Back Yard Photography

Paul Francisco Paso wrote:

greg parker wrote:

Paul Francisco Paso wrote:

greg parker wrote:At the risk of sounding like I expect everyone to automatically agree with everything I post (I promise I would hate that), I am kinda surprised that no one has commented on this.

To be clearer, I'm not talking about the position of the arms - it's the position of the legs in what I consider a fairly unusual stance that got my attention. To me, it looks almost exactly the same as in the BYP.

If no one else sees it, or you do see it, but don't think it means anything, fair enough - I'll drop it as just me being hyper-whatever...(conspiratorial? Vigilant? Obsessive?  )

I think it's been brought up before, Greg, if I'm not mistaken and quite a few others queried it like you did so you're not alone. I haven't dwelled on it because tbh I don't think it means anything that I can think of. It's a similar pose to the BYPs but that's about it for me.

Thanks Paul. Wasn't aware it had been brought up before. I'll drop it as having any value.

I think Mick pointed it out maybe on the old/new site we had but I could be wrong about that it may have been somebody else but I do remember it being discussed. I'm not sure if it has any value mate but who knows. I certainly don't mean to discourage you bro. Not in the slightest. My main interest in this case at this stage of my enthusiasm is strictly PM. It has been for a while now. I still read the stuff here but PM is Oswald. I know we're stalled on it till clearer scans come about but PM and the 2FE bullshit is what interests me. All the other stuff for me personally doesn't get my juices flowing as much but I appreciate and respect it all here at ROKC. Yourself, Ed, Mick, Barto, Hasan and Stan have done fucking wonders that never cease to amaze me. I'll confess that I wasn't totally on board with Mick's high suspicion of Frazier and his sister stuff entirely but he's turned me on that completely. I know I'm going off topic on this thread but I feel it important to point out how open and free this place is for me to reconsider my views. I love ROKC. The other forums can go fuck themselves as they do. Anything goes here and it usually does so as far as I'm concerned everything is valued whether you pick it up or drop it.

I've known Judyth Baker for four years ["Martin4" assured everyone]. I've studied her evidence, and spent time with her exploring the areas of New Orleans which relate to her account. I've talked with a witness who knew of her affair with Lee Oswald. Another researcher has talked with two other witnesses to the affair. I find her credible.⁽³⁾

Jake Sykes wrote:The following is an image essay describing modeling work I've done in analyzing the power line and LHO figure shadows in the back yard. 


Here is the model on a Google map. It sits on the Neely house. A feature of Sketchup is that one can geo-locate the model. As a result the shadows in the back yard can be generated for every minute of daylight on every day for the entire year.


Here you see the model closer in. I've replaced the google map with a green grass ground cover, but the geo-location is the same. Note the wires hanging in the air as if by magic. It's the wire shadows we care about, not the poles.


Above we have the wires as they were back in those days. Today they are in a different location, on poles further away from the house. 

All of the dimensions in the model are careful approximations based upon the google map scale, and upon photos showing apparent ground level changes, typical floor to floor heights, typical door heights, and stair construction technique observable from the variety of photos available on the internet. I do possess the types of construction knowledge needed for purposes of making these kinds of inferences. That said, the model isn't perfect. But it was useful for making a point in studying the back yard photos.


Above is at 2:25 PM on March 29, which was when I was able to get a decent match for shadows close to what we see in BYP's. One thing I struggled to get and never did succeed was a decent correlation between the post height and LHO's height. Could be my fault, could be something more suspicious, but I know this issue has been brought forward by others in the past.


Side view with some critical dimensions (again 3/29 @ 2:25 PM)


This is sequencing one minute at a time. I was amazed to see how far the shadows traveled up the pole (six inches) in just three minutes. Also note that as predicted by Steely, the head shadow goes UP the fence too, but much more slowly than the wire shadows. The speed of the wire shadows is due to the distance and elevation of the wires. These shadows are traveling toward the horizon faster than all the ground based shadows are. Point of order: Terry Martin gets the credit for the original discovery of this shadow anomaly.

So this leaves us with two possible conclusions: One, the photos are faked. Two, LHO moved closer to the camera within the time span of only several minutes between shots. Let's see how we must move LHO in this model in order to render a similar shadow change as observed in the BYP's:


Here it is at 2:27 as that time looks most similar in terms of wires on the post. I'm focusing here on the bottom wire shadow and ignoring the fact that the upper two wire shadows are much higher on the post in the BYP's. The point stands either way. LHO is now way too far forward of the wire shadows on the ground. He is even taller compared to the post. (For those who are interested, the field of view setting for the perspective views is 30 degrees).


Here are the dimensions and time stamp for the preceding view. The difference in distance from LHO to the fence is now 12" further from the fence.  

Thus eliminating the possibility that LHO moved closer to the camera, my final conclusion is that the photos are apparently faked.

Jake Sykes wrote:Thought I'd bump this in case somebody over there sees it and finds it useful.

Ed. Ledoux wrote:"One thing I struggled to get and never did succeed was a decent correlation between the post height and LHO's height. Could be my fault, could be something more suspicious, but I know this issue has been brought forward by others in the past."~Jake

Jake would say 5'2" model fit the post and pix more closely?

Thanks for great work on this!
Ed

Jake Sykes wrote:

Ed. Ledoux wrote:"One thing I struggled to get and never did succeed was a decent correlation between the post height and LHO's height. Could be my fault, could be something more suspicious, but I know this issue has been brought forward by others in the past."~Jake

Jake would say 5'2" model fit the post and pix more closely?

Thanks for great work on this!
Ed

I think that would do it nicely. 5" shorter should pretty much nail it.
I can check it on the model when I have a bit more time.
Thanks Ed.

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Bloody Good work Stan! btw
Ed

Ed. Ledoux wrote:That is now inescapable Jake.

Stan how goes the Condensed PM version, bullet points etc.
Any headway.
Mahalo, Ed