JFK Assassination Forum

Again, many people who encountered Oswald face to face described his manner of dress in different ways.  You are relying upon descriptions of how he was dressed as viewed from a 6th floor window to suggest doubt while disregarding one witness who confirmed it was Oswald while also ignoring the mountain of evidence that links him to the crime.

You are relying upon descriptions of how he was dressed as viewed from a 6th floor window to suggest doubt

I'm not suggesting any kind of doubt, I'm simply quoting what all three eye-witnesses said. It's you who wants to introduce doubt.

while disregarding one witness who confirmed it was Oswald

 
I'm disregarding Brennan's "identification" of Oswald?
Which identification would that be?
The first one? The second one?
Out of interest (not that you would know this) but when is Brennan's first official "identification" of Oswald?
What is the first documented evidence of Brennan's "identification"?
And as long as you're relying on Brennan's identification of the man he thought was about ten years older than Oswald, what about his description of the shooter lingering at the SN window until after the limo had reached the underpass? Doesn't that undo your narrative about Oswald teleporting down to the second floor lunchroom in time to buy a Coke before Baker comes bursting in even though Truly, who was ahead of Baker, never saw Oswald or the door closing or waffle, waffle, waffle.

while also ignoring the mountain of evidence that links him to the crime.

I don't ignore a single scrap of evidence that links Oswald to the crime.
How else could he be framed for it?

LHO’s t-shirt was open necked (as opposed to a buttoned-up collar). In other words the lower portion of his neck was visible. Whereas if he was wearing a buttoned up collared shirt the lower portion of his neck would not have been visible. I believe that this was the distinction between the two types of shirts that the investigators were asking about. You can believe whatever you wish. I really couldn’t care less.

And you can believe whatever you need to, it's none of my business.

Even though he mentions a collar and the type of T-shirt you're talking about isn't open necked?
How does Oswald's T-shirt have a collar?
How is it open necked?
It is "quite obvious" that you need this to be the clothing Oswald was wearing. It is "quite obvious" that you have chosen to ignore the bulk of the testimonies of Fischer, Roberts and Rowland regarding this matter.
Which is completely understandable and I hope you appreciate why I choose to look at things in a different way.

LHO’s t-shirt was open necked (as opposed to a buttoned-up collar). In other words the lower portion of his neck was visible. Whereas if he was wearing a buttoned up collared shirt the lower portion of his neck would not have been visible. I believe that this was the distinction between the two types of shirts that the investigators were asking about. You can believe whatever you wish. I really couldn’t care less.

What a shock!!
Three eye-witnesses describing the same clothing - a light coloured, open necked shirt - are all wrong because the Nutters know better.
And it's not that they all describe clothing different from that Oswald was wearing. It's that they are all consistent in describing the same clothing that Oswald wasn't wearing. They all corroborate each other.
Nutter Logic Alert - Of course this is just a silly mistake they all made because everybody knows it was Oswald doing the shooting, and if it was Oswald doing the shooting he must have been wearing Oswald's clothing but these three men aren't describing Oswald's clothes therefore they must be wrong.
At least Bill Chapman's tactic of producing a washed-out photo of Oswald being arrested to argue that his shirt looked a lot whiter in daylight has been abandoned 

But it's not like this is definitive evidence, maybe Oswald did have a sneaky sport shirt hidden in his rifle bag. It's circumstantial at best.
However, Rowland witnessing rifle man on the west side of the building while there was a black man in the SN is direct eye-witness testimony.
A black man in the SN at the same time Bonnie Ray Williams was having his lunch on the 6th floor.
The remains of this lunch being discovered on top of the boxes that form the SN by no less than SEVEN first responders.
The remains that were moved by Gerry Hill who was waving them out of the window, as reported by Jim Ewell.
Or is it really the case that Oswald cowered in silence for almost half an hour while Williams sat a couple of aisles away taking in the gloriously sunny day and his once-in-a-lifetime chance to see the President through a closed, dirty window. A window he could have opened with ease.
I find that odd.
Like I find it odd how Oswald wasn't noticed by anyone descending the stairs. Dougherty was more or less stood in the area he would have had to cross to get to the stairs down to the fourth floor where Dorothy Garner would have noticed him. Or any of the other ladies stood at the west windows in that area.
Maybe he teleported down to the second floor.
And maybe Oswald just had an outrageously lucky guess that Junior Jarman was hanging around with a very small black man, who can only have been Hank Norman, during the lunch hour. At the time Oswald said he was on the first floor, having his lunch in the Domino Room. Jarman and Norman entered the back door of the TSBD building to get an elevator up to the fifth floor. If they would have caught the east elevator, a person sat in the lunch room would never have seen them. But the east elevator wasn't available so they had to walk round to the west elevator and because of this - and only because of this - they became visible to someone sat in the Domino Room.
How could Oswald have guessed this if he were cowering in the SN at the time?
Is it a coincidence that Oswald claimed he was drinking a Coke at the time Baker burst in and that, in his initial report, Baker reported exactly the same thing but then crossed it out?

And loads of other annoying little details that all don't quite make sense.
The point is this - As far as I'm concerned, Oswald didn't take the shots. As far as you're concerned he did.
And if definitive evidence emerges that Oswald did take the shots I will gladly accept that as I just want to know what really happened.

Again, many people who encountered Oswald face to face described his manner of dress in different ways.  You are relying upon descriptions of how he was dressed as viewed from a 6th floor window to suggest doubt while disregarding one witness who confirmed it was Oswald while also ignoring the mountain of evidence that links him to the crime.

No interpretation required. Fischer said it could have been a t-shirt and it probably was white.

But look at how much you are willing to discard,
Ask yourself about that.