Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald Leaving TSBD?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

LL1.jpg

 

Take a real close look at this image!

Now the blackness supposedly shows that Lovelady's shirt was longer down at the back than in the front. YES?

Really? Take another look!!!

Still don't see it?

Now look inside the red circle, that blackness goes further to the right than Lovelady does it not?

Could it be that this is an object/person in front of Lovelady?

Well why don't we have a look at Gerda's GIF especially the first half a dozen or so frames where Lovelady is the most visible....

The so called shirt in conjunction with the dark object changes shape every damn frame and the black object even stays behind while Lovelady walks on with Shelley.

Indeed James, case closed.

 

Lovelady and Shelley both lied in their WC testimony about them staying behind on the steps and seeing Vicky Adams on the first floor. FACT

Both their first statements paint a very different picture. FACT

Calvery was nowhere near the steps encountered by Shelley, nor Lovelady FACT

 

Game, set and match!

 

Bart,

While I agree with you that the evidence for 2nd-floor-encounter-fabrication is highly compelling, I am less convinced about the the two walking down Elm extension being  Shelley and Lovelady.

I believe that Bill has a good point about the length of alleged Lovelady's shirt looking too long. It also looks oversized.

In addition, in some frames I've seen taken from the film, it appears that alleged Shelley's jacket has a pattern to it. Are there any other photos of him wearing a jacket that day? Do they show a pattern?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not really trying to throw a wrench but... I also have many years experience digitizing and encoding video and my first impression when examining this capture is that the same "pattern" is faintly visible on both subjects (and maybe the background) and seems more to be a by-product of the encoding process. i.e. a digital anomaly.

LL1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bart Kamp said:

 

Is no game Bill I debunked your long shirt in the back assertion, gimme some credit!.....:)

I suggest you to investigate Shelley and Lovelady's horse manure in regards their presence during and after.

Andrej has already posted plenty and so have I.

The proof counts not beliefs Bill.

You are aware are you not that there were others in and around the plaza that wore a red plaid shirt that day - right? I had been working behind the scenes with three other well respected researchers trying to find a way to better show if that was Lovelady or not, so I started with premise that the possibility was there. As far as the plaid nonsense circumstantial and was not a strong argument in favor if it being Billy Lovelady. Their meeting with Calvery would be to us, but we had to first find her as too may people have believed her to be the woman near the Stemmons Freeway sign and with her hanging out on the near the divider and pergola post shooting - it gave the appearance that Shelley and Lovelady conspired to invent a story of seeing Gloria Calvery immediately after the shooting. The woman running towards the TSBD was the most likely candidate for Calvery once we had seen she was very light complected and was caught in Darnell's film running to towards the steps. Her obituary write-up and how she chased behind the policeman was a big plus. Some people were quick to make conspirators out of both Lovelady and Shelley in my view and failed them by not considering that under moments of extreme stress and shock there is seldom and clear cut and dry recollection of such an event as this was. The slowing of Calgary as she approached the two you believed to be Shelley and Lovelady seemed reasonable and only 1 - 1.5 seconds of her arriving at the steps. And like I have said before - no single witness knew immediately after the shooting who was taking film and photos and from where. So Shelley and Lovelady making up seeing or speaking to a particular witness had no real motive in my view. As far as definitive evidence of that being Shelley and Lovelady - its not even if most probable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Newton said:

Not really trying to throw a wrench but... I also have many years experience digitizing and encoding video and my first impression when examining this capture is that the same "pattern" is faintly visible on both subjects (and maybe the background) and seems more to be a by-product of the encoding process. i.e. a digital anomaly.

LL1.jpg

Chris, that is a good point and was something some of us had been discussing behind the scenes this past week. Sandy had mentioned it too on the forum. We intend to make a comparison of the pattern on the alleged Lovelady to that of his shirt in i. Someone even asked if Shelley had a plaid design in his suit coat, so we checked and found none in the clear photos of Shelley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

Not really trying to throw a wrench but... I also have many years experience digitizing and encoding video and my first impression when examining this capture is that the same "pattern" is faintly visible on both subjects (and maybe the background) and seems more to be a by-product of the encoding process. i.e. a digital anomaly.

LL1.jpg

 

Good point, Chris.

The scan of an image with a very fine pattern can yield a far different pattern. Here's a demonstration of the effect:

image035.gif

 

As shown here, a very fine repeating pattern can become a much larger pattern. This demo also shows the effect of rotating the picture in the scanner at various angles.

However, for this to happen the the size of the pattern (e.g. the distance from line-to-line) must be quite small, on the order of the size of a pixel in the scanned image.

This effect is called aliasing. It was more common back in the day when low resolution scans were widespread. Check out the effect on the fine pattern in this guy's suitcoat:

Moire_example2.jpg

No, don't look at the pretty girl... look at the back of the guy's jacket!

Note how the draping of the fabric results in curves in the pattern. This is a dead giveaway for aliasing in a contoured surface, such as in the case of clothing.

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's something that seems to support the idea that it is Lovelady walking down Elm extension:

 

lovelady_on_elm_ext_comparison_zpshsctd4

 

In this composite I resized the color photo of Lovelady so that the top of his head and the bottom of his shirt line up with the same on the B&W alleged Lovelady. I used blue lines for them.

I also used a blue line to line up the tops of the two collars (in back).

The dark horizontal lines on alleged Lovelady's shirt appeared to represent the red horizontal lines on real Lovelady's shirt. I used green lines to connect them and found that both the number of lines and the spacing match quite well.

The nose and chin on real Lovelady are a little lower than on alleged Lovelady. But this can be attributed to his tilting his head down toward the reporter, or whoever the person is (see inset).

Having done this, I am satisfied that the bottom of alleged Lovelady's shirt is NOT too long, which is what I had thought before.

As for the shirt looking oversized (in breadth), it could be that alleged Lovelady had fully unbuttoned his shirt and the breeze from walking is pulling it back.

 

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Bart,

While I agree with you that the evidence for 2nd-floor-encounter-fabrication is highly compelling, I am less convinced about the the two walking down Elm extension being  Shelley and Lovelady.

I believe that Bill has a good point about the length of alleged Lovelady's shirt looking too long. It also looks oversized.

In addition, in some frames I've seen taken from the film, it appears that alleged Shelley's jacket has a pattern to it. Are there any other photos of him wearing a jacket that day? Do they show a pattern?

I think I debunked this oversized shirt make believe............and the jacket has already been answered above.

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

You are aware are you not that there were others in and around the plaza that wore a red plaid shirt that day - right? I had been working behind the scenes with three other well respected researchers trying to find a way to better show if that was Lovelady or not, so I started with premise that the possibility was there. As far as the plaid nonsense circumstantial and was not a strong argument in favor if it being Billy Lovelady. Their meeting with Calvery would be to us, but we had to first find her as too may people have believed her to be the woman near the Stemmons Freeway sign and with her hanging out on the near the divider and pergola post shooting - it gave the appearance that Shelley and Lovelady conspired to invent a story of seeing Gloria Calvery immediately after the shooting. The woman running towards the TSBD was the most likely candidate for Calvery once we had seen she was very light complected and was caught in Darnell's film running to towards the steps. Her obituary write-up and how she chased behind the policeman was a big plus. Some people were quick to make conspirators out of both Lovelady and Shelley in my view and failed them by not considering that under moments of extreme stress and shock there is seldom and clear cut and dry recollection of such an event as this was. The slowing of Calgary as she approached the two you believed to be Shelley and Lovelady seemed reasonable and only 1 - 1.5 seconds of her arriving at the steps. And like I have said before - no single witness knew immediately after the shooting who was taking film and photos and from where. So Shelley and Lovelady making up seeing or speaking to a particular witness had no real motive in my view. As far as definitive evidence of that being Shelley and Lovelady - its not even if most probable.

Show the evidence Bill, not what you believe. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

I think I debunked this oversized shirt make believe............and the jacket has already been answered above.

With all due respect I didn't see you debunk anything regarding the shirt length. You said that the black area below the shirt remained behind as alleged Lovelady walked forward from that position. You said that the black object was positioned between Lovelady and the camera,  if I understand correctly.

Looking carefully at the relevant frames, I did see a semicircular area of black that remained behind, but that was not the area of black Bill was referring to. The black area referred to by Bill moved ahead along with Lovelady, and it varied in shape, as you stated. I suspect that Lovelady had his hand in his left-front pocket and this lifted his shirt up in that area, thus revealing his dark slacks.

I appreciate all the work you and other researcher have put in regarding the 2nd floor encounter. I wish you'd be so rigorous with the Shelley/Lovelady identification in Couch.

You say the jacket question has already been answered. By which I think you mean that the pattern seen in alleged Shelley's jacket is an artifact of scanning the frame. Chris Newton made a comment that that possibility should be considered. That in and of itself hardly counts as "the answer." The best you can say is that that is your opinion.

I've asked two or three times if there's a photo of Shelley wearing a jacket that day. If someone more knowledgeable than myself reported that there is no photo of him wearing a jacket, I would be inclined to believe that Shelley's jacket did indeed have a pattern, and that it was recorded only in Couch. On the other hand, if someone more knowledgeable than myself said that a photo exists showing that Shelley's jacket had a dark solid color, then I would personally have a hard time accepting that that fellow in Couch is Shelley. The reason being this: Many have noted Lovelady's shirt having a pattern in Couch. Well, if we excuse the pattern seen on Shelley's jacket as being a scanning artifact, then we should do the same for the pattern seen on Lovelady's shirt.

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

"Having done this, I am satisfied that the bottom of alleged Oswald's shirt is NOT too long, which is what I had thought before."

 

 

Quote

Dear Sandy,

Oswald's  shirt???

Obvious typo in two of your recent posts, this thread.

-- Tommy :sun

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect, had you read my post and its explanations, and investigated this then you would have come to the same conclusion.

Rip the GIF in PS and open its layers and start at the beginning. IN PS that's at the bottom layer.

From that you will see that the so called "shirt longer in the back" is BS due to the black object in front of it and that seems to trail behind while Lovelady is moving forward. The shirt is at one length. You and Bill have stared at that cropped sole image, which wasn't the best of images in the first place and came to a wrong observation/conclusion. And it has been debunked.

I am as rigorous,  and I regard your remark as a cheap insult. Best to leave it at that.

What did I bring to the table.......hmmmmmmmmm lemme think.

 

Steps_1-by-Robin-Unger.gif?resize=800,63

I put forward that Lovelady is already seen going down on the steps in Wiegman, thanks to the Robin Unger GIF. 

 

shelley-in-wiegman-film.jpg

I also showed Shelley is following him which can also be seen in Wiegman, from our (ROKC) scan at the Archives, he is more in the middle of the landing whereas he originally stood more East, plus in the enlargement I showed he is seen looking west.

Lovelady-and-shelley-in-couch-okt-2016-B

I put the best Couch image forward of Shelley and Lovelady and sharpening methods that tend to show Lovelady's bald patch so easily seen in the Martin footage

And the b&w news footage scene where Oswald is put into a room after passing Lovelady.

That combined with all the statements/interviews I came across I put into a blog post

 

You ask whether Shelley was wearing a jacket, I find this rather interesting since you have waded so deeply into this debate for months already. This means that you have not read the blogpost I created with ALL this info available for months.

But to give you a direct answer:

shelley-collage-1.jpg

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________

You are right  it's not much, I better get to work.............................................................................................

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...