HomeSubscribe Live FeedJFK Research Photo GalleryStoreJFK Youtube ChannelArticlesSearchLinksNotepadLoginRegister
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 22, 2012, 08:22:18 AM
News:

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7
The Chin Issue  (Read 4107 times)

Super Member
*****

Posts: 8302


 To me this is the easiest way to show the BY photos are faked. The chin is simply NOT the chin LHO had.
Michael Griffith concisely writes about this issue. Here is what he said:

Quote on

------Lines in the Chin Area------

McCamy admitted that a line running across the chin was found on 133-A, as well as on 133-A, deMohrenschildt, and on 133-A, Stovall. This line is shown in Jack White's video FAKE. It is a nearly straight line. It begins on one side of the neck, crosses the chin, and ends on the other side of the neck.

McCamy declared, without any qualification, that this line was caused by a water spot. However, Mr. Mee and other professional photographers with whom I consulted told me that it would be unusual for the edge of a water spot to form a nearly straight line. Mr. Mee noted other problems with McCamy's explanation of the tell-tale line.

AND:

------Explaining the Conflicting Chins------

Now we come to the crucial issue of the chin seen in the backyard photos. As is well known, Oswald had a sharply pointed, cleft chin. This can be seen in any of the undisputed pictures of him (se, for example, Robert Groden, THE KILLING OF A PRESIDENT, pp. 102, 107, 108, 130, 141, 165, 171; hereafter cited as TKOAP). But the chin of the figure in the backyard photos has a square, flat chin. (I might add that in the TKOAP pictures, Oswald's chin is pointed and cleft even when his mouth is in varying positions.)

Mr. McCamy claimed that in some photos of Oswald in his younger years, his chin was "more rounded and didn't seem to show this cleft as much." First of all, the appearance of Oswald's chin as a youth is irrelevant, since the backyard photos supposedly show him as an adult.

Putting that fact aside, and just for the record, however, I dispute McCamy's assertion. I would direct the reader's attention to pp. 188 and 190 of British scholar Matthew Smith's book JFK: THE SECOND PLOT. Page 188 shows a picture of Oswald in the Civil Air Patrol, i.e., when he was about 15 years old. In this photo his chin is just as pointed and cleft as it is in later pictures of him. (This same snapshot can be seen on page 130 of TKOAP, although it is much larger in Smith's book.) Page 190 (of Smith's book) shows a picture of Oswald when he was in school, either junior high or high school. Here, too, his chin is clearly pointed and cleft.

The pictures McCamy displayed of the younger Oswald which supposedly showed a more rounded chin with less cleft were so unconvincing that Congressman Fithian said, "I did not visually at least identify any other chin that was even approximately as square as the one in the backyard photograph--from all of the pictures that you put up."
Mr. McCamy's only remaining argument was that the point of the chin in the backyard photos allegedly disappeared in the shadow of the chin. "It just disappears in the shadow," he said. McCamy's "best evidence" to support this claim was a police photograph of Oswald showing a PROFILE view, i.e., a picture that was taken of him FROM THE SIDE. McCamy admitted, grudgingly and obliquely, that none of the frontal shots of Oswald's head supported his theory. But, said McCamy, in the police profile shot, . . . there is apparently a rather wide, broad, flat area here. If
this were illuminated from above, you can see that the shadow might very well be cast, even as high as this. It could be cast fairly high. If it were, then the apparent point that one sees in his EARLIER photographs would not show up. (emphasis added)

Putting aside the speculative nature of this claim, what did McCamy mean by "his EARLIER photographs"? Was he referring to the pictures of Oswald in his younger years? This seems to be the case. If so, what relevance do these photos have given the fact that the backyard snapshots supposedly show Oswald as an adult?

Frankly, I find it hard to take McCamy's waffling and theorizing seriously. Instead of credibly dealing with the numerous photos which show Oswald with a pointed, cleft chin, McCamy appealed to a lone profile picture and then offered an unlikely theory based on speculative assumptions. The plain, undeniable fact of the matter is that in every frontal picture of Oswald's face, his chin is clearly pointed and cleft.

Further confusing matters, McCamy cited the eye shadows to support his vanishing-chin-point theory. He said,
The eyes, for example, hardly show up on the backyard photographs because of this overhead illumination. But the eye shadows in the backyard photos surely were caused by sun light at around noon because they fall straight down into the eye sockets. I think McCamy realized this difficulty, for he continued as follows:

“Of course, the nose shadow is produced by that [i.e., the overhead illumination that caused the eye shadows], but the chin form is not delineated well on that picture at all because there is little or no light coming from the front.”

First of all, McCamy certainly had not proven that there was "little or no light coming from the front" in terms of the light hitting the face. There was plenty of light striking the face from the front, which is why the nose and eye shadows are readily visible and fall straight down in a twelve o'clock position. Second, the statement that
"the chin form is not delineated well" was merely McCamy's opinion. McCamy had no choice but to deny that the chin form was fully visible in the backyard photos, otherwise he would have had to admit that the chin in those pictures was not Oswald's.

It seems to me that the chin form is definitely visible in the DeM photo, and it is still square and flat, as it is in the other backyard pictures. Furthermore, in a reenactment photograph shown in Jack White's video FAKE, the chin form of the man is also visible. The man is standing in Oswald's backyard; he is striking a pose almost identical to that of the figure in the backyard snapshots; and the sun is at about a four o'clock position in relation to his body, thus causing the body shadows to fall at a ten o'clock slant, as in 133-A.

Yet, the man's chin form is visible.

Mr. Mee disputed McCamy's assertion that the chin form disappeared in shadow, pointing out that the sun was not in the necessary position to cause this alleged effect.

Quote off


-------------------------

-------------------------
A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy

"Benavides- Saw Oswald kill Tippit, picked him out of a lineup." - Brian "Doesn't Know His Rear From His Back" Walker

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 5244


I am the first to admit I am not too hot on the photographic side .Its not my eyesight thats fine .The last time I looked at a blowup of the BY pics I thought I could see a crop line running from the left forehead (Right as viewed) and stopping above the mouth .I do not consider these pictures important now as they served thier purpose the first time they were seen .some copies were  among the objects and evidence donated by the DPD recently. Including 1 with a cutout .These were ordered by Fritz to see if it was possible to fake photographs!? .I know this sounds a little wierd from a cop but thats the way it is.Honest


-------------------------

-------------------------
Some things we know we know,the rest we have to find out for ourselves

 One of the first things we found out was that the Warren Commission never pursued a conspiracy investigation.
Louis Stokes

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 8302


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am the first to admit I am not too hot on the photographic side .Its not my eyesight thats fine .The last time I looked at a blowup of the BY pics I thought I could see a crop line running from the left forehead (Right as viewed) and stopping above the mouth .I do not consider these pictures important now as they served thier purpose the first time they were seen .some copies were  among the objects and evidence donated by the DPD recently. Including 1 with a cutout .These were ordered by Fritz to see if it was possible to fake photographs!? .I know this sounds a little wierd from a cop but thats the way it is.Honest

They are really irrelevant to the bigger question Ian, which is, did LHO shoot JFK, JBC and JDT?  They have taken on a monumental importance to some in this case when they really are not relevant to the question I just asked.  EVEN IF he posed for them, and the evidence says no, so what?  Posing with a rifle and a pistol does NOT mean or equate to you shooting someone. 

To me their importance comes in for two reasons.  Firstly, they show a DIFFERENT 40" Carcano model type (based on the sling swivel mounts) than the one found in the TSBD!  The WC already had major problems linking LHO to a 40" Carcano order, receipt and ownership, and now they can't even show he was holding the SAME rifle if you believe they are authentic. 

Secondly, they show once again how flimsy the evidence in this case is as they fall apart upon examination!  There are about 20 reasons why the man in the photos is NOT LHO, but none gets to the point quicker than the chin issue.

LHO simply did NOT have a flat, squared chin! 


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Group: Administrator
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2094


The chin is not square. Simply filling in the shadows proves this.


-------------------------

-------------------------
An opinion based on something other than fact, is an opinion based on ignorance.
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 8302


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The chin is not square. Simply filling in the shadows proves this.


Duncan, LHO had a CLEFT CHIN, and no matter how much you "fill it in" you will not get a cleft chin in those photos.

The chin in those photos is SQUARED AND FLAT!  It is simply NOT LHO's chin.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The chin is not square. Simply filling in the shadows proves this.


Duncan, LHO had a CLEFT CHIN, and no matter how much you "fill it in" you will not get a cleft chin in those photos.

The chin in those photos is SQUARED AND FLAT!  It is simply NOT LHO's chin.

Duncan has altered an altered image.


-------------------------

-------------------------
Firework As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

God bless Emmett Till:
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Insipired by the Movie "Invictus" and Nelson Mandela.
What a poem!

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1374


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The chin is not square. Simply filling in the shadows proves this.


Duncan, LHO had a CLEFT CHIN, and no matter how much you "fill it in" you will not get a cleft chin in those photos.

The chin in those photos is SQUARED AND FLAT!  It is simply NOT LHO's chin.

Now do you know the chin as seen in the BY photos is NOT more sharply pointed?  Of course you CAN'T.  Here is a quick primer for you.  The photos were taken from a low camera angle...like WAIST LEVEL.  You are looking level to UPWARDs into the chin in the BY photos. Want to see it yourself?  Look at the corner of a table from above.  Notice the nice pointy corner.  Move so your eye is level with the corner...pointy all gone!


BTW, "waterspots" on film negatives can often be long "streaks".  A spot is not always a "spot"  How do I know?  I've processed more film in every variety and process from reels to deep tanks to roller transport and dip and dunk processors than I care to imagine.  And I've seen many "waterspots" that can produce what is seen in the backyard photos.

The BY photos are real, get over it.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The BY photos are real, get over it.

Don't get me wrong Craig.
I don't want to get in trouble with you again but you should respect my:

NO. Not real.

best

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 1374


Clearly you have an opinion, thats fine by me.  That does NOT mean I must respect that opinion nor believe it is true.  You can attempt to prove the photo has been faked, but your track record in that regard is a bit weak....

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The BY photos are real, get over it.

Don't get me wrong Craig.
I don't want to get in trouble with you again but you should respect my:

NO. Not real.

best

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2660


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Clearly you have an opinion, thats fine by me.  That does NOT mean I must respect that opinion nor believe it is true.  You can attempt to prove the photo has been faked, but your track record in that regard is a bit weak....

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The BY photos are real, get over it.

Don't get me wrong Craig.
I don't want to get in trouble with you again but you should respect my:

NO. Not real.

best

Martin

Thats fair play to me.

best to you

Martin


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Group: Administrator
Super Member
*****

Posts: 2094


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The chin is not square. Simply filling in the shadows proves this.


Duncan, LHO had a CLEFT CHIN, and no matter how much you "fill it in" you will not get a cleft chin in those photos.

The chin in those photos is SQUARED AND FLAT!  It is simply NOT LHO's chin.

Tell me this, Rob.
How did the forgers manage to forge the scratch marks which forensically tied the backyard photographs to Oswald's camera, to the exclusion of any other camera ever made since camera's were first manufactured?


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
Full Member
***

Posts: 123


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The chin is not square. Simply filling in the shadows proves this.


Duncan, LHO had a CLEFT CHIN, and no matter how much you "fill it in" you will not get a cleft chin in those photos.

The chin in those photos is SQUARED AND FLAT!  It is simply NOT LHO's chin.

Tell me this, Rob.
How did the forgers manage to forge the scratch marks which forensically tied the backyard photographs to Oswald's camera, to the exclusion of any other camera ever made since camera's were first manufactured?

I'll field that question.

Maybe the test of the photos did not exclude all other cameras but they threatened the testers to say it did, or else.  (We know where little Johnny goes to school...)

Do I believe that?  No.

But it's always easy to patch up conspiracy theories.  A little duct tape...


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Gallery

JFKForum.com

JFK Assassination Kennedy Assassination JFK Assassination Forum JFK Dealey Plaza Dallas November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines