Yawn! Again, you bash a poor woman who simply saw Oswald zipping up his jacket and as agree this is verified by a plethora of eyewitnesses who also saw Oswald wearing a jacket. All these eyewitnesses independently saw the same thing. And let's not forget at the Tippit crime scene, Oswald was seen emptying his revolver and these shells were recovered and were an exclusive match to the revolver in evidence and this revolver is the same revolver he ordered and received and was arrested with. Try and wiggle out of that Weidmann.
I said "can" not "can't"
She only needed a few seconds to see Oswald zipping up his jacket. Because Earlene was blind in one eye doesn't mean she was blind. Your attack on Earlene is clueless, desperate and unwarranted.
Are you saying that the Police took the jacket and planted it under a car or even more bizarre swapped it? Have you even thought this through? How did they even know the killer was wearing a light coloured jacket? They really needed your Crystal Ball! LOL
The Jacket may have been interpreted to be white by a Police Officer! So what?
WTF? Please explain how you know the Officers who initialled the jacket had nothing to do with the chain of custody of the jacket?
JohnM
Yawn! Again, you bash a poor woman who simply saw Oswald zipping up his jacket and as agree this is verified by a plethora of eyewitnesses who also saw Oswald wearing a jacket. All these eyewitnesses independently saw the same thing. And let's not forget at the Tippit crime scene, Oswald was seen emptying his revolver and these shells were recovered and were an exclusive match to the revolver in evidence and this revolver is the same revolver he ordered and received and was arrested with. Try and wiggle out of that Weidmann. There is no plethora of eyewitnesses who saw Oswald wearing a jacket. There are few people that saw a man wearing a jacket and that same pre-selected group later identified Oswald at a very questionable line up.
I say again; If Earlene Roberts was wrong and Oswald left the rooming house without wearing a jacket those witnesses could not have seen Oswald during and after the killing.
All these eyewitnesses independently saw the same thing. Which in the real world is a near impossibility. When 5 people watch a car crash on an intersection, you'll get five different stories about what happened.
Eyewitness testimony (including identification) is the worst kind of evidence. Yet her you are to rely on it in other the make it more plausible that Roberts did see a jacket.
I say again; there is evidence that shows that Oswald's grey jacket was in Irving on Thursday evening and thus could not have been at Oak Cliff on Friday midday!
And let's not forget at the Tippit crime scene, Oswald was seen emptying his revolver and these shells were recovered and were an exclusive match to the revolver in evidence and this revolver is the same revolver he ordered and received and was arrested with. Try and wiggle out of that Weidmann. Don't have to! There is no chain of custody for the revolver taken from Oswald.
I said "can" not "can't"Indeed, my bad. That actually makes it worse. How is it you can understand that CT's concentrate only on the jacket if - as you falsely claim - there is a lot more evidence. What would be the point for them to do that?
She only needed a few seconds to see Oswald zipping up his jacket. Because Earlene was blind in one eye doesn't mean she was blind. Your attack on Earlene is clueless, desperate and unwarranted.Yeah right, just like Frazier only needed a few seconds to see Oswald putting the package in the cup of his hand and under his armpit. And Frazier wasn't even half blind.
Your attack on Earlene is clueless, desperate and unwarranted.She was blind in one eye, wasn't paying much attention and her employer called her somebody who made up stories. LNs don't believe a word she said except the part about the jacket.
Yeah, that's a real solid reliable witness!
Are you saying that the Police took the jacket and planted it under a car No. They found a white jacket that was probably put under a car by the guy who shot Tippit.
or even more bizarre swapped it? Swapped it? Where"At the car park? No.
Have you even thought this through? How did they even know the killer was wearing a light coloured jacket? They didn't. That's the point. You don't get this? It's so simple; Oswald was arrested and their only suspect. They weren't even looking further. And then a white jacket shows up that they can not match to Oswald in any way. But roughly at the same time, the officers who searched Ruth Paine's house return to the station and they bring with them a grey jacket that they knew belonged to Oswald. Do the math.
The Jacket may have been interpreted to be white by a Police Officer! So what?How do you describe a jacket that you are holding or at least seeing up close as being white when it actually isn't?
And it wasn't one police officer! There were several officers who described it as white!
Please explain how you know the Officers who initialled the jacket had nothing to do with the chain of custody of the jacket? Because none of them were near the car park where the jacket was found and Westbrook didn't name any of them and instead said he gave the jacket to an unidentified patrol officer.
But you will find that some of them did mark the revolver as well and we know that happened in the DPD lunchroom after Oswald had been brought in. I don't this won't be easy for you, but try to figure it out what actually happened.
