T.F. Bowley, A Wind-Up Wristwatch & 1:17

[Bill Brown]

You can make the same claim a 1000 times more and still you will not be correct. What you believe is not evidence!

As I proved conclusively in our mini-debate is that the ambulance driver tried to make two calls to the dispatcher to tell him the victim was a police officer.
This happened before Tippit was lifted into the ambulance.

You mistakenly claimed that one of those two calls was made to inform the dispatcher that the ambulance was leaving.
The ambulance driver, Butler, confirmed that you were wrong in the Nash interview.

You can make the same claim a 1,000 times more and still you will not be correct.  The police tapes themselves tell you everything you need to know, re: whether or not Callaway helped load the body before or after his call.  Same holds true for J.C. Butler.

[Martin Weidmann]

"Could be"  LOL


Six or seven minutes difference in total?  No.  Bowles pointed out no such "margins of error".  You're just making stuff up or you've completely forgotten just what it was that Bowles said.  Yes, perhaps you need to go "dig it up" and read it again.


Ball basically asked Markham what time do you "get your bus".  A strange way to ask a question.  We can't know how Markham perceived that non-descript question and therefore we cannot know what she meant by her answer.  She replied "1:15".  Since there was no 1:15 bus and she would regularly miss her bus if she gets to the bus stop at 1:15 to catch the 1:12 bus, I am left to conclude that she regularly caught the 1:22 bus, getting there around 1:15.  If my conclusion is correct, then it's reasonable that she's still one block away (at Tenth and Patton) at 1:14.

As for her estimate that she left her apartment at 1:07ish, the police tapes, combined with the descriptions and actions of MANY other witnesses, tell me that she left her apartment later than that.

You see, I'll take hard physical evidence (the police tapes) over a lady's estimate of when it was that she left her apartment.
You have no proof that Markham left her apartment around 1:07, only her claim.  On the other hand, the police tapes, combined with the actions of other witnesses, suggest that she left her apartment 5 minutes later.

"Could be"  LOL

Are you claiming the Hertz clock could not be off by a couple of minutes? You seem hesitant to claim it displayed the absolutely correct time. Why is that? Are you not so sure of yourself as you pretend to be?

Six or seven minutes difference in total?  No.  Bowles pointed out no such "margins of error".  You're just making stuff up or you've completely forgotten just what it was that Bowles said.  Yes, perhaps you need to go "dig it up" and read it again.

Stop being patronizing. It doesn't impress. Who said that Bowles pointed out such "margin of error"? You are misrepresenting what I said. Never a good sign if you want to convince anybody.

Funny enough, you seem to feel that the DPD time stamps could not have been 6 or 7 minutes wrong, but at the same time you suggest that Bowley's watch was wrong by that same margin, without providing a shred of evidence for it.
Even worse, you simply ignore the time needed by Bowles to get from the school where he picked up his daughter to 10th street. Very weak indeed.

Ball basically asked Markham what time do you "get your bus".  A strange way to ask a question.  We can't know how Markham perceived that non-descript question and therefore we cannot know what she meant by her answer.  She replied "1:15".  Since there was no 1:15 bus and she would regularly miss her bus if she gets to the bus stop at 1:15 to catch the 1:12 bus, I am left to conclude that she regularly caught the 1:22 bus, getting there around 1:15.  If my conclusion is correct, then it's reasonable that she's still one block away (at Tenth and Patton) at 1:14.

Oh boy... and you complain about spinning the evidence? Hilarious! First of all, you seem to be claiming that the buses always drove on time and exactly according to their schedule. Without that, your entire argument is moot.
Markham said she got her bus at 1:15 and that means that in her mind she must have been at Jefferson at that time. Period. Your conclusion is based on selfserving flawed arguments and as such worthless.

As for her estimate that she left her apartment at 1:07ish,

1:07ish? Where exactly did she say that?

the police tapes, combined with the descriptions and actions of MANY other witnesses, tell me that she left her apartment later than that.

There are no police tapes or witness statements that tell you anything about the time Markham left her apartment. None whatsoever. You just made it up, because you don't like what Markham actually said.

You see, I'll take hard physical evidence (the police tapes) over a lady's estimate of when it was that she left her apartment.

Say what? Oh boy, the quality of your silly claims is going downhill fast.

You have no proof that Markham left her apartment around 1:07, only her claim. 

The witness' statement under oath is evidence and proof. But I can understand why you don't like that.

On the other hand, the police tapes, combined with the actions of other witnesses, suggest that she left her apartment 5 minutes later.

Ok, I'll play. Pray tell, where do these tapes and witnesses make that suggestion?

[Martin Weidmann]

You can make the same claim a 1,000 times more and still you will not be correct.  The police tapes themselves tell you everything you need to know, re: whether or not Callaway helped load the body before or after his call.  Same holds true for J.C. Butler.

Ok, now we are just going round and round. Why don't you explain in detail how the police tapes and Butler tell me everything I need to know?
Making grand statements without backing them up with actual evidence is a pretty meaningless exercise.

[Bill Brown]

Ok, now we are just going round and round. Why don't you explain in detail how the police tapes and Butler tell me everything I need to know?
Making grand statements without backing them up with actual evidence is a pretty meaningless exercise.

I supported my statements, over and over again, in the mini-debate thread.  Go look.

[Martin Weidmann]

I supported my statements, over and over again, in the mini-debate thread.  Go look.

If that was all you've got, you've got nothing but assumptions and opinions.
But I fully understand why you don't want to go into the details again.

All you are doing is confirming time after time that you are incapable of even accepting evidence that shows you were and are wrong. But, hey that's what I expected anyway, so no worries.

[Bill Brown]

If that was all you've got, you've got nothing but assumptions and opinions.
But I fully understand why you don't want to go into the details again.

All you are doing is confirming time after time that you are incapable of even accepting evidence that shows you were and are wrong. But, hey that's what I expected anyway, so no worries.

You can make the same claim a 1,000 times more and still you will not be correct.
All anyone has to do, if they wish, is go have a look at that thread.  I stand by EVERY thing I said there.
If you feel you've proven me wrong, then why not debate me live either thru Skype or Youtube this week?  I know a few legitimate guys who would be happy to host it.

[Martin Weidmann]

You can make the same claim a 1,000 times more and still you will not be correct.
All anyone has to do, if they wish, is go have a look at that thread.  I stand by EVERY thing I said there.
If you feel you've proven me wrong, then why not debate me live either thru Skype or Youtube this week?  I know a few legitimate guys who would be happy to host it.

why not debate me live either thru Skype or Youtube this week?

And do what exactly? Do you propose to repeat the same flawed claims and expect another outcome, or do you have anything more than what you claimed and said in the mini-debate?

I don't have anything more, but I also don't need anymore as the facts are obvious and against you. But, as stated earlier, you will never accept that, so what would be the point in going over the same information?

This wouldn't be a case of you simply not being able to get over having been proven wrong, would it?