Then went outside to watch P. parade ( Parts 1 & 2 )

[Zeon Mason]

Well SOMEBODY noticed The Forearm With Bottle in Altgens 6 photo, otherwise that arm would have remained as seen in the 1st print version and never would there have been the 2nd print version with that arm and bottle Erased and replaced with some texture and pattern of Loveladys shirt to attempt fool the public.

AND IT WORKED for 50 years!

Until just very recently

Thanks to Mr. Fords almost accidental discovery of hitherto hidden in plain view image that even Walter Cronkite missed!

By the way, I DID find at least 4 newspaper front  page 1st print copy of Altgens photo that show this same anomaly of a forearm with bottle.

Just searching JFK assassination newspaper images.

Somebody else will have to post those images here on this forum, as I’m not really up to speed on how to use my phone

I

[Alan Ford]

Well SOMEBODY noticed The Forearm With Bottle in Altgens 6 photo, otherwise that arm would have remained as seen in the 1st print version and never would there have been the 2nd print version with that arm and bottle Erased and replaced with some texture and pattern of Loveladys shirt to attempt fool the public.

They noticed because Mr Oswald told Captain Fritz EXACTLY where he was when the shots rang out-------------including the detail that he was drinking the Coke.

[Alan Ford]

These two images are taken within seconds of one another------------

BELL FILM:


TOWNER FILM:


I believe the figure at the pink arrow in Towner is Mr Lovelady, at the yellow Prayer Man

[Walt Cakebread]

These two images are taken within seconds of one another------------

BELL FILM:


TOWNER FILM:


I believe the figure at the pink arrow in Towner is Mr Lovelady, at the yellow Prayer Man

Wow!!.....  Are you serious??   Do you believe that you can identify those blobs??

[John Iacoletti]

Do you know what Alan, I've had a good look into this and am unhappy to report that it doesn't look right.
I have to agree with you - it can't be a shadow from the corner of the wall being cast on Lovelady.
Go figure

Finally!

[John Iacoletti]

It may be time to start a Jack Nessan's fabrications thread.

He radically changed his story in this final interview. He abandoned the idea he ate lunch with or near the coworkers. He admitted to being on the upper floors during the assassination based on his continuing to work until he came downstairs because of th commotion and encountered Baker in the 2nd floor lunchroom.

Bull.  Not even Holmes in his ridiculously vague account says anything about upper floors.

You are right, unbelievable, he was offered an attorney and to have him present when interviewed and continued on talking anyway.

Bull.  There's no evidence that Oswald was offered an attorney for the interrogations.  On the contrary, Oswald complained on camera about not being allowed legal representation.

Holmes clearly states he has no knowledge of the interior of the TSBD. He also states the encounter with Baker took place by the Coke Machine.

Bull.  Holmes said nothing about the encounter with Baker taking place by the Coke Machine.

[Dan O'meara]

Finally!

Alan had been going on about the Wiegman shadow because, as he explains it, the film had been tampered with to disguise the fact Lovelady was wearing a long-sleeved shirt. Why did this need disguising? Because, according to Alan, the Altgens 6 pic he posted below shows Oswald's arm holding a bottle of coke:



For many reasons I wasn't going anywhere near this but I note, in your role as self-appointed, self-anointed fact-checker, you didn't have a word to say about this lunacy, revealing (as if it needed revealing) your stinking bias and hypocrisy.
To me it looked like the shadow of the wall was being cast on Lovelady, no mystery, and Alan's explanation was beyond bizarre so I wasn't getting drawn into that particular fantasy.
But Alan wouldn't let it go so I checked it out just to shut him up and came across this Allen pic:



The officer on the left on the top step with the white, rounded helmet is stood approximately where I imagined Lovelady to be.
He is clearly in sunlight with no shadow from the wall being cast on him.
I realised I was wrong and, not being a coward or a hypocrite, immediately posted Alan to tell him I'd checked it out and that I agreed something was weird about the Wiegman pic.

You have felt it necessary to post one of your snide remarks even though I have done what anyone researching this case should do - discover something that contradicts their belief then change that belief accordingly (like that happens a lot around here).

Get back under your stone.

[John Iacoletti]

For many reasons I wasn't going anywhere near this but I note, in your role as self-appointed, self-anointed fact-checker, you didn't have a word to say about this lunacy, revealing (as if it needed revealing) your stinking bias and hypocrisy.

Maybe because "lunacy" isn't defined as "Dan O'Meara disagrees".

To me it looked like the shadow of the wall was being cast on Lovelady, no mystery, and Alan's explanation was beyond bizarre so I wasn't getting drawn into that particular fantasy.

Well then you weren't paying much attention, because he asked you repeatedly to account for how that wall could cast a shadow on that spot.  Hence my observation of "finally".  Maybe you're too busy posturing to bother to try to absorb what it is you're responding to.