Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 1230999 times)

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1848 on: May 27, 2019, 02:44:51 AM »
I am amending the "facts" stated from one or more posters on this thread. I may be wrong myself but these are the "facts" as I understand them:

1. Billy Lovelady's  1964 FBI statements. There is nothing stated that Lovelady was "against the west wall" nor anything describing  where Sarah Stanton was standing exactly relative to Lovelady.
2. In Lovelady WC testimony, he does not locate Sarah Stanton other than with himself and Bill Shelley as a general statement.
3. The woman seen running up simultaneously to the front TSBD entrance steps, in the Darnell film, just as Baker is also approaching steps, and Roy Truly can be seen turning around, that woman is most likely Gloria Cavalry. It is uncertain if she reaches steps before Baker does, or Baker reaches steps before she does, as the camera pans away before either B or C get there.
4. The Altgens no.6 photo is taken at Z255 after 2 shots supposedly have been fired, but not yet the 3rd shot, so it is improbable imo  that Gloria Cavalry could be on the steps in that photo either. The logic being, that its not very likely that Cavalry would start running towards the TSBD at the first shot fired, since virually NO ONE recognized that as shot fired, or even that JFK was hit.

 It is unclear (imo) where exactly BW Frazier is, and where Sarah Stanton is, in the Altgens no.6 photo. If Bill Shelly is seen, but not BW Frazier, how is this possible if Bill Shelly were standing on the EAST side of the center handrail? Yet Bill Shelly seems to be in front of BWF. Frasier is in total shadow in this photo?

1) BillyLoveladyImage appears to be on the west side of the stairway center hand-rail in WiegmanFilm, DarnellFilm, and Altgens6Photo.
2) That to me indicates that if near SarahStantonImage, most likely both would be west of said hand-rail.

3) There is a separate thread that is dedicated to the Image identification of The Real Gloria Calvery. However, GloriaCalveryImage had time to reach, and appears to have reached the stairway in DarnellFilm, likely about 20 seconds after the last shot and just ahead of DPD Officer MarrionBaker.
4) There is nothing to indicate GloriaCalveryImage has left her Motorcade viewing place on the Elm St curb/sidewalk at the time of Altgens6Photo and just before the last shot. CameramanDarnell was in the 3rd CameraCar, and had just turned off Main St to Houston St when the shooting began, and with OfficerBaker along side/slightly ahead of said CC at that time.

The landing OccupantImages on the east side of the rail would likely be visible in Altgens6Photo, but mostly hidden on the west side, i.e BuellFrazierImage and SarahStantonImage.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2019, 05:01:26 PM by Larry Trotter »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1849 on: May 27, 2019, 11:34:36 AM »
That's it then, lock it down, it's over and as we'd want to be consistant, any talk of Lee's guilt, which Buell himself has serious doubts about, just show 'em this.

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1850 on: May 27, 2019, 12:05:41 PM »
Hughes and Lovelady in harmony, take a long hard look at his position pls Brian.

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2692
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1851 on: May 27, 2019, 12:06:55 PM »
Frazier is addressing the whole room, not just one person.

Like myself, Brian has noticed that Frazier's eyes, as well as his head, move to the right in synchronisation with the "We looked at one another" part of his statement.

The video quality of this section is better than the quality of this gif.



Duncan,

The man who asked the question that Frazier was addressing was sitting on the right side of the room, from Frazier's POV.

If you actually watch the part of the 48-minute and 53-second youtube video in which that man is asking that question, and how Frazier looks at him a few times in exactly the same direction while answering his question, you'll realize that Frazier doesn't "motion" with his head or eyes as you and Brian claim.

-- MWT  ;)
« Last Edit: May 27, 2019, 12:18:16 PM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1852 on: May 27, 2019, 12:30:55 PM »
Duncan,

The man who asked the question that Frazier was addressing was sitting on the right side of the room, from Frazier's POV.

If you actually watch the part of the 48-minute and 53-second youtube video in which that man is asking that question, and how Frazier looks at him a few times in exactly the same direction while answering his question, you'll realize that Frazier doesn't "motion" with his head or eyes as you and Brian claim.

I disagree, the body language is completely different.

Frazier makes an unconscious and extremely short but noticeable visual pause when unconsciously visually describing his head and eyes motions turns towards Sarah Stanton.

Offline Duncan MacRae

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
    • JFK Assassination Photographs
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1853 on: May 27, 2019, 09:09:46 PM »
Just for the record, I was not banned from The Education Forum.  Thumb1:

Offline Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2692
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #1854 on: May 28, 2019, 03:57:56 AM »
Mike,

I posted:


Brian,

You always seem to shoot yourself in the foot.

I wasn't banned from the EF because I was claiming that Prayer Person couldn't be Oswald, but because Mikey had baited me with three successive, short, non-contributing, asinine posts on a thread (after Kathy Beckett had sternly warned both of us in PMs to behave ourselves while was on her away-from-Internet vacation in Europe), waited for me to "rise" to said insults and to post something sarcastic in reply, and then, like a rat, very quickly deleted his offending posts so that Beckett wouldn't see them when she "checked in," but would see my outrageous reply, instead.

-- MWT  ;)




You replied:

That is fantasy,  Thomasitayuritovich. While you allowed yourself, and still do, the freedom to post, ad nauseam, your Bagley/spy wars plug, you completely lost your cookies when I set-out to begin answering (yes, ad-nauseum) them with my Howard Olson document which, as John Newman messaged me, served the purpose of “spiking Pete’s career”. Pete is Pete Bagley, for clarity.

That’s it. You made the rest of that up.



Mike,

You don't remember the three, consecutive, short, inane, "covering," non-contributing-to-the-thread posts you made on May 20, 2017, on page 1 of my new thread "For Chris Newton, Larry Hancock, Tracy Parnell and Other Critically-Minded Members" ???

Here's a screen shot of the pertinent part of that page, with your comments highlighted in bold text:



Michael Clark
Super Member
Michael Clark
Members
4,268 posts
Gender:Male
Posted May 20, 2017 (edited)
Deleted unnecessarily abrasive post.
Edited May 21, 2017 by Michael Clark

Michael Clark
Super Member
Michael Clark
Members
4,268 posts
Gender:Male
Posted May 20, 2017 (edited)
Deleted
Edited May 21, 2017 by Michael Clark

Michael Clark
Super Member
Michael Clark
Members
4,268 posts
Gender:Male
Posted May 20, 2017 (edited)
Unnecessary, OT post
Edited May 21, 2017 by Michael Clark
« Last Edit: May 28, 2019, 07:51:58 AM by Thomas Graves »