Prayer Woman

[Larry Trotter]

It's ASTONISHING how much irrational hostility the LHO/PM claim arouses in some people. You almost get the impression some people--------and not just LNers------want to close down any possibility of this case being solved!

What is MOST ASTONISHING is the hostility directed towards those who dispute any LeeHarveyOswald/PrayerMan Theory.

So, "you almost get the impression some people-------and not just LNers-------want to close down any possibility of this case being solved!" means what?

Certainly, claiming the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter to be a 'Hoax', and moving LHO away from said encounter to place him on the landing/stairs during the assassination will not address 'this case being solved'.

Based on my understanding of the evidence, the LHO/PM Theory, in my conclusion is indicative of a Hoax.

In any event, should there be any legally binding reliable provable statement/testimony with evidentiary value, it should be available among the linked to witnesses account of the assassination and situational event(s).


WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-MrBonnieWilliams:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/williams.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-MrBuellFrazier:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/frazierb1.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-JamesJarmanJr:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/jarman.htm
FederalBureauOfInvestigationTESTIMONY-MsPaulineSanders on 11/24/'63:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/exhibits/ce1434.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-MrsRobert[Jeraldean]Reid:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/reid.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-MrBillyLovelady on 04/07/'64:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/lovelady.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-DPD OfficerMrMarrionBaker:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/baker_m1.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-TSBD ManagerMrRoyTruly:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
WarrenCommissionTESTIMONY-MrDannyArce on 04/07/'64:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/arce.htm


 Should additional TESTIMONY and/or STATEMENT(S) be sought-should be available@:
https://www.history-matters.com/analysis/witness/index.htm

[Duncan MacRae]

No correspondance via any communication method will be entered into regarding any Admin actions.

Name calling, petty false allegations and personal insults towards fellow members of this Forum, when reported or observed, may carry (a to be determined on an individual basis) ban from posting on the Forum.
This includes posts which contain member directed mocking nicknames towards other members.
Posts containing the offences may be deleted, as may complete threads, where the thread has been created by the offender.
Posts containing links to websites which condone and allow the publication of abusive content will be deleted.
Messy untidy posts, or posts containing unacceptably large white space gaps between lines, when reported or observed, will be deleted.

[Larry Trotter]

Larry, why do you smush people's names together?  Also, why do you change your font type, size, color with every post?

IN REPLY...
John, I don't consider it to be smushing people's names together, as to me a systematic style of avoiding spacing between 'some' names' lettering.
Font type is a form of expression, as is size, and style related due to preference. Somewhat systematic, overall. Font color, is mostly preference, sometimes style related, and hopefully unique to some degree.
However, I also consider it all as a style, overall, which itself is systematic. Therefor, should a post be quoted, and instead of a reprint, a reproduced comment is posted with context altering adjustments, to appear authentic will not be an easy task. And, being difficult to disguise, said adjustments should be fairly easy to discover, and expose.
So, you asked, and I answered.

[John Iacoletti]

IN REPLY to POST #1449...
John, I don't consider it to be smushing people's names together, as to me a systematic style of avoiding spacing between 'some' names' lettering.

For what purpose though?

[John Mytton]

For what purpose though?

Who really cares, it's his style and it saves space and bandwidth, good luck to him!



JohnM

[Bill Chapman]

IN REPLY to POST #1449...
John, I don't consider it to be smushing people's names together, as to me a systematic style of avoiding spacing between 'some' names' lettering.
Font type is a form of expression, as is size, and style related due to preference. Somewhat systematic, overall. Font color, is mostly preference, sometimes style related, and hopefully unique to some degree.
However, I also consider it all as a style, overall, which itself is systematic. Therefor, should a post be quoted, and instead of a reprint, a reproduced comment is posted with context altering adjustments, to appear authentic will not be an easy task. And, being difficult to disguise, said adjustments should be fairly easy to discover, and expose.
So, you asked, and I answered.

Your format encourages a fly-by.
Buh-bye.

[Alan Ford]

Scale four people on west side steps using the later Weigman frame.
Clone Lovelady from later frame onto earlier frame.
Align the face of PrayerPerson in Weigman/Darnell.
Use a digital densitometer to measure Prayerperson's forehead/right forearm in early Weigman frame.

Chris, one cannot take the Prayer Man figure as a constant from Wiegman to Darnell. When the glass doors' horizontal aluminum strip is kept at constant height, we get this:

[Alan Ford]

Point being made:
The man traversed by the "momentarily dark background" has no shadow cast upon his head, while he is one step down and after he steps up on the landing.
If he turns and faces the camera as Lovelady is, there will not be a shadow across the front of his face either.
 

Thanks for clarifying Chris.
How do we know there's no shadow cast upon the upper half of his head when he's on the landing? Looks like shadow to me. Compare shadow that comes over the head of the (rifle-carrying?) man on the east side who steps up on the landing just after him.
What troubles me more tbh is the fact that in the initial frames the cowboy hat in center is in direct sunlight. Is this man short enough, and lowering his head enough, to miss the lintel shadow?