Did LHO know how to drive? Does it matter?

[Bill Brown]

It is very relevant as the first two versions of events did not include Brewer at all. Therefore, he may not have been in a position to see anything. Your lack of knowledge of the evidence doesn't make me a kook.

Where is the word "punch"? Where is the name "McDonald"? Remember according to McDonald he was the one grabbing LHO.

It is very relevant as the first two versions of events did not include Brewer at all. Therefore, he may not have been in a position to see anything.

What a bunch of Kookspeak.

You basically said that no one "outside of the police" saw Oswald punch McDonald.  Brewer saw Oswald punch McDonald.  Brewer was never a member of the "police".

Your lack of knowledge of the evidence doesn't make me a kook.

My lack of knowledge?  Nice try, but that dog don't hunt.

I have personally corrected you on at least three dozen points since you've been a member of this forum and the previous one.

I even challenged you to a live debate where neither of us can rely on a Google search for their information.  All you did was make excuses for why you won't agree to that.

[John Iacoletti]

Both are absolutely unrelated to whether or not Oswald's rights were violated while he was inside the theater.

How is a discussion about illegal police behavior grandstanding?  Nobody ever claimed that this was related to whether Oswald was guilty or not.  That was just a strawman you made up to be belligerent and to deflect the thread.  Which is what you do.

But don't let that stop you from grandstanding some more.

You're projecting again.  It's claiming that "there is no doubt" of Oswald's guilt that is grandstanding.

[Bill Brown]

For argument's sake, let's agree that Oswald's rights were violated while inside the theater.  What now?

[John Iacoletti]

For argument's sake, let's agree that Oswald's rights were violated while inside the theater.  What now?

Well, Bill, if you had actually read through the thread before chiming in you would have seen the comment that Doug Easterly made that sparked this tangent about rights.  He suggested that Oswald should have been detained by the police as a person of interest for daring to be in the lunchroom and not showing enough interest (whatever that means) in what was going on outside.  That led to a discussion of probable cause and what the grounds are/were for detaining or searching someone.

So, to answer your question, if for argument's sake we agree that Oswald's rights were violated while inside the theater then Doug and everybody else learns something new about how people's rights are protected in this country and why Baker couldn't have legitimately done so, even if he had wanted to.  Baker's reputation is then somewhat assuaged despite not remembering where he stopped the guy or what he was wearing.

We all come out more enlightened and dance off into the sunset together.

Next topic?

[John Mytton]

Yeah it's my right to watch a movie and know that everyone in that theater is unarmed and if I have to be patted down to determine if I have a weapon to make the World a safer place then who besides a hard core conspiracy Kook would think otherwise?

All these concertgoers were patted down, I wonder how many punched those security guys in the face? LOL!!!



JohnM

[Bill Chapman]

Well, Bill, if you had actually read through the thread before chiming in you would have seen the comment that Doug Easterly made that sparked this tangent about rights.  He suggested that Oswald should have been detained by the police as a person of interest for daring to be in the lunchroom and not showing enough interest (whatever that means) in what was going on outside.  That led to a discussion of probable cause and what the grounds are/were for detaining or searching someone.

So, to answer your question, if for argument's sake we agree that Oswald's rights were violated while inside the theater then Doug and everybody else learns something new about how people's rights are protected in this country and why Baker couldn't have legitimately done so, even if he had wanted to.  Baker's reputation is then somewhat assuaged despite not remembering where he stopped the guy or what he was wearing.

We all come out more enlightened and dance off into the sunset together.

Next topic?

Can you knock off the pen*s-measuring and dancing off into the sunset together?
Maybe save that for Grinder...

 

[Bill Brown]

Well, Bill, if you had actually read through the thread before chiming in you would have seen the comment that Doug Easterly made that sparked this tangent about rights.  He suggested that Oswald should have been detained by the police as a person of interest for daring to be in the lunchroom and not showing enough interest (whatever that means) in what was going on outside.  That led to a discussion of probable cause and what the grounds are/were for detaining or searching someone.

So, to answer your question, if for argument's sake we agree that Oswald's rights were violated while inside the theater then Doug and everybody else learns something new about how people's rights are protected in this country and why Baker couldn't have legitimately done so, even if he had wanted to.  Baker's reputation is then somewhat assuaged despite not remembering where he stopped the guy or what he was wearing.

We all come out more enlightened and dance off into the sunset together.

Next topic?

Oh come on now.

Don't pretend like a comment by Doug Easterly is what finally set you off about a supposed violation of Oswald's rights while inside the theater.

You've been bitching about McDonald touching Oswald's belt line long before this particular thread ever came along.