JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
Bill Brown:
--- Quote from: Martin Weidmann on January 18, 2018, 09:31:36 PM ---If Oswald did not leave the roominghouse wearing a jacket, then who did those Tippit witnesses see running wearing a jacket?
--- End quote ---
Faulty logic.
The only person who saw Oswald leave the rooming house said that he was zipping up a jacket as he was going out the door. No one else saw Oswald leave the house.
Bill Brown:
--- Quote from: Rob Caprio on January 18, 2018, 09:33:37 PM ---When you explain how LHO left the TSBD with no jacket but then suddenly had one when Whaley allegedly saw him then we can move onto your point.
--- End quote ---
We? You're a funny guy.
I've already moved on to my point without you. So have others.
Gary Craig:
--- Quote from: Bill Brown on January 18, 2018, 07:41:25 PM ---You've missed the point.
Regardless of whether CE-162 is Oswald's jacket or not (it is), the fact remains that he was seen by a multitude of witnesses (near the scene of the Tippit slaying) wearing a jacket.
Why did he have no jacket on when he was seen by Brewer?
--- End quote ---
Benevide's description of Tippit's killer doesn't match a photo taken of Oswald while in custody on
11/22/63.
Benevides was across the street from Tippit, 15 feet away, when he was shot and got a better look at the
murderer than any other witness.
Legally, one piece of exculpatory evidence, or in this case witness, can nullify any number of witnesses or
pieces of evidence.
If Tippit's murderer ditched his jacket and Oswald was arrested without a jacket that doesn't make him
the killer.
The found jacket was too big for Ozzie and it contained laundry tags from being commercially cleaned.
Marina did his laundry.
etc. etc. etc.
Bill Brown:
--- Quote from: Gary Craig on January 18, 2018, 10:07:25 PM ---Benevide's description of Tippit's killer doesn't match a photo taken of Oswald while in custody on
11/22/63.
Benevides was across the street from Tippit, 15 feet away, when he was shot and got a better look at the
murderer than any other witness.
Legally, one piece of exculpatory evidence, or in this case witness, can nullify any number of witnesses or
pieces of evidence.
If Tippit's murderer ditched his jacket and Oswald was arrested without a jacket that doesn't make him
the killer.
The found jacket was too big for Ozzie and it contained laundry tags from being commercially cleaned.
Marina did his laundry.
etc. etc. etc.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---Benevide's description of Tippit's killer doesn't match a photo taken of Oswald while in custody on 11/22/63.
--- End quote ---
Yes, I know... based on his "tapered hairline". Right? LOL
--- Quote ---Benevides was across the street from Tippit, 15 feet away, when he was shot and got a better look at the murderer than any other witness.
--- End quote ---
Markham got just as good a look at the murderer as did Bneavides.
Scoggins, Callaway and Guinyard got just as good a look at the man running from the scene with a gun in his hands as did Benavides.
Benavides never said that the murderer was not Oswald.
--- Quote ---Legally, one piece of exculpatory evidence, or in this case witness, can nullify any number of witnesses or pieces of evidence.
--- End quote ---
But, there is not even one piece of exculpatory evidence in the case of Tippit's murder by Oswald.
If you choose, name any evidence which you feel is exculpatory and we can discuss it.
--- Quote ---If Tippit's murderer ditched his jacket and Oswald was arrested without a jacket that doesn't make him the killer.
--- End quote ---
True. Simply ditching a jacket doesn't automatically mean one is guilty of killing a police officer.
Oswald was seen by at least eight witnesses running from the scene with a gun in his hands and wearing a jacket. Can you explain why Oswald would ditch his jacket?
--- Quote ---The found jacket was too big for Ozzie and it contained laundry tags from being commercially cleaned.
--- End quote ---
This argument is almost almost as lame as the tapered hairline argument.
The jacket was a size medium. Oswald was a size small. God forbid (with apologies to John Iacoletti) a small man should ever wear a medium sized jacket.
Bill Brown:
--- Quote from: Rob Caprio on January 18, 2018, 10:12:08 PM ---Of course you have since your points require absolutely NO supporting evidence at all.
The jacket found was WHITE. Live with it.
--- End quote ---
Why did Oswald ditch his jacket? Whether it was white, gray, black, bright yellow or lime green, why take it off and discard it?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version