Andrej Stancak

Mr. Gary Murr kindly sent one more sketch of the depository doorway with invaluable information about the depth of the Depository doorway. Gary's contribution is highly appreciated as until today we all have only guessed what could the depth of the top landing be. If I read the sketch correctly, the depth of the top landing was 3'9''.

In the context of the work presented in my earlier posts, no revision is needed because the estimated (3'8'') and the measured (3'9'') values different only by 1 inch. This small difference could not affect the findings or the figures. 

Credit: Gary Murr, February 3, 2018. The sketch was made by the FBI agent Brent Hughes on December 5, 1963.

The question of identities of the two ladies can only be speculated, however, there are no doubts in my mind that the two newly disclosed human figures on the top landing are the two missing ladies, Mrs. Stanton and Mrs. Sanders.

Here is a paragraph from my blog post at https://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com/ :

“If we interpret the witness testimonies literally, the shorter of the two ladies standing close to the glass door in the east part of the doorway would be Mrs. Sanders. Mrs. Sanders reported that she has stood "in the last line of spectators nearest to the door" in the east part of the doorway [3] which would suit better the shorter of the two ladies. Mrs. Sanders saw Mrs. Stanton as standing the closest to her which matches the reconstructed doorway scene (Figure 10). The taller of the two ladies would then, logically, be Mrs. Stanton. Her location at the center-east part of the top landing would corroborate the testimonies of Mr. Lovelady and Mr. Frazier. Mr. Frazier reported that Mrs. Stanton has stood next to him [6-7] and that he had changed words with her [7]. Indeed, the taller of the two ladies was Mr. Frazier's closest neighbour on the top landing in Darnell film (Figure 10).

Quoted footnotes:

[3]  The FBI report on Mrs. Pauline Sanders, Commission Exhibit 1434, 11/24/1963: "She said on the morning of November 22, 1963, she went outside to watch the Presidential parade at about 11:25 a.m. She said she did not see OSWALD during this time and she stood in the last line of spectators nearest the door to the Texas School Book Depository building. 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. ... She advised that she did not pursue the matter any further and she entered the building within five minutes of the blast. She said she did not observe Oswald in the lobby but the lobby was crowded with people at this time."

[6]  From Buell Wesley Frazier's testimony in Clay Shaw trial, February 13, 1969, New Orleans, Louisiana:

Q: Mr. Frazier, do you recall who you were with during the presidential motorcade?

A: Yes, sir, I can. When I was standing there at the top of the stairs I was standing there by a heavyset lady who worked up in our office, her name is Sara, I forget her last name, but she was standing right there beside me when we watched the motorcade.

Q: Do you recall anyone else who may have been with you?

A: Right down in front of me at the bottom of the steps my foreman Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady were standing there.

[7] From the interview with Mr. Buell Wesley Frazier for the Sixth Floor Museum, dated August 27, 2013 (33'50'').

Mr. Fagin: In the chaos that followed the shooting, did you see Oswald at all?
Mr. Frazier: I did. This was all... I do not know exactly how many minutes later, but the lady I was standing next to. Some of the people, Bill Shelley and Mr. Billy Lovelady, they went down towards the Triple Underpass because before they went down there, a lady come by, a woman came by, and she was crying and she said "Somebody has shot the President". And so we looked bewildered. And I turned to Sarah: she said "She said somebody shot the President", I said I doubt that's what she said. She said that she did say that. So we stood there for a few minutes, and, and I walked down to the first step, where Billy was standing down there, by myself so I looked around. And it was just total chaos there. And then from there I started to go down to see if I could find Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady, there was so much chaos down there. I said, well, I better go back to work, go back to the steps, so now, and I did, I walked back to the bottom of the steps, and then I walked out to the corner of the building right there where Houston comes up beside the building. And I was talking to someone, it was a lady, and I looked to my left, and come walking along the side of the Texas School Book  building was Lee Oswald.”

As a bonus, please find here different views of the Depository doorway with all occupants as seen in frame #20130908-003922. First, a view matching quite well the view of Darnell's camera:

And a southwest view:

Followed by a top view:

And a view through the glass door:

The location of the other of the two missing ladies is a bit trickier to demonstrate. Mr. Alistair Briggs, who was keenly interested in identifying the two missing ladies in pictures and films while he was around, correctly wondered if the ladies could have been in plain sight from the beginning. Indeed, they could. I hope that Alistair will have a chance to read and comment.

The other missing lady can be seen in any of the better versions of Altgens6. The figure below shows Robert Groden’s enhanced version of Altgens6. A face can be seen in the space between Billy Lovelady and Bill Shelley. 

The red line in the bottom right panel delineates the face of a so far unaccounted person standing on the top landing. It can also be seen in the version of Altgens6 purchased from the Associated Press:

The face of a person standing behind Billy Lovelady is delineated with a red line in the bottom middle panel. Obviously, the owner of this face stood on the top landing close to Bill Shelley and just behind Billy Lovelady. This person was shorter than Bill Shelley but tall enough to be able to peek over Shelley’s right shoulder.

The real challenge is to find out if both newly disclosed persons standing on the top landing would be also seen in the company of Prayer Man. The frame #20130908-003922 shows the short lady standing in the east part of the doorway and Prayer Man close in the west part of the doorway. Can we find a human form in the space surrounding Mr. Shelley’s right shoulder which space would be at or close to the spot occupied by this person in Altgens6?

The next picture shows a zoomed view of the top landing with Buell Frazier, Bill Shelley and the short lady standing in the east part of the doorway (top panel). The bottom panel is an enhancement of the same picture.

The presence of a person standing behind Bill Shelley can be inferred from the light blob as if attached to Shelley's right face. Maybe a better separation of Shelley's and another face is offered in the next picture because it says what in the white, burnt out blob is Bill Shelley's face and what belongs to a different face.

The body height of this new person was again reconstructed using a 3D model of the doorway. The body height of this person according to the present analysis was 5’4’’. This body height would quality this person for a comparatively tall lady. The body height obviously allowed this lady to peek over Mr. Shelley’s right shoulder. More importantly, this tall lady can be seen in the same frame in which both the short lady and Prayer Man can be seen. The reconstruction of the body heights of Prayer Man, Bill Shelley, Buell Frazier, the short lady and the new person is shown here:

This thread aims to analyse the locations of two ladies, Sarah Stanton and Pauline Sanders, on the top landing of the Depository doorway. One of the findings presented here was posted earlier in “Oswald leaving TSBS?” thread on November 10, 2017. However, I have added some more research since, and amended few details mentioned in the original post. Therefore, I start with the finding of a short lady in the east part of the doorway which was first mentioned in the main Prayer Man thread on November 10, 2017.

You can read a more detailed account of this research on my blog: https://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com/

The short lady who stood on the top landing can be seen towards the end of Darnell film in frame #20130908-003922:

The next figure presents a zoomed and enhanced view of the person standing in the east part of the doorway. This picture was first posted in "Oswald leaving TSBD?" thread last November.

The presence of the lady is obvious from the enlarged picture. It was a short person, a Caucasian, and stood in the shadow and very close to the glass door. The body height of this person was estimated by aligning Darnell still #20130908-003922 with a 3D model of the doorway made in Sketchup program. The dimensions of the doorway in the model rely on measured dimensions of the doorway except for the depth of the doorway. The depth of the doorway was set to 3’8’’ in this analysis.

The next figure shows the alignment of the doorway with the 3D models with all occupants included. It is an overlay of the original Darnell still and the 3D model at a blending of 75%.

After aligning Darnell still and the model, it is possible to measure the body heights of all figures. This is what the next figure shows. It is a zoomed view of the doorway with four manikins representing Prayer Man, Buell Wesley Frazier, Bill Shelley and the unknown person. The newly disclosed person measured 4’11’’ and it could only be a woman, actually a woman of sub-average body height. The average body height of women born in the 20^th of last century would be 63’’. The average body height of men born in the 20^th of the last century (measured in 1963) was 68’’. Thus, the person seen in Darnell’s still was a woman, a quite a short woman.

On 12/29/2017 at 7:31 PM, David Josephs said:

I explained to him the connection between General Cabell and TEXTRON/BELL Helicopter and Vietnam.

David:

would you please share your knowledge about Cabell Textron/Bell Helicopter links with us also.

Thanks

Andrej

2 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Hi Andrej, there's a pretty good record of what happened and it's been out in the open for years.  Why wait for yet another book to come out? Here's a pretty good retelling of what happened in the trauma room:

https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2008/november/the-day-kennedy-died/

And here's what happened about the fight over getting JFK's body out of the hospital.  According to Ken O'Donnell, one of JFK's closest friends and part of his Irish Mafia, he pretty much explained that it was Jackie who didn't want to leave the body:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/removing-body-of-jfk-from-dallas.html

Since we already know what happened then after 54 years, I can't imagine anything Earth-shattering coming out of this new book unless it's some kind of new conspiracy theory.

Hope this helps.

 

 

Michael:

the second of the two links is relevant to my post. It appears to be an account based on Vincent Bugliosi's book, and it matches quite well William Manchester's book: The Death of a President, which is my reference. 

The thing is that the removal of President's body was illegal. Dr. Rose, JP Theron Ward and the police officer standing next to Dr. Rose were right. Corrupt Henry Wade's views or his "consent" with the removal of the body out of the state Texas were irrelevant. While Mrs. Kennedy's wish was understandable, it does not justify the violation of the law. In case of a homicide, the spouse's view cannot overcome the legal requirement of the autopsy being performed in the state of Texas. As Dr. Rose commented, it would only take three hours. 

The body was moved illegally, the chain of evidence was broken decisively and there is just no remedy for this. Of course, Dr. Rose could not have been manipulated to produce a botched autopsy as were Dr. Humes and Dr. Boswell. The only chance was, and this is what David Lifton seems to propose, that Dr. Rose was actually a part of the conspiracy and he had fought hard to get to the President's body to do all to obfuscate the evidence. This is a novel view, at least to me.

20 hours ago, David Lifton said:

1. The original alteration of JFK's body (bullet retrieval, wound alteration, etc) was planned to take place in Dallas, and within 30 minutes of the shooting.

2. It did not happen because, among other unexpected events, Governor Connally was unexpectedly shot. (You can take this statement to the bank--the shooting of Governor Connally was completely unexpected, and was not in anyone's scenario. It completely upset a reasonably well-designed apple cart.)

3. As a consequence of an out-of-control situation that developed, i.e., as a result of unexpected events (such as the shooting of JC), President Kennedy's body left Parkland Hospital without an autopsy, and basically in the same condition as it was immediately after the shooting.

I cannot wait to read the Final Charade which will shed light on what happened at Parkland just before President's body was illegally transferred out of the state of Texas. It was my understanding thus far that the good guy was Dr. Earl Rose who would deliver a perfect forensic autopsy and not allow tampering with the body, bullets etc. According to this scenario, Dr. Rose was not allowed to do the autopsy because the pre-planned cover-up dictated that the body needed to be in full and complete possession of Washington and in no case could remain in Dallas. Should the body remain in Parkland and were it subject to a forensic autopsy by Dr. Rose, Parkland doctors would be able to liaise with Dr. Rose and it would be difficult for Dr. Rose to suppress the large defect in the parieto-occipital region of the head which miracously disappeared in the official autopsy report. With the body a thousand miles away, there was no way for Parkland doctors to confront Dr. Rose because he did not do the autopsy.

7 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Yes Andreji.  It comes from a book I don't recommend because of it's the mob did it conclusion and that Oswald was made a patsy by them.  However it does have a lot of interesting information on the relationships of the mob, police and political interactions in Dallas in the 1950's and early 60s.  The book is "Betrayal in Dallas" by Mark North.  It is well documented and has many pages of legal documents and letters.  Letters starting in 1950 from LBJ to Henry Wade and vice versa.  They fawned over each other, LBj called him Hank.  Same thing with letters to and from Hoover.  One from Barefoot Sanders.

From page 237.  Dallas based Italian-American social club, the Anonymous Club, met every Thursday evening in a private residence...Membership included Dallas mob boss Joe Civello...Club name was changed to Zu Roma Club in 1958 after Civello's arrest at a national mob summit meeting in Appalachian New York.  Weekly guest lists were published in locally circulated Texas Tribune, an Italian-American news letter.  May 3, 1958, future congressman Joe Pool,  State Congressman Barefoot Sanders, appointed u s Attorney for North Texas by JFK in 1961, future Federal Judge, LBJ pal.  July 7, 1962, Mayor Earl Campbell, district Attorney Henry Wade, Sheriff Bill Decker, candidate for congress Joe Pool.  Theses are from reproductions of the original paper.  Keep in mind these meetings centered around a meal and an illegal poker game.

https://www.amazon.com/Betrayal-Dallas-Street-President-Kennedy/dp/1626361223/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1512951680&sr=1-1&keywords=betrayal+in+dallas 

Thanks, Ron, for your detailed information. I will read the book, although will keep a cautious eye during reading as you have some doubts about the book. I find most as most extraordinary that Decker, Wade and Cabell partnered high members of Mafia in Zuroma club. This means that there was only one in-between connection between Mayor Cabell and Jack Ruby. Cabell admitted in his testimony for the Warren Commission to have heard about Ruby, and it were Earle Cabell and Elgin Crull who pressed Curry to parade Lee Harvey Oswald in front of cameras in the basement of Police department on Sunday morning. 

On 12/8/2017 at 3:26 AM, Ron Bulman said:

Ruby was sent to Dallas from Chicago as a front man to deal with police, politicians and competition as part of a team in an attempt at expansion of territory and power in the late 40's. Not a hit man.  It was partially successful.  They were in competition with people from New Orleans,  I. E. Marcello.  Ultimately they worked together for the benefit of all.  Ruby paid off cops.  Set up high stakes poker games they skimmed.  High dollar bets.  Provided prostitutes.  Marcello provided the racing wire.  Smuggled drugs to and through Dallas.  Fed Ruby some of the prostitutes/dancers.  Check out Civello, Campisi, the Zuroma Club where Henry Wade and Earl Cabbell visited.  They were his bosses.  Who was the first to visit him in jail? 

Ron:

is there any source for your interesting remark about Henry Wade and Earl Cabell visiting the Zuroma Club? It looks like Cabell and Wade shook hands with Dallas mafia. Any details on this line would be of great interest.

47 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Andrej I'll  try to put warnings up from now on. Remember  Kennedy and Oswald had families too.

Sandy FWIW thanks for that. I'm  only  doing this for educational  purposes.

Thanks, Michael, for responding to my previous posts.  Placing a warning would be all right if the distressing content would be the only issue. The further issues which the warnings do not alleviate are the protection of family members from displaying publicly the execution of their relative to which they did not have a chance to consent, and the fact that the video was recorded with an evil purpose by a criminal organisation, and by posting their video you say it does not matter to you. 

You are right that we wish to solve the murders of President Kennedy, Lee Oswald, and J.D. Tippitt. However, in the process of doing so, we cannot refer to materials such as this execution video.   

35 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Andrej,

I respect your opinion. But my code of ethics don't lie with yours. If I were brutally executed and a film of it served some educational purpose, with little chance of it going viral, I would not be opposed to it being used that way. And I would feel the same way about a family member. (Not to imply they would feel that way too.) At least that way my brutal demise wouldn't have been entirely in vain.

 

 

Well, thanks for letting me know your opinion. I have checked the EF rules on this point, and they appear not cover this specific case. Time to ask the administrator.

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

This man ain't no Texan! 

If the video serves a useful purpose (like showing what a human head does when hit by a high powered rifle) I think the file should remain. Though there certainly should be a warning.

 

Sandy:

the man who was shot while the video was made had a family, maybe children and a wife, and certainly parents. You would need to go and ask them if they are happy to display in slow motion this man's shooting by a criminal organisation such as ISIS for the purpose of discussions among lay people.  If the video is continued to be displayed, those forum members knowing but ignoring and not protesting this fact actually continue the spreading of ISIS crimes.  

The research ethics says that a researcher cannot have any advantage (e.g., in showing some novel findings) from unethical conduct. It is very unethical to display ISIS killings in slow motion for "educational purposes" as if this was an educational material.  

I have suggested Michael to find alternative ways to demonstrate his point. This could entail a visit to the university library and search through the medical forensics books which teach the doctors how different gunshots appear on the head. Michael could have a chance to go deeper into the problem and maybe the rest of community could benefit from his knowledge. 

I am familiar with dead bodies since I went through a one-year neuroanatomy course which included working with cadavers and detailed inspections, particularly of the brain.  I also work with chronic pain patients and know what human suffering means.  It is not about my personal sensitivity, it is about differentiating what is ethical and what is not.

Michael: may I request again to remove the video or the section showing the ISIS execution of someone who was innocent in our eyes. 

Michal:

I like your comments in various threads and appreciate your interest in resolving the assassination case. However, I find your video showing the execution of a man in an orange dress, resembling an ISIS execution, as horrible and distressing. I would like you to remove the video or the part showing the execution. If you would like to make your point about the type of entry wound, please describe it and maybe use a screenshot of only the entry wound from some other gunshot case, maybe from a forensic book. This website is about restoring justice and humanity which had been shattered by three murders, and we cannot use crimes to illustrate our cases. Thanks for considering my request.

15 hours ago, Robin Unger said:

Life Magazine crop

 

Thanks, Robin, for posting one more Hughes frame which has the advantage that it can be properly linked to a source. I have looked into the possibility to spot anything in the region of interest in the western part of the doorway only to find a black hole. This is illustrated in the figure below. The left-hand side panel is a cropped view of the doorway from the posted picture, and the right-hand panel shows the same picture after adding light to the dark part of the doorway.

The Life Magazine frame was clearly retouched because the horizontal metal separator between the top window and the three large glass windows can only be seen in the east part of the doorway. There is no natural explanation for not seeing this part of the door frame also in the west section of the doorway. Instead, there is a light object there which in theory could be some residual light from the ceiling lamp behind the glass door, however, not from the lamp which was right behind the glass door. The missing part of the door frame is highlighted with two yellow dot lines.

The Life Magazine may have touched the doorway for esthetic reasons or for other reasons, we may never know. However, their role in the cover-up (e.g., sitting on the Zapruder film for more than a decade, publishing a retouched backyard photograph) is hard to overlook, and so we are left with the same uncertainty as in many other aspects of the assassination case. Did Life retouched the west but not the east part of the doorway to cover up the presence of someone who should be on the sixth floor and shooting the President? Or is it just a coincidence and an innocent attempt to enhance the picture? 

Unless good-quality copies of Hughes stills with a proven birth certificate are available, I would say that Hughes film cannot conclusively prove or disprove the presence of Prayer Man in the doorway during the particular time instant when the motorcade was passing in front of the Depository.  I would be glad to be proven wrong though.

I found another frame in Hughes' folder at jfkassassinationgallery.  It is again a picture of superior quality compared to the quality of frames obtained after disassembling Hughes film into frames. 

The picture below shows a cropped view of the doorway from the picture above. The section above Lovelady's head was enhanced by resampling it, reducing shadows, and increasing the contrast.

Similar to the frame in my preceding post, something resembling a human figure having his/her right arm in front of the chest and the small light object can be seen. Due to noise, there are several other specks in the inset too. The problem is that we are zooming into a very small area of the film in pictures which appear to be processed pictures. There is a risk that a previous processing has simply produced an object from the noise. The picture below is a sample frame to illustrate what would be the initial pictures.

Are we actually able to resolve the presence of Prayer Man in the doorway in Hughes film?

I have analysed the partial frame with Hughes doorway picture from the composite posted by David to maybe answer the point if Prayer Man could be seen in Hughes film. His presence in Hughes film would be highly relevant as to the question of when did Prayer Man arrive at his spot in the doorway.

The picture below is the enlarged part of Hughes frame from David's composite.

A faint object of something which potentially could be a human face can be seen in the region above Lovelady's head. The next figure is the same picture after reducing shadows.

And the same enhanced picture with contour lines roughly delineating Billy Lovelady, Buell Frazier and what maybe could be a human figure. If there is a human figure there, it would be someone showing his/her profile, and having his/her arm in front of the chest. A small light object in front of the person's face associates a light-reflecting bottom of a bottle held in this person's hand.

A phantasy?

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Andrej... A question...

When does Lovelady in Hughes, as the limo turns into Elm in full color top left...

And in Altgens at z255... Get way over to the right with PM seen in the background?

And none of that jives with where Wesley says theses men are... ?

??

3

David:

your Hughes frame (the top picture in your composite) is of excellent quality compared to what I was able to obtain by disassembling the film into frames. Where did you find it? Your frame appears to show Prayer Man at his spot which is something I was never able to determine from film frames available to me. I would be grateful for pointing to the source of this image and maybe for posting the picture without any arrows and further panels. This would be is a very important finding as it would help to get a better idea of the arrival of Prayer Man into the doorway. Also, the frame of this quality is easy to model which I am happy to do in a few days time.

Your Hughes frame also shows that Lovelady's shirt was open down to his waist which is something I need to correct in my manikin model of Lovelady. 

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Hi Andrej...

Not altered... Misrepresented.

Move a shorter man forward a couple inches and he is now 5'9"....

Having a 13" head is not possible.... People simply don't work that way....

Noticeably taller?

Hello David:

I agree that one cannot read the head size from this type of picture because it is a 3D problem. It is easier to claim a photographic manipulation than to search natural explanations. However, to prove that Groden's picture could have been genuine I would need to model it, and I just do not have time and energy to do these time consuming but minor tasks.

"Noticeably shorter?" This refers to statements of one or two Depository employees who knew both Oswald and Lovelady and said that these two guys resembled each other in some features but Lovelady was shorter than Oswald.  It was a noticeable height difference. I think it was Buell Frazier in one of his interviews. 

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

 

Andrej,

What do you mean you can't measure the head height "from a front view such as this?" Of course you can.

The top of his head is at 5' 9" = 69". The bottom of his chin is at 4' 8" = 56" .

The height of his head is therefore 69"- 56" = 13" .

This ridiculous head height should put all height measurements in question. Obviously somebody has tampered with that photo.
 

This picture is actually from Robert Groden's book. Groden pointed to the 13'' head but he did not say the picture was tampered. Whether the picture is valid or not, Oswald was noticeably taller than Lovelady, and Lovelady was 5'8''. Would you agree?

18 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Andrej,

Did you notice that Oswald's head is 13 inches in height?

Moral of the story... it's difficult to know Oswald's true height.

 

Sandy, the body height is all right 5'9'' in this image. One cannot measure the head hight from a front view such as this.

Sandy:

Billy Lovelady was 5'8'' and Lee Harvey Oswald was taller than Lovelady and therefore it would be a mistake to assume Oswald as a man 5'8''. 

Thanks for pointing to the shadow on Frazier's chest: the two figures I posted were to help you to figure out the locations and I made them while working a different problem and therefore Frazier was just there and a bit neglected. It would never strike my mind that you would flag this up.

I look forward to seeing your work on Prayer Man as Oswald standing on the top landing.

54 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

(Or if PM isn't Oswald after all.)

Well, in that case, and I assume you are not thinking of one-foot-down-one-foot-up explanation, it would be someone about 5'2''. However, there would still be problems to satisfy all constraints with a 5'2'' person such as shadows and distances from other figures or doorway landmarks.

Sandy:

was not Lee Harvey Oswald 5'9''? Please see his autopsy report here:  http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/oswald, lee harvey_report.pdf . The height 5'9'' is the body height I work with, and I assume this body height has been agreed across the board.

One can reduce the body height by slightly bending the head and slightly pushing one foot forwards by not more than 2''. That would give the effective height of 5'7'' which is just too much relative to the shoulder/neck line of Buell Frazier. The standard height of human head is 9'' , however, the line to which Prayer Man's  head aligns with is probably 1'' lower as it looks like neck or shoulder level. That gives the body height of 5'2'' you need to fit if you subtract 10'' from 6' (Frazier' height). There is just no way how you could fit somebody of 5'7''  as Prayer Man. 

The figure below shows a man 5'8'' (actually a copy of Lovelady from the same scene) as much in the corner as possible . You may see that  he is just way too tall, and we do not talk 1-2''.  The other picture shows better the location in the corner. Not only would this figure be too tall, his crossed arms would not allow to have his hands and his left thigh exposed to the sunlight because the line of the shadow is too far from him. 

33 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Andrej - I am going to support Robin on this.  My eyes and brain tell me when I look at the film frame of PM, it just does not look like he has one leg down on a lower step.

Well, Michael, subjective views delivered to your conscious mind by your eyes and brain cannot be disputed. However, if you believe your eyes and brain and place Prayer Man with both his feet on the top landing, you may wish to answer the question who Prayer Man was. At least this is the question which we want to answer in this thread. Lee Harvey Oswald (5'9'') could not be Prayer Man if you place Prayer Man with both feet his on the top landing because he would be too tall (e.g. compared to Mr. Frazier's neck/shoulder line). So, who would be your candidate for Prayer Man if you are convinced that he stood further back on the top landing?