GDG- Devil's Den Sharpshooter

[Dale Trotter]

Groves made such a big deal out of the "rock" being the smoking gun.  When 
the clearer Library of Congress photo clearly showed there was no rock he 
had to explain it somehow or his whole theory becomes suspect.  I suppose 
this photo manipulation is the best way he could come up with to explain the 
absence of the "rock" on the pantleg in the photo.  I see no reason why the 
original photographers would have gone to all this trouble even if possible. 
They go to all this trouble of touching up the photo because this "rock", 
that I and many others have never been able to see, would give away the 
whole moving the body thing, yet not worry that the bodies are clearly 
identifiable as the same by facial features and the clothing.  It is 
definitely possible that the body was moved as Groves suggests, however his 
arguments offer no proof whatsoever.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Nugent" <mnugent at maine.rr.com>
To: "'GDG'" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 11:52 AM
Subject: RE: GDG- Devil's Den Sharpshooter


> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
>
> Jim makes some excellent points.  I find the  sequence of events proposed 
> by
> Bill Frassanito to be the most plausible, but of course it could have been
> otherwise.  Like Jim, the problem I have with Groves' analysis is his 
> belief
> that the image was manipulated after being taken.  I don't claim any
> expertise in ambrotype photography, but I don't think the alterations he
> suggests are likely, or perhaps even possible given the limits of the
> available technology.  Most importantly, why bother?
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike Nugent
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cameron2 at optonline.net
> Subject: Re: GDG- Devil's Den Sharpshooter
>
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
> <<<... I'm not sure I'd call it faked, so much as simply staged for 
> dramatic
> effect ...>>>
>
> <<<... Where Groves looses me isn't so much on the question of which way 
> the
> body was moved, but rather, his contentions that the picture itself was
> somehow altered and faked after it was taken ...>>>
>
> <<<... What possible motive would there have been for going to all that
> trouble?>>>
>
>                   ----------------------------------------------------------------
> You may unsubscribe by going to 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg
>
> You can add yourself to the GDG map at: 
> http://www.frappr.com/gettysburgdiscussiongroup
>
> View archived posts from May 2004 -  present at 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg/
>