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

Someone sent me this copy of the Moorman photo claiming that it's the original without the thumbprint. But look close; the thumbprint is still there.

And this damn thing is ridiculous. Look how they darkened the hillside across the street. It's not like that in the other. And remember that what you are seeing below is digital copy of Mary's own possession. So this is the gold standard for everything except the thumbprint. There is nothing that trumps this. 

Look at the other again:

So, we know that that dark hillside is bull shit. I have another copy of the "original" which isn't like that. 

This one obviously has the thumbprint too; it's just that it's faint. But, take a good look at it, and then look again at the other, because that one still has it too:

Note that it's cropped, but if you look closely, you can see the white graininess around Hargis' helmet which is the remnant of the thumbprint. Thumbprint. Thumbprint. Thumbprint. 

And how could these two vastly different versions both be "originals"? It's not as though they had any trouble in the 1960s making authentic and accurate photographic copies. Look at Mary's again, the one in her possession:

So, that tells you how light the background was, the hillside across the street. So, why would it look like this in the UPI photo?

It's all flim-flam. You are no more going to find the original Moorman photo than you are going to find the original Altgens photo. When they substituted a photo of the Babushka Lady's for Mary's they must have destroyed her original. The alternative would have been to store it somewhere in a safe and guard it round the clock for eternity. 

It's all lies. Mary's original photo is gone with the wind. It is never coming back.