The Bus Stop Farce

[Martin Weidmann]

A weak reply.

A strong reply would explain how your comments were "NOT immaterial". In other words: material.

My comments speak for themselves and there is nothing I could tell you that you would be prepared to accept. My replies will always be weak to you and you will always try to tell me what you would like to hear as a "strong" reply.
I am not about to waste my time with you again. Been there, done that...

If you want to ignore that Markham said she took her daily bus at 1.15, which means she couldn't have been at 10th street to see a shooting at that time, then ignore it...

If you want to ignore the obvious problem with the chain of custody for the revolver, then ignore it

And if you want to ignore the stupidity of Richard Smith's comment about witnesses and my example that showed just how wrong and stupid it was, then ignore it...

It all just confirms my earlier comment,

It never ceases to amaze how much factual evidence LNs are willing to overlook to keep Oswald in play as the lone gunman.

But who knows, perhaps for you ignorance and the continuation thereof is indeed bliss...

[Richard Smith]

If you want to ignore that Markham said she took her daily bus at 1.15, which means she couldn't have been at 10th street to see a shooting at that time, then ignore it...

This is embarrassing to read but explains a lot.  You really believe this rebuts multiple witnesses including Markham who saw Oswald at the Tippit scene?  And that Oswald had a pistol when arrested with the same two different brands of ammo that are found at that scene.  And even though there is a picture of Oswald's pistol being carried out of the TT, you believe it "mysteriously" appeared later at the police station (not to mention police officers confirming that Oswald had a pistol in the TT).  But let me get this one straight.  You won't admit that you are a CTer?  Wow. 

[Martin Weidmann]

This is embarrassing to read but explains a lot.  You really believe this rebuts multiple witnesses including Markham who saw Oswald at the Tippit scene?  And that Oswald had a pistol when arrested with the same two different brands of ammo that are found at that scene.  And even though there is a picture of Oswald's pistol being carried out of the TT, you believe it "mysteriously" appeared later at the police station (not to mention police officers confirming that Oswald had a pistol in the TT).  But let me get this one straight.  You won't admit that you are a CTer?  Wow.

So, no matter how many words you write, you still can not explain how Markham could have been at 10th street to see Tippit being killed at 1.14 or 1.15 when she, by her own account, would have been at the bus stop on Jefferson catching her daily bus at around 1.15? Got it

You really believe this rebuts multiple witnesses including Markham who saw Oswald at the Tippit scene?

So, you were in Miami yesterday beating your wife, right?

And that Oswald had a pistol when arrested with the same two different brands of ammo that are found at that scene.

Repeating the same old crap isn't making it any more credible. Show that the revolver now in evidence is the one they took from Oswald and you may be on to something, but all you've got so far is a revolver showing up at the police station two hours after Oswald was arrested and a detective claiming it was Oswald's revolver.

And even though there is a picture of Oswald's pistol being carried out of the TT, you believe it "mysteriously" appeared later at the police station (not to mention police officers confirming that Oswald had a pistol in the TT).

Show the picture and the proof that it is the same revolver that showed up at the police station two hours later. Nobody denies that Oswald he a pistol in the TT. That was never the point. The real point is that you and your ilk are jumping to conclusions based on incomplete and sometimes completely missing information. If Oswald was framed, a revolver being switched could easily have been part of the plan.

But let me get this one straight.  You won't admit that you are a CTer?  Wow.

No, I am not a CT for two reasons; (1) I don't have a conspiracy theory and (2) I follow the evidence where it leads me. If that means Oswald turns out to be guilty then so be it. But you don't hang a man based on a belief. So, show me the evidence, and that's where you and your ilk come up short every time.

So, tell me "Richard"... if Markham, when going to work, took the same bus every day, at around 1.15, how could she possibly have been at 10th street at that time to witness a shooting? Instead of acting like a weasel all the time, for once be a man and at least try to give a honest and plausible answer to the question.

[Ross Lidell]

My comments speak for themselves and there is nothing I could tell you that you would be prepared to accept. My replies will always be weak to you and you will always try to tell me what you would like to hear as a "strong" reply.
I am not about to waste my time with you again. Been there, done that...

If you want to ignore that Markham said she took her daily bus at 1.15, which means she couldn't have been at 10th street to see a shooting at that time, then ignore it...

If you want to ignore the obvious problem with the chain of custody for the revolver, then ignore it

And if you want to ignore the stupidity of Richard Smith's comment about witnesses and my example that showed just how wrong and stupid it was, then ignore it...

It all just confirms my earlier comment,

But who knows, perhaps for you ignorance and the continuation thereof is indeed bliss...

If you want to ignore that Markham said she took her daily bus at 1.15, which means she couldn't have been at 10th street to see a shooting at that time, then ignore it...

Mrs Markham was at 10th Street at the time of the shooting. Other witnesses to the crime and it's aftermath confirm that.

You fail to discern the obvious fact that Mrs Markham's testimony about daily bus times does not trump the testimony of eye witnesses who place Lee Oswald at the scene of the crime: the murder of JD Tippit. Oswald was identified as the man seen (a.) shooting the police officer or (b.) fleeing the location of the Tippit killing with a pistol in his hand.

Mrs Markham was a less than excellent witness before the Warren Commission. Markham's bus time statement was worthy of assessment by the Commission. However, it has to be dismissed as less important in determining the time of the Tippit killing and the identity of the perpetrator.

Like all JFK assassination contrarians, you're determined to accept the least plausible evidence and dismiss that which unambiguously points to the guilt of your imagined-client, Lee Harvey Oswald.

Keep going on with this ultra-contrarian tripe and you'll soon be labelled a "Norwegian demon".

[Martin Weidmann]

If you want to ignore that Markham said she took her daily bus at 1.15, which means she couldn't have been at 10th street to see a shooting at that time, then ignore it...

Mrs Markham was at 10th Street at the time of the shooting. Other witnesses to the crime and it's aftermath confirm that.

Of course she was at 10th Street at the time of the shooting, genius. But that wasn't the point, which apparently went straight over your head.

The point I was making is that Markham said she took the same bus to work everyday. She estimated the departure time from Jefferson to be 1.15, but according to the FBI the schedule for Markham's bus had stops at 1.12 and 1.22. So, if the shooting occurred at 1.14 or 1.15, then Markham couldn't have been at 10th Street, because at that time she would be getting on her regular bus on Jefferson. In other words, the shooting took place earlier than 1.14. In fact, there is sufficient circumstantial evidence to argue that the shooting probably took place between 1.06 and 1.10. This, in turn means that Oswald couldn't have been there, as he was seen at the roominghouse on Beckley at 1pm and taking the fastest route it took at least 11 minutes to get to 10th street from there.

You fail to discern the obvious fact that Mrs Markham's testimony about daily bus times does not trump the testimony of eye witnesses who place Lee Oswald at the scene of the crime: the murder of JD Tippit. Oswald was identified as the man seen (a.) shooting the police officer or (b.) fleeing the location of the Tippit killing with a pistol in his hand.

Eyewitnesses can be and often are wrong. These witnesses were never subjected to cross-examination by a defense lawyer, which is very often the moment in court where they recant or change their story. Witness identification is the least reliable evidence there is. I know from first hand experience how difficult it is to identify a person. I once witnessed a street robbery and although I saw the robber pretty well, when the police asked me if I would be able to identify him I said no.

Having said that, if Oswald couldn't physically have been at 10th Street when Tippit was shot then the witnesses were wrong. It's as simple as that.

Mrs Markham was a less than excellent witness before the Warren Commission. Markham's bus time statement was worthy of assessment by the Commission. However, it has to be dismissed as less important in determining the time of the Tippit killing and the identity of the perpetrator.

Wrong. You don't dismiss a clear time indication simply because it doesn't fit the narrative. Even less so when there is more circumstantial evidence to actually show that the shooting took place earlier than 1.14 or 1.15 and there is no evidence whatsoever that Tippit was really killed at 1.14 or 1.15.

Like all JFK assassination contrarians, you're determined to accept the least plausible evidence and dismiss that which unambiguously points to the guilt of your imagined-client, Lee Harvey Oswald.

Wrong again. I am not about to accept Oswald's guilt simply because you and your ilk say he is guilty. If you want to convince me of anything, you need to provide evidence that is sufficiently conclusive and holds up under scrutiny.

You are just dismissing evidence you don't like because of your predetermined conclusion that Oswald was guilty, when in fact the case against him has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. That's why LNs never want to examine or discuss the evidence honestly and complain about those who do!

Keep going on with this ultra-contrarian tripe and you'll soon be labelled a "Norwegian demon".

Pathetic... but since I know who it is coming from, I don't give a damn.

[Walt Cakebread]

If you want to ignore that Markham said she took her daily bus at 1.15, which means she couldn't have been at 10th street to see a shooting at that time, then ignore it...

Mrs Markham was at 10th Street at the time of the shooting. Other witnesses to the crime and it's aftermath confirm that.

You fail to discern the obvious fact that Mrs Markham's testimony about daily bus times does not trump the testimony of eye witnesses who place Lee Oswald at the scene of the crime: the murder of JD Tippit. Oswald was identified as the man seen (a.) shooting the police officer or (b.) fleeing the location of the Tippit killing with a pistol in his hand.

Mrs Markham was a less than excellent witness before the Warren Commission. Markham's bus time statement was worthy of assessment by the Commission. However, it has to be dismissed as less important in determining the time of the Tippit killing and the identity of the perpetrator.

Like all JFK assassination contrarians, you're determined to accept the least plausible evidence and dismiss that which unambiguously points to the guilt of your imagined-client, Lee Harvey Oswald.

Keep going on with this ultra-contrarian tripe and you'll soon be labelled a "Norwegian demon".

Mrs Markham was at 10th Street at the time of the shooting. Other witnesses to the crime and it's aftermath confirm that.

Yes, this a true statement Mrs Markham was on the NW corner of 10th  & Patton at the time of the murder of JD Tippit....She said that she was on her way to catch the 1:15 bus and was waiting to cross 10th street at 1:06 when she Saw Tippit shot by a man who she had seen WALKING North on east side of 10th street.

[Richard Smith]

So, no matter how many words you write, you still can not explain how Markham could have been at 10th street to see Tippit being killed at 1.14 or 1.15 when she, by her own account, would have been at the bus stop on Jefferson catching her daily bus at around 1.15? Got it

You really believe this rebuts multiple witnesses including Markham who saw Oswald at the Tippit scene?

So, you were in Miami yesterday beating your wife, right?

And that Oswald had a pistol when arrested with the same two different brands of ammo that are found at that scene.

Repeating the same old crap isn't making it any more credible. Show that the revolver now in evidence is the one they took from Oswald and you may be on to something, but all you've got so far is a revolver showing up at the police station two hours after Oswald was arrested and a detective claiming it was Oswald's revolver.

And even though there is a picture of Oswald's pistol being carried out of the TT, you believe it "mysteriously" appeared later at the police station (not to mention police officers confirming that Oswald had a pistol in the TT).

Show the picture and the proof that it is the same revolver that showed up at the police station two hours later. Nobody denies that Oswald he a pistol in the TT. That was never the point. The real point is that you and your ilk are jumping to conclusions based on incomplete and sometimes completely missing information. If Oswald was framed, a revolver being switched could easily have been part of the plan.

But let me get this one straight.  You won't admit that you are a CTer?  Wow.

No, I am not a CT for two reasons; (1) I don't have a conspiracy theory and (2) I follow the evidence where it leads me. If that means Oswald turns out to be guilty then so be it. But you don't hang a man based on a belief. So, show me the evidence, and that's where you and your ilk come up short every time.

So, tell me "Richard"... if Markham, when going to work, took the same bus every day, at around 1.15, how could she possibly have been at 10th street at that time to witness a shooting? Instead of acting like a weasel all the time, for once be a man and at least try to give a honest and plausible answer to the question.

Brutal stupidity.  Did multiple witnesses confirm that I was in Miami yesterday?  Was I arrested a short distance from the scene of a shooting in Miami with the same two brands of ammo used in the murder?  Good grief.  You should be ashamed to peddle this nonsense. I hope you are just playing devil's advocate to pass the time and don't actually believe any of your own nonsense.  There is zero doubt that Oswald murdered Tippit.  Zero.  The evidence confirms it beyond doubt.  Markham was there at the time.  She saw him do it.  Thus, we don't have to untangle your bizarre obsession with pedantic bus schedules and baseless assertions as to where people and buses should have been in a perfect world if they slavishly adhered to a schedule down to a precise minute every single day of their lives etc.  Do you think Markham and her bus relived the same day over and over again without any minor variance in time?  Like the movie Groundhog Day.  Absurd.