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

This is the one and only image of  Lovelady that I know of that they could have used to fashion Doorman's hairline, so let's see what we can figure out about it. 

First of all, how old is he in the picture? He looks quite boyish to me. If he's a man, he is a young man. The oldest he could be, in my opinion, is 21. Some have said that it looks like a high school prom picture, which would make him younger, although we know it wasn't that because Billy didn't graduate from high school. Others have called it his wedding picture, but I have reservations about that. Lovelady married a woman with two kids, and he looks awfully young there to be entering into step-fatherhood. Are you seeing step-father there? Besides, who takes a picture of a groom holding a coffee cup at his wedding?  A champagne glass I could understand, but not a coffee cup. But then again, he is wearing a corsage. So, could he be an usher at someone else's wedding? 

In any case, if he's 21 in the above picture, it would mean that it was taken in 1958. The HSCA said it was from 1959, but they didn't explain where they got the picture or anything else about the picture. I say it was probably 1957 or 1958.

The image was not sent to the Warren Commission, but the odds are great that it was in a file somewhere, perhaps an FBI file. It seems unlikely that the HSCA dug it up from scratch in the late 1970s. Why would they be interested in a photo from the 1950s? 

Joseph Backes claims that the HSCA got it from Mrs. Lovelady after asking her for photos of him, but there isn't the slightest scintilla of evidence for that. He pulled that claim from out his ass. 

The match to Doorman's hairline is spot-on. Even if it was from 1959 (and I dispute it) what are the odds that Lovelady's hair would be exactly the same 4 years later, not just in the amount of recession but in the length, cut, and style of the hair? 

Lovelady was a rapidly balding young man, and even over 4 years, there would have been some differences. Besides, we have the Mark Lane picture of Lovelady from the winter of 1964, and we can see that Lovelady was majorly bald by then. 

So, the hairline match between Young Lovelady and Doorman is spot-on, but it is also impossible. Hence, it must be fake. It must be fabricated. Besides, it's TOO good. Under no circumstances would the hair look exactly the same over a 4 or more year time span. Even if there was no significant balding that took place- and there was- change in length, change in style, and even differences due to the wind would cause it to look different. This is just too damn good. I'm not buying it, and neither should you.

 And notice that their right ears don't match. You want to see them up closer?

Loveland had this big lobule which Oswald didn't have. His whole ear was larger and longer than Oswald's too. But, the match to Oswald's ear is spot-on. It really syncs. 

So, we know that Young Lovelady wasn't Doorman, yet, for some reason, the hairlines do match. I have to assume the reason is subterfuge and falsification. 

But, it would be nice if we knew more about the origin of that picture of Young Lovelady. It would also be nice to know why the HSCA favored it over the FBI image, which I believe was also altered to make it a trifecta of matching hairlines. And finally, why did the HSCA publish a flipped image of Young Lovelady?