Sean Murphy's research deserves more

[Albert Doyle]

Prayer Man got rolling by pointing out that the 2nd fl lunch room encounter was a complete hoax, Greg Parker pushed this a decade ago and Sean Murphy followed soon after.

Bart,

I consider Greg Parker an obnoxious bs artist who has been repeatedly caught fabricating and spinning evidence against its true interpretation. Just look at his rendering of Carolyn Arnold that is now sitting in a pile on his lap.

I've seen the claims over Baker's lunch-room encounter. They are based upon the fact that he omitted it in his first report. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. I believe there are sound reasons to think that Baker omitted the lunch-room encounter for the same reason that DPD omitted the interviews at the police station. By your logic we could simplistically say that since the Dallas Police omitted any record of Oswald's interrogation that therefore the interrogation never happened. But we know that isn't true don't we?

The lunch-room encounter has not been disproven. We still have Carolyn Arnold seeing Oswald at 12:24-12:25. That would place Oswald in the lunch-room 7 minutes before Baker encountered him. Your unproven assertion places Oswald as Prayer Man by inference. Meanwhile we have one witness placing Oswald in the lunch-room (Two if you count Baker). The front steps? Zero out of dozens of potential witnesses.


"A complete hoax"? I disagree.

the thing about Carolyn Arnold isn't important either.
From a timing p.o.v. that is, what matters is that she saw him in the 2nd fl lunch room (sitting?????) before the shooting and that of course messes w the entire Truly/Baker/Oswald scenario which actually happened on the 1st floor.

No, not important. That's right, a woman who places Oswald comfortably eating his lunch in the 2nd floor lunch-room at 12:24 where he was encountered 7 minutes later by Officer Baker isn't important, no. And it isn't likely that CIA-assigned Harvey, who was gotten out of the way by being given a duty to be in the lunch-room (a place his handlers knew would be empty because everyone would be outside to see the popular president), would be there obeying orders - no.

Your overly general, simplistic brush-off of the Carolyn Arnold witnessing runs roughshod across some of the most sensitive, important evidence. We can just skip the detail that if Carolyn Arnold wasn't pregnant that she wouldn't have gone to the water fountain in the lunch-room in order to quench her thirst like she regularly did as part of her pre-natal routine.

Like Greg, you are assuming your contrived logic puts the Baker event on the 1st floor, but like Greg you infer things from the evidence that may have no basis whatsoever. The Carolyn Arnold timing is very important. Not only does it show that Oswald was most-likely eating lunch in the 2nd floor lunch-room during the shooting, but Greg's bungling of it is a very good barometer of his credibility. Like Greg, you assemble loose straws as a firm platform.

Earl Golz's article is 15 years after the fact, yet you hang a colossal weight on it like it is THE SMOKING GUN and it simply isn't.

Why? Because you wave your hand and say so? Your analysis of the details behind the Golz witnessing is impressive Bart. Time has nothing to do with the Golz issue. Carolyn Arnold merely confirmed what she told FBI in March 1964, that she left the building at 12:25. She also said that she never said 12:15, as FBI claimed in their November 26 1963 report. She also denied ever saying she saw Oswald on the 1st floor as FBI claimed in that same report. For you to give no notice to evidence of FBI fabricating witnessing in that report makes you uncredible Bart. Greg also committed the same offense and pressed the FBI lies.

Prayer Man is not just a picture, it is supported by the evidence

Sure, this isn't easily decided by a photo of a woman holding a purse clenched in her hands in a woman's posturing position with long hair. What's painfully obvious about this is the hair tones shown in Duncan's Darnell blow-up belong, without a doubt, to Prayer Man's hair and nothing else. The dark tone where we know there's hair at the top of the head is identical to the same dark tone down by the neck. In other words they're both hair. Unless someone can explain what else that dark tone is besides hair then it is scientifically sound to assume it is hair. And once you determine Prayer Man has long woman's hair that means Prayer Man isn't Oswald. Duncan's not outlining the extending woman's hairstyle according to his imagination, he's doing it according to the dark hair tone he is seeing. Answering this with 'degraded image' and 'pixels' does not live up to this superior, valid observation and argument. Unfortunately Bart violates the "Do you believe the arguments or your own lying eyes?" rule.

[Bart Kamp]

.

[Albert Doyle]

What's painfully obvious is that ROKC 'experts' rely on a large percentage of verbal rhetoric (bs) while speaking in a highly confident self-referencing tone. In case you haven't examined the content on ROKC it is an embarrassing troll pit that consists mostly of bankrupt so-called assassination researchers trolling persons on other more credible assassination sites.

Actually, no, my posts are not 'opinion'. If you looked at what they offered you could see Greg Parker adjusting his comments as he read them. He had to make excuses around the 12:30 time Carolyn Arnold had to have known about because she was a Book Depository employee for 4 months before she told FBI 12:25 (Greg is so desperate to make excuses he misses obvious things like this). No, my posts are based on facts Greg couldn't answer and you yourself ended up saying "The Carolyn Arnold story doesn't really matter". An entirely reckless statement for anyone who pretends to be an assassination researcher. Also, I think my post's content drove you to this rather vapid reply. You couldn't really answer what it said short of petty ridicule and unrelated personal remarks. What is kind of obvious is that while criticizing my methods you were unable to answer their content. In a typical Greg Parker backwards conclusion, ROKC considers their inability to answer as being the other side talking to themselves. ROKC members have existed so long in that intellectual black hole that they actually think the can troll the world and reality. Your response was very superficial. My suggestion is what I wrote is the reason why. A person who really believed my post was faulty would not recommend I write an article.


Greg Parker was justly excluded from this site because he offered the kind of escalating trolling and disingenuous entries that you do here. I really consider ROKC an infection of the valid Kennedy assassination internet that needs to be contained before it spreads. My post contained facts you could not refute right here in non-troll reality. Greg has fallen silent now.

[Bart Kamp]

..

[Albert Doyle]

A thread was created by the mods that this site was not to be used as a proxy site for ROKC.




Bart "You don't understand what I'm doing" Kamp.

[Albert Doyle]

Parker simply isn't credible. He keeps insisting Carolyn Arnold had 12:25 burned in her brain and that's why she gave that time to FBI in March 1964. But he ignores the fact that Carolyn Arnold worked at the Book Depository for the 4 months prior to that statement. The Depository would have been intensely buzzing with talk of the assassination, including the 12:30 shooting time. But so would the Dallas media that went on an intense campaign of assassination information. Does Greg maybe think that a Depository employee who witnessed Lee Harvey Oswald in the famous lunch-room might be curious about the newspaper coverage and maybe read a little prior to her 1964 statement? Greg is cooked. He's right back to his same old rotten lacking stuff while trying to crawl back out of yet another embarrassing hole of his own creation. He's confused and doesn't quite give any coherent answer to why, after having 4 months of post assassination exposure to the 12:30 shooting time, did Carolyn Arnold say 12:25? The answer is pretty obvious that Mrs Arnold would never confuse that time after being exposed to intense advertizing of the real 12:30 time over the preceding 4 months. Greg's wheels falling off response shows he's shot and can't come up with any credible answer. He doesn't show any acknowledgement of the fact that Mrs Arnold's statement was made 4 months later. And this is coming from the great Aussie corrector.


Greg is right back to ignoring that when Golz showed her the 1963 FBI statement saying she left at 12:15 she protested I never said that. She told Golz it was 12:25.


Greg's collapsing response with parts spilling out over the floor dishonestly ignores the fact Carolyn Arnold told FBI in 1964 that 12:25 was the time she "left the building". He keeps trying to dishonestly shape context by suggesting Mrs Arnold was saying when she left the area, but anyone can see Greg is ignoring Graves' post that showed photos of Mrs Arnold at the Depository corner around 12:40. Parker also ignores the fact those ladies would not ignore the time in that situation where they had to coordinate leaving work.


Parker finally finishes his diary of deceit by once again repeating that Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald in the vestibule - despite Mrs Arnold's clear protest to Golz that she did NOT see him there. Parker is clearly a psychopath who puts himself above the actual witnesses. It's kind of sad seeing him engage in a convoluted Cinque-like series of contrivances to get around the failed exercise that preceded it. He clearly failed to live up to the facts and arguments and his weak explanations are just a repeat of what was already refuted.


"This will be explained in my next book" - Poor man...



Parker is now Cinque level material and needs to be treated so.


He's done.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Parker simply isn't credible. He keeps insisting Carolyn Arnold had 12:25 burned in her brain and that's why she gave that time to FBI in March 1964. But he ignores the fact that Carolyn Arnold worked at the Book Depository for the 4 months prior to that statement. The Depository would have been intensely buzzing with talk of the assassination, including the 12:30 shooting time. But so would the Dallas media that went on an intense campaign of assassination information. Does Greg maybe think that a Depository employee who witnessed Lee Harvey Oswald in the famous lunch-room might be curious about the newspaper coverage and maybe read a little prior to her 1964 statement? Greg is cooked. He's right back to his same old rotten lacking stuff while trying to crawl back out of yet another embarrassing hole of his own creation. He's confused and doesn't quite give any coherent answer to why, after having 4 months of post assassination exposure to the 12:30 shooting time, did Carolyn Arnold say 12:25? The answer is pretty obvious that Mrs Arnold would never confuse that time after being exposed to intense advertizing of the real 12:30 time over the preceding 4 months. Greg's wheels falling off response shows he's shot and can't come up with any credible answer. He doesn't show any acknowledgement of the fact that Mrs Arnold's statement was made 4 months later. And this is coming from the great Aussie corrector.


Greg is right back to ignoring that when Golz showed her the 1963 FBI statement saying she left at 12:15 she protested I never said that. She told Golz it was 12:25.


Greg's collapsing response with parts spilling out over the floor dishonestly ignores the fact Carolyn Arnold told FBI in 1964 that 12:25 was the time she "left the building". He keeps trying to dishonestly shape context by suggesting Mrs Arnold was saying when she left the area, but anyone can see Greg is ignoring Graves' post that showed photos of Mrs Arnold at the Depository corner around 12:40. Parker also ignores the fact those ladies would not ignore the time in that situation where they had to coordinate leaving work.


Parker finally finishes his diary of deceit by once again repeating that Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald in the vestibule - despite Mrs Arnold's clear protest to Golz that she did NOT see him there. Parker is clearly a psychopath who puts himself above the actual witnesses. It's kind of sad seeing him engage in a convoluted Cinque-like series of contrivances to get around the failed exercise that preceded it. He clearly failed to live up to the facts and arguments and his weak explanations are just a repeat of what was already refuted.


"This will be explained in my next book" - Poor man...



Parker is now Cinque level material and needs to be treated so.


He's done.

You might be surprised at this but, I happen to agree with you about Golz. Considering how many other witness statements were edited by the FBI, it comes as no surprise that Carolyn Arnold's departure time from the building (and not Dealey Plaza) would be changed from 12:15 to 12:25. The FBI were desperate to place Oswald on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting, and 12:25 was cutting things a bit too close. It also comes as no surprise that Ms. Arnold was completely unaware of the FBI's "editing" until it was pointed out to her by Golz, fifteen years later.

All that being said, though, is it not possible that, a minute or two after Arnold left the second floor lunch room, Oswald heard the commotion of the crowd responding to the approaching motorcade and ran down one flight of stairs and out the front door, to see what the excitement was all about? He would have been on the top step (in the Prayer Man position) just before JFK passed by and just in time to be captured on the Couch film. This would also explain why PM was in such a poor position to view the motorcade. He simply got there too late to find a better position and, being the somewhat introverted individual that he was, he might have been hesitant about asking others to move so he might get a better view.

With the attention of those on the steps riveted on JFK, it is not surprising that no one on the steps saw Oswald. Buell Wesley Frazier should have seen him, though, but will not ID PM as Oswald. However, he will not ID PM as anyone else, either, and, considering that all of the witnesses on the steps stated they saw no strangers in the TSBD that day (I'm assuming this includes the steps), Frazier should have known who PM was, as PM, by default, had to be an employee who worked in the TSBD.

[Bob Prudhomme]

I would further like to point out that I have the greatest sympathy and compassion for Buell Wesley Frazier. As I said, it seems impossible that he does not know the identity of PM, given his close proximity to him post-assassination, and, unless PM was indeed Oswald, what possible reason could Frazier have for not revealing the true identity of PM?

If PM was indeed Oswald, try to imagine the fear that Frazier has lived with for the last 52 years, should he accidentally reveal the identity of Prayer Man.

[Albert Doyle]

No, if Oswald dashed down from Carolyn Arnold's witnessing he would have been out of breath when he dashed back up for the Baker encounter.


If you view all frames of Prayer Man there are over a dozen people headed towards the front steps. So this isn't reliant on Frazier alone. The Prayer Man theory requires all of those people to have missed the face of the man plastered in the papers as Kennedy's killer standing right there. Common sense tells you that didn't happen.



What I said 2 years ago still holds true. We know if Prayer Man was Oswald he did not walk out of the portal to the street. That didn't happen because an ID would be certain if he had. Besides, Oswald has to be inside the Depository according to Baker's witnessing. So that means Prayer Man went from Darnell to the bottleneck of the front door. Any run-through of that scene would be forced to admit that would mean Oswald would have been shoulder to shoulder with many people entering the Depository. Some researchers like to practice selective amnesia and pretend their Frazier theory answers the whole problem, but a simple run-through of the entire dynamic shows there are many other hurdles Oswald could not possibly have cleared in a common sense understanding of the event. Prayer Man as Oswald is shot down just by the front door bottleneck alone where it would be impossible for Oswald to slip by the many people that were filtering back in to the Depository at that juncture. Sorry, anything else is just bad analysis and frankly wishful thinking since common sense alone tells you Oswald couldn't be standing right there in the open on the front steps during the shooting and not be seen. I don't trust Frazier either, but he's not the only witness.


And finally, Duncan is 100% correct. The Darnell blow-up shows a woman in a button down dress clasping a purse in both her hands with long wavy hair.

[Bob Prudhomme]

No, if Oswald dashed down from Carolyn Arnold's witnessing he would have been out of breath when he dashed back up for the Baker encounter.


If you view all frames of Prayer Man there are over a dozen people headed towards the front steps. So this isn't reliant on Frazier alone. The Prayer Man theory requires all of those people to have missed the face of the man plastered in the papers as Kennedy's killer standing right there. Common sense tells you that didn't happen.



What I said 2 years ago still holds true. We know if Prayer Man was Oswald he did not walk out of the portal to the street. That didn't happen because an ID would be certain if he had. Besides, Oswald has to be inside the Depository according to Baker's witnessing. So that means Prayer Man went from Darnell to the bottleneck of the front door. Any run-through of that scene would be forced to admit that would mean Oswald would have been shoulder to shoulder with many people entering the Depository. Some researchers like to practice selective amnesia and pretend their Frazier theory answers the whole problem, but a simple run-through of the entire dynamic shows there are many other hurdles Oswald could not possibly have cleared in a common sense understanding of the event. Prayer Man as Oswald is shot down just by the front door bottleneck alone where it would be impossible for Oswald to slip by the many people that were filtering back in to the Depository at that juncture. Sorry, anything else is just bad analysis and frankly wishful thinking since common sense alone tells you Oswald couldn't be standing right there in the open on the front steps during the shooting and not be seen. I don't trust Frazier either, but he's not the only witness.


And finally, Duncan is 100% correct. The Darnell blow-up shows a woman in a button down dress clasping a purse in both her hands with long wavy hair.

Okay, let's assume Frazier did NOT have amnesia. According to all of the statements, there were no strangers present. Frazier was closer to Prayer Man than anyone else and, as seen in the Couch film, looking right at him.

Why can Frazier not identify Prayer Man? Why does he just not say, "Oh, PM was a stranger I had never seen before" or "Oh, PM was Mrs. ________ who worked on the 4th floor" or "Oh, PM was Mr. _________ who takes the trash out and sweeps the floors"?

Answer me these questions and you will convince me.

P.S.

You are also assuming the second floor lunch room encounter between Oswald and Baker actually took place, and there is a great deal of evidence that it did not.