What an appalling and despicable lie to claim that Harold Weisberg repudiated Oswald in the doorway.
What if you tried to tell that to Professor Gerald McKnight? What do you think he would say?
Harold Weisberg was a man of integrity. If he realized, late in life, when he was close to death, that he had been all wrong about Oswald in the doorway, surely he would have published and broadcast that as widely as possible because the truth is all he cared about.
Do you really think he would have left the world with a piece of unfinished business like that? What, do you think Harold Weisberg was of the same dark soul as Joseph Backes?
Harold Weisberg never repudiated Oswald in the doorway, not to anyone, including himself. He said it didn't matter even if Gorilla Man was Lovelady, he still wasn't Doorman because his shirt was not the same as Doorman's and it wasn't arranged the same as Doorman's.
It's obvious to anyone who looks that they are not the same man, and they are not the same clothes. Look at the collar and the little furl beneath it on Doorman. Gorilla Man's shirt wasn't configured like that. You can just look at his left collar, which is visible to us, and assume that his right collar was exactly the same. It didn't look anything like Doorman's.
The truth is that Harold Weisberg never published anything for mass consumption that endorsed Gorilla Man as Lovelady. His whole attitude was, "Even if that guy was Lovelady, he still wasn't Doorman; there is no way he could have been Doorman."
If I had gotten involved before he died, I would have gone to Harold Weisberg. I would have gone to him in person. I would have showed him Lovelady's testimony in which he said that he left the front of the building almost immediately with Bill Shelley to look around the railway yard, and they returned by way of the back of the building, never returning to the front. That's in plain English. Therefore, there is NO WAY that Gorilla Man could be Lovelady.
Then, I would have showed him the collage of Gorilla Man and Lovelady, which shows how disparate and dissimilar they were physically and anatomically.
Then, I would have discussed with him the origin of the clip, that it didn't surface until 1966, and it was in response to HIM. They concocted the thing to counter him. I would have pointed out that they claim it was from the Martin film but it has never been seen in any version of the intact Martin film, but only as a separate clip, and that qualitatively, it is polar-opposite to the Martin film.
I would have shown him all that and more, and I am positive that I would convinced him that the Gorilla Man clip is a fabrication; it is a hoax; and the target of the hoax was him.