Alan Ford

The great tell with the on-the-record deposition-taking of Mrs Paine at her home is that's it's so absurdly over the top, so surplus to requirements. Plenty of evidence has already been officially collected by law enforcement/investigators in situ at various places, and the WC has accepted it as evidence. No one would bat an eyelid if two curtain rods from the Paine garage are added to the list of 'Things officially collected into evidence'. But no, instead we must have a full on-the-record guided tour chez Paine, in the course of which laughably unimportant matters are gone into, and pieces of string etc are 'marked' into evidence as a way of getting from the number 270 to the magic number 275. The deposition-taking in the Paine home is a total charade. I don't know how the participants keep a straight face. The WC's visit to Irving has one goal and one only: to facilitate a switcheroo that will disappear two pesky curtain rods that have been disastrously found in (or near) the Depository.

I posit that the true reason for the curtain rods shenanigans of March '64 come down to the fact that whoever had brought the curtain rods to the attention of the 'investigating' authorities was viewed as a real potential danger to the 'investigation', such that they needed to be assured via legit paperwork that the matter had been carefully looked into and found not to be related to the case. However, a decision was subsequently made to go one better-------------and actually deal with the curtain rods issue head-on by 'demonstrating' that no curtain rods had been taken from the Paine garage by Mr Oswald (something that, were it true, could and would have EASILY been established months earlier). These March '64 shenanigans brought complications that were messy.................. Apropos a pesky civilian who needed placating, I find this from Mr Frazier in The Lone Star Speaks pretty interesting................

We know that law enforcement went through the Paine garage in the days following the assassination. We also know that a key part of the case against Mr Oswald was the accusation that he had brought the rifle to work the morning of the assassination. We also know that Mr Frazier had claimed that Mr Oswald had told him he had curtain rods in the bag he brought to work that morning. The idea that it never occurred to a single person during the early invesigation to ask Mrs Paine about curtain rods and then to check for them in the light of Mr Frazier's account......... is: absurd. The idea that, IF Mrs Paine's curtain rods HAD been found still in place, this fact would NOT have been officially noted and MADE MUCH OF as evidence that Mr Oswald had lied to Mr Frazier........... is: absurd. The idea that not until March '64 did anyone think to check out the Paine garage for curtain rods........ is: absurd. The crime lab curtain rod documents = a smoking gun. But just as much of a smoking gun is what appears to be a total gap in the documentary record when it comes to any interest whatsoever-------------prior to the March shenanigans-------------in the question of whether or not there had been curtain rods in the Paine home 11/22/63 and whether or not they were still there.

(From memory,) I cropped it from a high school yearbook photo which had Mr Jones' name printed below. Can't remember who originally found it, but it may have been one of the guys on ROKC?

But March 24 can't be the "true date" either, as this would mean the rods were submitted at 9:45am-------------having already been released that same morning at 7:50am!

Hmmm......... I have little doubt Lt. Day was complicit in Agent Howlett's falsification game. The fact that we have an alternate version of that document with different data from Lt. Day in the sign-out fields (and without Agent Howlett's sign-out signature) is pretty telling (& damning!). The evolution of the original, color-pen-handwritten form in its various instantiations is tricky territory, but I posit that a couple of copies of it must have been made at a point when it looked like this----------------------

This is young Mr Roy Milton Jones. Look like anyone?

'But the man in Couch is wearing PLAID!' That's far from clear. 'Plaid' all over noisy Couch. E.g.--------------- And I think that 'shirt' may be too long to be Mr Lovelady's plaid shirt

Thank you, Mr Doudna. However, I was uncomfortable with the consecutive neatness of two length markings of 27.5 inches & 27.6 inches respectively. My suspicion remains that BOTH rods were marked "27.5", and that the original form looked like this------------ Then, at a later date, Lt. Day added the 276 (note the unusual gap between '27.5' and '& 276')-------------- Conveniently, the version that got sent to the WC contained not a hint of the decimal point in '27.5'

Everyone has assumed that? Really?

Friends, it really is so good to have such a crisp version of Darnell now! Take for instance the vertical metal frame behind PrayerWoman--------------- It's markedly thinner than the horizontal frame we see it join with. This thinness corresponds much more closely with the true state of affairs--------------- -------------than does the ill-defined, more diffuse, too-wide image yielded in the 'classic' copy of Darnell which some researchers still like to fetishize as the gold standard version------------------- And just look at the difference in definition and clarity of the 'TEXAS SCHOOL BOOK DEPOSITORY' over the doorway! But hey, self-gaslighters gonna self-gaslight...............

It is not a "\ /" ---------------therefore it is not him. All that's now left by way of keeping the PM=LHO claim on life support is to do what most of the other PM=LHO diehards are doing, which is to cry "The 6FM version has been FAKED! Show us the ORIGINAL!!". And if that were to show the same scoop neckline? Not a problem! They'll just cry, "It's NOT the true original! NBC must have ALTERED the original!". And so the game goes on. What started out as an intriguing hypothesis has devolved into an embarrassingly unserious claim kept alive only by built-in unfalsifiability. In other news-----------------Mr Oswald claimed he went outside to watch the P. Parade, and his claim was suppressed by the 'investigating' authorities.

It's neither 'ambiguous', nor a 'photo'

'Scoop neckline? What scoop neckline?'

'DO NOT trust this image, the scoop neckline has been faked!'