Jump to content
The Education Forum

PrayerPerson ???

Chris Davidson

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 316
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The location of Sarah Stanton in the doorway appears to remain enigmatic. Let us review the basics. First, what did the witnesses, including Sarah Stanton, report regarding her location. Here are excerpts from the relevant testimonies or interviews.

Paula Sanders (FBI report, WC Exhibit 1381, 3/19,1964): I took up a position at the top of the front steps of the Depository building facing Elm Street. To the best of my recollection, I was standing on the top step at the east end of the entrance. I recall that while standing there I noticed Mrs. Sarah Stanton standing next to me, but I am unsure as to the others. 

Paula Sanders (FBI report, WC Exhibit 1434, 11/24/1963): She said she did not see OSWALD during this time and she stood in the last line of spectators nearest the door to the Texas School Book Depository building.

Sarah Stanton (FBI report, WC Exhibit 1381, 3/18/1964): When President John F. Kennedy was shot I was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository Building with Mr. William Shelley, 126 South Tatum, Dallas, Mr. Otis Williams, 3429 Southwestern, Dallas, Mrs. R.E. Sanders, 4226 Delmar, Dallas, and Billy Lovelady, 7722 Hume Drive, Dallas.

Billy Lovelady (WC testimony):

Mr. BALL – Who was with you?
Mr. LOVELADY – Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton, and right behind me
Mr. BALL – What was that last name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Stanton.
Mr. BALL – What is the first name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Bill Shelley.
Mr. BALL – And Stanton’s first name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Miss Sarah Stanton.

Bill Shelley, (WC testimony): 
Mr. BALL - And who was out there?
Mr. SHELLEY - Well, there was Lloyd Viles of McGraw-Hill, Sarah Stanton, she's with Texas School Book, and Wesley Frazier and Billy Lovelady joined us shortly afterwards.
Mr. BALL - You were standing where?
Mr. SHELLEY - Just outside the glass doors there.
Mr. BALL - That would be on the top landing of the entrance?
Mr. SHELLEY - yes.

Buell Wesley Frazier his video-recorded interviews:

"Buell Wesley Frazier drove Lee H. Oswald to work on Nov. 22", 1963 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5OnbKATeSE&t=6s

"Interview with Buell Wesley Frazier (21 June, 2002)", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSjJAhJ4J4g

It is clear from the testimonies that Sarah Stanton stood on the top landing. Here is a graphic illustration of the top landing and two first steps with shoeprints representing the relevant persons. The circles around each person define the space of the doorway where Sarah Stanton needed to be with the condition that that space includes the top landing. The grey-shaded area is the intersection of all four circles. In order for all four testimonies to be true, Sarah Stanton would need to stand in that grey-shaded area, labelled "SS". Notably, Sarah Stanton herself indicated as her neighbors people who stood immediately in front of her: Bill Shelley, Otis Williams, and Billy Lovelady.



BL = Billy Lovelady; JM = Joe Molina; PM = Prayer Man; BS = Bill Shelley; BWF = Buell Wesley Frazier; PS = Pauline Sanders; SS = Sarah Stanton; OW = Otis Williams

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mrs Stanton's appearance provides further clues as to her location in the doorway. Her hair showed four remarkable features which may help in her identification. The four features are highlighted with red symbols in the picture below.

The right panel highlights (1) a rectangular shape of the front part of Sarah Stanton's hair above her forehead. A circle (2) points to a dark spot on the front surface of Stanton's hair. Sarah Stanton's hair was of large volume not only on the front part above the forehead but also on the lower part of her hair creating asymmetric wings (3), with a larger volume of hair in the lower back aspect of the head on the right than on the left. The arrows in the left-hand panel point to curles (4) that are visible on parts of Sarah Stanton's hair. These curls created puffy, semi-transparent blobs on the surface of Stanton's hair. 


Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The statements listed below are from the transcript of the interview of Mr Brian Doyle with members of Stanton's family on June 18, 2018. This interview can be replayed from: https://soundcloud.com/user-788101711/oswald-was-in-the-lunch-room?utm_source=clipboard&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=social_sharing

This is what the members of Mrs Stanton's family, Rosa and Wanda, had to say regarding Mrs Stanton's appearance and body height during the interview:

01:36: "Sarah Stanton was a very big woman."
14:07:  Confirmed that Sarah was about 5'5''.
14:37: "Sarah could also be 5'6'' ".
14:49: "Sarah herself said she was 5'4'' - 5'6'' ".
15:36: "Sarah weighed at least 300 pounds. She was over 300 pounds."
16:11: "Sarah was big at the bottom and her hips, less so at her top. Her arms were big."

Besides conferring data on Mrs Sarah Stanton's body height and appearance during the interview, Mrs Stanton's step-daughter also gave this recommendation for identification of Mrs Stanton's figure: "And the way to find her is, she was a very big woman." The large stature of Mrs Stanton was also confirmed to me by Mrs Stanton's grand-daughter, Wanda in our email exhange dated April 4, 2020: "My grandmother was obese to the point she could barely fit through a doorway."

To arrive at the best possible estimate of Mrs Stanton's body height, it is possible to use Larry's body height as a natural measuring stick. Larry stood next to Sarah in their family picture, and he was 6' or 6'1'' according to members of Stanton's family. The yellow line in the picture below crosses the top of Sarah's head and Larry's face at a height of about 1/3 of his ear.



The figure below was produced from an online application allowing to compare appearances of two people of known body heights. I have set Larry's height to 6' (left) or 6' 1'' (right) and the adjusted the height of the other person to reproduce the yellow line in the family picture. Mrs Stanton was either 5'6'' if Larry was 6', or 5'7'' if Larry was 6' 1''.





Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taken all data together, we search for a light-colour rectangular object (the top of Sarah's hair) at the height of about 5'6'' above the floor of the top landing, in the central area of the doorway in front of glass door, and slightly to the right of Bill Shelley.

Here is a cropped view of Darnell still showing Buell Wesley Frazier in the left part of the picture and a light-coloured object at the height compliant with the height of 5'6'' - 5'7''. The middle panel shows Frazier's head overlaid with a high-resolution image of his head for a better comparison, and a line crossing the top of the light-coloured rectangle. To recall, Mr Frazier (6' 1/2'') was of practically identical body height as Larry (6' - 6' 1'') and therefore, it is possible to compare the line crossing his face (middle panel) with that crossing Larry's face in the family photograph (lower panel).



It is very likely that the light-coloured rectangular object floating at a height of about 5'7'' in Darnell belonged to Sarah Stanton, confirming her location in the middle of the top landing, in front of glass door, and to the left of Buell Wesley Frazier.

I am working on the details of hair seen in Darnell, and will post when finished. 



Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To identify Mrs Stanton in Altgens6 is more difficult compared to Darnell. I cannot explain the full process better than my video, therefore, please watch using this link if you are interested:


Notably, Mrs Stanton stood closer to the glass door window in Darnell than in Altgens which on itself is not surprising because at least 30 seconds had elapsed between these two snapshots. However, only her location in the front part of the top landing (ger Altgens6 location) would allow a person exiting the first floor through the glass door to pass beside her and to occupy a spot at the western wall. Once Mrs Stanton slid back, no one would squeeze through. 

Edited by Andrej Stancak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On film....

Reporter:  "Were you in the building at the time?"

Oswald:  "Naturally, if I work in that building, yes sir."

Oswald admits, on film, that he was inside the building at the time of the shooting.  Therefore, Oswald was not out by the front steps.  If Oswald was not out by the front steps, then he is not prayer man.  If Oswald is not prayer man, then who cares who prayer man was.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

From Bart: «The pic has only reduced brightness (-35) and contrast (-4) there is no so called heavy filtering present»

Adjusting brightness and contrast alone didn't work for me, see my next post.

Here is a copy of the image from the PM site, choose "download original image" to see full image (269 KB). 


Edited by Henry Frost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

From Bart: «The pic has only reduced brightness (-35) and contrast (-4) there is no so called heavy filtering present»

I tried to reproduce what's on the Prayer Man site while listening to the creepy MK Ultra podcast, and this is what I found.

First of all, I don't believe there was any attempt at deception, they just worked the image until they were happy with it.  Image processing is more an art than anything.

And if you want to try it at home:

1.  Find a suitable Darnell clip to start with, and capture the "scene".

2. Greyscale the image to make it black and white.

3. Increase the color depth to 16 million (24 bit).

4. Play with the color channel brightness curves.

5. Adjust brightness and contrast.

6. Keep fiddling until you like the result.

I got close to what's on the PM site. This is why I called it "heavily filtered", there were many steps involved. Unless the person who did it took meticulous notes, you may not be able to reproduce it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/10/2022 at 8:53 AM, Chris Davidson said:

Credit to Alan J. Ford (Duncan's Forum) for posting the "Original" in this collage some months ago.

It is a frame from Darnell. The source is unknown. I believe Alan said it was floating around the internet when he obtained it.

I was a little reserved at first, but then remembered James' comments about the neckline, from his viewing at the Sixth Floor Museum a few years earlier.

I enlarged the original somewhat and applied a couple of different filters to it.




The person who posted the original at left was Alan Ford (NOT ALAN J. FORD) who is also a member of Duncan's forum.

My apologies and thanks to AJF, as I hadn't realized in all this time that two members had very similar names.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

From Bart: «The pic has only reduced brightness (-35) and contrast (-4) there is no so called heavy filtering present»


So Bart now believes that PM was wearing a woman's blouse?

(Which is what we see in the Alan Ford Darnell frame, which Bart seems to be defending. Unless he said that about some other version of the frame.)

That's a little hard to believe (about the blouse). Bart should come here and speak for himself.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

None of these 11 people ever reported seeing Oswald on the front steps.


Gil, you're assuming that the cover-up artists didn't cover-up any of that testimony.

Some of that testimony falls apart on close inspection. Which is what got me to investigate it carefully.


20 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

IMO the evidence indicates that Oswald was in the Domino Room on the first floor eating lunch.


I agree. And the evidence also indicates that, at the beginning of his lunch, Oswald went back up to the 2nd floor to buy a coke. After which he went back down and ate his lunch.


20 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

Not one employee reported to the FBI that they saw him in the second floor lunchroom, no one saw him on the sixth floor and no one reported seeing him outside on the front steps of the building.


Oswald himself, in his interrogation, said he went "outside with Shelley" to "watch the P. Parade." Yes, that was his alibi, which the government covered up. The WR says that his alibi was that he was inside on the first floor. Which is certainly false.

The government later added the part about the 2nd floor Oswald/Baker encounter. It is obvious that it was added to the notes of one of the interrogations, because adding it changed the story such that it has Oswald encountering Baker and getting his coke FIRST, followed by his going back down to eat his lunch. Which of course is backward.

In addition, it is easy to see how Fritz squeezed in the fabricated 2nd floor encounter into his handwritten notes. It easily fits.


20 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

I agree with Pat. People look at blurry pictures and see whatever they want to see.


Gil, the idea that Oswald was on the front steps has nothing to do with the blurry PM frames. It is based on evidence and solid research. Apparently you are unaware of it.

I did my own research and hypothesized, based on solid evidence, that Oswald had been on the steps. That was without any Prayer Man consideration at all. Bart and his group did the same and came to the same conclusion. (I can't say how much PM influenced them, but it apparently got them questioning the second floor encounter.)

Later, Malcolm Blunt discovered the FBI interrogation note which stated that Oswald claimed to be out watching the presidential parade.

It was after that that I considered my hypothesis to be factual.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

Reporter:  "Were you in the building at the time?"

Oswald:  "Naturally, if I work in that building, yes sir."

Oswald admits, on film, that he was inside the building at the time of the shooting. 


The reporter only said, "at the time." He didn't specify what time he was referring to.

You believe Oswald thought the reporter meant "during the shooting." In contrast, I believe Oswald thought the reporter meant, "during the workday."

Now, let's complete Oswald's reply with what you believe he meant, and then do the same with what I believe he meant, and see if the two resulting sentences make sense:


Meaning of Oswald' reply, according to Bill Brown:

1) "Naturally, if I work in that building, I of course would have been in that building during the shooting."

Meaning of Oswald's reply, according to Sandy Larsen:

2) "Naturally, if I work in that building, I of course would have been in that building during the workday."


Now, read # 1 . Does that sentence make logical sense? What about #2?

What you have Oswald meaning is illogical. Just because he worked in the TSBD doesn't necessarily mean that he was in the building during the shooting.


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

  • Create New...