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

Glenn V.

8:34 PM (33 minutes ago)

- show quoted text -

You talk a lot of what would and would not have been evident for Oswald to
do. Unfortunately, your selectiveness and bias causes you miss the most
obvious answers. I've many times stated the below myself, but I think it's
appropriate to let your former chairman do it for me this time. Here's
Professor Norwood:

(2) EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY: In the Warren Commission hearings, seven
witnesses identified Billy Lovelady as the man in the doorway. (I am not
including William Shelley's ambivalent testimony.) Were all seven
witnesses who identified Lovelady guilty of perjury? Were they all
mistaken in their recall? Were they all coerced into giving false
testimony? After fifty years, not a single one of these eyewitnesses ever
recanted his/her testimony. The weight of the evidence here is on the side
of the eyewitnesses who identified Lovelady in the doorway.

(3) OSWALD'S OWN WORDS: Oswald himself had ample opportunities from Friday
evening through Sunday morning to proclaim his innocence by simply stating
that he was standing in front of the building observing the passing of the
motorcade. Oswald was captured on camera in an agitated state, crying out,
"I'm just a patsy" or "I emphatically deny these charges." But he never
proclaimed, "I was standing in front of the building at the time of the
shooting." One reporter pointedly asked Oswald the question, "Were you in
the building at the time?" It was at that moment, more than any other,
that Oswald should have answered loudly and clearly that he was standing
out front, if that is where he was at 12:30pm on November 22. Instead,
Oswald clearly informed the reporter that he was inside the building. The
weight of the evidence here is on the word of Oswald himself, who stated
publicly that he was in the building and not standing on the steps
outside."

As any student of the assassination knows, this thoroughly demolishes your
fantasies, Cinque. Until you provide the necessary evidence to support
your claims.

And this will never happen, will it? 

Ralph Cinque

Don't claim 7 unless you name 7. 

And don't claim Billy Lovelady at all because he never claimed to be Doorman. And he wasn't even asked. He was only asked to draw an arrow to himself on the photo, and he drew it to Black Hole Man.

There is only ONE arrow pointing to Doorman, and that's the one drawn by Frazier. Ipso facto, Lovelady MUST have drawn his arrow elsewhere. And he did, to Black Hole Man, the only other mark on the photo.

But, you are free to look for another one if you are so inclined. It's only been 52 years. See if you can find Lovelady's arrow elsewhere. 

Now, I'll tell you what happened. There were 70 employees, and they sought and found a few who would say that Doorman was Lovelady. IT WAS ALL PRE-SCREENED. They only included those who were willing to say "Lovelady". It was a show trial, a Stalinist show trial.

But, you are not thinking straight. It doesn't even matter what anybody said. And that's because: WE HAVE THE IMAGE IN QUESTION; WE HAVE IMAGES OF OSWALD AND LOVELADY; SO WE CAN SEE FOR OURSELVES. 

What the Hell is wrong with you? Are you such a second-hander that you have to depend on somebody else to tell you who is in a photo? You don't trust your own eyes? You don't trust your own mind? 

We can look for ourselves, and when we do, we see very clearly that it is Lee Harvey Oswald in the Altgens photo.

And the only words of Oswald's that you need to be quoting are: "I was out with Bill Shelley in front. How could he even know that Shelley was out there unless he saw him there himself? HE CITED SOMEONE WHO WAS THERE, and he was right about the person he cited. And that's because he sighted him. 

Parsing Oswald's words to the reporter isn't going to help you. If you've been in the back of that doorway where he was, and I have, you know that it's like a cave. Oswald was surrounded by the building on 5 sides: left, right, up, back, and below. Only the front was open. He wasn't on the street. He was within the confines of the building. He had no reason to distinguish it to that reporter, and that's because he didn't know about the existence of the photo and his presence in it. But, when he was alone with police, he told them that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front.

Out with Bill Shelley in front. Discovered in 1996, it is the biggest discovery of evidence in the JFK assassination since 1963. 

Viklund, your case is not just weak; it is non-existent. You have nothing. Oswald was innocent. He would have been found innocent in a court of law. And that is exactly why they had to kill him.