The Bus Stop Farce

[Martin Weidmann]

So many words.  In a nutshell, you suggest a vast conspiracy to frame Oswald for some unspecified reason and then dispute that the planted evidence links him to the crime.  The sole purpose of such planted evidence. Thus, pursuant to your baseless fantasy some unnamed entity for some unknown reason attempted to framed Oswald via his shirt fibers but then you reject the shirt fibers as linking him to the crime.  It is an Alice in Wonderland narrative.

So many words.

Something you can't deal with, right? You need small portions to be able to understand.

In a nutshell, you suggest a vast conspiracy to frame Oswald for some unspecified reason

No, that's your nutshell, with the emphasis on the three first letters in the word.

then dispute that the planted evidence links him to the crime.

Planted or not, if you are talking about the rifle, let's say that he did buy it (which although possible is by no means certain) and was photographed with it in April 1963. That doesn't mean that he was the shooter in November 1963.

some unnamed entity for some unknown reason attempted to framed Oswald via his shirt fibers but then you reject the shirt fibers as linking him to the crime. 

It wasn't an "unnamed entity"... It was the Warren Commission and Hoover's boys, who only had one task; to "prove" to the people that Oswald (who was already dead) had been the sole gunman. Remember the Katzenbach memo? Who was it again who said; we need to wrap this thing around Oswald as tight was we can.

John Adams said "facts are stubborn things" and he was right.

Fact: Oswald's arrest shirt was sent to the FBI lab, on Friday night, together with the rifle
Fact: No other shirt was ever sent to the FBI
Fact: On none of the photos taken of Oswald in which he was wearing that shirt, before it went to Washington, damage to a sleeve can be seen
Fact: After Oswald's death, the FBI found some fibers on the rifle which were similar to those of the shirt they had received.
Fact: When detectives took the arrest shirt to Bledsoe's house, in December 1963, it suddenly had a hole in it's sleeve.
Fact: Bledsoe had not said anything about the shirt or the hole in the sleeve in her Affidavit
Fact: Bledsoe told the WC in her testimony that she recognized the shirt because he [Oswald] was wearing it before he was shot. Despite the notes she brough with he, she does not mention anywhere in her testimony that she saw Oswald wear the shirt on the bus....

I'll leave it to you to do the math.... but you won't, because law enforcement officers never ever create evidence against a suspect they "know" is guilty when they lack the evidence to prove it, right?

It is an Alice in Wonderland narrative.

I wouldn't know. You're the expert on Alice in Wonderland...
 

[Martin Weidmann]

What route did Bowley take from the school to the Tippit murder scene?

He didn't say, but I seem to recall that he mentioned being om Marsalis coming into 10th street.

There are two options; he could have taken the I-35E or S. Marsalis Ave. The driving time for both is roughly the same, but as he was en route to pick up his wife from work, I would suggest that he likely took the I-35E and then turn onto N. Marsalis Ave when he reached Jefferson. But that's a guess...

I am not sure where you are going with this, but the fact that Bowley arrived just after Tippit was shot can not be denied, simply because Callaway, who was only half a block away, arrived on 10th street after Bowley had already used the radio and the two men helped to put Tippit in the ambulance. So, it doesn't really matter which route Bowley took, because Callaway confirmed Bowley was there before he arrived.

I'm answering your questions, so why don't you return the favor by addressing some of the points I have raised re the time Scoggins gave?

[Martin Weidmann]

Let me catch you up: Martin P. Weidmann has never stated anything even remotely brilliant. Or even anywhere close to clever, for that matter. Additionally, I recently outed him as to what he really is, to the point of him 'steering' himself into the ditch and out the door... as is always his fate whenever he attempts to get around me.

[Charles Collins]

He didn't say, but I seem to recall that he mentioned being om Marsalis coming into 10th street.

There are two options; he could have taken the I-35E or S. Marsalis Ave. The driving time for both is roughly the same, but as he was en route to pick up his wife from work, I would suggest that he likely took the I-35E and then turn onto N. Marsalis Ave.

I am not sure where you are going with this, but the fact that Bowley arrived just after Tippit was shot can not be denied, simply because Callaway, who was only half a block away, arrived on 10th street after Bowley had already used the radio and the two men helped to put Tippit in the ambulance. So, it doesn't really matter which route Bowley took, because Callaway confirmed he was there before he arrived.

I'm answering your questions, so why don't you return the favor by addressing some of the points I have raised re the time Scoggins gave?

There are two options; he could have taken the I-35E or S. Marsalis Ave.

Looking at a map of Dallas dated 1962 shows that I-35 was under construction in the area of Clarendon Drive and only proposed (not yet under construction) south of that area. Therefore, I submit that Bowley probably took Marsalis Ave. A check of google maps shows this route takes about 17 minutes. Your arithmetic doesn’t work so well now, does it?

[Martin Weidmann]

There are two options; he could have taken the I-35E or S. Marsalis Ave.

Looking at a map of Dallas dated 1962 shows that I-35 was under construction in the area of Clarendon Drive and only proposed (not yet under construction) south of that area. Therefore, I submit that Bowley probably took Marsalis Ave. A check of google maps shows this route takes about 17 minutes. Your arithmetic doesn’t work so well now, does it?

For a moment I thought it might be possible to have a normal, reasonable, conversation with you, but, once again, you blew it.

You can submit all you want but it doesn't matter a damned thing because google maps calculates based on present day traffic conditions and not the traffic in 1963, which, I submit, was not as heavy as it is today. And my arithmetic is actually about right, because if he picked up his daughter at 12.55, a trip of "about 17 minutes" would still have gotten him to 10th street at 1.12. Two minutes less and he gets there at 1.10 just like he said. Either way, when he got there, Tippit had already been shot, which means he was killed before 1.14 - 1.15!

[John Iacoletti]

Why the double standard? You take a bystander’s testimony that he looked at his wristwatch. But you don’t take an eyewitness’ testimony that his supervisor told him the time that his call was recorded?

Well for one thing, it’s hearsay. But it’s not just one bystander’s wristwatch, as Martin has aptly laid out.

FWIW, An FBI interview of cab dispatcher D.G. Graham on November 28, 1963 says Graham recorded the call coming in at 1:25 p.m. The two minute discrepancy is probably due to Graham’s desire to notify the DPD before recording the time of the call.

“With Malice” (reference note #399).

FWIW, indeed. Myers always claims his wild-ass guesses are “probable”.

[John Iacoletti]

Let me catch you up: Martin P. Weidmann has never stated anything even remotely brilliant. Or even anywhere close to clever, for that matter. Additionally, I recently outed him as to what he really is, to the point of him 'steering' himself into the ditch and out the door... as is always his fate whenever he attempts to get around me.

You’re a legend in your own mind. You can’t even get the most basic information right.

[John Iacoletti]

But wait they do link Oswald to the crime through a multitude of other evidence that you suggest they don't have - prints, rifle etc.

Sure, “Richard”. Which is why you never get around to ever specifying what this “multitude” is.

So let's summarize.  The [fill in the blank since you are not a CTer but believe all the evidence is faked]

Strawman “Smith” strikes again. Martin never said he believes all the evidence is faked.

decided to frame Oswald via some shirt fibers which requires the cooperation and lies of a random citizen but then it doesn't link Oswald to the crime.   

The fibers can’t be uniquely tied to any particular garment. Full stop.