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

 It's amazing the power of the individual to topple the lies of the Leviathan State. And I am thinking right now of two individuals who worked independently at different times and from different continents.

It started about 10 years ago when Gerda Dunkel started promulgating her discovering of Shelley and Lovelady walking to the railway yard, as they both said they did immediately after the shooting. Nobody has ever disputed that it's them. If you're going to dispute it, you've got to claim that there was another pair of guys who looked just like them. And if so, then, where were they? Shouldn't there be two sets?

The evil Praymanites actually tried to change Lovelady's shirt. The image on the left below is the orignal image that Gerda Dunkel circulated. The image on the right is what the evil Prayermanites did to it, trying to convert it from short-sleeved striped to long-sleeved plaid. And since Gerda's discovery proved that Lovelady wore the short-sleeved striped shirt, as he told the FBI, and they put in writing, twice, and then photographed him in the shirt, making him unbutton it like Doorman. there can be no doubt that he professed to wearing that shirt on 11/22.

But then, there is Roger Scott Cathey in 2023, following on Gerda's work, with the disovery that Wesley Frazier wore a short-sleeved pink and white shirt on his shoot day in Four Days in November. Now, why is that so important? If Gerda's discovery proves that Lovelady wore the short-sleeved shirt (and it does) what does Roger's discovery add to it? What it does is show that they, the authorities, knew that Lovelady wore the short-sleeved shirt. It shows their guilt. The pink in that shirt is like blood- the blood of John Kennedy and Lee Oswald.

Remember, I'm a filmmaker, and that was a film. Frazier was an actor in that film. He was playing himself, but still, he was acting. And actors don't decide what to wear. Costuming is a separate department in filmmaking. It couldn't have been Frazier's idea to wear that shirt. And let's face it: it's an unsual shirt to wear. To me, it looks like the uniform of a guy scooping ice cream at the ice cream parlor. You don't really think that Frazier wore that shirt under his Future Farmer's of America jacket on 11/22, do you?

So, the fact that they had him wear that shirt for that film tells you that they were aware that Lovelady wore such a shirt, and they wanted to confuse the issue; muddy the waters. And that confirms that Lovelady really did wear it. Now, anyone who wants to reject this analysis needs to realize something: that if you reject it, that there is only one place for you to land, and that is on the coincidence space. And we're talking about a very unlikely coincidence. As I said, it isn't common for men to wear such a shirt. I've lived 72 years, and I've never owned such a shirt. So, for both Lovelady and Frazier to have such a shirt in their possession would stand out as a coincidence. But, for Frazier to actually wear it for that film? I suspect he had only one day of shooting. So, of all the days and all the shirts, he just happened to wear that one on that day and for that purpose? We're supposed to accept that coincidence?

So, what Roger did is show us that the authorities knew very well that Lovelady wore a short-sleeved red and white shirt on 11/22/63. It was the lawyer Jones Harris who wrote the article that was published in the New York Herald Tribune on March 24, 1964 claiming that Oswald was the man in the doorway. And it created quite a stir. Amazingly, he's still alive. I have spoken to him on the phone several times- at length- for over an hour. And he told him that when he interviewed Lovelady outside the TSBD in May 1964 (and he said they wouldn't let him go inside; they sent Lovelady outside to talk to him) that he brought up the controversy over which shirt he wore on 11/22/63, and he wanted to know, once and for all, which shirt was it? Do you know what Lovelady told him? Jones told me that Lovelady hesitated. It was obvious that he was calculating. And then he said, "Both." Both? Is it necessary for me to point out that that can't possibly be true? That nobody would wear both a short-sleeved striped shirt and a long-sleeved plaid shirt?

Poor Billy Lovelady. They paid him. They made him wealthy. But, what a miserable rotten life. And in the end, chances are great that they killed him. He died of a "heart attack" at age 41. Now, I realize that it's possible. BUT, IT JUST HAPPENED TO HAPPEN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THE HSCA FINAL REPORT WAS COMING OUT? That puts us back in Coincidence Land. And remember that they were so concerned about Lovelady and his hapless ability to tell this lie, and the danger that he posed just because he was so non-credible when it came to walking the walk and talking the talk, that the top attorney for the HSCA resigned to represent Lovelady. Ken Brooten was his name. And do you know the main thing that Ken had to do? It was to keep researchers and journalists away from Lovelady. And after Lovelady's death, Brooten said that what killed him was researchers and journalists hounding him for interviews.

Here's to Gerda Dunkel and Roger Scott Cathey, two regular people who took down a State lie with nothing but sharp intellect and utter determination.