Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Sean Murphy]

As for Prayer Man's behaviour being no different from that of others near his location, that is true, at least up to a point. But it stops being true up to any point the instant he quits the spot in urgent quest of a coke.

For all we know, Sean, some or all of the others in the Geneva Hines group

also got cokes.

Can you prove they did not?

For all we know, Ray, some or all of the others in the Geneva Hine group

went upstairs

to have furtive group sex

in the second-floor toilets.

Can you prove they did not?

[Sean Murphy]

Is it a certainty that Geneva Hines gave Oswald change for the Coke machine that day?

No, far from a certainty.

[Paul Rigby]

As for Prayer Man's behaviour being no different from that of others near his location, that is true, at least up to a point. But it stops being true up to any point the instant he quits the spot in urgent quest of a coke.

For all we know, Sean, some or all of the others in the Geneva Hines group

also got cokes.

Can you prove they did not?

For all we know, Ray, some or all of the others in the Geneva Hine group

went upstairs

to have furtive group sex

in the second-floor toilets.

Can you prove they did not?

"Do not block the way of orgy,"

Charles Sanders Peirce, Collected Papers, Vol 1, para 135

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Charles_Sanders_Peirce

[Sean Murphy]

Here's Prayer Man in a different frame from Darnell (courtesy of Robin Unger):

Here he is with bit of width reduction (NB click on the image to enlarge):

That last, cropped and magnified:

[Sean Murphy]

Is that you, Lee?

Edited August 27, 2013 by Sean Murphy

[Sean Murphy]

For Oswald to be Prayer Man,

and

for the second-floor lunchroom incident to have really happened as described by Baker and Truly to the WC,

there is only one realistic scenario available.

• Oswald stands in the front entrance, not showing the slightest curiosity about what's just happened on the street--that's because he's been expecting it
• He is however taken by surprise by Baker's sudden and extraordinarily early dash into the building
• He follows him and Truly upstairs by taking the front stairs and crossing the second floor
• He looks through the door window at Truly crossing the landing
• He also sees Baker come onto the landing, but is startled when Baker notices him back
• Not wishing to draw attention to himself, he spins around and starts walking into the lunchroom
• Et cetera.

Why would the Oswald of this scenario want to keep tabs on Baker & Truly's progress? The answer hardly needs spelling out.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Hello Sean

It is encouraging to see that you are a researcher who maintains an open mind on the degree of involvement Oswald had in the assassination. While I do not think it likely, it is entirely possible Oswald knew all about the assassination and, while he might not have been a shooter, he might have had other roles to play. For that matter, I am even willing to entertain he was a federal agent engaged in infiltrating groups involved in whatever.

With this in mind, let us take your last scenario about Prayer Man/Oswald and go a bit further. To do so, it must be assumed Prayer Man is holding a camera, likely a movie camera.

If he is filming, is he not in the worst possible place, deep in the shadows, to catch the assassination on film? Maybe so, but what if there was a glitch in the operation and the assassination took place in the wrong spot? Let me explain.

If I was planning an assassination with rifles at a moving target, and I wanted to assure its success, I would concentrate the rifle fire at the place where my target was slowed to an absolute crawl. Between Houston St. and the Triple Underpass, where would that spot be? There is only one answer, the 120° turn from Houston St. onto Elm St. By the time the limo has reached the Stemmons Freeway sign, it is on a relatively straight stretch of road, picking up speed going downhill and, most important, able to make a quick getaway. No, that great sled of a Lincoln was completely vulnerable and almost at a standstill while making the turn.

Now, if we look at Prayer Man as an observer and recorder of this event, it makes much more sense. From deep in the shadows on the steps, he has a ringside seat of any event taking place on the corner.

So, what happened to the plan and when did Oswald know he was set up? To answer this, we have to assume Oswald was told all of the shots would be coming from the Dal-Tex Building and the County Records Building. In the time it took Baker to run to the TSBD, Oswald may have heard witnesses speaking about seeing a rifle on the 6th floor above him plus witnesses speaking of JFK being shot so much further down Elm St. If he was the only conspirator in the TSBD, and as intelligent as it is claimed he was, it may not have taken him very long to realize he had likely been set up to take the fall, especially so if he had any inkling there was a rifle in the TSBD.

Why did he go to the 2nd floor? It is possible he felt exposed on the 1st floor and needed somewhere more secluded to get his thoughts together and come up with a new plan. That plan, I believe, was for him to walk out the front door a few minutes later.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[Ian Kingsbury]

Sean

Both Baker and Truly knew Oswald was "in the building" therefore they could put him

Anywhere they wanted by shift the witness evidence to not conflict too much with thier story.

What this does is add more weight to the fact that the 3rd/4th floor

"Arrest" by Denham did occur!.

This also supports the twin evidence we see with Braden and Florer and the two sets of tramps.

Also remember Braden said in his HSCA. Evidence that they were bringing out

The rifle holding it by the STRING!

A quick shift of evidence can move the time and location or by ommiting it altogether helps their official story.

Ian

Edited August 28, 2013 by Ian Kingsbury

[J. Raymond Carroll]

"Do not block the way of orgy,"

Charles Sanders Peirce, Collected Papers, Vol 1, para 135

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Charles_Sanders_Peirce

Very good Paul.

How about Oscar WIlde:

We are all in the gutter,

but some of us

are looking at the stars.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

One need only give the gentlest of pulls on the tiny strand of Arnold's information to watch unravel the entire weave of lies put together around the question of Oswald's assassination-time whereabouts.

Arnold's sighting of Lee before the shooting tells us nothing nothing either way

about whether he late got a coke.

And remember Oz told us Fritz took notes

and Fritz said he kept no notes.

So far Oz has been proven truthful

while Fritz is a proven xxxx.

Edited August 28, 2013 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Sean Murphy]

Hello Sean

It is encouraging to see that you are a researcher who maintains an open mind on the degree of involvement Oswald had in the assassination. While I do not think it likely, it is entirely possible Oswald knew all about the assassination and, while he might not have been a shooter, he might have had other roles to play. For that matter, I am even willing to entertain he was a federal agent engaged in infiltrating groups involved in whatever.

With this in mind, let us take your last scenario about Prayer Man/Oswald and go a bit further. To do so, it must be assumed Prayer Man is holding a camera, likely a movie camera.

If he is filming, is he not in the worst possible place, deep in the shadows, to catch the assassination on film? Maybe so, but what if there was a glitch in the operation and the assassination took place in the wrong spot? Let me explain.

If I was planning an assassination with rifles at a moving target, and I wanted to assure its success, I would concentrate the rifle fire at the place where my target was slowed to an absolute crawl. Between Houston St. and the Triple Underpass, where would that spot be? There is only one answer, the 120° turn from Houston St. onto Elm St. By the time the limo has reached the Stemmons Freeway sign, it is on a relatively straight stretch of road, picking up speed going downhill and, most important, able to make a quick getaway. No, that great sled of a Lincoln was completely vulnerable and almost at a standstill while making the turn.

Now, if we look at Prayer Man as an observer and recorder of this event, it makes much more sense. From deep in the shadows on the steps, he has a ringside seat of any event taking place on the corner.

So, what happened to the plan and when did Oswald know he was set up? To answer this, we have to assume Oswald was told all of the shots would be coming from the Dal-Tex Building and the County Records Building. In the time it took Baker to run to the TSBD, Oswald may have heard witnesses speaking about seeing a rifle on the 6th floor above him plus witnesses speaking of JFK being shot so much further down Elm St. If he was the only conspirator in the TSBD, and as intelligent as it is claimed he was, it may not have taken him very long to realize he had likely been set up to take the fall, especially so if he had any inkling there was a rifle in the TSBD.

Why did he go to the 2nd floor? It is possible he felt exposed on the 1st floor and needed somewhere more secluded to get his thoughts together and come up with a new plan. That plan, I believe, was for him to walk out the front door a few minutes later.

Some very interesting thoughts in there, Robert. I think he may have nipped into the front-of-house storage room for just the reason you are giving for a purported trip upstairs to the lunchroom: to get his thoughts together and come up with a new plan.

I personally doubt that Oswald knew all about the assassination, but I do imagine he was implicated in some way. Otherwise the trap that was laid would not have snapped down so viciously and tightly on him. I believe the Prayer Man frames in Wiegman and Darnell may well be showing us a man in sudden deep shock.

My point about the scenario I laid out--Oswald following Baker & Truly upstairs--is not that I believe this is what happened (I don't) but that it is the all but necessary consequence of believing both that Oswald is Prayer Man and the lunchroom incident happened. Those buying into both elements may sincerely believe that their position is doubly supportive of Oswald's innocence: what could be sinister about standing on the steps watching the motorcade or buying a Coca-Cola? The problem is that these two actions, when combined in very quick succession, become problematical.

[Sean Murphy]

One need only give the gentlest of pulls on the tiny strand of Arnold's information to watch unravel the entire weave of lies put together around the question of Oswald's assassination-time whereabouts.

Arnold's sighting of Lee before the shooting tells us nothing nothing either way

about whether he late got a coke.

And remember Oz told us Fritz took notes

and Fritz said he kept no notes.

So far Oz has been proven truthful

while Fritz is a proven xxxx.

So you see nothing odd about a double visit up to the second-floor lunchroom, Ray? Just how thirsty do you think Oswald was that day?

And no, Oswald never told us Fritz took notes. Harry Holmes told us that Oswald said that. That would be the same Harry Holmes you have already in this thread declared quite untrustworthy.

[Sean Murphy]

Within a few short hours of the assassination, Marrion Baker gave an affidavit in the Homicide Office at DPD HQ.

Its central claim reads as follows:

As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me. The manager said, “I know that man, he works here.” I then turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5’9”, 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket.

There are three competing ways of accounting for these remarkable words:

1. Baker had encountered Oswald en route to the second-floor lunchroom, as per his later WC testimony, and got badly confused afterwards as to the details.
2. Baker had encountered someone other than Oswald coming off the stairway several floors up the building.
3. Baker's words report not a real incident but a rushed first draft of what would soon become the lunchroom story.

For reasons already outlined in this thread, I do not buy explanation #1.

Both #2 and #3 do however merit serious exploration on their own terms.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Sean Murphy

[J. Raymond Carroll]

So you see nothing odd about a double visit up to the second-floor lunchroom, Ray? Just how thirsty do you think Oswald was that day?

Correct me if I am wrong, Sean, but no one said he got a coke

while passing through the lunchroom before the shooting.

And no, Oswald never told us Fritz took notes. Harry Holmes told us that Oswald said that. That would be the same Harry Holmes you have already in this thread declared quite untrustworthy.

Holmes is clearly untrustworthy when he talks about matters he did not personally witness.

Beyond that you are right, I don't trust him very much generally.

But even a busted clock is right

twice a day.

While it may be true that no one else reports that Oz made this comment

(I'll have to check)

no one contradicts it either.

In my view, it is exactly the kind of irrelevant comment

(irrelevant to investigators present)

that only a layman would pick up on.

And of course, as we all know now,

Fritz lied when he claimed that he kept no notes,

while Oz was truthful.

The beautiful irony is

that it was Fritz's buddy Holmes

who let the cat

out of the bag!

Edited August 28, 2013 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Sean Murphy]

So you see nothing odd about a double visit up to the second-floor lunchroom, Ray? Just how thirsty do you think Oswald was that day?

Correct me if I am wrong, Sean, but no one said he got a coke

while passing through the lunchroom before the shooting.

And no, Oswald never told us Fritz took notes. Harry Holmes told us that Oswald said that. That would be the same Harry Holmes you have already in this thread declared quite untrustworthy.

Holmes is clearly untrustworthy when he talks about matters he did not personally witness.

Beyond that you are right, I don't trust him very much generally.

But even a busted clock is right

twice a day.

While it may be true that no one else reports that Oz made this comment

(I'll have to check)

no one contradicts it either.

In my view, it is exactly the kind of irrelevant comment

(irrelevant to investigators present)

that only a layman would pick up on.

And of course, as we all know now,

Fritz lied when he claimed that he kept no notes,

while Oz was truthful.

The beautiful irony is

that it was Fritz's buddy Holmes

who let the cat

out of the bag!

Some rather Jesuitical reasoning there, Ray!

RC: Holmes is clearly untrustworthy when he talks about matters he did not personally witness.

SM: Holmes said he personally heard Oswald say X to Fritz about his having taken notes + Holmes said he personally heard Oswald say Y to Fritz about the location of his encounter with the policeman. Apples + apples.

RC: And of course, as we all know now,

Fritz lied when he claimed that he kept no notes,

while Oz was truthful.

SM: Have you ever read the "2nd Fl coke" part of Fritz's notes alongside the equivalent part of Bookhout's solo report? Try it. You may notice something strange.

RC: The beautiful irony is

that it was Fritz's buddy Holmes

who let the cat

out of the bag!

SM: The really beautiful irony is

that I made exactly that observation

when talking about

Holmes's revelation of

a first floor encounter!