Drew Phipps Wrote:"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?
Drew You should go to John's website -harveyandlee.net and order the book.
I've read it. I am thinking that there is no discernible difference, with John's proof and evidence in that book, between an actual double, as opposed to a plausible legend created for Oswald to "explain" his defection and subsequent activities, in the event the Soviets, or someone else, started to look for his records; and in my mind at least, the legend possibility is far more likely.
However, there is no doubt in my mind that someone, from time to time, impersonated Oswald, beginning in 1958 (?) while he was in Russia.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
Drew Phipps Wrote:However, there is no doubt in my mind that someone, from time to time, impersonated Oswald, beginning in 1958 (?) while he was in Russia.
David Josephs Wrote:
And yes... Somehow Baker is convinced to support the lunchroom story...
It is possible Baker omitted this encounter originally because of the same overall corruption at the Dallas Police Station that subverted the interrogation notes. It is possible Dallas PD knew Oswald was a spook and delayed certain information. There's reason for them to know Oswald was spooky from prior encounters years earlier but also from the Carousel. The lunchroom encounter being omitted could have more reasons behind it than it simply never having happened. The statement above assumes the encounter never happened but that might not be so. The evidence does have a witness who put Oswald in the lunchroom near to 12:25 according to Golz. It could be possible that after seeing a double on the 4th floor landing Baker was convinced to omit the lunchroom encounter as being the furthest away from the 6th floor. The reason the 4th floor subject was not identified is because his identification would be problematic. Craig did see one Oswald exit in a different direction.
Is it possible and even likely that PM is an unaccounted for person who came in for whatever reason to watch motorcade? Motorcade goes by. JFK is shot. He leaves.
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I
"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
Yes I do remember and had created a composite of the 5 pages of Fritz's notes that I believe the 5 files refer to.
DAVID JOSEPHS WROTE:
We've talked Baker, Truly and Johnson...
what about Fritz's notes of the interrogation that say:
"Claims 2nd floor Coke when
off came in"
Was he making this up, that LHO never said this or was this well afterward when officers where gathering names of those in the building at the time?
Bookout's report on the interrogation reiterates this information and helps us understand the actual timing...
Bookout does not put Oswald in the lunchroom as do Truly/Baker and does put a COKE in his hand which Truly/Baker deny. In Baker's story, he did not ask OSWALD if he worked there, he asked Truly.
Representative BOGGS -Right. What did you say to him?
Mr. BAKER - I didn't get anything out of him. Mr. Truly had come up to my side here, and I turned to Mr. Truly and I says, "Do you know this man, does he work here?" And he said yes, and I turned immediately and went on out up the stairs.
(Note: If they were in the lunchroom and the automatic door closed behind them how was Baker able to turn and "immediately" be on the stairs without having to deal with that door?)
Bookout then has Oswald going down to eat lunch... THEN going "Outside with Bill Shelley in front" (even though it appears "Shelley" was crossed out)
Since all this occurs after-the-fact and cannot be corroborated by tape or independent 3rd party, we are left simply with the EVIDENCE and what it suggests.
To me it suggests they are lying and trying to cover for who they actually ran into on the stairs coming down from above...
DJ
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Bookout does not put Oswald in the lunchroom as do Truly/Baker and does put a COKE in his hand which Truly/Baker deny. In Baker's story, he did not ask OSWALD if he worked there, he asked Truly.
Bookout says "at which time a police officer came into the room".
I think he does put Oswald in the lunch room. The same room with the Coke machine.
Quote:And he said yes, and I turned immediately and went on out up the stairs
I would interpret this as "out" of the lunch room. Which would make sense since Bookout places him in the lunch room for the encounter.
Mrs Roberts' witnessing means this all happens after 12:30 with enough time to get to the boarding house around 1.
David Josephs Wrote:Only if they are the same person Albert....
That's why I just say "Oswald", knowing it is much more difficult to explain. That's exactly why intel does that doubles stuff because it is so effective at screwing-up the public and their ability to comprehend. It's easy to guide people's thinking because the mind wants things to be simple, and it is also effective at making people give up in confusion and frustration as well.
