PRAYER PERSON - PRAYER MAN OR PRAYER WOMAN? RESEARCH THREAD

[Bill Miller]

17 hours ago, Claude Barnabe said:

Bart,

   Your passion is compelling but witnesses such as Joe Molina had a chance before the HSCA to blow this wide open. All he had to say was 'yeah but LHO was standing there just to my right'. He couldn't say so because it just wasn't true. I don't believe there was any Dallas pressure or fed pressure that could have shut him up at that time. Just doesn't make sense. Respectfully.

Claude,

Not to mention there were interviews conducted on site that day and I seriously doubt that any government branch knew who all those people may have been or what they may have said. I might add too that when everyone was roll called and Oswald wasn't found to be at the TSBD ...  Truly - Shelley - Molina - Lovelady - etc., would have already been approached to say among one another to not say to anyone that Lee Oswald was standing with you all on the steps. That is where one is no longer a researcher - but rather has become an advocate in my view.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Bill Miller

[Bill Miller]

On 11/17/2016 at 9:20 PM, Brian Doyle said:

 

          Mr Stancak has completely ignored that Davidson's 1st frame undoubtedly shows a Prayer Man who is at a visible depth plane up and behind Lovelady to Lovelady's right. Since Lovelady is on the step in that 1st frame, the width of the steps forces Prayer Man to be on the landing since those steps are too narrow to allow a person to be visibly further back and still be on the step. The portal dimensions and ergonomics force Prayer Man to the landing in that situation.

That is a rational observation that has no other alternative in my view.

The lowering of the arms in sync with the reflective light makes me think that this person may have been taking a photo. I also think this person appears too large to be Oswald who didn't appear to be of equal build to Billy Lovelady. So if one finds the one called Prayer Man is of equal or larger size of Billy Lovelady while standing further back from the camera than Billy, then it doesn't make sense to me to consider it to be Oswald any longer.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Bill Miller

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Claude Barnabe said:

Sandy, do you believe the first day/weekend FBI affidavits cited have been changed? You've already answered the question above, just want to be sure.

Claude,

I don't have a hard and fast rule regarding that. I do believe that, in general, first-day affidavits are more reliable than WC testimony that conflicts. However, I've seen cases where first-day affidavits almost surely were concocted. For example, the first-day affidavits of those women who accompanied Gloria Calvery at the procession. So much of their wording is identical that I doubt very much they were written or spoken by each woman individually, without coaching.

I recall both Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady using some identical phrase, like "that little old island" (something like that) that seems suspicious. Though perhaps that is what the folks there called the island.

If someone said in their first day affidavit that they saw Oswald on the TSBD steps at the time of the shooting, certainly that affidavit was altered or deep sixed.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[Bill Miller]

54 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I recall both Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady using some identical phrase, like "that little old island" (something like that) that seems suspicious. Though perhaps that is what the folks there called the island.

One of the two men also used the term "divider". I also recall seeing the term 'island' used by other witnesses in their description of that area as well. Some called it that with a description of it being between the two streets in front of the TSBD.

[Sandy Larsen]

11 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

One of the two men also used the term "divider". I also recall seeing the term 'island' used by other witnesses in their description of that area as well. Some called it that with a description of it being between the two streets in front of the TSBD.

Perhaps the people of Texas had a habit of putting the phrase "little old" in front of certain nouns.

Ha! I just looked up "little old " up in the dictionary and got this:

little old someone or something

ordinary; harmless. (Said to downplay or minimize the importance of something.) Aw, honey, I wasn't gambling. I just went to one little old poker game. Charlie: Did you eat that whole chocolate cake that I was saving for the party? Jane: Little old me?

[Claude Barnabe]

Since the appearance of the PM photo on this thread, I've had an interest in the 'silvery' object around the PM's/PP's right wrist. I thought it would be intriguing to tie the object to LHO's marine corps bracelet. However, the arrest photos show the bracelet on the left wrist. Still, it would be interesting to enhance the photo. Perhaps the PM/PP arms were crossed. Using software called Image Analyzer, this was the best I could do given my limited knowledge of digital photography. The (1) silvery object morphed to (3). Could those be straps of a handbag?

 

My apologies I should have considered this before posting; I now believe that the middle forearm object and the one furthest from the wrist are an artifact of pixel alignment. Similar alignment can be seen on the wall behind PM. I still think the wrist object is real however.

 

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Claude Barnabe

[Andrej Stancak]

3 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

That is a rational observation that has no other alternative in my view.

The lowering of the arms in sync with the reflective light makes me think that this person may have been taking a photo. I also think this person appears too large to be Oswald who didn't appear to be of equal build to Billy Lovelady. So if one finds the one called Prayer Man is of equal or larger size of Billy Lovelady while standing further back from the camera than Billy, then it doesn't make sense to me to consider it to be Oswald any longer.

Bill:

my proposition was actually that Prayer Man stood with only his right foot on the first step (the step below the top landing), and had his left leg bend in knee joint and resting on the top landing. You can read my earlier reconstruction of Prayer Man's height in Darnell here: https://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com/ or in my earlier posts in this thread (about April). I am currently working on a reconstruction of also Wiegman's doorway scene in which Lovelady appears taller than Prayer Man, and actually on 3D reconstructions of all doorway scenes (Darnell, Hughes, Wiegman, Altgens).  So far, my reconstructions are consistent in Prayer Man being 5'9'' and standing with only one foot on the step below the top landing. 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Andrej Stancak

[Bill Miller]

1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Bill:

my proposition was actually that Prayer Man stood with only his right foot on the first step (the step below the top landing), and had his left leg bend in knee joint and resting on the top landing. You can read my earlier reconstruction of Prayer Man's height in Darnell here: https://thejfktruthmatters.wordpress.com/ or in my earlier posts in this thread (about April). I am currently working on a reconstruction of also Wiegman's doorway scene in which Lovelady appears taller than Prayer Man, and actually on 3D reconstructions of all doorway scenes (Darnell, Hughes, Wiegman, Altgens).  So far, my reconstructions are consistent in Prayer Man being 5'9'' and standing with only one foot on the step below the top landing.

It's hard to determine depth detail in 2D images. What I see in Wiegman's film is sunlight passing over this lower individuals legs when some women's heads move out of the way. I do not see anything that places him standing on two different planes. And unless an illusion - he appears to be casting some body shadow onto the wall.

As far as height ... photogammetry would be more useful in my view. But just from a perspective standpoint - any two people of identical height will appear shorter than the other if he or she is even one a step further from the camera and being seen at an upward angle.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Bill Miller

[Andrej Stancak]

12 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

What I see in Wiegman's film is sunlight passing over this lower individuals legs when some women's heads move out of the way. I do not see anything that places him standing on two different planes. And unless an illusion - he appears to be casting some body shadow onto the wall.

It is a bit unfortunate that neither Wiegman nor Darnell film offer a clear view of Prayer Man's legs, and we do not see actually the step below the top landing. Although, in the intitial doorway frames in Darnell's film a bend left leg can be assumed because if his left leg would be straight and perpendicular, we should see the white spot corresponding to the heater standing behind the glass door.

[Andrej Stancak]

I wonder if anyone would agree that Prayer Man in this Darnell's frame has his left leg bent? I took a frame from the first frames in which the doorway start to appear and in which the people on steps still do not obstruct the view. My point is that if the left leg would not be bent and in front of Prayer Man's body, we should see a light spot corresponding to the heater. However, we do not. If the left leg is bent and the foot resting on the top platform, then we can assume that the right leg was straight, in which case this stance would be compatible to the "one-foot-up-one-foot-down" pose.

 

This would be Poser11 reconstruction on Prayer Man's stance. It is not shown in exact Darnell's angle but it is close.

 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Andrej Stancak

[Andrej Stancak]

Maybe I can answer with asking another question: could actually Lee Oswald stand as Prayer Man on the top landing in a pose such as in the backyard photographs with his left leg bent and forwards while resting on his right foot and slightly leaning to his right? I am not sure how many inches could this detract from his height but it is something which needs to be tested  I spent a long time on reconstructing that man' stance few months ago, it is not that that difficult to combine the two projects. Sill some work ahead...

[Bill Miller]

20 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

I wonder if anyone would agree that Prayer Man in this Darnell's frame has his left leg bent? I took a frame from the first frames in which the doorway start to appear and in which the people on steps still do not obstruct the view. My point is that if the left leg would not be bent and in front of Prayer Man's body, we should see a light spot corresponding to the heater. However, we do not. If the left leg is bent and the foot resting on the top platform, then we can assume that the right leg was straight, in which case this stance would be compatible to the "one-foot-up-one-foot-down" pose.

 

 

Just looks to be back in the corner and leaning on the wall as people are filing past him.

[Bill Miller]

On 12/20/2016 at 3:21 PM, Claude Barnabe said:

Bart,

   Your passion is compelling but witnesses such as Joe Molina had a chance before the HSCA to blow this wide open. All he had to say was 'yeah but LHO was standing there just to my right'. He couldn't say so because it just wasn't true. I don't believe there was any Dallas pressure or fed pressure that could have shut him up at that time. Just doesn't make sense. Respectfully.

Of course it doesn't make any sense. People didn't have to know Oswald well - just know that the man they saw on TV was the man they filed past immediately following the shots. I am not impressed with the notion that a mass conspiracy was then put in motion to not tell anyone Lee was on the top landing watching the parade with fellow workers of the TSBD. Truly had even saved Oswald by telling Baker that Lee was an employee in the building. Had Roy seen Lee outside by the door, then he could have said to Baker that 'Lee just came in as I saw him off to the side of the door when we entered the building'. But the thing is, Claude - you aren't starting with the premise that anyone that is unrecognizable in a film image must be Lee Harvey Oswald. Those that keep harping 'evidence' have none when it comes to putting Oswald in that doorway from where I sit.

[Claude Barnabe]

I went back and reread portions of Joe Molina's HSCA testimony. He was asked point blank: 'Do you have an opinion as to if LHO had been standing on the front steps whether or not you would have seen him?' answer:"I would have recalled if he had been standing there, yes. I don't recall seeing him standing there". Personally, I can leave a 'crack' of doubt that Mr. Molina missed it, in that moment. The first day FBI affidavits however, (remember, the government thought they were going to trial) and reason tells me PM can't be LHO, though I wanted it to be.

[Andrej Stancak]

12 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

 

Just looks to be back in the corner and leaning on the wall as people are filing past him.

Bill:

 

The question was not to look or not to look on Prayer Man (I can assure I looked carefully over many months) but to say if Prayer Man had his left leg bent in knee joint or not. What is your opinion?