Author Topic: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?  (Read 3843 times)

Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #10 on: November 19, 2021, 10:36:29 PM »
Did you read her HSCA testimony. She said she took two photographs but she wasn't sure how many. They showed
her the third photograph, and she just shrugged. Yeah, ok..I must have taken three.

fred

Youíre correct. She said she took two but also inaccurately described how to use the Imperial Reflex camera (it operates differently than most cameras).

My broader point stands. Marina changed her stories too many times to be considered a good witness.

She even said at one point that she didnít know Lee owned a rifle until they moved to New Orleans, which contradicted her later testimony about the backyard photos and the Gen. Walker incident.

She was a bad liar or had a poor memory but either way, she wasnít a great witness.

« Last Edit: November 19, 2021, 10:37:25 PM by Jon Banks »

Offline David Von Pein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 236
« Last Edit: November 19, 2021, 11:27:36 PM by David Von Pein »

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1753
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #12 on: November 20, 2021, 08:14:46 AM »
A few notes on the Backyard photos:

- There are visible differences between the rifle in the BYP and the Sixth Floor rifle.

- The Sixth floor rifle appears to be a different Carcano model than the one Oswald allegedly ordered.

- Marina says she didn't take the photos fwiw. I've long held that Marina isn't a credible witness due to her willingness to lie and misremember stuff but LN'ers almost always cherry-pick the testimony from Marina that supports their narrative while downplaying her credibility problems.

- I have no idea what to think of the rifle and backyard photo controversies. It isn't the most important issue in my opinion. It's just one of many weird things in the Kennedy assassination investigations.

"There are visible differences between the rifle in the BYP and the Sixth Floor rifle."

I wasn't aware of this.
If true, it is tremendously important.
What are the "visible differences"?

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1006
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2021, 04:42:16 PM »
The photos are very incriminating for Oswald regardless of who took them.

It seems to me that the questions about the discrepancies with the Carcano rifle are the bigger concern.
I'll defer to the photographic experts who used technical methods to examine the photos over our - yours or mine or anyone's - eyeball interpretation. Wouldn't you?

Jon, you don't really think your judgment is superior to what the photographic experts did? Yes, maybe they are wrong - appeal to authority and all. But just saying your view is superior to theirs isn't persuasive.

And to clarify: their conclusion was, if I recall (too lazy to check right now) that it was "probably" the same rifle not that it definitely was.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2021, 05:21:17 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1006
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2021, 04:45:22 PM »
Youíre correct. She said she took two but also inaccurately described how to use the Imperial Reflex camera (it operates differently than most cameras).

My broader point stands. Marina changed her stories too many times to be considered a good witness.

She even said at one point that she didnít know Lee owned a rifle until they moved to New Orleans, which contradicted her later testimony about the backyard photos and the Gen. Walker incident.

She was a bad liar or had a poor memory but either way, she wasnít a great witness.
But no one is relying solely on her account. There's physical evidence as well. The camera "signature", the negative, the handwriting on the back, the DeMohrenschildts presented one of the photos, et cetera. Look at the totality of evidence.

This is a classic example of, I think, bad and wrongheaded conspiracy thinking: it "looks" funny therefore it's suspicious and is evidence of something conspiratorial or sinister.

Oswald did everything he could to distance himself from that rifle. He told the police he never owned one while in the US (except perhaps for a .22), he said he didn't live on Neely Street where the photos were taken, he said the photos were faked, he said he didn't know anyone by the name of Hidell, he said he didn't bring a large package to work with him that day. It's another long list of evidence pointing towards his guilt.

Yes, this is what the interrogators said he said. So they lied? He did own a rifle? He did use the Hidell name? He did bring a large package with him? In either case, this is damning evidence.

« Last Edit: November 20, 2021, 04:57:09 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5439
  • 'Pristine'..yeah, sure
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2021, 05:02:47 PM »
But no one is relying solely on her account. There's physical evidence as well. The camera "signature", the negative, the handwriting on the back, the DeMohrenschildts presented one of the photos, et cetera. Look at the totality of evidence.

This is a classic example of, I think, bad and wrongheaded conspiracy thinking: it "looks" funny therefore it's suspicious and is evidence of something conspiratorial or sinister.

Experts do not exist to CTethists

Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2021, 08:52:48 PM »
I'll defer to the photographic experts who used technical methods to examine the photos over our - yours or mine or anyone's - eyeball interpretation. Wouldn't you?

Jon, you don't really think your judgment is superior to what the photographic experts did? Yes, maybe they are wrong - appeal to authority and all. But just saying your view is superior to theirs isn't persuasive.

And to clarify: their conclusion was, if I recall (too lazy to check right now) that it was "probably" the same rifle not that it definitely was.

Iím not arguing that the BYP are fake so no, Iím not questioning the expertsí view that the photos are authentic.

On the rifle in the BYP, the loop for the rifle strap is on the bottom of the rifle while the rifle found on the Sixth floor of the Book Depository had loops/straps on the side. Iíll post a photo later if I can find comparisons.

The remaining controversy regarding the BYP is, who took the pictures if not Marina? She has given very inconsistent testimony on the photos which suggests that either she lied about taking the pictures or she has a very poor memory.

« Last Edit: November 20, 2021, 09:09:45 PM by Jon Banks »

Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2021, 09:08:49 PM »
But no one is relying solely on her account. There's physical evidence as well. The camera "signature", the negative, the handwriting on the back, the DeMohrenschildts presented one of the photos, et cetera. Look at the totality of evidence.

This is a classic example of, I think, bad and wrongheaded conspiracy thinking: it "looks" funny therefore it's suspicious and is evidence of something conspiratorial or sinister.

Neither I nor the experts in the film, "JFK Revisited", argue that the Backyard photos are faked. You might want to watch the movie rather than argue with stuff that no one is saying.

The BYP is referenced in the movie to elaborate on the inconsistencies between the rifle Oswald allegedly ordered (and held in the BYP) compared to the rifle that was found on the Sixth floor of the Book Depository. The Sixth floor rifle doesn't appear to be the model that Oswald ordered. Maybe he was shipped a different model than the one he ordered but the rifle in the BYP doesn't appear to be the same as the Sixth Floor Rifle.

I agree with Fred's article about Oswald having rings on both hands. That was one of the weaker points in that section of the movie.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2021, 09:27:07 PM by Jon Banks »

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1753
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2021, 11:27:05 PM »
Iím not arguing that the BYP are fake so no, Iím not questioning the expertsí view that the photos are authentic.

On the rifle in the BYP, the loop for the rifle strap is on the bottom of the rifle while the rifle found on the Sixth floor of the Book Depository had loops/straps on the side. Iíll post a photo later if I can find comparisons.

The remaining controversy regarding the BYP is, who took the pictures if not Marina? She has given very inconsistent testimony on the photos which suggests that either she lied about taking the pictures or she has a very poor memory.

"Iíll post a photo later if I can find comparisons."

It'd be great if you could post the photo showing the visible differences between the BYP rifle and the TSBD rifle.
It seems really important.

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3155
  • Skeptic
Re: JFK Revisited: Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
« Reply #19 on: November 21, 2021, 12:55:31 AM »
Quote
Were the Oswald Backyard Photographs Faked?
Why ask the question if you have already decided the answer?
Quote
The first photo alterationist was Lee Harvey Oswald -- he wouldn't even admit that the face was his.
Just stuffing words there.
Is that supposed to be legal testimony?....It's not.
In June 2018 I started a BY photo thread....
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,863.msg18903.html#msg18903
I believe I was called "a mindless dog barking in the night". Cute.
I never claimed I had any answers...just only asking the questions....
Why would someone go to such pronounced lengths to incriminate themself?

 

Mobile View