Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

One major difference between Joseph Backes and Robert Groden is that Groden admits that there was photographic alteration in the JFK assassination- he admits to quite a lot of it- whereas Backes says that there was none, that every image is lily white, as pure as the driven snow. 

For instance, in his published comments to the HSCA, Groden said that "the Backyard photos are beyond question fakes." And: "the only item added was the head of LHO from the middle of the chin up." 

Of course, that is what Jack White said, and Robert Groden did credit White. 

Groden also said that "the Moorman pictures as they exist now are fakes. MM took 3 consecutive photos, and the first and third show retouching." 

And regarding the autopsy photos, Groden said: "my visual inspection of the autopsy photos reveal forgeries of 4 of them." 

Groden even went on the describe, in detail, the alteration method used known as "soft edge matte insertion." 

Whether Groden is right in any of his technical explanations, I can't say. But, it says a lot that he is willing to admit that there was widespread photographic alteration in the JFK assassination.

Of course, Groden's blather about the Doorman issue is and was complete utter nonsense. He kept referring to Lovelady in the Martin film without even considering whether the guy was really Lovelady. He doesn't look like Lovelady. And he was there at a time when Lovelady said he was elsewhere- having left the entrance immediately with Shelley to join the throng of people that descended on the railroad tracks. And then, returning, they went around to the back to re-enter, never returning to the front at all. The fact is that Lovelady could not have been there at the time Gorilla Man was there. 

Likewise, Groden's claim of recognizing Lovelady in the Hughes film entails the same objections. There, the figure is seen way at the east edge of the doorway- which is a place that Lovelady never claimed to be.  And, he has the appearance of being a much older and much smaller man than Lovelady. And the idea that we can just assume that he is the same figure as the Doorway Man in the Altgens photo is ridiculous. 

As I have explained, the Lovelady figure in the Hughes film undergoes a weird transformation, an image convulsion. It happens when he first appears and lasts for a couple seconds before his image settles down, and it's because he is an unstable image from having been inserted into the film. On the right below is how he looks during this convulsive stage. In the center is him after his image stabilizes. And then on the left is the Altgens Doorman.

     
The guy on the right is simply a freak- a photographic freak. The guy in the middle is OK, but what does he have to do with the guy on the left? How can you just assume that the guy in the middle is the guy on the left? Why would anyone make that assumption? 

But, I digress because the main point is: if they altered the Moorman photos and the Backyard photos and the autopsy photos, as Robert Groden alleges they did, then NO PHOTO in the JFK assassination can be considered sacrosanct.  If they had the intent to alter images, they would not have stopped at those three. 

I like, many people, maintain that the Altgens photo was altered and severely so. The Altgens doorway is a veritable freak show. You've got the weird fusion between Doorman and Black Tie Man, the headlessness of Black Hole Man, the weird white blob over the face of Obfuscated Man, who is standing there with both arms crossing his chest, the huge hair extension on Big Afro Hair Woman, the insertion of the face of Roy Lewis in profile which was stolen from the Willis frame, and the implantation of the Woman and Child which was done to obscure the face of Fedora Man and what he was doing, which was staring at Oswald. That's seven alterations associated just with the doorway, and again, it is a freakin' freak show. 

The bottom line is that Robert Groden sold out to the HSCA over the Doorman issue, but at least he did acknowledge widespread photographic alteration in the JFK assassination. However, Joseph Backes defends EVERY image in the JFK assassination- every last one. And that places Backes much further down in the spectrum of the bloodied than Groden, although from a practical point of view, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them, both of them being traitors- traitors to Kennedy, traitors to Oswald, and traitors to the cause of JFK truth.