayer Man in the first segment.

Prayer Man lowers his right hand down to his side. There also appears to be upward movement with his left hand moving closer to his face.

If you have time to take a look at it, I would be interested in your take.

Hello Richard

Are you referring to the link Mr. Kelly posted in the first post of this thread?

Yes.

Here is the link:

▶ L.H. Oswald Leaving TSBD November 22 1963? - YouTube

Hello Richard

I have watched the film three or four times now and I must admit, it is a bit difficult to make out details in this film. Is that Prayer Man or Lovelady that seems to dominate the top of the steps in this film?

I believe there is an aspect ratio issue with the Darnell frames we have been looking at, with width being flattered somewhat.

This may be making Prayer Man look a little bulkier than he really is.

Look for instance at how brawny the man in the white cowboy suit (back to camera) looks in Darnell (look at those big arms!):

Now look at the same man in Wiegman--he looks so much more slight:

Aspect ratio really does matter in these things. It was for instance the reason some people thought the rather gorilla-esque 'Lovelady' in the Martin film couldn't possibly be the real Lovelady.

Here is what happens to Prayer Man with a 10% reduction in the width of the Darnell frame (without corresponding reduction in height):

**

Would anyone here--Robin? Martin?--have the know-how to look at this aspect ratio issue in a more systematic fashion?

Hello Sean

If that is a bottle of Coke that Payer Man is holding, it still bothers me that, in both pictures, he appRears to be holding it with both hands. Does this seem normal?

As I stated earlier in this thread, the posture reminds me of the stance my late father used to assume after he bought his first 8 mm home movie camera in the early 60's and he was out in public looking for something to film. We used to say he looked like a vulture waiting for something to die.

Robert,

My late father bought his Kodak 8mm camera in 1959 and that is a pose I often saw him in. That makes me think that "prayer man" was soeone with a movie camera, trying to film the motorcade.

Hello Ken

Let me guess, I'll bet your dad drove everyone crazy with his camera, too, right? LOL I remember when my dad decided to record my cousin Betty's wedding on film in 1964. He bought this light bar for his 8 mm camera with these four monstrous floodlight bulbs on it. My god, it was like looking into the flash from an above ground nuclear test! I sure miss the old guy sometimes.

I believe there is an aspect ratio issue with the Darnell frames we have been looking at, with width being flattered somewhat.

This may be making Prayer Man look a little bulkier than he really is.

Look for instance at how brawny the man in the white cowboy suit (back to camera) looks in Darnell (look at those big arms!):

Now look at the same man in Wiegman--he looks so much more slight:

Aspect ratio really does matter in these things. It was for instance the reason some people thought the rather gorilla-esque 'Lovelady' in the Martin film couldn't possibly be the real Lovelady.

Here is what happens to Prayer Man with a 10% reduction in the width of the Darnell frame (without corresponding reduction in height):

**

Would anyone here--Robin? Martin?--have the know-how to look at this aspect ratio issue in a more systematic fashion?

Hello Sean

If that is a bottle of Coke that Payer Man is holding, it still bothers me that, in both pictures, he appears to be holding it with both hands. Does this seem normal?

As I stated earlier in this thread, the posture reminds me of the stance my late father used to assume after he bought his first 8 mm home movie camera in the early 60's and he was out in public looking for something to film. We used to say he looked like a vulture waiting for something to die.

Robert, The YouTube film clip that William Kelly linked to shows Prayer Man in the first segment.

Prayer Man lowers his right hand down to his side. There also appears to be upward movement with his left hand moving closer to his face.

If you have time to take a look at it, I would be interested in your take.

Hello Richard

Are you referring to the link Mr. Kelly posted in the first post of this thread?

Hello Sean

If that is a bottle of Coke that Payer Man is holding, it still bothers me that, in both pictures, he appears to be holding it with both hands. Does this seem normal?

As I stated earlier in this thread, the posture reminds me of the stance my late father used to assume after he bought his first 8 mm home movie camera in the early 60's and he was out in public looking for something to film. We used to say he looked like a vulture waiting for something to die.

Robert, holding a coke with both hands is a little unusual but by no means unheard of...

If Prayer Man is taking periodic sips, his hands' default position will be a bit higher than in the photo above.

I actually came across a classic old-school small coke bottle yesterday and tried holding it in the posture of Prayer Man. The stance was surprisingly natural and comfortable.

There is of course also the possibility that something other than a coke is in Prayer Man's two hands.

Our old friend Captain Fritz might be able to offer us one interesting pointer:

Mr. BALL. Did you ask him what he was doing in the lunchroom? [/size]

Mr. FRITZ. He said he was having his lunch. He had a [/size]cheese sandwich[/size] and a Coca-Cola.[/size]

A sandwich?

Whether Coke, sandwich or neither--

Is it just me, or do Prayer Man's hands begin to lower ever so slightly just as the gif is reaching the end?

Now that you mention it...hmmm....

I believe there is an aspect ratio issue with the Darnell frames we have been looking at, with width being flattered somewhat.

This may be making Prayer Man look a little bulkier than he really is.

Look for instance at how brawny the man in the white cowboy suit (back to camera) looks in Darnell (look at those big arms!):

Now look at the same man in Wiegman--he looks so much more slight:

Aspect ratio really does matter in these things. It was for instance the reason some people thought the rather gorilla-esque 'Lovelady' in the Martin film couldn't possibly be the real Lovelady.

Here is what happens to Prayer Man with a 10% reduction in the width of the Darnell frame (without corresponding reduction in height):

**

Would anyone here--Robin? Martin?--have the know-how to look at this aspect ratio issue in a more systematic fashion?

Hello Sean

If that is a bottle of Coke that Payer Man is holding, it still bothers me that, in both pictures, he appears to be holding it with both hands. Does this seem normal?

As I stated earlier in this thread, the posture reminds me of the stance my late father used to assume after he bought his first 8 mm home movie camera in the early 60's and he was out in public looking for something to film. We used to say he looked like a vulture waiting for something to die.

On 23 September 1964 Roy Truly and Marrion Baker were asked to go back on the record to clarify an important point: was Oswald on his own in the second-floor lunchroom when they saw him just after the assassination? There had been press reports--based in large part upon statements made by Jesse Curry on 11/23/63--that Oswald was with others in the room when the officer came in.

Baker dictated a statement to FBI Special Agent Richard J. Burnett. It has become notorious because of a certain deletion evident in Burnett's handwritten sheet:

Why did Baker originally say "drinking a coke", only to have it crossed out and the deletion initialled ("M.L.B.")?

Is not this little slip compelling evidence that--contrary to what Baker and Truly testified to the WC--Oswald had already bought the coke by the time of the incident? And does this not bear out Oswald's claim in custody (as reported by Fritz and Bookhout) on this head? And does it not deprive him of even more time to get down from the sixth floor?

Not so fast. I agree that Baker's little slip is very telling indeed, devastating even, but what it is telling is not what people have generally suspected.

To understand the significance of "drinking a coke" we need to note two other little slips in its immediate vicinity. Though they have achieved far less attention, they are in my view of no less importance.

**

The first relates to the floor on which the lunchroom was located:

Second or third floor: this uncertain either-or formula echoes in an uncanny way Baker's original 11/22/63 affidavit, where he talks of having seen a man walking away from the rear stairway on "the third or fourth floor".

At least on 11/22 Baker might be said to have some excuse in that he was unfamiliar with the building.

But this is different. Here we have Baker, on the far side of having taken part in multiple WC reconstructions of his movements inside the building, and on the far side of having testified in excruciating detail on the lunchroom incident to the WC, still showing uncertainty as to which bloody floor the incident happened on.

**

The second interesting item is Baker's description of the circumstances of his first sighting of Oswald:

I saw a man standing in the lunch room: even if we factor out the fact that this phrase originally closes with the words drinking a coke, it is still very troubling.

It need hardly be pointed out that it does not chime with Baker's 11/22 affidavit words (which again use the very same phrase construction): I saw a man walking away from the stairway.

That's just the half of it however. This phrase doesn't even chime with the story that Baker had told to the WC, the story of a man spotted while walking towards and then into the lunchroom.

**

What, we must yet again ask ourselves, is going on here?

To get a handle on Baker's very weird Sep 64 statement, we need to bear in mind an important point made by Paul Rigby yesterday:

"The cover-up is, after all, a process, not an event, with many errors, early inadequacies, and/or improvisation, many of them subsequently abandoned."

I submit that the second-floor lunchroom incident is not just a fiction, it is a fiction contrived in haste and panic on the evening of the assassination. The authorities knew that Oswald had an alibi and they knew that something, anything, had to be done fast to liquidate it. It didn't much matter what that something was, as long as it got Oswald away from the damned front entrance at the time of the President's passing (no pun intended). The details could be worried about later

**

So what did they do?

In order to maintain maximum consonance between the true story already circulating and already being told by Oswald in custody, and in order to make things as easy as possible on Baker and Truly, they chose the simplest operation possible:

The Wholesale Switcheroo.

Fact: Oswald was standing drinking a coca-cola when the armed officer burst into the front entrance

became...

Fiction: Oswald was standing drinking a coca-cola when the armed officer burst into the second-floor lunchroom.

The details could be refined later.

**

Marrion Baker's fellow motorcycle officer Stavis Ellis told Larry Sneed that Baker was known to be not "real bright". In fact, he was thought to be "slow" and was nicknamed "Momma Son". Harold Weisberg, years earlier, remarked that Baker was thought by his colleagues to be a "dope".

Put the case that this verdict, however unkind, had at least a grain of truth in it.

And put the case that Baker, at some point after the assassination, was fed the first draft of the lunchroom story as follows:

You saw a man standing in the second-floor lunchroom drinking a coke. Got that? A man. Standing in the lunchroom. Second floor. Drinking a coke.

Going in to give his Sep 64 statement, Baker has not been heavily prepped in the way that he most assuredly was going into his WC session. The 'finished' script is no longer fresh in his memory.

What happens? He gets successive drafts of the Oswald Encounter Story almost comically confused with one another. He talks like a man who is not drawing on primary memory to describe an actually experienced incident. That's because he is describing an event that never happened.

• When he writes (and crosses out) "drinking a coke", he is not betraying a real, empirical memory of having seen Oswald drinking a coke in the lunchroom, he is betraying a real memory of having at some point been told to say that he had seen Oswald drinking a coke in the lunchroom.
• When he writes of having seen the man "standing in the lunch room", he is not betraying a real, empirical memory of having seen Oswald standing in the lunchroom, he is betraying a real memory of having at some point been told to say that he had seen Oswald standing in the lunchroom.
• And when he writes (and crosses out part of) "second or third floor", he is not betraying uncertainty as to where the incident had really. empirically taken place, he is...

Well, we must hold that thought because it brings us to Baker's all-important 11/22/63 affidavit story.

Excellent and well thought analysis. Do tell us more.

[...]

[...]

Here is a direct link to a thread containing static images and moving Gifs ot the man and the area in question.

It's a long thread with many interesting diversions and fantastic graphical analysis by some of the most talented and dedicated photo analysis people in the JFK community.

Here is one example of the standard of stabilized Gif construction which is a major feature at my forum.

This one shows clearly the man in question, and Baker running towards the entrance.

Credit Gerda Dunckel

Enjoy the thread - Link Below

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,6724.0.html

Has anyone noticed the person who slowly stands up or goes up one step, backwards, in front of Prayer Man?

Also, notice the suit-wearing man at the base of the steps on the left who waves Baker up the steps with his left hand and pivots out of the way. Could that be Roy Truly?

--Tommy

PS: Unrelated comment. It seems that the main purpose of this thread is to try to prove that "Prayer Man" was Oswald and, therefore, that Oswald couldn't possibly have been a shooter.

Rhetorical question: If we can do that, would it prove that Oswald wasn't wittingly involved in the conspiracy? (No, I'm not saying that he was.)

augmented and bumped

Hello Thomas

That is a good question. It certainly would prove, beyond all doubt, that Oswald was not the shooter if he could be positively identified as "Prayer Man".

However, that being said, I believe there is enough proof from persons such as Geneva Hine, Carolyn Arnold (the WC was wise not to call on her to testify) and, yes, even Officer Baker, in the duplicity (multiplicity?) of his various notes and statements, that put Oswald on the lower floors of the TSBD at the time of the shooting.

If Baker and Truly were faster or slower, there is a good chance they would not have encountered the man on the 3rd or 4th floor, either.

Was there an encounter with a man by the rear stairway on the 3rd or 4th floor?

That's the next question we need to explore.

Hello Sean

I've looked just about everywhere I can think of for that photo of the 5th floor stair entrance in the TSBD with the large "5" painted on the wall, to no avail. It would seem to make sense that the other floors would also have their own number somewhere on the wall to let people know which floor they were on.

As I said before, Baker only went up one flight of stairs before encountering Oswald. How could he possibly believe he was on the 3rd or 4th floor?

If Oswald was on the 1st floor at the time of the assassination AND on the 2nd floor when Officer Baker stopped him with a Coke in his hand AND Oswald obtained change for the Coke machine on a daily basis from Miss Hine (or Mrs. Reid? no one seems to clarify exactly who he got change from),

BK: HE GOT THE CHANGE FROM MRS. HINE, WHOSE DESK WAS CLOSEST TO THE DOOR.

this leaves us with a couple of questions to contemplate.

1. Where did he get change from on that day to buy a Coke, if he regularly received change from Mrs. Reid? (SIC MRS. HINE)

bk: ACCORDING TO SOME REPORTS OUT OF DALLAS ROBERT GRODEN TALKED TO MRS HINE AND SHE CONFIRMED TO HIM THAT SHE GAVE OSWALD CHANGE AROUND THE TIME THE SHOTS RANG OUT - SO HE COULDN'T HAVE SHOT THEM, A FACT THAT MAY BE IN THE NEXT EDITION OF GRODEN'S BOOK DUE OUT SOON. STAY TUNED.

2. If he had to stop to get change from Miss Hine, before purchasing his Coke, would that not make him late for his appointment with Officer Baker, considering the split second timing we are dealing with here? Remember, the WC themselves only gave Oswald 90 seconds from the time of the last shot to be on the 2nd floor and seen by Baker.

BK; OSWALD DIDN'T HAVE AN APPOINTMENT WITH BAKER - IT WAS A COINCIDENTAL RENDEZVOUS - IF OSWALD OR BAKER WERE SECONDS SLOWER OR FASTER, BAKER WOULD HAVE MISSED OSWALD WALKING PAST THE WINDOW OF THE SECOND FLOOR LUNCHROOM DOOR - AND WOULD HAVE CONTINUED UP THE STEPS BEHIND TRULY AND LIFE WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT FOR EVERYBODY.

BK: I DON''T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION RE: SIGNS DESIGNATION EACH FLOOR. BUT I HAVE ADDED ANOTHER BLOG POST ON THE SUBJECT OF MRS. HINE AND THE PUBLISHERS:

JFKCountercoup2: Geneva Hine and TSBD Book Publishers

Hello Bill

Yes, if Mrs. (Miss?) Hine gave change to Oswald that day, it would certainly change everything. I seriously doubt that Prayer Man could be Oswald if this were true, as I cannot see Oswald having enough time to not only go up to the 2nd floor and purchase a Coke, but to obtain change from Ms. Hine before doing so. This is supported by the fact that Prayer Man is still at the entrance to the TSBD as Baker is running up the stairs. Even if Oswald took the front stairs up to the 2nd floor and Baker and Truly took the far stairs, the distance to their meeting point would be almost identical. The only edge Oswald might have is that Truly and Baker stopped long enough to establish the elevators were not working and, with the elevators directly beside the stairwell, this would not have slowed them down much.

If Baker and Truly were faster or slower, there is a good chance they would not have encountered the man on the 3rd or 4th floor, either.

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

Hello Pat

I recall seeing a photo of the 5th floor landing, between lower and upper staircases, in the TSBD. In that photo, a large "5" was painted on the wall where anyone going up or down the stairs could not miss it.

Are you familiar with that photo, and is it possible each of the floors was so marked?

Didn't Mr. Simkin make it quite clear that this is not the kind of forum he wants to see?

If Oswald was on the 1st floor at the time of the assassination AND on the 2nd floor when Officer Baker stopped him with a Coke in his hand AND Oswald obtained change for the Coke machine on a daily basis from Miss Hine (or Mrs. Reid? no one seems to clarify exactly who he got change from), this leaves us with a couple of questions to contemplate.

1. Where did he get change from on that day to buy a Coke, if he regularly received change from Mrs. Reid?

2. If he had to stop to get change from Miss Hine, before purchasing his Coke, would that not make him late for his appointment with Officer Baker, considering the split second timing we are dealing with here? Remember, the WC themselves only gave Oswald 90 seconds from the time of the last shot to be on the 2nd floor and seen by Baker.