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

Patrick, the film was made for the same reason that the Gorilla Man film was made: to depict Lovelady in a plaid shirt, which he did not wear. Back in 1964, the FBI took pictures of Lovelady POSING AS DOORMAN in a short-sleeved, striped shirt. They also put in writing twice that he said he wore those clothes on 11/22/63. That's a lot to undo. Somebody must have realized that just declaring otherwise would not suffice, that they needed an image of Lovelady in a long-sleeved shirt. So, they got busy making one. 

Then came the late 1970s, and the Doorman controversy reared its ugly head again with the HSCA. That's when Brooten and Groden went to Colorado to talk to Lovelady. Groden took pictures of Lovelady, and Brooten interviewed him. An article about it was published nationwide which included an image of Groden and Lovelady but not Brooten. And in the text, Groden mentioned that there was a tape of Lovelady sitting in the squad room on 11/22 wearing a plaid shirt. So, Groden mentioned the tape- for the first time ever- but it was never mentioned or used by the HSCA. They never referred to it. They never included it in their analysis. 

I can't give you the actual date that it was done, but here is what I know happened: They (the FBI) decided that they were going to fabricate an image of Lovelady at the PD. So, they poured over all the footage to see where they could stick him, and the finally decided on that squad room. It's a real scene. It really happened. When they saw the desk, they decided to put Lovelady there.

So, they filmed their Lovelady figure sitting at a desk, and then reduced it to just him. Then they merged that into the original footage to make it look as though he was there. Video merging had been done for a long time, as early as 1945. 

That is from the movie Anchors Away which came out in 1945.

In the frame below, everyone is real except Lovelady. They implanted him in there. Doesn't it jump out at you?

 

All is wrong with this picture. His size is wrong. Lovelady is too small. They had to keep him small because that's all the room they had. The shadows are all wrong. He's ensconced in shadow, yet he's all light-up? What is casting the shadow on the shoulder of the big cop in back? Nothing. It's just part of the dark background to offset Lovelady. And his gaze is all wrong. He's not looking at Oswald. And in other frames his gaze is even further off. He's out of sync, and nobody in the scene syncs on him at all. Nobody looks at him. Nobody acts like they are aware that he is there. They aren't. 

So, that's the first version which was not recognized until the late 1970s. It's real footage from 11/22/63 but with a Lovelady figure implanted at the desk.  

But, the technology improved greatly after that and by the 21st century, the digital realm had turned image manipulation into pure wizardry. So, they redid it using this technology, and it does look much better photographically.

  

And I'm sure that at first they were very pleased with this guy they were using for Lovelady- until the realized that he was way too stocky and muscular to be someone who could be mistaken for Oswald. 



Remember the stories they told us, Patrick? That Lovelady's kids saw Oswald on tv and thought he was their daddy? Was that going to happen with these two guys? Was anyone going to mistake that behemoth guy for scrawny Oswald? 

So, they realized that they actually blew it and needed to slim that Lovelady down. So, they did, messing with the aspect ratio.



Patrick, the whole thing is a comedy of errors, a revolting, sickening, disgusting comedy of errors. I hope you realize it.