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

This very clear version of the doorway, which was done by the HSCA, was put up by Robin Unger. And, it's really got me thinking about that Woman and Boy.

She absolutely cannot be holding him. She would have to be doing it with ONE ARM. And, he is not leaning towards her the slightest bit. That means that his weight is falling straight down to the ground below him and not into her. And that would mean that it's all falling upon her outstretched arm, that she is holding up all that weight with just one arm. And, she's doing it with the greatest of ease. She would have to be Superwoman. 

These days, I spend a lot of time with my baby grandson. He's 6 months old now, and he's growing like a weed. He's more than doubled his birth weight. He weighs about 20 pounds. And, I know what it's like to hold him and carry him. But, that Altgens boy has got to be twice that weight. 

Keep in mind that there are two separate and distinct operations. One is the act of lifting a child, and the other is the process of holding the child. The difference involves the element of time. Lifting the child is just a momentary thing, and assuming that you're fresh when you do it, meaning unfatigued, it may be quite easy for you. But, once you get the child up and now you're just holding him or her, now the element of muscle fatigue sets in. With each passing second, that child gets heavier and heavier. Not really of course, it's weight as a gravitational force is the same. But because your muscles are getting fatigued, the child feels heavier. It's as though it's weight increases with each passing second.  

This was a situation in which they were watching a motorcade, and they were undoubtedly settled in to watch it. She didn't just pick him up for a momentary thing; rather, it was an ongoing thing. And there is no reason to think that she had just picked him up because Kennedy's limo was already down the hill. So, they'd been doing it a while. And with each passing second, the weight of that boy would have been bearing down on her arm. Yet, she is smiling!

This is insane! There is no bio-mechanical adjustment there by which she could be holding him. There is no piling of his weight on top of hers, which is how it is done. There is no sign of him getting support from her and leaning towards his source of support. They are both perfectly vertical. There is no chance that she is holding him. Therefore, how can he be so elevated as for his head to be higher than hers? He wasn't on stilts, and there was nothing there for him to be standing on. 

Many years ago, I used to do ergonomic consulting to small companies concerning lifting on the job, and I would give presentations to their workers about how to lift, etc. So, I know about the bio-mechanics that are involved, and I am telling that that woman was NOT holding that boy. He is independent of her. 

They were put into that photograph, and it was for the purpose of obscuring the man behind them, who was Jack Ruby. And, he had his back to us: he was facing Oswald. That's right: the President of the United States was driving by, and this guy was facing the other way. How would that have looked? They had to cover that up, and that's why the Woman and Boy were put into that photo. 

Fortunately, I am not the only one who recognizes this. There are others online who have pointed it out, including a guy who made a Youtube video about it. It is bogus. The Altgens Woman and Boy are not legit. And the man behind them had to be Jack Ruby.