JFK: Bethesda Autopsy Photos not JFK / Oswald Framed, Warren Report a Sham

James Fetzer9/11, blog

Jim Fetzer

Thanks to the brilliant research of Larry Rivera, we now have proof that the JFK autopsy photos are not of the body of JFK, that Lee Oswald was framed and that The Warren Report (1964) was a sham. We can now also prove that the backyard photographs were faked by pasting Lee Oswald’s face on someone else, as he claimed, and have identified the body-double as Dallas Police Officer, Roscoe White.

Autopsy photographs published by Robert Groden are not even of JFK

We have demonstrated that JFK autopsy photographs published by Robert Groden–who served as a special consultant to the HSCA during its re-investigation of the assassination during 1977-78 and who falsely testified that the man in the doorway was not Lee Oswald but a co-worker, Billy Lovelady, whom we have proven was standing beside Lee–were not of the body of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

We have likewise substantiated that the man in the doorway of the Texas School Book Depository, whose presence was caught in the famous photograph taken by Associated Press photographer, James “Ike” Altgens, was Oswald. He not only has the same height, weight, build, shirt and t-shirt as Lee was wearing when arrested, but his facial features are those of Lee Oswald as well.

The government maintains that Billy Lovelady was the man in the doorway, even though Billy went to the FBI on 29 February 1964 wearing the shirt that he had worn that day and was photographed by them. It was a red-and-white, vertically-stripped short-sleeved shirt, nothing like the long-sleeved, richly textured (and somewhat worn) shirt on Doorman. Lovelady could not have been Doorman.

(1) Autopsy Photos Fake

In his book, The Killing of a President (1994), Robert Groden published (what he has long since claimed to be) “a definitive photographic record of the Kennedy assassination”. On pages 72 and 82, we find two photographs from the autopsy of JFK for which Groden takes credit for himself having discovered. But it turns out that, when compared with photographs of the president, the body is not even that of JFK!

 
  
This finding has lent credence to the conjecture of Robert Morningstar that J.D. Tippit, Dallas Police Officer, whom Lee Oswald was accused of having killed (which was impossible, since Lee was already at The Texas Theater when it was being committed), may have been shot to serve as a body double for JFK. Here is one of the photos Robert has advanced, which certainly deserves further investigation:
  
Since Earl Rose, M.D., a noted medical examiner, conducted an autopsy of Tippit in Dallas that began at 3:15 PM/CT on 22 November 1963, the use of his body at Bethesda appears to be problematical, where the more likely explanation is that the body of “a Major”, whom Dennis David had been instructed not to log in (in violation of standard procedure at the morgue), was instead used in creating these fake images.
From Robert Morningstar’s latest presentation of his case for Tippit as the body-double at Bethesda, we have the above image, which, while not as definitive as an overlay (which we are going to create), makes it already apparent that he turns out to be an implausible candidate for that role. Morningstar had the right idea, however, because even if Tippit was not the corpse in the photo, it certainly cannot have been JFK.

(2) Lee Oswald was Framed

Here is the famous photograph of Lee holding the Mannclicher-Carcano with which he is alleged to have shot JFK, the revolver with which he is supposed to have shot Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit, and holding two communist newspapers, The Worker and The Militant, which was used to implicate him in the crime by combining motive and means with the already established opportunity to kill JFK:

Jim Marrs and I analyzed this photograph, “Framing the Patsy: The Case of Lee Harvey Oswald” (20 October 2015), and concluded that it had been staged as Lee had told Will Fritz. We inferred–on the basis of the height, build and chin, but also an abnormality of his right forearm–that the stand-in had been Roscoe White, a Dallas Police Officer with ties to the CIA. Larry Rivera has now confirmed:

(3) He was in the Doorway

The Warren Commission went out of its way to obfuscate the face that Lee Oswald had been captured in a famous photograph by AP photographer, James “Ike” Altgens, by manipulating testimony to make the case that the figure extending out from the doorway was instead co-worker, Billy Lovelady. The image of the area that has become the object of intense study was advanced by Robert Groden:

Notice that Doorman is missing his left shoulder, because Black Tie Man is both in front and behind him at the same time–a photographic impossibility, if it were real. The man with his arms upraised to shadow his eyes from the Sun is wearing a short-sleeved shirt, which has been massively obfuscated, where Larry has confirmed that Doorman is Lee Oswald. Here is proof that Oswald was Doorman:

Larry has also demonstrated that Doorman is not Billy Lovelady:

And he has proven that the man standing beside Lee was Lovelady:

 

When identities are corrected and colorized, it would have looked like this:

That Groden has become the champion of Lovelady as Doorman has many ironic aspects, not the least of which is that, before he became a consultant to the HSCA, himself maintained that Lee was in the doorway at the time of the motorcade, which was the subject of a newspaper article about him, “Two Conspiracies in JFK Death?”, Sentinel Star (20 April 1976), before he underwent a conversion:

Making a Mockery of a Mock Trial

A mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald was scheduled to be held on the campus of the University of Houston on 16-17 November 2017, during which Larry Rivera would have been the key expert to testify that Lee was in the doorway. He already had his tickets and had forwarded his proofs when he was notified that he had been removed from the witness list! Here is our discussion about this absurdity:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJkLDi6N5oY

The trial ended in a hung jury with a vote of 6-5 for conviction (where one of the prospective jurors skipped the trial), but had Larry been allowed to testify, they would have acquitted him after perhaps five minutes of debate, because his research leaves no doubt about it. Instead of a mock trial, they made a mockery of the trial–and sabotaged decisive proof that Lee Oswald was an innocent man.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota and co-editor of moonrockbooks.com.

Please follow and like us:
error
fb-share-icon
Tweet
fb-share-icon
views: 2,006

Related Posts

December 17, 2024 1

Joachim Hagopian, The Genocidal Knot around Humanity’s Neck Tightens Every Year

December 10, 2024 8

Joachim Hagopian, US Proxy Terrorists, Assad Coup, Zionist Greater Israel Project’s WWIII against Iran/Eastern Powers

December 8, 2024 0

Chuck Baldwin, Trump Picks a War Cabinet

70 thoughts on “JFK: Bethesda Autopsy Photos not JFK / Oswald Framed, Warren Report a Sham”

  2. Well, he's the wrong height, weight, build and shirt to be Billy Lovelady, who observed that he was 2-3" shorter than Lee and 15-20 lbs heavier. He was also wearing a short-sleeved, red-and-white vertically striped shirt. So it really doesn't look like Billy in any of those respects. But I like your observations since fresh eyes may notice things we have missed in the past. I don't know what would cause you hesitation with regard to the overlap of Lee's face on Doorman's. It's a perfect fit! What bothers you?

    Report comment

  4. Jim Fetzer,
    (Regarding the double photo of 'Oswald' vs. Roscoe White following the text: Larry Rivera has now confirmed:)

    How do you explain the strange connection of Roscoe White's right arm to his shoulder? One could argue, that if the right arm of the photo has already been pasted in, the argument with the rare bunion on his lower arm is not supported, at least not from this photo, and this leads to the suspicion, that this photo has already been tampered with (not by you, but before you used it for evidence).

    This leads to my personal objection to the image titled: Robert Groden – "JFK – Absolute proof".
    I have always found it obvious, that the 'Lee Harvey Oswald figure' – the far left person seen from the photographers view – looks a lot more like Billy Lovelady. On the other hand your projection of Billy Lovelady's face upon the face of the person with his arms shadowing his face seems to be correct and is more compelling. This leaves the impression, that somebody – before you came in possession of this photo – had already tampered with it and placed Lovelady's head on Oswalds body in order to confuse and trap later investigators, especially as your projection of Oswald's face upon the face on the leftmost person is seductive but not at all convincing.

    Report comment

  5. It's also revealing that instead of telling me what is wrong about that post I asked about, you divert off into a challenge to a debate. Tell us, in detail (in a blog post if you need), what is wrong with their debunking of your book and how you know it.

    Report comment

  7. I was confident you would be unwilling to debate. Your reluctance speaks volumes about your lack of integrity. I would have taken you apart for your feigned support for a FEMA drill as a real event, where the children were made up out of photos of older kids when they were younger. Revealing!

    Report comment

  10. I asked to know what they had wrong in their post, not to debate. I've seen how you debate. I have no interest in being subjected to the debate tricks you've learned over 35 years in academia. Formal debate doesn't prove which position is correct. William Lane Craig wins 90% of the debates he takes part in but that doesn't prove his conclusion that God exists.

    Report comment

  12. If you want to put up or shut up, we can do a debate that will be recorded and broadcast. It can even be done LIVE. Let me know and I will ask Dave Gahary, who has moderated other debates in the past, and we can have it out. But of course you will have to identify yourself. You can write to him at dave@moonrockbooks.com and tell him that I have challenged you to a debate on Sandy Hook. But I expect you won't do it because I will expose you as a complete and total fraud.

    Report comment

  15. For those unfamiliar with the evidence, a good place to start is with "The Real Deal must see Sandy Hook Update", which you can find under its title or this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff1dDE50Vfg I have presented proof so many places It's hard to keep track. Just do a search on "jamesfetzer.blogspot.com, Sandy Hook". If you don't find between 10 and 20 blogs about it, then do it again. They are there and leave no doubt about it. Someone here is lying through his teeth and that would not be me.

    Report comment

  16. This is embarrassing. Psedo-debunks don't count! Didn't they teach you that in shill school? You have to be paid for doing this, because otherwise your behavior is self-destructive and obscene. But then you appear to have no scruples at all and do not care that you are perceived as a phony and a fraud.

    Report comment

  21. I don't get it. These attacks are no more than harassment. I have made so many presentations on Sandy Hook that it's baffling why you would think that I need to do another. What they are attempting to do is distract me from more pressing matters, such as, in this instance, JFK. That they are posting about Sandy Hook when the blog concerns JFK should be a rather conspicuous red flag. Chris had a sincere inquiry about Las Vegas, but those on Sandy Hook are merely diversions. Surely you see that.

    Report comment

  23. The obvious absurdity of this claim is manifest when you realize I brought 13 contributors together, including 6 current or retired Ph.D. college professors. I have looked at his guy's claims and they are indefensible. We even have the FEMA manual for the event, 50 photos of furnishing an empty house to be the Lanza residence and 50 more of refurbishing the school to serve as the stage. He has his head where the sun does not shine.

    Report comment

  24. I do what a real researcher does on any topic (no matter how "near and dear"). I read the best arguments and best counter-arguments from both sides. I read Fetzer and I read Fetzer's detractors. On almost every substantive claim Fetzer makes about SH, he is wrong. Please go to http://sandyhookanalysis.blogspot.com/ and see how he goes wrong over and over and over again. It's almost hard to believe that that Fetzer was once a serious academic when you see his level of research. sandyhookanalysis.blogspot.com

    Report comment

  26. Yes, of course. JFK alive and standing is going to look very different. But they certainly do not look alike (not even remotely). Are you aware that Bobby and Jackie had to decide on an open casket or closed. They both thought the body did not look like Jack. That appears to be because it wasn't Jack. Your points are good ones, however, and warrant consideration.

    Report comment

  27. No. It's not a colorized version of the same photo. It's a reconstruction using a process known as Blender. Larry is in the process of recreating Dealey Plaza in a model that allows for visualization of events from any point of view (or perspective) one may desire. That image is only meant to convey the general idea and is not meant to be exact. Thanks for asking.

    Report comment

  28. As you will see from the updated blog I have now posted, Morningstar's thesis that Tippit's body was used for the autopsy photographs appears to be in considerable doubt. Even without the more definitive overlays we will produce, it's not a stretch to say that it cannot have been Tippit. But Morningstar was right that the body in the autopsy photos is clearly not that of JFK.

    Report comment

  29. I may have 20 blogs about Sandy Hook here. Anyone who wants to verify what we have claimed should find that easy to undertake. Start with "The Real Deal must see Sandy Hook Update". This appears to be an effort to draw me away from matters of current interest back to issues that were resolved long ago. Check out, for example, "Sandy Hook Charade: 'Noah Pozner' WAS Michael Vabner as a Child". A good place to start.

    Report comment

  30. It appears to be a human body, but there are lots of anomalies. Scott Bennett noticed the shell casings include for blanks and CO2 cartridges, which are used for gas propelled pellet guns. We did a 2+ hour discussion with Kerry Cassidy. Check out "Vegas Update with Dr. Jim Fetzer and Scott Bennett" at Project Camelot. Read my blogs on Las Vegas for more. They settle the issue beyond any doubt.

    Report comment

  33. It would assist no end in comparing the two if the b/w pic of (apparently) Oswald in the doorway and the colorized version of (allegedly) the same pic were printed close together. As they are, though, they plainly don't match. For instance, in the b/w photo Oswald (?) appears to be wearing a white under-shirt, whereas there's no sign of this in the colorized version. Is that b/w photo, incidentally, an unaltered copy of the one taken on the day by Altgens?

    Regarding the Kennedy autopsy photo, it shows Kennedy lying down, dead, whereas the one you've posted of Kennedy alive shows him sitting or standing, in the fullness of health. When dead and lying flat on a slab, Kennedy's facial features would have relaxed and sagged, and might well have resembled those of the corpse in the photo. I'd like to think you're right about this, but when I compare these 'before and after' photos I'm not convinced that the autopsy pic is not of Kennedy. Mind you, all I have to go on are these little digitised photos on your website; maybe things would be clearer if I were able to examine large, glossy photos, which I imagine is what you've been able to do.

    Report comment

  39. Wow, very interesting, I've had enormous respect and admiration for both Dr Fetz & his associates and Robert Morningstar and Robert's work is really being vindicated, thank you Larry & Jim!

    I'm troubled with the timeline Dr. F, as in all your recent shows, you are back to the "Body to Walter Reed" thesis, whereas for several years post-Doug Horne interviews, it was "Body to Bethesda" at 6:30PM and alterations by Humes as witnessed by Reed & a mortician? There wouldn't be time for the body to go to WR, be altered and then get to Bethesda by 6:30. Doug had me totally convinced of 1 body, with the subsequent 3 casket entries and alterations beginning at ~ 6:45, but now I'm not sure.

    Recall that Dr Freidel at Walter Reed, according to Rich DeLarosa said a body came to Walter Reed. With Morningstar's thesis and now that it is perfectly clear that this body is NOT JFK, is it possible that all of these honest brokers are correct or almost correct?

    Possibly the real JFK got snuck-off to Walter Reed, professionally patched-up/altered then reunited with the bronze casket at Bethesda during the Ambulance shell game at 8:00pm. Or would they even risk bringing the real JFK to Bethesda and a 3rd cadaver (Tippit?) brought in the bronze casket, with no rear blow-out?

    Meanwhile another cadaver, Tippit? or someone else was brought in the body bag/shipping casket by the Funeral Home to be worked-over by Humes at 6:45pm, with Humes being somewhat of a dupe, thus corroborating O'Connor, Reed, the young mortician?

    This is certainly a massive paradigm shift and opens up a whole new field of research. I would highly recommend revisiting the old Real Deal shows from 2009 with Rich DeLarosa "JFK Autopsy Timelines" and the Doug Horne "Part 2 Medical Evidence." It looks like we've been taking for granted that the real JFK was used for all these alterations, photos and shenanigans. Great work!

    Lucas

    Report comment

  41. Thanks Jim for your efforts. I bet most shills don't even realize they are a shill. In anonymous' case, it is more than likely it's own mind has been altered eliminating it's ability to invoke clear level headed thinking due to psychological implants by the life long criminal masters it serves. It is responses like those emanating from shills, like the one I am referencing, that actually prove the veracity of your research. I would say to anonymous that if they were to pay attention to their daily thinking processes they would quickly come to the realization that the way they think today has been usurped by some power Anonymous has been subjected to early in their life. And since the thoughts they have are someone else's, not their own, whose are they? If I were anonymous I would be questioning the reality of life itself since it has been living someone else's life and not their own. And having unquestioningly largely lived through another's thoughts for so many years, what are you going to do Anonymous when they pull the plug on your programmed thinking and your thinker no longer works properly and you start to injure those around you through verbal abuse and from there it escalates into who knows what. Pay attention because that is where you are headed. They got you. They own your cranial rights. Be honest with yourself. That would be a good place to start. I cannot imagine how baseless your life has been without being in possession of your own mind. I am truly sorry for your plight!

    Report comment

  42. Recycling rubbish does not change it. The two photos were obviously staged. So there is no merit to that claim. The sign, "Everyone must check in!" was acknowledge by Patricia Llorda to have been placed there by DHS and corresponds to the instruction in the FEMA manual, "Everyone must check in!" There was not only no internet activity but, as Dennis Cimino explained, the CT emergency communications network was taken over (apparently by FEMA) early that morning. Everyone can download the book for themselves by entering the title, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK. The 2nd edition, which corrects a few mistakes in the 1st, is available at moonrockbooks.com.

    Report comment

  43. Regarding Sandy Hook, you are either unfamiliar with the evidence or are unable to reason objectively or else are simply blowing smoke. They made up the kids out of photographs of children when they were younger. See, for example, "Sandy Hook Charade: 'Noah Pozner' was Michael Vabner as a Child". You are obviously here as a provocateur, not as a serious student of JFK, Sandy Hook or any other subject, which I deplore. If you had good reasons to dispute our collaborative findings, you would present it. Vague dismissals with no support have no argumentative value.

    Report comment

  45. As a teacher of logic, you surely know that a person's identity (or lack thereof) has no bearing on whether their arguments are true or false. No matter how many times we link to websites debunking, one after one, your claims about Sandy Hook you still go on claiming we provide no support for our assertions. If you are so egregiously wrong on Sandy Hook, there is no reason to suppose you are much better with the countless other conspiracies you endorse.

    Report comment

  47. No, Dr. I am not simply someone trolling your site. Frankly, I rather appreciate most(not all) of your work. This isn't about that. We have an issue that needs resolution.

    I see the connections, Dr. You're apparently coordinating in some capacity and I don't like where it is pointing. I consider it a potential threat.

    Report comment

  49. Chris, this is just bullshit. People who are not even willing to use their names but attack those of us who are doing what we can to expose falsehoods and reveal truths belong in a special region of hell. They are despicable cads, but you will find them here with nothing at all to support their attacks.

    Report comment

  50. These kinds of comments are moronic. I do collaborative research with the best qualified experts on JFK, 9/11, Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing and more. If someone thinks I have something wrong, they should identify what that is and explain what I have wrong and how they know. This kind of vague dismissal is a sign they have nothing of value to contribute.

    Report comment

  60. Roscoe White? He stood in for Lee Oswald in the backyard photographs. He was not the subject of any autopsy photos. I am sorry, but you need to develop your cognitive abilities. We suspect it may have been J.D. Tippit, who bore a strong resemblance to JFK, but we have yet to prove that, too. So we know it was not JFK and are looking for the right photos to show it was or was not Tippit as the body-double.

    Report comment

  62. Roscoe White does not look identical to JFK, based on the two photos of him circulating on Google images, one young, one older. Plus Roscoe White was very bald. Are there more photos of older Roscoe available, and especially from other angles? Ears are usually a dead giveaway and the ears in the Fetzer post above seem to match for JFK and the supposed corpse. What gives?

    Report comment

  65. I am currently reading "JFK and the Unspeakable" by James W. Douglass. It raises way more questions than it answers as far as I have read. I grew up in the 60s (now 71 years old) and these events truly shook me to the core of my being. What I am reading now in this book leaves me wondering about many people I once counted as a friend or close acquaintance. It also makes me wonder about the loyalty of many US military personnel and I mean true loyalty not for-public-view-stuff.

    Report comment

  66. I don't know about Jim, but I still don't.
    Just being honest, it's staggering to me how anyone DOES think lots of people were shot and killed. I always am thinking, what do these people see that I don't see? I mean I've kept an open mind. I've watched all the videos and news coverage ad nauseum. And still…Nothing. To me EVERYTHING is so staged, so fake, that I just scratch my head in amazement that anyone buys it.
    So, sorry…. don't mean to hijack this JFK comment thread with Vegas stuff.

    Report comment

  67. He must be busy at Kennedy convention Aristides I will say one thing I live in mass I did some checking just for the hell of it and I found out that a woman named Rhonda Laroque who died at Vegas shooting I'm just saying something weird about it funeral home wouldn't give straight answer then her cousin called me out of the blue how he get my number and it was verry strange Jeff Rense says people die Jim Fetzer says no what your honest opinion

    Report comment

  69. Ha ha, Chris Calo is worried, as am I, about Carny Jim ruining the credibility of good researchers doing good research (a distant memory for Uncle Jim) .
    I think THIS article is GOOD- at least worth being given full consideration. Many worry about the effect of having Uncle Beefaroni endorsing it, because we all know people died at Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, etc.

    Report comment

Leave a Reply