Oswald said someone took his picture and superimposed his face on the backyard photos

[Tony Krome]

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The photos were “discovered” in the afternoon of Nov 23 in the Paine garage, in a seabag identified as an Oswald possession (not a photo album).

Someone found them, at some time, in an album;

[John Butler]

2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Some clarifications:

The HSCA panel did not authoritatively authenticate the BYP - rather, their experts acknowledged that a face paste at the chin could not be ruled out, which is exactly the conclusion the FBI reached back in 1963. So this will always be subject to debate. That said, the panel did have access to the original prints and surviving negative, while the critics have largely worked with generational copies.

The photos were “discovered” in the afternoon of Nov 23 in the Paine garage, in a seabag identified as an Oswald possession (not a photo album). However, a backyard photo was seen by both Michael Paine and a reporter the previous evening, and Fritz refers to a BYP in his notes before assigning the officers who soon after made the discovery.

The photo said to have been destroyed by Marina and Marguerite Oswald may not have been a BYP but rather a photo of Oswald from the Soviet Union. Investigators unfortunately did not seek to clarify what MO was referring to, whereas witnesses such as Michael Paine specified “the photo published in Life”.

Marina Oswald’s story of participating in the creation of the BYP changed numerous times and she was unable to accurately describe the unique operation of the camera. Interrogation notes establish that, immediately before describing her participation in BYP, Marina was informed by government agents of potential punishment including deportation in the absence of her “cooperation”.

I have to admit I am no expert on the history of the BYPs.  But, this sounds more like the accounting of their find then the photo album.  I am not saying I disbelieve Tony Krome's account.  I just haven't seen or heard anyone speak about a photo album. 

But, like everything else in the JFKA there is point and counter point arguments abounding.  Don't you love it?

I don't know why but the processor does not want to save this reply.  This has been a constant headache in the past month or so.  Any solutions?

[Chris Bristow]

On 7/10/2021 at 7:51 PM, John Butler said:

Chris,

I agree.  But, someone has tried to put fingernails on the stubs.  I have painted lots of hands in various paintings and the fingernails have to shine or glow a bit from the skin surrounding the nail.  At the top of the nail and sides there must be an area of darkness that distinguishes itself from the skin and the nail for there to be separation.  I think I see that on the end of the stubs.  In order for hands in a painting or for that matter, skin and nails, the details must be right.  

Painters attempt to recreate the world as our eye or brain sees it. With photography we have to add another level because film is Limited and its ability to recreate the world. So I don't know if we should expect to see glare around the fingernail.

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/7/2021 at 1:43 AM, Chris Davidson said:

Head flopped. Eyes/nose lowered. Shoulders angled.

A few more.

[Tony Krome]

35 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

A few more.

Regarding Midnight Oswald on the right, did you only apply a lighting effect? I'm now seeing the regular Oswald chin on one of the frames.

[Chris Davidson]

Didn't apply any lighting effects. Those are four consecutive frames from original footage.

[Tony Krome]

11 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

Didn't apply any lighting effects. Those are four consecutive frames from original footage.

I can see the regular chin and black eye more clearly with your gif. Obviously the squarish chin seen on the original footage can be attributed to camera contrast issues. Thanks for that.

[John Butler]

4 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

Painters attempt to recreate the world as our eye or brain sees it. With photography we have to add another level because film is Limited and its ability to recreate the world. So I don't know if we should expect to see glare around the fingernail.

Chris,

A glare is different from a glow or shine.  Hold you hand under a light.  The keratin or hard substance in your nails reflects more light than skin.  Except for one small area just above the nail.  I don't know why that area shines more.  Nails are hard to paint if you don't consider all of the details concerned.  But, once you do you can make an almost photographic depiction.  Most people don't consider how many different skin tones have to be accounted for to make a two dimensional object into an apparent 3 dimensional object.  That's the illusion that an artist creates.  Different skin tones means different light reflections.  

Edited July 13, 2021 by John Butler

[John Butler]

36 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

I can see the regular chin and black eye more clearly with your gif. Obviously the squarish chin seen on the original footage can be attributed to camera contrast issues. Thanks for that.

Clearly edited with black ink or paint.

[Tony Krome]

3 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Clearly edited with black ink or paint.

Try using the same film as Chris used for his gif. The film you have selected has what looks like compression issues.

[John Butler]

38 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Try using the same film as Chris used for his gif. The film you have selected has what looks like compression issues.

I believe it is the same film.  Just a different area.  And, it's not compression issues.  It is clearly frame editing with black ink.

 

These shadowed areas pointed to by the red arrows are unnatural and clearly put there by someone.  The deputy behind Oswald has what looks like a black beard.  You can see a paint brush stoke on Oswald's left chin.  This shadowing technique was poorly done.  It doesn't matter whether it is or not since the frames go by so quickly one just sees shadow.  In that day when the editing was done that was good enough to get through and past the JFKA.  Once that was done who cares?

One needs to slow down the gif frames where you can see things properly frame by frame.  

I'll repeat the alterations here are poorly done.  This film has areas where Oswald is not unnaturally shadowed and areas where he is.  As far as I know this is the same film on the 23rd.  The description is the same as the one you and Chris are using. 

Edited July 13, 2021 by John Butler

[Tony Krome]

22 minutes ago, John Butler said:

I believe it is the same film.  Just a different area.  And, it's not compression issues.  It is clearly frame editing with black ink.

I was referring to issues in relation to uploading to an internet platform. Below is the same scene on different uploads. On the left we see more overall definition which would be closer to the original news reel footage. On the right we see loss of overall definition due to pixel/compression/sharpness issues. Some people alter the overall original footage to reflect what they believe to better quality, then they upload. That's the result on the right.

[Steve Thomas]

Over and above discussions of the photographic evidence; for me, the issue of the backyard photos is clouded by what I believe was a clumsy and ultimately, unsuccessful effort on the part of the Dallas Police to disguise the fact that Lee Harvey was interviewed by the Dallas Police at 12:35 PM on Saturday, November 23rd; and that during that interview was asked about the rifle photos.

I believe that this interview took place at least four hours before the Detectives returned from their second search at 2515 W. 5th St. in Irving.

You can find a fuller explanation of my analysis of the 12:35 interview on my web site at:

https://myjfksite.weebly.com/

and on the Education Forum in the thread entitled,

“Fritz ADDED the part about the photos afterward...” started by David Joseph on 11/28/2011.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/18440-fritz-added-the-part-about-the-photos-afterward/

 

There is also a version of the Interrogation of Oswald in CD 81 AG Texas Letter with attachments dated 07 Jan 1964 beginning on page 452. Covers the Interrogation of Oswald and takes up 13 pages. On page 460, Fritz references the 12:35 interview in the same language as is in the DPD Archives “with Inspector Kelley and some of the other officers and myself”.

He asks Oswald about the different places he lived in an attempt to find out where the picture was made of him holding a rifle.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=652&tab=page

Also, CE 2003 (24H beginning at page 195) - Dallas Police Department file on investigation of the assassination of the President (CD 81b, all pages). The Interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald begins on page 264 of this Exhibit and takes up 13 pages. Page 268 covers the 12:35 Interrogation.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1140#relPageId=286

 

The Warren Commission interviewed Detective Guy Rose on April 3, 1964

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/stovall.htm

Mr. BALL. On Saturday morning you went out to Irving again?
Mr. ROSE. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. BALL. But you brought that property back here into town, did you?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; we did.
Mr. BALL. Now, you say you sat in on the interrogation of Oswald later that day?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; we did.
Mr. BALL. Now, you say you sat in on the interrogation of Oswald later that day?
Mr. ROSE. On Saturday evening--that Saturday evening.
Mr. BALL. What time?
Mr. ROSE. I don't remember--it was late--it seemed like it was around 9 or 10 o'clock, I don't remember.
Mr. BALL. Who was present?
Mr. ROSE. Well, Captain Fritz, Detective Sims, and myself--I don't remember--there was an FBI agent and a Secret Service agent there, but I don't remember their names.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember what was said?
Mr. ROSE. Do I remember what was said?
Mr. BALL. That this took place in Captain Fritz' office?
Mr. ROSE. In Captain Fritz' office--yes. Well, the occasion was--I got back to the office and I took this small picture of Oswald holding the rifle, and left the rest of them with the Captain and I took one up to the I.D. bureau and had them to make me an enlargement of it, and they made an almost 8" by 10" enlargement of this picture and I brought it back to the captain and Oswald was brought in and the captain showed him this picture, and Oswald apparently got pretty upset when he saw the picture and at first he said, "Well, that's just a fake, because somebody has superimposed my face on that picture." Then, the captain said, "Well, is that you face on the picture?" And he said, "I won't even admit that. That is not even my face." I remember that part of it distinctly.

 

Guy Rose went back to 2515 W. 5^th St. in Irving on Saturday, November 23^rd. and searched the garage.

Detectives Moore, Rose, Adamcik and Richard Stovall were with him. Stovall told the WC that they were for 2-2 1/2 hours at the most, but be also said that they didn’t leave Irving until 5:30 or so.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/stovall.htm

Mr. BALL. The next day, you made another search of the Paine home, didn't you?
Mr. STOVALL. Yes, we did.
Mr. BALL. About what time?
Mr. STOVALL. Must have been around 1 o'clock, just past noon, 1:00 p.m.

Mr. BALL. What time did you leave there that day?
Mr. STOVALL. It must have been around 5:30, because it was--I believe it was 6 when we got back to the office.

Steve Thomas

 

[John Butler]

9 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

I was referring to issues in relation to uploading to an internet platform. Below is the same scene on different uploads. On the left we see more overall definition which would be closer to the original news reel footage. On the right we see loss of overall definition due to pixel/compression/sharpness issues. Some people alter the overall original footage to reflect what they believe to better quality, then they upload. That's the result on the right.

I see little difference between the two frames.  So, compression issues on the left and right.  Whatever the state of the film due to technological concerns, the two frames do not appear to be different.  The broadening of Oswald's chin by highlight and shadow is unnatural.  

From the same film without shadowing and highlighting.  Oswald's chin as it should be and untouched.  If you notice the other figures in the scene are not shadowed and highlighted either.  Same film.  Natural film effect.

Edited July 13, 2021 by John Butler

[Tony Krome]

17 minutes ago, John Butler said:

I see little difference between the two frames.

I've been in the printing industry for 40 years, so it might be easier for me to pick the differences.

Below is when a camera flash reveals Oswald's true jawline. Same news reel footage.