A Problem with "Prayer Man"

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Pat Speer writes:

Quote

I wish you'd had that at the ready a decade or so ago, when certain people were endlessly arguing that the photos were confiscated and faked via a CIA photo alteration lab set up in the parking lot next to the TSBD.

I recall those arguments, which I think were what prompted me to actually look at the evidence. It took me about half an hour, trawling through Trask's Pictures of the Pain, to learn that the authorities had no great interest in the photographic record and certainly didn't set out to confiscate the cameras and films.

Whoever instigated the assassination was clearly not concerned about what any home movies, news films, and still photographs might show. This fact alone is enough to debunk some of the more elaborate conspiracy theories.

It's conceivable that there may have been some ad hoc photo manipulation, although I'm not at all convinced that this happened. But if it did happen, it would have been done to support the lone-nut explanation for straightforward political reasons, and not necessarily by anyone who had a hand in the assassination.

Any theory that proposes all-powerful overlords micro-managing the events in Dealey Plaza, and then manipulating the physical evidence to the level of widespread photo alteration, needs to explain why those all-powerful overlords were happy to let dozens of photographers wander off to who-knows-where with their cameras and films.

Likewise, if undeniable evidence turns up which places Oswald on the steps when he should have been on the sixth floor, it won't just be the lone-nut explanation that gets destroyed. Any conspiracy theory that requires him to have been on the sixth floor will also fall apart. It's important to remember that Oswald could have been set up as a patsy before the assassination even if he was at liberty to go outside to watch the p. parade, or to eat his lunch in the domino room, during the shooting itself.

-----

James DiEugenio writes:

Quote

Bart Kamp's book is coming out in a couple of weeks.

That should be a thorough look at the whole issue of what was said about this during detention.

I hadn't heard about that, but I'm looking forward to reading it. I hope you'll be reviewing it! Bart has done a lot of good work on Oswald's interrogations.

-----

Tom Gram writes:

Quote

Alex Wilson, who knows a lot about WWII and European history, requested temporary posting status on the EF to debate Leslie. Can we start a petition? Mods, you know you want to see this happen. 

I'd sign that petition!

Alex is a serious student of the historical background which appears to be central to Albarelli's claims. I'm sure Leslie will be keen to correct Alex's belief that the book contains "errors, omissions, inventions and flat out falsehoods relating to WW2 era history and wider European history in general."

If Alex is prevented from joining the Ed Forum for whatever reason, the obvious next step would be for Leslie to join the ROKC forum and have the debate there instead.

-----

P.S. I don't know if I'm the only reader who has trouble following the "RO1-RO2-LS1" discussion. Handy hint: copy and paste the relevant part of the other person's comment, highlight it, then click the little quotation mark icon, and - hey presto! - it will appear within a blockquote box. You can then write your reply underneath, and everyone will be able to work out who's replying to whom!

[Pete Mellor]

18 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Thanks, Pete.  Very interesting read. It's remarkable he had opted to make a phone call related to the assassination;  does he deny that call as well, or is it an instance of presumed identity?

To reiterate, we make no mention of Osborne or Bowen traveling on a bus with Oswald because Lafitte makes no such note. 

It's remarkable he had opted to make a phone call related to the assassination;

I want everything in black & white or I get cynical, which in the JFKA case is quite often.  I assume you are referring to the supposed phone call to the Cambridge News, linked to Albert Osborne, just hours prior to the assassination.  My take is it never happened.  Former Cambridge News editor Keith Whetstone, who worked at the paper in '63, said in 1981 "It sounds like a completely fictitious story."  He traced 12 members of staff who also worked at the paper in '63 and none of them recalled the telephone call.  Also former senior reporter Jock Gillespie said, "There is no way that would have happened without being talked about.  That's been a wind-up, are you sure it isn't Cambridge Massachusetts they are talking about?" It's high time this fabrication was put in the trash can.

With regard to 'Coup in Dallas' on Osborne, pgs.239-242:-

Albert Alexander Osborne first tole the FBI when they tracked him down in 1964

His birth certificate reads Albert Osborne.  The 'Alexander' was Albert's invention, among a few other monikers.

Intrepid researcher Mae Brussell, long overdue for recognition by the wider community of assassination research, confirms, and takes it a bit further: "Bowen-Osborne had been running a school for highly professional marksmen in Oaxaca, Mexico, since 1934.

Maybe one of the real researchers on this Forum can educate me with evidence on this aspect & I haven't dug into the Floyd case either, but once again I am somewhat cynical of this 'academy of assassins' stuff.  Torbitt's 'Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal' is typical of these fairy stories that has Osborne & his men in a safe house at 3126 Harlendale in Oak Cliff, Dallas on the 22nd November '63.  These tales are repeated in quite a few books, as is Hugh McDonald rhubarb about Osborne being a Soviet agent.  No sale for me!

A women who contributed to both Osborne's and Bowen's missions told Russell that Bowen who died probably in 1958, but that the two had a history of working together.

Not surprising that people get confused about Osborne.  To be clear, it is Albert Osborne that we are dealing with here. Osborne met John Howard Bowen in North Carolina in the 1920's and thereafter stole & used Bowen's identity.  Bowen never worked with Osborne and took no part in Osborne's shenanigans.  Osborne travelled to MC in '63 using the Bowen alias because Mexican authorities had previously bunged him out of Mexico as Osborne.  The real John Howard Bowen died in 1962 as a result of injuries from a car accident. 

Visiting family he had not seen in 40 years.

Not true.  Albert visited family in Grimsby in 1953, Daryl Featherstone still had the 'Bible Stories for Children' that Uncle Albert presented to him at Christmas 1953 when I visited him c2019 in Grimsby.

p.s. In any future Index of 'Coup' my name is Pete Mellor, not Peter Mellon.  Cheers!

 

[Roger Odisio]

8 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

I recall those arguments, which I think were what prompted me to actually look at the evidence. It took me about half an hour, trawling through Trask's Pictures of the Pain, to learn that the authorities had no great interest in the photographic record and certainly didn't set out to confiscate the cameras and films.

Whoever instigated the assassination was clearly not concerned about what any home movies, news films, and still photographs might show. This fact alone is enough to debunk some of the more elaborate conspiracy theories.

Look Jeremy, I'm using your tip.  I thought my numbering would be enough to guide you thru the sequence of statements. But anyway, thanks.

I generally accept your take, but there are exceptions.  The Nix film shows parts of the grassy knoll during the shots.  Nix gave it to the FBI.  I think they asked for it, and said they would return it.  His granddaughter, Gayle Nix Jackson, still fighting to get the camera original back, has recently filed a second lawsuit..  The first was dismissed as being in the wrong venue.

Why do you suppose they weren't very concerned about what those films and photos might show?  Some things are clear.  They were going to shut up Oswald and create their own version of what happened.  They controlled the flow of information through the media. Given that, perhaps they decided running around immediately after the murder confiscating anything that might show what happened was too heavy handed and could ultimately backfire. The record shows that so far their approach has worked.

On the other hand, I'm thinking of what their co-conspirator, NBC, did by grabbing the Darnell and Wiegman films and refusing to let anyone else see them all these years. That's a bit different of course.  NBC is a private "news" organization, not accused of being involved in the actual murder.

Have you ever wondered why the cops went so hard after Frazier the day of the murder.  So as to threaten him with being an accessory or even an accomplice to their patsy Oswald, and throwing away the jail key? Sure, they probably already knew that Frazier gave Oswald rides to work, but that doesn't seem to be enough to explain what they did.  Could it be they had already seen an image on the steps that showed Frazier standing beside Oswald?  If so Frazier had to be scared enough to keep his mouth shut, as he has, for 60 years.

[Leslie Sharp]

6 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

It's remarkable he had opted to make a phone call related to the assassination;

I want everything in black & white or I get cynical, which in the JFKA case is quite often.  I assume you are referring to the supposed phone call to the Cambridge News, linked to Albert Osborne, just hours prior to the assassination.  My take is it never happened.  Former Cambridge News editor Keith Whetstone, who worked at the paper in '63, said in 1981 "It sounds like a completely fictitious story."  He traced 12 members of staff who also worked at the paper in '63 and none of them recalled the telephone call.  Also former senior reporter Jock Gillespie said, "There is no way that would have happened without being talked about.  That's been a wind-up, are you sure it isn't Cambridge Massachusetts they are talking about?" It's high time this fabrication was put in the trash can.

With regard to 'Coup in Dallas' on Osborne, pgs.239-242:-

Albert Alexander Osborne first tole the FBI when they tracked him down in 1964

His birth certificate reads Albert Osborne.  The 'Alexander' was Albert's invention, among a few other monikers.

Intrepid researcher Mae Brussell, long overdue for recognition by the wider community of assassination research, confirms, and takes it a bit further: "Bowen-Osborne had been running a school for highly professional marksmen in Oaxaca, Mexico, since 1934.

Maybe one of the real researchers on this Forum can educate me with evidence on this aspect & I haven't dug into the Floyd case either, but once again I am somewhat cynical of this 'academy of assassins' stuff.  Torbitt's 'Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal' is typical of these fairy stories that has Osborne & his men in a safe house at 3126 Harlendale in Oak Cliff, Dallas on the 22nd November '63.  These tales are repeated in quite a few books, as is Hugh McDonald rhubarb about Osborne being a Soviet agent.  No sale for me!

A women who contributed to both Osborne's and Bowen's missions told Russell that Bowen who died probably in 1958, but that the two had a history of working together.

Not surprising that people get confused about Osborne.  To be clear, it is Albert Osborne that we are dealing with here. Osborne met John Howard Bowen in North Carolina in the 1920's and thereafter stole & used Bowen's identity.  Bowen never worked with Osborne and took no part in Osborne's shenanigans.  Osborne travelled to MC in '63 using the Bowen alias because Mexican authorities had previously bunged him out of Mexico as Osborne.  The real John Howard Bowen died in 1962 as a result of injuries from a car accident. 

Visiting family he had not seen in 40 years.

Not true.  Albert visited family in Grimsby in 1953, Daryl Featherstone still had the 'Bible Stories for Children' that Uncle Albert presented to him at Christmas 1953 when I visited him c2019 in Grimsby.

p.s. In any future Index of 'Coup' my name is Pete Mellor, not Peter Mellon.  Cheers!

 

PM: "It sounds like a completely fictitious story." "There is no way that would have happened without being talked about....:
LS: This is black and white?
 

 

PM: His birth certificate reads Albert Osborne.  The 'Alexander' was Albert's invention, among a few other monikers.

LS: the operative phrase is ". . . told the FBI."
 

 

PM: you quote (inaccurately) Intrepid researcher Mae Brussell, long overdue for recognition by the wider community of assassination research, confirms, and takes it a bit further: ."Bowen-Osborne had been running a school for highly professional marksmen in Oaxaca, Mexico, since 1934.

LS: Confirmed in a September 28 datebook entry: Bowen + Hudson  school cover - wife Spain.

 

 

PM: No sale for me!

LS: Opinion, not fact, and hardly black and white. 

 

PM: Not surprising that people get confused about Osborne.  To be clear, it is Albert Osborne that we are dealing with here. Osborne met John Howard Bowen in North Carolina in the 1920's and thereafter stole & used Bowen's identity.  Bowen never worked with Osborne and took no part in Osborne's shenanigans.  Osborne travelled to MC in '63 using the Bowen alias because Mexican authorities had previously bunged him out of Mexico as Osborne.  The real John Howard Bowen died in 1962 as a result of injuries from a car accident. 

LS: Can you provide links to your source(s), or notes from interviews you have conducted personally?

 

PM: Not true.  Albert visited family in Grimsby in 1953, Daryl Featherstone still had the 'Bible Stories for Children' that Uncle Albert presented to him at Christmas 1953 when I visited him c2019 in Grimsby.

LS: thanks for the correction. Obviously it is a serious detail, and could alter Hank's investigation significantly? The salient fact is  "Bowen" + Hudson appear in a personal record of events maintained by Pierre Lafitte  leading to the assassination in Dallas.

 

LS: My sincere apologies for adding an "r" to your christian name.

 

Had the names Bowen and Hudson not surfaced in Lafitte's 1963 record on a date that coincides with Oswald's trip to Mexico City, we would not have included a reference to Bowen.  Are you familiar at all with government documents related to John Wilson Hudson? Do you know any reason why he might be liaising with "Bowen"?

 

sláinte

Edited July 5, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Jonathan Cohen]

3 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

Why do you suppose they weren't very concerned about what those films and photos might show?  Some things are clear.  They were going to shut up Oswald and create their own version of what happened.  They controlled the flow of information through the media. Given that, perhaps they decided running around immediately after the murder confiscating anything that might show what happened was too heavy handed and could ultimately backfire. The record shows that so far their approach has worked.

It only "worked" because there was no need to alter or fake anything. The Dealey Plaza photo record is a self-authenticating whole. No doppelgangers required!

[Denis Morissette]

I look forward to viewing the 6FM copy of the Darnell film and never-published TV films when I’m in Dallas in November. There’s nothing like checking out evidence yourself instead of relying on others’ observations. 

[Pete Mellor]

8 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

LS: This is black and white?

I think 14 ex-members of the Cambridge paper is a lot more black & white that the call never happened, than any claim that Osborne was responsible even if it did happen.  I'm sure, if such a tip off was received by such a relatively small newspaper the buzz would have been, as stated, talked about all round the office.

8 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Opinion, not fact, and hardly black and white. 

I don't see anything factual in regard to Osborne and a school for assassins.

8 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Can you provide links to your source

With regard to John Howard Bowen's death, a newspaper obit was found by researcher John Kowalski, of this Forum.

8 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Are you familiar at all with government documents related to John Wilson Hudson? Do you know any reason why he might be liaising with "Bowen"?

No. The only J.W.H. I'm aware of is the British journalist with the Cuba link to Trafficante & Ruby.

8 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

My sincere apologies for adding an "r" to your christian name.

😄It happens all the time.  It's the n for r in the surname that should be corrected.  Prost!

 

[Leslie Sharp]

55 minutes ago, Pete Mellor said:

I think 14 ex-members of the Cambridge paper is a lot more black & white that the call never happened, than any claim that Osborne was responsible even if it did happen.  I'm sure, if such a tip off was received by such a relatively small newspaper the buzz would have been, as stated, talked about all round the office.

I don't see anything factual in regard to Osborne and a school for assassins.

With regard to John Howard Bowen's death, a newspaper obit was found by researcher John Kowalski, of this Forum.

No. The only J.W.H. I'm aware of is the British journalist with the Cuba link to Trafficante & Ruby.

😄It happens all the time.  It's the n for r in the surname that should be corrected.  Prost!

 

 Your argument about the call is persuasive yet begs the question: why, 18 years after the fact when you inquired, wouldn't someone on the paper seize the opportunity to run a story denouncing allegations that Osborne made the call? Did they, and I've missed it?

 

The coincidence that Bowen and Hudson were together on September 28 - school cover in Mexico — at the same time as Oswald's trip and that Hudson was responsible for a similar assassination-related call focused on Jack Ruby is one of those high strangenesses. 

 

British journalist with the Cuba link to Trafficante & Ruby is one and the same John Wilson-Hudson identified in Lafitte's datebook on October 30. Ruby closely replicates Lafitte's note in the same 24 hour period.

 

The Lafitte datebook also substantiates claims that Osborne ran a school for assassins. How could Pierre know about that school?

Next time it's Mellor.

bueño bye

 

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Thanks for your reply, Roger! You ask some interesting questions.

Quote

Why do you suppose they weren't very concerned about what those films and photos might show?

If by 'they' you mean whoever instigated the assassination, the implication is that whatever the photographic record might show, that was fine by them. If it showed evidence of more than one gunman, they would have been happy for the shooting to be viewed as a conspiracy.

There were hundreds of people in Dealey Plaza, any number of whom could have captured any aspect of the shooting on film. Clearly the lone-gunman explanation was not baked into the plot.

If by 'they' you mean the law enforcement agencies who were responsible for investigating the crime, the implication is that they were not motivated by any preconceived interpretation of the assassination, at least in the early stages while dozens of members of the public with cameras were leaving Dealey Plaza and dispersing all over the country and abroad.

In those early stages, law enforcement treated the event like a normal crime: by interviewing the photographers who came to their attention, such as Zapruder and Moorman, and putting out a message for people to turn in their films and photos if possible.

Quote

They were going to shut up Oswald and create their own version of what happened.

The 'they' who wanted to shut up Oswald need not have been the same 'they' who wanted to enforce the lone-gunman explanation.

That explanation was decided upon by insiders in Washington, and can be interpreted plausibly as a straightforward political action by people for whom minimising public distrust of political institutions was more important than finding out who had shot the president.

The reason for shutting up Oswald might have been to prevent him spilling the beans about what he knew about the assassination, assuming that he knew anything. But we don't need to assume that. He may have been murdered simply to prevent the flimsy case against him being exposed during a trial. The latter would apply even if Oswald had known absolutely nothing about the assassination in advance.

Quote

They controlled the flow of information through the media. Given that, perhaps they decided running around immediately after the murder confiscating anything that might show what happened was too heavy handed and could ultimately backfire. The record shows that so far their approach has worked.

Again, the 'they' who controlled the media need not have been the same 'they' who instigated the assassination or the 'they' who could have confiscated the films and photos if they wanted to.

Widespread confiscation of films would indeed have looked heavy-handed. The important thing to remember is that it didn't actually happen.

Quote

Have you ever wondered why the cops went so hard after Frazier the day of the murder ... Could it be they had already seen an image on the steps that showed Frazier standing beside Oswald?

That sounds perfectly plausible. Or maybe Oswald mentioned that his buddy Wesley could vouch for his whereabouts: one more aspect of his alibi that didn't make it into the official reports.

[Andrej Stancak]

Thanks, Sandy, for your encouraging words.

 

 

 

 

[Michael Griffith]

On 6/30/2023 at 7:53 PM, Bill Brown said:

 

"Now that we're certain Oswald's role in Otto Skorzeny's strategy to assassinate Kennedy in Dallas was that of the designated patsy just as he insisted..."

 

"I'M JUST A PATSY"

You have to look at the patsy statement in it's entirety.

"They have taken me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm just a patsy." -- Lee Oswald

Oswald is clearly claiming that the Dallas Police Department is picking on him because he once tried to defect to Russia. He is not saying anything about mythical conspirators who are attempting to frame him for the assassination.

So, if nothing else, Oswald was saying that he had nothing to do with the JFK and Tippit shootings and that the police arrested him merely because he used to live in the Soviet Union. If nothing else, this is a strong declaration of innocence. 

But let's use logic and deduction and look a little deeper into his patsy statement, in light of his attempt to call a John Hurt in Raleigh, North Carolina. Since WC apologists don't want to have to argue that the attempted phone call is meaningless, they claim that there was no such attempt, that Ms. Treon just invented the whole story, even though her daughter and others corroborated key parts of her account and vouched for her integrity. 

But let's admit the obvious conclusion: Ms. Treon did not invent the story, nor was she delusional or "mistaken" (how would anyone make that kind of "mistake"?). She was telling the truth. Oswald did try to call a John Hurt in Raleigh, NC, and two federal agents ensured that the call did not go through. 

Obviously, Oswald had been given that name and those phone numbers to call in an emergency. When he made his patsy statement, he may still have been trying to maintain his cover as a Marxist, so he said he was arrested because he once lived in the Soviet Union. Like his request for Communist Party USA lawyer John Abt to represent him, his patsy statement may have been his way of trying to tell his handlers that he was still maintaining his cover.

If Oswald had not attempted to call John Hurt in Raleigh, NC, I would be quite open to the idea that he was so clueless about what was happening to him that he really did think he had been arrested just because he used to live in Russia. 

Of course, it is also possible that he tried to call John Hurt to tell him, "Hey, these red neck yahoos down here have arrested me because I used to live in the Soviet Union. Can you guys inform the Dallas police that I'm a federal intelligence operative and that I lived in the Soviet Union for a while because I was on an intelligence mission?"

Edited July 6, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Sandy Larsen]

6 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Quote

Why do you suppose [the plotters] weren't very concerned about what those films and photos might show?

 

6 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

.... the implication is that whatever the photographic record might show, that was fine by them. If it showed evidence of more than one gunman, [the plotters] would have been happy for the shooting to be viewed as a conspiracy.

 

Bingo!

This is why my working theory is that the Mexico City incident was designed to paint Oswald, not as a shooter conspiring with Cuba and Russia, but rather as part of a team of shooters and accomplices.

 

6 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

There were hundreds of people in Dealey Plaza, any number of whom could have captured any aspect of the shooting on film. Clearly the lone-gunman explanation was not baked into the plot.

 

Bingo!

The lone-gunman explanation was merely a part of the coverup, not the plot.

 

[Michael Griffith]

Quote

@Roger Odisio wrote:

Why do you suppose they weren't very concerned about what those films and photos might show?

The plotters and those handling the cover-up on their behalf were very concerned about those films and photos. That is why, as now know, they diverted the Zapruder film to the CIA-contracted Kodak Hawkeye photo lab in Rochester, NY, and then to the CIA's NPIC in DC. That is why the Zapruder film was suppressed for 12 ears (even in its altered state, it was unacceptable). That is why some photographic evidence disappeared or was deliberately damaged. That is why the NPIC briefing boards on the Zapruder film vanished.

But the cover-up operation could not suppress or damage every photo and film. The plotters and their cover-up people, for example, were not powerful enough to keep ABC from airing the Zapruder film in 1975. 

 

Edited July 6, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Leslie Sharp]

On 7/5/2023 at 2:22 AM, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Pat Speer writes:

I recall those arguments, which I think were what prompted me to actually look at the evidence. It took me about half an hour, trawling through Trask's Pictures of the Pain, to learn that the authorities had no great interest in the photographic record and certainly didn't set out to confiscate the cameras and films.

Whoever instigated the assassination was clearly not concerned about what any home movies, news films, and still photographs might show. This fact alone is enough to debunk some of the more elaborate conspiracy theories.

It's conceivable that there may have been some ad hoc photo manipulation, although I'm not at all convinced that this happened. But if it did happen, it would have been done to support the lone-nut explanation for straightforward political reasons, and not necessarily by anyone who had a hand in the assassination.

Any theory that proposes all-powerful overlords micro-managing the events in Dealey Plaza, and then manipulating the physical evidence to the level of widespread photo alteration, needs to explain why those all-powerful overlords were happy to let dozens of photographers wander off to who-knows-where with their cameras and films.

Likewise, if undeniable evidence turns up which places Oswald on the steps when he should have been on the sixth floor, it won't just be the lone-nut explanation that gets destroyed. Any conspiracy theory that requires him to have been on the sixth floor will also fall apart. It's important to remember that Oswald could have been set up as a patsy before the assassination even if he was at liberty to go outside to watch the p. parade, or to eat his lunch in the domino room, during the shooting itself.

-----

James DiEugenio writes:

I hadn't heard about that, but I'm looking forward to reading it. I hope you'll be reviewing it! Bart has done a lot of good work on Oswald's interrogations.

-----

Tom Gram writes:

I'd sign that petition!

Alex is a serious student of the historical background which appears to be central to Albarelli's claims. I'm sure Leslie will be keen to correct Alex's belief that the book contains "errors, omissions, inventions and flat out falsehoods relating to WW2 era history and wider European history in general."

If Alex is prevented from joining the Ed Forum for whatever reason, the obvious next step would be for Leslie to join the ROKC forum and have the debate there instead.

-----

P.S. I don't know if I'm the only reader who has trouble following the "RO1-RO2-LS1" discussion. Handy hint: copy and paste the relevant part of the other person's comment, highlight it, then click the little quotation mark icon, and - hey presto! - it will appear within a blockquote box. You can then write your reply underneath, and everyone will be able to work out who's replying to whom!

@Jeremy Bojczuk Before I consider your post carefully and respond in full, I'm on board Alex Wilson joining the forum for this debate, assuming he'll play nice and by these house rules, not those of ROKC.

[Bill Brown]

 

On film....

Oswald: "I work in that building."

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

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

Therefore, Oswald was not out on the front steps or on the landing.

If Oswald was not out on the front steps or the landing, then he is not Prayer Man/Prayer Woman.

Who cares, then?