Friday, January 27, 2012

JFK: Was Oswald in the doorway, after all?

JFK: Was Oswald in the doorway, after all?

James Fetzer

After publishing "JFK: What we know now that we didn't know then", I encountered the remarkable work of Dr. Ralph Cinque, who had seen something that no one else had noticed in nearly 50 years of study on the assassination of JFK, namely: that, in relation to the long-standing debate over the identity of the man in the doorway in the famous Altgens photograph, usually referred to as "Doorway Man", between Lee Oswald, the accused assassin of JFK, and Billy Lovelady, a co-worker who looked a great deal like him, it is not the FACES in the Altgens that matter, but their SHIRTS! I had noticed that the face of a figure in the Altgens had been obfuscated, which led me to infer that this must be Oswald, but his detailed and painstaking analysis of the differences between the shirt that Doorway Man was wearing and the shirts that Oswald and Lovelady were wearing persuaded me that he was right and that, unless Lovelady was wearing Oswald's shirt, the man in the doorway was Lee.

In the Altgens, you can see (1) the through-and-through hole in the windshield; (2) Doorway Man; (3) the broom-closet window of a uranium mining company that was a CIA asset, from which three shots appear to have been fired; and (4) the open door of the LBJ security detail, suggesting prior knowledge of what was to come. The man to the left of Doorway Man, wearing a fedora, resembles Jack Ruby; while the face and shirt of another figure to DM's left/front (right/front facing him) have been obfuscated or removed. A debate of long-standing has endured over whether DM was Lee Oswald or his co-worker, Billy Lovelady. We believe the face was "tweaked" or even moved to Doorway Man to obfuscate Oswald's presence, but the shirts tell the tale.

For those who review our more extensive study and look at all the evidence, if they scroll down to "Once more, with feeling!", where we have Doorway Man on the left and Lovelady on the right, where above Doorway Man is Oswald, I think anyone can see that the shirt on Doorway Man has been "touched up" but still does not resemble the checkered shirt on Lovelady; and it is obvious that Doorway Man is NOT wearing the striped shirt he (Lovelady) told the FBI he was wearing that day. But it very strongly resembles the shirt on Oswald, which was loose-fitting like Doorway Man and unlike Lovelady in either shirt. Lee tugged at the neck of his shirt, which gave it a "vee" like appearance, which is more visible in some photographs than in others. Lovelady's has no "vee".

Here is a diagrammatic summary of the witness reports that I take to be credible. There are lots of inconsistencies in the record, where some witnesses were intimidated, others had their testimony changed, and still others were never called at all. While we all know that there can be endless debate about exactly who said what when, these are the three that I take to be accurate reports, where I have overlaid the witness reports of his locations on a drawing from Gerald Posner's CASE CLOSED (1992):


We also have the handwritten and typed notes of Detective Will Fritz interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald, which reflect that he told Fritz he was "out with Bill Shelley in front", which I believe for several reasons, including that Lee was working for the FBI as an informant and had a history with ONI and the CIA, where I am inclined to believe that he expected he was going to be exonerated. During his interview, he also told Fritz, when shown one of the backyard photographs, that it was his face on someone else's body. Jim Marrs and I have written about this in "Framing the Patsy: The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald", which appears on Veterans Today with other recent JFK articles of mine.



In addition, in relation to the time line, an excellent, concise post has appeared by Richard Hocking:

Posted Yesterday, 04:14 PM

"From a Timeline perspective, it was possible for Oswald to be on the
front steps at the time of the shooting (as he told Fritz). Carolyn
Arnold's interview with Anthony Summers (1978) places Oswald behind
the double doors at the entrance as late as 12:25. The next sighting
in the testimony is Baker and Truly in the 2nd floor lunch room at
about 12:31:30. That leaves open the possibility that Oswald could
have been on the steps at the time of the shooting and then gone
inside after the shots were fired.

"On a side note, Oswald said he was on the steps with Shelley. That
raises several interesting points:

1. If Oswald was not on the steps, how did he know where Shelley was?
Oswald may have seen him there at 12:25, but that is no guarantee that
Shelley would have stayed there.

2. Oswald is giving Fritz information that can be cross-checked with
another witness. He is now relying on Shelley to provide verification
for his alibi at the time of the shooting. Why would Oswald put
himself in this position unless he thought Shelley would back him up?

If, otoh, Oswald was making up a story, why not say he was behind
everyone on the steps where no one noticed him? That would have
eliminated the possibility of being contradicted by another witness."


Finally, when I learned about the Fritz interrogation notes--which had actually been released by the ARRB back in 1997 but which I had only discovered a few months ago--I took another look at the Altgens and discovered that the face of the man to his left/front (right/front, viewing the photograph) had been obliterated, I inferred that this must have been Oswald. That was my position when Ralph and I came into contact. When, in the course of our exchange, I discovered that THE SHIRT AS WELL AS THE FACE of the other man had been obliterated it was obvious that there had to have been features of the shirt that need to be obscured, which led me to reconsider my position. As he and I began discussing his research on the shirts, I realized that he had noticed something that no one else had noticed before him--that the shirts, not the faces, were the key to resolving the issue.

As we all know, virtually nothing about the assassination can be known with certainty. It is almost always a matter of probabilities and likelihoods. When you put together the timeline with what Lee told Fritz (about being out front with Bill Shelly), given Richard Hocking's observations, especially in light of the obfuscation of the Altgens, the likelihood that he was there is the reason why the had to change the photograph becomes very strong. Why else, after all, would they have bothered with a crowd shot--unless someone was there who should not have been, where the only person who fits that bill is Lee Harvey Oswald. So the key to appraising this situation is to ask, "What is the probability of altering this photo and obfuscating images if Oswald had not been there?" Approximately zero.

The features that Ralph has identified in the style, the lapel, the lay, the fit, and the buttons have convinced me that he is right and that the man in the doorway IS wearing Oswald's shirt. Lovelady, of course, turned out to have a checkered shirt and a vertically striped shirt, both of which were rather distinctive. The complementary argument that I have advanced is that Doorway Man is also NOT wearing Lovelady's checkered shirt, much less his vertically striped shirt, which may have been on Lovelady but cannot have been on Doorway Man. DM's shirt has a rather loose fit and unusual features. Oswald's shirt has a rather loose fit and unusual features. Lovelady's shirt fits snugly and has no unusual features--other than its pattern. So they had to try to make Oswald's shirt look more like Lovelady's, but did so with only limited success, which was how Ralph could detect their differences and fashion his argument. Others may disagree, but he has convinced me.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is the editor of Assassination Science (1998), Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000), and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003).
Posted by Jim Fetzer at 3:19 PM
REACTIONS:

14 comments:

  1. In the Frontline program "Who Was LHO," there is this exchange:

    QUOTE:

    1st REPORTER : Did you shoot the President?

    LEE HARVEY OSWALD : I work in that building.

    1st REPORTER : Were you in the building at the time?

    LEE HARVEY OSWALD : Naturally, if I work in that building, yes, sir.
    UNQUOTE

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oswald/etc/script.html

    ReplyDelete

  3. David Von Pein is well-known to students of JFK as a zealous defender of the "lone nut" theory, which has been debunked on virtually every count. Since Fritz notes show that Oswald told him he was "out with Bill Shelley in front", where Fritz was the homicide detective who was interrogating him, we know that the suggestions we are receiving from other sources are less reliable and highly misleading.

    We also know that news stories were being manipulated by the FBI from the beginning, where Connie Kritzberg was astonished to discover that a story that she had submitted about the Parkland Press conference, during which Malcolm Perry, M.D., had described the bullet hole in JFK's throat as an entrance wound--not just once but three times!--had been altered, as she explains in this interview: www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY5dNpTYWT8

    What becomes important in sorting out what happened to JFK is not the enormous quantity of "proof" that supports the "official account" of the assassination but the evidence, like Fritz' notes, that undermine it. For those who want more about this case, my latest public lecture at the University of Wisconsin-Madison has been archived at noliesradio.org/archives/40500 That Pein is here shows their efforts to subvert the truth endure to this day.

    ReplyDelete

  4. Oswald had multiple opportunities to tell the world that he had an alibi, if he did indeed have one. He gave a press conference in which he might've asked Shelley or anyone else who'd seen him on the steps to come forward and prove his innocence. He also spoke to members of his family and to a Dallas lawyer, none of whom mentioned an alibi.

    More important, we have it from Oswald's own lips that he was not on the steps. I've quoted from a film clip that shows Oswald in the hallway of the police station telling a reporter that he was inside the building at the time. This clip has been shown in several documentaries and is still available online, so far as I know. Oswald himself has refuted this theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Nice try jean, but a flippant comment to a reporter as he's being ushered down the hall means nothing. As a FBI informant being set up as a patsy, may make a guy a little tight lipped . I'm sure if Oswald knew he was to be murdered the next day. He certainly would have taken the opportunity to profess his alibi to anyone and everyone, including reporters he passed in the hall.

      Delete

  5. After reading your article, I'm convinced that the whole Billy lovelady thing ( " Is that Oswald on the steps?"). Was a false lead ,designed to discredit conspiracy researchers (a red herring like the color of his shirt).We know Oswald was wearing a loosely fitting button up shirt with a V-necked tee. Billy Lovelady was wearing a tighter fitting checkered button up shirt with a straight necked tee. The blacked out face is obviously Ruby's, the whited out face is Lovelady's. They then cut & pasted Lovelady's face over Oswalds( we know they can do this;backyard photo ). We must understand they had total control over all photographic evidence pertaining to the assassination .There is no reason to release a photo with two obfuscated faces . Jim Fetzers research has put great doubt on the authenticity of the Zapruder film, the kill shot from the grassy knoll and even the backward and to the left movement of Kennedy .Could this be another easter egg left for researchers to grab onto, only to be left with egg on their faces when Billy Lovelady was trotted out in front of the House assassination committee? " To control the opposition, you must lead it". Good advise, Lenin.

    ReplyDelete

  7. David Von Pein is one of the best at attempting to defend the indefensible, THE WARREN REPORT (1964). A nice test of your JFK IQ is to find how many ways you can refute his multiple assertions. You can find some clues in "Framing the Patsy: The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald" (which I co-authored with Jim Marrs), "Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?", and "JFK: What we know now that we didn't know then", at Veterans Today and elsewhere. See what you can do with this.

    ReplyDelete

  8. Obviously Oswald was on the steps - 2 faces have been covered in the photo.

    Oswald stated to the press that he did not kill anybody and he said to the press I" emphatically deny these charges"

    ReplyDelete

  9. Dear Mr.Fetzer, i think you have done great work, i have read and seen many of your research, but on this subject as beeing Oswald in the doorway (wich i tend to believe is treu) raises one question. If we look at the doormans clothes as beeing a good reference to identify Oswald and use the photo's after his arrest to compare the clothes how can we know what clothes Oswald was wearing before his arrest, because he said he had changed clothes before he went to the theater where he got arrested. He might have worn very different clothes that morning, as he was in the doorway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Even the Warren Commission concluded that he had not changed his clothing. While I would ordinarily not cite it as a reliable source, in this case, this finding is contrary to its own interests in implicating Oswald in the crime.

      Assertions contrary to interest is a special kind of evidence in courts of law. Because parties would not be expected to admit facts that work against their interest, they deserve to be take seriously as credible.

      Delete

  10. TO Jim Fetzer, dear sir.
    I have watched your video at Youtube JFK getting him to the ambush and was impressed about the huge evidence you collected and arranged in a short video. Congratulations!
    Nevertheless I have some questions to ask you:
    1) Despite nobody reasonable person doubts about a conspiracy to murder JFK, the one man theory LHO seems so unbelievable as a conspiracy involving so many people! It looks like that a hundred people had to be taking place in the conspiracy, as you expose. I think it´s reasonable to conspire in a group of 5-10 people, the secrets remains close and secure, but don´t you think that many people rises the risk to filtration before the murder? Do you have some support for that?
    2) In your video you seem to discard any participation of Clyde Shaw and David Ferrie, as DA Garrison did. At least, Garrison was able to demonstrate there was a conspiracy, but couldn´t involve Clyde Shaw. Any conspiracy requires a leader, a command. Do you think that LBJ was the man on top? Did he decide to go green with the murder?
    3) If so, did he have all the resources and access to information to prepare the conspiracy? Wasn´t he spyed or at least watched by the JFK men?
    4) To prepare such a stage, how much time do you think they needed? months? Was there a shooting range for training? Where? Who raise the funds for this?
    I would like to hear your answer to my questions. Thank you in advance

    ReplyDelete

  11. See Noel Twyman's BLOODY TREASON (1997). On a single page, he lists eight prominent figures who talked about the death of JFK. See "Dealey Plaza Revisited: What happened to JFK?", where I include it. Plus I have extensive discussion of who was responsible in "What happened to JFK--and why it matters today" (UW-Madison, 22 November 2011), which is on YouTube. Lyndon was the pivotal player in the death of his predecessor.

    ReplyDelete

  12. On Clay Shaw, David Ferrie and the New Orleans connections, they were undoubtedly involved. See Judyth Vary Baker, ME & LEE, for example; or even Oliver Stone's "JFK". The location where JFK was to speak was changed to The Trade Mart to justify changing the motorcade route to pass by the TSBD. And the owner of that building was same company where Clay Shaw was a director.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)