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

Notice below what Richard Charnin says: "What the fuck?" That's in response to bpete's claim that the Altgens Woman and the Towner Woman are dressed the same. 

I'm engaged in a debate with bpete over this collage. He claims that this is the same woman at the same time in the same place holding the same child, and I disagree. I know Richard Hooke agrees with him, but I would like to know what others think.

Please, as you look at it, consider only the images and nothing else. Don't go by any letters or any references or anything else. Just what you see.

Here are the distinctions that I see, and I'll number them:

1. On the left, a 3 year old boy; on the right, 1 year old baby
2. On the left, the woman has a white scarf gong down her chest; on the right, the woman has on a black slinky dress, and all we see is the dress and her skin.
3. On the left, the woman has tall her from brushing it up and back; on the right, the woman appears to have bangs coming down.
4. On the left, no visible sign of hair over the woman's shoulder; on the right, her hair is flowing down over her shoulders.
5. On the left, the woman appears to be next to and very close to the boy, but each are rising up vertically; on the right, the baby is being held to the woman's chest where it's face is perched above her shoulder.
6. The 3 year old boy on the left has got a spike or cone to his hat that rises up as a distinct element. On the 1 year old, that element is absent.
7. On the left, the boy is looking in the same direction as the woman. On the right, the baby is looking essentially opposite to the mother- if it is looking at all.
8. There is a discernible collar and sleeve and form to the jacket the boy is wearing. There is no form, no distinctive features, to the white wrap that the baby is wearing.
9. There is no sign that the Altgens woman on the left is holding the boy, meaning that we can't see any evidence of her doing it, such as an arm going around him. Some infer that she is holding him just because they can see how elevated he is. But that is only a presumption and unjustified in my opinion, for several reasons. On the right, it may seem like the woman is holding the baby with her left arm, but she is not. In the movie, that arm can be seen waving at the President throughout. Therefore, we are stuck with the conclusion that she is holding that baby with her right arm alone, though we can't see it. In any case, the Altgens woman is definitely not holding the boy the same way; we would see her arm going around him if she were since his back is visible to us.
10. The utter helplessness of the Towner baby in the arms of the Towner woman is very apparent in sharp contrast to the utter independence of the boy in the Altgens photo, where the difference in autonomy is very great.

For these and other reasons, I maintain the impossibility of the Altgens Woman and Boy being equated with the Towner Woman and Baby. But, I want to know what others think.

Like ·  · Share · Stop Notifications · 5 hours ago

• Seen by 9
• 

  Richard Charnin I agree. Especially POINT #2 wtf? Can we get a sharper Towner?

  about an hour ago · Edited · Like
• 

  Ralph Cinque No, Richard, in fact, that one is unusually good. In all of the online versions of the Towner film, you hardly see her at all. You have no idea how bad it is. Try this one at the 9 second mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuHV7KFbIB8

The Towner Woman and Baby weren't even there. They were made up, fabricated.