Measuring up: The 'Lee' and 'Harvey' photo comparison

Editor's note: This is not intended as a dismissal of the massive documentary trail of John Armstrong, HARVEY & LEE: HOW THE CIA FRAMED OSWALD (2003), but as a commentary on some of the evidence that has been adduced in support of Armstrong's thesis of "the two Oswalds". Even if some of the "evidence" is not well-founded, this does not mean that his thesis is false. Because of her background in physical anthropology, however, Judyth is well-positioned to address the photographs.

JUDYTH EXPLAINS:

Time to talk about the two photos that some people think means two different skulls, re 'Lee' and 'Harvey'. First of all, I have a slight advantage with a degree in physical anthropology, which is a B.S., not a B.A.

I had to learn to measure and reconstruct actual human and primate skulls and skeletons of all ages and from various geologic time periods--from millions of years old to modern times.

The two photos below have often been used to demonstrate that 'Harvey' and 'Lee' are different people. But there are good reasons to doubt that that is the case:

They look different. If it's the same person, then what happened?

Distorted photos of Lee as shown on the Education Forum and elsewhere require distortion corrections.

Measurements are now the same--the width between the eyebrows where they meet in the center and the size of the eyes are both corrected.

The distortion was 10%--significant. The photo called “Harvey” was shown as ‘too fat.’ When the distortion is corrected, the skull shapes match ‘Lee’ even though the ‘Lee’ figure is younger, and the cheekbones are not yet well-developed.

Still, the receding hairline on the right (Lee’s left) has already begun. The unique eyebrow lines are also the same—e.g. Lee’s right eyebrow—to the left for us.

The nose has slightly matured, as expected, and become slightly more dominant as the facial bones matured. Even though the arrest photo shows a swollen left eye, slightly raising the eyebrow, the same eyebrow line is present for ‘Harvey’ and ‘Lee.’

Further, the ears--when distortion is removed--are exactly the same. The ‘young’ Lee to the right is the same as the 24-year-old Lee, center.

However, for some reason, photo to the left was widened, distorting the skull, shortening the jawline, and making the space between the eyes too great.

The photos above these three are all shown at the same eye-widths. The ear widths also fall into place at the same time at identical distances apart from each other—same skull.

I have vision problems, so this study can be duplicated with precise measurements (10%, 12%, etc.). Widening distortions happen with lenses. That’s why people tended to look ‘fatter’ when TV’s had curved screens.

And when a photo is taken of a photo, instead of a direct copy being made, and then it’s copied again, similar distortions can occur.

Here is a 10% distortion of Carlos Bringuier’s photo on the right. These are ‘THE SAME’ photos. But if we have different photos of Bringuier, notice what we can do:

These are the same people…but the photo to the left has 10% distortion.

Is one ‘Carlos’ and the other an impostor--a ‘Carlitos’? Of course not.

We must recognize how to analyze using undistorted photos—many of Lee H. Oswald’s photos have been altered, retouched…

We take the outer ear measurement, the measurements at the outer edge of the eyes, the width from pupil to pupil, the width between eyebrows, the shape of ears and eyebrows, and be aware of maturing bone structures.

So much can happen in just a few years…

Others may wish to go beyond the attached introductory study, taking measurements for yourselves on photos corrected for distortion.

But do your homework and learn about skull and bone structure in maturing individuals before deciding about 'Harvey' and 'Lee'.

Always be aware that photo retouching was done, photo flipping, too, and occasional deliberate distortions....

A couple of courses in forensic anthropology, where you have to reconstruct faces from skulls, can be useful, too.

JVB