Sean Murphy's research deserves more

[Albert Doyle]

Okay, Albert, let's not limit ourselves to what Frazier saw or did not see. Among the other witnesses on the steps of the TSBD, can you find a statement or testimony by any of these people that mentions Prayer Man? Can you find any one of these people that ID him?

You're switching the subject again Bob. I already answered what you are asking yet again. That answer is that for Prayer Man to be Oswald would require the dozens of people actively seen in Darnell headed towards the portal to miss him. As I've repeated several times, if you go to the full template of all Oswald witnessings you won't find such a profound exposure, like Oswald standing in broad daylight in the Assassination's Times Square, where there was zero witnessing. I see what you're doing. You're trying to suggest that the lack of any witnessing of Prayer Man makes the likelihood of it being Oswald stronger, however that isn't how it works. The way it works is you have to account for how the number of witnesses clearly shown in Darnell would escape the established statistical norm of Oswald sightings? I think you are trying to hide the obvious impossibility of so many people not seeing Oswald on the front steps behind suggestive arguments. At that point I think the onus is not to explain why no one identified Prayer Man, but why no one identified Oswald standing right out in the open in front of dozens of people, as well as mingling in the glass entryway on his way back in where people were paying attention. I honestly don't think the lack of identification of Prayer Man either lives up to or answers this. Again, I feel you are conflating speculation in front of facts you can't answer. I believe if you were forced to answer this you would be forced to wander into Fetzer territory where you would have to account for the fringe witnesses seeing Oswald in the portal being tracked down by the cover-up squad and told to shut-up. Like I said before, it just doesn't wash. There's too many people who would have seen him standing right there. And even worse being shoulder to shoulder in the glass entry.

I'm happy for you, Albert. Still, Mr. Golz has absolutely nothing to back up his story. A pity, actually.

Good, I'm glad I got you to say that because now we are out in open territory where we have to decide between Golz, who has high credibility, as far as I can tell, and your even more lacking proof. What you write is, at very best, against the gravity and grain of what I wrote that you are using it to avoid. As usual, what you write demands that you also practice the same standard and explain how much there is to back up the FBI source you are using - which your argument method relieves you of doing. After your answer we're right back to the same place. Golz vs FBI. Who are you backing Bob?

You are seriously confused about this issue. The first FBI report had her OUTSIDE at 12:15 when she looked back and saw Oswald on the 1st floor. It was in her second FBI interview, in March 1964, that she claimed she did not leave the building until 12:25. If the FBI was so good at lying, why not just say, in the second report, she did not leave the building until 12:14? Why confuse the issue by repeating her claim of 12:25, and give Oswald even less time to make it to the SN?

Bob, why should we have to answer to FBI lies? All you are doing is creating phantom arguments by using the corrupted FBI statements. All you need to know is Golz recorded Carolyn Arnold saying she never said that to the FBI. When we analyze what she did say it not only refutes the Prayer Man claim but most-likely puts Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom during the shooting. In my opinion making Prayer Man Oswald requires big scoops of Fetzer and FBI to make it work. It requires chasing suggestions around within FBI statements while ignoring Carolyn Arnold and Golz.