Et tu, Bonnie?

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Et tu, Bonnie?  (Read 228890 times)

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #413 on: April 22, 2021, 08:22:30 PM »
Run, Marty. Run. You lot are the JAQers around here. If you can't stand the heat..

I've already 'figured it out', buster: Oswald killed Tippit in front of witnesses and Rosetta-stoned Kennedy in the process.
Combine that reality with the fact that Oswald pretty much pointed to himself when he left the two directional fingerprints on the box supporting the gun-rest box.

Oswald would have fried.


Edits begun: APR 22 12:30PM EST




I've already 'figured it out', buster: Oswald killed Tippit in front of witnesses and Rosetta-stoned Kennedy in the process.



Of course the fact that Oswald was witnessed killing Tippit (and Rosetta-stoning Kennedy in the process) would be 'crap' to those residing on the far shores of the lunatic fringe.


While you lot continue to circle the wagons around your pet theories some 58 years after Oswald shot Tippit in front of witnesses and Rosetta-stoned Kennedy in the process, nonLNs bask in the knowledge of Oswald shooting Tippit in front of witnesses and Rosetta-stoning Kennedy in the process. 



> No point arguing about who killed who (so-to-speak), when said who killed who was witnessed doing just that @Tippit, while Rosetta-stoning Kennedy in the process, Mr Pretend-Lawyer.

You really like the term "Rosetta stone" a lot, don't you?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2021, 08:32:01 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3774
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #414 on: April 22, 2021, 08:30:13 PM »
That is mostly just your subjective interpretation of his motives.  He doesn't remember every mundane detail with scientific precision or answer every such question consistently.  That doesn't mean he is lying or getting his story straight.  It just means he is not particularly precise or consistent when recounting what were mundane events down to the minute at later dates.  These types of details take on greater significance to us with 50+ years of knowledge of the events than to someone who just had lunch that day not realizing his every movement would be subject to scrutiny.  There are numerous instances in this case of folks being wildly off in their estimate of the time that certain events occurred.  Someone once went through a entire list here on the forum of witnesses miscalculating the time that certain events occurred that day including obvious ones such as the time that JFK was assassinated and getting it wrong.

"He doesn't remember every mundane detail with scientific precision or answer every such question consistently."

I couldn't agree more. We're all human and fallible to say the least.
My memory isn't that great at the best of times and if I was asked to recall my movements from a few hours ago I have little doubt there would be lost details, incorrect times etc.
But one thing I feel confident about is that I wouldn't remember something that didn't happen. Which is what BRW appears to have done. The mundane detail that seemed to slip from his mind was that he went up to the 6th floor alone, spent the better part of half an hour up there and then went down to meet up with Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor minutes before the motorcade arrived.
Instead, he remembers meeting up with Norman and Jarman on the first floor and going up to the 5th floor with them!

He's not being asked to remember something from 50 years ago. It was earlier that day and his recorded statements don't change with time.
Maybe it is my "subjective interpretation" of events.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that.


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #415 on: April 23, 2021, 01:00:44 AM »


You really like the term "Rosetta stone" a lot, don't you?

'Rosetta-stoned':
Cuts to the quick; fits like a glove.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 03:47:22 AM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #416 on: April 23, 2021, 02:26:12 AM »
"He doesn't remember every mundane detail with scientific precision or answer every such question consistently."

I couldn't agree more. We're all human and fallible to say the least.
My memory isn't that great at the best of times and if I was asked to recall my movements from a few hours ago I have little doubt there would be lost details, incorrect times etc.
But one thing I feel confident about is that I wouldn't remember something that didn't happen. Which is what BRW appears to have done. The mundane detail that seemed to slip from his mind was that he went up to the 6th floor alone, spent the better part of half an hour up there and then went down to meet up with Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor minutes before the motorcade arrived.
Instead, he remembers meeting up with Norman and Jarman on the first floor and going up to the 5th floor with them!

He's not being asked to remember something from 50 years ago. It was earlier that day and his recorded statements don't change with time.
Maybe it is my "subjective interpretation" of events.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

Tell me anyone who doesn’t know what time their lunch time is.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 02:54:54 AM by Colin Crow »

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #417 on: April 23, 2021, 02:41:17 AM »
That is mostly just your subjective interpretation of his motives.  He doesn't remember every mundane detail with scientific precision or answer every such question consistently.  That doesn't mean he is lying or getting his story straight.  It just means he is not particularly precise or consistent when recounting what were mundane events down to the minute at later dates.  These types of details take on greater significance to us with 50+ years of knowledge of the events than to someone who just had lunch that day not realizing his every movement would be subject to scrutiny.  There are numerous instances in this case of folks being wildly off in their estimate of the time that certain events occurred.  Someone once went through a entire list here on the forum of witnesses miscalculating the time that certain events occurred that day including obvious ones such as the time that JFK was assassinated and getting it wrong.

The "story" was straightened by Belin and Ball on March 20. Those of Jarman and Norman too. A story that sort of allowed Oswald to be silent in th SN for many minutes unnoticed. Still wondering how Rowland's 12.15 gunman managed to stay out of William's gaze though.

By May seems 12.15pm wasn’t a problem any more for him. More memory loss?



Does anyone think he got the times he left for work wrong that day?
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 02:54:21 AM by Colin Crow »

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #418 on: April 23, 2021, 03:02:54 AM »
That is mostly just your subjective interpretation of his motives.  He doesn't remember every mundane detail with scientific precision or answer every such question consistently.  That doesn't mean he is lying or getting his story straight.  It just means he is not particularly precise or consistent when recounting what were mundane events down to the minute at later dates.  These types of details take on greater significance to us with 50+ years of knowledge of the events than to someone who just had lunch that day not realizing his every movement would be subject to scrutiny.  There are numerous instances in this case of folks being wildly off in their estimate of the time that certain events occurred.  Someone once went through a entire list here on the forum of witnesses miscalculating the time that certain events occurred that day including obvious ones such as the time that JFK was assassinated and getting it wrong.

Strawman....it is the sequence of events that can be corroborated that is important. Not the exact time. Also if important events are omitted that were known to have occurred. Would you have William's in the elevator with Jarman and Norman on their way to the fifth? Maybe Bonnie Ray joins them on the fifth before they arrive. Perhaps you could offer your analysis of the evidence presented rather than a simple....they were just confused and had memory loss verdict. I hope you can appreciate that for some of us that just doesn’t cut it. All those taking of statements would just be a total waste of time.

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #419 on: April 23, 2021, 03:08:13 AM »
That's not Mr Shelley, it's Mr Danny Arce.

Mr Lovelady is still on the steps (yellow arrow)



Mr Shelley completely changed his story from
------------------I ran into Gloria Calvery on the corner of the park and she told me what had happened
to
------------------I stayed on the steps and Gloria Calvery came up and told us what had happened then Billy & I left the steps

Mr Shelley, not inconsequentially, had been best man at Gloria Calvery's wedding a few months earlier!

Mr. BALL. Where were you standing when you heard the shots?
Mr. ARCE. I was standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository. I was on that grassy area part in front.
Mr. BALL. You were not on the sidewalk?
Mr. ARCE. No, I was on the sidewalk, then I walked up to the grass to get a higher view. and still couldn't see.

I believe he has been identified standing east of the main entrance on the sidewalk as the motorcade passed. Hopefully someone has that image.