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

Richard Hooke claims that he has correlated Altgens' Black Tie Man with a figure from the Wiegman film, proving that he's real. But, I say that you have to be very careful about making these correlations, and in this case, Richard is wrong. They are not the same man. Consider:

First, the Altgens photo coincides very well with the start of the Wiegman film, so for all practical purposes, they were taken at the same time. 

So, how could the same man be facing in different directions at the same time? In Altgens, Black Tie Man is facing east; he is turned a full 90 degrees away from Oswald. But, the figure in Wiegman whom Richard says corresponds to Oswald, is facing exactly the same as Oswald. How can he be the same man if he is turned differently at the same time?

Second, the man in Wiegman does not appear to be wearing a tie, whereas in Altgens, the guy is named after his tie. How can a man be wearing a tie and not wearing a tie at the same time? 

Third, how can the Wiegman figure be the same man if he's in a different location? In Altgens, Black Tie Man, is right on top of Oswald. In fact, he is  merged with him, where the photographic overlap depicts a physical impossibility. Yet, in Wiegman, the same guy is far away from him? If you think the positions of the two cameramen accounts for it, you would be wrong. It doesn't work. If Black Tie Man got shifted over by the angular effect (parallax), why only him? Why not the others as well.

Richard is wrong. They are not the same man, and Black Tie Man in the Altgens photo was not there at all. He was implanted into the photo.