Back Yard Photography

Wed 24 Apr 2019, 3:52 pm

First topic message reminder :

Back Yard Photography - Page 5 Pbucket

The Most Incriminated Man In the World.

All fun aside the new CTKA article was pointed out by Bart.

http://www.ctka.net/2015/JeffCarterBYP4.html

One point made was,
30) If the backyard photos were faked, it means that all items within the photo were deliberately chosen by the forgers. The odd inclusion on the Oswald figure is then the pistol. It invokes the Tippit slaying, but how could the Tippit slaying be anticipated months ahead? Perhaps a shootout with the pistol-carrying assassin was the anticipated event.

Was slaying of Tippit with an automatic pistol changed to match the picture of a revolver. More likely they knew LHO had purchased a pistol in Fort Worth.

Or were the photos composited onto an empty backyard photo after Tippits murder thus the need for a pistol wearing murderer.

When you examine the photos the shadows under the stairs do not change yet the shadow of LHO does, denoting time between images.
This would lend credence to Oswald's being composited onto a single image. See images below.

Again the stairs shadow is the same, note its appearance on the blanket etc. yet the "oswald" shadow has changed implying time between photos.

In fact the shadow of the rifle is at a different angle than the holder of rifle in second pose.

Of note is the bag or sack, or "blanket" possibly used to carry the rifle to the location, under the stairs by the post. Possibly a connection to the baby blanket later claimed to hold a disassembled rifle.

Back Yard Photography - Page 5 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ0Ws8LTadNjjep1yrsO2KI3y1LhcjlSp-XmJCJd-H3M0qu6sMk

Back Yard Photography - Page 5 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ0Ws8LTadNjjep1yrsO2KI3y1LhcjlSp-XmJCJd-H3M0qu6sMk

In this image is a black 'thing' sticking out of the fence known as the black dog nose. It is likely light leak from the compositing process.

No black sports shirt with two white buttons was not on clothing inventory of LHO.

Do the black pants look like dress pants or more like work pants?

Do you think these are black dress pants?

Please respond to the questions raised first, then we can expand the post to other areas of the BYPs.

Cheers, Ed

Fri 24 May 2019, 6:46 pm

HOLLAND, HELEN E. (MRS.)
Owned National Photo, 930 W. Jefferson Blvd., Dallas, TX. One of her processors, Robert J. Hester, claimed he saw photos of LHO in FBI's hands before Dallas Police were supposed to have found them.
Ft. Worth Star Telegram, 9/30/78

930 West Jefferson is just down the street from Theater and shoe shopping row.

Sat 25 May 2019, 9:16 am

Ed. Ledoux wrote:This is a bit from interwebs that should be recognizable.,

Quote: "My investigation has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Zapruder never stopped his camera at that point, as he repeatedly told people , and that the film was cut and optically reframed so that there is no splice. Optical reframing is the method used when a film receives " special effects" or is altered. As is explained in my book on the film, "The Hoax of the Century", there are no flash frames or evidence of "first frame over exposure" at Z-133, the transition from the three motorcycles leading the motorcade to the limousine, and it is a jump cut. I have interviewed a leading film expert in the world as well as the inventors of the camera who were trying to prevent such flash frames, and it is a certainty that the camera always produced them when it was stopped and then restarted .We do not see them at this crucial transition from one scene to another in the film.

It is reasonable that there was another person operating a camera close by Zapruder with essentially the same perspective, perhaps in the "pill box" just behind Zapruder in the pergola. This film was the one that was flown to Kodak in Rochester N.Y, as testimony indicates, altered, and Zapruder's film disappeared later on. During the massive shell game that was played with Zapruder's film before it was developed in Dallas. the other film was already in the air. Or, as I elsewhere suggested, it was being developed in either the Hester�s lab, or in a mobil film lab somewhere�. Off Quote.

Marilyn Sitzman, Charles and Beatrice Hester were filmed by Abraham Zapruder shortly before the motorcade arrived�..the same Charles Hester owned �Commercial Photography��.
A Robert and Pat Hester were part owners, along with Fritz and Helen Holland of a company called �The National Film Company��
The daughter of Robert & Pat Hester, Vicky Mayne who worked in the lab, of TNFC, told Harrison Livingstone that had actually developed numerous films and photographs, including photos taken of the President�s body at Parkland. ..upon which seeing, she threw up�She also mentioned that she helped develop the Zapruder film�.

Below from �Killing The Truth� H.E Livingstone..

Vickie Mayne : Page 511

� Vickie Mayne was sixteen on the day that John Kennedy died. She helped
do the work in her parents film lab when the Secret Service brought in
all the photos, films, and the Zapruder film they had rounded up in
DealeyPlaza. She told me that she had seen the photographs of
Kennedy's body taken at ParklandHospital, a fact that no outsider was
aware of. She remembered this with great clarity because she threw up
upon seeing them. What else could make her throw up but pictures of a
dead body and terrible wounds?

Two couples owned the lab, the National Photo Company, and the Secret
Service supposedly allowed them to retain copies of all the pictures
they developed that day. If this is true, it would seem an unlikely
scenario that the Secret Service conspired to kill President Kennedy.
Another interpretation is that the passing of copies to outside
witnesses was for their S.Ss own protection. Some of
the Secret Service agents had testified to other guns and the sounds of
pistols. They must have known it was a conspiracy, and their later
descriptions of the wounds were not in line with the Warren Commission
story.

In any event, the home of Vickie Mayne's parents burned down some time
later, and the treasure trove in it---if that is where it was----burned
with it. "There were hundreds and hundreds of rolls of film," she told
me.Mayne said the fire was determined to be arson. Healey told me
that he knew of the trove and that Mayne's parents had, had this
material. Vickie told me that her family still had the materials when
her mother died in June 1987.
Her parents were Robert and Pat (Edna) Hester. The other couple was
Fritz and Helen Holland, both deceased and leaving no children.�

I recall Sen(?) Gonzales had some info on pictures, his met a unknown fate... supposedly...
Spooks burning down the house to stop the pics.
Wild stuff. Great article Bart.
Cheers, Ed

Thanks for sharing Ed,

Vickie Mayne - amazing stuff!
Either Homer McMahon lied or he did not, fascinating really.

The connections and proximity to the TT and the two shoe stores is incredible - Lowery, Brewer, and the photo shop. Great stuff Ed and Bart.

Thu 30 May 2019, 8:29 am

Sun 09 Jun 2019, 7:03 pm

Thanks to Malcolm Blunt

Mon 10 Jun 2019, 7:03 pm

Seems the #2 item is proof these keystone cops lied their collective arses off

Sat 03 Aug 2019, 2:45 am

Sun 04 Aug 2019, 10:56 am

Anything else on Hester Bart? I'm having a moment too, who is the guy referred to above about having made comment while thought he was off the air? Gerald Ford?

Thanks for posting and to you too Ed.

Tue 06 Aug 2019, 11:06 am

Interesting. Although Hester's recollections are years after the fact. Some form of Corroboration. Possibly.

Mr. LIEBELER - Did the FBI or any other investigatory agency of the Government ever show you a picture of the rifle that was supposed to have been used to assassinate the President?

Mr. PAINE - They asked me at first, the first night of the assassination if I could locate, identify the place where Lee was standing when he was holding this rifle and some, the picture on the cover of Life.

Mr. LIEBELER - Were you able to?

Mr. PAINE - I identified the place by the fine clapboard structure of the house.

Mr. LIEBELER - By the what?

Mr. PAINE - By the small clapboard structure, the house has an unusually small clapboard.

Mr. LIEBELER - What did you identify the place as being?

Mr. PAINE - The Neely Street address. He didn't drive a car, so to have them over for dinner I had to go over and pick them up.

Tue 06 Aug 2019, 4:37 pm

Wed 07 Aug 2019, 1:18 am

Mick,
Going in ...as in living there, or squatting there?
How would just anyone acquire the padlock key from Mr George., someone who made a spare jey, made a mold or impression of the key .... or picked the padlock.
Anyone recall any hasp for a padlock, or a padlock in any of the photos of Neely ????

Cheers, Ed

Wed 07 Aug 2019, 8:59 am

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Mick,
Going in ...as in living there, or squatting there?
How would just anyone acquire the padlock key from Mr George., someone who made a spare jey, made a mold or impression of the key .... or picked the padlock.
Anyone recall any hasp for a padlock, or a padlock in any of the photos of Neely ????

Cheers, Ed

Two very good questions Ed, which I don't have the answers to. The way it's written up it seems to me Mr. George is in the know.
I'd assume maybe wrongly by the way, that the FBI report would have stated that the person or persons George thought were entering his rental property were either squatters or tennants. Instead we are left with the idea that someone has got hold of a spare key, a mold of one or had one cut from a prior occupier. Of course George could be mistaken. But it's a strange accusation just the same.

George does state or rather the report says- "since that time the apartment has been vacant and padlocked"

Michael Paine, would collect Marina and Lee from Neely for dinner at theirs he would tell authorities. Those BYP's and the Paines are interesting.

Wonder where the padlock was actually placed? Gate, Back door, front door, who knows.

Wed 07 Aug 2019, 1:09 pm

Good questions
Mick
Would need one one padlock on front door and one on rear.
The padlock is Mr Georges so he can keep out tenants who have keys to the doors.
Those who have ever visited or photographed the property and never mentioned, photographed or saw any hasps or padlock hardware, or even impressions of where hasps have been then we have just Mr George's word, not even a peep ftom FBI about the locks or if they were locked...
Recall that same day as tbe George interview the DPD and Forest Sorrels of SS show up at noon to recreate the BYPs.
Cheers, Ed

Thu 08 Aug 2019, 1:17 am

These pages are from the Assassination Inquiry Committee Vol. 1 No. 8 Jan. 1969

Sun 11 Aug 2019, 10:10 am

If we take it as fact that the BYP's are forgeries then we must ask who had the opportunity and the motive to create these incriminating pieces of evidence.

The perpetrators of the composite BYP's would need access to the Neely Street backyard.

Have in their possession a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and a pistol.

Copies of The Worker and The Militant newspapers.

Access to or own the Imperial-Reflex camera.

Have in their possession a photo (Or several) featuring Oswald’s face.

Ruth Paine and Michael Paine are two names which spring to my mind.

Sun 11 Aug 2019, 12:02 pm

Could photos be made in succession?
1- Backyard
2- The backyard with a person
3- The backyard with Lee's face on person.

Rather than one go with access to everything all at once, a progression.
Likewise those taking photo 1 or 2 may not be making 3.
I am generalizing the process, hopefully not being overly complicated or too simplistic.
Cheers
Ed

Sun 11 Aug 2019, 6:36 pm

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Could photos be made in succession?
1- Backyard
2- The backyard with a person
3- The backyard with Lee's face on person.

Rather than one go with access to everything all at once, a progression.
Likewise those taking photo 1 or 2 may not be making 3.
I am generalizing the process, hopefully not being overly complicated or too simplistic.
Cheers
Ed

Absolutely Ed, the combination of the way it all went down could easily have been in stages.....Now who was the guy who called in to Neely St to visit Marina while Oswald was at work, ...the one who had a passion for photography - the one who had started working with a photographer?
Dem M's son in law I believe Gary Taylor. Reckoned Marina's English had improved enormously. Maybe it was he who snapped off the Junie pics on the balcony with say a Imperial Reflex camera

Whoever took those pics and in whichever order that was achieved they had to have access to or know someone who had a processor and a darkroom for the post work.... back in the day a photographer fits the bill. Wonder what Mr. Gary Taylor did in his spare time?

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 1:23 pm

I spent some time trying to find a photo of Gary Taylor. No luck. Wondered what body type he had and if it was similar to Lee. A couple of scenarios came to mind. One where he has Marina take the photos of himself modeling the weapons. Another where during his visit photographing June, he takes shots of the empty back yard for future use if needed. With his film background and spooky connections, he might have been an operative working in this way.

It stands to reason he and Marina may have had relations. If so, that could have helped persuade her to come across with her testimony saying she took the photos of Lee, even though she knew not how an Imperial operated.

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 1:29 pm

We also have to note, that if we subscribe to the idea that that the figure in the BYP (Minus the face/head) was actually photographed standing in the backyard with the items in the figures hands then what do we make of the supposed claim of manipulated body shadows falling on the ground.

Why would the body's shadows on the ground need alteration if that person really did stand in the backyard at Neely St?

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 1:40 pm

Jake Sykes wrote:I spent some time trying to find a photo of Gary Taylor. No luck. Wondered what body type he had and if it was similar to Lee. A couple of scenarios came to mind. One where he has Marina take the photos of himself modeling the weapons. Another where during his visit photographing June, he takes shots of the empty back yard for future use if needed. With his film background and spooky connections, he might have been an operative working in this way.

It stands to reason he and Marina may have had relations. If so, that could have helped persuade her to come across with her testimony saying she took the photos of Lee, even though she knew not how an Imperial operated.

I can't find a photo of Gary Taylor either.

On November 3, 1962 Gary Taylor would help rent a trailer for Oswald, then assist in the relocation of Marina and June, with belongings, from Fort Worth to a new home at Apartment 2 – 604 Elsbeth, which Lee had arranged the week before. 11Three days later, Marina moved out, allegedly the result of a bad argument sparked by her conversation with the wife of the Elsbeth apartment’s building supervisor. Marina and June shuttled between three White Russian homes for two weeks before another reconciliation with Lee was achieved on November 18. On November 22 the Oswalds attended a Thanksgiving dinner hosted by his brother Robert in Fort Worth. Several snapshots of the Oswald family were taken at the Fort Worth bus depot’s Photo-mat booth, the only specific instance of “family-type snapshots” from the period that Marina could later recall.

Known visitors to this address included a few members of the White Russian community, the de Mohrenschildt’s once or twice, Michael Paine once and Ruth Paine several times, and also Gary Taylor, George de Mohrenschildt’s now estranged son-in-law. He came by the apartment one afternoon, when Lee Oswald was at work.

Back Yard Photography - Page 5 19Neelybalcony2

Mr. JENNER. Why did you go there?

Back Yard Photography - Page 5 20Neelybalcony1

Gary Taylor: “Some of the baby's toys – a ball and something or other – were out there on this porch.”

Mr. TAYLOR. Just for a friendly visit. Marina was at home. She – her English had improved enough for her to get across to me a few ideas ... I did inform Marina of my impending divorce and – uh – in other words, telling her that Mrs. Taylor and I were no longer living together and we had separated.” (WC testimony March 25, 1964)

Taylor was able to recall a specific image: “this apartment in question had a small balcony on the front of it and I remember the door was open and I thought what a nice place for the baby to play and some of the baby's toys – a ball and something or other – were out there on this porch.”

Early during Taylor’s testimony, Commission counsel Albert Jenner established:

Mr. JENNER. During the time you had your interest, which you still may have, in – what did you say – photographing?

Mr. TAYLOR. Yes ...

Mr. JENNER. Are you an amateur camera fan?

Mr. TAYLOR. Just a little bit. I try to carry it on as best I can ...

His former wife Alexandra (Mrs Donald Gibson) confirmed “he was working on and off with a photographer ... ” (WC testimony May 28, 1964). In light of Gary Taylor’s photography interest, the Commission’s interest in establishing this hobby, and his specific recollection of June Oswald on the Neely Street balcony – this may establish the origin of the Neely Street balcony photographs (and assist in emphasizing Lee Oswald did not take any “family-type snapshots” while in America 1962-63).

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/a-new-look-at-the-enigma-of-the-backyard-photographs-part-4

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 1:44 pm

Jake Sykes wrote:I spent some time trying to find a photo of Gary Taylor. No luck. Wondered what body type he had and if it was similar to Lee. A couple of scenarios came to mind. One where he has Marina take the photos of himself modeling the weapons. Another where during his visit photographing June, he takes shots of the empty back yard for future use if needed. With his film background and spooky connections, he might have been an operative working in this way.

It stands to reason he and Marina may have had relations. If so, that could have helped persuade her to come across with her testimony saying she took the photos of Lee, even though she knew not how an Imperial operated.

Marina also had a stay at Robert Oswald's home after Lee's death. She stayed for more than a few nights around the time Robert would hand over the Imperial reflex camera to the authorities.

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 2:31 pm

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 1:07 am

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Brilliant Stan.
Translucent paint applied to a large format neg then all taken though the IR, to be traceable to LHO.... (eventually)
Recreation photo has the indentation in leg shadow

Cheers
Ed

Great observations guys. I agree that it is clear that it should not be a straight line shadow.

_________________
Release clear scans. Reveal the truth about Prayer Man. Preserve the history of the assassination of JFK.

Ed. Ledoux

Posts : 1896
Join date : 2012-01-04

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 1:25 am
To be exact the recreation photo indentation is caused by rifle.

The positioning of the leg is angled back.
Different from 133a
This shortens the length of legs shadow and minimized the area of knee.
Still to be fair 133a shows no indentation from rifle ...arrow straight edge (across terrain no less)
Cheers
Ed

Ed. Ledoux

Posts : 1896
Join date : 2012-01-04

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 1:49 am
Cappel's left ankle area shows the folds and furrows of his pants and more faithful represents the natural shadows.
Although Cappel and Schiller minimized his right sides shadow ... or altered the stance as the 133a lean was unrepeatable, take your pick, it still impugns the fake 133a.
I cant imagine an argument to discount size discrepancies, wrong way shadows, extremely straight body shadows, shadows moving opposite each other, etc etc ad infinitum, except lone nuttified circular reasoning of it exists therefore its real and XYZ said its real.
Terry's find said shove your XYZ up your AZZ
Cheers,
Ed

Last edited by Ed. Ledoux on Tue 14 May 2019, 4:40 am; edited 1 time in total

Ed. Ledoux

Posts : 1896
Join date : 2012-01-04

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 2:09 am

Ed. Ledoux

Posts : 1896
Join date : 2012-01-04

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 8:38 am

[size=20][size=16]Notes

[/size][/size]

1 501 Elm Street is the Dal-Tex Building. Since the two photos and their corresponding negatives were said to be found inside a “packet”, perhaps that packet had an identifier listing this address. Did the Dal-Tex building have a tenant in 1963 which could process photos in the fashion associated with the originally discovered backyard photos?

OF NOTE of the note by Jeff Carter
Packet doesn't necessarily mean photo finishers packet it could be any kind of packet
and the TSBD did have their address their
so until a better look at the packet and its address it is not proper to think a photo lab existed in the DALTEX and no photo labs or stores or photographers give a 501 Elm addy in the city directory

Cheers, Ed

PS
Why did HSCA let LIFE give them a print instead of a copy negative of their original copy negative of 133a

PPS
Where the hell is their Original Copy Negative of 133a anyways

Stan Dane

Posts : 3458
Join date : 2013-09-02
Age : 66

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 1:56 pm

Ed. Ledoux wrote:
PS
Why did HSCA let LIFE give them a print instead of a copy negative of their original copy negative of 133a

PPS
Where the hell is their Original Copy Negative of 133a anyways

It's almost as if...there was a conspiracy to commit/cover-up a crime.

In theory anyway.

Ed. Ledoux

Posts : 1896
Join date : 2012-01-04

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Tue 14 May 2019, 11:01 pm
Yes especially when one looks at the evidence provided

"Officer Kirk was tasked with providing the Committee an analysis of the forensic photography and photographic documentation of the JFK investigation. This included providing testimony to the Committee on Lee Harvey Oswald’s infamous “backyard photographs,” which many in the public had begun to think were fabricated. Through his work and testimony, Kirk and his team confirmed the authenticity of these photos.
Varying examples of the Lee Harvey Oswald’s infamous backyard photograph. Kirk made prints from the photograph’s original negative to present as part of his testimony. Collection of the National Law Enforcement Museum, 2015.2.3.
The archive includes copies of Kirk’s testimony to the HSCA with his hand written notes, as well as examples of some of the photographs he used to make his case."

Not so fast lawman.
Kirk actually did a poor job and his case is flimsy, unfounded and there is broken custody chains, with disparate testimony and statements. Legally Kirk should have been more discriminatory.
But when no checks or balances apply this is the end product.

Cheers, Ed

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 885
Join date : 2013-11-29
Age : 67
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

Re: Back Yard Photography

on Wed 22 May 2019, 2:22 am
Either Ed or Bart (I believe) posted a link to a Jack White hour-long presentation on the BYPs and I watched the whole darned thing.

Very interesting as it seems he mentioned the problem with the shadows I noticed a couple of years back and while that one fact alone proves they were forgeries he decided to focus on two main discrepancies:

1 - the erroneous chin and the probability that it proves the same head was pasted on each photo, and

2 - the odd stance Oswald has in the photos... he claims no one can stand like that.

He mentions off-handedly the relation of the shadows on the ground and the fence as well as the erroneous proportions of the papers, the gun, and Oswald himself but seems to push all of that aside for the very nuanced evidence that he supports.

Why marginalize the most obvious sound undeniable scientific evidence and instead rely on the touchy-feely of the stance and the "face doesn't look right" claim. One was recently disproven by some jerk in a studio and the other relies far too heavily on whether of not the viewer can see the obvious artifacts in the manipulated photos - and not everyone can.

I prefer to leave the fuzzy logic and opinion-oriented crap off the table.

Makes me wonder why that was Jack's "best" argument.

_________________
If God had intended Man to do anything except copulate, He would have given us brains.
- - - [size=10]Ignatz Verbotham[/size]

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 9:36 pm

Mick Purdy wrote:We also have to note, that if we subscribe to the idea that that the figure in the BYP (Minus the face/head) was actually photographed standing in the backyard with the items in the figures hands then what do we make of the supposed claim of manipulated body shadows falling on the ground.

Why would the body's shadows on the ground need alteration if that person really did stand in the backyard at Neely St?

It's true that if he had Marina take them, then the shadows needn't be altered. I threw it out here on the principle that until we know for sure, we should consider alternatives to our own theories. I do agree the evidence does suggest alteration of the shadows.

Mon 12 Aug 2019, 11:34 pm

Jake Sykes wrote:

Mick Purdy wrote:We also have to note, that if we subscribe to the idea that that the figure in the BYP (Minus the face/head) was actually photographed standing in the backyard with the items in the figures hands then what do we make of the supposed claim of manipulated body shadows falling on the ground.

Why would the body's shadows on the ground need alteration if that person really did stand in the backyard at Neely St?

It's true that if he had Marina take them, then the shadows needn't be altered. I threw it out here on the principle that until we know for sure, we should consider alternatives to our own theories. I do agree the evidence does suggest alteration of the shadows.

I think that's what does your head in Jake. For the life of me the figure (minus the face from the chin up) looks like it actually stood in the back yard at Neely Street. I've read all the arguments for shadow alteration/manipulation and I keep asking why if thats actually the figure standing in the backyard in the BYP.

I fail to see the cut out of any of the body or the weapons and the newspaper. It's got me stumped. Could it be they were that good at the post work we cannot detect the insertion of the Oswald figure into the Neely Street backyard on an empty frame of same.

Tue 13 Aug 2019, 8:24 am

Mick Purdy wrote:

Jake Sykes wrote:

Mick Purdy wrote:We also have to note, that if we subscribe to the idea that that the figure in the BYP (Minus the face/head) was actually photographed standing in the backyard with the items in the figures hands then what do we make of the supposed claim of manipulated body shadows falling on the ground.

Why would the body's shadows on the ground need alteration if that person really did stand in the backyard at Neely St?

It's true that if he had Marina take them, then the shadows needn't be altered. I threw it out here on the principle that until we know for sure, we should consider alternatives to our own theories. I do agree the evidence does suggest alteration of the shadows.

I think that's what does your head in Jake. For the life of me the figure (minus the face from the chin up) looks like it actually stood in the back yard at Neely Street. I've read all the arguments for shadow alteration/manipulation and I keep asking why if thats actually the figure standing in the backyard in the BYP.

I fail to see the cut out of any of the body or the weapons and the newspaper. It's got me stumped. Could it be they were that good at the post work we cannot detect the insertion of the Oswald figure into the Neely Street backyard on an empty frame of same.

The black clothes are what make me think it is possible Mick. No expert I but intuition says black clothing would be easier than white for dropping it in. I'm agnostic though. More interested in truth than being right.

Tue 13 Aug 2019, 10:25 am

One of the astute observations of Jeff Carter:

Taylor was able to recall a specific image: “this apartment in question had a small balcony on the front of it and I remember the door was open and I thought what a nice place for the baby to play and some of the baby's toys – a ball and something or other – were out there on this porch.”

Back Yard Photography - Page 5 2Q==

Did Taylor take those balcony photos?

There is also this very strange comment from Marina's testimony in regard to why the backyard shots were being taken:

Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't attach any significance to what he said at the time, but he added, "That maybe some day June will remember me." He must have had something in his mind – some grandiose plans.

I guess Oswald might have said this if he did not expect to live much longer - and that is hinted at in the so-called Walker letter - though there is much doubt about that letter as well.

Also, he already had a similar photo inscribed to Junie on the back... while none of these were inscribed to her. The one inscribed would be sufficient for June to remember her father by, should he die young.

But what if it wasn't Lee who Marina is quoting here? What if she was having an affair with the newly single Taylor? Might he have said it, realizing that the affair had no chance of becoming a long-term thing? Was it Taylor in those BYP... taking the Micky out of Lee. giving one to DeM inscribed on the back in Russian to "Hunter of Fascists"... which in itself may be an inside joke referring back to the original photo taken in Minsk of Oswald holding his HUNTING club shotgun?

FROM MARINA'S HSCA
Mr. McDONALD. Well, first of all, what does it say?
Mrs. PORTER. "For hunter of fascist, ha, ha, ha."
Mr. McDONALD. "Hunter of fascist"?
Mrs. PORTER. Yes.
Mr. McDONALD. "Ha, ha, ha."
Now if you will look closely, there is a possibility that if you look you will see the handwriting, the dark handwriting, it appears that someone might have wrote over the original handwriting. You can see underneath.
Mrs. PORTER. I can see something, right here that looks like have been erased and copied over.
Mr. McDONALD. Or possibly someone wrote over it just to bring out a light handwriting underneath. But nevertheless, does any of that look like your handwriting?
Mrs. PORTER. Like mine?
Mr. McDONALD. Yes.
Mrs. PORTER. No.
Mr. McDONALD. Do you recall ever writing such a phrase on that photograph?
Mrs. PORTER. No, but it would sound like me.
Mr. McDONALD. It sounds like you?
Mrs. PORTER. Yes, and at first, you know, I thought it look like my handwriting, but when I examine I do not, like letter "f," I do not print it that way, and "t." I am talking about Russian description, not English.
Mr. McDONALD. You are saying you don't print it that way now. How about in 196----
Mrs. PORTER. No, it wasn't habit.
Mr. McDONALD. So it sounds like something you would have written but you can't identify your handwriting.
Mrs. PORTER. When one letter is scratched underneath, I mean marked underneath, it is a sound in English like "s" and "h," "sha" sound. That is not necessary to put this marking on it, but it is typical of some Russians do.
Mr. McDONALD. Is it typical of the way you would have written then in 1963?
Mrs. PORTER. Pardon me?
Mr. McDONALD. Is that peculiarity---
Mrs. PORTER. Well, that would be typical for Russian to write it, but at the same time another letter---
Mr. McDONALD. Excuse me, just so everyone understands what letters we are talking about.
At this point I was referring to Ms. Jackie Hess who was pointing out the Russian letters. [Jackie, who is a staff member, speaks Russian.]
Mrs. PORTER. It is the third letter in the second word. "F A," and then another one that looks like--Yes?
Mr. McDONALD. She speaks Russian?
Mrs. PORTER. She does?
And "t," it is not necessary to put this mark underneath as well, but it is kind of habitual, not habitual. It is a habit of some Russians to do that. But this letter "ha," in the first word after "0," this is something like maybe foreigner would try to write it, you know, to copy Russian language.

Taylor testified to not knowing Russian. Marina disavowed it being in her hand based on the formation of specific letters, but she did suggest the writing was similar to hers. Was this written by Ruth Paine with someone going over it in an attempt to copy Marina's handwriting?

We know Oswald never had those black clothes after the assassination. If he was not living at Neely, Lee would not have known about this photo shoot. Did Taylor and/or his photographer associate then place Oswald's head over his own? Marina would not have kept those photos.

Maybe the BYP (except for the DeM version) ended up with the Paines?

In the context of taking the piss out of Lee with an inside joke, I can see them using both newspapers, either not knowing the two parties were opposed to each - or that being the very reason both were used... as part of the inside joke.

Just more thinking out loud. A photo of Taylor would help enormously.