Categorized | USA

JFK Special 3: Oswald was in the doorway, after all!


By Ralph Cinque (with Jim Fetzer)

So we begin with the Altgens photograph, where JFK is clutching his throat and you can even see a bullet hole in the windshield–a small, while spiral nebula with a dark hole in the center–where his left ear would be if it were visible, where it passed through:

Then we move toward the background images, where someone is looking out the doorway, where his identity has been disputed:  some say it’s Lee Oswald, others that it’s Billy Lovelady; but if it’s Lee Oswald, then he can’t be on the 6th floor shooting at JFK:

Then we look more closely and discover that that whitish-blur to the right-front of the man in the doorway is the obfuscation of someone, where the only reason for obfuscating an image would have been if someone had been there who should not have been:

But the only one who should not have been there was Lee Oswald, which led me (Jim Fetzer) to suppose that the man whose face and shirt had been obfuscated was Lee, who even told Will Fritz he was “out with Bill Shelley in front” during his interrogation:

where the features that have bee obscured can be identified more readily when they have been colorized, where I was convinced that Lee had been there, since there was no other (apparent) good reason to have obfuscated the face of anyone else:

and where the shirt on the man in the doorway seemed to be checkered like the shirt that Billy Lovelady was seen wearing both inside the Dallas Police Department (third above) and outside on the steps (below), shortly following the assassination of JFK:

but where K.D. Ruckman realized that the man on the steps (shown here) did not appear to be the same man in the Dallas Police Department (shown above), which meant that there appeared to be a “Lovelady imposter”, which would make a lot of sense if,

as Ralph Cinque had inferred, the man in the doorway was Oswald, where Lovelady’s face had been imposed upon him, the opposite of what had been done in creating the “backyard photographs” done by imposing Lee’s head on somone else’s body,


which Jim Marrs and I had explained, building on the prior work of Jack White, who had already shown that these photographs could not possibly be genuine, since they had exactly the same Oswald face on four different poses taken at four different times.

Where Ralph realized that he had more than enough proof to establish that Billy Lovelady (shown here in an FBI photograph wearing the shirt he said he had worn at the time) was not the same person as “Billy Lovelady” at the Dallas Police Departmant.

A Matter of Identity

by Ralph Cinque

Look at these two images, and tell me if it is the same man. If they are not the same man, then the entire official story of the JFK assassination falls completely apart.  Everything hinges on those two individuals being the same person.  If they are different human beings, then it’s all over for The Warren Report (1964):

The man on the left is Billy Lovelady, who worked at the Texas School Book Depository alongside Lee Harvey Oswald.  When the Altgens photo came out, many people, from all over the world, thought that the man standing in the doorway was Lee. But, it was quickly announced that, no, it was Billy. But, it was a hard sell. As much as they raved about how much Lee and Billy looked alike, Lee was 5’9” and weighed 135 pounds whereas Billy was 5’8” and weighed 170 pounds.  That’s a big weight difference, and it hardly makes them twins. And most agree that Doorway Man had a slender build, much like Lee.

And with Doorman wearing a loose-fitting, unbuttoned outer shirt over a notched t-shirt, it was a perfect match to Lee’s garb. But what was Billy wearing? That’s where it gets dicey.  At first, Billy said that he wore a red and white striped shirt and blue jeans. He told that to the FBI, and they wrote it down and sent it to the Warren Commission. And the shirt, which you can see above, was short-sleeved.  That immediately ruled him out as Doorway Man.  And keep in mind.  This is a default situation:  If it wasn’t Billy, then it had to be Lee. There were no other candidates, no other possibilities.  It had to be one or the other.  And so, the story had to be changed. Are you aware that other aspects of the assassination also got changed? For instance, they didn’t go with the “Magic Bullet” theory in the beginning.

At first, they said that JFK and Connally were struck by different bullets, which is also what Connally claimed. But then when they discovered that there had been a missed shot that nicked bystander James Teague, they had to account for all the wounds with just two bullets.  And since the last and fatal head shot was considered a solo event, they had to attribute all of the remaining seven wounds in two men to just one bullet, the so-called “magic bullet”. But, they definitely would not have gone that route if the fragment that hit Teague had not been found.  They weren’t going that route.  It’s like they hit a wall, and they had to go around it. Flexibility, it seems, is the key to effective story-telling when it comes to political assassinations.

Since they had to get Lovelady out of that short-sleeved shirt and into a long-sleeved one–for there to be any chance of him being Doorman–the story became that he actually wore a long-sleeved plaid, checkered shirt that day, like that worn by the DPD Lovelady on the left above.  As for what he told the FBI earlier, that was just a misunderstanding.  And to prove it, they came up with the image that you see on the right above. That is supposed to be an image of Billy Lovelady that was taken outside the Texas School Book Depository sometime after the assassination, where  you can see that he is wearing a long-sleeved, plaid, checkered shirt.

Comparing the “Loveladys”

Ain’t detective work grand? If you’re smart and cunning like Lieutenant Columbo, all the pieces come together, they fit like a glove, and there are no loose ends. Except in this case, Lieutenant Columbo would have been the first to point out that FBI Lovelady and TSBD Lovelady were not the same man.

What exactly do they have in common? The only thing I can see is a similar pattern of hair loss, but even that isn’t identical. Nothing else about them is even a good match, let alone a perfect one.  So, how is it that people came to accept that they were one and the same person? The answer is simple: the psychological power of officialdom.  When something comes from high above, that is, from government and media, it flies on the wings of authority, and the critical faculties of the mind shut down.  The very same thing is happening right now, this day, in perfect parallel with the events of 1963. Here’s what I mean:

It is now the one-year anniversary of the (alleged) assassination of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. But, did he really live until 2011? Ten years earlier, in 2001, his kidneys were failing, and he was on dialysis. Do you know how long the average dialysis patient lives in the United States? About 5 years, and that’s with the best medical care. For a while, Osama was living in a cave. And he had a myriad of other health problems, including: diabetes, hepatitis, osteoporosis, and Marfan’s syndrome. [Editor’s note:  See Nicholas Kollerstrom, “Osama bin Laden:  1957-2001”, and David Ray Griffin, Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive? (2009).]

The left picture below is Osama bin Laden from 2001 and to its right is an image from 2011 which was released by the Pentagon.   Which man looks older and which man looks younger? They say that he dyed his hair, but forget about that.  Compare their eyes, and hone in on the tired, old eyes of the “younger” Osama.  Compare the fullness of their faces, or I should say that lack of it in the older-looking, more decrepit Osama from 2001. Look at the firmness and solidness of the musculature around the shoulders of the latter-day bin laden compared to how he looked 10 years earlier. Those are some solid trapezoid muscles. What, was he lifting weights at his compound in Abbottabad?  With all his health problems and with the stress of living in a cave, living on the run, remaining in hiding as the most wanted man in the world, do you really think there is any chance that bin laden could emerge in 2011 in the obvious good, robust condition that you see above? We’re talking about 10 years on dialysis!

I happened to watch the movie, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”, in which a man aged in reverse, where he got younger with each passing year. But, I needn’t have to tell you that that never happens in real life. People only age in one direction – from younger to older.  Osama, above, seems to have defied the laws of biology.  Apparently, he spent the whole time on a spaceship traveling at the speed of light so that he didn’t age, as per Einstein. But hey, he not only didn’t age, he actually got younger- a lot younger. And all while on dialysis! Heck, maybe we should all start doing it.

But the question is, why does any American believe that that second picture was really Osama bin laden? And the answer again is: the psychological power of officialdom.

But getting back to the two images of Billy Lovelady, there are people today, supposedly intelligent people, who are still arguing that they are the same person.

Allow me to re-present the basic points of comparison, most of which were laid out by Canadian researcher, Kelly Ruckman.   What follows is an excerpt from the last article in this series:

First, TSBD Lovelady’s head (right) is wider from front to back than is FBI Lovelady’s (left). Second, the slope of FBI Lovelady’s head is more vertical, and the angle of his forehead with the top of his head is more rectangular. On TSBD Lovelady, there is no angle at all, rather there is just a long, gentle, slope, like a ski slope, and it reminds me of the images we have seen of Cro-Magnon Man or Neanderthal. Third, FBI Lovelady seems to have a longer nose, and TSBD Lovelady seems to have a shorter, stubbier nose. Fourth, the hairlines are different. FBI Lovelady’s hairline at the temple seems to go straight up whereas TSBD Lovelady’s hairline angles back more. Fifth, the ears look different, with the real Lovelady’s on the left being longer and narrower. Remember that ears are very distinctive, like fingerprints.

Thank you Kelly Ruckman for pointing out the above. But there is a difference between the two of them which jumps out even more at me: their necks. TSBD Lovelady (right) has got a condition known as FORWARD NECK SYNDROME. Any orthopedist or chiropractor can see it at a glance. Instead of going up, his neck is going forward. FBI Lovelady (left) has a much more vertical neck. The basic, fundamental direction that it is going is UP. But on TSBD Lovelady (right), his neck isn’t going up so much. His neck is going more FORWARD, and that has the effect of shortening his neck. And that is something we can measure. Take a ruler and measure the length of the visible neck on each of them, going from the bottom of the ear to wherever the vertical line reaches the shirt. As I measure it, I get a full inch of neck length on FBI Lovelady, but only 2/3 inch on TSBD Lovelady. So, from the perspective of TSBD Lovelady, FBI Lovelady has 50% more length in his neck.

Next, I want you to drop a plumb line on each of them. And the way you can do it is to take a ruler and place it right behind the ear, and holding it vertical, track it down and see where it goes. With good posture, the ear should not be too much in front of the sagittal plane of the shoulder, and FBI Lovelady is doing quite well in that respect. His isn’t bad alignment. I like what I’m seeing. But TSBD Lovelady’s ear is much farther forward than that; his plumb line is well forward of his shoulder. He is really quite contorted, and he’s the kind of guy who is destined to have osteoarthritis of the neck.

In holding his neck forward like that, he has to do something to maintain his eyes level, that is, parallel with the ground, and what he’s doing is cocking his head back sharply at the very top of his neck. You may not be able to see it as well as I can, but if you were to see it on an x-ray, it would jump out at you. So, his neck is going forward, and at the very top of his neck, his head is rocking back on his neck. And that is like putting a heavy weight on a spring, compressing it. And that puts pressure on all the cervical joints, and over time, they wear out from it. The compressed cervical discs thin out until they are practically non-existent. Cervical disc herniations are also possible with this kind of posture.

Here’s another way you can tell the difference: look at the axis of FBI Lovelady’s ear. It’s pretty much vertical: straight up and down. Not perfectly so, but close. But, on TSBD Lovelady, the ear is rocked back more. It’s got more pitch to it. The line of greatest length through the ear is more diagonal, with the upper part back and the lower part forward. Again, it’s rocked back, and the reason it’s rocked back is because the whole head is rocked back. This is a very rigid, locked, dysfunctional posture that compromises mobility, flexibility, and coordination.

As a chiropractor, it’s a pleasure for me to look at FBI Lovelady because he has such nice lengthening in his neck and that translates into freedom of motion, lightness of being, and a generally expansive state of the body, which is what you want. But, it’s very distressful for me to look at TSBD Lovelady because he looks solid, rigid, steeped in stiffness, and destined for pain.

Is there any chance that Lovelady was just standing and comporting himself differently on the two days? No. There is absolutely no chance of that. Postural habits are deeply ingrained. They are the MOST deeply ingrained of all the habits you’ve got. It’s extremely hard to break them- even if you try, and there is no reason to think Lovelady was trying. And the reason that it’s so hard to change them is because your habitual way of carrying yourself is the only thing you know; it’s the only thing that feels right to you; anything else would feel way out of balance, terribly wrong, like you were going to fall. It’s like your own little world that you’re living in- your way of responding to gravity and other forces- and it’s the only one you can even conceive of.

Having been a chiropractor for 36 years, I can tell you that this one factor of the FORWARD NECK SYNDROME on TSBD Lovelady and its absence on FBI Lovelady completely eliminates any possibility that the two of them were the same man. It clinches it like different dental x-rays. It is not just a different position that TSBD Lovelady is holding his neck; he is anatomically fixed that way. He could not make his neck look like the FBI Lovelady’s no matter what he did. It would be anatomically impossible.

That concludes the excerpt, and I hope you are convinced now that the case for them being different individuals is solid and compelling. However, our opponents, including all lone-nutters and even some conspiracy theorists, say things like: “you can’t tell anything from old photographs,” “it’s too blurry to make precise comparisons,” “posture fluctuates from day to day,” (actually, it doesn’t) and more.  They have actually been fighting tooth and nail to defend the idea that those two disparate men are both Billy Lovelady. For lone-nutters, it may be that they are wise enough to realize that they have to cling to that claim or else they lose everything.  As for the CTs who are fighting me, I haven’t a clue as to what motivates them.

The Experts Speak

But, to ratchet it up a notch, I decided to seek the opinions of some other doctors whom I know. And in order not to bias them, I made no mention of the JFK assassination, and I made no mention of what my opinion is.  I certainly did not include the excerpt above. Here is all I said:

Doctors, I have a favor to ask of each of you. Please look at this composite picture of two men. I wish for you to tell me, based on anatomical comparisons, whether you think there is any chance they are the same individual. It’s important concerning some research I’m doing. Thank you.
Dr. Ralph Cinque

Now, let’s take a look at the results, and I am going to post them verbatim. And I am going to provide the names and locations of the doctors, just so that you know, without a doubt, that I am talking about real people. There is no bull-shitting going on here.

This is from Dr. David Peters, who is an eye doctor in Lockhart, Texas:

Hello Raffie!

Based on the bone structure, they do not appear to be the same person.

Pal David

*     *     *       *       *       *       *      *      *      *     *      *

Dr. James Panzetta is a dentist from Virginia:

Hi Ralph:  I’ll give you my opinion.  I do not believe they are the same person.  My reasons are as follows:

1. The bridge of the nose on one man appears convex and the other appears concave.
2.  The lips appear different to me.  Bottom lip seems more retruded on the right than on the other.
3.  Eyes and eye brows appear different to me.
4.  Head and neck articulation appear different to me.
5.  Man on right has more robust chest.

*      *        *        *        *         *       *       *       *      *       *

This is a response from Dr. Glenn Skene, a chiropractor, from Anaheim, CA:


I see them as two distinct individuals. True, they are both working on a good “reverse yamaka’ with their hairlines, but the ears are wrong, the cervical curves are way different, and so are the slopes of their shoulders. There is also the overall size difference- the guy on the left is slighter of build.
So, my analysis is: 2 different dudes, both bad dressers!


*      *      *       *      *       *      *      *      *      *     *     *

This is from Dr. Gary Skene, who is the brother of Glenn Skene, and also a chiropractor. He practices in Boca del Toro, Panama:

Ralph, they’re not the same guy. Their faces are different, and the guy on the right is a lot stockier. But, he also has that short, anterior bulldog neck, and the other guy doesn’t. Is someone really saying that they are the same guy? Who? I can’t believe it. I mean, I can’t believe that anyone would say that. They’re definitely not the same guy, and it’s not a matter of belief. Hey, when are you coming down here? You gotta see this place. Gary

*     *     *     *     *       *      *      *     *     *     *     *      *

This is from Dr. Alan Goldhamer, a chiropractor from Santa Rosa, CA:

These appear to be two different individuals. I suppose picture quality and angle could alter perceptions, but many features appear to be different, including the noses, the ears, and especially the cervical anatomy.

*    *    *     *      *     *     *      *      *      *      *     *      *

This is from Dr. Erwin Linzer, who is also a chiropractor from Santa Rosa, CA:

Hi Dr. Cinque

It looks to me like two different people. The ear size is different, and the jaw size seems different.

Dr. Erwin Linzner

*     *    *     *      *       *      *       *      *      *      *      *

This is from Dr. John Wilbur who happens to be my dentist here in Austin TX:

They are not the same man. With enough surgery, you might be able to change the left man into the right one, but I can’t see it going the other way.

*    *    *     *      *      *       *      *     *     *      *     *      *

This is Dr. Theresa Longo M.D., who is a pediatric intensive care specialist from southern Illinois.

Dear Ralph, I would have great difficulty saying that those two men are the same man. The man on the right has a very different slant of his forehead and brow, and his eye socket configuration is different too. And his whole face seems to plane farther back, that is, to be wider. They are two individuals. Theresa

*     *      *       *       *       *       *       *       *       *       *

Finally, here is Dr. Ward Dean, a brilliant medical doctor, the author of several textbooks, two of which I have read: The NeuroEndocrine Theory of Aging (1992) and Biological Aging Measurement (1988), which has to do with fine observations and measurements of the human body, which therefore applies directly to what we are talking about. Dr. Dean said:

Ralph, Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. They look like different men to me. Their cranio-facial features look distinct, and the man on the right looks heavier and older. And what a difference in physiognomy! The man on the left looks relaxed, but I wouldn’t want to tangle with that guy on the right. He looks mean! Just an impression. Ward

*      *      *      *      *      *      *      *      *      *     *      *

I could continue posing the question it to other doctors, but since I’m getting a unanimous verdict- that they were different men- there is hardly any point. But please feel free to send the pictures around yourself to doctors or non-doctors. I asked doctors simply because they know anatomy and they are used to studying the human body. But, Jim Fetzer put it as well as anyone when he said that one of them looks like a man and the other like a gorilla. In lay terms, that’s as good a way as any to express the magnitude of the differences between them.

What does this mean?

What does all this mean? It means that the totality of the single gunman theory collapses to nothingness. Lovelady was not the one wearing the plaid checkered shirt on 22 November 1963, yet he posed in that shirt, or one like it, several times over the years, and as late as 1978, as photographed by Robert Groden. Lovelady knew very well that he was not the one wearing that shirt that fateful day in 1963. Rather, it was his imposter who wore it.

So, Billy Lovelady was part of, or at least became part of, the conspiracy. He was not the Doorway Man in the Altgens photo, which means that Lee Harvey Oswald has to have been. And if Lee was standing in the doorway during the shooting, he could not have been on the 6th floor doing the shooting.

This is open and shut. There is no longer any doubt about it. The image of Doorway Man in the Altgens photo is visual proof that Oswald was innocent. And all the pining of Vincent Bugliosi, Gerald Posner, John McAdams, S.V. Anderson, Max Holland, and others cannot change it or contradict it.  The only thing left to do now is to spread the word, one mind at a time. Unfortunately, the power and dominance of government and media are utterly on their side.

Even the talking heads mentioned above have got the hobnail boot of the state backing them up. Ironically, there can’t be more than a few individuals still living who were involved in any way with the assassination, and none of them are in power.  No one in power now can be considered the least bit culpable for the murder. Obama had nothing to do with it. Neither did Attorney General Eric Holder. So, why won’t they re-open the case?

The answer is that it’s not just the perpetrators who would be on trial if the case were reopened. It’s the integrity and the moral authority of the entire U.S. federal government and also the whole corporate media that would be on trial because they have been feeding us the lies for 48 years.  So, they are not going to cooperate; they are never going to cooperate. They correctly recognize that, ultimately, it is their own hides that are on the line, if not for the murder, then for the cover-up. 

They have already crossed the Rubicon concerning JFK, and there is no turning back for them. They are going to stick to their story to the bitter end- despite how preposterous it is and always was.  They control the television and radio broadcasts; they determine the content of the school books; and they know full-well about the psychological power of officialdom, and so they use it.  But, that doesn’t mean that we can’t win. You have to think of this as a guerrilla war.

We have the power of the internet. We have sister truth movements, such as the 9/11 truth movement and the Ron Paul movement, with whom to network. And once the light goes on in someone’s head, there will be no turning back for that person. We’ll have them on our side for life.  We can win this war of attrition.  So, please start now by urging every person you know and love to read this article. Help spread the truth about the murder of JFK.  Doing so will help galvanize the revival and restoration of our country. It really will.


Ralph Cinque, a chiropractor, health spa operator, and entrenpreneur, has published a series of articles on JFK at His video series, “Visible Proof that Oswald was Innocent”, is archived on YouTube.

James H. Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and a columnist for Veterans Today, where his most recent studies of the assassination of JFK can be found.

Comments are closed.

Shoah’s pages