Oswald autopsy photographic fakery?

[James H. Fetzer]

The testicles are not the same size, the distance between the legs is
not the same, and the penis is not the same weight and girth. You
are wrong, Jack. These are not photographs of the same member.

Judyth's response:

The color photos are not of him, ridiculous.

The black and white photo is correct.

JVB

There's no fakery, Jim.

Duncan...thanks for the comparison. I agree.

Jack

Both photos were taken in Parkland at the time of the autopsy.
JVB is wrong.

Jack

[Charles Drago]

Someone doesn't know dick about photography.

[James H. Fetzer]

Love it, Charles. And look at the length of the scrotum in the black-
and-whites. Jack doesn't seem to know the elements of a member.

Someone doesn't know dick about photography.

[Magda Hassan]

Jack has it, Magda. No doubt, he will post it here in the near future.

Is there a copy of the written autopsy report around?

Here is page one. It runs 5 or 6 pages. It is inconvenient for me
to post all of them. It is on the internet...likely at the Mary Ferrell site.

Jack

Thanks Jack, I'll check MFF and post them for completeness of the subject.

[Duncan MacRae]

You have omitted the space between the legs, which was greater on the
black-and-white than in the color version. Plus, as I previously observed,
the testicles in the black-and-white appear to be larger and heavier. The
penis itself does not look the same in both either. I am not convinced.

There's no fakery, Jim.

The space between the legs is irelevant to the size of Oswald's member.
You are mistaking shadow ( more of which can be seen in the black and white photograph because of the different camera angle ) for a wider space in the black and white photograph, than in the color photograph.
The colour photograph is taken from an almost directly above the body position, whereas the black and white photograph has been taken from the left side of Oswald's body, and probably at a distance behind his feet, hence the difference.
Remember that things, anything, look smaller when looking down.

[Allan Eaglesham]

You have omitted the space between the legs, which was greater on the
black-and-white than in the color version. Plus, as I previously observed,
the testicles in the black-and-white appear to be larger and heavier. The
penis itself does not look the same in both either. I am not convinced.

There's no fakery, Jim.

The space between the legs is irelevant to the size of Oswald's member.
You are mistaking shadow ( more of which can be seen in the black and white photograph because of the different camera angle ) for a wider space in the black and white photograph, than in the color photograph.
The colour photograph is taken from an almost directly above the body position, whereas the black and white photograph has been taken from the left side of Oswald's body, and probably at a distance behind his feet, hence the difference.
Remember that things, anything, look smaller when looking down.

Duncan:

I agree. I made this comparison a few days ago.

The apparent difference is something of an optical illusion, due to difference in camera angle.

Allan

[Anthony Marsh]

Anthony, Just when I was complimenting you. Unless you know the
context from having followed the Judyth thread, you are entitled to
your opinion, but independent of the context, it has very little value.

I have studied the pictures very closly and I agree with Jim that either the color photo is faked or was switched

Jim I really hope you can find the picture you are talking about

I think this study is imporatant as if this photo was faked/switched it goes to prove yet another alteration in the JFK case

Just compare the color photo with the black and white photos, it is very easy to tell of the difference in size, also consider how much closer the color photo is taken of LHOs privates, the color photo should show an even larger member

Instead we see an avarage or below avarage size compared to the large size we see in the B&W photos

Jim says that his photo shows an even larger member

I hope Jim can find this photo as it will help to prove that point

The ED forum shut down this research because the Mods thought the photos were offensive

I do not agree that the photos are offensive at all, we are all adults and if we research this with respect with no jokes or slang made about LHOs privates I dont see a problem

If this photo is faked or switched then it is a huge discovery

Well, in fact posting the photos violates the child pornography law by placing photos of nudity where children can see them. 10 year sentence.
I don't object to the nudity. I object to people wasting time discussing something so trivial when there is so much work to be done.

I know the context and it is silly.
I thought it should be pointed out to people who didn't know that posting the photos in a forum like this is a violation of the child pornography law.
I don't really care what Judyth did or did not say except that I don't like to see people lying about what she actually did say.

[Anthony Marsh]

Jim...Dr. Rose's autopsy reports the pubic hair shaved.
The photos show the same.

That Judyth Baker disputes this does not necessarily show
photographic fakery. There are many options to explain
this oddity, including that Judyth did not know...especially
since she is quoted as having said conflicting things about his
"private parts."

Jack

The Dallas police shaved Oswald's public hair for evidence.

I find that not credible. (provide evidence)

These photos were taken at Parkland with LHO freshly deceased.
I believe Dr. Rose dated the autopsy at 2:45 p.m.

If your statement is valid, the DPD "shaving of pubic hairs" took
precedence over the autopsy. Why were they so in need of the hairs?
Before the autopsy? Why shave the whole area, instead of just a sample?
The DPD "theory" makes no sense.

Jack

You didn't seem to understand what I said. I said that the DPD shaved Oswald's pubic hair for evidence while
he was in their custody, while he was alive.
They wanted to compare it to a hair they had found
on the blanket.

[Anthony Marsh]

I have studied the pictures very closly and I agree with Jim that either the color photo is faked or was switched

Jim I really hope you can find the picture you are talking about

I think this study is imporatant as if this photo was faked/switched it goes to prove yet another alteration in the JFK case

Just compare the color photo with the black and white photos, it is very easy to tell of the difference in size, also consider how much closer the color photo is taken of LHOs privates, the color photo should show an even larger member

Instead we see an avarage or below avarage size compared to the large size we see in the B&W photos

Jim says that his photo shows an even larger member

I hope Jim can find this photo as it will help to prove that point

The ED forum shut down this research because the Mods thought the photos were offensive

I do not agree that the photos are offensive at all, we are all adults and if we research this with respect with no jokes or slang made about LHOs privates I dont see a problem

If this photo is faked or switched then it is a huge discovery

False. We are not all adults here. Children can stumble onto this site and posting full nudity where children can see it is a violation of the child pornography law.

[Jack White]

Jim...Dr. Rose's autopsy reports the pubic hair shaved.
The photos show the same.

That Judyth Baker disputes this does not necessarily show
photographic fakery. There are many options to explain
this oddity, including that Judyth did not know...especially
since she is quoted as having said conflicting things about his
"private parts."

Jack

The Dallas police shaved Oswald's public hair for evidence.

I find that not credible. (provide evidence)

These photos were taken at Parkland with LHO freshly deceased.
I believe Dr. Rose dated the autopsy at 2:45 p.m.

If your statement is valid, the DPD "shaving of pubic hairs" took
precedence over the autopsy. Why were they so in need of the hairs?
Before the autopsy? Why shave the whole area, instead of just a sample?
The DPD "theory" makes no sense.

Jack

You didn't seem to understand what I said. I said that the DPD shaved Oswald's pubic hair for evidence while
he was in their custody, while he was alive.
They wanted to compare it to a hair they had found
on the blanket.

So they shaved THE ENTIRE PUBIC AREA TO GET ONE SAMPLE?
Can you document this?

Jack