This at least gives me pause about the LN narrative

Author Topic: This at least gives me pause about the LN narrative  (Read 1055 times)

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 894
Re: This at least gives me pause about the LN narrative
« Reply #56 on: Today at 03:46:17 PM »
Is it astounding unreliability "minutes apart" or is it something more mysterious or even sinister? If two eyewitnesses describe an Airbus and a Huey, is witness unreliability a plausible explanation? Lest we forget, these accounts are bookended by Truly saying a white t-shirt with nothing in his hands and Bledsoe saying a brown shirt with a hole in the elbow. "Witness unreliability" is always an easy way out, but sometimes it just isn't plausible. I don't see it as plausible here. One plausible explanation is that Reid fabricated her account, but this would not eliminate Truly. Surely, we would expect Baker to remember the encounter more clearly than Truly. Just one of them genuine Harvey and Lee mysteries, it seems to me (Lee was in the white t-shirt, in case you're keeping score).

But wait, my fellow CTers: I put on my tinfoil thinking cap while outside feeding my menagerie of feral kitties and had the following epiphany. WHAT IF Reid was not off on WHAT she saw but WHEN she saw it? What if she saw Oswald, coke in hand and clad in the white t-shirt he typically wore while working, exiting the lunchroom BEFORE the JFKA! She either conflated the time or fabricated to make the encounter after the JFKA! Pure speculation, except that it might bolster Oswald's alibi and would solve the evidential mystery as to why Baker and Reid seemingly saw two differently clad Oswalds. Nice, no? You're welcome.

If you think eyewitness unreliability is not a factor in these divergent accounts of what Oswald was wearing, then give us a scenario in which all the various witnesses could have correctly described what Oswald was wearing. In lieu of such a scenario, I will continue to chalk up these varying descriptions as evidence of eyewitness reliability. Don't forget to include what Whaley described (a dark shirt with white spots on it, according to my AI). Then there is Earlene Roberts who might have been the best witness because she said she didn't remember what color shirt Oswald was wearing or whether she had ever seen him wearing the jacket he left with. She also answered that she didn't remember to a number of questions. I wish more of these witnesses had simply said they didn't remember instead of confusing the issue by pretending they did.

PS. Oswald has no alibi. He was in the 6th floor sniper's nest at 12:30 firing the shots that killed JFK. That is a mortal lock.

Online Jarrett Smith

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: This at least gives me pause about the LN narrative
« Reply #57 on: Today at 04:03:16 PM »
If you think eyewitness unreliability is not a factor in these divergent accounts of what Oswald was wearing, then give us a scenario in which all the various witnesses could have correctly described what Oswald was wearing. In lieu of such a scenario, I will continue to chalk up these varying descriptions as evidence of eyewitness reliability. Don't forget to include what Whaley described (a dark shirt with white spots on it, according to my AI). Then there is Earlene Roberts who might have been the best witness because she said she didn't remember what color shirt Oswald was wearing or whether she had ever seen him wearing the jacket he left with. She also answered that she didn't remember to a number of questions. I wish more of these witnesses had simply said they didn't remember instead of confusing the issue by pretending they did.

PS. Oswald has no alibi. He was in the 6th floor sniper's nest at 12:30 firing the shots that killed JFK. That is a mortal lock.

There is no iron clad proof Oswald was there at 12:30, even Chief Curry conceded that.

Online Zeon Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1254
Re: This at least gives me pause about the LN narrative
« Reply #58 on: Today at 05:51:21 PM »
What gives me pause is that Hosty note about Oswald going out front to watch the parade.

Prayerman looked like a discovery until he became a woman , so the   Hosty.note has more or less bern dismissed by LNs to be just  a story Oswald made up .

None the less, it’s worth considering the Domino room was were Oswald was at about 12:23 because he picked out Norman and Jarman out of all the set of TSBD employees he could have selected. That’s about the time Norman and Jarman came back into TSBD via the back loading dock door, and they would have passed by the Domino room on their way to get to the west freight elevator.

I’m suspicious of Will Fritz early scribbles of his interrogation of Oswald, especially due to the absence of an attorney or stenographer or  a recording which Fritz could have easily made since the FBI did have tape recorders.

So the Fritz scribbled note reference to the 2 “negro” could have been Oswald saying he was in the Domino room when he saw Norman and Jarman come back into the TSBD by the back door. Then Oswald went out to the front LOBBY to watch the parade. An FBI report has Carolyn Arnold stating she looked  back at the entrance of TSBD at about 12:25 and thinks she saw Oswald thru the glass wall in the lobby.

If Fritz was is under pressure by LBJ himself that “Oswald is our man” it’s not unreasonable to suspect that Fritz would have excluded details from Oswald statements that would give Oswald an alibi.

Fritz, the guy who disturbs the SN by picking up shells BEFORE they were photographed and comes back later and places MC shells (or throws them per Tom Aleya) back down on the floor.

And that’s just a couple of things. There’s about 20 others things I could list that should give pause , but LNs dismiss these things because the WC report is good enough for them apparently even with chain of custody problems and contradictory statements of where and when items were found.