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

I am applying to be a speaker at the CAPA JFK Conference in Dallas in November, and I have been asked to submit an abstract of my talk. This is it:

The Case for Oswald In The Doorway

By Ralph C. Cinque, founder and administrator of the Oswald Innocence Campaign

People the world over, upon seeing the Altgens Photo, honed in on “The Man in the Doorway” observing his striking resemblance to Lee Harvey Oswald, and even recognizing Oswald’s arrest shirt and the manner in which it was worn.  The FBI quickly announced that the Man in the Doorway was another TSBD employee, Billy Lovelady, who happened to look like Oswald (and apparently  he dressed like him too). But, the FBI did NOT release a photo of Lovelady, and Dallas Police quickly spread the word that photographing Lovelady was off limits.

On February 29, 1964, the FBI took images of Lovelady which they sent to the Warren Commission, but the WC did nothing with them. The world found out about them only because Harold Weisberg went through the WC “document pile.” Weisberg found that Lovelady did not look like Oswald, and he did not dress like him either. Around the same time, Mark Lane “stole” a photo of Lovelady in Dallas which also proved that he did not look like Oswald.  

And that launched the resistance to the official lie that the Man in the Doorway is not Oswald. He most certainly is.

Ralph Cinque’s talk would include the following elements:

1 photographic evidence: this is the most compelling and conclusive thing. Oswald’s person and clothing can easily be recognized on the Man in the Doorway, whereas, for Lovelady, the image that Mark Lane pirated is the only reliable image of him that we have, and it is no match to Doorman.  

2 photographic alteration: the people who decided to claim that Oswald was Lovelady knew that words would not be sufficient, that something had to be done to Doorman to “Lovelady-ify” him. So, working  off an image of Lovelady from the 1950s, they moved over the top of Lovelady’s head and installed it on Doorman who was Oswald. This will be demonstrated visually.

3 how the government handled the Doorman problem, starting with the Warren Commission and then moving on to the HSCA. Both investigations of this issue were corrupt.

4 the surfacing of the Fritz Notes in 1996 with “out with Billy Shelley in front”. So, Oswald told Fritz that he was out with Shelley in front, and it will be explained why he must have been talking about during the motorcade and not after it.

5 why for those who know that Oswald was not up on the 6^th floor shooting at JFK that the doorway was the ONLY place he could have been. Bullet-proof reasons will be given why Oswald could not have been in the 1^st or 2^nd floor lunch room during the shooting- or anywhere else.  

6 why those who wish to defend Oswald need to provide him an alibi, why it is crucial, and why it is the heart of his defense, and why the one and only correct alibi for him is that he was standing in the doorway of the Book Depository at the time of the shooting.