Ray Mitcham Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 Frazier is quite right. Oswald obviously couldn't have been on the stairs at the Lancer Conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted December 6, 2014 Share Posted December 6, 2014 Well I was at the conference, heard his full remarks to the group, talked with both he and his son afterwards and I know Pat was there as well. I don't recall any specific statement from him about Oswald not being on the stairs during his general remarks to the conference. However he did describe several of the people in front of him on the stairs and certainly made no remark about Oswald being among them. I think the only open question - which Pat mentioned earlier - was whether he was aware of anyone at all that might have been behind him.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 I spoke to Frazier at the Bethesda conference, and spoke to his son at the Lancer conference. Frazier was totally aware of the contention it's Oswald in the Altgens photo, and said it was Lovelady both publicly and privately in Bethesda and Dallas. He didn't seem cognizant of the whole "Prayer Man" argument. I asked his son, Robert (ironically), to show the prayer man images to his dad and see if he could identify the figure as Stanton, or Shelley, or Oswald, whomever... His son agreed it would be a good idea. But that's where it was left... Larry, are you in touch with Robert? Perhaps you could put a bug in his ear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 Pat, thanks for coming back on that and clarifying Frazier's position that it was Lovelady on the stairs. I'm not in touch directly with his son but might be able to come up with something in that regard; I'll give it a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 Let's speculate for a moment. IF Oswald was indeed Prayer Man, or even the figure in the doorway many now accept as Lovelady, how many witnesses would have had the courage to come forth, once the authorities started speaking about the ironclad evidence against him, the sniper's nest, the defection to Russia, etc.? And with the way most researchers now cling fiercely to the notion that it was Lovelady there, with the debate considered over, such a witness wouldn't even be welcomed by many of those who think Oswald wasn't a shooter. Wesley Frazier is a witness whose testimony can be used to both incriminate and exonerate Oswald. We know that he was grilled by authorities initially, and perhaps was considered a backup "lone nut." If he suddenly admitted that he'd seen Oswald on the steps somewhere, how would that effect his credibility with researchers? It's doubtful that anyone would believe him at this point. We really know nothing about "Oswald leaving the TSBD." Those 'investigating" this crime simply picked 12:33 p.m. out of the air, enshrining it as the time Oswald left the TSBD, when there is zero evidence for that. Given what we know of Oswald's reputation as a "loner" at work, how likely is it that anyone would have been talking to him, if he WAS out front on the steps somewhere, or even have noticed him? In a much more trusting 1963-era America, very few citizens would have been willing or able to summon the resolve to provide such a smoking gun that proved Oswald's innocence. Analyzing photographs is something I feel unqualified to do, although I grant you that it always makes for interesting debates on these forums. The best evidence, in my view, for Oswald leaving the TSBD are the at least five separate, unconnected witnesses, who reported someone resembling him racing down the slope and into a Rambler shortly after the assassination. That certainly seems more credible than the official story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 (edited) In 51 years, I don't believe anyone has managed to get Frazier to admit there even was someone in the corner occupied by Prayer Man, despite the fact the tall, gangly Frazier appears to be looking directly at him in the still capture from the film. As you say, Don, this could be explained by Frazier being fearful of retribution, should he go against the official story. The thing that fascinates me is that, in his appearance before the WC, he could not recall the helmeted Baker going into the TSBD with Truly. This is amazing as, judging by the position of Frazier and Prayer Man in the film, Baker must have come very close to running the two of them over. Edited December 8, 2014 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 He was there before the motorcade, during and after... Mrs. Reid walks in and Mr. BELIN. All right. You went up through the stairs and then what did you do?Mrs. REID. I went into the office.Mr. BELIN. You went into your office?Mrs. REID. Yes.Mr. BELIN. And then what did you do?Mrs. REID. Well, I kept walking and I looked up and Oswald was coming in the back door of the office. I met him by the time I passed my desk several feet and I told him, I said, "Oh, the President has been shot, but maybe they didn't hit him." He mumbled something to me, I kept walking, he did, too. Mr. BELIN. And then you went through your actions, what you saw, your conversations that you had, and your actions in going back into the building and up to the point that you saw Lee Harvey Oswald?Mrs. REID. That is right.Mr. BELIN. Do you remember how long by the stopwatch it took you?Mrs. REID. Approximately 2 minutes. Mr. BELIN. Do you remember whether he had any shirt or jacket on over his T-shirt?Mrs. REID. He did not. He did not have any jacket on. Don't we find it a bit surprising that not a soul in the years since mentions seeing Oswald on the stairs.... The "fear factor" did not stop Craig or Yates or Bolden or Ms Arnold from coming forward. Here is Baker running toward the TSBD while our man is standing there... I guess it is possible that Truly supports Baker's affidavit to testimony story change NOT in order to move Oswald from higher up on the stairs coming down - for we are sure that Baker and Truly saw one of his employees in the stairway a flight or so up rather than in the lunchroom but to place Oswald INSIDE the building at all right afterward, at least that was better than his not in the building at all. The more I dig into Mexico City the more I find the FBI playing with the evidence. That someone may have said something about this being Oswald and that info disappearing is not so far fetched. In fact it is more in line with all the other activities of the FBI than not. Frasier NEVER says it was Ozzie out front? "Out front with Bill Shelley" with Shelley being the man in the tie behind Lovelady makes alot of sense. How can it be proven once and for all though? DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 David In this film clip, I wonder who is standing directly in front of Prayer Man? Could that be Lovelady? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 Carmine... Authenticated Evidence placing Oswald in that corner would be great. I personally believe "Out front with Shelley" from Fritz's notes refers to a time after the shots when Oswald finally leaves. I was not inferring it was Oswald due to a lack of witnesses at all... I am suggesting that the FBI can make evidence disappear or change to its needs. That no one ever comes forward to say they saw Oswald standing there, even to private researchers is quite telling since so much has been discovered that was said to the FBI yet was never reported or was changed. Those who have taken the time to show by process of elimination that there are few if any others if could be... it is VERY possible that it's Oswald as Ms Arnold places him near this door at the right time: I did the accompanying composite to illustrate how it could indeed be Ozzie Bob... this is at least 30-60 seconds after the shots... I think the white head is a scarved woman... DJ What I find strange though is how he disappears from one frame to the next... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 (edited) David In this film clip, I wonder who is standing directly in front of Prayer Man? Could that be Lovelady? Robert, If you view the clip, I think you'll see the the white head I think you're asking about directly in front of Prayer Man (in other words at the far left side of the entrance) belongs to a woman who is wearing a light-colored scarf on her head and who is slowly climbing the stairs towards Prayer Man. --Tommy Edited December 9, 2014 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 100+ pages of, mostly, real collaborative research that takes every witness statement, every report, every newspaper clipping that we know of, TSBD diagrams, and all of the relevant testimony and builds to a theoretical, but logical, conclusion that the unidentified man in the doorway (stood next to Buell Wesley Frazier), as seen in two separate films, is Lee Harvey Oswald. This type of thread is a credit to this forum. Its few empty-handed detractors are not. bumped Welcome back, Lee. --Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Perhaps, A clear picture, perhaps an original picture, perhaps a witness statement? How about some expert assessment? Perhaps any sort of verifiable evidence would help. Just a suggestion. No need for insults and off topic commentary if you have that. Carmine, in order to give any answer here, it would be helpful to know what you understand the term "independent corroboration" means. If we can come to an agreement on what the term means, I will accommodate your request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Greg, I'm happy to accept any evidence, even speculation is fine long as it is not demanded that you are correct in the face of substantial contending evidence. Just as I am not, should I decide that despite the opposition of most evidence I am correct. I invite you to judge me by the exact same standards. No insults, nothing but what we can prove. That is all I ever wanted. It is unfortunate all that has occurred did between here and there. Here is my only request, no matter what occurs, this is it and the disruption of other conversations ceases. After this there is no need to speak further on the issue with me. I will offer the same courtesy I receive. I would imagine we both have more productive things to do. I am willing to disagree and move on so long as you are. Carmine, What I was going to offer is "independent corroboration", but there is little point without some agreement on what that term means. I would only add there is no "contending evidence" save your forlorn insistence that Oswald said he was in the lunch-room at the time. Forlorn, because you don't know the question he was answering. There is no other "contending evidence". What we have is an absence of of evidence that you personally would like to see. Witness statements. Better quality photo etc. That's an ABSENCE of evidence, Carmine - not "contending evidence". I'm not really clear from what you said if you want to proceed or not, but if you do, could I ask again what your understanding is of "independent corroboration". I ask only because if I lay out that evidence, and you have a different interpretation of what "independent corroboration" is, we really won't make much progress. It'll be back to square one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Hi Carmine I think this Prayerman research by Sean Murphy is probably the most significant information to surface since 22 November 1963. I haven't seen any WC defenders really come up with an explanation as to who this figure might be or why he remained unidentified by the WC and the HSCA. Would appreciate your views on who is it and why he hasn't been identified by the formal investigations, if you have the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Hi Carmine Of course, I agree we are all entitled to our opinions. And I think we are all searching for evidence-based information which is why I personally find the Prayerman thread so compelling because not only do we have the photographic evidence but the detailed research done by Sean Murphy to eliminate all other possible TSBD employees. I'm sorry I don't really know if you're a WC defender or not as I'm new on here. But I was making a general comment that I haven't seen anyone come up with a plausible explanation of who it could be (other than Oswald) and why this man wasn't identified by the WC or the HSCA. Especially as it seems that the HSCA was aware of this person appearing on Weigman/Darnell and mentioned it in Billy Lovelady's questioning. Thanks for your views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts