Jump to content
The Education Forum

Backyard photos


Richard Booth
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 9/2/2020 at 11:31 PM, Richard Booth said:

What is your best argument for why these photos are fake? 

A "ghost" image of the BYP 133-C was found in DPD records...

Taking the 1978 discovered 133-C and pasting him back in... uh, doesn't work.

Additionally, I think we've all shown that Oswald never had a rifle in the states....  kinda makes the BYP moot by definition.  I did a 4 part series on the rifle/pistol with 1 piece on the BYPs...  the rest of the articles are also on K&K.

Hope they shed some light
DJ

https://kennedysandking.com/images/pdf/JosephsBYP.pdf 

133962474_Image3-Oswald-BYP-ghost-COPY-misalignment.thumb.jpg.034f024f272fe5918cce510699899dd1.jpgSkewed-GHOST-image-used-to-put-Oswald-into-the-BYPs--smaller.gif.25fe87b2ac0037cd6a054b4f3efe7c5d.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

A "ghost" image of the BYP 133-C was found in DPD records...

Taking the 1978 discovered 133-C and pasting him back in... uh, doesn't work.

Additionally, I think we've all shown that Oswald never had a rifle in the states....  kinda makes the BYP moot by definition.  I did a 4 part series on the rifle/pistol with 1 piece on the BYPs...  the rest of the articles are also on K&K.

Hope they shed some light
DJ

https://kennedysandking.com/images/pdf/JosephsBYP.pdf 

133962474_Image3-Oswald-BYP-ghost-COPY-misalignment.thumb.jpg.034f024f272fe5918cce510699899dd1.jpgSkewed-GHOST-image-used-to-put-Oswald-into-the-BYPs--smaller.gif.25fe87b2ac0037cd6a054b4f3efe7c5d.gif

Look at the shrub in the rear of the 'ghost' image. It's growth is much larger: this tells us the "ghost" image is a separate photograph taken many months after the Oswald picture. 

I suspect it was a photo taken by Dallas police after the assassination. That shrub reveals it. 

So you're trying to fit Oswald from one picture into a separate picture taken months later. The person cut out of the 'ghost' photo is probably a Dallas cop, doing a re-enactment. 

I do agree with you about the rifle. The work John Armstrong did on that is phenomenal and I've seen your follow-up work on it which is also great. It's clear to me there were records fabricated to link the rifle to Oswald.

I think that fact alone makes the BYP very interesting, it also makes me question how the rifle got into the TSBD and why Frazier lied about the package and constantly lies about that package. 

Edited by Richard Booth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

Look at the shrub in the rear of the 'ghost' image. It's growth is much larger: this tells us the "ghost" image is a separate photograph taken many months after the Oswald picture. 

I suspect it was a photo taken by Dallas police after the assassination. That shrub reveals it. 

So you're trying to fit Oswald from one picture into a separate picture taken months later. The person cut out of the 'ghost' photo is probably a Dallas cop, doing a re-enactment. 

I do agree with you about the rifle. The work John Armstrong did on that is phenomenal and I've seen your follow-up work on it which is also great. It's clear to me there were records fabricated to link the rifle to Oswald.

I think that fact alone makes the BYP very interesting, it also makes me question how the rifle got into the TSBD and why Frazier lied about the package and constantly lies about that package. 

Yes the images used for those cutouts are Dallas PD photos 140 and 141. The shadows at the bottom of the screen door are a match. Those photos were also taken from a position a couple feet to the left and the camera was very low compared to the Backyard photos.
 Lt Brown duplicated the 133c stance for one of the photos but the cutout was made from Oswald's image in 133c. A cutout of LT Brown is a very different shape than Oswald in 133c. Stovall and Roscoe White had made personal copies of 133c, so it is no surprise that Roscoe White, who supervised the Dallas PD backyard photos, had access to 133c in order to duplicate the stance Oswald's stance in 133a.
Besides rotating the images to an incorrect position whoever did it also tried to match Oswald's height to the roof line in the background like the real 133c. But because the camera was lower than the real BY photos the roof line lines up much lower relative to the post next to Oswald.
 aligning his head with the roof line caused his feet to be placed a bit lower. That would mean Oswald was standing a little closer than 133c. But that also means he should appear larger or taller relative to the top of the post next to him. He should have gained a couple inches in size but he shrunk. 
 

backyard cutouts.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/8/2020 at 4:23 AM, Richard Booth said:

I agree with your conclusion that the Walker shot was an intentional miss.

That whole thing was designed to show that Oswald was violent, and I think it was also part of the script to show that Oswald needed a scope because he missed without one. The original script has Oswald getting a scope separately from the rifle. It has Oswald visiting Furniture Mart in November asking for work on his rifle. They refer him to an Irving sports shop. "Oswald" also tells the people at Furniture Mart that he will be coming into money in a couple weeks. Next up we have a repair tag found at Dial Ryder's Irving gun shop and a number of "anonymous tips" being given to DPD and FBI saying Oswald had a scope mounted by Dial Ryder. Then a front page newspaper article appears which says Oswald had his scope mounted. But, there is a problem: Dial Ryder denies that he ever mounted a scope for Oswald. He denies it to CBS News TV reporters and he denies it on the phone to other reporters. Subsequently, after November 29th, it is reported that Oswald's scope came with the rifle. As a result, the Dial Ryder repair tag for "Oswald" now makes no sense, and the phony street theater going on at Furniture Mart and Sports Drome rifle ranch are tied in to this thing.

Also of note is that the "Oswald" who appeared at Furniture Mart drove a car. Note that Ruth Paine was trying to get Oswald a driver's license. I think that was going on because the Oswald impersonator was seen driving (and talking about how he was coming into money) and so they needed Oswald to have a driver's license for those witnesses.

All this stuff about Furniture Mart, Dial Ryder's gun shop, and Sports Drome are in the WC volumes and WC testimony. I conclude all of the above from reading the WC testimony and exhibits: the script initially had Oswald missing Walker and deciding "I need a scope" then subsequently very visibly looking for, and eventually getting mounted a scope. We have impersonations and "witnesses" to Oswald looking for that scope and we have these very suspicious "anonymous tips" on November 23rd about mounting the scope.

The original BY photos, supposedly taken before the Walker shooting, depict a rifle without a scope on it. At least, that is what you can discern if you look at the original photographs. No scope visible. It's only the later very high quality LIFE magazine cover where you can all of a sudden see incredible level of detail and lo and behold there's a scope on the rifle. 

I have always had reservations about the many people who said they saw Oswald before the assassination attempt, or saw Jack Ruby, or saw them together. Some may be reporting an actual Oswald double or plant, others may be succumbing to false memories, and yet others may simply be seeking drama and publicity. In the end, the "Oswald double" stories unimportant, as it seems clear to me already Oswald was a CIA asset, and one who was maneuvered to take part in a false-flag phony assassination attempt. Maybe the backyard photos are real, maybe faked. I suspect they are "real" and taken for the purpose of building the Oswald biography, just as the Walker photos are real, and at least parts of Oswald's trip to Mexico City are real, and Oswald's leafletting and TV-radio appearances in New Orleans are obviously "real." 

This is also why "the Mafia did it" does not ring true. They certainly were not setting up Oswald this way. It has the stamp of an intelligence-PR operation. The Mob did all this? 

I enjoy your insights. And yes, John Newman does get into the weeds. Still, reading actual documents is important. But Newman sometimes "reads" the redacted parts too. Beyond that, who is to say the key documents are monkeyed with to be misleading, or have simply vanished? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2020 at 7:31 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

Some may be reporting an actual Oswald double or plant, others may be succumbing to false memories, and yet others may simply be seeking drama and publicity.

 

Probably all three. I agree with that and can think of a few so-called "witnesses" who I believe are bogus publicity and drama seekers.

The key thing for me regarding the sightings I mentioned (Furniture Mart, Irving Sports shop, Sports Drome rifle range) which leads me to believe these were part of some "script" and that they are very real are the corresponding "anonymous tips" flooding into the police and FBI. I see then the activity at FM and Sports Drome as street theater that is part of a covert operation. 

This whole thing is saturated with scripted things. Not just those things I mentioned about the scope, but you also have for example letters sent from Cuba to Oswald in the second week of November. These letters are clearly bogus, designed to make Oswald look like a Castro agent. 

I simply can't ignore things like the "anonymous tips" made to the police telling them about the scope, or those bogus letters sent to Oswald from Cuba.

Then there are the bogus impersonations in Mexico City Sep 28 and Oct 1, guy speaking broken Russian and broken English.

The whole thing has scripted written all over it, it's just so exceedingly obvious. 

Re: Newman - he does what he does, I haven't seen anything he's done that I really take offense to or have fundamental disagreement with... I tend to agree with Salandria's objections over Newman's language in his 1995 book, but I'm not going to savage a guy for merely trying to appear respectable, or behaving in a way that is careful - which is really what he was doing. 

Agree regarding documents disappearing or monkeyed with: seems both might be necessary 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...