Mark Ulrik

We could ask one of the ear-witnesses: Garland Slack, 11/22/63 affidavit, Decker Ex 5323, 19H495

Do these witnesses (Goldstrich, Salyer) cite publication of the "strange deaths" as the reason they hesitated to come forward? Not specifically, it seems, but maybe the interjected newspaper items could give you that impression. It would be mildly ironic, however, if (as suggested) early conspiracy authors like Penn Jones inadvertently aided the evil conspirators by contributing to a paranoid climate that kept people from talking.

You could at least have tried to establish a proper baseline before accusing the police of nefariously deviating from their usual practices. Apart from that, it's probably safe to say that no one was prepared for the investigation of the century.

The name "Lee Oswald" is easy enough to spot. Dunno about the rest.

I would've been more inclined to agree with you if the smallest diameter of the wound had been 7 mm, but it seems to have been only 4 mm.

In the group photo, the damaged photo is lying on top of what looks like some envelopes. Wouldn't we expect them to be visible through the hole?

Perhaps here? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10505#relPageId=46 (and zoom in as much as you can)

Well, Marina had no reason to lie about this, but memory can play tricks, and perhaps the FBI showed her a second gen copy where the damage was less apparent. In an evidence photo in Curry's book, it looks like the license plate was already missing.

It doesn't look like the FBI tampered with the photo to me, so I'm probably the wrong guy to ask.

A probability that actually does seem kind of low is for the photo to have been taken after the shooting. Who knows why Oswald kept it. Perhaps he had a sentimental streak.

Perhaps Oswald got a little paranoid and at some point obliterated the license plate because it in a very concrete way could connect him to Walker and the shooting if it fell into the wrong hands. Does it have to be more complicated than that?

Don't you have Oltmans' book, Jean? You might also consider the Italian edition of Gun's book, Le Rose Rosse Del Texas. Unlike the rare and expensive US edition, this one is large format, loaded with photos, and very easy to find on ebay.it. Bloomgarden's The Gun should also be right in your wheelhouse.

My eyes were naturally drawn to the passages mentioning my home country, and there were a few typos and other peculiarities. 1) Typos (can happen with casual copying from pdfs) "Elstrabladet" = Ekstra Bladet "Berlingske-Tidende" = Berlingske Tidende "Lolland-Palsters Polketidemic" = Lolland-Falsters Folketidende "Mykning P." = Nykøbing F. 2) Redundancy (repeatedly referring to the same person as a "known communist") "a known Danish Communist, Jorgen Theilgaard Jacobsen" "Jorgen Jacobsen, a known Communist" "Jorgen Jacobsen, the known Communist" Note: Jørgen Jacobsen quit the DKP in 1956. 3) Currency conversion gone wrong "2500 D.kr. ($35.24 USD)" "5000 D.kr. ($70.49 USD)" Different inflation calculators will give you slightly different results, but 1 DKK in 1965 seems to correspond to roughly 1.70 USD in today's currency.

Barb Junkkarinen (last year, I think).

Stephen Roy (May 2016) Anthony Marsh (unconfirmed, but appears to have been MIA since March 2021)

Perhaps you could get Lance Payette to review the book instead.

Greg, it's from Fort Worth. There's a very similar photo in this article: PHOTOS: President John F. Kennedy’s visit to Fort Worth on day of assassination

Sandy, please be aware that there are better versions (e.g. with less contrast) than the one posted previously. I dunno whether it will help you find the shirt pocket, though ...

Apparently, it was reported by the Washington Post. Mentioned in the WC testimony of Dean Rusk: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=40#relPageId=377 And I think it was the "no foreign involvement" angle.

I almost posted this yesterday: The Dallas Police Department’s Channel 1 Radio Dictabelts: The Chain of Possession by Chris Scally (2004).

Those interviews were specifically about one particular Walker photo, not the backyard photos. On other occasions, before and after, they did talk about the backyard photos. Read JP's posts if you don't believe me.

Yeah, shows the value of asking direct questions.

It would've been awfully nice of them to mention that there was an exception, but perhaps they knew that the FBI hadn't come to talk about the backyard photos. The FBI were acting on a request from the WC to investigate the matter of the Walker photo with the obliterated license plate. It's nicely summarized in CE 1351.

Another way of saying that he wouldn't be able to describe to you what they depicted. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it if I were you.

In Shayneyfelt's expert opinion, the backyard images were not composites. In the case of the 133B negative, specifically, he explained the steps that would have been required and concluded that it didn't seem at all possible. In fact, he felt certain "beyond reasonable doubt" that it couldn't have been done. It's an interesting tactic to attempt to build a positive case (using Shaneyfelt of all people) for the images being composites when you don't even believe that it's Oswald's face in the images.