TSBD Doorway man - Oswald or Lovelady?

[David Josephs]

If the chances are 50% on any ONE ITEM then the CHANCES of YOU AND RALPH being right about 2 of the items is 25%, 3 items? .5 to the 3rd... 50 items?

[TABLE="width: 481"]
[TR]
[TD="class: xl63, width: 641, bgcolor: transparent"][FONT=Arial][size=12]1,125,899,906,842,620 : 1 are the odds that YOU AND RALPH are correct on ALL 50 items if you are correct 50% of the time in your matches... 50% to the 50th power

So what? That enormous number is also the probability that all the points of identification are wrong.

You haven't proved a thing.

Huh? What was it you think I was trying to prove Mark? Do you agree with JF about Doorman being Lovelady or not?

Yes Mark.. BECAUSE THE ASSUMPTION AS STATED WAS 50% CHANCE OF BEING RIGHT (or wrong) the odds I posted are for either... Which was my point... the reciprical of RIGHT is indeed WRONG
the higher each item's odds of a match are, the LOWER the odds of them being wrong... simple.

I simply showed how JF is wrong in is presentation about probability. His point was that the odds were astronomical that all these points of matching would occur NATURALLY unless the shirts were the same.... and then offered his 10% solution.... problem being there is no such thing as a 10% chance of MATCH as he stated.... only a 10% chance of correctly identifying a match.... or whatever % they, you, anyone would like to give it....

Since this % is completely subjective (JF will tell you they are 99% right on all 50 items) while someone else would not be as generous.

So, do you understand that the only probability that matters here is the probability that JF and RC are correct about EACH "MATCH" times 50 items and NOT the astronomical odds AGAINST 50 items matching with 10% surety per item... unless that's the % he gives himself and RC as to THEIR matching correctness...

Starting at the beginning, let's remember this all started based on a line from Fritz's notes...
"OUT WITH BILL SHELLEY in FRONT"

"Out with Billy Shelley in front"

It was astonishing to me to learn only last year, 2011 that the Assassination Records Review Board had discovered the [COLOR=#0f72da]handwritten interrogation notes of Will Fritz, the DPD Homicide Detective who had interrogated Lee Oswald, notes that had been released way back in 2007, that said Oswald told Will Fritz that he had been "out with Bill Shelley in front" during the assassination. This discovery led me to take a second look at Altgens6 and to revist the question of whether Doorman could have been Oswald.

On a previous page of the same notes Fritz tells us:

Changed shirts + tr. Put in dirty clothes - long sleeve red sh + gray tr.

On the SAME PAGE AS THE LOVELADY reference is:
home by bus changed britches
(britches being clothes btw)

Roberts tells us Oswald came in in SHIRTSLEEVES...

He also correctly identified Jarman and Norman as they went thru the domino room to ultimately get to their 5th floor positions (and I have proven how Full of it these three men were... what needs to be explored is the DEEPER aspect of why and how they were put into a position to lie.... proof? 10 feet from a 140dB rfiel shot will make a person temporarily deaf and create such loud ringing in the ears to follow as to make it difficulkt to know even how long it lasts... and there there were two more shots? the CLINK of a hull and working of a bolt? please)

So if the NOTES FRITZ TOOK are reflective of what was said and is to be believed (Bookout confirmed the clothing comment in his report) why do these men believe that the shirt they are comparing to Altgens 6 is the same shirt Oswald was wearing AT WORK?


So now you tell me looking at their analysis... #39 compares the "LOWER PORTION OF THE WHITE OF DOORMAN's LEFT EYE, to OSWALD in custody"
They are claiming with some % of correctness that they can MATCH the lower white portion of Oswald's left eye to the Altgens photo... and claim this as proof the image is of Oswald....

What % of "correctness" would YOU give to that observation?
Now look at the 50 items and see the level of granular detail in comparing one image to the next.... as I asked JF/RC... do the same, apply a real % to each of the 50 items... and multiply...THAT is your probability of THEM being right about the shirts matching... NOT that the shorts actually match or not....

BIG difference.


Now my turn.

Here are 6 things I find indicative that Doorman is Lovelady....

Apply a % of correctness to each of my six to arrive at the probability that MY EVIDENCE CORRECTLY indicates that Doorman is Lovelady.... NOT the probability that it IS Lovelady...

Got it?
DJ