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.
