The Sign of a Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracy Theory

[Richard Smith]

So you agree, he does lie about not being on the 6th floor?
However, the reason you offer makes zero sense. A young black male, being interviewed by notoriously racist police, decides to lie to their faces concerning a crime of such magnitude because he was on the same floor as the assassin? Rather than just tell them everything he knows.
You may think that is somehow plausible but I do not.

And how do you know that Williams knew where the assassin fired from by the time he was taken in?

This is a really bizarre comment.
If he saw nothing to report why would he create a lie to avoid telling the police he was up there?
Remember - it's not that BRW fails to mention being on the 6th floor, that could be forgetfulness, the important thing is that he creates a new reality (deliberately lies) in order to give the impression he was never there.
Also of importance is that he drags Norman and Jarman into this lie.
How could he tell this specific lie if he knew Norman and Jarman would say something different when they were interviewed.
Why would he tell such an easily refuted lie to the Dallas police, knowing there would be very severe consequences when caught out in that lie?
The only feasible explanation is that he was confident Jarman and Norman would support him in the lie.
Which is exactly what they do.

It contains these details - after collecting his lunch he accompanies Jarman and Norman up to the 5th floor and shortly after they all arrive on the 5th floor the motorcade arrives.
This is a complete fabrication, a deliberate untruth, a lie.
It is not a misunderstanding due to the brevity of the affidavit or "misremberance". It is the creation of a falsehood.

How can we be sure that is the case?
Because the very next day he tells the FBI the following:

"At approximately 12 noon, WILLIAMS went back upstairs in the elevator to the sixth floor with his lunch. He stayed on that floor only about three minutes, and seeing no-one there, descended to the fifth floor using the stairs at the west end of the building. There he joined two other men known to him as HANK and JUNIOR"

In this account, given 24 hrs after the first, BRW now goes up to the 6th floor on his own, sees there is no-one there and goes down to the 5th floor to Norman and Jarman.
This is a completely different account to the lie he told the DPD.
Extraordinarily he also lies to the FBI !!

I find this quite mind-blowing - it's one thing to lie to the DPD but then to lie to the FBI is off the charts.
Williams states that he is on the 6th floor for only 3 minutes, sees no-one there, and comes down to the 5th floor.
We now know this is a complete lie.
BRW is up on the 6th for around 25 minutes having his lunch before he goes down to the 5th floor.
Remember - he's not giving this statement months later, it's the day after the assassination!
He is being to give an accurate description of his movements by the FBI as part of an investigation into the assassination of the President of the United States...and he lies!

And this is not the end of his lying, it continues into his WC testimony.
And a pattern emerges - he is at pains to downplay how long he is on the 6th and to distance himself from the Sniper's Nest while he is up there.

If you can think of a REASONABLE explanation why he does this I would like to hear it.

LATER EDIT: I am not implying that BRW is in anyway involved in a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.

If you are not implying that he was involved in a conspiracy, then what difference does it make and why list him as having foreknowledge of the assassination?  Are you suggesting he saw the assassin (Oswald or otherwise) and they just let him leave the floor trusting he wouldn't raise the alarm and he decided to go down to the window directly below the one he has cause to suspect is being used by the assassin?  And he stays forever silent about whatever he saw?  That is very farfetched.  It's only in your interpretation that he creates any lie.  It's an omission in a very short statement.  For which there are several plausible reasons.  Not the least of which is that he saw nothing of importance on the 6th floor to mention in his initial short statement.   His estimate of time, like that of almost every witness in this case, is all over the place.  He had no particular cause to note how many minutes it took him to eat lunch that day.  And later he just makes an estimate based on his faulty memory.  I don't see anything here particularly sinister. 

[Dan O'meara]

If you are not implying that he was involved in a conspiracy, then what difference does it make and why list him as having foreknowledge of the assassination?  Are you suggesting he saw the assassin (Oswald or otherwise) and they just let him leave the floor trusting he wouldn't raise the alarm and he decided to go down to the window directly below the one he has cause to suspect is being used by the assassin?  And he stays forever silent about whatever he saw?  That is very farfetched.  It's only in your interpretation that he creates any lie.  It's an omission in a very short statement.  For which there are several plausible reasons.  Not the least of which is that he saw nothing of importance on the 6th floor to mention in his initial short statement.   His estimate of time, like that of almost every witness in this case, is all over the place.  He had no particular cause to note how many minutes it took him to eat lunch that day.  And later he just makes an estimate based on his faulty memory.  I don't see anything here particularly sinister.

"If you are not implying that he was involved in a conspiracy, then what difference does it make and why list him as having foreknowledge of the assassination?"

I'm not implying that he wasn't involved in the assassination - I'm stating it very clearly.
Nowhere have I put Williams on a list of people with foreknowledge of the assassination. That is an error on your part.

"It's an omission in a very short statement."

I've gone to great lengths to make it clear it is not an "omission". It is the creation of a false narrative. He hasn't left something out of his statement, he has added something that didn't happen. He has fabricated a different version of events, not forgotten to mention something that happened.
By any measure he has lied to the DPD and then to the FBI.
You can underplay it all you want.

According to your understanding of events, how long is BRW up on the 6th floor having his lunch?

[Richard Smith]

"If you are not implying that he was involved in a conspiracy, then what difference does it make and why list him as having foreknowledge of the assassination?"

I'm not implying that he wasn't involved in the assassination - I'm stating it very clearly.
Nowhere have I put Williams on a list of people with foreknowledge of the assassination. That is an error on your part.

"It's an omission in a very short statement."

I've gone to great lengths to make it clear it is not an "omission". It is the creation of a false narrative. He hasn't left something out of his statement, he has added something that didn't happen. He has fabricated a different version of events, not forgotten to mention something that happened.
By any measure he has lied to the DPD and then to the FBI.
You can underplay it all you want.

According to your understanding of events, how long is BRW up on the 6th floor having his lunch?

I have no idea how long he was there eating lunch.  He didn't know himself because he had no cause to believe it mattered at the time.  He gave different estimates.  Just as many people in the case gave wrong times and estimates of times.  As a result, no one can say for sure.  What matters is whether he saw anything.  He says he didn't.  It defies belief that any assassin, much less a conspiracy of more than one person, acting for months or years to frame Oswald, would allow someone to leave the 6th floor after seeing something and trust them not to raise the alarm and remain forever silent.  And then that person decides to go to the window directly below that from which he has cause to suspect something is up and possibly get caught in the cross fire. 

At worst, perhaps as a black man in the 1960s South, BRW initially was reluctant to admit that he had been on the 6th floor just minutes before the president was murdered from that location.  Black men had been punished for much less at that time.  But that isn't a lie per se.  He never denied being there.  He simply did not volunteer that information in his initial short statement.  Most likely because he saw nothing while eating lunch and didn't think it mattered.  He later explained it when questioned at greater length.  In his statement, he says "we" went down the elevator but then "I" went to the 5th floor.   That is entirely consistent with his actions.

[John Iacoletti]

The special pleading exhibited here by "Richard" is unbelievable.  When Oswald "omits details that don't matter" he's a liar with a consciousness of guilt because he just murdered the president.

[Robert Reeves]

Your attempt to comfort yourself with lame absurdity will not ever disguise the depth of depravity that runs right through USA's corruption spewing century of dominance. As if the two sickest individuals in American politics/security service (you jokingly use to mock the JFK assassination) are even remotely considered above such depraved abuses of power that were needed to successfully maintain the wicked conspiratorial lies to deprive the people of the truth.

You seriously live in the delusion that Hoover and LBJ didn't find it advantageous to see the back of JFK? Sad bastard.

[Dan O'meara]

I have no idea how long he was there eating lunch.  He didn't know himself because he had no cause to believe it mattered at the time.  He gave different estimates.

I find your unfamiliarity with the witness testimony on such a pivotal question surprising.
The reason it is a pivotal question is that the witness testimony makes it abundantly clear Williams is on the 6th floor at the same time as the assassin.
Obviously you are uncomfortable with this.
Unlike you, I have a very good idea how long he was eating lunch there and I will lay out the testimonial evidence as I see it.

After his initial fabrication to the DPD (that he travelled up to the 5th floor with Norman and Jarman), BRW is interviewed by the FBI the next day. He concedes that he went up to the 6th floor alone, that he saw no-one there and went down to the 5th floor. No mention of eating his lunch. He is only up there for 3 minutes.

On January 14th, agents Carter and Griffin report that BRW said he went down to the 5th floor at 12:05 pm

During his WC testimony he is asked how long he stayed on the 6th floor. He replies:
"I was there from--5, 10, maybe 12 minutes."

Later in the same testimony he is asked what time he saw Norman and Jarman. He replies:
"It was after I had left the sixth floor, after I had eaten the chicken sandwich. I finished the chicken sandwich maybe 10 or 15 minutes after 12."

He is then asked to clarify what time, approximately, he left the 6th floor. He replies:
"Approximately 12:20, maybe."

As you point out, Williams gives various estimations for his time on the 6th floor. You would like to believe it's just a muddled memory but there is a distinct pattern to his estimates - the more he is questioned, the longer he is up there.
3 minutes, 5, 10, 12, 15, and 20 minutes.
20 minutes!
At first he tries to distance himself from the 6th floor completely, then he tries to minimise the time he is up there.

In order to clarify how long Williams was up there we must turn to the evidence given by the two men he meets up with on the 5th floor - Norman and Jarman.
Both men make their way out to the front of the TSBD. When asked how long he was out front, Norman gives a very specific timestamp. He states that they stayed out front until they heard the motorcade was on Main Street. According to the DPD dispatch tapes the motorcade is approaching Main Street at 12:22 pm. We can say with confidence Norman and Jarman are still stood outside the TSBD at 12:22 pm.
When Jarman is asked the same question he replies:
"Well, until about 12:20, between 12:20 and 12:25."
This corroborates Norman's timestamp which removes the "muddled memory" argument.
When asked what time he arrived on the 6th floor Jarman replies:
"That was about 12:25 or 12:28."

At 12:22 pm Norman and Jarman are stood outside the front of the TSBD.
Williams is up on the 6th floor having his lunch.
Seven minutes before this, at 12:15 pm, Arnold Rowland reports seeing a black male in the SN window at a time when Williams is having his lunch on the 6th floor. Rowland also reports seeing a white male carrying a high powered, scoped rifle on the same floor at the same time.

According to all this testimonial evidence it is safe to say Williams is on the 6th floor at the same time as the assassin.
Do you have any credible counter-evidence?
Do you disagree with this assessment of the testimonial evidence?

At worst, perhaps as a black man in the 1960s South, BRW initially was reluctant to admit that he had been on the 6th floor just minutes before the president was murdered from that location.  Black men had been punished for much less at that time.

?? But he wasn't "reluctant" to lie to the DPD and FBI??
Are you joking? You think lying to law enforcement agencies investigating the assassination of the president is somehow plausible for a black man in the 1960's South?

But that isn't a lie per se.  He never denied being there.  He simply did not volunteer that information in his initial short statement.

For the third time - he doesn't leave information out of his initial DPD statement, it isn't an omission or forgetfulness.
For the third time - Williams gives details of something that didn't happen. He lies. There is no other word for it.
He states he went up to the 5th floor with Jarman and Norman. He embellishes on this lie when he says that shortly after they reached the 5th floor the motorcade arrived.
None of this is true. He's made it up. He's created a false narrative. He has deliberately lied.

Your unreasonableness over this point is noted. I've no doubt you will keep on repeating the same point.

Most likely because he saw nothing while eating lunch and didn't think it mattered.

Again, this truly bizarre suggestion.
If he saw nothing why would he lie?
Think about it.

He later explained it when questioned at greater length.  In his statement, he says "we" went down the elevator but then "I" went to the 5th floor.   That is entirely consistent with his actions.

Utterly meaningless.

Your post is really weak and I don't think you should be taking on an issue like this if you are as unfamiliar with the witness testimony as you appear to be (although I strongly suspect you are more than familiar with the relevant evidence).
If you have a different (reasonable) interpretation of the evidence I've presented let's hear it.
Your last recourse is to simply classify me as one of the many nut-jobs plying their trade on this forum and walk away from this discussion. I advise this course of action.

[John Iacoletti]

No, "Richard" isn't all that familiar with the evidence and he doesn't even care.  "Oswald did it" is all he needs to know.