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

Someone suggested getting a photo expert to analyze the Jackson photo for alterations, but this is naivete. They won't do it. It's like touching the third rail. It would destroy their careers. You can't criticize political photos without personal ruin and destruction- if you're a professional. Your profession would be over.

But, fortunately, it only takes common sense; just average intelligence; nothing more to see that the Jackson photo was altered.

First, Oswald did NOT slap his arm to his chest after being shot. You hear me? He did not. And nobody would. You don't slap your arm to your chest upon being shot. Nobody does. Nobody ever has. Nobody ever would. This is childish. This is stupid. It is ridiculous.

What that is is two arms that were added to the photo. 

It's two hands laced together, as in prayer. 

Why did they do it? They did it because Oswald wasn't shot, and they needed to cover up the area of impact to account for the absence of blood and trauma. That's why they did it.

I've already pointed out that the thumb atop Bookhout's clenched left fist is fake. It was added on. His real thumb is tucked underneath.

The whole left forearm of Jim Leavelle is fake. Where's the elbow in it? You think it's straight? Then the arm would be longer. And the entire arm would be straight, when it's not. It's a fake appendage added on, including the wax hand.

Oswald's jutting right hand is fake too. The thumb is on backwards.

The thumb there is on backwards. The nail shouldn't be showing. We should be seeing the pad of the thumb. When you turn your hand out, the thumb goes out with it. And look at that ridiculous porcelain handcuff. It was a standard metal handcuff. It certainly didn't look like that. Was Oswald wearing handcuffs at all? 

Now, listen, Robert Jackson, because I am talking to you. I'm not asking you to confirm that it's altered. I don't need you for that. I know it was altered. What I need from you is to know when it was altered. Did they have a photo altering team at the Dallas Times Herald that altered it? OR is your story about developing the film yourself a lie? I already know that you lied about having your foot up on the bumper of the car when you took the picture because the car was moving. 

The car was moving before the shot, during the shot, and after the shot. So, how can someone have his foot up on the bumper of a moving car?

Now listen, Robert. I know you are used to being coddled as the award winning photo boy, but to me you're just the photo-mole of the Fascist State, and you've lied for them. But, life doesn't go on forever. Nobody's does. Before life ends, don't you think there needs to be truth? So, I want you to level up about that photo and what was done to do it. Who did it and when was it done? That it is a photographic monstrosity is not in doubt. That's established. Your photo is a lie, Robert. It is a hoax. Oswald was NOT shot in that garage. It was all an act. Oswald was shot later. 

This involves some very bad people, Robert- people that you have supported and lied for. It's time for you to do the right thing and tell the truth. Yes, they have rewarded you handsomely for being their photo mole. But, you can't take it with you, Robert. And it's all blood money anyway. Speak the truth for once: When was your photo altered, and who altered it? Clear the air. For the sake of John Kennedy. For the sake of Lee Oswald. And for the sake of Jack Ruby. They are all grievously wronged men, and you've been part of wronging them.