Andrej Stancak

8 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Cudos to the wife.

She is 5'10" tall without shoes.

She is 5'10 1/2+ with those shoes on.

Standing on the mini tailgate of a 99' Landcruiser which is 34" above the ground.

Shot using an Iphone12 with the 26mm wide angle setting.

Approx 67ft away.

76ft was preferred, but there was a parked car in the way.

 

 

 

I guess we can agree that Prayer Man could not be a short person around 5'3'' (with shoes on) standing on the top landing?

53 minutes ago, Miles Massicotte said:

I still don't understand this logic. BWF is not allowed to say that he stood next to Oswald in the doorway.....but he is allowed to say that he thinks he is innocent? Whether you believe it is by coercion or from some kind of ptsd that is compelling him to stay quiet, Frazier really hasn't done a great job of staying quiet. He says he believes Oswald is innocent, and has insisted essentially that the whole deus ex machina that the WC used to place Oswald with the rifle and transporting it to the 6th floor (the curtain rods story) is bogus by staying consistent on the length of the supposed package. And yet we are to believe that when he emphatically states that it was certainly not Oswald in the doorway next to him, that is concealment, whether purposeful or not. I just don't buy it.

Yes, it is one of Mr Frazier dissonanancies to say publicly he believes Lee was innocent but to incriminate him with a package which could somehow be a rifle, by denying that Lee brought a lunch with him to work on Friday morning, and denying he had seen him leaving the Depository after assassination. I do not blame him for not saying Lee stood next to him in the doorway for a short period of time because that would put him into direct conflict with the the deepest echelons of political power that wanted Lee to be the assassin. Mr Frazier was and still is scared to death to be in opposition to the power structures. Saying Lee was innocent is benign, it is only an opinion, and many American citizen said so. Saying Lee stood next to me and he was therefore innocent would refute the whole official story by an irrefutable proof of innocence. The strengths of just proclaimig innocence and testifying in a way refuting the official version is a very different situation.

9 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

So he obviously told them during his interrogation that's where he was during the shooting.

It seems to be the case. The law enforcement wanted to check if there was any photographic evidence of Lee being outside. Notably, Darnell film and particularly the identity of Prayer Man question only popped up some 50 years after the fact. Neither the Warren Commission nor the HSCA were shown the still with Prayer Man.

10 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

To me, it still makes no sense why authorities would care whether it was Billy Lovelady on the front steps in Altgens 6 (even a couple days later) if Oswald never claimed to be out on the steps watching the parade with Bill Shelley. Why would they care whether it was Lovelady or not?

The authorities were scared of the possibility that Lee Oswald was outside during the time of assassination and photographed. That would ruin their case completely, right on that day. The FBI visited Lovelady either on Friday or Saturday night with a very large copy of Altgens6,  and wanted Lovelady to confirm his identity which he did. They came because one of the FBI agents felt unseasy about Lee being in the doorway. So, now the FBI could claim that yes, there were rumours of Lee Oswald being photographed in the doorway, however, this has been resolved and the man in question was Lovelady, he himself has self-identified. The problems is that that FBI agent who heard something, purportedly from a witness, might have felt uneasy about a a different person in the doorway and a different photograph, not about the clear and obvious Lovelady in Altgens6.  

47 minutes ago, Sean Coleman said:

And….if Pman is Oswald, BWF not noticing his buddy stood next to him? WTF?

My take on Mr Buell Frazier is that he saw Lee next to him but was completely, and irrationally from a neutral standpoint, overwhelmed by his situation which was aggravated by his proneness to a post-traumatic stress disorder reaction. He understood that he never could say that Lee stood next to him in the doorway. Basically, Lee  standing next to him was even a bigger problem than the curtain rod story. At this stage, he speaks the truth as he sees it through his coarted memories related to this event. 

While I cannot prove anything, I carry a nagging intuition that there was perhaps something even more sinister than the curtain rods or Lee standing next to him that has caused Mr Frazier's emotional breakdown after the shots rang out.   

1 hour ago, Tony Krome said:

Does that front door open by pushing in, or only by pulling out as per the top pic?

Tony:

it could be swung both ways.

15 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Andrej,

Since the heads/faces are blurry, I always thought it would be better to use actual photos of BWF/Oswald for the comparisons/models:

 

 

Chris:

your animation feels dead realistic, I have to say, even if it is not a proof.

20 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

I hope It is LHO.

But what puzzles me is….after the imaginative creation of the ‘Oswald legend’, the sheepdipping, the guidance from dubious 3rd parties etc…. how/why was the designated patsy allowed to be seen in public? Shouldn’t he have been told to be totally out of sight? He can’t be the shooter if he’s on the front step. I’m not sure the organisers of the plot would have let this happen after so much nefarious hard work-which was to culminate in- LHO shooting JFK, from the 6th floor, with his ‘own’ rifle.

In a nutshell…he shouldn’t have been there.

Sean:

you certainly have a valid point. There are two possibilities of why it was possible for Lee Oswald to be out and photographed. One plausible theory is along the line presented in The Second Plot (Matthew Smith, 2002; available on Amazon) which says that Lee Oswald was only aware of the "second" plot which was to get to Red Bird airfield on Friday afternoon and be flown to Cuba for his another mission, as a continuation of his New Orleans-Mexico City activities aimed against Castro. He was told that JFK's visit will be a welcome distraction allowing him to depart from Red Bird airfield unnoticed. Larry Hancock and David Boylan did subsequent amazing research on the Red Bird part. There is another possibility, maybe a less likely one, that Lee Oswald participated in a mock assassination attempt and was told to lend his rifle which would temporarily drive attention to a pro-Castro sympathiser, allowing to break the war against Cuba. However, he was also told that he could always prove his innocence by being provably somewhere else than on the sixth floor. Only after hearing (witnessing) the shooting did Lee realise he was in big trouble and became to behave like a fugitive. I may be wrong, however, the moment he learned about JFK's killing could be the moment in Darnell when he was standing at the western wall and the lady with a dark scarf (Gloria Calvary) approached the doorway and told everyonene what she had seen. It would explain Prayer Man's gaze orientated toward Elm/Houston street, seen in the critical Darnell still. Prayer Man was not exploring the scene around Grassy Knoll or Tripple Underpass like everyone else in the doorway because he already knew enough, and he was now thinking what he should do next.

I do not know which of the two scenarios would be more plausible, and I am currently willing to admit either as an explanation for Lee being out and photographed. What would you think?

It may sound like bringing wood to a forest, however, let me repeat some facts that explain the reason why some people think that the possibility of Lee Oswald needs to be explored.

1. It has been established by process of elimination early on in the original Prayer Man thread and on ROKC that none of the Depository employees but Oswald could fit the figure standing at the western wall of Depository doorway. This elimination process was based on witness testimonies and known locations of all Depository employees.  At the same time, none of the people in the doorway admitted that anyone from the outside crowd would step up and join them in the doorway, not mentioning the top and back part of the doorway. 

2. While neither Darnell nor Wiegman film offers enough resolution and sharpness to identify Prayer Man according to his facial features, there are several distinct features which can be used to refute Lee Oswald as Prayer Man should that person be someone else. For instance, if Prayer Man had a distinct blonde hair or if he was of Afro-American descent, we would be able to refute the PM=Oswald hypothesis immediately. However, over the years no single feature in Prayer Man's figure has emerged to alow to refute Oswald as Prayer Man.

3. Here are the features which have been explored so far, each offering a match with Lee Oswald. To recall, each of them could with high probability go different way if Prayer Man was not Oswald.

- Prayer Man was a white Caucasian as was Lee Oswald, excluding 20% of Dallas population as candidates right away.

- Prayer Man was a man, excluding 51% of general population (or crowd in Dealey Plaza) as candidates.

- Prayer Man had a hairline with receding hair over the temple which is known as Type II male baldness pattern; Lee Oswald had the same pattern of male baldness. 25% of males show this type of baldness.

- Prayer Man's body height (5' 9 1/2'' - 5' 3'') was compatible with a man 5' 9'' which was Lee Oswald's body height. This body height was prevalent among males at the time with about 50% of males showing this body height.

- Prayer Man wore a worker type of shirt rolled up to his elbows with the front facing of the shirt being pulled out of trousers, and the neck wide open with a visible white T-shirt beneath. This was the way Lee Oswald wore shirts, and he was photographed like this on  Friday afternoon after he changed his maroon shirt CE151 for the darker CE150.

- If converted into grey scale, the shirt CE151 would give a very similar level of grey as his trousers. That would form almost a continuous colour of his whole garment from shirt to trousers, something we see when grey versions of shirt CE151 and his work trousers are aligned.

- As Prayer Man had to stand at one particular location in the doorway in Darnell, that location would prompt him to rest his left foot on the top landing and bear the weight of his body on his right foot and stretched right leg. The resulting posture would be comparable with the way Lee Oswald used to stand from his childhood until his adulthood. Interestingly, his own brother Robert showed this type of posture when photographed at Lee's funeral.

- Prayer Man also showed his arms flexed in elbow joints in front of his chest. Lee Oswald used to cross his forearms in front of his chest as well.

- The feature which may be decisive in the identification of Prayer Man are the dark spots on the front facing of Prayer Man's shirt. Those dark spots appear to match the dark spots seen on shirt CE151, howoever, more research is needed to be able to decide if the dark spots in CE151 and Prayer Man's shirt match.

4. Anyway, I hope it is clear to those who question the importance of Prayer Man's indentity why there are good reasons for investigating Prayer Man's identity. Obtaining high quality scans would be of great help and may shed more light on the problem. 

And the final question to those who ridicule the efforts of some of the Forum members: why does none of the Prayer Man's features  refute the possibility of Lee Oswald being Prayer Man? Add point (1), the elimination argument, and it is difficult to supress the thought that that person standing at the western wall might have been Lee Oswald.

On 9/18/2022 at 7:04 PM, Chris Davidson said:

which puts the person, if standing on the landing at 5'4 8/10".

Chris:

your new estimate of 5' 5'' (I am rounding to the next inch as we do not really have accuracy of tenths of inches; my estimates have accuracy of about 1/2'') should be wrong in my opinion, and your former estimate of 5' 3'' would be very close to my estimate of 5' 2 1/2'' for the height of plane crossing the top of Prayer man's head.

Please consider how a tall person 5' 5'' would look like when standing on the top landing. You can 1) subtract a value 9' 1/2'' (the height of head in a male of Fraziers' body height) from Frazier's body height because Prayer Man's head reached only to the shoulder level or lower aspect of his chin (should be the same levels), and you get a numeric estimate of 5' 2 1/2' (Frazier 6') ' or 5' 3'' (Frazier 6' 1/2''). 2) you can also compare appearances of two people of unequal heights standing on the same plane using an online tool, e.g. https://www.mrinitialman.com/OddsEnds/Sizes/compsizes.xhtml, and there may be even better tools out there. A person 5' 5'' would reach to about mouth level of a person 6' or 6' 1/2''. 3) I was able to verify my estimate by setting a body heights of two mannequins in Scketchup to 6' and 5' 2 1/2'' to verify my estimate. 4) you can have a feet metric scale with feet and inches as a vertically orientated tape measure, and get a picture of normal sized male, and scale him to 6' (or 6' 1/2'') and again in the way that the next image would reach the body height at the level of the first person's shoulder line, and read the height value for the shorter person.

Here is a comparison combining methods 3 and 4.

On 9/17/2022 at 3:03 PM, Paul Bacon said:

Andrej, Chris Davidson is probably the only one in this thread who can appreciate the capabilities that the program you've used provide.  He does measurements inside photographs all the time.  I would love to see him corroberate your findings using his own methods.  I completely agree with you that the Prayerman figure is male.

A side note:  I was a small time remodeling contractor and I "photo-matched" (using the program) pictures I'd taken of potential jobs a lot of times.  It took time, but it was worth it because I could virtually build the whole addition (or deck, etc.) sitting at home on my computer.  It was accurate enough that I could pre-cut parts without resorting to tape measures and plumb bobs hanging in thin air.

Sketchup--architects use it all the time--is very accurate.  You've done great work.

Paul: 

thank you for your encouraging comments. Sketchup is a professional architect design software and very suitable for modelling a space such as Depository doorway. It struggles a bit with human models as those require a notoriously large number of triangles to render the curved shapes and details, e.g, face. Therefore, I used Poser 11 program to model the most important persons, such as Oswald. It is encouraging to have among us someone who is familiar with Sketchup.

Chris could speak for himself if he could endorse my analysis. I remember he determined the height of the plane crossing the top of Prayer Man's head as 5' 3'' which is in almost perfect agreement with my estimate of 5' 2 5/8''.

However, I always provide an independent validation of model-based height estimate. The height of the plane crossing Prayer Man's top of the head can be determined by comparing the height of that plane with Buell Wesley Frazier body. The plane of interest crosses Frazier's body at the height of his shoulders or lower aspect of his chin. As Frazier's body height is known (6' or 6' 1/2''), it is possible to arrive at a reasonable height estimate using an online tool allowing to compare appearances of two people of known heights, in our case 6' 1/2'' and 5' 1/2'', for instance here: https://www.mrinitialman.com/OddsEnds/Sizes/compsizes.xhtml , and this would be the outcome:

Independent validation is always useful and adds to the validity of the model-based analysis.

As far as the other lady or ladies shown in Chris'es last post is concerned, obviously there are glaring mismatches in the shape of hairline and clothing  between that lady and Prayer Man. For instance, if this lady had the part of her arm above the elbow joint naked (and I can see this to be the case), this detail would exclude her as Prayer Man because Prayer Man has only his forearms exposed. 

However, there are more fundamental reasons for refuting the possibility that a woman could be Prayer Man. The main reasons are the body height, location and the posture. The overlay of my 3D model with original Darnell shows that a man 5' 9 5/8'' standing with his right foot on the step below the top landing would fit Prayer Man figure very accurately. There is no satisfactory solution for any person, man or woman, standing with both his or her feet on the top landing. I will explain it in a narrative, however, am also willing to prepare a model of a lady 5' 2 1/2'' with a light-coloured decolt and fit her as Prayer Man for everyone to see the problems.

A lady 5' 2 1/2'' standing with both her feet on the top landing would appear tiny, simply because she would be 7+'' shorter than Prayer Man and therefore her head and limbs and trunk would appear proportionally smaller compared to a person 5' 9 5/8''. As she would be standing with both her feet on the top landing, the vertical plane crossing her right elbow would be at least a 1/2 foot away from the same vertical plane crossing the right elbow of a man having one foot on the first step (or Prayer Man in Darnell). As person 5' 2 1/2'' would be tiny, she would need to be pushed a bit inward into the doorway toward the post of the glass door at the western wall to achieve her head be crossed by this post (seen in Darnell). This would cause additional increase of the distance between Prayer Man's right elbow and her right elbow. In an overlay of Darnell and a model having a lady 5' 2/12'' on the top landing, a glaring mismatch would be seen in the area of right elbow. To continue, a person 5' 2 1/2'' would be able to show a good correspondence between the top of Prayer Man's and this person's head, however, the rest of their bodies would not match because a person 5' 2 1/2'' has shorter arms than a person 5' 9 5/8'' standing 7 1/8 inch lower than the short person, and her crossed arms would appear 2 inches too high compared to Prayer Man's arms. 

Of course, I did test a possibility of a person 5' 2 1/2'' being Prayer Man, and saw the mismatches mentioned above. Prayer Man was one concrete person, whoever he was, and therefore we cannot have two alternative solutions (5' 9 5/8'' and 5' 2 1/2'') fitting Prayer Man equally well. Only one solution is possible. After spending more than 5 years on this project I can see that the only solution matching Prayer Man figure is the one having him standing with his right foot on the step below, and having his left foot slightly bent in the knee joint and resting on the top landing. Any other solution (e.g., a person standing with both his/her feet on the top landing) would not fare.

For the reasons explained here, I see not purpose in highlighting problems with every new lady identified in the doorway in historic photographs. No lady or man 5' 2 1/2'' would fit Prayer Man figure as that person would have to stand on the top landing causing incurable mismatches with Prayer Man figure in Darnell.

11 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Willis was also an indication that the only people in and around the TSBD steps on film/video that wore short sleeves and no collars were all women.

There has never been and never will be a reference to Sarah Stanton by me, claiming she was Prayer Person.

In fact, here's another woman added, fitting that dress combination.

The men all were either wearing dress suits or shirts with collars, long sleeved shirts/sweaters. Hard to tell with BWF.

Prayer Person is wearing a short sleeve garment.

If it's Oswald, what/whose shirt was he wearing?

 

 

 

Chris:

the lady labelled #2 in your composite appeared to be too tall to fit Prayer Man figure. I have overlaid the relevant part of her figure onto Darnell still; the yellow line crosses the top of her head and shows how much taller she would be compared to Prayer Man. It does not mean that the lady would be 5' 7'' when barefoot. Almost all young ladies working in the TSBD wore high, 3.5'' heel shoes. Thus, she could well be of usual body height of 5'2''-5'3'' but her body heigth as it appears in this photograph would be inflated by about 3 inches owing to her high heels.

Here are a few views of the Depository doorway in Darnell illustrating a solution for locations of doorway occupants. The top picture is the the original Darnell still with the 3D model of the doorway overlaid onto the original picture, and the bottom pictures are different views of Darnell doorway. Mrs Stanton in Darnell still stood just in front of glass door, to the left of Buell Wesley Frazier, and her light-coloured hair, modelled according to the family photograph, matches the original picture accurately. It is the overlay of the 3D model and the original picture which allows to validate a particular solution. It is a very punishing process because any mismatch due to a wrong model solution is instantly visible. It takes many iterations (adjustments of body heigt, orientation, limbs positions) to obtain an overlay that sits well.

I would like to make some sense out of this thread. It started with Chris posting Willis #21 slide with two ladies, perhaps suggesting that one of them could be "Prayer Person", three question marks. There was also a hint from the past that another woman, Sarah Stanton, could be Prayer Man. I hope all agree that each of these ladies has been rightfully discarded as Prayer Man. The pink lady in Willis 21# was too short and her light-coloured dress would not match Prayer Man clothes. The lady behind the glass door would not match Prayer Man owing to her rich hair creating a roof and a specific hairline so much different to Prayer Man. Sarah Stanton had rich, light-coloured hair and her hair exclude her as a candidate right away. Thanks to everyone who helped in bringing on her photograph which eventually was the decisive piece of data to exclude Sarah Stanton as Prayer Man. There are good hints and witness testimonies allowing to estimate Sarah Stanton's location quite precisely given limited resolution of the photographs, especially in areas at the back of the top landing.

Then there were two futher "versions" of Darnell still which were also brought here from another forum, with a comment and a drawing by Mr. Hackerott pointing to very feminine features of Prayer Man, making a case for Prayer Man being actually a Woman. These pictures have never been discussed previously on our Forum, causing me to think what was going on.

It appears that the "versions" of the famous Darnell still we all used to view and analyse are actually different frames of Darnell film. In the left-hand panel, cropped views of three pictures are shown, labelled "jfkassfor.", "red-arrow", and "2013", with two former pictures being those brought here from jfkassassinationforum.com, and the latter being the best version of Darnell still available from the very start of Prayer Man saga. The right-hand panel shows the corresponding frames identified in Darnell film (the version of Darnell film posted on this forum by Robin Unger in "Oswald leaving the TSBD?" thread about in 2016). Clearly, we deal with three different frames of Darnell film, not with different versions of the same frame. The two frames brought here recently have never been analysed because of motion blur distortions.

To show Prayer Man in all three frames, in Darnell original film and in their parallel versions, the next figure shows  cropped views of Prayer Man in six variants. The lower row are the frames from original Darnell film - I have resized them and added a bit of light equally to each of three frames for better visibility. It is possible to appreciate the heavy distortions in Prayer Man's figure in frames "jfkassfor." and "red-arrow", and absence of this distortion in "2013".  The top panel shows Prayer Man in the pictures that have been brought here from the other forum. Heavy photograpic manipulations were needed to get from original film frames to "jfkassfor." and "red-arrow", with "red-arrow" being processed much more than "red-arrow". Please note Prayer Man's thin right forearm in "red-arrow"; this were the dues needed to be paid to reach the figure we see. 

Mr. Frazier did not change his story "a bit". He changed it to the extent that he did not speak the truth under oath by saying he did not see Lee Oswald in the Depository on Friday except couple times in the morning. Many years later he started to claim he did see him minutes after the shooting when Lee was walking south on Houston street to Elm street. In his recent autobiography, he came with a story that he had seen an unknown man stashing a rifle into a car in front of the Depository building within minutes of assassination. Would this information not be relevant to the Warren Commission or law inforcement officers? He told nothing to anyone. Did he speak right there with Police about a man with a rifle in front of the Depository couple of minutes after the shooting, the APB could have gone in direction of this man. These are not human errors, these are big memory lapses in critical parts of the case.

I agree with Mark that Mr Frazier cannot recall seeing Lee Oswald around the time of assassination. The reason is the postraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) he very likely developed feeling extreme danger to himself and his sister. It was interesting to listen to Mr Frazier recent interviews that followed his book. He said he experienced severe discomfort while writing, and made long (months) breaks before resuming his writing. People differ in their chances to develop postraumatic stress disorder and those being subject to abuse and hardship in early childhood having an increased risk. Mr Frazier described in detail what abuse he received from the hands of his stepfarther when he was a child. The symptoms of PTSD are memory lapses, attentional deficits, avoiding conversations on the stressful event,  experiencing physiological arousal when talking about stress-related events, and other symptoms.

If all was right with Mr Frazier's mental state, Mr. Frazier would say: "The lady who works in one of the publishing offices, her name was Sarah, stood to the left of me, and the person XY (or somebody whom I did not know) stood at the western wall just in front of me." Instead, Mr Frazier only admitted seeing Sarah Stanton to his left and blinked the person to his right completely. 

The latest arrivals of processed versions of Darnell, advertised as original stills, look so similar to actions of the intelligence/media in other facets of the case. To tackle a promising trail, one or more alternative stories to the true one are made up, and the researchers themselves then bury both the valid and invalid piece of evidence.  

14 hours ago, Henry Frost said:

I got a copy of the image posted by Alan Ford on the JFK Assassination Forum as mentioned on Page 1:

It is NOT THE SAME as the image on the Prayer Man Site:

https://postlmg.cc/G99TrN11

Here is a copy of the Darnell film with the TSBD, there may be better ones out there:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7p1ntLF--s

But both the one shown here and the one linked were tampered with. The quality of both images is much worse than of the ones discussed from 2013. 

To identify Mrs Stanton in Altgens6 is more difficult compared to Darnell. I cannot explain the full process better than my video, therefore, please watch using this link if you are interested:

Notably, Mrs Stanton stood closer to the glass door window in Darnell than in Altgens which on itself is not surprising because at least 30 seconds had elapsed between these two snapshots. However, only her location in the front part of the top landing (ger Altgens6 location) would allow a person exiting the first floor through the glass door to pass beside her and to occupy a spot at the western wall. Once Mrs Stanton slid back, no one would squeeze through. 

Taken all data together, we search for a light-colour rectangular object (the top of Sarah's hair) at the height of about 5'6'' above the floor of the top landing, in the central area of the doorway in front of glass door, and slightly to the right of Bill Shelley.

Here is a cropped view of Darnell still showing Buell Wesley Frazier in the left part of the picture and a light-coloured object at the height compliant with the height of 5'6'' - 5'7''. The middle panel shows Frazier's head overlaid with a high-resolution image of his head for a better comparison, and a line crossing the top of the light-coloured rectangle. To recall, Mr Frazier (6' 1/2'') was of practically identical body height as Larry (6' - 6' 1'') and therefore, it is possible to compare the line crossing his face (middle panel) with that crossing Larry's face in the family photograph (lower panel).

It is very likely that the light-coloured rectangular object floating at a height of about 5'7'' in Darnell belonged to Sarah Stanton, confirming her location in the middle of the top landing, in front of glass door, and to the left of Buell Wesley Frazier.

I am working on the details of hair seen in Darnell, and will post when finished. 

The statements listed below are from the transcript of the interview of Mr Brian Doyle with members of Stanton's family on June 18, 2018. This interview can be replayed from: https://soundcloud.com/user-788101711/oswald-was-in-the-lunch-room?utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing

This is what the members of Mrs Stanton's family, Rosa and Wanda, had to say regarding Mrs Stanton's appearance and body height during the interview:

01:36: "Sarah Stanton was a very big woman."
14:07:  Confirmed that Sarah was about 5'5''.
14:37: "Sarah could also be 5'6'' ".
14:49: "Sarah herself said she was 5'4'' - 5'6'' ".
15:36: "Sarah weighed at least 300 pounds. She was over 300 pounds."
16:11: "Sarah was big at the bottom and her hips, less so at her top. Her arms were big."

Besides conferring data on Mrs Sarah Stanton's body height and appearance during the interview, Mrs Stanton's step-daughter also gave this recommendation for identification of Mrs Stanton's figure: "And the way to find her is, she was a very big woman." The large stature of Mrs Stanton was also confirmed to me by Mrs Stanton's grand-daughter, Wanda in our email exhange dated April 4, 2020: "My grandmother was obese to the point she could barely fit through a doorway."

To arrive at the best possible estimate of Mrs Stanton's body height, it is possible to use Larry's body height as a natural measuring stick. Larry stood next to Sarah in their family picture, and he was 6' or 6'1'' according to members of Stanton's family. The yellow line in the picture below crosses the top of Sarah's head and Larry's face at a height of about 1/3 of his ear.

The figure below was produced from an online application allowing to compare appearances of two people of known body heights. I have set Larry's height to 6' (left) or 6' 1'' (right) and the adjusted the height of the other person to reproduce the yellow line in the family picture. Mrs Stanton was either 5'6'' if Larry was 6', or 5'7'' if Larry was 6' 1''.

Mrs Stanton's appearance provides further clues as to her location in the doorway. Her hair showed four remarkable features which may help in her identification. The four features are highlighted with red symbols in the picture below.

The right panel highlights (1) a rectangular shape of the front part of Sarah Stanton's hair above her forehead. A circle (2) points to a dark spot on the front surface of Stanton's hair. Sarah Stanton's hair was of large volume not only on the front part above the forehead but also on the lower part of her hair creating asymmetric wings (3), with a larger volume of hair in the lower back aspect of the head on the right than on the left. The arrows in the left-hand panel point to curles (4) that are visible on parts of Sarah Stanton's hair. These curls created puffy, semi-transparent blobs on the surface of Stanton's hair. 

The location of Sarah Stanton in the doorway appears to remain enigmatic. Let us review the basics. First, what did the witnesses, including Sarah Stanton, report regarding her location. Here are excerpts from the relevant testimonies or interviews.

Paula Sanders (FBI report, WC Exhibit 1381, 3/19,1964): I took up a position at the top of the front steps of the Depository building facing Elm Street. To the best of my recollection, I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance. I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stanton standing next to me, but I am unsure as to the others. 

Paula Sanders (FBI report, WC Exhibit 1434, 11/24/1963): 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.

Sarah Stanton (FBI report, WC Exhibit 1381, 3/18/1964): When President John F. Kennedy was shot I was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository Building with Mr. William Shelley, 126 South Tatum, Dallas, Mr. Otis Williams, 3429 Southwestern, Dallas, Mrs. R.E. Sanders, 4226 Delmar, Dallas, and Billy Lovelady, 7722 Hume Drive, Dallas.

Billy Lovelady (WC testimony):

Mr. BALL – Who was with you?
Mr. LOVELADY – Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton, and right behind me
Mr. BALL – What was that last name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Stanton.
Mr. BALL – What is the first name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Bill Shelley.
Mr. BALL – And Stanton’s first name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Miss Sarah Stanton.

Bill Shelley, (WC testimony): 
Mr. BALL - And who was out there?
Mr. SHELLEY - Well, there was Lloyd Viles of McGraw-Hill, Sarah Stanton, she's with Texas School Book, and Wesley Frazier and Billy Lovelady joined us shortly afterwards.
Mr. BALL - You were standing where?
Mr. SHELLEY - Just outside the glass doors there.
Mr. BALL - That would be on the top landing of the entrance?
Mr. SHELLEY - yes.

Buell Wesley Frazier his video-recorded interviews:

"Buell Wesley Frazier drove Lee H. Oswald to work on Nov. 22", 1963 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5OnbKATeSE&t=6s

"Interview with Buell Wesley Frazier (21 June, 2002)", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSjJAhJ4J4g

It is clear from the testimonies that Sarah Stanton stood on the top landing. Here is a graphic illustration of the top landing and two first steps with shoeprints representing the relevant persons. The circles around each person define the space of the doorway where Sarah Stanton needed to be with the condition that that space includes the top landing. The grey-shaded area is the intersection of all four circles. In order for all four testimonies to be true, Sarah Stanton would need to stand in that grey-shaded area, labelled "SS". Notably, Sarah Stanton herself indicated as her neighbors people who stood immediately in front of her: Bill Shelley, Otis Williams, and Billy Lovelady.

BL = Billy Lovelady; JM = Joe Molina; PM = Prayer Man; BS = Bill Shelley; BWF = Buell Wesley Frazier; PS = Pauline Sanders; SS = Sarah Stanton; OW = Otis Williams

4 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

You mean the photo with a red arrow on the PM website is altered/filtered?

Denis:

Of course, it is.

15 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I think I saw this on the JFK Assassination Forum some years ago. Wasn't this photo taken years later? 

Yes, this picture appeared in June 2018 when Brian Doyle contacted from members of Mrs Stanton's family. Linda Zambanini was instrumental in indentifying the family members.