The Brown Paper Bag

[Bill Brown]

At best, a polygraph can indicate if someone is being DELIBERATELY deceitful. It can't give an indication if someone didn't remember an event accurately. That's why they call it a lie detector. It's not called a can't-remember-shit detector.

Well said.

Some people just don't get it.

It's the same with Roy Vaughn, who was guarding the top of the Main Street ramp on Sunday morning.  Vaughn took a polygraph and stated that Ruby did not enter the basement through that ramp.  Vaughn passed the polygraph.  This does not prove that Ruby did not walk down that ramp.  It only proved that Vaughn's belief was that Ruby did not walk down that ramp.

[Bill Brown]

WHAT?  - therefore, it is also faulty to state as a fact that Oswald was not wearing a jacket while inside the cab.

Whaley told the Commission he saw both jackets;
Mr. BALL. Here is Commission No. 162 which is a gray jacket with zipper.
Mr. WHALEY. I thank that is the jacket he had on when he rode with me in the cab.

Mr. BALL. Look something like it?
And here is Commission Exhibit No. 163, does this look like anything he had on?

Mr. WHALEY. He had this one on or the other one.
Mr. BALL. That is right.

Mr. WHALEY. That is what I told you I noticed. I told you about the shirt being open, he had on the two jackets with the open shirt.

Dec 18, 63 to the FBI  - He called it a gray work jacket;
"...OSWALD was wearing grey work pants and a grey work jacket and had on a darker shirt which had a gold streak in it .
He also recalled that this shirt was opened down the front to about the fourth button, and he does not recall OSWALD wearing
an undershirt. He also recalled that the. sh1rt, as well as the rest of OSWALD's attire, was unpressed and wrinkled as though
it had not been ironed after washing or as though he had slept in the clothes."

Right.

And his 11/23/63 affidavit makes no mention of any jacket, even though he described (in detail) Oswald's shirt, bracelet, etc...

So none of us can say with any certainty (based on the statements to the FBI, the Warren Commission and his next day affidavit) whether or not Oswald was wearing any jacket inside the cab.

Understand now or still confused?

[Martin Weidmann]

You're still confused.

My only point here is that Whaley's Warren Commission testimony doesn't make it a fact that Oswald was wearing a jacket while in his cab.

Therefore, it is faulty to state as a fact that Oswald was wearing a jacket while inside the cab.

My only point here is that Whaley's Warren Commission testimony doesn't make it a fact that Oswald was wearing a jacket while in his cab.

But Roberts' WC testimony about Oswald leaving with a jacket somehow does make it a fact that he did indeed leave with a jacket?

You want your cake and eat it too

[Bill Brown]

My only point here is that Whaley's Warren Commission testimony doesn't make it a fact that Oswald was wearing a jacket while in his cab.

But Roberts' WC testimony about Oswald leaving with a jacket somehow does make it fact that he did indeed leave with a jacket?

You want your cake and eat it too

That doesn't make sense.  Apples & oranges.

There is evidence for both arguments, re: Whaley and whether Oswald was/was not wearing a jacket in the cab.

Unless of course you can cite for Earlene Roberts saying anything which is at odds with her statements that Oswald left in a jacket.  Betcha can't.

[Michael Capasse]

Right.

And his 11/23/63 affidavit makes no mention of any jacket, even though he described (in detail) Oswald's shirt, bracelet, etc...

So none of us can say with any certainty (based on the statements to the FBI, the Warren Commission and his next day affidavit) whether or not Oswald was wearing any jacket inside the cab.

Understand now or still confused?

Understand now or still confused?

Thanks for clarifying. Much like Fox News, you simply didn't provide all the facts to Zeon;

On the day after the assassination, William Whaley described what Oswald was wearing in his cab (even describing the shirt to some detail) and makes no mention of a jacket at all.

[Martin Weidmann]

That doesn't make sense.  Apples & oranges.

There is evidence for both arguments, re: Whaley and whether Oswald was/was not wearing a jacket in the cab.

Unless of course you can cite for Earlene Roberts saying anything which is at odds with her statements that Oswald left in a jacket.  Betcha can't.

You're such a hypocrite.

You can't cite any statement by Frazier that is at odds with the way he described Oswald carried the package (in the cup of his hand and under his armpit) yet you don't believe him.
Why, because he is saying you don't like.

Roberts on the other hand is saying something you not only do like but desperately need to keep the narrative alive. That's why you blindly believe her.

Roberts couldn't even identify the jacket when it was shown to her during her WC testimony and she went completely of the rails by claiming the jacket she had seen was dark colored

[Bill Brown]

You're such a hypocrite.

You can't cite any statement by Frazier that is at odds with the way he described Oswald carried the package (in the cup of his hand and under his armpit) yet you don't believe him.
Why, because he is saying you don't like.

Roberts on the other hand is saying something you not only do like but desperately need to keep the narrative alive. That's why you blindly believe her.

Roberts couldn't even identify the jacket when it was shown to her during her WC testimony and she went completely of the rails by claiming the jacket she had seen was dark colored

I have no need for hypocrisy here.  I have indeed shown a statement (signed, in fact) by Frazier where he acknowledges that the rifle was in the bag, i.e. the bag was large enough for the rifle, i.e. the bag couldn't have been carried the way Frazier described.