The Dale Myers Blog

[John Tonkovich]

Probability arguments definitely make sense. Certainly, in this case.

Mr. Brewer was about 7 years younger than Ms. Postal. Mr. Brewer was a tall handsome man with a steady job. It doesn’t sound too likely that they would get to know each other. If they were the same age, it would be more likely. And I get the feeling that Mr. Brewer would probably not get on a first name basis with Butch.

Mr. Brewer knew Julie and Butch. Knew both on a first name basis. Did the Butch act as the ‘chaperone’ for Johnny and Julie on their dates? Or was there something, how shall I say it, a little less conventional about the relationship among the three? To me this all sounds pretty unlikely.

It all boils down to this:

33-year-old memories are suspect.

33-year-old memories that it appears did not exist 2 weeks or 4 months after the event, but do appear by 33 years later, are very suspect.

And new 33-year-old memories that just popped up and sound fishy are very, very, suspect.


And in general, at lot of these new 33-year old memories that just popped up seem fishy.

Mr. Brewer was with two IBM employees. It was a Friday, 6 days before Thanksgiving, when I would think they would be at work but they were just hanging out at a shoe store, lounging around and killing time. Mr. Brewer remembers them being there but doesn’t remember any interaction with them. Asking them if they thought that young man was acting strange. Asking them to come with him to check out this suspicious man. Doesn’t even remember asking them to leave the store so he can lock up for a bit and check out this mystery at the theater.

And he suddenly, years later, remembers that he did see Oswald before. That he sold Oswald a pair of shoes. He now even remembers exactly the model numbers of the shoes. Yeah.

33-year-old memories that just popped up need to seem plausible to be accepted as possibly real memories and not false memories that even honest people will develop over time. These memories do not seem real. There is no obvious reason why they should be lies. None of these memories got him an extra $ 20,000 or do anything for him. They sound like false memories.

Moving past " probability" arguments  - which don't "definitively"make sense - and on to the crux of this whole episode,  Brewer had no reason to follow Oswald. No radio broadcast of Tippit's death.
Also, Brewer could not see the theater entrance from inside his shop, or even outside of his shop.
So his rationale for approaching Ms. Postal was entirely unfounded.

[Bill Chapman]

Moving past " probability" arguments  - which don't "definitively"make sense - and on to the crux of this whole episode,  Brewer had no reason to follow Oswald. No radio broadcast of Tippit's death.
Also, Brewer could not see the theater entrance from inside his shop, or even outside of his shop.
So his rationale for approaching Ms. Postal was entirely unfounded.

Brewer didn't need to have news of the Tippit shooting. And he already knew that the entrance to the theater was inset from the street.

[Joe Elliott]

But Joe Elliott's conjecture 57 years later clarifies everything

BEFORE ME, Mary Rattan, a Notary Public in and for said County, State of Texas, on this day personally appeared Johnny Calvin Brewer w/m/22 of 512 N. Lancaster, Apt. 102, WH1 4793. Bus: 213 W. Jefferson, Hardy Shoe Store who, after being by me duly sworn, on oath deposes and says:

Friday November 22, 1963 I was at work at Hardy's Shoe Store, 213 West Jefferson. I had heard on the radio that the President had been shot, also that a policeman had been shot in Oak Cliff. About 1:30 pm I saw a man standing in the lobby of the shoe store. This man was wearing a brown sport shirt. He also acted as if he was scared.

Mr. Freeman’s quote makes it appear that Mr. Brewer signed an affidavit on November 22, 1963, and stated, in part, “that he heard on the radio that a policeman was shot”.

However, when one looks at the affidavit:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339626/m1/1/

It is clear that he is talking about the events of November 22, 1963, but is making this statement before a Notary Public on December 6, 1963, as can be seen at the bottom of the document. Two full weeks after the assassination. As far as I know, this is his earliest statement about hearing over the radio that a policeman had been shot.


Many witnesses interviewed the same day were already confused, 2 or 3 shots, about the direction of the shots, about the limousine coming to a stop, and a host of other details, it is not surprising the Mr. Brewer might get jumbled up in his memory about hearing about the President and hearing about the police officer getting shot.

It doesn’t matter if I bring up the claim that memories are unreliable, and become more unreliable over time, the same day, 2 weeks later or 56 years later (its not yet November), it is still a valid claim. Memories age. Valid points do not.

And how is your implied conjecture, that memories are always reliable, therefore Mr. Brewer is lying less of a conjecture than mine that memories are unreliable and become more unreliable over time?

[Joe Elliott]

Moving past " probability" arguments  - which don't "definitively"make sense - and on to the crux of this whole episode,  Brewer had no reason to follow Oswald. No radio broadcast of Tippit's death.
Also, Brewer could not see the theater entrance from inside his shop, or even outside of his shop.
So his rationale for approaching Ms. Postal was entirely unfounded.

Doesn’t need to hear that a policeman had been shot. Hearing that the President had been shot, just 3 miles away, just about an hour before, is reason enough to be alert for suspicious behavior.

I assume he could see Oswald disappear, likely, as Bill Chapman said, into the entrance ‘hall’ that leads to the theater doors. He doesn’t need to see Oswald go through the doors to infer that he had likely snuck into the theater. In any case, it doesn’t hurt to go check it out and when he finds that Oswald is not indeed not in the ‘hall’, he knows he must have passed through the doors.

I get the impression that CTers are annoyed with Mr. Brewer. Why couldn’t he have just minded his own business.

[John Iacoletti]

It is clear that he is talking about the events of November 22, 1963, but is making this statement before a Notary Public on December 6, 1963, as can be seen at the bottom of the document. Two full weeks after the assassination. As far as I know, this is his earliest statement about hearing over the radio that a policeman had been shot.

If you can find any statement from Brewer or Postal prior to December 4, I’d be interested in seeing it. The question becomes, why did it take them that long to get statements from Brewer and Postal?

[John Iacoletti]

I assume he could see Oswald disappear, likely, as Bill Chapman said, into the entrance ‘hall’ that leads to the theater doors. He doesn’t need to see Oswald go through the doors to infer that he had likely snuck into the theater. In any case, it doesn’t hurt to go check it out and when he finds that Oswald is not indeed not in the ‘hall’, he knows he must have passed through the doors.

No he doesn’t. Because he wasn’t watching the front of the theatre for the entire time.

[Jerry Freeman]

It is clear that he is talking about the events of November 22, 1963, but is making this statement before a Notary Public on December 6, 1963,

So what? Brewer repeated his claim..

Mr. BREWER - Well, they kept reconstructing what had happened and what they had heard, and they talked about it in general. There wasn't too much to talk about. They didn't have all the facts, and just repeated them mostly. And they said a patrolman had been shot in Oak Cliff.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brewer_j.htm
Didn't sound very confused to me. To say otherwise is just unfounded speculation.

And how is your implied conjecture that memories are always reliable---

I didn't ever write that and you know it. You just added those words out of the blue. 
Besides, why is a memory only reliable when it supports the official story?