The Initials Of FBI Agent Elmer Todd Are On CE399 (Hi-Def Photo Proof)

[David Von Pein]

Is there any evidence whatsoever that makes this wild guess “very likely”?

Markham's own testimony makes it very likely. Because if she really DID get to her bus stop at 1:15 each day, she would have had no choice but to wait for the 1:22 bus a lot of the time.

[Martin Weidmann]

She couldn't possibly have "GOT ON" her regular bus at 1:15, because (per CD630) there was no bus at 1:15. It was 1:12.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11029#relPageId=73

I think she normally attempted to be at her bus stop at 1:15 (to catch the 1:22 bus, because she sure as heck didn't catch the 1:12 every day, unless it was always late), but on Nov. 22 she was just a tiny bit behind schedule.

The FBI report tells you the busses were scheduled to arrive at 1:12 and 1:22, not that they always arrived exactly on time.
It has been my experience, as a young man taking a bus to school every day, that busses in urban areas seldom actually arrived on time.

But - and I have already said this earlier - it doesn't make a damned bit of difference on which of the two busses she actually got. In her mind she needed to be at the bus stop at 1:15, which means that she wouldn't be at 10th and Patton at 1:14:30.

You think it takes three full minutes to walk the one short block from 10th & Patton to Patton & Jefferson?

No, I don't think that. I knew it was less, but I was being kind to you, as the 3 minutes give Callaway a bit more time between the shots and his arrival at the crime scene. Less than three minutes would mean that Markham arrived at 10th/Patton even earlier than 1:10.

This may go over your head, but the totality of the evidence involves three people; Markham, Bowley and Callaway.

Markham arrived just prior to the shots and Bowley a minute or so after the shots. Callaway was further down Patton, when he heard the shots and saw a man with a revolver running towards him. After the man turned on to Jefferson, Callaway ran to the Tippit scene. As both men were running, it couldn't have taken Callaway much more than about 2 minutes to get to the scene, and by that time Bowley had already arrived and made his 48 seconds long radio call. In other words, Bowley must have arrived roughly one minute after the shots. His timeline and Markham's are linked. You can not push back Markham's times and not do the same with Bowley's.

We know that the distance Bowley had to drive from the school where he picked up his daughter to 10th street is 6.3 miles. I know this for a fact as I drove the distance myself, but you can also check it on google maps if you don't believe me. A 6.3 miles journey in normal traffic would have taken him about 13 to 15 minutes, which fits perfectly with his arrival at the scene at around 1:10.

Maybe you can help me out on exactly WHERE on Jefferson Blvd. her bus stop was actually located. Maybe I'm not thinking of the location correctly. I'm envisioning her bus stop being right at (or near) the corner of Patton Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard. Is that correct or incorrect?

EDIT -- I see now that the CD630 page I linked above does say where the bus stop was --- it was "at the corner of Patton and Jefferson" (per CD630). And there's no way it takes 3 minutes to walk that distance.

You are right. From 9th street to the bus stop is two blocks of each around 400 feet. It would have taken around 5 minutes to walk that distance at normal walking speed.

[Martin Weidmann]

Markham's own testimony makes it very likely. Because if she really DID get to her bus stop at 1:15 each day, she would have had no choice but to wait for the 1:22 bus a lot of the time.

Again, it doesn't make a damned bit of difference which bus she actually took. She knew she had to be at the bus stop at 1:15 and - like most people - she would probably make sure she arrived there a couple of minutes earlier.

You are desperately trying to make the evidence fit your narrative instead of honestly looking at the evidence.

[David Von Pein]

She [Markham] knew she had to be at the bus stop at 1:15...

Nonsense. That's ridiculous. She had about 90 minutes to get to her job by 2:30. And even you admitted this....

"I think Markham was very well aware of the fact that a bus would come every 10 minutes."

So why would it be so critical for her to be at the bus stop at precisely 1:15?

Also....

Markham never told the WC that she HAD to be at the bus stop by 1:15 (or "at" 1:15). She did say she "usually" (Joe Ball's word) got her bus at 1:15, yes. But you're making it sound like it was 1:15 OR BUST for Helen Markham, and that's just silly given the fact she had oodles of time to get to work by 2:30.

Also....

She told the FBI on 3/16/64 that "she had hoped to catch a bus at about 1:15 PM". [CD630c]

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11029#relPageId=59

[Martin Weidmann]

Nonsense. That's ridiculous. She had about 90 minutes to get to her job by 2:30. And even you admitted this....

"I think Markham was very well aware of the fact that a bus would come every 10 minutes."

So why would it be so critical for her to be at the bus stop at precisely 1:15?

She had about 90 minutes to get to her job by 2:30

I'm not sure when you got this from, but it's meaningless. If you start calculating from 8 AM she even had more time to get to her job by 2:30

The fact of the matter remains that she testified that she left home at 1:06 / 1:07 and she got on her regular bus at 1:15.
The walking distance between 9th street and the bus stop is about 5 minutes, so she would have arrived on Jefferson at around 1:11 or 1:12 well in time for her bus.

So why would it be so critical for her to be at the bus stop at precisely 1:15?

Who said anything about it being "so critical for her"? She just told us what she did every day and you have no reason whatsoever to doubt what she said, unless of course, you want to make the evidence fit your narrative.

Btw what happened to the LN mantra of having to consider that totality of the evidence and not just trying (and failing) to discredit a single part of that evidence?

[David Von Pein]

...you have no reason whatsoever to doubt what she said, unless of course, you want to make the evidence fit your narrative.

I have every reason to doubt her specific timestamps, that's for sure.

So everybody's got a gripe with Markham for one reason or another---LNs and CTs alike.

You like Markham for her timestamping ability....but you don't agree at all with her positive identification of Oswald as Tippit's murderer, do you Martin?

Should we call it a stalemate?

[Martin Weidmann]

Also....

Markham never told the WC that she HAD to be at the bus stop by 1:15 (or "at" 1:15). She did say she "usually" (Joe Ball's word) got her bus at 1:15, yes. But you're making it sound like it was 1:15 OR BUST for Helen Markham, and that's just silly given the fact she had oodles of time to get to work by 2:30.

You are really trying too hard.

I never claimed she told the WC that she had to be at the bus stop by or at 1:15. She just answered Ball's question by saying that she "usually" got her bus at 1:15.

How you feel I am making this sound is irrelevant. The fact remains that she said it.

Also....

She told the FBI on 3/16/64 that "she had hoped to catch a bus at about 1:15 PM". [CD630c]

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11029#relPageId=59

What's your point? This reenforces exactly what I have been saying. She left the washeteria after failing to reach he daughter on the phone at around 1:04. This means she was probably correct when she said she left at 1:06 or 1:07.

The walk from 9th street to the bus stop on Jefferson took about 5 minutes, which means that her hope to catch as bus at about 1:15 was fully justified. It also means that if she wanted to be at the bus stop by 1:15, she wouldn't have been hanging around on the corner of 10th and Patton at 1:14:30.

[Martin Weidmann]

I have every reason to doubt her specific timestamps, that's for sure.

So everybody's got a gripe with Markham for one reason or another---LNs and CTs alike.

You like Markham for her timestamping ability....but you don't agree at all with her positive identification of Oswald as Tippit's murderer, do you Martin?

Should we call it a stalemate?

No, it has nothing to do with liking or disliking a particular witness. It should be about the evidence and not the person, but perhaps that's a foreign concept for you. Ball called Markham an utter screwball and still he used her identification.

I don't think her identification ("was there a # 2) of Oswald was convincing, because of the way it was obtained. And as far as her times are concerned, they are intertwined with those of Bowley and Callaway and unless you want to argue that Bowley needed 22 minutes to drive 6.3 miles and Callaway needed 7 or 8 minutes after the shots to run less than 400 feet, you simply can not dismiss Markham's times.

I have every reason to doubt her specific timestamps, that's for sure.

Sure you do. They don't fit with your preferred narrative. And that's the only reason!

You might not have noticed by I have only used information from the official narrative to make my case. I have shown that the DPD time stamps can not be relied upon by using the actual radio recordings. I have used the information provided by Markham, Bowley and Callaway to present a sequence of events that must have happened within about three minutes and which only could have happened at a particular moment in time for all three components to come together in the right order.

All you have done is actually dismiss just about all the information from the official narrative I have used.

Kinda ironic, don't you think?

Should we call it a stalemate?

Most certainly not, because even if Markham's identification of Oswald was questionable, it doesn't automatically mean that she was also wrong about her daily routine and the corresponding times. Even less so, as the totality of the evidence suggests her times were actually pretty accurate.

But I am not getting the impression that you want to bail out of this conversation. Is that so, and, if so, why?

If you are not bailing out, why don't you explain what reasons you have exactly to doubt Markham's timestamps?