Tag Archives: Doorman

JFK Myths Exposed: Oswald as Doorman was “put to bed in 1978 and makes CTs look foolish”; Lovelady was Doorman because “it looks like him”

JFK Myths Exposed: Oswald as Doorman was “put to bed in 1978 and makes CTs look foolish”; Lovelady was Doorman because “it looks like him”

Richard Charnin
Oct.14, 2015

Look inside the books:
Reclaiming Science: The JFK Conspiracy
Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts

Regarding Oswald in the Doorway, a poster wrote: “This was put to bed in 1978 and is irrelevant except to make conspiracy people look foolish”.

Another poster commented: Lovelady was Doorman because “it looks like him”. I asked him to prove it but he kept repeating “it looks like him”. I showed him links to my posts which provide powerful evidence that Oswald was Doorman. It was like debating a wall, but it is instructive to see how disinformationists and trolls operate. Show them proof and they just ignore it – and keep repeating their nonsensical one-liners. View the thread here:

This was my reply to the first poster.
It was also decided by the HSCA in 1978 that the Mafia did it, and that the CIA and FBI were not involved, and that Oswald was a shooter in the TSBD, and that it was just a coincidence that the other shooter was independent of Oswald, and there was no definable witness universe and therefore it was impossible to calculate witness death probabilities, and that the London Times actuary was wrong and that…

the Oswald backyard photos were not fakes, and Oswald shot Tippit and shot at Walker, and that Oswald was a lone nut, not a CIA asset or FBI informer, and that Hoover, LBJ and the Warren Commission were honest in their search for the truth, and that the Zapruder film was not altered, and the magic bullet theory was credible, and that Clay Shaw was not CIA, and that just 4 bullets were fired based on acoustics and that…

THE MAJORITY OF DEALEY PLAZA WITNESSES  STATED THAT THE SHOTS CAME FROM THE TSBD, and that the CIA  did not have to respond to a subpoena from HSCA investigator Richard Sprague, and that’s why they hired Blakey who would not investigate the CIA and who stated that the mob did it, and that there was no coverup, and that the photos of JFK head wounds were not altered and that…THE WC SINGLE BULLET THEORY MADE SENSE…and that OSWALD WAS NOT IN THE DOORWAY…



According to the poster’s logic, anyone who does not believe the above must be a CT and looks foolish. Such twisted logic from one who is not a Lone Nutter.  Lone Nutters believe the impossible SBT and that Oswald was on the 6th floor shooting JFK and cannot be Doorman, and that he outdid Superman by hiding the rifle and  ran down four flights to the lunchroom in a little over a minute,  and that he was not seen by Victoria Adams (the girl on the stairs).

Strangely, posters who are not Lone Nutters also believe that Oswald was confronted by Roy Truly and Officer Baker drinking a coke on the 2nd floor – and he was not out of breath. But Baker and Truly did not mention seeing Oswald in their original testimony in which they reported seeing someone on the third or fourth floor who did not resemble Oswald. That was easy.

1 Comment

Posted by on October 14, 2015 in JFK


Tags: , , , , , ,

JFK: Warren Commission apologists claim that…

Richard Charnin
September 11, 2015

JFK Blog Posts
Twitter Chronological Links
Look inside the book:Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy

Warren Commission apologists claim that…

1. Oswald shot Tippit.
But Tippit was shot no later than 1:06 pm. Oswald was seen outside his rooming house a mile away at 1:04 (some claim he was at the Texas Theater). The WC had to add 10 minutes to the time of death (1:16) to fabricate the myth that Oswald had enough time to get to the scene.

2.The Magic Bullet theory is correct.
But the bullet entered 5.5” below JFK’s collar and never exited. Gerald R. Ford, a member of the Warren Commission, suggested that the panel raise its initial description of the bullet wound in Kennedy’s back in a transparent, illegal scam to bolster the ridiculous SBT.

3. The three tramps were not Harrelson, Holt and Rogers.
But they were identified by Lois Gibson , who works for the Houston Police Department and is probably the most respected forensic artist and facial expert in the world. She has just been awarded with a notation in the Guinness Book of World Records for the highest crime solving rate based on composite sketches.

4.Cancer and heart attacks cannot be induced.
But Judyth Vary Baker and Mary S. Sherman, under the direction of cancer expert Alton Ochsner, developed a cancer-producing agent to kill Castro. . The 1975 Church Senate Intelligence Committee heard testimony of methods to induce heart attacks and cancer.

5.The witness unnatural death probability calculation does not take margin of error into account.
But this was not a poll of witnesses. It is a statistical analysis based on historical data.

6. The Weigman photo proves that Lovelady was standing at the Doorway.
But it does not show Lovelady at 12:30. The Altgens 6 photo was taken at the precise second that JFK was shot. It shows Lovelady standing on the steps.

7. Oswald was the Lone Gunman on the 6th floor.
But according to Det. Will Fritz, no one could place him there. And he was seen on the second floor at 12:25 by Carolyn Arnold – who was not called to testify at the WC.

8. No one testified that they saw Oswald in front on the steps of the Texas School Book Depository.
But the Warren Commission and the FBI had their patsy and would never allow such testimony. To claim they would is laughable disinformation.

9. Lovelady was Doorman. Oswald was not in front of the TSBD.
But Lovelady and Frazier both testified that Lovelady was standing on the steps in front of Frazier. Doorman was on the first floor. So Lovelady could not have been Doorman.

10. The HSCA determined that the London Times actuary’s 1 in 100,000 trillion probability that 18 material witnesses would die (13 unnaturally) within three years of the assassination was invalid. The HSCA claimed the witness universe was “unknowable”.
But the HSCA did not consider a) unnatural deaths, b) 552 Warren Commission witnesses, of whom at least 30 died suspiciously, c) 7 FBI officials were due to testify at HSCA and died suspiciously within a 6 month period, d) and at least 100 others.

11. The HSCA noted just 21 suspicious deaths.
But not one of them was Mafia (8), CIA (16), FBI (9), Dallas police (12) or anti-Castro Cuban (5). There were at least 122 suspicious deaths between 1964 and 1979.

12. There is no proof that the suspicious witnesses were JFK-related.
But approximately 67 of the 122 in the JFK Calc spreadsheet were called to testify at the WC (1964), Garrison/Shaw trial (1967-69), Church Senate Intelligence Committee (1975-76) and HSCA (1976-79).

13. There was no connection between the witnesses.
But at least 50 were from the Dallas area. It cannot just be a coincidence. If there was no connection, the deaths would have been distributed randomly throughout the United States.

14. Warren Commission apologist John McAdams said that John Simkin’s JFK Index includes a number of individuals who were inserted in the index because they died.
That is laughable but not unexpected considering the source. Seventy (70) of the 656 died suspiciously, 44 unnaturally (including 22 homicides). The probability: 1 in trillions.

15. Fingerprint expert Nathan Darby was proven wrong after claiming that fingerprints taken from the 6th floor of the TSBD were those of hitman Mac Wallace.
But “Wallace’s police ‘ten-print’ from his 1951 arrest, used in Mr. Darby’s comparison, was taken 12 years before the murder of JFK and even Mr Darby himself observed differences in the two prints that had arisen during the intervening time (e.g., he recorded what appeared to be an injury to the skin that was not present in the 1951 print but disrupted the 1963 print). He still felt confident enough to swear an affidavit stating that he had found 14 matching points, the threshold for admissibility in Texan courts. By all accounts, he later revisited the prints out of personal interest and found a 32-point match”.

16. Oswald’s palm prints were found on the Carcano
But Dallas police officials said during public interviews that Oswald’s prints had NOT been found on the weapon. When the FBI’s Latona examined the Carcano on November 23, he did not find Oswald’s prints on the weapon. Moreover, Latona said the rifle’s barrel did NOT look as though it had even been processed for prints. There is evidence that suggests the palm print was obtained from Oswald’s dead body at the morgue, or later at the funeral home So suspicious was the palm print that even the WC privately had doubts about the manner in which it was obtained (Garrison 113; Marrs 445; cf. Lane 153-158)

17. Oswald purchased the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle by mail-order under the alias “Alek Hidell”.
But this video proves that Oswald never ordered the rifle.

Why would he order a sub-par rifle from Klein’s Sporting Goods in Chicago using an alias when he could have purchased a superior rifle anonymously anywhere in Texas?
– Oswald was at work when he is said to have purchased the money order. So who bought the money order? If Oswald didn’t buy it, why does the handwriting seem to be his? There are forgers who can copy a person’s handwriting so well that it is difficult if not impossible to detect the fakery. The original order form and envelope were destroyed, so the FBI had to rely on microfilm copies of this evidence.

– Nobody at Oswald’s post office reported giving him a hefty package such as the kind in which a rifle would be shipped. None of the postal workers reported ever giving Oswald ANY kind of a package. Oddly, the FBI apparently made no effort to establish that Oswald picked up the rifle from the post office, or that he had ever received a package of any kind there.

– Postal regulations required that only those persons named on the post office box registration form could receive items of mail from the box, yet there is no evidence that Oswald listed the name of Hidell on the form (Smith 290-291). In a report dated 3 June 1964, the FBI stated, “Our investigation has revealed that Oswald did NOT indicate on his application that others, including an ‘A. Hidell,’ would receive mail through the box in question”.

– There is a discrepancy in size between the weapon ordered by “A. Hidell” and the rifle that Oswald allegedly left behind on the sixth floor of the TSBD. “A. Hidell” ordered item C20-T750 from an advertisement placed by Klein’s Sporting Goods in the February 1963 issue of AMERICAN RIFLEMAN. The rifle that was listed as item C20-T750 is 36 inches long. The Mannlicher-Carcano that Oswald supposedly abandoned on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building is 40.2 inches long.

Leave a comment

Posted by on September 11, 2015 in Uncategorized


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

JFK: Oswald in the Doorway – An Opinion Survey

Richard Charnin
April 5, 2015
Updated: Oct.16, 2015

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.
JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database

The purpose of the 20 questions in this post is to gauge the OPINIONS of readers as to whether or not they believe that Oswald was”Doorman” standing on the first floor (Top level) of the entrance to the Texas Schoolbook Depository at the time of the assassination.

I believe the evidence is overwhelming that Oswald was Doorman. The best way to gauge the opinions of those who may or may not agree is to compare their YES or NO answers to mine.

On May 5, I posted the survey on John McAdams’ JFK assassination forum – a disinformationist hang-out. As of May 8, there were 182 views and 37 posts in the thread, but not ONE individual has taken the survey. What are they afraid of? That the “litmus test” would reveal the implausibility of their belief that LHO was not Doorman?!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/9rar6nNazGg

One individual (Mr.X) took the survey (below). His responses were evasive. I specifically asked for a YES or NO answer to each question, but he failed to do so. This was not a court trial.

1: Assume Oswald was in front of the TSBD at the exact time of the assassination. If so, do you believe that’s why Det. Fritz’s notes (Oswald said he was “out with Bill Shelley in front”) were hidden for 30 years? Yes or No?
X. Not solid proof of anything.
RC. I did not ask for proof, just an opinion – assuming the hypothetical that Oswald was in front of the TSBD.

2: In his WC testimony, Lovelady was asked to point to himself  in the Altgens6 photo by placing a DARK arrow in the DARK area. The head of  the arrow appears to be pointing to Doorman who was standing on the TOP level. Frazier also placed an arrow pointing to Doorman. However, both Lovelady and Frazier stated multiple times under oath that Lovelady was standing in FRONT on the STEPS – not on the TOP level. Do you find this suspicious?
X. Why don’t you provide us with the picture so we can decide for ourselves what it “appears” to show?
RC. The picture is the Altgens 6 photo in the original post I linked to above.

3: If a photo, video, document or witness testimony had to be altered or fabricated to convict Oswald, do you suppose it would have been?
X. That is definitely a possibility.
RC. Of course it is a possibility, but do YOU think the evidence would have been altered or fabricated?

4: If a witness could confirm that Oswald was standing out front, would he/she be allowed to so testify?
X. What witness are you talking about? Or is this hypothetical?
RC. ANY witness. It is a hypothetical. I am just asking for your opinion.

5: If a witness called to testify could confirm that Oswald was out front, would he/she be asked the question?
X. Same as above.
RC. Same answer. It’s a hypothetical. I am just asking for your opinion.

6: If a witness was a participant in the conspiracy and saw Oswald out front, would he/she be allowed to say so?
X.This is speculative psychology. What is the point?
RC. No speculative psychology. I am just asking for your opinion.

7: TSBD witnesses were not asked directly if they saw Oswald out front. Would it have been a logical question to ask?
X. If they considered it a possibility, they should have asked.
RC. Of course it was a POSSIBILITY. Therefore your answer should be YES.

8: Oswald told Will Fritz that he was OUT FRONT WITH BILL SHELLEY. The Warren Commission concluded that he ran from the 6th to the 2nd floor lunchroom in 75-90 seconds, He was allegedly seen by officer Baker and Roy Truly holding a coke but not short of breath. It’s a 10 second walk from the first floor entrance to the 2nd floor lunchroom. Do you believe that Oswald told the truth to Fritz since he already had an alibi (he saw Bill Shelley out front)?
X. It’s possible that Oswald was out front, but no photograph yet discovered can prove this.
RC. Yes, it’s possible (see Altgens6). But do you believe LHO told the truth to Fritz?

9: Lovelady died in Jan. 1979 (during the HSCA investigation) from “complications” due to a heart attack. The probability of a 41 year old white male dying from a heart attack was approximately 1 in 10,000. Lovelady did not testify at the HSCA. Do you believe he should have been called?
X. I don’t understand the question. Was Lovelady an important witness? Would they have called Lovelady to testify at the HSCA? How many other TSBD witnesses did they call? ZERO. They didn’t seem too concerned with that end of the case at that point.
RC. Not true. They called Frazier. Like Frazier, Lovelady was an important witness.

10: Many JFK researchers believe that Oswald was framed but insist that he is not in the Altgens6 photo. They claim that no one testified they saw LHO out front and that Doorman “looks like” Lovelady. But is that a sufficient response? Doorman also “looks like” Oswald. Note that Doorman’s open long-sleeve jacket/shirt (open in a V to reveal his tee shirt) is the same shirt Oswald wore at the police station. And it is different from the shirt Lovelady was wearing.
X. There is not enough visual evidence to conclusively use the shirt as a source of identification.
RC. But are the responses sufficient to just say “it looks like” Lovelady or that no one testified that they saw LHO in front?

11: Is it just a coincidence that TSBD witnesses are not clearly shown in Altgens6?
X. What do you mean “not clearly shown?” How about giving us photographic examples?
RC. I specifically said the Altgens6 photo. “Not clearly shown” means that the identity of the witnesses in Altgens6 are indecipherable (blurry and whited out).

12 Do you believe the Oswald backyard photos were fakes?
X.They seem fairly consistent to me, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they were altered. It is a possibility.
RC. They were proven to be fakes. But do YOU believe they were?

13: Do you believe the Z-film was altered?
X. Definitely a possibility.
RC. The Z-film has been proven to be altered. But do YOU believe it was?

14: Is there at least a possibility that Oswald is Doorman?
X. I don’t believe Oswald was Doorman, but there is not enough evidence to prove it. So,I would have to say “I don’t know.”
RC. “I don’t know” means YES, it is possible that Oswald was Doorman.

15: Do you believe Carolyn Arnold, a TSBD secretary, was mistaken in her statement that she saw Oswald was on the first (i.e. ground) floor of the TSBD at 12:25pm?
X. She could have been mistaken. Happens all the time.
RC. But she could have actually seen Oswald. What is your best OPINION?

16: Do you consider it odd that Arnold was not interviewed by the Warren Commission?
X. A lot of potentially valuable witnesses were not interviewed by the Warren Commission.
RC. The question referred specifically to Carolyn Arnold. She was not just ANY witness. She was CRITICAL since she claimed Oswald was on the first floor – not the 6th – FIVE MINUTES BEFORE THE SHOOTING.

17: At the 2 minute mark of this video, a balding figure who looks like Billy Lovelady appears at the lower right of the screen facing the TSBD. He is wearing a checkered shirt buttoned to the collar. No tee shirt is visible. It is NOT the shirt that Doorman was wearing. Do you agree that it appears to be Lovelady?
X. It does appear to be Lovelady.
RC. If it is Lovelady, then his closed shirt proves that he cannot be Doorman.

18: In the Altgens6 photo, Doorman is wearing a long-sleeve shirt open to reveal his tee shirt. An FBI photo of Lovelady taken 2/29/64 shows him wearing a short-sleeve striped shirt that he supposedly wore on 11/22/63. Given the discrepancy, does the fact that Doorman is wearing a long-sleeve shirt seem odd to you?
X. Not enough visual evidence.
RC. That was not the question. I asked if it is ODD that the FBI claimed Lovelady wore a short-sleeve shirt and Altgens6 showed Doorman in a long-sleeve shirt.

19. Naysayers claim that Lovelady must be Doorman because no TSBD employee claimed to have seen Oswald out front. Since the FBI concluded within a few hours of the assassination that Oswald killed JFK, do you believe that the FBI/WC would inhibit witnesses from testifying that they saw Oswald in front, destroying their case?
X. What is the point of speculating in this way?
RC. It is reasonable to ask if testimony which completely exonerated Oswald would be allowed at the WC. If witnesses were inhibited from saying they saw LHO out front, then that is just additional proof the WC/FBI was determined to frame Oswald.

20: Lovelady and Frazier both testified multiple times that Lovelady was standing on the STEPS in front of Frazier who was standing on the TOP level (the first floor entrance to the TSBD). Since Doorman was standing on the TOP level, do you agree that their joint testimony is powerful evidence that Lovelady could not be Doorman?
X. Maybe they moved around?
RC. No. The Altgens6 photo was taken at 12:30 – the EXACT time of the shots.

My answers vs. those of Mr.X:
1. YES. Did not ask for proof, just opinion.
2. YES. The Altgens6 photo is included in the post.
3. YES. A photo,video or document that proved Oswald was innocent would have been altered,destroyed or hidden.
4. NO. Evades the question (any witness)
5. NO. Evades question
6. NO. Evades question
7. YES. Evades question.
8. YES. Not asking for proof, just opinion.
9. YES. Simple question.
10 NO. Evades the fact.
11.NO. Altgens6 is altered. You have the photo, not an example.
12.YES.The backyard photos are proven fakes.
13.YES. Evades the question.
14.YES. Evades. Of course it is possible.
15.NO. Evades: Do you believe Arnold was mistaken?
16.NO. Evades.The WC would not call her since it destroys their case.
17.YES. I agree. It does appear to be Lovelady in the video.
18 YES. Evades. Doorman was wearing a long-sleeve shirt.
19.YES. No speculation. What is your opinion?
20.YES. Evades the question which is about the Altgens6 photo.

– The Timing of the Encounter with Oswald
The FBI reported that Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald after she had left the TSBD. According to the first account, she had left the building by 12:15; according to the second, she left at 12:25. The first statement, which she was not given the opportunity to check, is likely to be less reliable than the second, which she was required to sign.
Both of Carolyn Arnold’s statements, but especially the second, corroborate the accounts of two employees, James “Junior” Jarman and Harold Norman, who indirectly attested to Oswald’s presence on the first floor at “between 12:20 and 12:25,” in Jarman’s words (see Lee Harvey Oswald’s alibi).

The Earliest Report of Oswald’s Alibi
Two FBI agents, James Hosty and James Bookhout, attended Fritz’s first interview with Oswald. They wrote a joint report on 23 November, from notes taken on the 22nd which no longer exist:
OSWALD stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunch room; however he went to the second floor where the Coca–Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca–Cola for his lunch. OSWALD claimed to be on the first floor when President JOHN F. KENNEDY passed this building. … he then went home by bus and changed his clothes.(WR, p.613)
Hosty’s and Bookhout’s joint account of the first–day interview is the earliest surviving account of Oswald’s alibi. It implies this sequence of actions:
At “approximately noon” Oswald ate his lunch in the domino room on the first floor.
He then went up to the second floor, where he bought a Coke from the vending machine in the lunch room.
Finally, he went downstairs and was on the first floor when JFK came past.

The Second FBI Version of Oswald’s Alibi
The earliest report contains no mention of Oswald being stopped by a police officer, as Fritz would later report. Once Oswald was dead, however, Bookhout alone wrote a new account of the first–day interview, which did include an encounter with a policeman:
OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca–cola from the soft-drink machine, at which time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there. MR. TRULY was present and verified that he was an employee and the police officer thereafter left the room and continued through the building. OSWALD stated that he took this Coke down to the first floor and stood around and had lunch in the employees’ lunch room. He thereafter went outside and stood around for five or ten minutes with foreman BILL SHELLEY, and thereafter went home.(WR, p.619)

This version omits Oswald’s claim to have been on the first floor at the time of the assassination. Two events which had originally been reported to have occurred before the shooting, Oswald’s purchase of a drink and his eating his lunch, now occur after the shooting:
Oswald bought a Coke in the second–floor lunch room.
Moments later, he encountered Roy Truly, the TSBD’s building supervisor, and Marrion Baker, the motorcycle policeman who ran into the TSBD within half a minute of the shooting. Oswald then went downstairs and ate his lunch in the first–floor domino room.

Finally, Oswald chatted with his foreman for a few minutes before going home.
The official account of Oswald’s activities has him leaving the TSBD at 12:33, just three minutes after the shooting (WR, p.156), which implies that at least one element of Bookhout’s revised account is incorrect. Oswald must have eaten his lunch before, not after, the assassination. Many accounts by TSBD employees mention that they stopped work and began their lunch break at about 11:45 or 11:50. Two of Oswald’s colleagues make it clear that Oswald did indeed eat his lunch before the assassination:

– Was ‘Prayer Man’ Lee Harvey Oswald?
Prayer Man’s location, at the top of the steps, suggests that he is unlikely to have been a passer–by. He is more likely to have been someone who worked inside the TSBD building, as were the fourteen witnesses known to have been standing in the doorway during the assassination. All of the TSBD’s white, male, manual workers, except for Oswald, were accounted for. A process of elimination indicates that Prayer Man may have been Oswald. Of the fourteen witnesses, seven women and two black men may be ruled out immediately. The remaining five white men may also be ruled out with varying degrees of certainty.

– Did Officer Baker and Roy Truly encounter Oswald on the 2nd floor?
Why didn’t the WC question Baker about the affidavit in which he stated that he saw a man who did not match Oswald’s appearance on the third or fourth floor walking away from the stairwell? There was no mention of encountering anyone in the 2nd floor lunchroom.
TSBD manager Roy Truly said the man worked at the TSBD. According to Occhus Campbell, Vice-President of the TSBD, Oswald was seen near a small storage room on the first floor shortly after the shooting.

– Look closely to see the difference in the figure in front from the original Altgens6 Oakland Tribune photo and the Groden version.

– Proof that the AP and the FBI were actively involved in altering the Altgens6 photo is revealed in this memo:

Note this GIF appeared in the original post:

– The shirt Oswald was wearing in police custody was open in a V to reveal his Tee shirt – just like that of Doorman in the Altgens 6 photo.


Posted by on April 5, 2015 in JFK


Tags: , , ,

To Believe Oswald was Not Standing in Front of the TSBD, You Must Believe that…

Richard Charnin
Updated June 13, 2015

Click Reclaiming Science:The JFK Conspiracy to look inside the book.

JFK Blog Posts
JFK Calc Spreadsheet Database
Tables and Graphs

To believe Oswald was not standing in front of the TSBD at 12:30pm, you must believe ALL of the following…

1- Oswald was on the 6th floor or somewhere else in the TSBD.
2- Oswald had no interest in viewing the motorcade.
3- Oswald lied to Det. Fritz when he said he was “out with Bill Shelley in front”.
4- Oswald ran from the 6th floor to the 2nd in 75-90 seconds  where he was confronted by DPD Marrion Baker and Roy Truly who said he was drinking a coke. (note: in their original testimony they made no mention of having seen Oswald).

5- Fritz’s Oswald interview notes were hidden until 1993 due to poor record-keeping.
6- Fritz’s notes were not revealed by the Warren Commission due to administrative oversight.

7- Since no one claimed to seeing Oswald in front, it proves he was not there.
8- The Warren Commission would have allowed testimony that Oswald was in front.
9- The goal of the Commission was to get at the truth, not convict Oswald.

10- Faces in the Altgens6 photo were accidentally blotted out during photo processing.

11- Judyth Baker’s pixelation analysis of Doorman’s shirt which proved that Lovelady was not Doorman is junk science.

12- Lovelady lied to the Warren Commission when he said that he sat down to eat lunch on the STEPS in FRONT of Shelley.

13- Buelle Frazier lied on five occasions from 1963-86 when he said Lovelady was standing a few steps BELOW him:
1) Nov.22,1963 to the Dallas PD,
2) 1964 at the Warren Commission,
3) 1969 at the Garrison/Shaw trial,
4) 1978 at the HSCA,
5) 1986 at the Oswald Mock trial.

14- Warren Commission lawyer Ball asking Lovelady to point a BLACK arrow to himself in the BLACK area of Altgens6 is not suspicious.

15- Doorman “looks like Lovelady”, therefore it must be him.
16- If Doorman’s shirt did match Oswald’s, it was just a coincidence.
17- Just because Doorman wore Oswald’s shirt does not prove  he was Oswald.
18- If Doorman’s open shirt did not match Lovelady’s short-sleeved striped or long-sleeve plaid shirt, it does not disprove that Lovelady was Doorman.
19- Lovelady was mistaken when he stated to the FBI that he wore a vertically striped shirt which did not match Doorman’s shirt.
20- Oswald cannot be Doorman since it was decided long ago that Lovelady was Doorman.

21- Carolyn Arnold was mistaken in claiming she saw Oswald on the first floor of the TSBD at 12:25.

22- The Altgens6 photo and Zapruder film were not altered and the photos of Oswald standing in the backyard were not fakes.

23- The visible portion of the cutout’s face does not match Lovelady…

24- There is no evidence that Officer Baker and Roy Truly lied about encountering Oswald on the 2nd floor.

25. There was not enough time to alter Altgens6.

1 Comment

Posted by on July 14, 2014 in JFK


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Richard Charnin's Blog

JFK Conspiracy and Systemic Election Fraud Analysis