Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Prayer Woman  (Read 276523 times)

Offline Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #90 on: May 01, 2018, 11:53:33 PM »
Brian,
Weigman shows PM facing the front, shoulders square, yes, then Darnell shows him angled, so his body moved obviously. But you keep saying that PM would have to have put a foot down... Why? Why can't he be on the steps already in Wiegman and put a foot up to the landing for Darnell?

If you read what I'm writing that was already explained...If Prayer Man was on the step in Wiegman he would be illuminated by the sun plane Stancak shows in his graphics...This was already spelled-out in clear detail in my posts...

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #90 on: May 01, 2018, 11:53:33 PM »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #91 on: May 01, 2018, 11:58:26 PM »
You also said his shadow was a foot off... wth?

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #92 on: May 02, 2018, 12:00:53 AM »
Reporter with his leg up in Murray

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #92 on: May 02, 2018, 12:00:53 AM »

Offline Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #93 on: May 02, 2018, 12:10:06 AM »
If you were following my arguments...If you take Prayer Man in Wiegman and place his body over the step like it would be when his weight shifted to the lower leg, when you square his shoulders in that position on the step like Prayer Man does in Wiegman, his left side would be illuminated by the sun you see in your Murray image...

I have yet to see anyone answer this correct argument...
   
Also, the Murray image is probably pretty closely aligned with the sun/shade line...Which means Frazier would have the west wall shadow on his right side as seen in Darnell...

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #94 on: May 02, 2018, 12:12:00 AM »
If you read the original thread on the EF I think most of your queries could be answered Larry, the why now and what have you. Basically the theory is not constricted by testimony, you seem to class testimony as solid evidence and thus proof for PM not being Oswald whereas modern detectives have rejected such notions, they're going in the oppositite direction, good enough to support a case in court sure but to find the truth...

Lunchroom encounter is not set in stone, both Truly and Baker are human and stories can stray from facts with just the slightest provocation.

I don't know how you see a woman in Darnell, you'd have to explain it.
From your last statement above it seems that you've never even given the PM theory any credit at all, ever, even before checking the testimony?

Do you think it's possible that BWF(the only one there of real significance) was convinced that he might have seen LHO on the steps minutes affter the shots instead of during the motorcade? You think Fritz could manage that on his own?  That's all it would take.

"To claim that the image is that of a male is one thing...", to me it's the only thing that and the fact that it looks enough like him for this to continue.
Mr Pollard, I was about 245 miles away from DealeyPlaza at 12:30pm, CST on 11/22/'63, so I did not witness the event, but I remember hearing about it within minutes of the occurrence.. So, considering there is no eyewitness testimony, and several eyewitnesses were available, that places the accused LoneGunmanAssassin, LeeHarveyOswald on the TSBD Elm St entrance landing at the time, added to what I do see, along with testimony as to who was there, is the basis for my conclusion. To me, it appears as though it took about half a century for someone to decide an image of an un-identified person is LHO. The LHO as PrayerMan Theory to me defies common sense.

You sir, do not know what I have studied and what I haven't, but FYI, I spent a great deal of effort on the PrayerPerson subject, as well as the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter. I remain committed to my "conclusions" that the PrayerPerson image represents a female, then employed at the TSBD, as well as the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter as it occurred and do not believe the "HoaxTheory".


What are "most of my queries"?
« Last Edit: May 02, 2018, 12:18:53 AM by Larry Trotter »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #94 on: May 02, 2018, 12:12:00 AM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6749
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #95 on: May 02, 2018, 12:16:43 AM »
I don't know if it's a woman or a man, but there is no good reason to think that it's Lee Harvey Oswald.

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #96 on: May 02, 2018, 12:25:55 AM »
   If you were following my arguments...If you take Prayer Man in Wiegman and place his body over the step like it would be when his weight shifted to the lower leg, when you square his shoulders in that position on the step like Prayer Man does in Wiegman, his left side would be illuminated by the sun you see in your Murray image...


     I have yet to see anyone answer this correct argument...


Sorry Brian but if that is real shadow hitting Lovelady then anyone to the west of him would be in complete shadow and I see no way around that.
If the mock up has the shadow line correct however then I could see your point but I don't see how you can have it both ways.
Trying to isolate the image with the reporter with the shadow on his back... posted the one above because you said you hadn't noticed it.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #96 on: May 02, 2018, 12:25:55 AM »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #97 on: May 02, 2018, 12:49:04 AM »
Mr Pollard, I was about 245 miles away from DealeyPlaza at 12:30pm, CST on 11/22/'63, so I did not witness the event, but I remember hearing about it within minutes of the occurrence.. So, considering there is no eyewitness testimony, and several eyewitnesses were available, that places the accused LoneGunmanAssassin, LeeHarveyOswald on the TSBD Elm St entrance landing at the time, added to what I do see, along with testimony as to who was there, is the basis for my conclusion. To me, it appears as though it took about half a century for someone to decide an image of an un-identified person is LHO. The LHO as PrayerMan Theory to me defies common sense.

You sir, do not know what I have studied and what I haven't, but FYI, I spent a great deal of effort on the PrayerPerson subject, as well as the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter. I remain committed to my "conclusions" that the PrayerPerson image represents a female, then employed at the TSBD, as well as the SecondFloorLunchRoomEncounter as it occurred and do not believe the "HoaxTheory".


What are "most of my queries"?

Simply, the Darnell frames we have available now were not there before 2013. You can see it evolving in  the thread on EF, it went from "it couldn't be him could it?" to "it has to be him" . Not sure but I think Murphy was still "new" to the research scene, so only took him ten(if that) years? Still not sure what point you are making though, I just found something new the other day. What is your point?

You did say you never gave it much credit, " never not refuted it" that shows a clear bias does it not? I took you at your word is all.
Do you have any evidence that discounts the idea that PM could get to the lunchroom before Baker did in less than a minute?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #97 on: May 02, 2018, 12:49:04 AM »

Offline Barry Pollard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 615
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #98 on: May 02, 2018, 01:29:27 AM »

    Disinfo???


     No one on the Education Forum notices or asks Stancak why Prayer Man's leg in his graphic where he has a foot on the step is 47% of his body length but in his Oswald comparison image with both feet flat his leg is 40% of the length of his body...
 

The mock up is not perfect but hasn't it been accepted that if PM was on the landing he would be around 5'3, well then if he was in fact on the step then around 5'9 should also be acceptable, there's no need for an accurate drawing to see that, what do you think is going to happen when he corrects the leg/torso Brian? Here's what it won't do, it will not prove that PM cannot have one foot on the landing.

Offline Brian Doyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3141
Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #99 on: May 02, 2018, 01:54:34 AM »
The mock up is not perfect but hasn't it been accepted that if PM was on the landing he would be around 5'3, well then if he was in fact on the step then around 5'9 should also be acceptable, there's no need for an accurate drawing to see that, what do you think is going to happen when he corrects the leg/torso Brian? Here's what it won't do, it will not prove that PM cannot have one foot on the landing.
No...That 5 foot 3 figure is something that Gilbride and Stancak determined from their analyses...I disagree and say the images make Prayer Man about 5 foot 5 or 6 inches if both feet are on the landing...I sent inquiries to the Texas Bureau Of Public Safety and even tried a famous Texan private detective to try to get records of Sarah Stanton's height and came up with a bust...I will bet my monkey's uncle that Stanton will prove to be 5 foot 5 or 6 in height...

I have already proven that Stancak has provided very accurate measuring sticks that precisely measure Prayer Man's height to be 5 foot 9 inches - the same as Oswald...You don't seem to grasp what I have proven...Since Stancak has measured a very precise 5 foot 9 for Prayer Man and publicly admitted he has added an extra 2 inches to the leg that he needs to subtract, that means he has disproven Prayer Man being on the step...It means he can't make Prayer Man's leg reach the step without adding an extra 2 inches that isn't there...You haven't adequately responded to what I have already proven...

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Prayer Woman
« Reply #99 on: May 02, 2018, 01:54:34 AM »

 

Mobile View