Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald Leaving TSBD?


Recommended Posts

I bought the Prayerman book. It is written by Stan Dane.
 
It is written much as a diary and the main ideas are very much opinion and assumption. The real brain behind this theory is Sean Murphy. I remember Sean from Lancer and he was certainly a thoughtful researcher. However Stan is taking his thinking - which was a great number of years ago - as gospel. I have no idea what Sean thinks about his ideas from the 1990’s today.
 
The identification of Oswald as this man is based on spurious evidence. Prayerman is clearly a person, but until the 1990’s when Sean identified him and actually named him, the research community were unaware he was even in the image. One thing that bothers me is the poor research. There is a section where Stan comments that Prayerman was not him, not her and so on therefore he had to be Oswald. But that is utter nonsense. I seem to remember there was well over 100 employees and therefore this Prayerman could be anyone of them. Prayerman is identified as being one of a select group: those who are known to be in the doorway and Oswald. Prayerman could be anyone. Oswald is included in this group because of Fitz’s notes.
 
But we have no idea whether Oswald ever was on these stairs. Oswald says - in Fitz’s notes he was outside - and that is taken as gospel. Fitz's notes have been the source of considerable debate in the JFK assassination community however because Oswald says in these notes he was outside that is considered a fact in the book. That Prayer man could be any one of the other employees in the TSBD is not considered. They do not exist. The only ones from whom the selection of Oswald was made were those known to be on these outside steps and Oswald. Not exactly the pinnacle of academic research.
 
I have not completed the book, but it appears ( based on what I have read so far ) to be very much “castles in the air” type of  writing. Bart mentioned the reviews, actually we do not have the real names of many of these reviewers. One is actually called Hidell. I suspect many are ROKC members. So I am not sure these reviews - which are indeed positive - may be friends supporting Stan and not legitimate reviews. There is certainly no academic or a reputable JFK assassination researcher who has reviewed the book - as far as I can see.
 
I will complete the book and write a proper review.
 
James
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

6 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:
 
I have not completed the book, but it appears ( based on what I have read so far ) to be very much “castles in the air” type of  writing. Bart mentioned the reviews, actually we do not have the real names of many of these reviewers. One is actually called Hidell. I suspect many are ROKC members. So I am not sure these reviews - which are indeed positive - may be friends supporting Stan and not legitimate reviews. There is certainly no academic or a reputable JFK assassination researcher who has reviewed the book - as far as I can see.
 
I will complete the book and write a proper review.
 
James

It would not be the first time that people log into an account as someone else and write their own review or reviews for others just to give the appearance that good reviews are pouring in. I was on a site one time where one person got nailed for doing just that - he wrote his own review using a handle that he used years ago. In another field there was a guy who has three degrees to his resume and he says he can talk to Bigfoot through telepathy. Wrote a book about it and it too got good reviews.

Now Bart says I am hiding behind you, but a review of your position was that you agreed with my own. I remember this site being called an Education Forum for a reason .... not the 'read my version and let me do the thinking for you' forum. It has been my reviewing the things written that allows me to make observations as an investigator and it appears Bart is uncomfortable with that. I respect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone! I'm back on the Forum after a lovely holiday granted to me by Mr. Gordon, during which I had the opportunity to reflect on my questioning the comprehension skills of a fellow Forum member.

While it may be that no one, including Buell Wesley Frazier, recalls seeing LHO on the top step of the TSBD entrance, there is something here that I find very strange. The film clearly shows Frazier standing on the top step looking toward the corner where Prayer Man was standing, yet I am not certain Frazier has ever admitted to even seeing anyone there. 

Was PM invisible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we reached here a deep and long impasse at which the views of those promoting the possibility of Prayer Man being Oswald are balanced out by those having opposing views. This impasse has no immediate solution, and the more one side will push, the more opposition it will face.  The frustration is high and understandable. Anger and denial are very common responses to any sort of frustration. The problem is that this situation may last for quite a long time, e.g., until high-quality images of Prayer Man would be available to the community, or some other relevant documents would emerge.

I would propose to declare a moratorium on posting on Prayer Man threads until a researcher has a novel factual information on the case, or responds to such posting of another researcher. This could be based on a gentlemen agreement of those interested in Prayer Man problem. As the one proposing the moratorium, I will now stop reacting to posts in Prayer Man's thread until I have anything novel coming from my own research which would deserve posting, or unless anyone else posts a strong novel find. I see no problems to discuss partial issues (e.g., Baker's run to the Depository, or Second floor encounter) in other relevant threads. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, James R Gordon said:
I bought the Prayerman book. It is written by Stan Dane.
 
It is written much as a diary and the main ideas are very much opinion and assumption. The real brain behind this theory is Sean Murphy. I remember Sean from Lancer and he was certainly a thoughtful researcher. However Stan is taking his thinking - which was a great number of years ago - as gospel. I have no idea what Sean thinks about his ideas from the 1990’s today.
 
The identification of Oswald as this man is based on spurious evidence. Prayerman is clearly a person, but until the 1990’s when Sean identified him and actually named him, the research community were unaware he was even in the image. One thing that bothers me is the poor research. There is a section where Stan comments that Prayerman was not him, not her and so on therefore he had to be Oswald. But that is utter nonsense. I seem to remember there was well over 100 employees and therefore this Prayerman could be anyone of them. Prayerman is identified as being one of a select group: those who are known to be in the doorway and Oswald. Prayerman could be anyone. Oswald is included in this group because of Fitz’s notes.
 
But we have no idea whether Oswald ever was on these stairs. Oswald says - in Fitz’s notes he was outside - and that is taken as gospel. Fitz's notes have been the source of considerable debate in the JFK assassination community however because Oswald says in these notes he was outside that is considered a fact in the book. That Prayer man could be any one of the other employees in the TSBD is not considered. They do not exist. The only ones from whom the selection of Oswald was made were those known to be on these outside steps and Oswald. Not exactly the pinnacle of academic research.
 
I have not completed the book, but it appears ( based on what I have read so far ) to be very much “castles in the air” type of  writing. Bart mentioned the reviews, actually we do not have the real names of many of these reviewers. One is actually called Hidell. I suspect many are ROKC members. So I am not sure these reviews - which are indeed positive - may be friends supporting Stan and not legitimate reviews. There is certainly no academic or a reputable JFK assassination researcher who has reviewed the book - as far as I can see.
 
I will complete the book and write a proper review.
 
James

In this same thread Richard Hocking in conjunction with Sean Murphy deduct the possible candidates based on all available evidence for Prayer Man's ID. 

"That Prayer man could be any one of the other employees in the TSBD is not considered. They do not exist. The only ones from whom the selection of Oswald was made were those known to be on these outside steps and Oswald. Not exactly the pinnacle of academic research." This has to be taken with a massive grain of salt James.

Fritz's notes are a small part, not the gospel you allude to either. It helps to know that Oswald knew where Shelley was. Even if the phrase is used in conjunction where he was when it happened, or whether he talked to him after the shooting (no work etc.). Which would place Oswald much longer at the TSBD, since Shelley went to the rail road yard with Lovelady first!, which doesn't help the story-line for getting his change of clothes and his so called gun to blast JDT away either. Add on 3 newspaper reports that place Oswald at the TSBD at 12:45 as part of a timing issue!

The fact that the 2nd floor lunch room encounter did not happen and the numerous reports by various lawmen that state that Oswald was encountered in the vestibule on the first floor while trying to leave instead have more weight, that in conjunction with his statements where he was just before and during the shooting.

Of the 11 5 star reviews at the .com site one is done by a ROKCer.

On the .co.uk site again the same person has left a reviews. He again is the only ROKCer who submitted a review.

Hidell is the nickname for someone who is a DPUK member actually, has no connection to ROKC whatsoever.

 

Why don't you guys mention the ROKC swearing instead, at least I would be able to say "you got me"

 

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am well aware that Richard and Sean reflected on other employees. That is described in the book. The point is that when it comes to the point to decide who could be Prayerman only those known to be on the steps and Oswald were seriously decided. It would be different if the Robin Unger image were clear - though I agree it is the clearest so far - but it is not and there is nothing in that image on which serious discussion can be made. It is a grainy image from which all kinds of assumptions can be made. And that is the problem. Prayerman could be anyone. But Stan is convinced it is Oswald and it is clear a third candidate would clearly be inconvenient to the present argument. I understand that, but what is absent in this argument is clear evidence why Prayerman cannot be anyone else but Oswald. Yes it could be Oswald, but so far there is no evidence why it must be Oswald and why it cannot be anyone else. Without that this is a flimsy argument.

As regards the second floor meeting, I have yet to get to that part. The 2nd floor meeting is an established part of the JFK assassination literature. I am interested to see the evidence why it actually never took place.

Swearing at ROKC is not the only activity there. Character undermining appears to have been the sole activity at ROKC in the recent weeks.

James.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with statements like "Prayer Man can be anybody."

Because there are clues that can be used to narrow down the number of candidates. For example, it is clear that Prayer Man is indeed a man. (The whole Prayer Woman ordeal was a bunch of silliness IMO.) That alone doubles the odds that Prayer Man is Oswald... or any other man.

PM is likely an employee working in the TSBD building. (What passerby would climb to the top step of what appears to be a private business entrance and stand in the corner?) That narrows down the number of candidates tremendously. (I realize, of course, that this is already a given for most people here.)

Determining PM's height will either increase or decrease the odds that Prayer Man is Oswald. I believe his height can be determined, but doing so could require a good deal of effort. Andrej is working on that. I would hope that somebody would do the same, but assume PM is standing back in the corner, not out with a foot down one step.

I've read that most the TSBD employees other than Oswald have been ruled out. If so, then that greatly increases the odds of PM being Oswald.

That leaves employees of the other businesses operating in the building. The more information that can be gathered about them, the better for determining the odds PM is Oswald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James you now also confirmed that you are not up to date with all the material either.

Why do people in here do not ask questions about the material instead of stating their opinion based on the partial evidence they only are aware of.......and with questions I mean the ones that have not been asked/discussed before. The search system on this forum is one of the best around!

The second floor encounter fugezi is all the more telling for placing Oswald away from the 1st floor where Oswald stated he was.

It's evident you have a bone to pick w ROKC as well, I suggest you join up and voice your concerns there.

Any way. Best to you all and HNY!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2016 at 0:15 PM, Bart Kamp said:

I have a made a post about Richard Bernabei a Canadian researcher who corresponded heavily with Richard E. Sprague, Howard Roffman and Harold Weisberg.

Bernabei is the first researcher who actively mapped everyone on the steps from the available material at that time. He has id-ed Prayer Man and has even made sketches of him back in the late 60's

Bernabei is without a doubt the first one who mapped Prayer Man along with Richard E. Sprague.

Mati Bernabei, Richard's daughter, contacted me recently after seeing this post. She told me a few things about her dad and also provided me with his picture from the 50's.

I have added the info at the bottom of the post linked above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stated on Facebook yesterday that i do NOT believe that prayer man is Oswald.

I was then immediately asked if i had read Stan Danes book, as if it is the Holy Grail of Prayer Man Research.

 

I was there when Sean Murphy first started his Prayer man thread, i read every post he made,

my conclusion, Oswald is NOT standing on the top landing of the TSBD doorway.

Until i see clearer, higher resolution Darnell frames, no amount of speculation will convince me that Prayer Man is Oswald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Robin Unger said:

I stated on Facebook yesterday that i do NOT believe that prayer man is Oswald.

I was then immediately asked if i had read Stan Danes book, as if it is the Holy Grail of Prayer Man Research.

 

I was there when Sean Murphy first started his Prayer man thread, i read every post he made,

my conclusion, Oswald is NOT standing on the top landing of the TSBD doorway.

Until i see clearer, higher resolution Darnell frames, no amount of speculation will convince me that Prayer Man is Oswald.

Robin,

The final sentence of your post suggests that you COULD be convinced PM is Oswald, if you could see a clear, high resolution frame showing that to be the case. So my question is, what made you conclude it is NOT Oswald? Does the fuzzy image not look like him to you?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Robin,

The final sentence of your post suggests that you COULD be convinced PM is Oswald, if you could see a clear, high resolution frame showing that to be the case. So my question is, what made you conclude it is NOT Oswald? Does the fuzzy image not look like him to you?

 

The Fuzzy Prayer Man image proves nothing, it just leads to wild speculation

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...