Oswald: No power lunch

[Walt Cakebread]

Not another hoax.

What would be the point of having both men tell the same lie about how long it took Baker to arrive after the shots?

Dan, ol man.... I don't have all the answers.    But I know that Lee Oswald had been "tried" in the court of public opinion and most Texans found him guilty.    The news papers printed false accounts that were basically fairy tales, and people believed them.  That's the way it had always been in Texas.     Many a black man had been tried in the newspapers and found guilty of some crime, and then lynched ....  Lee Oswald was simply a stinkin commie, cop killer who deserved to be lynched.

Thus if men like Shelley, and Lovelady thought that they were adding to the evidence against Lee Oswald they would say whatever they thought the investigators wanted to hear.

[Dan O'meara]

Dan, ol man.... I don't have all the answers.    But I know that Lee Oswald had been "tried" in the court of public opinion and most Texans found him guilty.    The news papers printed false accounts that were basically fairy tales, and people believed them.  That's the way it had always been in Texas.     Many a black man had been tried in the newspapers and found guilty of some crime, and then lynched ....  Lee Oswald was simply a stinkin commie, cop killer who deserved to be lynched.

Thus if men like Shelley, and Lovelady thought that they were adding to the evidence against Lee Oswald they would say whatever they thought the investigators wanted to hear.

I understand what you're saying Walt and I agree that there are examples of the kind of corruption in this case you refer to.
But that can't be used as a "catch all" to cover every single detail of the case (IMO)

[Walt Cakebread]

I understand what you're saying Walt and I agree that there are examples of the kind of corruption in this case you refer to.
But that can't be used as a "catch all" to cover every single detail of the case (IMO)

Dan, I wish that I could "dot every I and cross every T " for you, but alas, I'm not a walking encyclopedia .   I can't only see the broad picture.... many of the fine details are obscured by the smoke created by the conspirators.   

[John Mytton]

Dan, ol man.... I don't have all the answers.    But I know that Lee Oswald had been "tried" in the court of public opinion and most Texans found him guilty.    The news papers printed false accounts that were basically fairy tales, and people believed them.  That's the way it had always been in Texas.     Many a black man had been tried in the newspapers and found guilty of some crime, and then lynched ....  Lee Oswald was simply a stinkin commie, cop killer who deserved to be lynched.

Thus if men like Shelley, and Lovelady thought that they were adding to the evidence against Lee Oswald they would say whatever they thought the investigators wanted to hear.

Many a black man had been tried in the newspapers and found guilty of some crime, and then lynched

I can't argue with that, but the cases against the Black men were usually small with only a few cops and an eyewitness or two and nowhere the magnitude of this case which has many eyewitnesses, dozens of Cops, the FBI and many others, so the chances that everyone collaborated to frame an innocent man becomes exponentially smaller with each person involved, it's just basic logic.
It is what it is, Oswald took a rifle to work and assassinated the President.

JohnM

[Dan O'meara]

I can't argue with that, but the cases against the Black men were usually small with only a few cops and an eyewitness or two and nowhere the magnitude of this case which has many eyewitnesses, dozens of Cops, the FBI and many others, so the chances that everyone collaborated to frame an innocent man becomes exponentially smaller with each person involved, it's just basic logic.

Agreed

It is what it is, Oswald took a rifle to work and assassinated the President.

If it was that simple then why is that Shelley, Lovelady, Williams, Norman, Jarman and Dougherty all lie in their various statements.
These are not "misrememberences" or misunderstandings. They are out and out lies.
If these are just normal working men going about their day while, unbeknownst to them, some lunatic shoots the President, then why all the lies?

[Walt Cakebread]

I can't argue with that, but the cases against the Black men were usually small with only a few cops and an eyewitness or two and nowhere the magnitude of this case which has many eyewitnesses, dozens of Cops, the FBI and many others, so the chances that everyone collaborated to frame an innocent man becomes exponentially smaller with each person involved, it's just basic logic.
It is what it is, Oswald took a rifle to work and assassinated the President.

JohnM

Oswald took a rifle to work and assassinated the President.

That's a gross over simplification, and you should be embarrassed to post such silliness.

You've been around long enough to know that nobody can prove that Lee took a rifle to work , and in fact there is strong evidence that refutes the idea. 

And Lee had a very strong alibi that refutes any contention that he was on the sixth floor at the alleged "Sniper's Nest " at the time that JFK was murdered.  Lee said that he was in the 1st floor lunchroom when the president's parade passed by the TSBD.
And he saw two fellow employees pass through the first floor while he was sitting there in the lunchroom eating his lunch.

Why do you insist on keeping your head tucked in where you can't see or hear the truth/

[Martin Weidmann]

Oswald took a rifle to work and assassinated the President.

That's a gross over simplification, and you should be embarrassed to post such silliness.

You've been around long enough to know that nobody can prove that Lee took a rifle to work , and in fact there is strong evidence that refutes the idea. 

And Lee had a very strong alibi that refutes any contention that he was on the sixth floor at the alleged "Sniper's Nest " at the time that JFK was murdered.  Lee said that he was in the 1st floor lunchroom when the president's parade passed by the TSBD.
And he saw two fellow employees pass through the first floor while he was sitting there in the lunchroom eating his lunch.

Why do you insist on keeping your head tucked in where you can't see or hear the truth/

That's a gross over simplification, and you should be embarrassed to post such silliness.

You've been around long enough to know that nobody can prove that Lee took a rifle to work , and in fact there is strong evidence that refutes the idea. 

 

It's just Johnny's usual nonsense. He constantly makes claims he can't prove!

[Alan Ford]

Just a thought:
There is a glaring omission in the affidavits of both Shelley and Lovelady - that they walk down to the railroad tracks and enter the TSBD through a door on the west side of the building. In their affidavits both men give the very distinct impression that they re-enter the TSBD through the front door.

Indeed!

And another thing-------------Mr Shelley's affidavit is all about him singular (I ran out across the street, I ran into Gloria Calvery, I went back to the building).

There appears to be no sign of Mr Shelley on the steps in Darnell, but a figure looking a lot like Mr Lovelady is in evidence there-------------



The effect of Mr Shelley's change of story appears to be to
a) keep him on the steps for a longer time
b) thereby keep Mr Lovelady and himself paired up

Is Mr Shelley helping Mr Lovelady out in some way? Or is he getting Mr Lovelady to help him out?

One thing is for sure: Mr Shelley's blatant relocation of his encounter with Ms Calvery (from out at the corner of the park to at the front steps) is most troubling. As is the bizarre time estimation both men give for their sighting of Officer Baker and Mr Truly fixing to go inside the building