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

[Thomas Graves]

I just finished watching Jack White's presentation on the photos. Jack said that by tilting the print of one of the backyard photos in his lab, he was able to precisely achieve the same perspective in another of the photos. (Unfortunately he didn't elaborate as to whether the third background also matched.)

Based upon this and what we've seen in this thread, I believe it can be concluded that -- with near certainty -- at least two of the photos were made from one photo. Which means that the person posing with the rifle, and his shadow, were added later. And since this was indeed done, it is reasonable to assume it was also done for the third photo.

I learned one other pertinent thing from Jack's presentation, and that is that experts hired by the HSCA concluded the photos came from Oswald's camera. They determined this by comparing markings (imperfections made by the camera) on the backyard photos with those on a picture known to have been taken by that camera. Jack noted that these marks could have been introduced by taking the final photo of a photo using Oswald's camera.

Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother Robert a couple weeks later.

Does anybody know:

1. When the existence of the backyard photos was first made public?

2. When copies of the backyard photos were first made public?

The Imperial reflex camera was first shown by Robert Oswald on Feb 24th 1964, three months after the shooting. He said he found it several weeks after the assassination.

"Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother, Robert, a couple weeks later."

Neither did the DPD find it when they searched the Paine residence twice. So they were either the most inept policemen ever or the camera wasn't there when they searched.

Ray,

Didn't an Irving policeman or detective claim to have found it at Ruth's on 11/23/63?

"It looked broken, so I didn't take it in or list it as evidence." Or words to that effect.

http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pdf/WH25_CE_2557.pdf

-- Tommy

Edited September 14, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Ray Mitcham]

I just finished watching Jack White's presentation on the photos. Jack said that by tilting the print of one of the backyard photos in his lab, he was able to precisely achieve the same perspective in another of the photos. (Unfortunately he didn't elaborate as to whether the third background also matched.)

Based upon this and what we've seen in this thread, I believe it can be concluded that -- with near certainty -- at least two of the photos were made from one photo. Which means that the person posing with the rifle, and his shadow, were added later. And since this was indeed done, it is reasonable to assume it was also done for the third photo.

I learned one other pertinent thing from Jack's presentation, and that is that experts hired by the HSCA concluded the photos came from Oswald's camera. They determined this by comparing markings (imperfections made by the camera) on the backyard photos with those on a picture known to have been taken by that camera. Jack noted that these marks could have been introduced by taking the final photo of a photo using Oswald's camera.

Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother Robert a couple weeks later.

Does anybody know:

1. When the existence of the backyard photos was first made public?

2. When copies of the backyard photos were first made public?

The Imperial reflex camera was first shown by Robert Oswald on Feb 24th 1964, three months after the shooting. He said he found it several weeks after the assassination.

"Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother, Robert, a couple weeks later."

Neither did the DPD find it when they searched the Paine residence twice. So they were either the most inept policemen ever or the camera wasn't there when they searched.

Ray,

Didn't an Irving policeman or detective claim to have found it at Ruth's on 11/22/63?

"It looked broken, so I didn't take it in or list it as evidence." Or words to that effect.

-- Tommy

I don't recall that statement, Tommy. (Not that I am saying that it was never made.)

However, there is no record in any of the FBI testimony of either Robert Oswald or Marina confirming that it was the Imperial that Robert had obtained from the Paine household.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=9XEhAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT210&lpg=PT210&dq=Robert+Oswald+and+the+Imperial+camera&source=bl&ots=yIofxPASjI&sig=NL-juXveZtkoqe0HQH8-v-hX874&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjY1J_4z47PAhXGK8AKHU1rBpsQ6AEIJjAC#v=onepage&q=Robert%20Oswald%20and%20the%20Imperial%20camera&f=false

Edit apologies, Tommy. Apparently McCabe said that. but was never called before the W.C.

Again if he did see it and considered it not to be evidence, It is either gross incompetence or a later addition to the evidence. (IMO)

Edited September 14, 2016 by Ray Mitcham

[Thomas Graves]

I just finished watching Jack White's presentation on the photos. Jack said that by tilting the print of one of the backyard photos in his lab, he was able to precisely achieve the same perspective in another of the photos. (Unfortunately he didn't elaborate as to whether the third background also matched.)

Based upon this and what we've seen in this thread, I believe it can be concluded that -- with near certainty -- at least two of the photos were made from one photo. Which means that the person posing with the rifle, and his shadow, were added later. And since this was indeed done, it is reasonable to assume it was also done for the third photo.

I learned one other pertinent thing from Jack's presentation, and that is that experts hired by the HSCA concluded the photos came from Oswald's camera. They determined this by comparing markings (imperfections made by the camera) on the backyard photos with those on a picture known to have been taken by that camera. Jack noted that these marks could have been introduced by taking the final photo of a photo using Oswald's camera.

Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother Robert a couple weeks later.

Does anybody know:

1. When the existence of the backyard photos was first made public?

2. When copies of the backyard photos were first made public?

The Imperial reflex camera was first shown by Robert Oswald on Feb 24th 1964, three months after the shooting. He said he found it several weeks after the assassination.

"Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother, Robert, a couple weeks later."

Neither did the DPD find it when they searched the Paine residence twice. So they were either the most inept policemen ever or the camera wasn't there when they searched.

Ray,

Didn't an Irving policeman or detective claim to have found it at Ruth's on 11/23/63?

"It looked broken, so I didn't take it in or list it as evidence." Or words to that effect.

http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pdf/WH25_CE_2557.pdf

-- Tommy

Bumped because I was still editing it when Ray replied to it.

Edited September 14, 2016 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

Re the Walker shooting, two guys were seen leaving the scene of the crime after the shooting.

Kirk Coleman saw them leave.

Two Men Outside Walker’s House

There were no witnesses to the shooting itself, but one of Walker’s neighbours was alerted by the gunshot and saw two men leaving the scene. Each man got into a car and drove away. The witness, Walter Kirk Coleman, was able to give detailed descriptions of the men and their cars (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.26, pp.437–441 [Commission Exhibit 2958]). After the JFK assassination, Coleman was shown photographs of Oswald. He denied that Oswald resembled either of the men he had seen. In any case, Oswald could not drive.

Robert Surrey, an associate of General Walker, reported that he had seen two men acting suspiciously outside Walker’s house two days before the shooting. Neither man resembled Oswald (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.5, pp.446–9).

{My emphasis.]

I just finished watching Jack White's presentation on the photos. Jack said that by tilting the print of one of the backyard photos in his lab, he was able to precisely achieve the same perspective in another of the photos. (Unfortunately he didn't elaborate as to whether the third background also matched.)

Based upon this and what we've seen in this thread, I believe it can be concluded that -- with near certainty -- at least two of the photos were made from one photo. Which means that the person posing with the rifle, and his shadow, were added later. And since this was indeed done, it is reasonable to assume it was also done for the third photo.

I learned one other pertinent thing from Jack's presentation, and that is that experts hired by the HSCA concluded the photos came from Oswald's camera. They determined this by comparing markings (imperfections made by the camera) on the backyard photos with those on a picture known to have been taken by that camera. Jack noted that these marks could have been introduced by taking the final photo of a photo using Oswald's camera.

Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother Robert a couple weeks later.

Does anybody know:

1. When the existence of the backyard photos was first made public?

2. When copies of the backyard photos were first made public?

The Imperial reflex camera was first shown by Robert Oswald on Feb 24th 1964, three months after the shooting. He said he found it several weeks after the assassination.

"Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother, Robert, a couple weeks later."

Neither did the DPD find it when they searched the Paine residence twice. So they were either the most inept policemen ever or the camera wasn't there when they searched.

Thanks Ray for all the useful information in your two posts.

It's amazing that the WC would say with a straight face that it was Oswald who shot at Walker, given all the evidence against it.

EDIT: And thanks to you and Tommy for the McCabe information. (Didn't submit the camera as evidence because it looked broken.... LOL, what a crock!)

Edited September 14, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[Paul Trejo]

In order to involve LHO with his 6.5mm Carcano rifle in the Walker shooting, there is one small hurdle that must be overcome.

In the police report of the Walker shooting, investigating officers reported that the bullet recovered from the Walker residence was "steel jacketed". As you may, or may not, know, the Western Cartridge Company 6.5mm Carcano bullets allegedly used by LHO were lead bullets jacketed in a copper alloy that contained no steel, and did not even resemble steel.

To make matters worse, the bullet recovered from the Walker residence, CE 573, is most definitely jacketed in a copper alloy that bears no resemblance at all to a steel jacketed bullet.

...

Robert, I appreciate your posts -- yet I disagree here with your "small hurdle."

IMHO, since LHO was involved in the Walker shooting as part of a Conspiracy -- involving other people, involving automobiles and involving other weapons -- there is no need to insist upon a Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 mm bullet.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 14, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

I just finished watching Jack White's presentation on the photos. Jack said that by tilting the print of one of the backyard photos in his lab, he was able to precisely achieve the same perspective in another of the photos. (Unfortunately he didn't elaborate as to whether the third background also matched.)

Based upon this and what we've seen in this thread, I believe it can be concluded that -- with near certainty -- at least two of the photos were made from one photo. Which means that the person posing with the rifle, and his shadow, were added later. And since this was indeed done, it is reasonable to assume it was also done for the third photo.

I learned one other pertinent thing from Jack's presentation, and that is that experts hired by the HSCA concluded the photos came from Oswald's camera. They determined this by comparing markings (imperfections made by the camera) on the backyard photos with those on a picture known to have been taken by that camera. Jack noted that these marks could have been introduced by taking the final photo of a photo using Oswald's camera.

Note that the FBI did NOT find the camera in Oswald's possessions. It was brought forward by brother Robert a couple weeks later.

Does anybody know:

1. When the existence of the backyard photos was first made public?

2. When copies of the backyard photos were first made public?

Sandy, thanks for further pursuing Jack White's theory about the BYP and Roscoe White.

As for your questions, they are important. Yet to respond to your questions I must first ask what you mean by "public".

Do you mean "publicized" as in the newspapers, i.e. after the arrest of LHO?

Or do you mean "public" as in one other person; i.e. who was the first person outside of the Oswald household to see the BYP?

If you mean the latter, then this is one of the most important questions in the Oswald-Walker saga, namely, the disposition of the workers as Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.

I have asked folks to try to contact the children of the former workers at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall there in Dallas, for family stories and clues. That cannot be an easy task.

Yet I'm convinced that the first people to have a look at the BYP were the workers there at JCS, and IMHO also, LHO was fired from JCS because of his relentless abuse of company camera equipment for personal use.

For example, the fake ID of Alek J. Hidell was made there at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, and this was admitted by the JCS workers at some level, IIRC.

But NOBODY would admit to seeing the BYP in 1964 because that would mean that they were partly aware of the Conspiracy to murder Walker and/or JFK. So, it was a deep, dark secret.

Of course, Hoover and LBJ wanted to promote the Lone Nut theory of Oswald in the interest of National Security, so all these early witnesses to the BYP (including Michael Paine) got a pass.

We found out in the 1970's that George DeMohrenschildt had a *different* BYP than the WC had.

We found out in 1990 that Roscoe White had yet a *different* BYP than ever before seen.

We found out in 1993 that Michael Paine claims to have seen a BYP on April 2, 1963.

But of far more importance, IMHO, are the witnesses at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall -- and their family secrets.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited September 14, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Does anybody know:

1. When the existence of the backyard photos was first made public?

2. When copies of the backyard photos were first made public?

Sandy, thanks for further pursuing Jack White's theory about the BYP and Roscoe White.

As for your questions, they are important. Yet to respond to your questions I must first ask what you mean by "public".

Do you mean "publicized" as in the newspapers, i.e. after the arrest of LHO?

Or do you mean "public" as in one other person; i.e. who was the first person outside of the Oswald household to see the BYP?

Paul,

Let me repeat the questions, but this time being more specific:

1. When was the existence of the backyard photos first publicized?

2. When were the backyard photos first published in the public domain?

Presumably the date is the same for both.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul,

Let me repeat the questions, but this time being more specific:

1. When was the existence of the backyard photos first publicized?

2. When were the backyard photos first published in the public domain?

Presumably the date is the same for both.

OK, Sandy, now I see your meaning -- you're speaking of the broad, newspaper-reading public.

According to WC testimony of Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, the BYP first came to the notice of the newspapers on the very weekend of the JFK assassination. Here's how it happened, by my reading:

Usually the Dallas DA never visited the Dallas Police Department, but would focus on the Court system. However, on the evening of 11/22/1963, the Dallas DA saw both Captain Fritz and Chief Curry on TV, giving to the newspapers, radios and TV cameras all of the evidence against LHO as it came in. No matter what the Dallas Police learned on their own or from the FBI or whatever source, Chief Curry would immediately give it away to the press.

So, Henry Wade rushed over to the DPD that evening, sometime after 7pm, and tried to explain to Chief Curry that it is improper to try a case in public, through the newspapers, and tried to convince Curry to stop making public anything that the DPD received. Chief Curry said it was a good idea -- but actually the Chief could not resist the massive magnetic attraction of the world press inside the DPD.

Even Henry Wade got caught up in the media melee, and stayed at the DPD way past midnight, trying to manage the news, but even failing himself to keep evidence secret.

By Saturday, Chief Curry could not resist parading the alleged Oswald rifle before the TV cameras -- even before it was proved to be Oswald's. Henry Wade pounded his living room table at the sight of this. Everything was given to the press -- the rooming house address of Oswald -- just EVERYTHING.

Henry Wade despaired of being able to get a fair jury, with so much rampant publicity about Lee Harvey Oswald.

By Sunday, however, all of Henry Wade's worries were over. There was no more case against Oswald, and Wade now had a new suspect -- Jack Ruby.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 14, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Paul,

Let me repeat the questions, but this time being more specific:

1. When was the existence of the backyard photos first publicized?

2. When were the backyard photos first published in the public domain?

Presumably the date is the same for both.

OK, Sandy, now I see your meaning -- you're speaking of the broad, newspaper-reading public.

According to WC testimony of Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade, the BYP first came to the notice of the newspapers on the very weekend of the JFK assassination.

Thanks Paul. But it appears that Henry Wade was wrong.

Quoting from this article:

"The photo was made public in late February 1964, simultaneously appearing on the cover of Life magazine and on the front page of the Detroit Free Press. Within days it had appeared in many other publications. But sharp-eyed observers noticed that the photo appeared to have been tampered with since details differed from publication to publication."

For all we know, the photos could have been faked weeks or even months after the assassination. And documentation of Oswald's interrogation, where he is questioned about the photos, edited as necessary after the fact.

[Ray Mitcham]

Sandy

"The day after the assassination, the Dallas police released photographs of Lee Oswald holding the murder weapon in one hand and a copy of a communist paper in the other hand. These photographs, according to Dallas police, were taken in his backyard. One of the photographs appeared on the cover of Life Magazine in February of 1964.

Captain Fritz had shown Oswald this photograph during interrogation and Oswald said that he knew something about photography and although the photograph was his face, it had been pasted on the body and he had never seen the photographs before.

The photographs were found at 2515 West Fifth Street in Irving, Texas, the home of the Paines. On two searches on the day of the assassination of this address, the Dallas police did not locate the photographs. However, another search was made the following day and it was this third search in which the Dallas police say they found the photos. But the two photos were never listed on inventory sheets of Oswald's possessions. Neither was the black shirt and the black pants that Oswald had on in the photographs ever located. Officially, two photographs but only one negative were found. Yet, Dallas police Gus Rose says that there were also two negatives. Until 1967, these photos were the only ones known to be of the backyard pose. "

Oswald said that it was his head on somebody else's body, so he must have seen them on Saturday 23rd.

http://www.pimall.com/nais/news/backyard.html

[Paul Trejo]

Thanks Paul. But it appears that Henry Wade was wrong.

Quoting from this article:

"The photo was made public in late February 1964, simultaneously appearing on the cover of Life magazine and on the front page of the Detroit Free Press. Within days it had appeared in many other publications. But sharp-eyed observers noticed that the photo appeared to have been tampered with since details differed from publication to publication."

For all we know, the photos could have been faked weeks or even months after the assassination. And documentation of Oswald's interrogation, where he is questioned about the photos, edited as necessary after the fact.

Sandy, what is the assurance that the article you quoted was correct?

Furthermore, the first evidence we have in the WC testimony about the BYP comes from Captain Will Fritz. He said that on Saturday 23 November 1963, about 6pm, he confronted LHO with the BYP.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 14, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

DELETE

Edited September 14, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Sandy

"The day after the assassination, the Dallas police released photographs of Lee Oswald holding the murder weapon in one hand and a copy of a communist paper in the other hand. These photographs, according to Dallas police, were taken in his backyard. One of the photographs appeared on the cover of Life Magazine in February of 1964.

Captain Fritz had shown Oswald this photograph during interrogation and Oswald said that he knew something about photography and although the photograph was his face, it had been pasted on the body and he had never seen the photographs before.

The photographs were found at 2515 West Fifth Street in Irving, Texas, the home of the Paines. On two searches on the day of the assassination of this address, the Dallas police did not locate the photographs. However, another search was made the following day and it was this third search in which the Dallas police say they found the photos. But the two photos were never listed on inventory sheets of Oswald's possessions. Neither was the black shirt and the black pants that Oswald had on in the photographs ever located. Officially, two photographs but only one negative were found. Yet, Dallas police Gus Rose says that there were also two negatives. Until 1967, these photos were the only ones known to be of the backyard pose. "

Oswald said that it was his head on somebody else's body, so he must have seen them on Saturday 23rd.

http://www.pimall.com/nais/news/backyard.html

Thanks Ray.

It's possible that Oswald was never even shown the photograph, and that the interrogation notes were altered later to include what Oswald supposedly said about them.

I highly doubt that the photos were released to the public the day after the assassination. Life Magazine would not have sat on them for three months while every other major news organization was publishing them.

[Paul Trejo]

...I highly doubt that the photos were released to the public the day after the assassination. Life Magazine would not have sat on them for three months while every other major news organization was publishing them.

Sandy, this is a fair point -- but for me it only raises your original question: "When was the first BYP made public?"

While it's possible that Captain Fritz might have lied about confronting LHO with it at 6pm 11/23/1963 -- there are problems with doubting Fritz, too.

For example, multiple DPD officers, Marina Oswald, Ruth Paine, Michael Paine, Volkmar Schmidt, George DeMohrenschildt, Jeanne DeMohrenschildt and Everett Glover -- all gave sworn testimony that confirms Captain Fritz.

Now -- the CIA-did-it CTers claim that the CIA controlled all these people to force them to lie about LHO.

I've never accepted that theory -- it is impossible to get so many people to coordinate a single story. The evidence is too great that Captain Fritz was telling the truth, IMHO.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited September 14, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Thanks Paul. But it appears that Henry Wade was wrong.

Quoting from this article:

"The photo was made public in late February 1964, simultaneously appearing on the cover of Life magazine and on the front page of the Detroit Free Press. Within days it had appeared in many other publications. But sharp-eyed observers noticed that the photo appeared to have been tampered with since details differed from publication to publication."

For all we know, the photos could have been faked weeks or even months after the assassination. And documentation of Oswald's interrogation, where he is questioned about the photos, edited as necessary after the fact.

Sandy, what is the assurance that the article you quoted was correct?

Furthermore, the first evidence we have in the WC testimony about the BYP comes from Captain Will Fritz. He said that on Friday 22 November 1963, about 6pm, he confronted LHO with the BYP.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

Everybody seems to agree that Life Magazine published the photo in February 1964.

I just cannot believe that the photo was released on 11/23, published by numerous newspapers the following day (which most assuredly would have happened), yet Life decided it wasn't important enough to publish right away. They waited three months before doing so. That's just inconceivable if you ask me.

BTW the article I quoted, which states that the photo was published in Life Magazine and in newspapers in February 1964, does go into detail on the differences in the photo depending upon which newspaper published it. Specifically that the scope was missing in some. And the article does gives reference. It's the best source I've seen so far.