Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

There's some incredible pretzel logic going on here with these backyard photos. Apparently some people want to reject the following:

1. The HSCA photo panel of experts (not Jack White or armchair internet jockeys) authenticated the photos as real.

2. FBI Shaneyfelt matched the irregular edge markings from Oswald's camera to an original negative.

3. Yes, there was one or two NEGATIVES found in Oswald's possessions. Did your secret conspirators leave that in there as well? Explain that, please.

4. Marina admitted taking them.

5. George DeM. had one (133-A). Well isn't that interesting, the secret Ninja Conspirators gave one to George. Wow! 

6. The HSCA photo panel examined the ORIGINAL PHOTOS AND NEGATIVE to come to their conclusion they were real, not faked.

7. Oswald's own mother, Marguerite admitted under oath that she saw one that Marina burned. Now why would she do that? 

8. Somehow these secret conspirators knew where Oswald was living at Neely street, way back in April 1963! Wow, amazing stuff. Somehow they secretly went over there and snapped photos, but couldn't get the leaning pose down right! 

Of course the simple answer is they were real, not faked. If you want to wrap yourself into a pretzel trying to explain all this away......go right ahead. Your armchair photoshopping of Oswald's pictures will never be believable. Frankly all this is laughable. 

When you ignore the evidence, the sky's the limit. You can make up anything. 

Steve, a fundamental aspect of the conspiracy theory is that there was a cover-up of the evidence. Personally I have examined every explanation for the Parkland doctors account of the head wound. There WC testimony refutes every argument that tries to explain how 20 staff members reported a wound completely inconsistent with the official story, and only four staff members support the official story.

Even after you throw out all the crazy CT stuff that has built up over 50 years there is still serious problems with the official story. So I do believe it is possible that evidence in the case could have been altered. I think it is possible that Witnesses were coerced.

I think when you consider just how close the CIA came to a full cover up of MK Ultra, it is reasonable to assume that in another case they were able to go just a little farther and successfully cover it up. The MK Ultra project was a massive 10 year project in multiple countries.

If the numbers in the Parkland doctors issue was reversed and 20 staff saw the hole in the official location and only four supported the CT location, I would be called a crazy conspiracy theorist if I support the argument that we should listen to the four doctors over the 20 staff members. But the Skeptics will try and Float the idea that those 20 staff members just got it wrong.

I think it is perfectly rational to have about the official story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 7/7/2021 at 10:23 AM, Steve Thomas said:

I don't know.

To me, his eyebrows and his eyes look all wrong - especially the outside corner of his right eye.

image.png.1143a601b3fd04a6be270905e849a09c.png

image.png.7b63ce495922ba4b223e477feaa801a1.png

image.png.a54c0b3157d7d05f9b06bc3bcaa2995b.png

Steve Thomas

Do you mean like anatomically wrong or in comparison to other photos of Oswald? I spent a lot of time looking at his eyes because I was an optician for many years and looked for inconsistencies between different photos.

One interesting thing is that his right eye is 1 mm farther out from the center of his Bridge than his left eye. Not really out of the ordinary but it is consistent in all photos where he's looking straight forward, like mugshots and Military photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

Tony, it is even more Awkward looking because the original unflipped version of the photo is rotated a couple degrees too far to the left. The most accurate version will show the picket fence leaning 2 and 1/4 to 2 and 1/2 degrees to the right. There's a well-known comparison photo in which a tall and skinny guy named Capell attempts to duplicate Oswald stance, and it is a very poor attempt. But in that photo you can see the door jamb on the house behind Oswald. It is about the only object in the backyard photos that can accurately reflect the vertical plane. Everything else  save for the corner of the house is wonky . When that door jamb is aligned the picket fence sits at 2 and 1/4 degrees right. In the comparison image of 133a and the Capell photo they have rotated Oswald two extra degrees to the right to decrease his lean. Then they took the Capell image and rotated it two degrees to the left to make it appear like he was leaning more than he was. Now that's photographic fakery! I will find that comparison photo and Post it.

Chris, what's your take on the hand in the backyard photo;

oswald-backyard-hand-compare.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

Steve, a fundamental aspect of the conspiracy theory is that there was a cover-up of the evidence. Personally I have examined every explanation for the Parkland doctors account of the head wound. There WC testimony refutes every argument that tries to explain how 20 staff members reported a wound completely inconsistent with the official story, and only four staff members support the official story.

Even after you throw out all the crazy CT stuff that has built up over 50 years there is still serious problems with the official story. So I do believe it is possible that evidence in the case could have been altered. I think it is possible that Witnesses were coerced.

I think when you consider just how close the CIA came to a full cover up of MK Ultra, it is reasonable to assume that in another case they were able to go just a little farther and successfully cover it up. The MK Ultra project was a massive 10 year project in multiple countries.

If the numbers in the Parkland doctors issue was reversed and 20 staff saw the hole in the official location and only four supported the CT location, I would be called a crazy conspiracy theorist if I support the argument that we should listen to the four doctors over the 20 staff members. But the Skeptics will try and Float the idea that those 20 staff members just got it wrong.

I think it is perfectly rational to have about the official story.

The topic of this thread is the backyard photos. That's what I am addressing here. No need to sidetrack the conversation over to Parkland doctors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Oswald's own mother, Marguerite admitted under oath that she saw one that Marina burned. Now why would she do that? 

Are you suggesting another different backyard photo was burned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Chris, what's your take on the hand in the backyard photo;

oswald-backyard-hand-compare.png

Tony,

Well done.  That is an absolutely original idea.  I don't know of anyone who has ever suggested comparing the Oswald figure's right hand to another Oswald photo in 57 years.  Oswald's fingers are longer in that comparison.  I believe Oswald's hand should be a tad larger.  They look similar is size, but to me the Oswald figure's hand looks a bit larger.

Most people believe that the Oswald figure's finger tips are cut off.  But, they may be there, perhaps painted on.  If that is trutthfully Oswald figure's hand without manipulation, then the hand is not Oswalds.  The finger lengths on the right hand do not look natural.  The left hand is even worse with strange, mismatched joinings of the fingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

The topic of this thread is the backyard photos. That's what I am addressing here. No need to sidetrack the conversation over to Parkland doctors.

My intention was not to divert the discussion to Parkland. I was referencing Parkland In order to support my opinion that there is reason to doubt the official evidence you sited. I did not feel comfortable just stating that I doubt the evidence you accept without giving my reasoning. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Chris, what's your take on the hand in the backyard photo;

oswald-backyard-hand-compare.png

All I can say it it looks strange as if the ends of the fingers are cut off. The fingers length is just a bit shorter than the comparison photo. I compared the distance between the little knuckle and index finger knuckle and decided to decrease the Backyard hand by 6%.  a very small amount but that is what I based the finger lengths on. The fingers also look fatter but it may just be the brighter exposure or the slightly shorter finger length.
I used to think it may be due to Oswald curling his fingers a bit but your comp photo has his hand more curled the the BY photo. So it is one of those weird things that may or may not be the result of a cut and paste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Bristow said:

All I can say it it looks strange as if the ends of the fingers are cut off. The fingers length is just a bit shorter than the comparison photo. I compared the distance between the little knuckle and index finger knuckle and decided to decrease the Backyard hand by 6%.  a very small amount but that is what I based the finger lengths on. The fingers also look fatter but it may just be the brighter exposure or the slightly shorter finger length.
I used to think it may be due to Oswald curling his fingers a bit but your comp photo has his hand more curled the the BY photo. So it is one of those weird things that may or may not be the result of a cut and paste.

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2021 at 8:16 AM, Tony Krome said:

Are you suggesting another different backyard photo was burned?

Yes, Marina admitted burning another picture with the rifle. Here is Marguerite's WC testimony about seeing that photo, which Marina had hidden in her shoe, folded up. 

There's no fakery going on with the backyard photos, that's been debunked decades ago.

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, sir--the 22d, Friday, the 22d.
I am worried because Lee hasn't had an attorney. And I am talking about that, and Mrs. Paine said, "Oh, don't worry about that. I am a member of the Civil Liberties Union, and Lee will have an attorney, I can assure you."
I said to myself but when? Of course, I didn't want to push her, argue with her. But the point was if she was a member of the Union, why didn't she see Lee had an attorney then. So I wasn't too happy about that.
Now, gentlemen, this is some very important facts.
My daughter-in-law spoke to Mrs. Paine in Russian, "Mamma." she says. So she takes me into the bedroom and closes the door. She said, "Mamma, I show you." She opened the closet, and in the closet was a lot of books and papers. And she came out with a picture a picture of Lee, with a gun.
It said, "To my daughter June"-written in English.
I said, "Oh, Marina, police." I didn't think anything of the picture.

Now, you must understand that I don't know what is going on on television--I came from the jailhouse and everything, so I don't know all the circumstances, what evidence they had against my son by this time. I had no way of knowing. But I say to my daughter, "To my daughter. June." anybody can own a rifle, to go hunting. You yourself probably have a rifle. So I am not connecting this with the assassination--"To my daughter, June." Because I would immediately say, and I remember--I think my son is all agent all the time no one is going to be foolish enough if they mean to assassinate the President, or even murder someone to take a picture of themselves with that rifle, and leave that there for evidence.
So, I didn't think a thing about it. And it says "To my daughter, June." I said, "The police," meaning that if the police got that, they would use that against my son, which would be a natural way to think.
She says, "You take, Mamma."'
"Yes, Mamma, you take."
I said, "No, Marina. Put back in the book." So she put the picture back in the book. Which book it was, I do not know.

So the next day, when we are at the courthouse this is on Saturday-she--we were sitting down, waiting to see Lee. She puts her shoe down, she says, "Mamma, picture." She had the picture folded up in her shoe.
Now, I did not see that it was the picture. but I know that it was, because she told me it was, and I could see it was folded up. It wasn't open for me to see. I said, "Marina." Just like that. So Robert came along and he says,

146



"Robert" I said, "No, no Marina." I didn't want her to tell Robert about the picture. Right there, you know. That was about the picture.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever tell her to destroy the picture?
Mrs. OSWALD. No. Now, I have to go into this. I want to tell you about destroying the picture.
Now, that was in Mrs. Paine's home.

I want to start to remember--because when we leave Mrs. Paine's home, we go into another phase, where the picture comes in again. So I have to tell the--unless you want to ask me specific questions.
Mr. RANKIN. No, you go right ahead.
Mrs. OSWALD. Mrs. Paine, in front of me, gave Marina $10. Now, Mrs. Paine, when I said, after the representatives left--I said, "You know, I do want to get paid for the story, because I am destitute, and here is a girl with--her husband is going to be in jail, we will need money for attorneys, with two babies."
She said, "You don't have to worry about Marina. Marina will always have a home with me, because Marina helps."
Now, Mrs. Paine speaks Russian fluently. "She helps me with my Russian language. She babysits for me and helps me with the housework, and you never have to worry about Marina. She will always have a home with me."
Now, Mr. and Mrs. Paine are separated. Mr. Paine does not live here. So it is just the two women.
So, Mrs. Paine didn't graciously do anything for Marina, as the paper stated--that Lee never did pay Mrs. Paine for room or board. Mrs. Paine owes them money. That is almost the kind of work that I do, or the airline stewardesses do, serve food and everything. Marina was earning her keep, and really should have had a salary for it--what I am trying to say, gentlemen, Mrs. Paine had Marina there to help babysit with the children, with her children-if she wanted to go running around and everything.
So actually she wasn't doing my son or Marina the favor that she claims she was doing.
But the point I am trying to stress is that she did tell me Marina would never have to worry, because Marina would have a home with her.
At this particular moment, I cannot remember anything of importance in the house. Otherwise, about the picture I have stated. And Mrs. Paine with the Life representative, and her saying that Lee would have an attorney, and Mrs. Paine giving Marina a $10 bill.
Oh, Marina told me, "Mamma, I have this money." It was money in an envelope--in the bedroom, when she showed me the picture. I said, "How much money, Marina."
"About how much?" I asked her.
"About $100 and some."
Now, Mrs. Paine has stated to the Life representative that Lee and Marina were saving his pay in order to have a home for themselves for Christmas time, because they had never been in a home of their own at Christmas time in order to celebrate Christmas. So, the hundred and some odd dollars isn't a big sum, considering that Lee paid $8 a week room in Dallas--and it has been stated by the landlady that Lee ate lunchmeat or fruit. And Lee was very, very thin when I saw him. And Lee gave his salary to his wife in order to save to have this home for Christmas.
So, that is not a lot of money to have in the house I would not think so, because I believe Lee was earning about $50 a week. And let's say he could live for about $10 or $12. And he gave the rest of the money to his wife.
And so I reported this money to the Secret Service while we were in Six Flags--that Marina had the money. I wanted them to know. She showed me the money.
I cannot think now-I did think of the money after going back--but I cannot think of anything at this particular moment that would be of any benefit that happened in this house.
Mr. RANKIN. In regard to the photograph, I will show you some photographs. Maybe you can tell me whether they are the ones that you are referring to. Here is Commission's Exhibit 134.
Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir, that is not the picture.

147



Mr. RANKIN. And 133, consists of two different pictures.
Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir, that is not the picture. He was holding the rifle and it said, "To my daughter, June, with love." He was holding the rifle up.
Mr. RANKIN. By holding it up, you mean----
Mrs. OSWALD. Like this.
Mr. RANKIN. Crosswise, with both hands on the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. With both hands on the rifle.
Mr. RANKIN. Above his head?
Mrs. OSWALD. That is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Steve Roe said:

I said, "The police," meaning that if the police got that, they would use that against my son,

I'm assuming you are saying this other "backyard photo" was eventually burned because it could be used against Oswald.

That makes perfect sense if not for the two other backyard photos left in the Oswald family photo album for the police to find. I also don't recall Marina saying she took four photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, John Butler said:

Someone has tried to put fingernails on the stubs.

I'd love to know how you reconcile the notion that someone "painted" fingernails onto this photo when, as Steve Roe has pointed out, the original negative exists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I'd love to know how you reconcile the notion that someone "painted" fingernails onto this photo when, as Steve Roe has pointed out, the original negative exists?

It seems that you and Steve need to learn how film/photo alteration is done.  I would suggest looking at David Healey's work.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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”.

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...