The Backyard Photos Have Insomnia

[Walt Cakebread]

JT...Those pictures were sufficient enough to accomplish the purpose of vilifying Oswald as the assassin. I concede that it was done quite professionally. 

Posted by: Richard Smith
Supporting evidence would also include a whichever jock strap?
Rick's contributions are just absolutely underwhelming.

Those pictures were sufficient enough to accomplish the purpose of vilifying Oswald as the assassin.

Those pictures??.....  There was only ONE photo originally.....And that photo by itself  was NOT sufficient to convict Lee Oswald in the public's mind ...and that's why the authorities kept it hidden from the public.    Lee Oswald immediately pronounced the photo they showed him to be a fake...  They reasoned that if Lee Oswald spotted the fakery so quickly then they dare not show the photo to the public where there were thousands of photo analysts who might also spot the fakery...( What the dunder neads failed to realize was Lee KNEW what the photo that he had Marina take looked like because he had worked with that photo  CE 133A)....So naturally when they showed him 133c he knew it was a fake.

The authorities finally released the photo ( CE 133A ) on the cover of Life Magazine. where is was displayed like a post Office wanted fugitive flyer and captioned...Lee Harvey Oswald with the guns he used to kill President Kennedy and Officer JD Tippit.

If viewers had just used their own God given brain they would have laughed at the ridiculous carnival photo aspect of the amateur attempt to trick the viewer into believing the man in the photo was a armed and ready communist revolutionary.

[Jack Trojan]

Still waiting for a brave LNer to take a stab at my 1st question...

Setup

March 31, 1963: Marina takes at least 5 infamous "Backyard Photos" of LHO and burns 1. (Originally she recalled only taking 1).

April 5, 1963: Date written on back of 5"x5" print of CE 133-A allegedly written by Oswald and given to George de Mohrenschildt.

The two prints originally found among Oswald?s possessions were described by the HSCA panel as ?drugstore or photofinisher prints because they appeared to have been produced on the type of commercial photo printing machine used by photofinishers for camera stores, drugstores and mass-produced prints.? The prints are small 3?x3?, with a white border and markings consistent with an automated commercial machine.

The de Mohrenschildt print is larger 5?x5? and described as ?probably made in a high quality enlarger with a high quality lens? due to its increased resolution. The panel notes that ?the entire negative area is printed? (showing more picture than the cropped ?drugstore? print), and that the print had yellowed, ?indicating that it was not adequately fixed or washed during the development process?.

So correct me if I'm wrong, Oswald had the film roll developed in a drugstore, cut up the negatives into single frames and had at least 1 print made of CE 133-A in a photo-lab, wrote an inscription on the back and gave it to his handler George de Mohrenschildt all in less than 5 days.

My question

What drugstore back in 63 had a turnaround time of a couple of days so that Oswald could take the negative to a photo-lab to create de Mohrenschildt's print, which also had a turnaround time of only a couple of days?

[John Mytton]

But Roscoe wasn't savvy enough to scale Oswald's head consistently with his body for CE 133-A & B:

Wow, so you've matched two heads and then say that the bodies don't match, are you for real?

Btw thanks for the animation, it shows Oswald's head in two distinct orientations, Caprio won't be pleased!

In fact the more that I look at the gif the more logical differences become apparent, like when the head rotates backwards the nose shadow is affected and becomes longer, similarly the eye shadows are also affected, the ears and the respective shadows rotate slightly and the chin shadow is affected by the slight variation.





JohnM

[Richard Smith]

I never claimed that and it was not my argument. Lee's handler didn't have to tell him what he was being sheep-dipped for. Get it?

Here is what you posted:  "What would-be assassin has himself photographed holding both murder weapons and commie lit 8 months before the "Big Event"? Baaa. (including a rifle with a useless scope). Give me a break."  I can realize why you want to runaway from it now, but the fact remains that you suggested that Oswald would not have posed for the BY photos in March while contemplating the JFK assassination 8 months later.  Thus, they must be faked.  What you apparently failed to understand is that Oswald had no clue at the time the photos were taken that he would be assassinating JFK.  Get it?

[Walt Cakebread]

I almost forgot this...

The rifle doesn't match with the shadows against the body
and of course: "Clumpy the Hand"

This is CE 133B....And there's no doubt that it's a fake.   The question is WHO? altered the photo?



Why does everybody overlook the most obvious indication of photo tampering in CE 133B??    The black triangle on the fence was added  when the background was used in creating a photo..... The black triangle was added beside the man's right thigh to enhance the rifle and make it more visible in the photo.  The photo apparently didn't meet the approval of the "artist"  and it was destroyed but he forgot that he had added the bit of rifle butt to the background when he created CE 133B.......   

[Jerry Freeman]

Also.. in this one it looks like a dog is sticking it's nose through the gate.
 

 

[Walt Cakebread]

Also.. in this one it looks like a dog is sticking it's nose through the gate.
 

 

Yes that is what I was referring to.....The black triangle on the fence....It is actually something that the "artist" added to another photo (similar to CE 133A with he rifle at an angle across the body)) in which he used the background .....The rifle didn't show up well against the black trousers so he added a couple of inches of stock that protruded out past the right leg and that showed up well against the white fence in the background.    But apparently he didn't like the results of his photo alteration and destroyed that photo.....But he used the same background when he created CE 133B and he forgot to white out that that bit of rifle butt on the fence.....

And you are 100% correct in pointing out the shadow of the rifle on the ground is totally askance and it dos not correspond to the angle the rifle as it is being held in CE 133B.

The ONLY photo that is genuine is CE 133A..... That's the photo that Marina took and that's the photo that Lee autographed for his handler, George De Morhenschildt. 

[Matt Grantham]

 BY photos found at the Paine house


At 4:30 PM (CST) November 23, 1963, the Dallas Police Identification Bureau received two negatives matching photographic prints showing ?Lee Harvey Oswald holding rifle with scope.? Earlier in the afternoon, Dallas Police detectives had undertaken a second search at Ruth Paine?s home in Irving, Texas, concentrating on the small one-car garage where seabags, suitcases and boxes belonging to Lee Oswald were stored. The Investigation Report (CE Stovall D) states ?found by Dets. Rose was two snapshots and negatives showing Oswald holding the rifle (murder weapon) and wearing a pistol in a holster on his right hip (Tippitt murder weapon).?