Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[Bill Brown]

So, you didn't agree with me but nevertheless said we have nothing to talk about? Is that your current position?

As I said; cue for the word games

No.  I did not agree with you.  You're now taking my post completely out of context to try to prove a point. 

[Bill Brown]

From Dale Myers:

"The death certificate "discrepancy" - as I noted in "With Malice" - was explained during a 1983 interview I conducted with the late Dr. Paul Moellenhoff, who attended Tippit at Methodist. He told me that the clocks within the emergency area at Methodist showed different times - neither of them accurate as it turns out.

He used the 1:15 p.m. time shown on one of the clocks. The time reported to the FBI by Dr. Liquori (With Malice [WM], 2013 [edition], p.557) - 1:24 pm - is probably the accurate one based on the recorded timing of Bowley's call, the recorded departure of the ambulance from 10th and Patton, and the known drive time from 10th and Patton to Methodist Hospital.

DPD Officer Davenport noted that Moellenhoff removed one slug from Tippit's body at 1:30 pm (WM 2013 p.536). That same time (1:30 pm) made its way into Leavelle's homicide report (WM 2013 p.519) as the time Tippit was pronounced DOA (which couldn't possibly be true, right? You don't pull a slug from a body until after he's pronounced dead). This matches up with Moellenhoff's 1983 recollection that he removed a slug from the body within ten minutes of declaring Tippit DOA.

My caption under the death certificate (WM 2013 p.506) seeks to clarify the discrepancy between the Time of Injury (1:18 pm) and the time Death Occurred (1:15 pm). Again, it stems from my conversation with Dr. Moellenhoff. The 1:18 pm time, of course, probably refers to the time that Bowley's radio call was received - not the actual time Tippit was shot.

The 1:15 p.m. notation (although close in time to the actual moment of the shooting, as far as I can calculate) probably stems from Dr. Moellenhoff's use of an inaccurate Methodist emergency room clock.

Interesting, huh? All this fuss because no one at Methodist bothered to synchronize the clocks to actual time (some running fast, some running slow).

Can you imagine how many other death certificates were marked with times that were off by a few minutes? But what does it matter in those cases? Not one whit."

[Martin Weidmann]

Why didn't she have a clue?  Because you don't like what she said?

Because she basically told us so in her testimony. She could not provide any details for what Oswald was wearing when he came in, but within 3 minutes and despite the fact that she was concentrating on the television and thus had her back turned to the living room  she suddenly developed perfect vision? Give me a break!

The only reason why you want to keep Roberts in play is because without her you don't have Oswald wearing a jacket at the Tippit crime scene when Tippit was killed. You are struggling to keep a fake narrative alive instead of looking at the facts truthfully.

[Martin Weidmann]

No.  I did not agree with you.  You're now taking my post completely out of context to try to prove a point.

Ok. Very strange, but I'll take you word for it.

Now tell me how long did it take Callaway to get to the scene after he heard the shots?

[Bill Brown]

To be dishonest? Yes, you would know all about that.... posting one word from a reply I made to Dan O'meara in a different context say everything about you and nothing about me.

Mr. selfdeclared expert in the Tippit case is reduced to playing childish claims because he can not argue the actual facts. I would ask you if you were not ashamed, but you are a LN so it goes with the territory.

You haven't got the guts to confront me in a live face to face discussion because I will destroy you and you know it.

You took my comments and posted them out of context to get my words to say what you wanted them to say.  I'm just showing you how easy it is for others to do that to your words, too.

And no, I am not a "selfdeclared" expert.  I haven't claimed to be an expert on the Tippit case (save for one occasion when I was making an obvious joke) nor have I ever claimed to be a researcher.  You sound jealous though.

Why do discussions with you always turn personal and about other forum members instead of simply discussing the case?  Do you even know that you're the only member in this entire forum with this certain posting characteristic?

Are you this angry in real life, too?

[Martin Weidmann]

You took my comments and posted them out of context to get my words to say what you wanted them to say.  I'm just showing you how easy it is for others to do that to your words, too.

And no, I am not a "selfdeclared" expert.  I haven't claimed to be an expert on the Tippit case (save for one occasion when i was making an obvious joke) nor have i ever claimed to be a researcher.  You sound jealous though.

Why do discussions with you always turn personal and about other forum members instead of simply discussing the case?  Do you even know that you're the only member in this entire forum with this certain posting characteristic?

Are you this angry in real life, too?

You took my comments and posted them out of context to get my words to say what you wanted them to say.

No, I quoted from our actual conversation. Anybody who follows the links can see that

I'm just showing you how easy it is for others to do that to your words, too.

By quoting from another conversation and pretend it is my answer to your question? Just how desperate are you?

And no, I am not a "selfdeclared" expert.  I haven't claimed to be an expert on the Tippit case (save for one occasion when i was making an obvious joke) nor have i ever claimed to be a researcher.  You sound jealous though.

So you did claim it and are now saying you were making a joke? Got it...

Why do discussions with you always turn personal

Because (1) discussions with types like you always turn personal quickly and (2) I hate dishonest propagandists like you. If you want to have a normal civil conversation with me than stop writing a lie every second word you write.

instead of simply discussing the case?

With the likes of guys like you?.... I have no interest in a discussion with somebody who is constantly lying to me and playing childish word games to score points. That's why I wanted to debate this case with you live and face to face. No chance for playing games or outright lying!

Do you even know that you're the only member in this entire forum with this certain posting characteristic?

Really? Say who? But you are right to the extent that I don't suffer fools gladly. And btw the only one who is making this conversation personal, instead of "simply discussing the case" is YOU!

Are you this angry in real life, too?

What makes you think that I am angry? Just because I disagree with the crap you are trying to sell. Don't flatter yourself!

[Bill Brown]

You took my comments and posted them out of context to get my words to say what you wanted them to say.

No, I quoted from our actual conversation. Anybody who follows the links can see that

No.  You posted only a portion of my post, completely misrepresenting what I said.