The Bus Stop Farce

[Alan J. Ford]

A final thought about the dark trousers ---->

Mr. BALL. What did he have on?
Mrs. MARKHAM. He had on a light shirt and dark trousers. (Representative Ford is now in the Commission hearing room.)

The wrongly accused wore light coloured grey pants (see his apprehension photo at the Texas Theatre for confirmation, where he is indeed wearing light grey trousers). According to the WC's "star" witness, Tippit's gunman wore dark trousers. Tippit's gunman was twice--2X-- the physique of the wrongly accused.

An innocent man was framed amid a hastily contrived script mired knee deep in horse manure. It's a dam* disgrace what lying treasonous cowards like Ford, Dulles, etc. did to frame him.

Tippit's actual gunman donned different clothing than the wrongly accused and was MUCH larger in physique. Not to mention his hairstyle as reported earlier in this thread was also much different.

[Alan J. Ford]

Note the mere 131lb weight of the wrongly accused when compared to the actual Tippit gunman's physique (165-170lbs), who was MUCH heavier ---->

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=961#relPageId=389&tab=page

The wrongly accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody.

[Walt Cakebread]

First things first, Mr. Brown:

(A) Who told you sir the jacket was only zipped up halfway during the encounter between Tippit and the actual gunman? Source please.

(B) Now, regardless of the light colour of the shirt, which did Not match the dark reddish brown shirt donned by the wrongly accused, How do you account for the difference in the light grey pants worn by the wrongly accused as oppose to the dark coloured trousers described by Mrs. Markham worn by the actual gunman?

Now, for the record, Mr. Brown, I'm not here to clash with you in spite of our obvious differences in this case as I have come to respect you in spite of those differences. That said, I'm no longer the "rookie" researcher you, Mr. Mack (Gary, RIP), etc encountered in May of 2014 w/the Ben Hur chariot avatar drawn by a team of horses. Mr. Mack flooded my then PM box w/your wrong about this "kid", you're wrong about that "kid", etc.

However, upon further reading and immersing myself deeper into this case, suffice it to say the hastily contrived script fed to the general public framing an innocent party does Not pass the test of time. That said, best to you & yours for a safe, healthy & Happy Thanksgiving!

The wrongly accused did Not shoot anybody. Anybody.

The wrongly accused did Not shoot anybody....... Anybody.  That's what the evidence indicates....

Now, regardless of the light colour of the shirt, which did Not match the dark reddish brown shirt donned by the wrongly accused,

Lee Oswald was wearing the dark reddish brown shirt at the TSBD that morning.....  He changed his clothes in the rooming house at 1026 N Beckley at 1:00 pm before going to the theater.    He was wearing a tawny brown colored shirt when he was dragged from the theater.

[Bill Chapman]

That would be a short thread because nobody denies that Oswald carried a revolver when he was arrested.

The only possible discussion could be whether CE143 is in fact the revolver they took from Oswald.

That would be a short thread because nobody denies that Oswald carried a revolver when he was arrested

> Iacoletti

[Martin Weidmann]

That would be a short thread because nobody denies that Oswald carried a revolver when he was arrested

> Iacoletti

Then show us where he denied it.

[Bill Chapman]

Then show us where he denied it.

He denies everything: In irreligious wonderland, nothing can be known and nothing is provable.

[Martin Weidmann]

He denies everything: In irreligious wonderland, nothing can be known and nothing is provable.

That's what I thought. You can't show it.

Btw, asking for proof or even just evidence is not the same as denying something.