I have to admit that this is painful because this guy is so fucking stupid. He's Backes-stupid. That's how stupid he is.
He posted this image of the Wiegman doorway.
So, Kamp claims that Lovelady is #2, which I told you is a bogus image. He claims that #3 is Shelley, and who knows what that's based on. Shelley wore a coat and tie, so how could that be Shelley? And, Kamp claims that that faint blur below the #1 is Oswald. Now, what is the photographic reason why Oswald, if standing there, wouldn't be captured and imaged as substantially and visibly as the others? And Kamp, if you need some technobabble to help explain it, check with Backes.
Then, Kamp proceeds to try to discredit Lovelady by pointing out contradictions in his various statements. But, some of what he refers to are accounts of what he said by others, like an FBI agent. They aren't his direct statements, and they are not signed statements. And, I am not going to wade through it all because it has no bearing on Baker. That's what we are talking about: whether Baker had an encounter with Oswald on the 2nd floor.
Then, Kamp makes a big deal out of the fact that Truly was willing to lead the way up the stairs "into the line of fire." Huh. Truly knew there wasn't going to be any more fire. Again: you can't equate or even compare Truly to Baker. It's like comparing apples and oranges, although in this case, the apple was poisoned (Truly).
Kamp, focus your feeble mind:
Baker, good; Truly, bad.
Baker, good: Truly, bad.
Baker, good; Truly bad.
Baker, good: Truly, bad.
Baker, good; Truly bad.
Then, Kamp reports on a couple of newspapers that had Truly saying that Baker led the way up the stairs. Kamp: that's just what some newspapers published. Newspapers gets things wrong all the time, you dumb pluck.
Next, Kamp gets to the discrepancy in Baker's original statement that the encounter happened on the 3rd or 4th floor, not the 2nd floor. Everybody and his brother knows about that, and it is a genuine discrepancy. However, Baker did go up a flight of steps to get to the entrance, and then there were two flights to get to the 2nd floor (meaning that there was a landing in-between) so that's 3 flights right there. This is a genuine discrepancy, and I don't mean to dismiss or make light of it. But, it takes more than this to assign malfeasance to Baker.
And what is the implication of it? That Baker did encounter someone on the 3rd or 4th floor but that Truly tapped him on the shoulder and said, "Let's say it was Oswald, and it happened on the 2nd floor." Is that it? Well, I would sooner believe that he just made a mistake than believe that.
And be keenly aware of this: Baker's testimony is EXTREMELY exonerating of Oswald because Baker said he saw Oswald moving through the vestibule and into the lunch room, and it's something he could only have seen if Oswald came from the office side. If Oswald had gone through the door through which Baker was looking (through the glass window) then that door would not have been closed. It would have been in operation. It would have been swinging. But, it was not. It was indeed closed. Oswald was not using it. He hadn't used it. Oswald was using the door on the other side.
So, there's Baker, in the stairwell. He is able to see Oswald but only because his door is closed. Oswald is moving through the anteroom at the time, going from the office area into the lunch room. The optics and the mechanics of this wouldn't work if Oswald had entered through the same door through which Baker was looking. So, this testimony of Baker's gets Oswald off the hook; it vindicates him. So, how could Baker be a conspirator?
Oh, this is painful to read; that fucking Kamp is such a moron. He goes on to bungle what Oswald said. What Oswald said was that he was out with Bill Shelley in front during the shooting, and all the contrary statements of investigators are lies. Fritz lied by saying that Oswald said he was eating lunch with other employees during the shooting- although those very employees were up on the 5th floor watching the motorcade during the shooting. Hosty and Bookhout said that Oswald said he was on the first floor during the shooting, but who would use the whole first floor of a building as big as a city block as his alibi? Wouldn't he narrow it down more than that? It would be evasive to just say you were on the first floor. These people, all 3 of them, heard Oswald say he was out with Bill Shelley in front, and they knew what it meant, but they didn't want to admit it. They did not want to enter Oswald's alibi into evidence. So, they lied. Bookhout twisted it around, making it that Oswald was out front with Shelley when he left for home, but that is impossible since Shelley wasn't out there then. Kamp is such a fucking parser, and he's no damn good at it. He can't separate the wheat from the chaff. He's the last person who should be deciphering testimonies.
Note that even the WC admitted that Oswald took the front stairs down. But, what they failed to admit is that he was just backtracking, reversing his steps; itt's how he got up there.
Then, I have to laugh. Kamp the scamp makes a big deal over whether Oswald had a Coke in his hand when Baker and Truly saw him, but since he denies that the encounter even happened, what difference does it make? According to Kamp, they we were never there at all. So, how can you have a Coke or not have a Coke in an event that didn't happen?
Oswald did NOT have a Coke when Baker and Truly saw him. Baker and Truly both said so. And if people would just think, they would realize that it has to be true because Baker saw Oswald before he even went into the lunch room; when he was still in the vestibule. So, Oswald could not possibly have gotten a Coke yet. And, he certainly could not have gotten it in the few seconds it took Baker to get in there and bring him into view again. When Baker saw him, Oswald was walking through the lunch room and wasn't even headed toward the Coke machine. He had no Coke in his hand, and he didn't even have change out. There is no question that Oswald's encounter with Truly and Baker was Coke-free.
But, Kamp goes on at length about it, even though he thinks the whole event didn't take place. He's a guy with a lot of time on his hands.
Then, he addresses the known discrepancy in Baker's description of Oswald's clothes versus Mrs. Reid, with Baker saying that Oswald wore a light brown jacket (note that others also described Oswald's arrest shirt as a jacket) while Mrs. Reid said that he wore only a white t-shirt.
This is another genuine discrepancy, and I don't have an answer to it. I could speculate as to how the discrepancy came about, but I won't bother since it would only be a speculation. Sometimes you just have to live with a discrepancy, leave a question mark there, and move on.
Finally, and after endless parsing of the testimonies, over and over, Kamp and his cohort Stan Dane get to their alternate theory of Oswald's movements. You know that they are both Prayermanites and think that Oswald was eating his cheese sandwich in the doorway as Prayer Man during the shooting, which is ridiculous.
Why anyone would think that person on the left was Oswald is a mystery to me. Look at the girth. What size trousers are we looking at there? Kamp admits that Oswald weighed only 131 pounds which is pretty damn skinny for 5'9". I weigh 5 pounds more than that, and I'm only 5'6", and I'm lean. So, how could Oswald be that massive person? It's insane.
And let's focus on something else: we know Oswald was in the doorway at 12:30, and we know he left the doorway right away, and not just right away, but before the thing was over. He must have. And that's because if he stayed there, then surely he would have been seen. Didn't people start going in afterwards? Isn't that what we see in the Darnell clip? It's very probable that Bill Shelley instructed him to go to the lunch room, and it was right around the time of the fatal head shot: meaning, before it was over. We know there was a commotion in that doorway. Something must have happened to cause Dave Wiegman to do his second pan of the doorway. He either heard something or he saw something through the corner of his eye, or both. And that's why he did the second pan. And by the time his camera got there, Oswald was gone, and that's why they put that second Doorman in there and blurred everyone else to smithereens.
Tell me, how did Carl Jones, Popeye, and the Doorman come out relatively clear, but the people next to Doorman completely and totally jumbled? What is the photographic reason for that? And again, Kamp, if you need some help with technobabble, Joseph Backes is your man.
Call this Part 4.