I have a physical copy of the book Assignment: Oswald by FBI Agent James Hosty. And I found the page in which he refers to FBI Agent James Bookhout. So, he said that when he got to the 3rd floor, that Bookhout was standing on some sort of pedestal, so that he could see above the crowd, in trying to find him.

I am going to post the excerpt from the book so that you can see it yourself like you were holding it in your hands. Would a six foot tall man even think about doing that? Consider how rare such a behavior is. I can't cite any other instance of anyone doing that anywhere, let alone in a police station. I take it is clear and solid evidence that Bookhout was short. And remember that the claim is that he was tall: six feet tall. A six foot tall man could just stand on his toes and get up to 6'2". He is not going to stand on any pedestal. And what was the pedestal? I have no idea. I would just be guessing.

So, I'm thinking that Bookhout stood in the doorway of the Homicide Bureau on some object he saw. He was facing the hallway. He did it to find Hosty. And he found him and guided him in. And soon thereafter, they entered Fritz's glass-walled office within the Homicide Bureau.

What I have been saying that Bookhout was short is the truth. The people claiming he was tall are ones who have been lying.

And my claim is based on much more than this. It's based on the fact that we found his high school photo, and he was the shortest guy in the ROTC lineup. It's based on the fact that Bookhout told the WC that he couldn't see JFK on Main Street because there were people in front of him. He didn't even bother to explain it because he was there and his shortness was evident. A tall person wouldn't say that, right? It's based on the fact that the Shooter standing admid the detectives is obviously short. It was taken on the 3rd floor a couple minutes after the shooting. It's weird because they were standing in the dark. The only light is the light from the flash on the NBC camera. So, why were they standing in the dark on the 3rd floor of the PD?

James Bookhout was the Garage Shooter of Oswald in the televised spectacle. I don't say he actually shot him. I think that was all theater. I think Oswald was shot afterwards, and I'm sure it wasn't by Bookhout. But, I am absolutely sure Bookhout knew of Oswald's fate. So yes, he was involved in killing him, even though he didn't pull the trigger.

 In case you don't know it, Prayer Man was nobody. He wasn't Oswald, and he wasn't anyone else. He didn't exist. He is a fiction. And I know why he was created. He was created to draw away from Oswald in the doorway; the Altgens doorway. It was an attempt to create noise and distraction; to create a decoy that would muddy the waters. I'll explain.

So, when the Jimmy Dorman film was handed over, there was something he captured at the beginning of it that was a threat to the official story. So, what they did was trim it out. And that was true for 28 years. It wasn't until 1991, with the release of Oliver Stone's JFK movie that the opening of the Dorman film was shown to the public for the first time, which means that they had 28 years to alter it.

Prayer Man is NOT in the Wiegman film. There is just a little bit of undisacernible contrast there- a very little bit.

So, the opening of the Dorman film, that was hidden away for 28 years, is the only thing that displays Prayer Man. However, the whole clip is preposterous. It's supposed to be just seconds after the shooting, and yet, there are all these strange people there whom we don't recognize. The quality of the clip is extremely poor. It is beyond blurry; it is freaky. Some of the figures are grotesque.

And it is supposed to be Officer Baker running to the steps, but it can't be him. That's because he parked his bike at the tip of the island, right next to the traffic light. He wasn't where that cop was.

Also, notice at the end of the clip that a man in a suit walks into frame, bottom right, who is very solid. He is visually more sharp and defined than the rest of the clip,. One researcher suggested that he was added to cover up the real Baker who was just pulling up at that time.

So, who are all those people?

So, there is your Prayer Man, with the big, wide body and tiny head. Who is that freak in the top center in the white pajamas? I don't know, but he isn't human. No human being stands like that or could stand like that. Who is the woman standing next to him with shoulders wider than a linebacker's. And there is a tall figure below Pajama Man who has no head. This is all freaky, fabricated stuff, and it took them 28 years to do it. I'm sure if they could have waited until today, they could have done a much better job. There is nothing real about any of this.

So, don't listen to the Prayermanites. They are an evil cult. Oswald was standing in the doorway, for sure, and it is him in the Altgens photo. Don't be misled by the evil Prayermanites.

 John Loftus

I believe you Ralph.

Why the Dallas police put a sack over the shooter’s head after the shooter dives into a crowd only makes sense if the shooter’s identity threatens an agreed outcome.

• 3h
• Reply

Ralph Cinque

John Loftus Thank you, John. I have posted your statement on my blog. I trust you don't mind.

 Gary Mayo

Dean Langridge I've studied every single image frame by frame from all cameras and film i could find on this shooting and I've gone into the rationale of someone doing a felony shooting, and police putting a garment oved the perpetrators head and leading him out of the area. Two things I've discovered, the ears, haircut, hairline, jawline and most importantly bald patch are not consistent with Ruby. Secondly, no other felony arrest in the history of law enforcement has ever taken place by putting fabric over the bad guys head and leading him off somewhere. Do i think Ruby shot Oswald? % NO!.

• 50m
• Reply
• Share

Ralph Cinque

Gary Mayo Gary, I thank you, and I hope you don't mind that I published your statement on my blog.

 This is a new collage of Ruby and the Garage Shooter. Ruby's image on the left was taken about 1 AM Saturday morning, so 34 hours before the Garage Spectacle. The image of the Shooter is from the Beers photo.

 They are plainly not the same man, and there are many things I can point to. Ruby, on the left, looks older. His skin is more leathery. The Shooter's face looks rounder and softer and pudgier, and his neck is shorter. Look at the top of his collar and notice how close it is to his hairline. It's very close to his hair. But, on Ruby, there is much more distance.

But now, do this. Since neither of them is alone, we can compare their heights to the other men near to them. In the shooter's case, you can see that he is much shorter than LC Graves and even Oswald. Compare the height of the Shooter's hat, which is an artificial elevation, to Graves. Even with the hat on, the Shooter is sunk way below Graves. And the Shooter is closer to the camera than Graves, which enlarges him.

Ruby's driver's license said 5'9". The Coroner said he was 5'8", but he measured him lying on his back after he was dead. So, he wasn't standing up straight, as people do when their height is taken. But, we could split the difference and say that he was 5' 8 1/2". And that's about how he looks. He blends in with the men beyond him. Some of them are taller, but not drastically. In the context of the other men, 5'8 1/2" looks just about right for Ruby. But, the Shooter, in the context of the men he was near, looks nowhere near 5' 8 1/2".

 Someone noticed that Ruby's shirt collar rose much higher above his jacket. It is quite a drastic difference.

Ruby's left ear looks about twice as big as the Shooter's.

The Shooter's hair in backlooks much thicker, and it looks matted. And, it looks like it could easily be a wig because you don't see any strands of hair growing out of his head. And he doesn't have any scruffy hair growth below. If you look at Ruby, it looks like he has beard on his face and also below his hairline in back because it's dark; mottled; and it has that scruffy look.

They are different men, and it's only because we are in JFK-land that some people won't admit it. Not only don't they look alike; they don't even look like they could be related.

Stop thinking that it is drastic and extreme to claim that Ruby wasn't the Shooter. It is drastic and extreme to claim that he was when he so obviously wasn't.

I don't expect those who support the official story to admit it, but if you already know that Oswald was innocent, then you have only a very small step to take to admit that Ruby was innocent too.