It’s amazing how Simon can illustrate and elevate the “evidence” to fakery proof. The same old media actors are trotted out to psychic drive the message, in this case, Matt Lauer. Yes Simon, JFK leading researcher needs to try and talk his way out of this very compelling evidence. After all, it’s the evidence that we must utilize to draw our conclusions, and not the other way around as he likes to pontificate.
Well, I will be blunt: there’s is just no way that Mary, an inexperienced photographer armed with a bulky unfit for sports photography! Polaroid family-camera – standing only a few feet from that 20mph-drive-by limo – could possibly have captured anything else than a very poor / blurry photograph. Yet, if you scroll up this page, you can check out for yourself the surprisingly sharp picture that Mary Moorman is credited with.The “Mary Moorman” story is full of holes, it stinks to high heaven – and doesn’t stand up to even the most cursory scrutiny. The mystery remains: WHY have 50 years gone by without ANY JFK researcher as far as I know questioning the very legitimacy of the woman introduced that day on TV – on 11/22, 1963 – as “housewife Mary Moorman, alleged author of one of the most important and famous pictures of the 20th century”?How could possibly a seasoned / veteran photo-expert like the recently deceased Jack White completely overlook these ‘details’ ?How could possibly a seasoned / veteran JFK-case expert like the still lively kicking Jim Fetzer completely overlook these ‘details’ ?