Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald Leaving TSBD?


Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

I find it ironic as to how certain individuals will say that all these people "lied" without considering that various people can recall an event with some room for error and actually believe they are being truthful in describing the same occurrence.

The lunchroom encounter is one such example. That encounter was investigated on-site and nowhere have I ever read that there was a lunchroom on the first floor that could be mistaken for the lunchroom on the 2nd floor. There was what was called a domino room if I remember correctly. But does that justify claiming people lied because it doesn't fit a personal belief?

When Truly and Baker entered the building ... no one had said they went to a 1st floor domino room looking for an assassin. As I recall they had went to the elevator so Baker could get to the top of the building as that was his reason for entering the building in the first place. Once inside - it was the elevator not being readily available that led to Truly leading Baker to the stairway. I personally do not see the confusion here unless someone is wanting to be confused for what ever reason.

Shelley and Lovelady's timing of their actions is another one. They basically are telling the same thing despite the poor style of questioning that they were being presented with. They saw Gloria Calvery running towards them crying and saying the President had been shot. That can be interpreted as she came up to the steps to them or they started down the steps to meet her. The Darnell film shows the latter to be the most likely probability. On that particular matter it looks like the only lie that was being told was the one involving our own interpretation of the poorly designed questioning of the witnesses. This is not uncommon when it comes to cross referencing witnesses statements. I personally believe that human error is often overlooked before claiming someone has lied. Both Lovelady and Shelley mentioned going from the steps to the divider/island. I believe it was Shelley when asked if he went straight across the street from the TSBD steps - he replied that it was a bit more angled to the right. And when asked about seeing Truly and the Patrolman entering the building - Lovelady said he looked back after 15 to 25 steps to see Roy and Officer Baker enter the building. I find nothing about what was said on that issue that was a lie. Even the going on from there to the RR Yard - pausing for a while and then heading back to the TSBD for a span of 2 - 3 minutes isn't a big deal as it they only estimated the time out in the plaza before returning to the building. Eventually Lovelady made it back outside and is filmed in the area of the steps, which that was my only interest in the matter. So yes, just keep telling people that everyone lied despite James asking that you make specific references as to how you reached that conclusion. At least if you have nothing more to add, then you won't have to worry about running up the thread count answering questions.   :)

 

Crystal clear example of someone who is not up to date with the facts...I rest my case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Bart Kamp said:

Crystal clear example of someone who is not up to date with the facts...I rest my case.

I will quote James Gordon:

Bart, ..................  I have read most of the thread and - aside from the circumstantial evidence throughout the thread - I see no consistent line of thought. On a number of times you have chastised members to read the whole thread. In doing so, you imply that once having read the thread we will better understand your position. 

It is a real “cop-out” and evasion of the numbers questions that have been raised to respond by saying “read the whole thread.”

May I offer a suggestion. It is clear you know the thread better than most. Therefore - rather than constantly referring members to read the whole thread - which contains around 1000+ posts - could you highlight what ( for you are the most important posts ) for us to read to better understand your position. "

Bart response:

" I'd like to add that the bigger picture and the barrage of evidence puts a very strong case together for Oswald to be Prayer Man. And that the pic. is merely the icing on the cake.

  1. The 2nd floor lunch room encounter did not happen.
  2. Oswald stated he was on the first floor.having lunch and while the motorcade went past. Many newspaper reports and interrogation reports support this.
  3. Shelley and Lovelady lied in their WC testimony when it came to to their timings and observations
  4. Truly lied.
  5. Baker lied.
  6. Reid and Sanders lied.
  7. Frazier has been economical With the truth as well.
  8. etc.
  9. etc. ............................................................................  "

 

Bart response #2:

Crystal clear example of someone who is not up to date with the facts...I rest my case. "

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this post I will show Bill Miller why the Baker/Oswald 2nd floor encounter is being challenged. (Well, some key parts of it.) In the post I will narrow down what really happened to three possible scenarios.

I ask forum members more knowledgeable than myself to point out mistakes I've made so that I can correct them. I hope Bart Kamp will weigh in here.

 

5 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

Even the going on from there to the RR Yard - pausing for a while and then heading back to the TSBD for a span of 2 - 3 minutes isn't a big deal as it they only estimated the time out in the plaza before returning to the building.

One of them (Lovelady I believe) also said that they went down to where the limo was during the shooting, and they stayed there for four or five minutes.

So, in all, they went 1) to the island across the street from the TSBD entrance, 2) to where the limo had been, 3) to the railroad yard, and finally 4) back into the TSBD through the door on the west side (if I understand correctly where that door is). Upon going inside, they (or just Lovelady?) see Victoria Adams exit the stairway.

This Shelley/Lovelady testimony contradicts Victoria Adam's testimony. She said that she ran down the stairs right after the shots took place. She said that she saw Shelley and Lovelady as she exited the stairway. She also said that nobody else was there at the time.

Could Victoria Adams be so wrong in her recollections that she only thought she ran down the steps right after the shooting, whereas she really waited several minutes before running down? Or is it possible that Shelley and Lovelady actually went back inside the building right after the shooting, at which time Victoria Adams saw them?

Let's look at Shelley's and Lovelady's first-day affidavits:

Shelley said:

"I ran across the street to the corner of the park and ran into a girl crying and she said the President had been shot. This girl's name is Gloria Calvary who is an employee of this same building. I went back to the building and went inside and called my wife and told her what happened. I was on the first floor then and I stayed at the elevator and was told not to let anyone out of the elevator. I left the elevator and went with the police on up to the other floors. I left Jack Dougherty in charge."

Lovelady wrote:

"After it was over we went back into the building and I went to work. took some police officers up to search the building."

 

Here's the timeline I gather from these two statements, what Victoria Jackson testified to, and what we see (and don't see) in the films:

  1. The shots are fired. Both Bill Shelley and Gloria Calvary immediately run to the island across the street from the TSBD.
     
  2. Victoria Adams begins running down the steps.
     
  3. Shelley decides to call his wife and runs back to the TSBD entrance. He and Lovelady run inside the building.
     
  4. Victoria Adams exits the stairway on the first floor and sees Shelley and Lovelady, but nobody else. At the same time, Officer Baker runs across Elm Street extension.
     
  5. Shelley calls his wife.


So far all the statements agree with each other and everybody is honest.

In later statements and testimony, Shelley and Lovelady add to their prior statements. They say they went to where the limo had been when the shots were fired, and later went to the railroad yard. Let's call this "The Excursion."

I have two questions regarding these additions:

  1. Did The Excursion really happen?
  2. If so, did The Excursion happen before or after Shelley and Lovelady went back inside the TSBD (as per their first day affidavits, quoted above).

Here are the three possibilities, and my takes on each one:

  1. Shelley and Lovelady did indeed make the rail yard excursion after the shooting. But they did so AFTER they went back inside the TSBD.

    If this is what happened, then the first-day statements and Victoria Adams' testimony generally agree with each other. There are no lies. Other than what the WC drew out.

    The WC lawyers made it sound like that Lovelady first saw Victoria Adams exit the stairway after his and Shelley's long excursion (when in reality he first saw her the first time he went into the TSBD). The WC did this to discredit Victoria Adam's testimony, because it contradicted the Baker/Oswald 2nd floor encounter.
     
  2. Shelley and Lovelady did indeed make the rail yard excursion after the shooting. And they did so BEFORE they went back inside the TSBD.

    This scenario makes a xxxx out of Victoria Adams. (Or makes her memory seriously flawed.) Because she claimed to have seen Shelley and Lovelady upon exiting the stairway less than a minute after the shooting. Yet they weren't there till several minutes after the shooting.
     
  3. Shelley and Lovelady's rail yard excursion was fabricated after the first day. It was done at the behest of the WC in order to discredit Victoria Adam's testimony, since it contradicted the Baker/Oswald 2nd floor encounter.

    This scenario makes liars of Shelley and Lovelady. It also begs the question why Victoria Adams was called to testify. Had she not been called, then this charade would have been unnecessary.
     
Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

I will quote James Gordon:

Bart, ..................  I have read most of the thread and - aside from the circumstantial evidence throughout the thread - I see no consistent line of thought. On a number of times you have chastised members to read the whole thread. In doing so, you imply that once having read the thread we will better understand your position. 

It is a real “cop-out” and evasion of the numbers questions that have been raised to respond by saying “read the whole thread.”

May I offer a suggestion. It is clear you know the thread better than most. Therefore - rather than constantly referring members to read the whole thread - which contains around 1000+ posts - could you highlight what ( for you are the most important posts ) for us to read to better understand your position. "

Bart response:

" I'd like to add that the bigger picture and the barrage of evidence puts a very strong case together for Oswald to be Prayer Man. And that the pic. is merely the icing on the cake.

  1. The 2nd floor lunch room encounter did not happen.
  2. Oswald stated he was on the first floor.having lunch and while the motorcade went past. Many newspaper reports and interrogation reports support this.
  3. Shelley and Lovelady lied in their WC testimony when it came to to their timings and observations
  4. Truly lied.
  5. Baker lied.
  6. Reid and Sanders lied.
  7. Frazier has been economical With the truth as well.
  8. etc.
  9. etc. ............................................................................  "

 

Bart response #2:

Crystal clear example of someone who is not up to date with the facts...I rest my case. "

 

To hide behind James Gordon is pretty lame Bill Miller.

I don't work for him and his request was partially addressed, but that reply you quote as a direct reply to James' request is solely your (!) interpretation.

A partial c&p is not helping you either.

If you are so desperate to know the main points then I suggest to get your finger out and 

1/ Read the actual thread.

2/ Read Stan Dane's book.

3/ Go to the Prayer Man website and other sites to get better up to date.

4/ The one year old movie only offers a partial picture.

 

Until then have a great one!

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...