How Did They Get Roscoe White To Lean Like That And Not Fall Over?

[Andrej Stancak]

Finally, please see the alignment of RIT 4.1. and the CE-133c. Again, a very good match. Thus, my answer to the question I asked in post No. 239 would be that the Imperial camera had an optical problem causing the vertical lines in the right part of the picture to be displaced towards the right. Thus, keystoning was in place, however, it was a natural phenomenon which related to a certain malfunction of this particular camera. Further, it is almost excluded, in my opinion, that this defect was present in every Imperial camera. Therefore, the divergence of the vertical lines actually cements this particular camera as the one used to take all three backyard pictures.

Edited September 21, 2016 by Andrej Stancak

[Paul Trejo]

And here we go with CE 133B and RIT 4.1. - the same angle. The backyard picture was rotated to have the staircase post vertical.

This is impressive, Andrej, but here is the further challenge. We have not one, but four different BYP poses.

To add confirmation to your demonstration, you must show that this angle applies to ALL FOUR of the BYP poses. Can you?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Andrej Stancak]

And here we go with CE 133B and RIT 4.1. - the same angle. The backyard picture was rotated to have the staircase post vertical.

This is impressive, Andrej, but here is the further challenge. We have not one, but four different BYP poses.

To add confirmation to your demonstration, you must show that this angle applies to ALL FOUR of the BYP poses. Can you?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul:

I am not sure I am familiar with the fourth backyard picture. Please post it or a link if possible. Thank you.

[Paul Trejo]

And here we go with CE 133B and RIT 4.1. - the same angle. The backyard picture was rotated to have the staircase post vertical.

This is impressive, Andrej, but here is the further challenge. We have not one, but four different BYP poses.

To add confirmation to your demonstration, you must show that this angle applies to ALL FOUR of the BYP poses. Can you?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul:

I am not sure I am familiar with the fourth backyard picture. Please post it or a link if possible. Thank you.

OK, this is getting more interesting, Andrej. Here's my understanding of it.

You have shown three poses -- and yet there were four BYP's. Yet, there were really only three poses of Roscoe White (in my theory) and the fourth pose was LHO himself.

And, we don't have the original pose by LHO (in my theory).

However, for 133-A, we have TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS, and this is what I was thinking of, when I said four BYP's.

The two different versions are the 1st one found allegedly in Ruth Paine's garage (CE-133A) and the 3rd one found by Jeanne and George DeMohrenschildt in 1967, (CE-133A-deM) around the time of the Jim Garrison scandal.

This is the same pose -- BUT A WIDER BACKGROUND than the Ruth Paine model. Perhaps you have seen the difference. Here is a link:

http://www.jfklancer.com/Rifle.html

Now -- it you have proven that Jack White was mistaken about his "Keystone" theory -- then I'm duly impressed. I always thought that Jack White was decades ahead of everybody else in this regard. You might have surpassed him, and that's spectacular, if you have. One more photo should do it, IMHO.

Now, having said that, it does not change the question of pasting LHO's head onto Roscoe White's body. The Imperial Reflex camera was the same -- according to your findings -- but the body-double question remains open, in my reading.

I personally see a lump in the right wrist of the BYP -- and LHO didn't have such a lump -- but Roscoe White did. I wonder if you are working with the most original copies.

I have asked NARA for exact replicas back in 2013, but they denied my request.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 21, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Thanks to Tom Hume we finally have a reversal (left-to-right) of the BYP with that right-leaning stance. Notice how the center of gravity is obviously lost in the reversal photograph -- which is never lost in any merely left-to-right reversal.

Many thanks to Tom.

Regards,
--Paul

Edited September 21, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Tom Hume]

You’re welcome Paul, but actually is was Ray Mitcham’s straightening job in post #22 - I just flipped it.

Edited September 21, 2016 by Tom Hume

[Andrej Stancak]

I have flipped a different version of CE133A, the one showing more of the background, and it does not look to me any more suspicious than the unflipped version. We come to the pose itself soon.

[Paul Trejo]

Please find here a comparison of the backyard picture with my simulation of Oswald's pose. The purpose of this small experiment was to show the maximum leaning angle provided that: 1) the front part of the left foot touches the ground, 2) all weight rests on the right foot, 3) the trunk and the head align with the vertical plane perpendicular to the ground. The arms simulate Oswald's pose only approximately, however, it was not the purpose of this experiment to reproduce all aspects of Oswald's pose. Also, the right foot is rotated slightly more compared to Oswald's stance...

The angle of leaning in the right picture appears even larger than in the original backyard picture. This is highlighted in the picture below. The yellow line in Oswald's figure connects the tip of the left foot with the nose, and crosses the left knee. In the right hand side figure, the same line was copied to cross the tip of the left foot. However, the yellow line misses the nose by a large margin. Thus, Oswald's pose looks strange on the first sight, however, it can be reproduced. Holding a rifle weighing 3.4 kg would make the pose even more stable. I have tested this condition by reproducing the pose whilst holding a stone weighing about 3 kg in my left hand (not shown).

The new pictures were taken by my daughter. Interestingly, I had to ask her to make sure in the next round of shooting that the vertical lines are really vertical and the horizontal lines are horizontal. The reason was that my daughter rotated the pictures towards the right in maybe a subconscious effort to correct the strong leaning as if trying to avoid my falling down. Could this be the reason for seeing this particular backyard picture rotated towards the right?

Andrej, surely you see that the yellow line drawn passes directly through LHO's head, but only grazes your left ear.

The center of gravity is not the same. That's beside the fact that your right toes are keeping your balance -- unlike LHO's.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 21, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Andrej Stancak]

And here we go with CE 133B and RIT 4.1. - the same angle. The backyard picture was rotated to have the staircase post vertical.

This is impressive, Andrej, but here is the further challenge. We have not one, but four different BYP poses.

To add confirmation to your demonstration, you must show that this angle applies to ALL FOUR of the BYP poses. Can you?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul:

I am not sure I am familiar with the fourth backyard picture. Please post it or a link if possible. Thank you.

OK, this is getting more interesting, Andrej. Here's my understanding of it.

You have shown three poses -- and yet there were four BYP's. Yet, there were really only three poses of Roscoe White (in my theory) and the fourth pose was LHO himself.

And, we don't have the original pose by LHO (in my theory).

However, for 133-A, we have TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS, and this is what I was thinking of, when I said four BYP's.

The two different versions are the 1st one found allegedly in Ruth Paine's garage (CE-133A) and the 3rd one found by Jeanne and George DeMohrenschildt in 1967, (CE-133A-deM) around the time of the Jim Garrison scandal.

This is the same pose -- BUT A WIDER BACKGROUND than the Ruth Paine model. Perhaps you have seen the difference. Here is a link:

http://www.jfklancer.com/Rifle.html

Now -- it you have proven that Jack White was mistaken about his "Keystone" theory -- then I'm duly impressed. I always thought that Jack White was decades ahead of everybody else in this regard. You might have surpassed him, and that's spectacular, if you have. One more photo should do it, IMHO.

Now, having said that, it does not change the question of pasting LHO's head onto Roscoe White's body. The Imperial Reflex camera was the same -- according to your findings -- but the body-double question remains open, in my reading.

I personally see a lump in the right wrist of the BYP -- and LHO didn't have such a lump -- but Roscoe White did. I wonder if you are working with the most original copies.

I have asked NARA for exact replicas back in 2013, but they denied my request.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul:

You raised many interesting question, and I hope that this thread will answer many if not all of them. Too bad that NARA did not volunteer to give you copies of backyard pictures.

I have the highest appreciation for Mr. Jack White's work. He was limited in his research by the technical possibilities of that time. I am sure he would be delighted to see that researchers continue to search for the truth about the backyard photographs. And if some of components of his research would now be updated, so be it - this does not detract from his work at all. However, it would be a mistake not to check Mr. White's findings and conclusions.

[Andrej Stancak]

Please find here a comparison of the backyard picture with my simulation of Oswald's pose. The purpose of this small experiment was to show the maximum leaning angle provided that: 1) the front part of the left foot touches the ground, 2) all weight rests on the right foot, 3) the trunk and the head align with the vertical plane perpendicular to the ground. The arms simulate Oswald's pose only approximately, however, it was not the purpose of this experiment to reproduce all aspects of Oswald's pose. Also, the right foot is rotated slightly more compared to Oswald's stance...

The angle of leaning in the right picture appears even larger than in the original backyard picture. This is highlighted in the picture below. The yellow line in Oswald's figure connects the tip of the left foot with the nose, and crosses the left knee. In the right hand side figure, the same line was copied to cross the tip of the left foot. However, the yellow line misses the nose by a large margin. Thus, Oswald's pose looks strange on the first sight, however, it can be reproduced. Holding a rifle weighing 3.4 kg would make the pose even more stable. I have tested this condition by reproducing the pose whilst holding a stone weighing about 3 kg in my left hand (not shown).

The new pictures were taken by my daughter. Interestingly, I had to ask her to make sure in the next round of shooting that the vertical lines are really vertical and the horizontal lines are horizontal. The reason was that my daughter rotated the pictures towards the right in maybe a subconscious effort to correct the strong leaning as if trying to avoid my falling down. Could this be the reason for seeing this particular backyard picture rotated towards the right?

Andrej, surely you see that the yellow line drawn passes directly through LHO's head, but only grazes your left ear.

The center of gravity is not the same. That's beside the fact that your right toes are keeping your balance -- unlike LHO's.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul:

The purpose of this small experiment was to show that extreme leaning is possible without falling down. Here I showed a pose which inclined even more than Oswald's pose. I had no intention to reproduce the exact Oswald's pose in CE133A - this would require a thorough preparation, shooting pictures by triggering the camera from the laptop, inspect the result by comparing each new picture with the backyard picture, and shooting again. It should also involve preparation of an object of similar shape and weight as the rifle held in man's left hand.

The center of mass analysis has some limitations. The rifle held by the left hand was an essential component in keeping this posture stable. Further, the man's body is not a sack of potatoes which would fall or not depending on the location of centre of mass. Human's foot muscles (actually the tibial muscles) can exert force which counteracts the gravitation force, hence it is not just a calculation of centre of mass as in the paper from Dartmouth university.

Edited September 21, 2016 by Andrej Stancak

[Tom Hume]

Please excuse me for changing the subject for a moment.

Subjective and open to interpretation as it is, here is what appears to be emerging from my analysis of the ICO puzzles.

There were four backyard photos using two body doubles: Roscoe White, one of the potential assassins, and Buell Wesley Frazier, a good guy and an associate member of Richard Nagell’s ICO group.

This appears to mean that Roscoe White was the subject of at least one photo, and Wesley was the subject of at least one photo.

There are two different rifles pictured, one ordered by A Hidell from Klein’s, and the second rifle, a "ringer" created by Richard Case Nagell bearing the serial number C-2766.

One of the rifles is sporting a rope sling, and the other a stock leather sling.

If my preliminary work is correct, Buell Wesley Frazier is holding the Klein’s Carcano, and it has the stock leather sling. Roscoe White, then, should be the one pictured brandishing the Carcano with a rope sling.

With a complete set of four good photos, the "rope sling" portion of this JUST MIGHT BE TESTABLE.

GO!

Tom

Edited September 21, 2016 by Tom Hume

[Thomas Graves]

[moved to a new thread and deleted here]

[moved and deleted]

Edited September 22, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

Paul,

Thanks for finally answering my question.

I hate to admit it, but I rather like your answer.

-- Tommy

Question: Did LHO happen to have Roscoe's phone number in his little book?

How do you know Roscoe joined "Walker's team"?

Tommy, on this point I refer to Ron Lewis and his book, Flashback: The Untold Story of Lee Harvey Oswald (1993).

I realize very few people refer to this book, and I do admit that Ron sometimes exaggerates his case a bit (by claiming he was LHO's "best friend"). Yet I find Ron's story to be believable in its general outline and in its naivete. In brief, Ron's story is this:

(1) Ron was in New Orleans hiding out from the law because of some bounced checks in the Northeastern US. Ron was also a less-than-honorably discharged Marine. Ron had a quickly deployable skill -- meat packing. He walked to work passing by Reily Coffee Company. One day in the summer of 1963, Ron met LHO on the street, handing out FPCC fliers.

(2) Ron and LHO struck up a conversation, and developed a rapport. Ron was convinced that LHO was a Socialist, looking out for the little guy, and that they had much in common.

(3) One day LHO offered Ron a volunteer position working for Guy Banister on the Russell Long campaign. Ron was to join the Russell Long campaign and spy on them, and bring reports to Guy Banister. Ron decided to do it for the intrigue. It turned out that Ron had a great time doing that.

(4) Ron would get up early in the morning on his way to work just to meet LHO at Thomas Alba's Garage for camaraderie and Long campaign gossip.

(5) At one point, LHO told Ron to listen to the radio to hear LHO in support of the FPCC. Ron was delighted with what he heard.

(6) However, around the same time, LHO changed his personality. He became darker. He demanded that Ron help him hijack an airplane to Cuba. Ron back-pedaled as fast as he could, and told LHO that Cuba is only 50 miles from Florida, and the best way to Cuba would be to take a small, private airplane from Miami.

(7) To make a long story short, in the context of their brief summer relationship, Ron visited Guy Banister's office once, which was swarming with Cuban refugees -- and Ron soon learned that LHO was not really a Socialist, but was actually working for the Radical Right. Rather than support Fidel Castro, LHO was more likely to assassinate Fidel Castro.

(8) Among the Radical Right folks that Ron Lewis saw in New Orleans in Guy Banister's circle in 1963 was Roscoe White. Ron remembers the name very clearly, because of the association with the cartoon "Roscoe Rabbit," and Ron and LHO used to joke about Roscoe's name.

That's very abstract -- but this could explain why LHO had Roscoe White's contact info in his address book.

In other words, Roscoe White was working with Guy Banister, even in the summer of 1963 -- along with David Ferrie, and with mercenaries like Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Roy Hargraves, William Seymour, and countless Cuban refugees. (This was part-time, though, because Roscoe lived in Dallas.)

Their common goal was to assassinate Fidel Castro -- but there was a secondary goal known only to a very few -- namely, to assassinate JFK.

In his book, Flashback, Ron Lewis says that he confronted LHO with this shocking plot, and LHO confessed that when Guy Banister learned that LHO had been General Walker's shooter, that Guy Banister began to put pressure on LHO to force his cooperation.

That is -- General Walker played a direct role in Guy Banister's New Orleans operation. In Jeff Caufield's new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015) we see a confirmation that Guy Banister and General Walker were close political allies (along with folks like Joseph Milteer).

In the Radical Right in Dallas in 1963, General Walker was the leading figure. Roscoe White, who was also in the Radical Right, would have moved in General Walker's circles (as did J.D. Tippit). When Roscoe White joined the Dallas Police in October, 1963, it was not by accident.

Anyway -- this is a rational connection between Roscoe White and LHO on the one hand and General Walker on the other hand. I admit that Ron's story is abstract and incomplete -- but I also believe it harmonizes more facts about LHO's summer and LHO's connections than anything else I've read from the past 50 years, until Caufield's book.

Finally, as you may know, Ron Lewis was one of Oliver Stone's advisers for his 1992 movie, JFK.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 22, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Guest Rob Caprio]

Being "under oath" with the WC meant very little for several reasons. Firstly, they never enforced a perjury charge against any witness, thus, they never enforced a "must tell the truth" approach.

Secondly, there was no cross-examination, therefore, it is not legal testimony that you will find in a court of law. Numerous witnesses brought lawyers with them to testify, but there was no lawyer for LHO. That is wrong.

You have the right to believe everything that Marina said, but both the WC and HSCA had doubts about her truthfulness on quite a few issues. I choose to be more careful and that is my right.

You call my account of the camera "one-sided", but it is based on the evidence. Do you have different evidence? If so, please let me know about it. You seem willing to believe claims by Marina and lay the issue on LHO, but that is not how I see it. Anything LHO would have told her in private was protected under law so all we would have is her claim that it was said.

I don't need to review the testimony in this thread as I have reviewed it for thirty years, therefore, I know that there is no evidence showing that LHO owned that camera or that Marina ever took any photos.

Just so you know, I am new here, but I am not new to this topic.

I do recognize, Rob, that you're not new to this topic. The opinions of CTers varies widely -- and always did. The data is enormous and the fact that the US Government has chosen to withhold thousands of JFK documents from the American people is a guarantee that dozens of conflicting theories would emerge as a result.

It's like taking a long list of large numbers, and then covering one of the numbers up, and then asking people to add up the numbers. With one of the large numbers covered up, people will either walk away, or take a guess based on the numbers they can see. The results will vary widely.

So -- I realize that there are other alternatives to my theory. That's why I like to engage others who are well-read on the topic.

I choose to believe Marina Oswald -- you choose to disbelieve her. I choose to believe Ruth Paine. I gather you choose to disbelieve her.

That says little about the witnesses, IMHO, and everything about the Warren Commission decision to withhold thousands of pages of evidence from American historians, jurists, journalists and intellectuals.

Even the HSCA was unable to extract those withheld documents from the US Government. Our best hope today, IMHO, is the JFK Records Act, signed by former President GWH Bush in 1992, authorizing final release of these JFK documents on Thursday 26 October 2017.

In any case -- until then our best resource remains the Warren Commission volumes -- with all its faults. The HSCA documents were published 15 years after the JFK tragedy -- and that is just too long to wait to trace a warm lead on any murder case.

The biggest error of the HSCA, as I read it, was their failure to see the importance of General Walker in so many Warren Commission testimonies.

In any case, the BYP is directly tied to the Walker shooting. That is why Roscoe White is so important -- because he also figures into the Walker shooting, because the BYP were taken only a few weeks before the Walker shooting, when the Walker house photographs were taken, and the Alek J. Hidell fake ID was made, and the famous weapons were purchased. They go together.

For any CT which claims that the Walker shooting was bogus, and that LHO had nothing to do with it -- I am curious why people bother to claim that General Walker's shooting any ANYTHING to do with the JFK shooting. ANYTHING. Otherwise, it was only General Walker himself who claimed a connection.

I believe historians are missing the General Walker connection -- and the BYP are the key to the LHO's connection to the Walker shooting.

IMHO, even Roscoe White was willing to push LHO into the patsy role -- that's how ugly it became. General Walker himself found out that LHO was one of two shooters back in April, and he got revenge on the Kennedys and on LHO at one and the same time.

I believe the clues can be found in the Walker papers, still non-catalogued at UT Austin. Here's only one sample among many:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19750623_EAW_to_Frank_Church.pdf

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Thanks for a summary of your position. I realize that CTers see things differently and that is good as long they are not ignoring the evidence in the process.

The BYPs were allegedly taken 10 days before the Walker shooting (March 31-April 10) and have no connection to the JFK assassination. It was the WC that tried to make a connection. Walker never thought that LHO was involved in the shooting and he had conducted a private investigation as well. He was adamant in saying that CE 573 was not the bullet that he saw and held on the night of April 10.

I personally believe that LHO did not take any photos of Walker's house as he had nothing to do with that based on the evidence in the twenty-six volumes and CDs. There is evidence showing that he could have been eating dinner with the Paines on the night of the 10th as well.

Can you please share with me the evidence that shows EAW thought that LHO was one of the two shooters? I am interested as I have not seen that before so it would be exciting to see it. Thanks.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Rob Caprio

[Thomas Graves]

moved and deleted

moved and deleted

Edited September 22, 2016 by Thomas Graves