Prayer Woman

[Barry Pollard]

As noted, a partial rendering of research developed indicative evidence that  indicates SarahStanton is the person represented by PrayerPersonImage aka PrayerWomanImage.

That junk has been around for almost six decades and everyone that you'd call even half a researcher has been over it three or four times at least, so are you saying that it has only "recently developed" IN YOUR MIND?  Ahh, I see.  Welcome to the case.  May I ask what you were doing all these years before PM became an issue?

Witness testimony doesn't mean as much as it used to.  You're stuck in the past and you won't even begin to look for a way out of that nasty little hole you are caught in.  Even if the prosectution wasn't biased as it was, you'd still be playing a dangerous game by throwing the word "evidence" around when referring to testimony.  Circumstantial is what it is, at best.  We have far better stuff pointing us all to the Grassy Knoll.

[Barry Pollard]

Mark,

Do you think a camera lens in the shade like that would have reflected that much light?

-- MWT 

It's a good question.  From the options put forward, white enamel makes the most sense for me at this time, despite the procimity of that discarded pop bottle found near, what would have been, Oswald's right foot.  "Camera" seems to be lifted toward his mouth too.

[Mark A. Oblazney]

It's a good question.  From the options put forward, white enamel makes the most sense for me at this time, despite the procimity of that discarded pop bottle found near, what would have been, Oswald's right foot.  "Camera" seems to be lifted toward his mouth too.

In my humble opinion, it WAS a camera.  I believe this was someone that came off the street, not a TSBD employee at all, but just a dude that wanted a better resolution of the prez' a-goin' by..... and then...... bye-bye.  The Crime of the Century.

[Ray Mitcham]

Bill Newman pointing the wrong way.

[Larry Trotter]

As previously posted:

"Notably, research has now developed evidence indicative of SarahStanton as being the person represented by PrayerPersonImage aka PrayerWomanImage."

Research(noun):diligent and systematic inquiry into a subject in order to discover or revise facts, theories, etc.
Evidence(noun):the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Indicating(verb):to be a sign of;betoken;evidence;show:
Indicative(adjective):serving as a sign or indication of something.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/exhibits/ce1434.htm
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/lovelady.htm
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/frazierb1.htm
https://i2.wp.com/www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/WH_Vol22_0353a-FBI-STATEMENT-March-18-1964.jpg
https://i0.wp.com/www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/211163-fbi-interview.png
https://i1.wp.com/www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/WH_Vol22_0351b.jpg

As noted, a partial rendering of research developed indicative evidence that  indicates SarahStanton is the person represented by PrayerPersonImage aka PrayerWomanImage.

As I have previously stated, I make no claim to be a "Researcher", but maintain that I remain a "Student of The Research" into the murder by assassination of JohnFitzgeraldKennedySr, and the critical wounding of JohnBowdenConnallyJr, as well as the murder of JdTippit, and the murder of LeeHarveyOswald two days later.

That junk has been around for almost six decades and everyone that you'd call even half a researcher has been over it three or four times at least, so are you saying that it has only "recently developed" IN YOUR MIND?  Ahh, I see.  Welcome to the case.  May I ask what you were doing all these years before PM became an issue?

Witness testimony doesn't mean as much as it used to.  You're stuck in the past and you won't even begin to look for a way out of that nasty little hole you are caught in.  Even if the prosectution wasn't biased as it was, you'd still be playing a dangerous game by throwing the word "evidence" around when referring to testimony.  Circumstantial is what it is, at best.  We have far better stuff pointing us all to the Grassy Knoll.

Perhaps BarryPollard considers himself a "Researcher", if so maybe he can articulate the difference between his expertise and that of "Half a Researcher". But, either way, if he wishes to dispute sworn statements and testimony by witnesses, unless he can provide indicative evidence confirming the validity of said dispute, his statement is just an opinion that said witnesses are either lying or mistaken.

Larry you haven't any experience in image manipulation, so your opinion in this field isn't really worth reading let alone remembering but here's the point.  Brian produced taped evidence that the face he likes as Stanton was dismissed by two people that actually knew her and here was your only contribution when I focused on it;

You never corrected your mistake or commented on it again.  Would you care to do so now or talk on it's significance to Brian's overall agenda?  I've already guessed it's a no, so there you go, a chance to prove me wrong, a first.
I can think of no other significant evidence that Brian produced in that "interview" and that's what you call research?  A diligent and systematic inquiry, it was not.  It was agenda driven but that's something else you rather conveniently failed to pick up on right?

I make no claim of expertise and/or experience in image manipulation, nor do I desire such, but I stand on my previous statement confirming, paraphrasing, "I am unable to embrace the authenticity of the PrayerPersonImage 'FacialFeatureEnhancement' often attributed to ChrisDavidson, nor do I afford any 'EvidentiaryValue' for said 'Enhancement'.

BarryPollard's reference to a "never corrected mistake" needs to be explained. Perhaps a reference to an expressed opinion as to the meaning of an interview comment? No surprise, "My Take" and that of BarryPollard will quite often differ.

When BarryPollard states, "I can think of no other significant evidence that Brian produced in that 'interview' and that's what you call research? A diligent and systematic inquiry, it was not. It was agenda driven but that's something else you rather conveniently failed to pick up on right?", I do wonder, as I wander, if there are really a couple of questions asked, or just statement add-ons.

In any event, the referred to "interview" contained much indicative evidentiary information that indicates that SarahDeanStanton is indeed the person represented by PrayerPersonImage. However, the post being replied to by BarryPollard was primarily in reference to "witness testimony", and not to the "interview".

[Larry Trotter]

Bill Newman pointing the wrong way.

"Bill Newman pointing the wrong way"?

It appears to me as if he was using his index finger to indicate witnessing a wound to JFK's temple area.

As I recall, a fairly common way of pointing for persons in his age group, and in that era, at least in eastern Texas.

[Ray Mitcham]

"Bill Newman pointing the wrong way"?

It appears to me as if he was using his index finger to indicate witnessing a wound to JFK's temple area.

As I recall, a fairly common way of pointing for persons in his age group, and in that era, at least in eastern Texas.

Yes, Larry. But he was pointing to his left temple, whereas JFK was shot in the right temple, according to the spokesman at Parkland,

[Larry Trotter]

Bill Newman pointing the wrong way.

 

"Bill Newman pointing the wrong way"?

It appears to me as if he was using his index finger to indicate witnessing a wound to JFK's temple area.

As I recall, a fairly common way of pointing for persons in his age group, and in that era, at least in eastern Texas.

Yes, Larry. But he was pointing to his left temple, whereas JFK was shot in the right temple, according to the spokesman at Parkland,

Did you, Ray, happen to notice that a very upset BillNewman was trying to confirm what he had just witnessed as President JohnKennedySr had been mortally wounded and Governor JohnConnallyJr seriously wounded just a few feet away from, and well within bloodstain proximity of, himself and his wife Gayle, and their two young sons?

And, did you, Ray, happen to notice the interview was being conducted by a visibly upset WFAA-TV ProgramDirector/Anchor JayWatson (1925-2001), who himself was nearby and witnessed the chaos in the aftermath of the shooting?

And Ray, did you notice that while being interviewed, BillNewman was holding his younger son, age 2, with JayWatson, in an apparent effort to provide sufficient audio for the interview, positioned against Mr Newman's right arm and holding the microphone next to said arm upper/bicep area, thus blocking mobility of that arm?

Also Ray, as I recall, BillNewman, when asked, indicated that to him it seemed that the shots had been fired from behind his location along, and on the north side of the westbound Elm St curb. And therefor, the direction of travel of the Motorcade should indicate shots fired from the right side of the Limousine Occupants, assuming of course, that there were no entry wounds to President Kennedy's left temple area.

In any event, perhaps an ambiguous wound location indication, but not a wrong wound location indication.

EDIT: This posted Reply is strictly in response to the RayMitcham posted Reply, as quoted, in reference to the head wound location indication by BillNewman, as seen in the video of the witness interview conducted at the WFAA-TV station by JaYWatson. It is not meant to represent my thoughts and/or conclusions about how the fatal wounding of JFKSr and critical wounding of JBCJr occurred, as well as from where the shots originated.