The Assassination was Sloppy and Amateurish

[Royell Storing]

Obviously, you didn't Google "Open Neck Shirt".
You appear to be the only person on the planet who believes it can refer to a t-shirt.

   I would be #2 in believing that everybody knows the difference between an "Open Neck Shirt" and a "T-Shirt". This is what we get when people try to manipulate Eyewitness Testimony. A Square Peg being jammed into a Round Hole. It does Not work. Never has.

[Dan O'meara]

I think that it is more like that you are the only person in the universe who believes it can’t.

 
Your desperation knows no bounds.
You are actually willing to blow your whole argument out of the water to try and score a point!
It is such a LNer trait.

What did you find when you Googled "Open Neck Shirt"?
Did you see, like i did, dozens and dozens of images of shirts WITH A COLLAR and not a single image of the classic crew neck t-shirt Oswald was wearing?
Be honest now, because anyone can Google it.



Oswald was wearing a classic crew-cut t-shirt. The four eye-witnesses below are not describing such a garment.
They are describing something Oswald was not wearing that day and did not possess.
It is really strong circumstantial evidence that the shooter was not Oswald.

"He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway and then he had a regular t-shirt...under this..."   Arnold Rowland

"And he had-he had on an open-neck shirt...It was light in color: probably white, I couldn’t tell whether it had long sleeves or whether it was a short-sleeved shirt, but it was open-neck and light in color."    Ronald Fischer

"Light colored shirt, short sleeve and open neck"  Robert Edwards

"I mean other than light color - not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side"   Howard Brennan

You are free to believe whatever you need to, Charles.

[Charles Collins]

Your desperation knows no bounds.
You are actually willing to blow your whole argument out of the water to try and score a point!
It is such a LNer trait.

What did you find when you Googled "Open Neck Shirt"?
Did you see, like i did, dozens and dozens of images of shirts WITH A COLLAR and not a single image of the classic crew neck t-shirt Oswald was wearing?
Be honest now, because anyone can Google it.



Oswald was wearing a classic crew-cut t-shirt. The four eye-witnesses below are not describing such a garment.
They are describing something Oswald was not wearing that day and did not possess.
It is really strong circumstantial evidence that the shooter was not Oswald.

"He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway and then he had a regular t-shirt...under this..."   Arnold Rowland

"And he had-he had on an open-neck shirt...It was light in color: probably white, I couldn’t tell whether it had long sleeves or whether it was a short-sleeved shirt, but it was open-neck and light in color."    Ronald Fischer

"Light colored shirt, short sleeve and open neck"  Robert Edwards

"I mean other than light color - not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side"   Howard Brennan

You are free to believe whatever you need to, Charles.

None of the witnesses said anything about a collar. A t-shirt can be considered an open-neck shirt (if it is open around the neck, which LHO’s shirt obviously is). I believe they are all describing LHO and his dingy white open neck shirt, as can be seen in the photo below. It might technically be considered a crew neck (versus a V-neck) shirt. However it is a bit oversized; plus the neck area most definitely appears to be open. It looks dingy and worn out and the elasticity around the neck area appears to have worn out also. This leaves the neck area significantly more open than if the shirt was newer. Hence, the open-necked shirt descriptions.

I have worn open-neck undershirts (V-neck t-shirts) practically my entire adult life. I have also done my own laundry practically my entire adult life. So, I know first hand how they can get dingy (if not whitened regularly) and the neck area will become “relaxed” over time. When it comes to the witness descriptions, the appearance of an open-neck shirt (as seen in the photo below) is what matters. How the shirt would have appeared when it was newer is irrevelevant.

Believe whatever you wish. But the idea that LHO didn’t own a shirt like the one in the witness descriptions is nonsense.

[Royell Storing]

 A "T-Shirt" is Not an "open neck shirt".  Same goes for a "Wife Beater". Both are NOT "open neck shirts". An "open neck shirt" is the same thing as a "button up" shirt.  A "pull over" would be as close to an "open neck" shirt as you can get. A "pull over" is not a "T-Shirt".

[Dan O'meara]

None of the witnesses said anything about a collar. A t-shirt can be considered an open-neck shirt (if it is open around the neck, which LHO’s shirt obviously is). I believe they are all describing LHO and his dingy white open neck shirt, as can be seen in the photo below. It might technically be considered a crew neck (versus a V-neck) shirt. However it is a bit oversized; plus the neck area most definitely appears to be open. It looks dingy and worn out and the elasticity around the neck area appears to have worn out also. This leaves the neck area significantly more open than if the shirt was newer. Hence, the open-necked shirt descriptions.

I have worn open-neck undershirts (V-neck t-shirts) practically my entire adult life. I have also done my own laundry practically my entire adult life. So, I know first hand how they can get dingy (if not whitened regularly) and the neck area will become “relaxed” over time. When it comes to the witness descriptions, the appearance of an open-neck shirt (as seen in the photo below) is what matters. How the shirt would have appeared when it was newer is irrevelevant.

Believe whatever you wish. But the idea that LHO didn’t own a shirt like the one in the witness descriptions is nonsense.

"None of the witnesses said anything about a collar"

This isn't true and, more importantly, you know it's not true.
You are clearly willing to go to any length rather than simply accept the common sense, face value interpretation of these key witness reports.
Not only does one of the witnesses specifically mention a collar but the accepted interpretation of "open-necked shirt" "usually refers to a shirt with a collar, like a button down shirt".
It never refers to the classic crew neck t-shirt Oswald was wearing (you actually posted this yourself).

You are free to believe whatever you need to believe.
Even when it is in direct contradiction with the evidence.
All four eye-witnesses are describing are garment Oswald was not wearing that day.
A garment he didn't have in his possession at the time of his arrest.
Collectively, these eye-witnesses are describing a white/off-white shirt open at the collar.
They are 100% NOT describing the classic crew-neck t-shirt Oswald was wearing.
Obviously you cannot accept this because it is strong circumstantial evidence that the shooter was not Oswald.

Whereas I allow the evidence to inform my opinion, you try to change the evidence to support your preconceived conclusion.

"He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway and then he had a regular t-shirt...under this..."   Arnold Rowland

"And he had-he had on an open-neck shirt...It was light in color: probably white, I couldn’t tell whether it had long sleeves or whether it was a short-sleeved shirt, but it was open-neck and light in color."    Ronald Fischer

"Light colored shirt, short sleeve and open neck"  Robert Edwards

"I mean other than light color - not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side"   Howard Brennan

[Charles Collins]

"None of the witnesses said anything about a collar"

This isn't true and, more importantly, you know it's not true.
You are clearly willing to go to any length rather than simply accept the common sense, face value interpretation of these key witness reports.
Not only does one of the witnesses specifically mention a collar but the accepted interpretation of "open-necked shirt" "usually refers to a shirt with a collar, like a button down shirt".
It never refers to the classic crew neck t-shirt Oswald was wearing (you actually posted this yourself).

You are free to believe whatever you need to believe.
Even when it is in direct contradiction with the evidence.
All four eye-witnesses are describing are garment Oswald was not wearing that day.
A garment he didn't have in his possession at the time of his arrest.
Collectively, these eye-witnesses are describing a white/off-white shirt open at the collar.
They are 100% NOT describing the classic crew-neck t-shirt Oswald was wearing.
Obviously you cannot accept this because it is strong circumstantial evidence that the shooter was not Oswald.

Whereas I allow the evidence to inform my opinion, you try to change the evidence to support your preconceived conclusion.

"He had on a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that. This was open at the collar. I think it was unbuttoned about halfway and then he had a regular t-shirt...under this..."   Arnold Rowland

"And he had-he had on an open-neck shirt...It was light in color: probably white, I couldn’t tell whether it had long sleeves or whether it was a short-sleeved shirt, but it was open-neck and light in color."    Ronald Fischer

"Light colored shirt, short sleeve and open neck"  Robert Edwards

"I mean other than light color - not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side"   Howard Brennan

The image hosting site appears to be having issues right now. So I am copying and pasting the Google AI response to the question: Does an open-neck shirt need to have a collar in order to be classified as an open-neck shirt?


“ AI Overview


+7
No, an open-neck shirt does not necessarily need a collar to be classified as such.
Explanation
An open-necked shirt or blouse is generally defined as one where the top button is unfastened or that features no buttons at the top, leaving the neck area exposed.

While many open-necked shirts do have collars (often referred to as "open-collared"), the defining characteristic is the open neckline, rather than the presence of a collar itself.

Some shirts are specifically designed to be collarless, but can still have an open neck, like certain V-neck or scoop-neck styles.

In essence, the "open-neck" aspect refers to the open or unfastened nature of the neckline, allowing for a relaxed or casual style, whether or not a collar is present.”



What is important and relevant to this discussion is the appearance of the shirt on 11-22-63. As can be seen in numerous photos, LHO’s dingy white t-shirt is worn out and distinctly quite open at the neck. What it might have appeared like when it was newer is irrelevant to this discussion.

[Dan O'meara]

The image hosting site appears to be having issues right now. So I am copying and pasting the Google AI response to the question: Does an open-neck shirt need to have a collar in order to be classified as an open-neck shirt?


“ AI Overview


+7
No, an open-neck shirt does not necessarily need a collar to be classified as such.
Explanation
An open-necked shirt or blouse is generally defined as one where the top button is unfastened or that features no buttons at the top, leaving the neck area exposed.

While many open-necked shirts do have collars (often referred to as "open-collared"), the defining characteristic is the open neckline, rather than the presence of a collar itself.

Some shirts are specifically designed to be collarless, but can still have an open neck, like certain V-neck or scoop-neck styles.

In essence, the "open-neck" aspect refers to the open or unfastened nature of the neckline, allowing for a relaxed or casual style, whether or not a collar is present.”



What is important and relevant to this discussion is the appearance of the shirt on 11-22-63. As can be seen in numerous photos, LHO’s dingy white t-shirt is worn out and distinctly quite open at the neck. What it might have appeared like when it was newer is irrelevant to this discussion.

I have a lot of respect for you Charles, so it is a great pity to see you resorting to such underhand tactics to try to 'score a point' rather than engage in a genuine debate. You told an untruth when you posted this:

"None of the witnesses said anything about a collar"

I called you out on this untruth and, rather than acknowledge it, you have decided to ignore it and carry on with this ridiculous post about a shirt not needing a collar to be considered an "open-neck shirt". Just to clarify, the post you responded to actually contained Arnold Rowland's testimony that the shirt worn by the man on the 6th floor was "open at the collar".
Just a few posts ago I made this specific point:

Rowland specifically describes it as being open at the collar with a t-shirt underneath so I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

This was part of your answer:

"...Rowland (the only one of the witnesses you cite, who gave that description) said he saw this person on the west end of the building about 15-minutes before the shooting. I think it is entirely reasonable that the assassin could have still been wearing his shirt over the t-shirt at that point in time, shedding the outer shirt later, only after he got hot due to sitting in the sun shining in through the sniper’s nest window. If I remember correctly, Rowland gave that description months after the assassination (as he was embellishing some other aspects of what he said he saw)."

Not only did you acknowledge that Rowland testified about the shirt having a collar, you then postulated that the "assassin could have still been wearing his shirt over the t-shirt at that point in time". So, even though you have acknowledged and discussed Rowland's testimony concerning the shirt having a collar, you then turn around and argue that none of the eye-witnesses mentioned the shooter's shirt having a collar.
I correctly called you out on this and you simply ignored this as if nothing had been said.
And just to emphasise Rowland's point, he also refers to the shirt being "unbuttoned". He describes the shirt as being "a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that".
He is clearly not describing the reddish/brown shirt Oswald wore to work that day or the pure white, classic crew-neck t-shirt he wore under this shirt.

Even the AI overviews you post contain information completely contradicting your assertion that these eye-witnesses are describing Oswald's classic crew-neck t-shirt:

"...when someone refers to an open-necked shirt, it could very well be describing a t-shirt with a neckline that is not a classic crew-neck"

You posted that.
You posted that when the eye-witnesses refer to an open-necked shirt they are NOT describing Oswald's t-shirt.
The white t-shirt Oswald was wearing that day is an iconic garment, instantly recognisable as a specific piece of clothing - a t-shirt,
If the man on the 6th floor was wearing a t-shirt all four men would have recognised it as a t-shirt (just as you do).

There can be no serious doubt that Rowland, Brennan, Fischer and Edwards are describing the same man on the 6th floor and that this man was wearing a very light coloured shirt, open at the collar.
Oswald wasn't wearing such a shirt that day.and didn't have such a shirt in his possessions when arrested.
In effect, these eye-witnesses are describing someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald on the 6th floor.

It must be remembered that this is not the only circumstantial evidence that points to someone other than Oswald being on the 6th floor around the time of the shooting.

[Charles Collins]

I have a lot of respect for you Charles, so it is a great pity to see you resorting to such underhand tactics to try to 'score a point' rather than engage in a genuine debate. You told an untruth when you posted this:

"None of the witnesses said anything about a collar"

I called you out on this untruth and, rather than acknowledge it, you have decided to ignore it and carry on with this ridiculous post about a shirt not needing a collar to be considered an "open-neck shirt". Just to clarify, the post you responded to actually contained Arnold Rowland's testimony that the shirt worn by the man on the 6th floor was "open at the collar".
Just a few posts ago I made this specific point:

Rowland specifically describes it as being open at the collar with a t-shirt underneath so I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

This was part of your answer:

"...Rowland (the only one of the witnesses you cite, who gave that description) said he saw this person on the west end of the building about 15-minutes before the shooting. I think it is entirely reasonable that the assassin could have still been wearing his shirt over the t-shirt at that point in time, shedding the outer shirt later, only after he got hot due to sitting in the sun shining in through the sniper’s nest window. If I remember correctly, Rowland gave that description months after the assassination (as he was embellishing some other aspects of what he said he saw)."

Not only did you acknowledge that Rowland testified about the shirt having a collar, you then postulated that the "assassin could have still been wearing his shirt over the t-shirt at that point in time". So, even though you have acknowledged and discussed Rowland's testimony concerning the shirt having a collar, you then turn around and argue that none of the eye-witnesses mentioned the shooter's shirt having a collar.
I correctly called you out on this and you simply ignored this as if nothing had been said.
And just to emphasise Rowland's point, he also refers to the shirt being "unbuttoned". He describes the shirt as being "a light shirt, a very light-colored shirt, white or a light blue or a color such as that".
He is clearly not describing the reddish/brown shirt Oswald wore to work that day or the pure white, classic crew-neck t-shirt he wore under this shirt.

Even the AI overviews you post contain information completely contradicting your assertion that these eye-witnesses are describing Oswald's classic crew-neck t-shirt:

"...when someone refers to an open-necked shirt, it could very well be describing a t-shirt with a neckline that is not a classic crew-neck"

You posted that.
You posted that when the eye-witnesses refer to an open-necked shirt they are NOT describing Oswald's t-shirt.
The white t-shirt Oswald was wearing that day is an iconic garment, instantly recognisable as a specific piece of clothing - a t-shirt,
If the man on the 6th floor was wearing a t-shirt all four men would have recognised it as a t-shirt (just as you do).

There can be no serious doubt that Rowland, Brennan, Fischer and Edwards are describing the same man on the 6th floor and that this man was wearing a very light coloured shirt, open at the collar.
Oswald wasn't wearing such a shirt that day.and didn't have such a shirt in his possessions when arrested.
In effect, these eye-witnesses are describing someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald on the 6th floor.

It must be remembered that this is not the only circumstantial evidence that points to someone other than Oswald being on the 6th floor around the time of the shooting.

These are the facts:

Arnold L. Rowland, affidavit dated 11/22/63 describing the man with the rifle he said that he saw on the west end of the TSBD about 15-minutes before the assassination.

“This man appeared to be a white man and appeared to have a light colored shirt on, open at the neck. He appeared to be of slender build and appeared to have dark hair.”



Now, for the witness descriptions of the man they said they saw in the sniper’s nest window on the east end of the TSBD just seconds before, and during the assassination.


Howard Brennan’s 11/22/63 affidavit:

“ He was a white man in his early 30's, slender, nice looking, slender and would weigh about 165 to 175 pounds. He had on light colored clothing but definately [sic] not a suit.”


Howard Brennan’s WC testimony:

“ Mr. BELIN. Could you describe the man you saw in the window on the sixth floor?
Mr. BRENNAN. To my best description, a man in his early thirties, fair complexion, slender but neat, neat slender, possibly 5-foot 10.
Mr. BELIN. About what weight?
Mr. BRENNAN. Oh, at--I calculated, I think, from 160 to 170 pounds.
Mr. BELIN. A white man?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what kind of clothes he was wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Light colored clothes, more of a khaki color.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember the color of his hair?
Mr. BRENNAN. No.”
.
.
.

“ Mr. BELIN. Do you remember the specific color of any shirt that the man with the rifle was wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. No, other than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.

Mr. BELIN. I am handing you what the court reporter has marked as Commission Exhibit 150.
Does this look like it might or might not be the shirt, or can you make at this time any positive identification of any kind?
Mr. BRENNAN. I would have expected it to be a little lighter--a shade or so lighter.
Mr. BELIN. Than Exhibit 150?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is the best of my recollection.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Could you see the man's trousers at all?
Do you remember any color?
Mr. BRENNAN. I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I called their attention to at the lineup.
Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by that?
Mr. BRENNAN. That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the window.
Mr. BELIN. You mean with reference to the trousers or the shirt?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, not particularly either. In other words, he just didn't have the same clothes on.”


Robert E. Edwards,’ 11/22/63 affidavit:

“I noticed that he had on a sport shirt, it was light colored, it was yellow or white, something to that effect, and his hair was rather short; I thought he might be something around twenty-six, as near as I could tell.”


Robert E. Edwards,’ WC testimony:

“ Mr. BELIN - What kind of clothes did he have on?
Mr. EDWARDS - Light colored shirt, short sleeve and open neck.
Mr. BELIN - How much of him could you see? Shoulder up, waist up, knees up, or what?
Mr. EDWARDS - From the waist on. From the abdomen or stomach up what,
Mr. BELIN - Was the man fat, thin, or average in size?
Mr. EDWARDS - Oh, about average. Possibly thin.
Mr. BELIN - Could you tell whether he was light skinned or medium skin or if you couldtell?
Mr. EDWARDS - No.
Mr. BELIN - Was the sun shining in or not, if you know?
Mr. EDWARDS - Don't know.
Mr. BELIN - Was the sun out that day?
Mr. EDWARDS - Yes.
Mr. BELIN - What color hair did the man have?
Mr. EDWARDS - Light brown.
Mr. BELIN - Light brown hair?
Mr. EDWARDS - That is what I would say; yes, sir.“



Ronald B. Fischer’s 11/22/63 affidavit:

“ I looked up at the window and I noticed that he seemed to be laying down there or in a funny position anyway, because all I could see was his head. I noticed that he was light-headed and that he had on an open-neck shirt, and that was before the motorcade rounded the corner. I noticed his complexion seemed to be clear, and that he was in this twenty's [sic], appeared to be in his twenty's [sic].”


Ronald B. Fischer’s WC testimony:

“ Mr. FISCHER - He was in the---as you're looking toward that window, he was in the lower right portion of the window. He seemed to be sitting a little forward.
And he had--he had on an open-neck shirt, but it-uh--could have been a sport shirt or a T-shirt. It was light in color; probably white, I couldn't tell whether it had long sleeves or whether it was a short-sleeved shirt, but it was open-neck and light in color.
Uh---he had a slender face and neck---uh---and he had a light complexion----he was a white man. And he looked to be 22 or 24 years old.
Mr. BELIN - Do you remember anything about the color of his hair?
Mr. FISCHER - His hair seemed to be---uh---neither light nor dark; possibly a light---well, possibly a---well, it was a brown was what it was; but as to whether it was light or dark, I can't say.”
.
.
.

“ Mr. BELIN - The statement here says that he was light-headed and that he had on an open-neck shirt. Did he have an open---neck shirt on?
Mr. FISCHER - Yes.”




Amos Euins’ WC testimony:

“Mr. SPECTER. Now, could you tell what color hair he had?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Could you tell whether his hair was dark or light?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. How far back did the bald spot on his head go?
Mr. EUINS. I would say about right along in here.
Mr. SPECTER. Indicating about 2 1/2 inches above where you hairline is. Is that about what you are saying?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir; right along in here.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, did you get a very good look at that man, Amos?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir; I did not.
Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to tell anything about the clothes he was wearing?
Mr. EUINS: No, sir.”


None of the witnesses who said they saw a man in the sniper’s nest window said anything about a collar. And Arnold Rowland’s 11/22/63 affidavit doesn’t say anything about a collar either. I have already addressed the later testimony of Rowland. If you choose to believe he saw a collar, then it was about 15-minutes before the assassination and about 100-feet west of the sniper’s nest window. And shedding an outer shirt between those two times and places is a reasonable possibility.

Again, the idea that “it couldn’t have been LHO because he didn’t have the shirt described” does not agree with the facts. The t-shirt on LHO when he was arrested is significantly more open at the neck than a typical V-neck (aka: open-neck) shirt. It is this open-neck appearance of the dingy-white shirt that is relevant and important.