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

I confirmed with the Physics Professor that a spherical object, like a motorcycle helmet, will always appear round in a photo, no matter what direction you are viewing it from. So, this flat-top look of Hargis' helmet is a physical impossibility.

What happened is that somebody went over that with some color; someone who was not a good artist. 

Now, a good artist can draw a perfect circle unaided; I've seen them do it. But, a bad artist can't. In this case, somebody was slopping on white color, and sloppy is how it came out.

And you can't blame the thumbprint, which could not possibly disturb a dry, fixed, stable photo. And what substance was on his thumb that should leave a mark like that? The whole idea of the accidental  thumbprint is preposterous. What, an "oops" moment? Stop the foolishness. 

You know I don't believe in coincidences when it comes to the JFK assassination. Guess how I feel about accidents?  

I think they really tried to bolster that helmet of Hargis to overcome the loss of visibility from the thumbprint and also to discourage anyone from looking for another helmet, Martin's helmet. That helmet does draw your attention, and it drowns out any thought of any other helmet. 

That helmet really acts like a vortex in the area of the thumbprint, and that's exactly what they wanted: that one and only helmet.

Notice that Hargis' helmet doesn't even look photographic, like Cheney's. Instead, it looks like art. But, Jiminy Christmas, they could have at least gotten a decent artist to do it, someone who could handle making a circle without giving it a flat-top. The thing is ridiculous. It is screaming out loud fraud.