"Prayer Man" on the Education Forum

[ianlloyd]

First topic message reminder :

As I am not a member of the EF, I cannot post there but there is an interesting discussion going on there at the moment regarding a figure in the TSBD doorway generally referred to as "Prayer Man" due to the apparent position of his hands, seemingly clasped in front of his chest as if in prayer.
 
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354
 
I recall this person being discussed somewhere many years ago and was referred to as "Prayer Man" pretty much from the outset but I cannot recall where it originated, maybe on Lancer?
 
Anyway, the reason for this post is that, upon looking closely at the various photographs and movie clips presented as part of the discussion, it struck me that his hands don't seem to move from the "prayer" position for what seems to be quite some time. Was he holding something, I wonder? If so, it seems an odd way to hold whatever it was.

[Colin_Crow]

Mr. BELIN - What did you see and what did you do as you ran into the building?
Mr. BAKER - As I entered this building, there was, it seems to me like there was outside doors and then there is a little lobby.
Mr. BELIN - All right.
Mr. BAKER - And then there are some inner doors and another door you have to go through, a swinging door type.
As I entered this lobby there were people going in as I entered. And I asked, I just spoke out and asked where the stairs or elevator was, and this man, Mr. Truly, spoke up and says, it seems to me like he says, "I am a building manager. Follow me, officer, and I will show you." So we immediately went out through the second set of doors, and we ran into the swinging door.


It seems the initial Baker Truly interaction occurred in the lobby. Baker claims some people had already gone in ahead of him. Could one (or the only) person who went inside the glass doors have been PM? We can see Baker almost at the steps on film. PM and Frazier are the 2 closest to the door at the top of the steps. Frazier claimed to have stayed outside.

[Colin_Crow]

R

James Jarman HSCA testimony excerpts:

"...as we was running out of the building the police stopped us, he told us to come back inside the building, so we proceeded back inside the building. And, after we was inside the building after that, I heard that Oswald had come down through the office and came down the front stairs and he was stopped by the officer that had stopped us and sent us back in the building and Mr. Truly told them that that was alright, that he worked there, so then, he proceeded own (sic) out the building and we wondered why he stopped us."

"Well, there was a Billy Lovelady standing out there, he was on the steps, see... And, Oswald was coming out the door and he (Lovelady) said the police had stopped Oswald and sent him back in the building, Billy Lovelady said that Mr. Trudy (sic) told the policeman that Oswald was alright, that he worked there, so Oswald walked on down the stairs."

Of course Frazier has now claimed on two occasions that he saw Oswald walking South on Houston towards the Elm corner, presumably having left via the dock, then cross the road and head in the direction of the bus. This was a few minutes after the shots.

[GuestGuest]

I believe Gary Mack noted that Robert Groden has prints of the Couch film. Has anyone who knows Groden contacted him to ask him to scan the print at the highest resolution possible to aid in the identification of the Prayer Man?

[GuestGuest]

I believe Gary Mack noted that Robert Groden has prints of the Couch film. Has anyone who knows Groden contacted him to ask him to scan the print at the highest resolution possible to aid in the identification of the Prayer Man?

I just hope that at some point in the future Warner Brothers decides to make a 4k print of the movie JFK.  That will be the highest possible clarity we will ever get of this short piece of film.  Whether the image gives us any more detail is up for grabs.  Personally, the difference between the original version that Sean was using versus the image taken from the Blu-Ray version of JFK which is a 1080p print was quite startling.  Maybe the next step up at 4k will give just a little more detail.

Don't really know about the practicalities of scanning the original at 4k or costs involved for a private individual and cannot ever see the 6th Floor Museum ever doing it to be honest.

[GuestGuest]

I believe Gary Mack noted that Robert Groden has prints of the Couch film. Has anyone who knows Groden contacted him to ask him to scan the print at the highest resolution possible to aid in the identification of the Prayer Man?

I just hope that at some point in the future Warner Brothers decides to make a 4k print of the movie JFK.  That will be the highest possible clarity we will ever get of this short piece of film.  Whether the image gives us any more detail is up for grabs.  Personally, the difference between the original version that Sean was using versus the image taken from the Blu-Ray version of JFK which is a 1080p print was quite startling.  Maybe the next step up at 4k will give just a little more detail.

Don't really know about the practicalities of scanning the original at 4k or costs involved for a private individual and cannot ever see the 6th Floor Museum ever doing it to be honest.

Well, given that Groden is a welcome thorn in the flesh of the 6th Floor Musuem, owns copies of all early JFK films and photos, owns professional photographic equipment, and served as a consultant on the film JFK, one assumes he would happily arrange to scan his copy of the Couch film? (I could be wrong, but I think some of his films were used for Oliver Stone's JFK DVDs.)

He could have the job done on a drum scanner at BWC in Dallas for a marginal expense.

[GuestGuest]

R

James Jarman HSCA testimony excerpts:

"...as we was running out of the building the police stopped us, he told us to come back inside the building, so we proceeded back inside the building. And, after we was inside the building after that, I heard that Oswald had come down through the office and came down the front stairs and he was stopped by the officer that had stopped us and sent us back in the building and Mr. Truly told them that that was alright, that he worked there, so then, he proceeded own (sic) out the building and we wondered why he stopped us."

"Well, there was a Billy Lovelady standing out there, he was on the steps, see... And, Oswald was coming out the door and he (Lovelady) said the police had stopped Oswald and sent him back in the building, Billy Lovelady said that Mr. Trudy (sic) told the policeman that Oswald was alright, that he worked there, so Oswald walked on down the stairs."

Of course Frazier has now claimed on two occasions that he saw Oswald walking South on Houston towards the Elm corner, presumably having left via the dock, then cross the road and head in the direction of the bus. This was a few minutes after the shots.

If it makes Frazier feel better saying this then so be it.  The evidence suggests otherwise.

[greg_parkerAdmin]

A poster at the Ed Forum found this:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=882&relPageId=5

which has Hoover telling LBJ on Nov 29 that

 “He [Oswald] then threw the gun aside and came down….at the entrance of the building he was stopped by police officers and some manager in the building told the police officers, ‘well he’s allright…he works there…you needn’t hold him.’ They let him go. That is how he got out.”

Unless Hoover is relying on first day newspaper reports, this conversation - a full week after the assassination - has to be coming via his agents present during the interrogations, or at very least, Dallas police.

I note also the use of "officers" plural.  

If we go back to the testimony of Harry Holmes, we find:

Mr. HOLMES. He said, as I remember, actually, in answer to questions there, he mentioned that when lunchtime came, one of the Negro employees asked him if. he would like to sit and each lunch with him, and he said, "Yes, but I can't go right now." He said, "You go and take the elevator on down." No, he said, "You go ahead, but send the elevator back up."
He didn't say up where, and he didn't mention what floor he was on. Nobody seemed to ask him.
You see, I assumed that obvious questions like that had been asked in previous interrogation. So I didn't interrupt too much, but he said, "Send the elevator back up to me."
Then he said when all this commotion started, "I just went on downstairs." And he didn't say whether he took the elevator or not. He said, "I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about."

Could be just a transcription error though - or Harry misspeaking. I think the rest is pretty accurate, if not somewhat compressed and open to differing interpretations. I think for instance, his "I went down" is invariably taken as being from the 2nd or 6th floors - yet I think it could actually be the 1st floor going down some steps to go outside.   

[beowulf]

Wow, can't remember seeing an example of triple hearsay before and on this page we have two.

Jarman said what Lovelady said Truly said Truly said to Officer Barnett at the door. Either Jarman or Lovelady mistakenly thought Truly meant Barnett instead of Baker and repeated the error.
Hoover said what local agent (Hosty?) said Truly said Truly said to police officers at the door.  Either Hoover or agent mistakenly thought Truly meant police officers plural instead of police officer (Baker) singular and repeated the error.

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Wow, can't remember seeing an example of triple hearsay before and on this page we have two.

Jarman said what Lovelady said Truly said Truly said to Officer Barnett at the door. Either Jarman or Lovelady mistakenly thought Truly meant Barnett instead of Baker and repeated the error.
Hoover said what local agent (Hosty?) said Truly said Truly said to police officers at the door.  Either Hoover or agent mistakenly thought Truly meant police officers plural instead of police officer (Baker) singular and repeated the error.

On another matter, it is very interesting that Hoover is telling Johnson that Oswald was stopped by the front entrance, also the business that, a week after shooting the FBI still wasn't sure if LHO used elevator or not. 

One other point, Hoover sounds pretty certain shots were from 5th floor (if nothing else, J. Edgar was a stickler for detail).  Can we rule out that the shooter (or a shooter, if there were two in TSBD) was on the 5th floor?

All the evidence suggests that Baker did NOT specifically speak to Oswald/Prayer Man, but asked something along the lines of "who works here? I need to know where the lifts or stairs are." Truly steps forward. We then have evidence suggesting Oswald/PM steps back inside. He is in there, has taken his outer shirt off and is seen by Campbell and Reid sipping his coke by the store-room near the stairs. He then tries to leave...

[beowulf]

All the evidence suggests that Baker did NOT specifically speak to Oswald/Prayer Man, but asked something along the lines of "who works here? I need to know where the lifts or stairs are."

I'd agree with that, I was merely pointing out the dangers of relying on triple hearsay. )

[greg_parkerAdmin]

All the evidence suggests that Baker did NOT specifically speak to Oswald/Prayer Man, but asked something along the lines of "who works here? I need to know where the lifts or stairs are."

I'd agree with that, I was merely pointing out the dangers of relying on triple hearsay. )

Yeah, but that's only the courtroom Perry Mason coming out in you.

Well, I object, Your Honor!

None of the investigations into this heinous crime gave a tinker's cuss about whether something was hearsay or not. The ONLY criteria used was how useful it was in tightening the noose around the already deceased accused. And even in court, there are exceptions to the rule. I'd be concerned about using it if there was nothing to help corroborate it. But there is no shortage of corroboration here. Yes, in the retelling, a minor detail or two may have changed - but the general thrust - the VIBE of it resonates as being a million times more accurate than the State's case.

And I rest mine, Your Honor.

[beowulf]

Its not to the Warren Commission's (or for that matter, HSCA's) credit that they were so cavalier about hearsay testimony. Neither of the examples above fail into one of the hearsay exceptions (excited utterance, dying declaration, statement against interest, etc) and both show how a witness can testify, in good faith, to events happening that everyone then treats as a solid fact even though witness has no way of knowing if they actually happened. Its like the game of telephone (or Chinese whispers) that children play.
A game played around the world, in which one person whispers a message to another, which is passed through a line of people until the last player announces the message to the entire group. Errors typically accumulate in the retellings, so the statement announced by the last player differs significantly, and often amusingly, from the one uttered by the first. Reasons for changes include anxiousness or impatience, erroneous corrections, and that some players may deliberately alter what is being said in order to guarantee a changed message by the end of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers

I know what you're concerned about, so I'll point out its possible what Lovelady told Jarman was "the boss" cleared Oswald with the officer at the door. Jarman correctly inferred Lovelady meant Officer Barnett but mistook "the boss" to mean Truly when Lovelady actually meant Shelley.

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Neither of the examples above fail into one of the hearsay exceptions (excited utterance, dying declaration, statement against interest, etc) 

Isn't there another that allows it if the actual witness is deceased or can't be located?

[beowulf]

Isn't there another that allows it if the actual witness is deceased or can't be located?

And here I thought I had gone far enough into the weeds, but I'll keep going... there isn't a specific exception for "deceased or can't be located" per se, its just the list of exceptions are broader when a witness is unavailable. In the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 803 is  "Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay — Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness" and Rule 804 is "Hearsay Exceptions; Declarant Unavailable".  Excited utterance (the go-to exception for criminal cases) is in 803 and dying declaration and statement against interest are in 804.

[GuestGuest]

Jarman's HSCA interview isn't exactly gospel- in it he creates the impression that he, Norman & Williams were stopped at the front door while on their way out. But the film evidence shows that this trio made it to street level, at the bottom of the steps, before being called back into the building. See "Who Is This Man?" on page 8 of the JFK thread.

Now, the fact that they made it to street level, and never mentioned it, does little to allay my suspicions that they were involved in the plot (albeit somewhat marginally, as a buffer underneath the 6th floor). The passage of time probably helped Jarman conveniently forget going as far as the street- in the apparent hope of getting the heck out of the TSBD.

They were stopped, by their own estimates, around 5 minutes after the shots. Maybe 6. During this time period Truly & Baker were up on the roof. So Jarman is confusing Shelley and Truly. Shelley acknowledged going to the RR tracks w/ Lovelady, and returning into the TSBD. So Shelley must be the one that Lovelady is referring to, when he tells Jarman that "Mr. Trudy told the policeman that Oswald was alright, that he worked there, so Oswald walked on down the stairs."

By the way, the HSCA transcriptionist evidently didn't know the case very well.

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Isn't there another that allows it if the actual witness is deceased or can't be located?

And here I thought I had gone far enough into the weeds, but I'll keep going... there isn't a specific exception for "deceased or can't be located" per se, its just the list of exceptions are broader when a witness is unavailable. In the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 803 is  "Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay — Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness" and Rule 804 is "Hearsay Exceptions; Declarant Unavailable".  Excited utterance (the go-to exception for criminal cases) is in 803 and dying declaration and statement against interest are in 804.

Thank you, Mr B. 

Appreciate your willingness to venture into those weeds.

[beowulf]

Sean is just posting gold day after day. I didn't know Hoover told Johnson on the 29th that Oswald was stopped at front entrance or that FBI unsure if LHO used elevator or not.  Hoover does seem sure shooter was on 5th floor.
EDIT: I'm sorry, I was paying attention, Bjørn Gjerde was who posted the above info on that thread.  Here's the transcript he linked to (the page before, if anyone cares, Hoover explains where the magic bullet came from, "in trying to massage his heart at the hospital... they apparently loosened that and it fell on the stretcher, And we recovered that." Carry on.).
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=882&relPageId=5

 Sean  documents that Chief Curry says on 1st day LHO stopped at entrance, on 2nd day says he was found among other persons in 2nd floor lunchroom. December 10 FBI report says something similar, that Oswald was seen in lunchroom but that LHO and other individuals were identified by Truly as employees.
----
Truly's first day FBI interview sounds like he and Baker went up the front stairs, his affidavit reads "immediately up stairs to 2nd floor". At the front lobby, the front stairs look a hell of a lot more immediate than taking the back stairs behind the freight elevators.
http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2013/08/tsbd-first-floor.html

The front stairs to 2nd floor and then seeing Oswald in lunchroom on the way to back stairs would actually make sense (its the scenario the Washington Post describes in Dec. 1 story). There must have been specific reasons they didn't run with it. Baker's 3rd/ 4th floor backstairs affidavit was one problem, a second one might have been expected "fixed testimony" from Mrs. Hine and whoever they wanted to place in lunchroom as witnesses (hell, maybe Jack and Piper were there) fell through.

[GuestGuest]

Bill Kelly  has sworn by that story for decades now.

Incredibly, he did not understand that when he posted that frame, he was going to undermine his own theses.

BTW, where is a link to this previous discussion on Lancer Forum?

Most of us have our blind spots. This seems to be Bill's.

Though I think it's unfortunate, he makes up for it and then some in other areas.

I agree with you about Bill's other work, Greg, but this is becoming somewhat tiresome now.  Bill's still saying that PM could be Frazier.  Jeez.  If Prayer Man is Frazier then who is the guy who looks like Frazier stood next to him?

This is turning into a game of Guess Who or an Abbott and Costello sketch;

"Who's the guy on the steps who looks like Oswald?" 
"That's Lovelady." 
"So who is the guy that looks like Lovelady?"
"That's Lovelady." 
"So who is the guy who looks like Oswald?"
"That's Frazier."
"So who is the guy who looks like Frazier?"
"That's Frazier."   
"So who is the guy who looks like Lovelady?"
"That's Lovelady." 
"So who is the guy that looks like Oswald?"
"That's Frazier."
"So who is the guy who looks like Frazier?"

Bill Kelly, on this issue, has lost all credibility in my opinion.

[Colin_Crow]

Looks Like Baker passing Truly to me

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Bill Kelly  has sworn by that story for decades now.

Incredibly, he did not understand that when he posted that frame, he was going to undermine his own theses.

BTW, where is a link to this previous discussion on Lancer Forum?

Most of us have our blind spots. This seems to be Bill's.

Though I think it's unfortunate, he makes up for it and then some in other areas.

I agree with you about Bill's other work, Greg, but this is becoming somewhat tiresome now.  Bill's still saying that PM could be Frazier.  Jeez.  If Prayer Man is Frazier then who is the guy who looks like Frazier stood next to him?

This is turning into a game of Guess Who or an Abbott and Costello sketch;

"Who's the guy on the steps who looks like Oswald?" 
"That's Lovelady." 
"So who is the guy that looks like Lovelady?"
"That's Lovelady." 
"So who is the guy who looks like Oswald?"
"That's Frazier."
"So who is the guy who looks like Frazier?"
"That's Frazier."   
"So who is the guy who looks like Lovelady?"
"That's Lovelady." 
"So who is the guy that looks like Oswald?"
"That's Frazier."
"So who is the guy who looks like Frazier?"

Bill Kelly, on this issue, has lost all credibility in my opinion.

Bill - and it's just my opinion - made two mistakes in his early analysis of this:

he started with the assumption that Baker was an impenetrable personification of rectitude, and

he believed (correctly) that the 2nd floor encounter exonerates Oswald.

The problem with the second part is that exonerating Oswald is an outcome - not an aim, and is not any sort of reason to hang on to it. It also ignores the fact that being one floor further down has to be even better proof of innocence.

Bill has since moved on and now seems to lean towards the possibly that PM may be Oswald and that Oswald went up for a coke in time for the 2nd floor encounter. I believe Bill is clinging on to the 2nd floor encounter, even with Oswald as PM because of the assumption about Baker listed above.  

Bill - unlike others - at least believes his version of events. He's calling it as he sees it, probably knowing it's becoming an unpopular take. My point was that his list of achievements in this case far outweighs this one blind spot, and it would be a mistake to ignore everything he says based on this one thread.

[Colin_Crow]

Greg,
I find myself in a similar position you describe for Bill. I have spent much time researching what is now becoming in my mind a fictional encounter. It never worked for timing or logic.....and was good grounds to prove Oswald could not be the gunman. I found myself as Bill did, attempting to get Oswald to the lunchroom from the first floor. Time for me to re-evaluate.

[greg_parkerAdmin]

Colin,

The scene in JFK has a lot to answer for. It should be reshot and edited in.  

Bill is dead wrong on this, but he is and always will be, one of the good guys. I hope that doesn't sound overly defensive. I do understand Lee's frustration.

[GuestGuest]

There are a number of reasons why Oswald wasn't the shooter. The gun can't be really traced to him, it very likely wasn't fired that day due to the rust in the barrel and on the firing pin, as well as the markings on the shells and the mysterious missing/not missing clip. The absence of nitrates on his cheek, Arnold's sighting of him of the first floor near the time of the shooting etc. The lunchroom story is not needed.

[Hasan Yusuf]

I didn't know Hoover told Johnson on the 29th that Oswald was stopped at front entrance or that FBI unsure if LHO used elevator or not.

FWIW: I believe the FBI couldn’t make up their mind about whether Oswald came down the elevator or not, because Otis Williams, the TSBD bookkeeping manager, claimed that he had gone up the stairs following the assassination, but didn’t encounter Oswald.
 
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/10/1045-001.gif
 
Curiously, in the following interviews with the FBI, there is no mention of Williams going up to the fourth floor via the stairs. Not that I would expect them to actually mention this pertinent detail in their reports.
 
WCD 5:
 
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=328825
 
WCD 706:
 
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11104&relPageId=105
 
 
TSBD survey to determine the time it would take for Oswald to go from the 6th floor to the front entrance of the building:
 
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=57697&relPageId=129

[Colin_Crow]

From the FBI TSBD survey mentioned by Hasan above. Note options 4 and 5 appear to be times that can only be useful if the encounter occurs on the 4th Floor as per Baker's first day statement. This was done On the 29th Nov. Yet Sean has posted that the earliest Truly talks of the 2nd Floor encounter late on the 22nd to the FBI. If the 3/4th floor encounter has been rejected as early as the day of the shooting why are they including a timing for it a week later?

[Sponsored content]