Those Front Steps

[Zeon Mason]

Well maybe I FINALLY understand what Alan is suggesting that the shadow was ADDED in some way to mask out Oswald just BEHIND? Lovelady?

Would that not put Oswald basically in FRONT of BW Frazier. In effect, Oswald would be BETWEEN Lovelady and BW Frazier, or so close to Frazier that  even Fuzzy memory Frazier could not have missed seeing Oswald?

[Alan Ford]

Well maybe I FINALLY understand what Alan is suggesting that the shadow was ADDED in some way to mask out Oswald just BEHIND? Lovelady?

Would that not put Oswald basically in FRONT of BW Frazier. In effect, Oswald would be BETWEEN Lovelady and BW Frazier, or so close to Frazier that it would even Fuzzy memory Frazier could not have missed seeing Oswald?

Yes! 

[Alan Ford]

Now! I don't care whether people like my claim, accept it, or consider it unworthy of serious attention. Truth is not a popularity contest, nor is it to be determined by garrulous oddball fanatics who don't have a life!

I care only about one thing here:

Can someone-------be they LNer, CTer, or 'CTer'--------offer an alternative explanation, one grounded in logic rather than in fantasy and wishful thinking, for the dark strip down Mr Lovelady's right side in Wiegman?

To date, only one person has made any serious attempt in this direction, and that person was-----------me! I tried to find a way of putting a dark jacket or coat on Mr Lovelady. But it didn't work.

So! Can anyone rise to the challenge?

"I, ______________________, having carefully and with an open mind examined the Wiegman frames, have concluded that the dark strip down Mr Lovelady's right side is easily and innocently explained: it is _____________________________"



If you truly understand what is at stake here, then you will make it your business to defeat my confident claim that Mr Oswald's alibi was finally established on 21 October 2019!

[Zeon Mason]

Yes! 

so if the propostiion now is that Oswald is even CLOSER to BW Frazier, in fact right in front of him,f BW Frazier missing seeing Oswald is now even more questionable

If Prayerblob is Oswald then Oswald came out late at about 12:29 opening the door inward perhaps and he could sneak BEHIND everyone over to that corner. But he would have had to be very CLOSE to Sarah Stanton who is presumed to be WITH Pauline Sanders, unless Stanton has been identified BEYOND DOUBT as being lower in front of Sanders on the right side of the handrail on some lower step.

But how Oswald could move  from the corner,between BW Frazier and Billy Lovelady for just a brief few seconds then BACK to the corner again and then move AGAIN to the front door and into the Lobby aka "vestibule"? and this all be missed being seen and also not captured in Weigman or Couch/Darnell films..

 

[Alan Ford]

so if the propostiion now is that Oswald is even CLOSER to BW Frazier, in fact right in front of him,f BW Frazier missing seeing Oswald is now even more questionable

Except I'm not claiming that Mr Frazier missed Mr Oswald. Try to keep up!

If Prayerblob is Oswald

Not in Wiegman, and my ID of Mr Oswald in Wiegman is not dependent on the PrayerManInDarnell issue. Try to keep up!

then Oswald came out late at about 12:29 opening the door inward perhaps and he could sneak BEHIND everyone over to that corner. But he would have had to be very CLOSE to Sarah Stanton who is presumed to be WITH Pauline Sanders, unless Stanton has been identified BEYOND DOUBT as being lower in front of Sanders on the right side of the handrail on some lower step.

But how Oswald could move  from the corner,between BW Frazier and Billy Lovelady for just a brief few seconds then BACK to the corner again and then move AGAIN to the front door and into the Lobby aka "vestibule"? and this all be missed being seen and also not captured in Weigman or Couch/Darnell films..

 

Again, a multi-layered misrepresentation of my claim!

I call  on you, Mr Mason. Your studied point-missing, invention of pseudo-problems, and misrepresentation of straightforward claims is a tired little game, and it's not working.

You can't explain the dark strip down Mr Lovelady's side, so you just divert to non-issues.

"I, Mr Zeon Mason, having carefully and with an open mind examined the Wiegman frames, and having recently learned the difference between vertical and horizontal, have concluded that the dark strip down Mr Lovelady's right side is easily and innocently explained: it is _____________________________"

 

[Alan Ford]

To all those who believe PrayerPerson----------in Wiegman OR in Darnell------------is NOT Mr Oswald!

Let's assume for argument's (and for peace) sake you're right. Let's forget about PrayerPerson, whom we can dismiss as 'Somebody Other Than Mr Oswald'. 

Now!

I am making a straightforward claim-----------that Mr Oswald is standing just behind Mr Lovelady and that his head is visible in these Wiegman frames:



I am relating this straightforward claim to the straightforward observation that the dark strip down Mr Lovelady's side in Wiegman cannot possibly be a natural shadow:



You don't agree? Fine-----but irrelevant!

You think Mr Oswald was not out on the steps? Fine-----but irrelevant!

I am not asking you to agree with me, I am not even asking for your opinion. I am asking you to refute me!

Can you--------without making reference to PrayerPerson or any other extraneous issue--------offer an alternative explanation for the above phenomena in Wiegman?

 

[Tom Scully]

... says the most universally despised JFK 'researcher' since----Mr Cinque! 

A shadow from the western wall has been categorically ruled out. End of.

Looking forward to hearing from someone who does understand how angles work and/or doesn't believe the sun was hopping back and forth in the Dallas sky at 12:30pm on 11/22/63! 

......
To return to the question we opened with............
Why did Messrs Shelley and Lovelady change their story for the WC and say they both stayed on the steps and only left them after hearing from Ms Calvery about what had happened out on the street?
Answer: To knock Mr Oswald out of the talking-with-Ms-Calvery picture!

Postscript!
In their weasely-worded 22nd Nov statements, neither Mr Shelley nor Mr Lovelady say outright that they did not see Mr Oswald at the time of the shooting---------------
...........

A tug-o-war between arrogance and ignorance. Who is going to "win"? i don't know about the rest of you, but I am sitting here on the edge of my seat, hoping against hope that 40 pages more of the "insight" splashed across the voluminous pages of this thread so far, is merely the intro to blockbuster discoveries and earnest analysis! The key witnesses all lied to frame Mr. Oswald. Why didn't I think of that?

[Alan Ford]

A tug-o-war between arrogance and ignorance. Who is going to "win"? i don't know about the rest of you, but I am sitting here on the edge of my seat, hoping against hope that 40 pages more of the "insight" splashed across the voluminous pages of this thread so far, is merely the intro to blockbuster discoveries and earnest analysis! The key witnesses all lied to frame Mr. Oswald. Why didn't I think of that?

Mr Scully, is it true that Mr Wiegman's name was misspelled 'Weigman' in the Milwaukee Dispatch of 10/13/61 and that Weigman was the middle name of Ms Pinchot Meyer's best friend's dogwalker?

Thank you in advance for your help in blowing this case wide open!