The Bus Stop Farce

[Bill Chapman]

Not a fantasy that Oswald was the only person on the planet placed at both scenes during the firing sequences.

Was he?

In Tippit's case, only if the witnesses were right. The problem is that he probably couldn't have been there when the shooting happened, which, if true, means the witnesses were wrong.

So you pound on Earlene as being practically useless, yet she's bang-on with her timing. Same thing with Markham. No cherrypicking there.

[Martin Weidmann]

Circular logic is based on an assumption that something is true. Therefore something else must be true. I am not assuming anything. Roberts said that she saw LHO leave with a jacket (no assumption needed). Multiple witnesses minutes later said they saw LHO wearing a jacket (no assumption needed). The multiple witnesses’ accounts strengthen Roberts’ testimony regarding LHO wearing a jacket. Your idea that LHO was not wearing a jacket (which I am still waiting for you to “establish”) can only be based on your assumptions, because Roberts said otherwise.

This would be so funny if it wasn't so tragically ignorant.

Circular logic is based on an assumption that something is true. Therefore something else must be true. I am not assuming anything

You assume that what Roberts said is in fact true, despite circumstantial evidence that indicates it couldn't have been.
You assume that the Tippit witnesses did in fact see Oswald and could not possibly be mistaken

Roberts said that she saw LHO leave with a jacket (no assumption needed). Multiple witnesses minutes later said they saw LHO wearing a jacket (no assumption needed).

And there it is... the assumption that witnesses, who are known to be the least reliable sort of evidence, could not possibly be wrong, except of course at Dealey Plaza where most witnesses were deemed to be wrong about just about everything. It's the LN way.

The multiple witnesses’ accounts strengthen Roberts’ testimony regarding LHO wearing a jacket.

And there is, once again, 50% of the circular logic you apply all the time. The mere fact that the Tippit witnesses saw a man wearing a jacket does not, in any way, shape or form, support Roberts' claim that Oswald left the rooming house wearing a jacket. Unless of course, you first assume that the Tippit witnesses did in fact see Oswald, which brings us back to the assumptions you don't even understand you are making.

Your idea that LHO was not wearing a jacket (which I am still waiting for you to “establish”) can only be based on your assumptions, because Roberts said otherwise.

It's not my idea. There is evidence that the grey jacket (CE 162) could not possibly have been at the rooming house on Friday morning and that both of the jackets Marina said Oswald had have been accounted for. Ergo, if that evidence is correct, Roberts could not possibly have seen Oswald wearing CE 162 at the rooming house on Friday morning.

Mr. BALL - On Thursday afternoon when you went home, drove on home, did he carry any package with him?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; he didn't
Mr. BALL - Did he have a jacket or coat on him?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - What kind of a jacket or coat did he have?
Mr. FRAZIER - That, you know, like I say gray jacket.
Mr. BALL - That same gray jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. Now, I can be frank with you, I had seen him wear that jacket several times, because it is cool type like when you keep a jacket on all day, if you are working on outside or something like that, you wouldn't go outside with just a plain shirt on.

It's not difficult to understand, yet you seem to be struggling to comprehend this.... Why is that

[Martin Weidmann]

So you pound on Earlene as being practically useless, yet she's bang-on with her timing. Same thing with Markham. No cherrypicking there.

No, I never said that Earlene Roberts was bang on with her timing. The fact of the matter is that the WC narrative has Oswald arriving just before 1 pm and that Roberts said she wanted to switch the television on for the 1 pm news when Oswald came in. I think it's safe to assume that none of this happened at, let's say 3 pm, right? I'm not sure about you, but when I am watching the 1 pm news it's probably just after one, right?

As for Markham, her estimate of 1.06 for her arrival at 10th street is probably not bang-on either. However, the fact that she was walking towards the bus stop to catch her regular bus at 1.15, combined with Bowley's statement that he arrived just after the shooting and he looked at his watch which said 1.10 corroborates Markham's estimate to the extend that it is reasonable to assume that she was indeed at the crossing of 10th and Patton somewhere between 1.05 and 1.10. Even more so, as subsequent events support and corroborate the time line which starts with Markham's estimate.

[Charles Collins]

Not a fantasy that Oswald was the only person on the planet placed at both scenes during the firing sequences.

Was he?

In Tippit's case, only if the witnesses were right. The problem is that he probably couldn't have been there when the shooting happened, which, if true, means the witnesses were wrong.

Prime example of circular logic!

[Martin Weidmann]

Prime example of circular logic!

You really need to google "circular logic" before you make a fool of yourself again.

[Charles Collins]

You really need to google "circular logic" before you make a fool of yourself again.

You are the fool.

[Martin Weidmann]

You are the fool.

Have it your way. I don't mind. I have understood for a long time that I can't fix stupid or ignorant.