Mary Ferrell

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Robin,

Having enlarged and colourised (False colours) your original

Altgens6 sharp image which you posted

at the beginning of this thread

I have come to the conclusion

that the area you highlighted

contains only one person.

The area you believe to be another person

is - IMO - a coat,a shawl or a cardigan.

The woman has draped a coat/shawl/cardigan

over her right shoulder. The coat/shawl/cardigan

looks like another person but,IMO,is not.

The dark area which has been mistaken

for hair is again - IMO - the shadow of the

coat/shawl/cardigan on the woman's arm.

Bernice posted an image of the same woman(?)

seconds after the Altgens6 picture was taken

and a woman, IMO, can be seen in that image

with the same coat/shawl/cardigan over her

upper right arm.Is this the same woman as

the one in Altgens6?

Bernice's image tends to make me think that it is.

However, in the Altgens6 image I originally thought

the person in question was wearing a belt and wearing trousers!

In the area of her left shoulder is a man's face visible?

The woman in Bernice's image seems to have

a wide sleeve dress on. Would her sleeves have fallen

automatically when she raised her arms?

Thanks to Bernice for her post.

This is all conjecture on my part.

I may be totally wrong.

In conclusion it may be a man or it may be a woman.

IF (Big if) the woman in Bernice's image and the person in Robin's Altgens6 are the same person

then obviously it follows that the person in Robin's Altgens6 is a woman.

However, I am - FWIW - pretty sure that there is just one person.

EBC

Edited March 13, 2007 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Bernice Moore]

Hi Eugene:

These photos are seconds between...Wiegman says, he started running, as the second shot sounded,

this is from the beginning of his films sequence...

Scroll down to the Wiegman film...

http://jfkmurderphotos.bravehost.com/photos.html

Thanks....B..

Edited March 12, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Robin Unger]

No Problem Eugene.

We all see things in different ways, i also agree that the figure could be either man or woman.

This is Allan Eaglesham's notation on wiegman & Altgen 6

You may find one of my previous post of interest.

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...mp;topic_page=5

Edited March 12, 2007 by Robin Unger

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Robin,

My interpretation may be totally wrong.

You make an interesting point

on why this particular area of the photo

seems to be blemished.

Has someone attempted to draw a veil

over that area?

EBC

[Robin Unger]

Robin,

My interpretation may be totally wrong.

You make an interesting point

on why this particular area of the photo

seems to be blemished.

Has someone attempted to draw a veil

over that area?

EBC

That post was made sometime ago, i have had a re-think on the green "blemished area" and i no longer agree with the comment i made regarding it.

If you look at the corrolation between the two annotated photo's above it puts the person with two hands raised way over in the top right hand corner of the wiegman frame, and the one you colorised right down the bottom in the middle, even lower than the Dark complected man in the left hand corner.

I think it is very important to look at both photo's together.

[Charles Drago]

I've comandeered the term "cognitive dissonance" to describe the phenomenon consciously generated by manipulators/forgers of evidence in this case. The Z-film, for example, may have been altered as much to be discovered as a "fake" -- and thus promote rancor and confusion among investigators and otherwise dilute our energies and mire us in secondary mysteries -- as to obliterate proof of conspiracy.

And so the figure in the doorway with the distinctive over/under shirts and the oh-so-tantalyzing facial features drives us to distraction. Oswald? Lovelady?

Yes.

Charles

[Bernice Moore]

I've comandeered the term "cognitive dissonance" to describe the phenomenon consciously generated by manipulators/forgers of evidence in this case. The Z-film, for example, may have been altered as much to be discovered as a "fake" -- and thus promote rancor and confusion among investigators and otherwise dilute our energies and mire us in secondary mysteries -- as to obliterate proof of conspiracy.

And so the figure in the doorway with the distinctive over/under shirts and the oh-so-tantalyzing facial features drives us to distraction. Oswald? Lovelady?

Yes.

Charles

**************

Yes:

And so much more...documents, statements within the WC, and on......

Results, being to keep the researchers from their further and perhaps new investigative studies..

B

[Chris Davidson]

Robin,

My interpretation may be totally wrong.

You make an interesting point

on why this particular area of the photo

seems to be blemished.

Has someone attempted to draw a veil

over that area?

EBC

That post was made sometime ago, i have had a re-think on the green "blemished area" and i no longer agree with the comment i made regarding it.

If you look at the corrolation between the two annotated photo's above it puts the person with two hands raised way over in the top right hand corner of the wiegman frame, and the one you colorised right down the bottom in the middle, even lower than the Dark complected man in the left hand corner.

I think it is very important to look at both photo's together.

A and E would appear to be O.K.

B might be a problem.

B body fits E head in Altgen's

Inset shows B body below E head in Wiegman.

Validated Time Sync Needed.

chris

[Bernice Moore]

This is all I have Chris, re the timing......of the David Wiegman film....

the wee bit on the Sprague-Mack study, included, was found

on the web....and the article is not available.

Though if anyone does have this copy of "Coverups" 9/82..

the information would be appreciated, when I contacted Gary a

few years ago he had them packed away and they were not accessible.

David Wiegman:

"We were in that straight-a-way heading down to what I now know as

the Book Depository, and I heard the first report and I thought like every

body that it was a good size firecracker---a cherry bomb .Then when I

heard the second one, the adrenaline really started pumping because

there was a reaction in the motorcade, I was sitting on the edge of the

(car door) frame,which I sometimes did. I keenly remember right after

the incident that my feet were on the ground during one of the reports.

I don't think I was fast enough to react to the second, but I think on the

third one I was running.

The car had slowed down enough for me to jump out. I swung my leg

over and jumped while the car was still moving, but it was very slow.

I jumped and I remember running and I remember the third shot.

When I got out I knew I better get around the corner. The car was

stopping. I'd better run around there and see what was happening. I

knew the reaction was to run forward. I'd done this before in other

motorcades because a lot of times the President will stop and do

something. He might just shake a hand. He might look at a sign.

So your doing no good sitting in your car, and you can always

retrieve your car as it goes by....It was a technique I've used and

I've gotten some good pictures that way. That may have been built

in to get out and run and get up there and see what the heck's

happening . The motorcade has stopped, plus you heard a report

I don't think I thought on the first or second ( shot ), but when the

third one went off, I really thought I felt the compression on my face.

----I really thought I felt it. The I thought "Somebody is shooting".

The idea of turning on the camera, I don't know where that came

from. I’ve turned in some real sloppy work over the years that

went into editing because I believed that sometimes your not

photographing what's happening as much as the moment. It's a

slice of time. And something told me, "hey look, what have I got to

lose. I've got a full spring and just turn it on." I can't stop and plant

my feet, so I put it against my chest because you can't run with a

Filmo up to your eyes. So I just slid it down under my chin and

looked forward and ran as fast as I could and took in everything I

could."

Telephone interview Wiegman, 3/11/89..P.O.T.P...Trask..

pages 371-372.

..........................

He was in the Press car 1."the reel car"

the first with photographers aboard..A yellow 1964 Chev.Impala

convertible.

The President's Lincoln..The Queen Mary.SS...L.B.Js ...

SS..The Bell Telephone press pool car ..then the Press #1 Car..

(Wiegman's). Along with Atkins,Craven,John Hoefen,( Wiegman's

sound man..Front seat driving a Texas Ranger..then Cleve Ryan

then Wiegman on the passenger seat in the sixth car behind the

President..

He was carrying a Filmo movie camera,used no handle,

shot with left eye finders on left side of camera.Wide angle lens,

He thought he used a 10mm.that day..

Worked for NBC..TV cameraman..White House attachment every

day for 8 years..37 years old..

.........................

"It would appear through careful analysis of this film, and aided in

research done by Richard Sprague and Gary Mack ,on the timing

of the sequence, that Wiegman began filming

A LITTLE OVER THREE SECONDS:....

prior to the President BEING HIT IN THE HEAD".

Gary Mack 's,"Coverups!"..9/1982..p.2-5...9/1985, p.1-2..

Letter Richard Sprague to Robert Cuttler, 10/31/1982.

..........................

"Wiegman probably first pressed his camera trigger just after

the second shot."..clip.."begins as Wiegman's car is approaching

the TSDB, while the telephone car infront begins making the

left hand turn.".." shows various spectators on the steps of the

Book Depository as well as others on the sidewalk..Many are

looking forwards towards the presidential vehicle while some

are gazing back at the vehincles coming in their direction."

.Trask..p373

.......

In the film we see, the film begins with a panning of the front

entrance of the TSBD,swings to the left, then back to the right,

he then was on his way to the knoll,and behind the fence...see.

the film at below...click, Wiegman, then when page loads, click top

right hand corner button....ta da..

http://www.jfk-online.com/films.html

.................................

We have Wiegman capturing the TSBD entrance approximately

"A little over three seconds" prior to the President being hit in

head."..see above..Sprague..Mack..

......................

He continued filming as he ran his film shakes and jumps as he

spans the grassy knoll area, the Limo travelling to the underpass,

and what appears to

be smoke coming from under the trees in the area

of the fence ,then the pergola area

again, and some of the witnesses laying on the

ground,finally he proceeded to the

parking lot behind the fence area..

Wiegman

*********************************

Altgens

From what I have been able to find out, the Altgens 1st..then..approximately in the area of

30 to 45 seconds later the Wiegman was taken..

The Altgens as the first shot rang out, the Wiegman as he heard the final two shots as he was

jumping from the press car running and filming .

B......

Edited March 13, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Robin Unger]

My interpretation of the Wiegman frame:

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Here is a full length view of the Shawl Woman.

There is a person holding a briefcase to

her left. Sandwiched between the Briefcase person and her

can be seen Lovelady's clothing.

Is Briefcase Holder resting

his case on woman's head??!!

I have redone the image showing woman with

two hands in air.

Is there a man wearing a hat behind her?

Also was this woman acting as some sort of diversion?

Or was she signalling to the shooter(s) that

JFK had been hit?

Or is she a totally innocent bystander?

EBC

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

And so the figure in the doorway with the distinctive over/under shirts and the oh-so-tantalyzing facial features drives us to distraction. Oswald? Lovelady?

Yes.

Charles

Charles,

I am toying with the idea that Oswald is the man standing

beside the animated woman with

two hands in the air and that the man behind her is Jack Ruby.

Am I going too far?

[Charles Drago]

And so the figure in the doorway with the distinctive over/under shirts and the oh-so-tantalyzing facial features drives us to distraction. Oswald? Lovelady?

Yes.

Charles

Charles,

I am toying with the idea that Oswald is the man standing

beside the animated woman with

two hands in the air and that the man behind her is Jack Ruby.

Am I going too far?

Eugene,

Who am I to say?

My studies of the JFK assassination and related phenomena throughout history have focused on, for lack of a more appropriate term, more arcane aspects. As a point of general reference, I direct you to the recent work of author Peter Levenda.

The recurrences of doubles -- doppelgangers, agents, etc. -- within the relatively narrow confines of this site's main area of interest intrigue on any number of levels.

I write "doubles," but of course, in the case of LHO manifestations, we can count to ... what ? ... a half-dozen or more.

In an earlier post I asked, not rhetorically, if the Oswald/Lovelady figure in the doorway was a construct designed to create what I've defined as cognitive dissonance in the minds of investigators. I'd expand upon the question by noting that iron-clad evidence for the impossibility of forgery of the photos in question would hardly moot my point.

I'm lacing up my skates and heading for thin ice now, but what I'm referencing is the singularity most commonly personified and referred to as The Trickster. We needn't go skipping off into the realms of Bruno, Eliade, and Culianu to reach an understanding of this strangeness. We need not look beyond the works of contemporary masters of manipulation of human perceptions and behavior -- Gottlieb, Cameron, Delgado, and the rest of the BLUEBIRD and MK/ULTRA boys who in another age might have been labeled magicians -- to gain a workable sense of how and why JFK evidence has been altered.

The Oswald/Lovelady conundrum stops us dead in our tracks. The under/overshirts configuration stands out like a frigate bird's crimson puffery. Was this fashion statement rendered by others while LHO was in custody -- specifically to resemble the figure in the doorway?

Am I going too far?

Another example: Was the "terrible sound," as George Michael Evica has described what earwitnesses characterized as everything from a firecracker to a railroad torpedo, designed to trump the instincts and blur the long-term perceptions of protective agents and witnesses? This in addition to creating a tangible threat in the front of the motorcade that would prompt the drivers to halt their progress -- if only for a moment -- toward the sound?

There are studies focusing on the expansion of sensory input during trauma which leads to time dilation. Surely we can expand the definition of "trauma" to include the psychological as well as the physical. And the former surely was experienced by the innocent in Dealey Plaza that day.

Do I "believe" that the figure in the doorway -- at least in Altgens -- is a combination of LHO's body and Lovelady's head, or is the photo unaltered?

Yes.

Charles

[Jack White]

Add to the mix that the figure in the doorway was first brought to the attention

of everyone by none other than MARGUERITE OSWALD.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

Do I "believe" that the figure in the doorway -- at least in Altgens -- is a combination of LHO's body and Lovelady's head, or is the photo unaltered?

Yes.

Charles

If it is Lee Oswald's body, then they dressed him in Lovelady's red plaid shirt. Oswald's arrest photos show Lee wearing a brown grainy shirt. Groden's book "TKOAP" shows Lovelady wearing his red plaid shirt. The Hughes film shows it to be a read shirt. Altgens photo #6 shows the plaid design. Lovelady's head - Lovelady's clothes.

Bill Miller