Andrej Stancak

... and it is also the man photographed in Dallas police station and on steps in Martin film. Lovelady was not shaved well on that day in contrast to his appearance in the FBI photograph.

Sandy: it is irrelevant what shirt Lovelady showed to Robert Groden, he may have shown him a wrong shirt just like that. There is no way to demonstrate that the shirt wearing by Lovelady in Martin's film and in Altgens6 differed. Hence, you do not have a case which is what I wanted to hint to in my post. Carl Jones wore a long-sleeved shirt of uniform beige colour, as seen in Willis photograph. If you were right and Altgens6 shows his arm instead of Lovelady, we would beed to see a transition between a uniform, light-coloured shape and Lovelady's shoulder or arm. But there is no such transition to be seen in Altgens6. Hence, you do not have a case. As per Lovelady's forward head posture, this is evident in Martin's film. The comparatively forward head location in Lovelady's figure explains the V-shaped shadow on Lovelady's neck and upper chest. Had he a normal head posture, there would not be any V-shaped shadow on Lovelady. In my video, I systematically varied the position of Lovelady's head to be able to reproduce the V-shaped shadow as accurately as possible. Bending the trunk in waist to achieve the exact positioning of Lovelady's head in Altgens6 was not possible, only moving of his head forward relative to his chest did reproduce the V-shaped shadow. The top left image shows the uniform and light colour of Carl Jones's shirt contrasting the patterns and dark tone of Lovelady's shirt.

Sandy: it is not possible to determine from any of Altgens6 copies if Lovelady's shirt had a pocket or not owing to the distance between Altgens's camera and Lovelady, the limited resolution of digitised copies, and incomplete view of Lovelady's shirt. A checkered pattern of comparatively lighter and darker rectangles cannot be resolved fully in Altgens6 owing to the insufficient resolution causing a phenomenon of aliasing - basically the apperance of blurred, irregular texture of darker and lighter spots due to inadeguate sampling of a regular plaid pattern. There is no enigma here. It is irrelevant what shirt did Lovelady bring for his FBI photographic session, or what shirt did he show to Robert Groden. It may all be a ruse; it was so convenient to the official version to constantly ruminate Lovelady in the doorway as a man resembling Lee Oswald. This certainly helped to distract attention from that other man standing in the shadow of the western wall of the doorway, you know who I am talking about. You are an astute and well versed researcher in JFKA case, and this thread does not contribute to such profile of yours.

Sandy: the explanation lies in degradation of the plaid pattern in a photograph which cannot offer enough resolution for details such as this. A rectangular shape of palid turns to an irregular shape and since there were dark- and light-coloured strips in Lovelady's shirt, the shirt appears to be a mesh of dark and light spots.

I have addressed the details of Lovelady's figure in my video analysis. This includes Lovelady's forward head posture, shape of his head/face, positions of his arms and a few other details. All those apparently strange phenomena surrounding Lovelady in Altgens6 have natural explanations. https://youtu.be/C0Hwt-cIGq4?t=376 The relevant section starts at 6:15.

Sandy: Lovelady's arm stuck in the neck or shoulder of Carl Jones was an issue that prompted many in the past to assume a photographic forgery. In my analysis, this apparently strange phenomenon can be explained by the strong foreshortening effect of Altgens's Nikor telephoto lens - it caused Lovelady's arm and Jones's upper body to appear on the same plane while in reality Lovelady was about a yard backward. It so happened that Lovelady's left hand was located about in front of his crotch, and in the bottom-up axis of view of Altgens's camera and the foreshortening effect of the lens, Lovelady's left hand appear to be stuck in Jones's neck. Carl Jones's clothes were of continuous beige colour, unlike Lovelady's plaid shirt. Altgens6 shows a continous shirt pattern over Lovelady's arm from the shoulder up to Jones's neck or shoulder. Had Jones raised his arm, there would be a clear point of transition between the patterns of Lovelady's arm and Jones's arm.

Greg: Ad 1): the man on a lower step in the western part of the doorway could be Billy Lovelady. Lovelady is seen stepping down in last frames of Wiegman, so he clearly had abandoned his spot on the 2nd step he occupied in Altgens6. Yet, he still was in the doorway territory in Darnell and the scene there appears to depict the moment when Gloria Calvery (the woman wearing a dark scarf and facing the steps) reached the steps and told the doorway occupants about the shooting. Both Lovelady and Shelley reported to have heard Gloria Calvery talking. Ad 2): Sarah Stanton was in the space between Lovelady and Shelley in Altgens6. Pauline Sanders's figure cannot be seen in Altgens6 because she stood behind Shelley and was a tiny person. As far as Sarah Stanton's figure is concerned, her hair and nose fused with the contour of Lovelady's left face and especially the left chin. Lovelady's left chin appears broken in Altgens6; this visual effect is due to the foreshortening effect of the telephoto lens Altgens used to shoot this memorable picture. As a result of the foreshortening effect of the lens, the partial Stanton's face and Lovelady's face appear merged. Some people still believe that the damaged-like appearance of Lovelady's chin is a proof of photographic forgery made in Altgens6. It is a rare circumstance that almost nothing can be seen from the huge Stanton's figure in Altgens6. However, my model clearly shows that the small residuals of her figure appear at predicted spots in Altgens6, such as a bit of Stanton's right shoulder or curles of her thick hair and her nose. It is not possible to correctly attribute bits of a photograph to individuals we know have stood in the doorway unless a hypothesis-driven model is employed, allowing to test different solutions. Also, witness testimonies need to be taken into account to navigate the solutions. Ad 3): I am not sure who the LFF is in your text. However, the centre of the doorway in Darnell shows a complicated blob which contains figures of three people: Sarah Stanton in the back (just in front of glass door), a person wearing dark suit (Shelley), and a man in white shirt (Ottis Williams). It may help to view this part of the doorway by adding the depth information in the bottom of this post. The other man in white shirt in the east part of the doorway in Darnell is the same man who is seen at about this spot in Altgens6. This person could be Joe Molina. In absence of a detailed photograph of him taken on that day it is difficult to identify him based on independent visual evidence. My identification rests on the method of elimination - Molina is the only man who we know stood on upper steps and that man in white shirt is the only man who could not be assigned to any other man (Lovelady, Frazier, Shelley). While I expressed my intention not to rehash the content, I admit I should have written an account on my findings which I will do in due course so that it can be easily checked and quoted. Thus, please find a couple of images with short comments to support my claims. The image below supports the possibility that the white blob in Darnell could be Stanton's white (blonde) hair. The yellow dashed line shows the level of the top of her hair and how it intersects with Frazier's figure. Frazier's body height is known (6' - 6' 1/2''), and the anatomical relations of human head allow to estimate the height of the yellow dashed line. Below is the truncated image of Sarah Stanton standing next to her son Larry. Larry was of similar body height as Frazier - 6' or 6'1''. Thus, it is possible to predict from Stanton's family photograph where should the top of Stanton'slight-coloured hair be in Darnell relative to Frazier's head. Please note also, that the white blob in Darnell has a dark bottom - it "sits" on dark hair of a shorter person standing in front of her - Bill shelley. Shelley's dark tie appears as a dark triangle on white shirt. Here is a depth separation of Stanton, Shelley and Williams figures in Darnell. It would be nice to see more details than Darnell offers, however, this is what we have at the moment. Finally, I made an estimate of Stanton' location based on testimonies of doorway occupants. Each person's location is indicated by footprints and the circle surrounding each person's location would be his/her personal space in which people they reported should be found. The only apriori assumption was that their personal space (circle) would encompass the top platform- up to the glass door. The most probable location where Stanton could stand if all witnesses told the truth of who was around them was the dark-shaded area on top landing close to the glass door. In Altgens6, Stanton was in the front of this area, In Darnell and Wiegman she slipped back to the glass door. SS = Sarah Stanton, BL = Billy Lovelady, BWF = Buell Wesley Frazier, OW = Otis Williams (no circle around him), BS = Bill Shelley, PS = Pauline Sanders, JM = Joe Molina (no circle around him), PM = Prayer Man (no circle around that person) I hope this helps.

Greg: I am afraid you have it wrong on a few of essential figures in the doorway. Also, some assumtions you apply are false. I have explained my reasons for identification of different figures extensively over past few years, and see no reasons to rehash the content. Please check my video: https://youtu.be/C0Hwt-cIGq4 and my previous posts. Pauline Sanders was where she told the FBI she was: in the east part of the doorway, close to the glass window. She cannot be seen in Altgens6 because her figure is masked by the figure of a man wearing dark suit and tie. Sanders can be seen in one frame of Darnell (shown in my video). I have made the height estimate using 3D modelling, and she indeed was tiny - 4'11''. This height estimate was verified by an independent method using a group photograph, discovered by Linda Zambanini. In that group photograph, Sanders's tip of the nose is about 2 inches below the avererage height of the level of tips of noses of all ladies. As the average body height of ladies of Sanders's age in was 5'2'' in 1963, her body estimate comes to about 5', close to my estimate of 4'11'. Sanders wore a specific dark hat both in the group photograph and in Darnell frame which also helps in her identification. Sarah Stanton's location was on the top landing, and to the left of Wesley Frazier. He confirmed her location at least twice in interviews, also linked in my video. She was a huge lady, and she needed a large platform to stand on, not only an area of one step. She was tall (but she did not wear any 3-inch heels - verified by me in an email exchange with a family member) and had dense, light coloured hair. Unfortunately, as she stood at the back of the top landing and behind some other people, an area covered by shadow, none of the photographs shows enough of her figure. However, it is possible to infer on her presence from a light-coloured spot at the height of 5'7'' above the level of the top landing. Such a light-coloured blob can be seen both in Darnell and Wiegman, and some patches of her hair can also be seen in one version of Algens6 which shows enough details (shown in my video). As per Bill Shelley, you are wrong assuming he could be seen in Couch in front of the Depository within 30 seconds of the last shot. He clearly told in his testimony for the Warren Commission that he first, within the first minute or so, did not do anything (meaning he stayed where he was). As he continued standing on his spot, he was able to hear Gloria Calvary telling everyone in the doorway about the shooting (WC testimony). There is photgraphic evidence of Bill Shelley wearing a dark tie and suit on that day. As only one figure in dark suit and wearing a tie can be seen in the doorway, that should be him. Else, there should be two men with ties in the doorway (the proven Shelley's tie and the speculative Molina's tie), but only one man with a tie stands there. It took me a while to figure out that Sanders's hair can be seen behind Bill Shelley (the man in dark suit in the centre of the doorway), until Sander's photograph and reports of her body height were made public. With her thick blonde hair, Sanders (5'6'' - 5'7''), was taller than Bill Shelley (5'6'') and therefore, the white blob above the dark strip of Shelley's hair can be seen both in Darnell and Shelley. I hope this helps.

PS: The very films you claim show Oswald on the front steps show Shelley and Lovelady race towards the train yards. AS: I do not assert that any of the JFKA films shows Oswald on the front steps during the shooting. My work is about testing every possible physical aspect of Prayer Man' figure and checking if any of his features would disprove the possibility of Oswald being Prayer Man. So far, every Prayer Man's feature tested complies with Lee Oswald's figure and appearance. I have challenged everyone to point to just one Prayer Man's feature that would exclude Oswald as a candidate; so far, no one came up with any such feature. The two men seen in Couch film (that has been spliced with Darnell film) have been discussed thoroughly on this Forum. I have analysed their figures and came to a conclusion that the two men were not Shelley and Lovelady because the one wearing a coat was taller than the man wearing a plead shirt; however, in reality Lovelady was taller than Shelley. Further, it appears in the last frames of Couch film showing the two men that the two men actually went different directions; they did not continue walking together. Couch film does show Carl Jones walking toward the curb in front of the building though. Carl Jones was the tall Afro-American man standing on the lower steps in the west part of the doorway. Thus, he would be the first from among the doorway occupants to be seen in front of the doorway. The people on the top landing would logically appear after Carl Jones. To repeat, Darnell shows the man wearing a dark suit and dark tie in the center of the top landing and this is the same man seen in Altgens6 and Wiegman. This location was Shelley's location according to his and other witnesses testimonies. PS: 2. Shelley said he saw her but couldn't remember when...and this would have been the only time that made sense. AS: To continue with what Shelley said about meeting Vicky Adams in his WC testimony: Ball: Did you ever see Vickie Adams? Shelley: I saw her that day but I don’t remember where I saw her. //AS: this does not support meeting her at the back of the first floor Ball: You don’t remember whether you saw her when you came back? Shelley: It was after we entered the building. Ball: You think you did see her after you entered the building? Shelley: Yes sir; I thought it was on the fourth floor awhile after that. //AS: So, not even on the first floor, rather on the 4th floor... Shelley's report does not suggest he met Vicky Adams on the first floor in less than a minute after the last shot. PS: 3. Lovelady said he saw a girl when he came in but he couldn't say for sure if it was Vickie, and Adams and Styles were the only girls to be at the back of the building at the time. AS: Lovelady was clearly led by Ball to say he met Vicky Adams after he and Shelley returned to the building. It was a common practice with the WC that the commissioner went through all questions with the interviewee before the interview proper; when he was satisfied with the answers, commissionaer would ask a witness to repeat his/her answers without adding anything. This explains the illogical mentioning of Vicky Adams by Lovelady in his WC testimony: Lovelady: I saw a girl but I wouldn’t swear to it it’s Vickie. //AS: Lovelady already knew Ball was interested in Vicky Adams only. Ball: Who is Vickie? Lovelady: The girl that works for Scott, Foresman. Ball: What is her full name? Lovelady: I wouldn’t know. Ball: Vickie Adams? Lovelady: I believe so. Ball: Would you say it was Vickie you saw? Lovelady: I couldn’t swear. //AS: This was a polite way to say he did not identifiy her as a person he talked to. Ball: Where was the girl? Lovelady: I don’t remember what place she was but I remember seeing a girl and she was talking to Bill or saw Bill or something, then I went over and asked one of the guys what time it was and to see if we should continue working or what. //AS: Apparently, Lovelady saw a girl as she was having a conversation with Shelley. But Lovelady and Shelley came in together, and Shelley cold not have time to initiate a conversation with someone else. Lovelady would have to unsee Shelley first for a while and then rediscover him in a new scene. Ball: Did you see any other people on the first floor? Lovelady: Oh, yes; by that time there were more; a few of the guys had come in. //AS: Not naming anyone. Thus, the only person Ball was interested in was Vicky Adams. PS: Baker said he saw two white men at the back of the building when he came in, and Shelley and Lovelady are the only two that make sense. AS: The only solution which makes sense is that Baker's testimony contains an honest or dishonest error. He said he had seen two white man; however, there was only one man, Eddie Piper, on the first floor during the time of shooting. Vicky Adams correctly reported in Barry Ernest's book seeing a black man when she reached the first floor. PS: '5. Shelley said Truly asked him to guard the elevator. As Truly went upstairs within two minutes of the shots, and didn't come down till 7 or 8 minutes later, when cops were pouring in the building, this only makes sense if Shelley and Lovelady were the two men at the back of the building. AS: Truly was back from the 7th floor within about 7 minutes after the last shot. There were a large number of people on the first floor, police officers and newsmen, and this was the time when Truly asked Shelley to operate the elevator. PS: 6. Sawyer said he came In at 4 minutes or so after the shooting, and was escorted up to the fourth floor by an employee waiting near the front elevator. AS: It could well be Bill Shelley if it was 4 minutes after the last shot. PS: 7. Shelley said he escorted a cop up to the fourth floor shortly after the shots. It is clear this cop was Sawyer. AS: Why not? Shelley was back in the building about 3-4 minutes after the last shot and could have assisted Sawyer. PS: Now, it is quite telling, IMO, that Ball/Belin never created a timeline of the movements of the employees. If they had it would have been clear Shelley and Lovelady were on the first floor within a minute or so of the shots, and saw Adams come down...BEFORE Baker and Truly reached the back of the building. AS: Had they created a timeline of movements of all relevant people, it would turn out Oswald could not get from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor without beeing seen or heard by Vicky Adams, Sandra Styles, Mrs Garner, and couple of other people. This is the reason they never created a timeline. Had they created a timeline, Shelley's and Lovelady's trajectories would be completely irrelevant because their trajectories would be outside the critical time window of about 90 seconds after the last shot. PS: 8. This fact was supported, moreover, by Lovelady, who told the HSCA he saw Baker and Truly run up the stairs. Well, huh, in the WC scenario he was outside at the time. AS: Lovelady saw Baker and Truly running up the steps (the doorway), not stairs (the stairwell in the back of the building). The HSCA's "stairs" appears to be an error. However, I would need to see a full transcript of Lovelady's HSCA testimony to be able to comment more. ---------------------------------------------- Vicky Adam's testimony for the WC has been manipulated to disprove her timeline which was critical for the concocted theory of Oswald being a 6th floor assassin who descended to the 2nd floor with 90 seconds of the last shot. The whole WC report was drafted with one aim: to pin all blame on one single person who was conveniently killed in the process. Changing Vicky Adams' testimony was a necessary step in this, and any traces that would reveal manipulation were destroyed. It was only thanks to the breakthrough research of Barry Ernest we got the true message about Vicky Adams. Not only the message, but also the insight into inner workings of WC. Briefly, Adams correctly told the WC she had seen a black man on the first floor, and this version was in the draft she authorised. None of the changes made by Vicky Adams in the draft she authorised were reflected in the official, printed account of her testimony. The sentences about Shelley and Lovelady were inserted into her testimony, and the inserted notes were then used to disprove her timeline in the final report. It is sad that a pro-conspiracy researcher like yourself cannot see through this.

Pat: let us compare the times required by Vicky Adams and Shelley&Lovelady to get to the back of the first floor. Vicky Adams: she left her location at the window on the fourth floor immediately after the last shot. It took her about 10-15 seconds to get to the stairway, and about 7 seconds to descend to the next foor, and there were 3 floors to make. Thus, she would be out of the stairs in the first floor not later than 45 seconds. Shelley: he did not do anything for about 1 minute after the last shot (his WC testimony) which means he stood at the spot he occupied during the shooting and that spot was on the top landing in front of the glass door. Therefore, he can can be seen at that spot in Darnell which captures the moments about 30 seconds after the last shot. While standing there, he heard Gloria Calvery shouting that the President had been shot (confirmed by Shelley and Lovelady) which event could only happen after tens of seconds because Gloria Calvery had to run from her location on South Elm to the Depository building. Sandy Larsen has pointed out that the lady wearing dark scarf and approaching the doorway in Darnell was actually Gloria Calvery. Thus, we have about one minute of time when Shelley did not do anything. He and Lovelady then walked briskly toward the railroad yard but they were stopped by Police. They spent about a minute to contemplate what to do next, and eventually they entered the Depository building via a side door. They then walk toward the back of the first floor which would take them another 10-15 seconds. Shelley's route toward the back of the first floor would take at least 3 minutes. Vicky Adams reached the back of the in less than a minute. While Shelley and Lovelady were listening to Gloria Calvery's report of what happened, Vicky Adams was already somewhere on second floor soon to reach the first floor. There is just no possibility that Vicky Adams could see Shelley and Lovelady when she reached the first floor. The whole Lovelady&Shelley story about how they saw Vicky Adams was concocted by the Warren Commission to allow Lee Oswald to descend from the sixth floor to the second floor without encountering Vicky Adams or being heard/seen by Vicky Adams. That was the whole problem. For that reason, her testimony for the Warren Commission has been manipulated. All details about Vicky Adams's case have been researched excellently by Barry Ernest.

David: the logic and common sense work pretty well in this case. If Molina were the man with black tie, e.g., in Altgens6, where is Shelley who indeed wore a dark tie on that day? There should then be two men on top steps wearing ties, but this was not the case. Altgens6 does not allow any judgment on whether the person wearing a dark tie was slim or heavy. We only see a part of that person's trunk.

David: only one man in the doorway was wearing a dark coat and dark tie. The photograph of Bill Shelley taken on that day show him wearing a dark coat and a tie. Thus, the man in the centre of the doorway had to be Bill Shelley. The top left panel in the composite below shows Bill Shelley (red ellipse). Unfortunately, there is no photograph of Joe Molina taken on Friday, November 22, and the doorway photograps (Wiegman, Altgens, Darnell) show the person I assume is him shielding his eyes with his forearm making his hair not visible. I have indentified Joe Molina as the person standing in the east part of the doorway, on one of the top steps, wearing white shirt, and shielding his eyes by the process of elimination. Returning to Bill Shelley, he had distinct dark and quite voluminous hair. His hair forms a horizontal dark strip on top of a white oval (his face). This dark horizonta strip can be seen in that figure in the centre of the doorway in Darnell and Wiegman. If that figure belonged to Molina, there would not be any distinct dark strip on top of a white oval shape, rather only one oval owing to Joe Molina showing clear balding. The composite below shows the likely locations of the doorway occupants. None of the testimonies mentioned Molina as standing nearby the cluster of people including Shelley, Sanders, Stanton, Lovelady and Frazier. Taken together, the most likely candidate for the person wearing a dark tie and standing in the centre of the doorway was Bill Shelley. There is no straightforward way to identify Joe Molina other than the process of elimination. However, making my case for Bill Shelley being the man in the centre of the doorway, both men - the central man and the man shielding his eyes (who I believe was Molina) stood in the doorway in Darnell film. As Darnell film shows the doorway at about 30 seconds after the last shot and Shelley himself told the Warren Commission to have remained standing at his spot (did not do anything for a minute), there was no way Vicky Adams could encounter Bill Shelley in the back of the first floow as she got to that place about 30-45 seconds after the last shot.

As per my earlier post, Shelley himself testified in his WC testimony to remaining standing where he was (the top landing of the doorway) for about a minute after the last shot, to hearing Gloria Calvery while standing in the doorway, and only then going to the curb infront of the building where he again spent about a minute. We need to add about 30-60 seconds for his and Lovelady's walk back to the building. The total time of their excursion exceeds the time spent by Vicky Adams to descend from the 4th floor by a large margin. Thus, there is no chance that Vicky Adams could encounter Lovelady and Shelley right after she descended from the fourth floor.

David: There was another timing detail in William Shelley's testimony for the Warren Commission, just above the section you quoted: Mr. SHELLEY. Sounded like a miniature cannon or baby giant firecracker, wasn’t real loud. Mr. BALL. What happened; what did you do then? Mr. SHELLEY. I didn’t do anything for a minute. Mr. BALL. What seemed to be the direction or source of the sound? Mr. SHELLEY. Sounded like it came from the west. Mr. BALL. It sounded like it came from the west? Mr. SHELLEY. Yes. Mr. BALL. Then what happened? Mr. SHELLEY. Gloria Calvary from South-Western Publishing Co. ran back up there crying and said “The President has been shot” and Billy Lovelady and myself took off across the street to that little, old island and we stopped there for a minute. Shelley's testimony is consistent with his presence in Darnell film at the centre of the top landing, the spot he occupied in Altgens6 and Wiegman too: Thus, we have Shelley on the top landing for about a minute, his and Lovelady's walk toward the curb infront of the building, another minute they hung up there before returning to the building. This gives about a three minute period after the shooting during which neither Shelley nor Lovelady could be in the building. Therefore,Vicky Adams could not meet them as she and Sandra Styles walked through the back of the first floor about 30-45 seconds after the shooting.

The version of a still showing Prayer Man at a comparatively good quality without extensive motion blur which plagues other Darrnell film frames is the one posted on jfkassassinationgallery.com: Or this one having a bit higher resolution than the one above (also from jfkassassiantiongallery.com): And there is a cropped version of the same still showing some more details. I am not sure about the provenance of this picture as my archive does not contain any meta-data about this picture. Or this: I usually start my analyses from the still exported directly from Darnell/Couch film: I hope this helps.

The responsibilities are not set by me but by the research community. If I refrained to present source data to the research community (researchers, editorial boards of journals, any member of the public), the journals and my university would be all over me. You seem to come from a different world in which only Authors have the right to analyse primary data and draw their conclusions. I regret to conclude that you are not going to allow free access to high-resolution copies of the datebook pages you seem to have at your disposal which for me is the end of the datebook case. The rest - the access to the whole Lafitte's datebook - is the task for both the law-enforcement institutions and all interested members of the research community, and I understand you are not pursuing this path.

Leslie: you have asked how I recovered the details of the message with "DPD" in in one of your posts addressed to me. I only humbly explained how I did it; it was not my intention to advertise my "services";

Leslie: while it may be an interesting exercise to compare how primary data have been handled by different researchers, such exercise is not an appropriate response to my and others members' request to submit for analysis a high-resolution copy of the datebook. It is your responsibility as the surviving author and the one who promotes the datebook as a breakthrough in the case to provide the sources on which you base your conclusions. Please post all high-resolution scans (pages) of the datebook you have at your disposal in public domain, for instance on a dedicated web page or a suitable Open Access server. This is the open access policy which has become a standard in modern research. There is no way forward without this step. My analysis of one of the pages that I showed in my yesterday post was based on a Kindle version of the book. I opened the document on a PC and made a screenshot from a large screen. I then applied different enhancement methods, such as resizing, adding light, increasing the contrast and reducing the noise. I cannot know what my procedure did with bits of the original text. In addition to making the high-resolution copies of datebook pages available to the research community, it will be necessary to proceed with authentication of the datebook by a criminal investigation body based on the fact that the diary suggests that the alleged assassin Lee Oswald was unjustly blamed for the murder of the US President. I am not a lawyer and neither am I familiar with the US legal system. However, there must be a legal way to subpoena the datebook and let it be analysed by experts. The authentication process would not be a simple matter, however, it can be done. You may appreciate that I am not asking you to arrange for the authentication of the datebook which may be a costly affair. Analysing the datebook as a whole would also allow to evaluate the importance of individual records by someone else than the Authors team. This is essential for acceptance of any conclusions. May I ask to kindly respond to my points in one post rather in separate posts?

My concern regarding Lafitte's datebook is also that of authenticity of the document. The JFKA case has been badly damaged by false data and made-up stories, hence the reluctance to jump in on Albarelli's account of Lafitte's datebook. However, the JFK assassination is still an open criminal case and it should be possible to ask the law-enforcement institutions (e.g., the FBI) to solicit the datebook from Lafitte's family on evidentiary grounds. As it is related to the JFK assassination, the NARA should eventually get hold of it. Either it is a piece of evidence in a criminal case and it then needs to be taken seriously and consequantially, or it is not a piece of legally relevant evidence. It feels wrong that Lafitte's family and Albarelli could decide which records to show to the public and which not. What if anything in unpublished parts of the datebook would be of greater importance than the published records? What if any of the records would shed new light on Lafitte's role in the assassination case? Also, the unpublished entries could help to verify the integrity of the datebook as such. Finally, I am not convinced that deciphering of the handwritten records from the comparatively poor quality records was accurate enough. Here is an example of one record which I find to be the most relevant from the perspective of my reasoning of who was behind the shooting and fabricating evidence to frame Lee Oswald: Even the enhanced version of this record does not allow unequivocal interpretation of some of the words or syllables, e.g., the one highlighted with arrow. Why the word "buiding" (?) is missing an "l"? Is this misspelling consistent across the datebook? How frequent was it and in which records did it occur? My point is that the datebook needed to be scanned with the highest possible resolution in the first place, and if it has not been done yet, a new scan is required. Referring to my notes above, the datebook would preferably be in possession of the NARA (in the best case) and a high-resolution copy of the datebook needs to be available to the public. Before reading about a widespread conspiracy involving Nazi elements, I would first like to analyse the primary evidence.

Thanks, Sandy, for your encouraging words.

Well, even if some Forum members would like to shovel away the problem of Prayer Man identity, the fact remains that that unknown man resembling Lee Oswald stood there at the western wall, and the question of who that person was is a very legitimate one. The story can be closed once we have a positive identification of that person as being someone else than Lee Oswald. Until then, the identity of Prayer Man is a challenge that needs to be addressed. I understand that quite many people got frustrated and could not find any way to explore the issue further but their pessimistic attitudes do not serve the JFKA community well. Arguments like who from the well-known JFKA researchers had ignored Prayer Man are laughable. Writing a book on e.g., medical evidence does not make a researcher capable to also comment on Prayer Man identity. So, can someone please name one single feature that would disqualify Lee Oswald as Prayer Man? Just one such feature would close the case immediately. For instance, if Prayer Man had blonde hair, we could exclude Lee Oswald right away because Lee's hair as dark. In contrast, we stare at a long list of points that strengthen the possibility of Lee Oswald being Prayer Man. Sorry for repeating the same arguments again and again: 1. Prayer Man was a male, as was Lee Oswald. This feature excludes about 50.5% of general population as Prayer Man candidates. 2. Prayer man was a White Causasian, as was Lee Oswald. This excludes 15% of Dallas population who belonged to one of race minorities in Dallas in 1963. 3. Prayer Man had dark hair, as Lee Oswald had. 4. The shape of Prayer Man's hairline was that of type II male baldness, as was Lee Oswald's hairline. About 25% of males have this type of hairline, age not being a factor here. 5. Prayer Man's body height was between 5'9'' and 5' 10'', matching Lee Oswald's body height. The height data requires some detailed analysis. Being an author of a book on JFKA does not help. You really need to use realistic measures of the doorway and a realistic 3D model of the doorway to be able to determine Prayer Man's body height. I understand that some Forum members opted not to invest time, effort and funds to carry on such modelling project. They chose not to want to know Prayer Man's body height. 6. Prayer Man could only stand at one particular location in the doorway else, if he stood at any different location, the distances from other objects in the doorway, e.g. the door frame, the brick wall seen on the western wall, or figures of other people standing next to Prayer Man, would not match the scene depicted in Darnell still. The problems of body height and Prayer Man's exact location in the doorway are inseparable. If you want to estimate Prayer Man's body height, you need to also say where exactly did he stand. 7. The exact location of Prayer Man at the edge of the top landing dictates that he had to stand with his right foot on the step below the top landing and his left foot on the top landing and slightly forward. There are couple of frames in Darnell film which also show the space occupied by Prayer Man's left leg, and those stills allowed to visualise the bend left leg, after applying 3D brightness coding of the still. Again, I am not sure how writing a treatise on some aspect of assassination can help a researcher to figure out a detail such as this. Of note, Lee Oswald used to stand this exact way, which is documented in several photographs. 6. Prayer Man's clothing (the shirt and the trousers) form one, almost continuous grey area. We know what garment Lee wore on Friday morning: the maroon CE 151 and the slacks CE157. The shade of grey in photographs of these two pieces of clothing matches the grey seen on Prayer Man's figure. Of course, this is not a proof of identity. However, if Lee had on himself his darker shirt CE150 and his trousers CE158 in which he was captured in the Texas Theatre, there would be no match with Prayer Man's grey clothes, and we could exclude him as Prayer Man right here. 8. I leave out my observation of dark spots seen on Prayer Man's shirt and their resemblance with the spots seen on shirt CE 151 as this aspect requires some further analysis. However, if Lee's shirt CE151 would not show any dark spots, we could already eliminate Lee as Prayer Man. The point is that that shirt actually shows some diagonally aranged spots. Just try to guess how many shirts on males watching the motorcade on Dealey Plaza (or in the entire Dallas) showed any dark spots arranged diagonally. It would be a pitifully small number of shirts; dare I say - maybe just this one. 9. Exclusion analysis: is there any better candidate among the Depository employees to be Prayer Man? This analysis has been done exhaustively early on on ROKC forum, and the simple answer was that there was no other person from among the Depository employees whose whereabouts and his physical features allowed to be considered as Prayer Man. Lee Oswald could be Prayer Man because his whereabouts have been made intentionally murky, but no one else. I do not understand the pessimism on the large part of Forum members as to whether the Prayer Man identity problem will ever be solved. It certainly will and it is only a matter of time. The work of quite many researchers who invested themselves into following this case will eventually come to fruition. In the meantime, we will tolerate those sceptic, often arrogant, voices promising an assured nil result. This is a martahon run, and the winner will only be known when we reach the finishing line.

There are alternative solutions to Lee Oswald's behaviour during and after shooting between him being the 6th floor shooter and being a completely unaware of any plot. Lee Oswald did behave suspiciously after the shooting by leaving the Depository within minutes of the shooting, by asking the taxi driver to stop a few blocks away from his rooming house, by taking his pistol when leaving 1026 North Beckley, and by going to the Texas Theatre to watch a movie. These are not forms of behaviours a naive observer of a truly historic event, which assassination of the US President was, would display. Lee acted suspiciously but that does not make him an assassin right away; however, it creates favorable conditions for his framing. Assuming some kind of foreknowledge on the part of Lee Oswald, we can speculate what type of foreknowledge could this be. I wrote an essay article on the topic titled "Symptoms of foreknowledge" https://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com/2021/03/28/symptoms-of-foreknowledge/. However, the article needs an update because one more possible scenario came to my attention after discovering the book by Matthew Smith: JFK. The Second Plot (1991). Briefly, Smith puts forward a hypothesis that there were two parallel plots happening on Friday, November 22 1963 and Lee Oswald was only aware of the "second plot", not the "first plot" which was the assassination of the President. The "second plot" consisted in following the Mexico City thread and entailed Lee Oswald's flight to Cuba to support a clandesitine operation against Castro. After the failure of MC operation to obtain visa to Cuba, Lee was most likely asked to return to Dallas and be on standby until the new phase of the operation. That operation was planned for November 22, and assumed transporting Lee Oswald to the Red Bird airfield in PM hours. To this end, Lee Oswald was asked to be at a certain place or meet somone in Oak Cliff area around 1PM, and if that meeting went wrong, to go to the Texas Theatre to meet a contact. The coincidence with the visit of the President to Dallas was presented to Lee as an advantageous distraction allowing him to get to the airfield unnoticed. Please note, that synchronising the "second plot" with the assassination at 12:30 made Lee look like fleeing the crime scene. The question is when did Lee realise that something was fishy with his assignment and that he might have been targeted as a patsi. In my view, this happened right there on the steps of the Depository doorway, some 30 seconds after the shooting when Gloria Calvery got to the lower steps and told everyone that the President has been shot. Lee Oswald as Prayer Man behaved very differently to all other doorway occupants; while the rest of the people in the doorway have moved and directed their gaze to enhance their views of South Elm/Tripple Underpass where President has been struck and where the limo was quickly departing from, Prayer Man is turned toward the east and his gaze is orientated toward the Records building or general area of the intersection of Elm and Houston. Prayer Man was more interested in understanding the meaning of the shooting for his assignment rather than in analysing the shooting scene visually. Eventually, he decided to follow the scenario of the "second plot" anyway. While getting access to the first generation digitised copies of Wiegman and Darnell films would be the most desirable development in Prayer Man saga, it is possible to read a number of useful cues from Darnell still in the currently available version of Darnell. Besides the points excluding anyone else but Lee Oswald as Prayer Man listed by Jeremy, I would add a couple of positive cues which can be read from Darnell still: 1. Prayer Man was a male, as was Lee Oswald. 2. Prayer Man as a White Caucasian, as was Lee Oswald. 3. Prayer Man's hairline was type II male baldness hairline (receding hair on temples without baldness at vertex area), the same type of baldness Lee Oswald had. 4. Prayer man's hair was dark, as was Lee Oswald's hair. 5. The body height of Prayer Man was 5' 9 1/2', fitting Lee Oswald's body height (according to the autopsy report) plus the height of a shoe heel. 6. The body posture of Prayer Man was that of left leg forward and right leg slighly backward and the right foot holding the weight of the body. Lee Oswald was photographed a number of times (even as a child or in the famous photograph with David Ferrie) in this stance. Moreover, Lee's own brother Robert stood this way during Lee's funeral. 7. The clothing of Prayer Man, the shirt and the trousers, appear as of almost continous grey colour; these tones of grey could be received by converting the maroon coloured shirt CE 151 to grey scale. The strongest identification point, excluding anyone else but Lee as Prayer Man, could be the dark spots seen on Prayer Man's shirt. Here, a better quality version would be of great help. However, even the current version of Darnell may provide a chance to compare the dark spots on Prayer Man's shirt with those on CE 151. Briefly, the dark spots are grouped diagonally over the front of the shirt from the right shoulder to the left hip. This shape of dark spots would be expected to be seen on shirt of a worker who often lifts and carries dusty book boxes. Here is a picture comparing enhanced CE151 and Prayer Man's shirt; please note the dark spots distributed diagonally in both shirts.

There are couple of questions I would like to ask Mr Buell Wesley Frazier and receive truthful answers. I am afraid Mr Frazier would not answer any questions. Back in March 2021 when Mr Frazier's autobiography book was just freshly published, I asked him the question related to this section of his book: Page 52 in Steering Truth: " I'd later learn that Jack Ruby owned two nightclubs, the Vegas Club in Oaklawn and the Carousel Club, which was on Commerce Street in Downtown Dallas, just a few blocks east of the Texas School Book Depository. There were several occassions leading up to the assassination when some of the guys I worked with would invite me to join after work for a beer. One of the places they went to was the Carousel Club. I was trying to save money, so I never joined them. I cant't tell you the numebr of times I've thought about what would have happened or where I would have been right now if I had walked into that nightclub with my coworkers" This thing clearly bothered Mr Frazier, however, when I asked him on his Facebook page who the coworkers who frequented the Carousel Club were, he did not reply. If anyone has a chance to ask him who from the Depository employees was spending time in Carousel Club after work, please ask. It may be one of the missing bits in context of the question if there could be an insider in the Depository who unwittingly or wittingly may have contributed to the assassination plot.

My problem with an entry wound just above the external occipital protuberance is that there is no credible exit wound for such entry, at least in my understanding. Could it be that Kennedy received two headshots in quick succession? One headshot, in my opinion, entered the right temple above the eye orbit (Malcolm Kildulff's early localisation of the entry wound), in an area covered by hair, causing a well defined circular wound; the bullet would damage the right frontal lobe and exit in the right parietal area, going straight back. The next shot was likely to the right temporal area above the right ear (described by Dr Jenkins in his book "The Cold Shoulder of History"). It was a tangential shot and it was possibly responsible for the bone flap above the right ear seen in couple post Z-312 frames. That shot would also exit the parietal area; these two shots together devastated the right cerebral hemishere and caused a fist-size hole in the right parietooccipital region of the skull. However, the right frontal lobe of the brain would also show a funnel-shape damage expanding toward the back of the brain due to the shot in the right lateral supraorbital area. The extensive fracturing of the skull seen in extant X-rays could hardly be caused by only one bullet entering the occipital bone as low as the external occipital protuberance. Ida Dox's drawing (HSCA F-302) (in Best Evidence, 4th Ed., 1988, p. 471) illustrates the vast damage to the whole right hemishere. It is not possible to sustain this amount of damage by receiving only one head shot. A bullet entering a spot above the external occipital protuberance would not cause the damage in the frontal lobe seen in F-302. In absence of an exit wound in the right frontal bone, it could be only be a frontal shot in right supraorbital region that would be responsible for such damage to the frontal lobe of the brain. The autopsy pictures show what the cover-up wanted us to see, e.g., a lack of the gaping hole in the right parietooccipital area. However, I think I was able to approximate the parietooccipital head wound in one existing autopsy picture which, in my view, was most likely tampered with. I have posted my analysis a while ago: Briefly, my analysis evaluated the depth profile of grey values, and found a black instead of grey (skin-like) background in an area which shows hair, suggesting a dark, hollow space beneath hair.

Michael: there may be also another interpretation of the "framed for assassination" phrase. Ruby could have participated in the JFK assassination plot in some important way and he could have been threatened by the conspirators to be exposed, and that was used as a vehicle to make him silence Lee Oswald. It appears they had something on him related to the main plot, therefore, he wrote he had been framed. He wrote he went to silence Lee Oswald, not just to kill him. He wanted in the first place that Lee could not speak. This means Lee Oswald would reveal details of the plot in which he (Ruby) was also involved and was framed for.