(PART 1123)


[Marrion] Baker had no intention of running into the TSBD when he began his mad dash, and didn't enter till later. As you will see, this is yet one more nail in the coffin of the Baker-Oswald second-floor lunchroom encounter myth.

The key to following the path taken by Baker is to follow his footsteps. As obvious as that sounds, it has surprisingly never been done. At least not seriously.


Marrion Baker was not headed for the TSBD. Not to go inside. No way.


The utter desperation of conspiracy theorists is astounding, as Sandy Larsen's ludicrous claim regarding Police Officer Marrion L. Baker in this forum thread clearly demonstrates.

Sandy thinks Baker told one lie after another FOR DECADES ON END after the assassination.

Now, all Sandy needs to do is to logically and reasonably tell us Why Marrion Baker would want to tell a bunch of lies about his movements on November 22, 1963.

Was he paid very handsomely for lying so much, Sandy? Or did the FBI threaten Baker's life if he didn't go along with the "LN" story?

Here's the proof that Sandy Larsen is dead wrong:


David, have you no eyes to see? The photographic evidence is irrefutable. Unless, of course, you believe the Darnell video has been altered.

I believe Marrion Baker initially told the truth, and after that was convinced by powerful people to be a Patriot and protect the nation from America's "enemies." And thus his lies -- as hard as they were for him to keep straight -- were justified.


Oh, for Pete sake. Get real, Sandy. The Darnell film doesn't come close to providing "irrefutable" evidence that Baker bypassed the Book Depository and was headed for the Dal-Tex Building instead. The film clip stops short of showing Baker actually reaching the Depository's front steps. So your "irrefutable" evidence is nothing but pure speculation and amateur photographic (film) interpretation on your part.

I, on the other hand, have Marrion Baker's own words and testimony, which make it clear that he immediately ran into the Book Depository after the shooting. And Baker's own signed affidavit, which he filled out on the day of the assassination itself, also bears out the fact that he went straight to the Depository after jumping off of his police motorcycle:

"I decided the shots had come from the building on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston. This building is used by the Board of Education for book storage. I jumped off my motor and ran inside the building." -- Marrion L. Baker (Via Affidavit); November 22, 1963

And, by the way, Sandy, this statement you made in your thread-starting post is not accurate at all:

"The official story has long held that police officer Marrion L. Baker found Oswald in the second story lunchroom of the Texas Schoolbook Depository (TSBD) within 20 to 25 seconds of the shooting." -- S. Larsen

Where on Earth did you get the "20 to 25 seconds" timing? Nobody that I know of has ever claimed that the second-floor TSBD encounter between Marrion Baker and Lee Harvey Oswald occurred as early as "20 to 25 seconds" after the assassination. It is generally accepted by almost everybody (even most conspiracy believers) that the encounter in the lunchroom took place approximately 90 seconds after the shooting, just as Officer Baker estimated in his CBS-TV interview in 1964.


Great work, Sandy. You know that you're square on the mark when you've got DVP on your tail trying to shoot you down.

Someone is worried.

Note the obvious attempt at distraction as DVP appears to be "confused" about how Baker made it to the 2nd floor in 20-25 seconds. He knows darn well this time refers to Baker's claim as to how long it took him to reach the front door.


Can't you read, Bob? That's not what I'm talking about at all. I just posted the relevant (wholly wrong) quote written by Sandy on this matter. And Sandy wasn't ONLY talking about Baker's time to get to the TSBD's front door. Here's what Sandy said....

"The official story has long held that police officer Marrion L. Baker found Oswald in the second story lunchroom of the Texas Schoolbook Depository (TSBD) within 20 to 25 seconds of the shooting." -- Sandy Larsen


So Sandy made a little mistake. Get over it, Davey.


Should I take that as an official apology, Bob, after you made a mistake when you accused me of being "confused" earlier?


Take it any way you want, Davey. And you know where you can put it.


And if I do put it there, what good would it do? You'd just accuse me of being "confused" as to which orifice I stuffed it into.


I knew what he [Sandy] meant.


So did I. He meant just exactly what he clearly said in Post #1. And he's dead wrong.

EDIT: As I knew Sandy would do (because I do not think he is a dishonest person), Sandy has changed his first post to read "90 seconds" instead of "20 to 25 seconds". But I wanted a copy of the original post, just to prove that I did not "invent" anything I attributed to Mr. Larsen, so I quickly saved Sandy's initial erroneous post by creating this screen capture of it.

But thanks for your honesty in changing the time to "90 seconds", Sandy.


I no longer believe that Baker was ever headed toward the west half of the TSBD entryway. In fact, I don't believe he was ever headed toward ANY part of the entryway.


It's amazing what a fertile imagination can do when a conspiracy theorist gets ahold of a GIF clip. Remarkable.

BTW, here's another of Marrion Baker's statements that Sandy Larsen is now forced to completely toss into the nearest gutter or trash can:

"I, Marrion L Baker, being duly sworn say:

1. I am an officer in the Dallas Police Department.

2. On November 22, 1963, upon hearing shots I rode my motorcycle 180 to 200 feet, parked the motorcycle, and ran 45 feet to the Texas School Book Depository Building.

3. On March 20, 1964, counsel from the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy timed a re-enactment of my actions after hearing the shots on November 22, 1963. During this re-enactment, I reached the recessed door of the Texas School Book Depository Building fifteen seconds after the time of the simulated shot."
-- Marrion L. Baker; August 11, 1964



I appreciate the work you put into this, but I'm really not seeing the relevance. I mean, it's a great little slice of the event captured on film of him running into the TSBD. And the far more intriguing part of it is the Prayer Man figure still standing there at the top of the stairs.

There are people standing, looking, walking, and running amid the confusion of what just happened in that clip, but I just don't see how you can take such a huge leap to assume he's heading over to D-T [Dal-Tex], then cuts and runs into TSBD. And even if he did cut and run, what does it really matter anyway?


I agree with everything you just said, Michael.

Plus, I think one of the most intriguing parts of the GIF clip below is the fact that we can see TWO different people who appear to be looking UP toward the upper floors of the Depository -- "Stetson Hat Man" and the man in the dark suit on the far right:

In addition, when looking at the full-sized version of the GIF clip presented by Sandy (1024 x 613), it looks to me as if a pretty good argument could be made for Baker's last step in that GIF clip representing a bit of a "jump up" by Baker as he goes from street level "up" one step to the higher level of the sidewalk that is right in front of the Book Depository Building. (Click the above clip to enlarge it to full size.)

And if that is the case (Baker "jumping" up onto the sidewalk), that would certainly not be consistent with him continuing to run in the street toward the Dal-Tex Building.



Baker is about six feet away from the sidewalk in the last frame we see him in Darnell. We know that because his shadow (which happens to be about six feet long) just barely hit the face of the curb before the clip ends. So it is quite unlikely that he is jumping up on the sidewalk at that time. I'd say impossible.


I respectfully disagree. I see Baker taking a long stride in that last step, in order to step up onto the sidewalk. Looks to me like Baker is striding directly toward the sidewalk and the Depository (running directly into the shadow his body is casting).


You are respectfully blind. Not only is Baker six feet from the sidewalk, he is taking a big step parallel to its edge... thus maintaining his six-foot distance from it. Follow my blue line.


Your silly blue line is worthless and meaningless. You can't start drawing lines on photos or films and expect to extract perfect three-dimensional information, which is something Dale Myers has been trying to drill into the heads of you know-it-all conspiracy hobbyists for years:

"Photogrammetry describes how three-dimensional spatial relationships can
be extracted from two-dimensional photographs or images. Without taking into account these relationships, accurate interpretations of two-dimensional
images are impossible. In short, you cannot simply draw or overlay lines on a two-dimensional image and extract three-dimensional information."

-- Dale K. Myers


In Officer Baker's early statements, he gives no account whatsoever of pulling a gun on Oswald, or even seeing him in the second floor lunchroom.


But what about Roy Truly's CORROBORATION of Baker's encounter with OSWALD (not some other unknown person) in the LUNCHROOM on the SECOND FLOOR?

We have TRULY corroborating BAKER.

Should I believe they BOTH lied?

Why should I believe such a thing, Sandy? Why?

And furthermore, WHY would they both lie about an encounter on the SECOND FLOOR? Such an encounter most certainly doesn't prove Oswald was on the SIXTH FLOOR shooting at President Kennedy 90 seconds earlier. So why on Earth would anyone create and act out such a charade, which, in effect, proves NOTHING?

~great big shrug~


Show me a first-day affidavit from Marrion Baker that is corroborated [by] a first-day affidavit from Roy Truly, where the topic of corroboration is Oswald in the second floor lunchroom.


Well, first off, there is no "first-day" affidavit by Depository Superintendent Roy S. Truly. He didn't fill out his affidavit until the next day (November 23). So does that mean I should think it is not an accurate statement by Mr. Truly? Is that it, Sandy?

It's certainly true that Officer Baker doesn't mention the "lunchroom" or "second floor" or "pulling a gun on Oswald" in his 11/22/63 affidavit, but if we compare the two affidavits — BAKER'S and TRULY'S — the reasonable conclusion to reach, despite Baker's error about the event occurring on either the "third or fourth floor", is that Baker and Truly are describing the exact same encounter.

Another reason we can pretty much KNOW that Baker and Truly are describing the exact same encounter with Oswald in their respective Nov. '63 affidavits is because each man described just ONE single encounter with ONE single man during their trek through the building on 11/22/63.

And if you want to believe that Baker really DID encounter a person on the "third or fourth floor" of the TSBD, then what possible reason would there be for anybody (including Roy S. Truly) to want to lie and change the location of the encounter to the SECOND floor, which is two additional floors further away from the sixth floor where the crime was committed? Does that make a lick of sense? It sure doesn't to me.


[Quoting] DVP: "It's certainly true that Officer Baker doesn't mention the "lunchroom" or "second floor" or "pulling a gun on Oswald" in his 11/22/63 affidavit, but if we compare the two affidavits...the reasonable conclusion to reach, despite Baker's error about the event occurring on either the "third or fourth floor", is that Baker and Truly are describing the exact same encounter."





Well, Jimmy, it's either the SAME encounter, or Roy S. Truly was a big fat liar.

Now, guess which option I'm going to pick?


Sure is fun to watch the deniers coming out of the woodwork. It's just unfortunate that it distracts from serious discussion on this topic which is, of course, the primary purpose of deniers being on this forum.

I always measure how close a theory, such as Mr. Larsen's current theory regarding Baker, is to the actual truth by how frantic the opposition to it by DVP is.


Bob P.,

Do you really think Roy Truly was lying through his teeth here? Really? ....


Somebody had to be lying, why not Truly?

Mr. BALL. Did you see a police officer with him [Roy Truly]?
Mr. MOLINA. I didn't see a police officer. I don't recall seeing a police officer but I did see him go inside.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a white-helmeted police officer any time there in the entrance?
Mr. MOLINA. Well, of course, there might have been one after they secured the building, you know.
Mr. BALL. No, I mean when Truly went in; did you see Truly actually go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I saw him go in.


Mr. BALL - Did you see anybody after that come into the Building while you were there?
Mr. FRAZIER - You mean somebody other that didn't work there?
Mr. BALL - A police officer.
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir.


Here is a question for you, Davey; was Baker invisible?


Just as invisible as Oswald, I guess, since nobody on the steps saw Oswald walk right past them at 12:33 either.* Funny, huh?

* Not counting Buell Frazier's 2002 story of seeing Oswald walking down Houston Street, which is an observation totally at odds with what Frazier said in his 11/22/63 affidavit.



First, I want to apologize for my earlier knee-jerk response (where I said, "You are respectfully blind.") Your constant disagreeing with me got the better of me. I actually value a lot of your posts because I want to be made aware when there is a problem with a CTer's POV, including when it is my own.

You are right, of course. Photo analysis is something the needs to be approached very carefully and is something best left to experts.

However, that doesn't mean that simple analyses cannot be made by people who aren't experts but who do understand the tricks that can be played by perspective, focal length, etc.

In my analysis, I chose to focus on where the feet of Baker (and the young woman) touch the ground. There is nothing ambiguous or that can be misinterpreted about these points. I then connected these points with a smooth line. Had Baker been walking, the straight-line may not have perfectly represent[ed] his path. But he was running fast and momentum would have prevented him from varying directions appreciably from my smooth line. Estimated locations of his foot-landings behind others are in support of my smooth line.

Only the very last footstep is up to any kind of interpretation. But 1) knowing the location of this step is not necessary in showing that Baker was not headed for the TSBD entrance, and 2) I'm confident the any impartial interpretation of the final step would indicate that Baker's direction at that point would be roughly parallel to the curb.

That Baker was running roughly parallel with the curb is verified by the fact that we see him from his side (and not his BACK side), whereas we see the BACK side of the nearby woman who is undoubtedly running toward the sidewalk. (And there is [a] second nearby woman walking to the sidewalk whose back side we see.) This is the clincher to the argument if you ask me.

As for Baker's distance from the curb/sidewalk at that point, it is easy to see in this clip, where Baker's shadow hits the face of the curb and quickly rises to the top of the curb. (Remember, the gray line I drew represents the base of the curb.) When that happens, we know that Baker is a distance from the curb that is equal to the length of his shadow. I haven't done a careful measurement, but on my monitor, with its aspect ratio, I can see that that the lengths of people's shadows are roughly the same as their heights. And so I conclude that Baker is roughly six feet away from the curb/sidewalk at the end of the clip.


But, Sandy, how can Baker's shadow "[hit] the face of the curb and quickly [rise] to the top of the curb" if he's not running TOWARD that curb?

If he's running parallel to the curb, then why do we see his shadow hitting the curb and rising, as if he's running right toward the curb/sidewalk?

Please explain further. Thank you.




That's a lot of nice technical talk, but....

From strictly a layman's point-of-view, Baker's shadow hitting the curb and RISING onto that curb would most certainly indicate that Baker was GETTING CLOSER to that curb and sidewalk. Hence, his body was moving toward the Texas School Book Depository Building.

IMO, your analysis is a lot of wishful thinking (which is not supported by Marrion Baker's shadow).

David Von Pein
April 18-20, 2016