Sean Murphy's research deserves more

[Albert Doyle]

Albert - Carolyn places him walking past the front doors on the inside at 12:25... not the lunchroom.

And it would make more sense to place Oswald CLOSER to the 6th floor, not farther away, giving the timing. Walking down the stairs 1-2 flights up is much more incriminating thatn in the lunchroom with the mechanical door closed with a coke in his hand... so they at least tried to lose the Coke... but the man on the stairs in the affidavit is completely eliminated from consideration.

If Prayerman is HARVEY, which is looking more and more likely, the lunchroom thing NEVER HAPPENED and the man in the stairs was indeed LEE.
the lunchroom scene is created to get Oswald from the Prayerman location - and it being impossible he was on the 6th floor, at least in the building. Mrs Reid sees LEE. Craig sees Harvey get into the car since we also know the McWatters bustrip was fabricated as well.

As far as I know I believe DiEugenio said Carolyn was shown her FBI statement and complained she didn't say 12:15 as the time of her sighting of Oswald in the lunchroom, she said 12:25. FBI moved it back to 12:15 on the assumption that Carolyn was mistaken since Oswald wouldn't have time to make it to the Sniper's Nest at 12:25.

If you have two Oswald's in the Depository isn't possible one took the bus? Is it possible the wrinkles with the bus trip is for the same reason as those in the Depository? The need to lose one of the Oswald's. There was a similar fatal wrinkle involved with Ralph Yates.

[David Josephs]

Albert - Carolyn places him walking past the front doors on the inside at 12:25... not the lunchroom.

And it would make more sense to place Oswald CLOSER to the 6th floor, not farther away, giving the timing. Walking down the stairs 1-2 flights up is much more incriminating thatn in the lunchroom with the mechanical door closed with a coke in his hand... so they at least tried to lose the Coke... but the man on the stairs in the affidavit is completely eliminated from consideration.

If Prayerman is HARVEY, which is looking more and more likely, the lunchroom thing NEVER HAPPENED and the man in the stairs was indeed LEE.
the lunchroom scene is created to get Oswald from the Prayerman location - and it being impossible he was on the 6th floor, at least in the building. Mrs Reid sees LEE. Craig sees Harvey get into the car since we also know the McWatters bustrip was fabricated as well.

As far as I know I believe DiEugenio said Carolyn was shown her FBI statement and complained she didn't say 12:15 as the time of her sighting of Oswald in the lunchroom, she said 12:25. FBI moved it back to 12:15 on the assumption that Carolyn was mistaken since Oswald wouldn't have time to make it to the Sniper's Nest at 12:25.

If you have two Oswald's in the Depository isn't possible one took the bus? Is it possible the wrinkles with the bus trip is for the same reason as those in the Depository? The need to lose one of the Oswald's. There was a similar fatal wrinkle involved with Ralph Yates.

What bothers me about the bus ID is Bledsoe... she describes the arrest shirt.. torn buttons, torn elbow... not the shirt he wore to work.
LEE, if it was him, was in a T-shirt, no jacket and simply disappears into Dealey Plaza.

The time should say 12:25 at the end of paragraph 1. Now how likely is it that Prayerman is our Ozzie?

[Drew Phipps]

"Prayerman" is too simply short to be 5'9" Harvey Oswald, standing next to, and almost the exactly the same distance from the camera as, Frazier. If there was a double named "Lee" (of which I entertain great doubt), at least according to Armstrong, "Lee" was taller and more physically robust.

The real question we should be asking is why does Truly not EVER identify "the man on the stairs" by a name?

[Albert Doyle]

http://22november1963.org.uk/carolyn-arn...ess-oswald

Earl Golz Interviews Carolyn Arnold

In an interview with the journalist Earl Golz in 1978, Carolyn Arnold claimed that "she saw Oswald in the 2ndfloor lunchroom as she was on her way out of the depository to watch the presidential motorcade …. She left the building at 12:25pm." (Earl Golz, Was Oswald in Window?,' Dallas Morning News, 26 November 1978, p.13A; available as PDF).
Golz quotes her as saying that Oswald "was sitting there … in one of the booth seats on the righthand side of the room as you go in. He was alone as usual and appeared to be having lunch. I did not speak to him but I recognized him clearly." She explicitly denied that her sighting of Oswald took place near the front doors: "Why would I be looking back inside the building? That doesn't make any sense to me."

[Bob Prudhomme]

I doubt no notes were taken of Oswald's interrogation. So therefore they were subverting evidence. It isn't surprising in this situation that Fritz would fumble.

I find it unlikely that Baker would dash for the entrance of the Depository and not enter. The act of running towards the structure that is the means of entering the building and not entering is contrary to that action. It could be that Frazier was intimidated at the hospital into not getting involved. Therefore he just might not have been answering any questions about anything when asked about Baker.

And just how do you know Baker was rushing for the front entrance? How do you know he was not heading for something outside of the TSBD on Houston St.?

And let's see, your doubt of no notes being taken is PROOF of subversion of evidence....hmmm. Weird.

[Albert Doyle]

"Prayerman" is too simply short to be 5'9" Harvey Oswald, standing next to, and almost the exactly the same distance from the camera as, Frazier. If there was a double named "Lee" (of which I entertain great doubt), at least according to Armstrong, "Lee" was taller and more physically robust.

The real question we should be asking is why does Truly not EVER identify "the man on the stairs" by a name?

I think there is a perspective mirage there and Prayer Man is standing on the first step beneath the landing.

[Albert Doyle]

And let's see, your doubt of no notes being taken is PROOF of subversion of evidence....hmmm. Weird.

Not at all weird. Frankly Bob I don't see where you've earned the tone you seem to assume in your inquiry.


I find it unlikely that the Dallas police would interrogate a presidential assassin and the most important suspect they ever had and take no notes.


Weird is looking at the already recognized massive amount of subversion of evidence in this case while mocking the suggestion of subversion of evidence.


It's no different than your suggestion that no mention of Oswald being Prayer Man is proof of intimidation.

[Bob Prudhomme]

"We do need to consider that some of this was simply bad memory or poor recollection - timing of things are sequence can be very difficult months after the fact... I agree they are both very suspicious and the conflicts abound... yet relying on people to be accurate related to how long things take is not where I'd rest my conclusions. POWELL shows that Adams is not at the window any longer and that was 30 seconds? afterward..."

Dave

We do not need to rely on these witnesses having precise memories, as they name events that took place.

For instance, both Shelley and Lovelady testified to remaining on the front steps for 3-4 minutes following the shots. If this is all they said, I could understand it being poor recollection. HOWEVER, both men also testified they never left the steps until Gloria Calvary returned from down by the pergola with news of the assassination. Here is Gloria Calvary at the time the motorcade went past her, and she is within spitting distance of the Stemmons Freeway sign.



As that is also Gloria Calvary on the left in the bottom photo, and that is undoubtedly the north pergola behind her, and from the tearful expression on Hicks' face we can only assume this photo is taken post-assassination (plus the fact this still is from Darnell, who was riding way back in the motorcade in a camera car. Darnell took this footage of Calvary, Hicks and Reed AFTER he filmed the footage of Baker), there is little doubt in my mind that Officer Baker easily beat Gloria Calvary to the steps of the TSBD. Therefore, I would say we can safely say that Shelley and Lovelady either lied to the WC, or their testimony was altered without their knowledge.

Either way, there are a lot of things wrong with the official record of what occurred on the steps of the TSBD, and Baker, Shelley and Lovelady are only the tip of the iceberg.

[Tracy Riddle]

I'll make it easier for you. Find a witness who even saw him go up the steps. How do you know he didn't go around the corner and up Houston St.?

Don't you see that if that's the investigatory standard you're going to use that it then begs the question where is the witness who said they saw Oswald in the Depository entrance? Some people are the first to complain about proving negatives and then promote a theory based on nothing but that.

I just refuse to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald would be standing right wide out in the open in the Depository entrance during the assassination and nobody would mention it.

This case had total corruption. But the total corruption card can only be used within reasonable limits.

I'm skeptical about Oswald being PM mostly because it shows the plotters having a total lack of control over the patsy. At the very least, Oswald's handler would have told him a story about needing to hang around inside the building at 12:20-30, maybe in the first floor warehouse where there was a phone. Maybe he was told to wait for a call at 12:25 (the motorcade was running late), and by 12:30, he got tired of waiting and went upstairs to the second floor lunchroom. Or something like that. In any case, you can't have Oswald just wandering around outside where he could be photographed by a dozen people.

Or maybe you are assuming the plotters of the assassination had intended for Oswald to be the main patsy. If the original plan had been to foist the blame on Cuba and the USSR, and the "Oswald alone" cover up was hastily thrown together in the immediate aftermath, Oswald might have been a very small part of the original plot, and his actions might never have been noticed if the original plan had stayed together.

Oswald was a pretty important part of it. They went to a lot of trouble to set up Oswald as the gunman (the Mexico City incident, the fake crime scene in his workplace, the backyard photos, etc.)

[Bob Prudhomme]

Don't you see that if that's the investigatory standard you're going to use that it then begs the question where is the witness who said they saw Oswald in the Depository entrance? Some people are the first to complain about proving negatives and then promote a theory based on nothing but that.

I just refuse to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald would be standing right wide out in the open in the Depository entrance during the assassination and nobody would mention it.

This case had total corruption. But the total corruption card can only be used within reasonable limits.

I'm skeptical about Oswald being PM mostly because it shows the plotters having a total lack of control over the patsy. At the very least, Oswald's handler would have told him a story about needing to hang around inside the building at 12:20-30, maybe in the first floor warehouse where there was a phone. Maybe he was told to wait for a call at 12:25 (the motorcade was running late), and by 12:30, he got tired of waiting and went upstairs to the second floor lunchroom. Or something like that. In any case, you can't have Oswald just wandering around outside where he could be photographed by a dozen people.

Or maybe you are assuming the plotters of the assassination had intended for Oswald to be the main patsy. If the original plan had been to foist the blame on Cuba and the USSR, and the "Oswald alone" cover up was hastily thrown together in the immediate aftermath, Oswald might have been a very small part of the original plot, and his actions might never have been noticed if the original plan had stayed together.

Oswald was a pretty important part of it. They went to a lot of trouble to set up Oswald as the gunman (the Mexico City incident, the fake crime scene in his workplace, the backyard photos, etc.)

Really? And how do you know there was not a large group of players present in Dealey Plaza that day that had been set up as well and, should circumstances have required it, any one of them or a whole group of them could have been thrown into the limelight as the villain(s)?