Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[Bill Chapman]

There, fixed it for you.

I was very specific.

Genius.

I couched it as typical of you CTers
Meaning as group; as in you're all the same

Almost-genius Beck.

[Bill Chapman]

Roberts stated that Oswald came in with no jacket and left zipping one up.

Hey genius, how can Oswald zip up a jacket (CE 162) at the rooming house when that jacket is in Irving?

Hey almost-genius, how can Oswald be ID'd by several witnesses @Tippit and seen to be wearing a jacket at and near same?

Oswald would fry.

[Dan O'meara]

Why do you keep repeating this insignificant part of Frazier's testimony, when I have just shown you that it is getting you nowhere.

Even if Oswald wore CE 162 to the TSBD that morning, how come CE 163 was found there and how did CE 162 get to the rooming house, when there is no evidence whatsoever that Oswald left the TSBD wearing a jacket?

Officer Baker only saw a brown shirt during the lunchroom encounter
Mrs Reid, the last person to see Oswald as he was walking towards the front door only saw a shirt
Mrs Bledsoe claimed she saw a hole in a shirt sleeve, which she could not have seen if Oswald was wearing a jacket

McWatters did say he saw a man wearing a jacket but he could not identify him as Oswald

Whaley, in his early statements, did not mention seeing a jacket (as pointed out by Bill Brown)
And Mrs Roberts said Oswald was only wearing a shirt when he entered the rooming house.

So, genius, how did CE 162 get from the TSBD to the rooming house?

The next time you think you have something of substance to offer, think again... and again... and again, because now you're only making a fool of yourself.

"Why do you keep repeating this insignificant part of Frazier's testimony, when I have just shown you that it is getting you nowhere."

 
This "insignificant part of Frazier's testimony" that you rely on for your crazy assertion Oswald left his grey jacket in Irving?
That "insignificant" piece of testimony?
The same piece of testimony that states Oswald wore the same grey jacket to work?
Something you refuse to accept.

I repeat it to show your idiocy in action.

[Martin Weidmann]

Hey almost-genius, how can Oswald be ID'd by several witnesses @Tippit and seen to be wearing a jacket at and near same?

Oswald would fry.

how can Oswald be ID'd by several witnesses @Tippit and seen to be wearing a jacket at and near same?

How can witnesses identify Oswald as a man wearing a jacket when he did not leave the rooming house wearing a jacket?

The answer is an easy one; the bogus line up!

It's a mathematical impossibility that so many witnesses identify the same man yet disagree about just about everything else, like for instance the color of the jacket.

[Martin Weidmann]

"Why do you keep repeating this insignificant part of Frazier's testimony, when I have just shown you that it is getting you nowhere."

 
This "insignificant part of Frazier's testimony" that you rely on for your crazy assertion Oswald left his grey jacket in Irving?
That "insignificant" piece of testimony?
The same piece of testimony that states Oswald wore the same grey jacket to work?
Something you refuse to accept.

I repeat it to show your idiocy in action.

You really are not getting this, are you now? I have said several times now, that even if Oswald did wear CE 162 to work that Friday morning it still means it could not possibly have been at the rooming house for him to put on at 1 PM.

As CE 163 was found at the TSBD after the assassination, and nobody saw Oswald leave the TSBD wearing a jacket, the logical conclusion (which seems to be a foreign concept to you) is that he wore CE 163 to work that morning, but even if he didn't it still doesn't matter one bit, as there is no way that CE 162 could have gotten from Irving or the TSBD to the rooming house.

If you want to continue to display your ignorance, feel free to do so.... you'll only be making a fool of yourself.

[Tim Nickerson]

It's a mathematical impossibility that so many witnesses identify the same man yet disagree about just about everything else, like for instance the color of the jacket.

Is it really a mathematical impossibility?

[Bill Chapman]

Is it really a mathematical impossibility?

Not at all. In fact it would be more surprising if there hadn't been a variation in color perception amongst the witnesses. It's all in the eye cone variations between people.