PrayerPerson ???

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

As stated ad nauseam, the CTs with the means to get a clearer copy of the film have viewed a clearer copy of the film. and stopped pursuing a clearer copy of the film afterwards. To my understanding some who viewed this film remained convinced it showed Oswald. But none with the moolah or cache thought it worth the effort to purchase this film or pursue another film of similar quality. 

It's toast, IMO. Pursuing Prayer Man is like trying to document James Files' confession, or Judyth Baker's love story. If it was gonna happen it would have happened, IMO. 

In the meantime there are a number of much better leads that remain largely unexamined in the media. 

Couldn't agree more.

But it's good to see some younger researchers digging in the piles of documents.   Answers - if any - will have to come from those documents. 

I don't expect spectacular "new" pictures or better films.  Old films can be "improved" but that also means "changed".  If the original is a blur, you can get a blur that looks better....  but one is also moving away from reality in the same time.   Those projects can be rewarding, but I wouldn't call them proof of something.

[Andrew Prutsok]

13 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

So let's be clear... A handwritten draft for an FBI report which contains the claim Oswald said he went outside to watch the parade that does not specify at what time he went outside (and which is not supported by any actual reports written by the FBI or DPD, or even the statements of the man who wrote this draft) is clear-cut evidence Oswald was outside at the time of the shooting... While a taped exchange with Oswald in which he is asked if he was in the building at the time of the shooting and responded in the affirmative is ambiguous...

Got it... 

Clear as mud...

 

Mr. Speer, if Oswald never stated he was outside watching the parade, why did the FBI freak out over Altgens 6 and take it to Billy Lovelady's house that evening to make him identify himself? 

[Jonathan Cohen]

5 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Mr. Speer, if Oswald never stated he was outside watching the parade, why did the FBI freak out over Altgens 6 and take it to Billy Lovelady's house that evening to make him identify himself? 

How about because they looked at the photo and, like most of us, saw enough of a resemblance to Oswald to warrant further investigation? What's unusual about that?

[Guest]

And if Lovelady said it was LHO,  Altgens film would have been "Alt(g)ered" in due time 😇

[Tom Gram]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

As stated ad nauseam, the CTs with the means to get a clearer copy of the film have viewed a clearer copy of the film. and stopped pursuing a clearer copy of the film afterwards. To my understanding some who viewed this film remained convinced it showed Oswald. But none with the moolah or cache thought it worth the effort to purchase this film or pursue another film of similar quality. 

It's toast, IMO. Pursuing Prayer Man is like trying to document James Files' confession, or Judyth Baker's love story. If it was gonna happen it would have happened, IMO. 

In the meantime there are a number of much better leads that remain largely unexamined in the media. 

Right, but a lot of valuable brainpower and effort is currently being spent on PM - and if PM is not Oswald that needs to be actually verified before anyone will stop caring about it. The issue is anything but “toast”, and this thread is a testament to that.

So some CTs got to see a copy of Darnell that was either inconclusive or suggested that PM was not Oswald. So what? Is it now literally impossible for anyone to obtain and have a professional analysis performed on an in-camera original of either the Darnell or Weigman films because a couple well known CTs saw an allegedly first-gen copy of Darnell in some shady guy’s garage and didn’t proclaim to high heaven that they’d solved the case? Give me a break. 

Also, your claims about this incident have been disputed by someone directly involved, and advocacy for PM is still thriving, so I’m not sure what you seek to accomplish by repeating this story every time someone mentions the topic of obtaining better scans. If you want the PM theory to actually die, the only way to achieve that is finding out who the hell PM really is, and the only way to do that is by obtaining better scans. It’s not that complicated. 

I honestly think that arguing back and forth about PM is a waste of time at this point. If PM isn’t Oswald, everyone needs to just get over it and move on - but I can’t think of a more achievable and worthwhile effort than obtaining better scans, since: 1) if it isn’t Oswald a lot of smart people will finally focus their attention elsewhere; and 2) if it’s Oswald the case will be reopened immediately.

I just think this is a simple issue that the entire JFKA community should support. Let’s solve the mystery, put the issue to bed for good, and maybe, just maybe, we’ll win the lottery. 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

And if Lovelady said it was LHO,  Altgens film would have been "Alt(g)ered" in due time 😇

No, it wouldn't have, because the photo showing Lovelady had already gone out over the AP wire within a couple hours of the assassination and was shown on live television by Walter Cronkite that evening.

[Pat Speer]

34 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I can’t think of a more achievable and worthwhile effort than obtaining better scans, since: 1) if it isn’t Oswald a lot of smart people will finally focus their attention elsewhere; and 2) if it’s Oswald the case will be reopened immediately.

I just think this is a simple issue that the entire JFKA community should support. Let’s solve the mystery, put the issue to bed for good, and maybe, just maybe, we’ll win the lottery. 

I would agree but the problem is that people have been saying this for 10 years. It's led nowhere, but in circles. And the people at the top of the "community"--those with access to the media, who put out documentaries and put on conventions, etc, have taken a hard pass. 

 

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

I would agree but the problem is that people have been saying this for 10 years. It's led nowhere, but in circles. And the people at the top of the "community"--those with access to the media, who put out documentaries and put on conventions, etc, have taken a hard pass. 

 

That can be very frustrating of course.  Especially when you know something is out there, but they will not let it out (or simply ignore the need).  

Pat is a long time member of this community, I think he can say  "Been there, done that, and got the shirt", every now and then.   

PS :  I'm not sure about the shirt  😃 

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

No, it wouldn't have, because the photo showing Lovelady had already gone out over the AP wire within a couple hours of the assassination and was shown on live television by Walter Cronkite that evening.

Plus, the Altgens photograph was also appearing on the front pages of many newspapers as early as Day 1 (Nov. 22), such as these random newspaper examples (click to make huge):

 

 

Edited September 20, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Cory Santos]

9 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Plus, the Altgens photograph was also appearing on the front pages of many newspapers as early as Day 1 (Nov. 22), such as these random newspaper examples (click to make huge):

 

 

On the first paper, why are there two arrows.   One in particular where the cracked windshield approximately is.  

[David Von Pein]

7 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

On the first paper, why are there two arrows.  

Read the caption, Cory....

Edited September 20, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Cory Santos]

4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Read the caption, Cory....

Ah ha.   So you DVP admit photos were manipulated by adding images on the first day.   Lol.  

Edited September 21, 2022 by Cory Santos

[Cory Santos]

Actually, I must say this caption is interesting.  It has explained both occupants had already been hit and that secret service agents were looking where the “shot” came.  Brilliant deductions so early on.   Almost as if the paper had solved the case that day.  

[Pat Speer]

10 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Mr. Speer, if Oswald never stated he was outside watching the parade, why did the FBI freak out over Altgens 6 and take it to Billy Lovelady's house that evening to make him identify himself? 

They didn't. The story that it was Oswald in the Altgens popped up weeks later, not that evening. 

[David Von Pein]

3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Actually, I must say this caption is interesting.  It has explained both occupants had already been hit and that secret service agents were looking where the “shot” came.  Brilliant deductions so early on.  Almost as if the paper had solved the case that day.  

I have to confess --- I wrote that caption myself. The managing editor of The Tampa Times telephoned me at 3:35 PM EST on 11/22/63 and asked me if I would write them an accurate caption for the Altgens photo that they said was going to adorn the front page of their 11/22 second edition. So, I agreed to help out my Tampa newspaper pals and write up the caption. (Not bad for a kid who wasn't even 2 years old yet, huh?) 😁

Edited September 21, 2022 by David Von Pein