Prayer Woman

[Larry Trotter]

No other TSBD entrance stairs/landing occupant confirmed or indicated the presence of LeeHarveyOswald at said time.
No eyewitness confirmed or indicated the presence of LeeHarveyOswald on the entrance landing/stairs at said time.
Neither Bldg Superintendent RoyTruly, or DPD Officer MarrionBaker confirmed or indicated seeing LeeHarveyOswald on the entrance landing/stairs at said time as they had entered the bldg through said entrance.
But, after about 50 years/half a century, someone decided that an otherwise unidentified PersonImage filmed from a moving hand-held camera, from a moving motorcade vehicle some cars behind the PresidentialLimousine, as seen in shadow, in a corner area, must be LeeHarveyOswald, without any confirmation evidence.
So, a History Changing Story was born, never mind contradictory provable evidence.
On the other hand, pictured is a great example of the value of DayLightSavingsTime.

[Larry Trotter]

No good reason why this can't be LHO.
No good reason to think it can be any other TSBD employee, and every good reason to think it can't!



The elimination of Sarah Stanton and the fine probative work of Stancak et al, have moved this into the territory of Beyond Reasonable Doubt IMO. The AnybodyButOswald crew are sounding more and more desperate. They're out of alternative candidates! 

Bumped for image preservation to pursue detection of any PersonImage(s), beyond those filmed/pictured, being "inserted into the scene".
However, any  assertions beyond fact need to  .

[Larry Trotter]

Neither Bldg Superintendent RoyTruly, or DPD Officer MarrionBaker confirmed or indicated seeing LeeHarveyOswald on the entrance landing/stairs at said time as they had entered the bldg through said entrance.

Should come as no surprice after having kooked up the lunchroom deal...

Not being any sort of EnglishLanguageMajor, I am curious as to what a 'surprice' is(?)
I also would like to be able to correctly understand what is meant by the statement, 'having kooked up the lunchroom deal...'(?)

[Jerry Freeman]

Apologies if these have already been posted.....

[Larry Trotter]

Apologies if these have already been posted.....

Jerry:
The images from a HughesFilm and a MartinFilm have been posted, and discussed, and actually I started a thread discussion on another forum about a year and a half ago, where I referred to said person as ScarfLady, which, is actually only an image, that I now recognize/refer to as ScarfLadyImage. However, I absolutely make NO CLAIM OF DISCOVERY, although to me a discovered subject identity question.
I continue to see/observe what to me are similarities between PrayerPersonImage and ScarfLadyImage, although I do acknowledge that evidence has been presented that indicate the images represent different persons. But, I continue to seek clarification, which includes a positive identity of the person represented by ScarfLadyImage.

[Alan Ford]

This footage is from about 12.50pm.

Therefore! That lady can't be Pauline Sanders 



Nor can she be Sarah Stanton, who is admittedly the SPITTING IMAGE OF HER (look at that gray hair-----the match is uncanny!). Heartbreakingly, we know that Sarah reentered the building very shortly after the assassination and didn't leave again until about 14.20 

So who could she be??

Logic tells us she's probably either Vida Lee Whatley or Virginia H. Barnum.

But logic is boring! Let's pull out all the stops to secure an identification of this random woman who can't possibly be Prayer Person! Go team 

[Alan Ford]

A smarter more capable researcher would realize that anyone who believes in the two Oswalds theory is FxxxxD In The Head.

True dat

[Alan Ford]

Nevermind , too high to be a step, could be behind Shelley though.

Ah, never thought of that! Very possible------thank you





If you're right, then the white may well be a piece of clothing (Stancak interprets 'Lovelady's left ear' as part of Sarah's head/face... I think he's right about it not being Lovelady's ear----too big!)