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

I am very pleased that OIC Chairman Larry Rivera has been invited to speak at the JFK symposium in Kansas City, Missouri in April.

Of course, Larry will be showing his overlays of Oswald and Lovelady and Doorman to demonstrate that there is no doubt that Oswald was Doorman. When you consider how well the man matches Oswald and how well his clothes match what Oswald wore- the long-sleeved shirt that was sprawled open exposing the tattered white t-shirt with the stretched, sunken collar- there is no way he could not be Oswald. There is no way that Oswald and Lovelady looked that much alike and dressed that much alike. It really has reached the point of insanity for people not to admit that he was Oswald. 

And the government investigations? Don't you know that the key word there is "government"? The government killed Kennedy. So, how how could you expect them to honestly investigate Oswald? The government couldn't honestly investigate Oswald in 1963, not in the late 70s, and not in the 90s. They couldn't do it today in 2020. 

The Warren Commission dealt with it just by getting hand-picked employees to vouch that Doorman was Lovelady. Remember there were 75 employees, and any who were going to say that he was Oswald were not going to be paraded before the Warren Commission. Those witnesses were pre-screened. 

And some of them, Joseph Ball was very confident about. With Frazier and Arce, Ball pointed directly to Doorman and said, "Who's that?" SO, WHY DIDN'T HE DO THE SAME THING WITH LOVELADY? No, no, no. With Lovelady, he played games, and they were sly. He slyly asked Lovelady to draw an arrow to himself- in the black, using a black marker. It reminds me of the old joke about the painting of a black cat eating black caviar in a coal mine at midnight, and it's all black. Ball didn't trust Lovelady. Somebody must have warned him that Lovelady was playing hard to get, that he wasn't acting like a team player. And that's why Ball played it safe and asked Lovelady to respond non-verbally. And, he even gave him the same photo that Frazier had drawn his arrow on, so that Lovelady would know exactly what was expected of him. But Lovelady just plain didn't want to lie. So, he instead drew a very, very tiny arrow in the black to Black Hole Man, and we just got lucky that it overlapped the flesh color of the BH Man's arm. But who knows? Was it by accident or on purpose?

But, that black mark on his forearm is the only other artifact on that photo besides the arrow that Frazier drew to Doorman. 

And realize that Frazier is damaged goods. He really is. He was in bad shape mentally then, and it's only gotten worse. He doesn't have the capacity to distinguish between what really happened and what didn't. And he has never described the situation and arrangement of people in the doorway the same way twice.  He contradicted himself in his own testimony in 1964! 

And then the HSCA, oh God. First, they recruited Robert Groden to photographically prove that Doorman was Lovelady. They paid him, of course. And Groden failed to put a single image of Oswald next to Doorman. He failed to put a single image of Oswald anywhere. The closest he got to Oswald was Oswald's shirt, and even that wasn't accurate. He just used C.E. 150 which was not Oswald's shirt. 

That is not Oswald's shirt. For God's sake, Oswald's shirt did not have a stiff collar. It was all soft material. It was undoubtedly a Russian shirt. 

Oswald beat the sons of bitches just by getting dressed that morning. 

And then the anthropologists, the government anthropologists. First, they say that Doorman's image was too blurry to take measurements, then they waxed on and on about the differences between Oswald and Lovelady, and then they finished by saying that the preponderance of evidence favored Lovelady. 

You can plainly see that the man and the clothing are a match to Oswald. That's the same guy as certain as it is Jesus on the Cross. 

I tell you, it's the evil of it all that gets to me: the evil then, and the evil now. But, you give 'em hell, Larry.