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

Very weak post from bpete who, in vain, tried to defend the legitimacy of Doorman in the Altgens photo. bpete claims that his shoulder isn't compromised, but it is! And here is the best demonstration of it

:
Look at the slope of his shoulders. That is extreme. YET, HIS HEAD/NECK ARE NEUTRAL! They're not leaning at all. That's impossible! You lean with your spine, not your shoulders. Your shoulders just go along for the ride.

You couldn't duplicate what he seems to be doing there, and nobody can. Above, the woman is leaning but her head and neck are leaning also; it's a package deal.

Besides, we know for a fact that Doorman wasn't leaning at all. He was standing straight. We can see that in the Wiegman film.

That's Oswald at about the same time at Altgens, within 2 seconds of Altgens, and he was standing straight.
So, bpete is being ridiculous, and his ignorance of human bio-mechanics is glaring. He even speculates that Doorman may be "holding the door handle of the glass door with his left hand as he either comes through the door or went to go back inside and turned around at the sound of rifle fire."  Pure bull shit, bpete. Doorman is just standing there clasping his hands.

Then bpete cites this image of Gus Rose, but his shoulder ares even; they're not inclined. It's just that his trapezius muscle is hunched up on one side. That's just a muscular thing. And it's very slight compared to what we see on Doorman.

 Next, we get to Doorman's shirt, and bpete quoted several times in the distant past in which I described Doorman's shirt as "plaid." Well, that was a mistake. The most you can say about Doorman's shirt is that in some versions it looks "varied.". Plaid is a very specific thing: it refers to horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes. It is a rectangular pattern. It is geometric. But, even in the most distorted, hazy versions of Doorman, his shirt never looks plaid. It just looks splotchy.

What you see above is as "plaid" as Dooman's shirt ever looked, which is to say, not plaid at all. And the splotchyness you see there is mostly haze and distortion. Is there any reason to think that Lovelady's shirt on the right would come through for Altgens as what we see on the left? I'm afraid not. I stood in that doorway wearing a plaid shirt and was photographed exactly as Oswald was- with Tri-X film from the same position and the same conditions. 

The rectangularity of the plaid came though, even on Tri-X film. Plaid looked plaid! You see horizontal and vertical lines crossing. bpete is mentally obtuse, so let's try some repetition.

bpete: to be plaid, it has to show horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes
bpete: to be plaid, it has to show horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes
bpete: to be plaid, it has to show horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes
bpete: to be plaid, it has to show horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes
bpete: to be plaid, it has to show horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes
bpete: to be plaid, it has to show horizontal and vertical lines crossing forming boxes

Now, I hope that bpete never again describes Doorman's shirt as plaid because he has been sufficiently informed. I was mistaken for saying it back in the early days. But, we learn; we grow; we move on. Isn't it true of all of us?

Finally, bpete laments the fact that there were no witnesses citing Oswald in the doorway. But, the Warren Commission inquiry was a show trial, and they never would have allowed such a witness. Are we to believe that if someone had said it was Oswald in the doorway that they simply would have put it into the Warren Report? As I have said before, if anyone tried to say that, you can be sure they were visited by big tall men in dark suits and sunglasses, who spoke in low, gruff voices, and who told them that they saw no such thing and they had better not say it again if they value their life- and that of their loved ones. Even Buell Frazier admitted that he was threatened and his family was threatened.

So, it means absolutely nothing that no such witnesses were recorded. There was no chance they would have allowed it. But, there was one witness who said Oswald was outside, and that was Oswald. He told Captain Fritz that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front." How could he have known Shelley was there unless he was there himself? Even if you just took for granted that Shelley was outside, we are only talking about the doorway. So, how did he know that Shelley was in the doorway as opposed to being elsewhere outside?

And he could not have meant after the assassination because Shelley left right away with Lovelady for the railroad tracks (before Baker climbed the steps), and then they re-entered through the back door and were in the building for a long time doing various things. So, when Oswald departed for home at 12:37 or whenever, Shelley was DEFINITELY not out in front, and Oswald could not have meant seeing him then. Oswald could only have meant that he was out with Bill Shelley in front DURING the assassination and perhaps a few minutes before.

Another colossal failure for bpete! But at least, he's back on point and discussing the JFK case instead of obsessing about my personal life.