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

Here's the latest, and I want to thank Bill Cole for pointing something out to me: There is no object behind the little girl. It's not a mailbox, as one man suggested, and it's not anything else. That blackness is just the pants of the man wearing the light blue shirt. It's easy to see once you get it in your mind. You can even see his belt buckle faintly- which Bill also pointed out. 

I could kick myself for not seeing it myself, but here's why I didn't:  It's because of how deep the black is. You really think the guy was wearing pants that black?  And that would photograph that black on a bright sunny day? Of course not. They photoshopped that blackness in. All of the rich, deep, colors we're seeing in this photograph were photoshopped in. They may have been enriched versions of the colors that they actually were, but not necessarily. For instance, I doubt the woman and girl both just happened to wear a solid pink. I doubt the little girl woke up that morning and said, "Mommy, let's you and me wear the same color today." That seems very unlikely. 

So, that black is just the guy's pants. But, what caused the black smear above his belt? I mean right over his blue shirt. It really doesn't look like a shadow, if you compare it to the real shadows. And what object could be casting a shadow there? That's another thing that threw me. I might have figured it out if not for that. And I'll point out that nobody else, until Bill Cole, saw it for what it is. 

So, now you know that they photoshopped like crazy the rich colors in this photo. But, what else did they do? They photoshopped the girl in there because there is no way the mother could be holding her with one arm (unless she's Superwoman) and furthermore, there is no way the little girl could sit up so straight and tall while danging in a woman's one arm. The girl has to be sitting on a firm, hard, solid, stable surface- somewhere.