Post by Rob Caprio on Dec 10, 2018 13:44:32 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/10/27/00/45AB083000000578-5022503-image-a-64_1509062389318.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) wanted everyone to believe that the Backyard Photographs (BYP -- CE-133A & CE-133B) allegedly depicting Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) with his alleged Carcano and .38 revolver are authentic.
LHO himself said that the Dallas Police Department (DPD) superimposed his head on someone else's body. Here are but five reasons why he was most likely correct.
1) Shadows
It has been noted for many years by many experts that the shadow for the body and neck, and the shadow for the nose do NOT match up. The body shadow reflects the time of 10:00 AM, and the nose shadow reflects the time of 12:00 PM. How can this be if it is an authentic photograph as the WC claimed?
The neck leaves odd shadows as well that can't be explained if this is an authentic photograph, and there is an issue with a "bulge" (discussed below) in the neck area in the A photo.
In CE-133B LHO’s head is slightly tilted to the right (for viewer, left for the person posing) yet the nose shadow has not changed in the slightest, it is still straight up and down. How can this be if this is an authentic photograph?
Detective Superintendent Malcolm Thompson (25 years as the head of the Police Forensic Science Laboratory Identification Bureau at Scotland Yard) said the following about the shadows:
“The body shadows DON’T relate to the other shadows in the picture and one can only come to the conclusion that this body has been placed in the background and photographed but all the shadows here are swinging to the left where as this shadow is slightly to the left but also behind the body is common to both pictures (A and B), but when one examines the shadow content, one sees the sun at an angle to the body, which does NOT relate to the angle of the shadow. The gun is reaching far more out to the right, more in a horizontal position here in relation to the body shadow than the gun is ACTUALLY being held by the person.
When one measures the pictures, photograph A is ENLARGED slightly greater than photograph B but even allowing for that, the shadow details in the static areas of the picture, that is in particular on the staircase here, the shadows are so EXACT that there is NO doubt in my mind, it is either a COMMON NEGATIVE used to produce the two prints or two successive negative with the camera on a tripod and with neither camera or tripod moved in any way between the two exposures.” (Emphasis mine)
Thus, we see from a true expert that CE-133 A & B are tied so closely together (perhaps from the same negative) that is impossible to say that A is authentic and B is a fake. They are in all likelihood from the SAME source! IF not, then were is the tripod as is unlikely there is NO movement by a human holding the camera?
2) Chin
LHO had a cleft chin, yet all the BYP photographs portray a man with a square chin, how can this happen if it is authentic? What is more disturbing is the fact there is a very clear line that runs across the top of the chin, like a knife cut, that indicates LHO’s claim that someone put his head on the body of someone else is most likely true. There has NEVER been an explanation for this, all we were given initially was denial, and then the lame excuse of it just being a “water spot” was used.
3) Disproportion
Jim Garrison was the first to notice the neck and body did NOT match the head in terms of proportion. In fact, when the two photographs are overlayed NOTHING matches up except for the head, which is NOT suppose to happen. If one uses the face as a standard for measurement, LHO appears taller in one of the photographs. IF these photographs are authentic as claimed, how is this explained?
4) Changing Posture & Distances
Again Garrison noted that the facial “portrait” was the same in BOTH photographs, but the distances and posture were different from one photograph to the next. If Marina Oswald is correct, and she did snap the two photographs extremely close together, how could the person’s posture and distance from the camera change so dramatically in a matter of seconds (or less)?
5) Unnatural Bulges
In both A and B there appear “unnatural bulges” that do not fit the photographs. In A it occurs in the neck area, and in B it appears on the post to the right of the person’s head. They appear to be parallel to each other as well. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) photographic panel said the post “bulge” was an optical illusion caused by a twig, but Jack White and others have said it is an example of composite retouching.
Mr. Brian Mee discussed this issue in an interview (professional photographer and photograph lab technician for 18 years and for over 10 years he worked for a U.S. government lab. He has worked in the areas of negative retouching, print development, shadows and negative analysis.).
“Well, the problem I have with that, keeping in mind the angle of the body shadows and others, is that a branch or a leaf here would have been struck by sun coming from around a four o'clock position. Therefore, a branch or leaf shadow here would fall in about a ten or eleven o'clock position, and so I don't think the bulge here could have resulted from a natural shadow. With the sun coming in from a four o'clock angle, I don't see how that bulge could have been caused by the shadow from a branch or a leaf. The angle's not right.”
He viewed the video again to be sure, and then said this.
“No, I don't see how that bulge could have been caused by a shadow from a branch or a leaf. I don't see it. The shadow angle would be wrong. The sun's in the wrong position to do that. I'd like to see the originals, though. For a small detail like this, you want to look at the original photos. But from what I can see here, I really don't think this bulge was caused by any kind of a branch or a leaf shadow-- not with the sun shining the way it is in these pictures.”
How about the neck bulge in A? The interviewer points out the HSCA photographic panel did NOT deal with this issue at all.
“Well, that neck bulge needs to be explained. It doesn't look natural, and it's parallel to the bulge in the post. It disappears in 133-B, but then you have an indentation in the post [in B].”
These are but five reasons why the BYPs are NOT genuine, but there are many more. It is most likely that these photographs were created to frame LHO.
i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/10/27/00/45AB083000000578-5022503-image-a-64_1509062389318.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) wanted everyone to believe that the Backyard Photographs (BYP -- CE-133A & CE-133B) allegedly depicting Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) with his alleged Carcano and .38 revolver are authentic.
LHO himself said that the Dallas Police Department (DPD) superimposed his head on someone else's body. Here are but five reasons why he was most likely correct.
1) Shadows
It has been noted for many years by many experts that the shadow for the body and neck, and the shadow for the nose do NOT match up. The body shadow reflects the time of 10:00 AM, and the nose shadow reflects the time of 12:00 PM. How can this be if it is an authentic photograph as the WC claimed?
The neck leaves odd shadows as well that can't be explained if this is an authentic photograph, and there is an issue with a "bulge" (discussed below) in the neck area in the A photo.
In CE-133B LHO’s head is slightly tilted to the right (for viewer, left for the person posing) yet the nose shadow has not changed in the slightest, it is still straight up and down. How can this be if this is an authentic photograph?
Detective Superintendent Malcolm Thompson (25 years as the head of the Police Forensic Science Laboratory Identification Bureau at Scotland Yard) said the following about the shadows:
“The body shadows DON’T relate to the other shadows in the picture and one can only come to the conclusion that this body has been placed in the background and photographed but all the shadows here are swinging to the left where as this shadow is slightly to the left but also behind the body is common to both pictures (A and B), but when one examines the shadow content, one sees the sun at an angle to the body, which does NOT relate to the angle of the shadow. The gun is reaching far more out to the right, more in a horizontal position here in relation to the body shadow than the gun is ACTUALLY being held by the person.
When one measures the pictures, photograph A is ENLARGED slightly greater than photograph B but even allowing for that, the shadow details in the static areas of the picture, that is in particular on the staircase here, the shadows are so EXACT that there is NO doubt in my mind, it is either a COMMON NEGATIVE used to produce the two prints or two successive negative with the camera on a tripod and with neither camera or tripod moved in any way between the two exposures.” (Emphasis mine)
Thus, we see from a true expert that CE-133 A & B are tied so closely together (perhaps from the same negative) that is impossible to say that A is authentic and B is a fake. They are in all likelihood from the SAME source! IF not, then were is the tripod as is unlikely there is NO movement by a human holding the camera?
2) Chin
LHO had a cleft chin, yet all the BYP photographs portray a man with a square chin, how can this happen if it is authentic? What is more disturbing is the fact there is a very clear line that runs across the top of the chin, like a knife cut, that indicates LHO’s claim that someone put his head on the body of someone else is most likely true. There has NEVER been an explanation for this, all we were given initially was denial, and then the lame excuse of it just being a “water spot” was used.
3) Disproportion
Jim Garrison was the first to notice the neck and body did NOT match the head in terms of proportion. In fact, when the two photographs are overlayed NOTHING matches up except for the head, which is NOT suppose to happen. If one uses the face as a standard for measurement, LHO appears taller in one of the photographs. IF these photographs are authentic as claimed, how is this explained?
4) Changing Posture & Distances
Again Garrison noted that the facial “portrait” was the same in BOTH photographs, but the distances and posture were different from one photograph to the next. If Marina Oswald is correct, and she did snap the two photographs extremely close together, how could the person’s posture and distance from the camera change so dramatically in a matter of seconds (or less)?
5) Unnatural Bulges
In both A and B there appear “unnatural bulges” that do not fit the photographs. In A it occurs in the neck area, and in B it appears on the post to the right of the person’s head. They appear to be parallel to each other as well. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) photographic panel said the post “bulge” was an optical illusion caused by a twig, but Jack White and others have said it is an example of composite retouching.
Mr. Brian Mee discussed this issue in an interview (professional photographer and photograph lab technician for 18 years and for over 10 years he worked for a U.S. government lab. He has worked in the areas of negative retouching, print development, shadows and negative analysis.).
“Well, the problem I have with that, keeping in mind the angle of the body shadows and others, is that a branch or a leaf here would have been struck by sun coming from around a four o'clock position. Therefore, a branch or leaf shadow here would fall in about a ten or eleven o'clock position, and so I don't think the bulge here could have resulted from a natural shadow. With the sun coming in from a four o'clock angle, I don't see how that bulge could have been caused by the shadow from a branch or a leaf. The angle's not right.”
He viewed the video again to be sure, and then said this.
“No, I don't see how that bulge could have been caused by a shadow from a branch or a leaf. I don't see it. The shadow angle would be wrong. The sun's in the wrong position to do that. I'd like to see the originals, though. For a small detail like this, you want to look at the original photos. But from what I can see here, I really don't think this bulge was caused by any kind of a branch or a leaf shadow-- not with the sun shining the way it is in these pictures.”
How about the neck bulge in A? The interviewer points out the HSCA photographic panel did NOT deal with this issue at all.
“Well, that neck bulge needs to be explained. It doesn't look natural, and it's parallel to the bulge in the post. It disappears in 133-B, but then you have an indentation in the post [in B].”
These are but five reasons why the BYPs are NOT genuine, but there are many more. It is most likely that these photographs were created to frame LHO.