It is clear that Frazier testifies to Oswald wearing a grey jacket to Irving on the evening of the 21st
Indeed and that could only have been CE 162, right?
We can assume that.
and that he was wearing a light grey jacket when he went to work on the morning of the 22nd.
So how did they blue/grey jacket (CE 163) end up in the Domino room of the TSBD where it was found after the assassination?
"The fact that he wore the blue/gray jacket (CE 163) to work on Friday morning, which means that the light gray jacket stayed behind at Irving."
This is incorrect. Frazier is clear that Oswald was wearing a light grey jacket to work that morning. We must assume it is the same grey jacket he was wearing when Frazier dropped him off. This makes sense. What doesn't make sense is your assertion that Oswald swapped jackets while he was in Irving.
Instead of acknowledging your error you ask how CE 163 ends up in the domino room. What has that got to do with the jacket Frazier saw Oswald wearing on Friday morning? The answer is - it doesn't have anything to do with it.
Nobody recalls seeing Oswald leaving the TSBD so do not know what he was wearing.
The last person to see Oswald inside the TSBD after the assassination was Mrs Reid;
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what clothes he had on when you saw him?
Mrs. REID. What he was wearing, he had on a white T-shirt and some kind of wash trousers. What color I couldn't tell you.
Mr. BELIN. I am going to hand you what has been marked Commission Exhibit, first 157 and then 158, and I will ask you if either or both look like they might have been the trousers that you saw him wear or can you tell?
Mrs. REID. I just couldn't be positive about that. I would rather not say, because I just cannot.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember whether he had any shirt or jacket on over his T-shirt?
Mrs. REID. He did not. He did not have any jacket on.
As I said, nobody saw Oswald leaving the TSBD. So what if Reid saw him upstairs with no jacket. It doesn't mean anything. I don't see why you would even bring that up.
McWaters recalls the man who got on the bus was wearing a "little old jacket".
Whaley testifes that Oswald was wearing "some type of jacket".
But McWaters did not even identify Oswald was the man he had seen and Whaley actually said that his passenger was wearing two jackets, which was impossible if Oswald left the TSBD without a jacket.
I never said anything about McWatters identifying Oswald. McWatters testifies that the man he gave the transfer ticket to was wearing a jacket. Oswald had that transfer ticket it on him. It is not a stretch to assume Oswald was that man and that he was wearing a jacket. What else makes sense? That the transfer ticket was planted on him? That the investigating authorities wanted to frame him for an aborted bus ride?
Whaley testifies Oswald was wearing a jacket. Unbelievably you argue this could not have been the case if Oswald left the TSBD without a jacket!! The point is surely that Oswald left the TSBD with a jacket on as the bus driver who gave out the transfer ticket that was discovered in Oswald's possession described the man as wearing a jacket. As did the taxi driver who took Oswald home.
Why do you believe Oswald left the TSBD without a jacket? What do you base that on?
Is it the case the only person who believes Oswald was wearing a shirt when he got back to the rooming house was Earlene Roberts?
Yes.
If this is indeed the case we can assume Roberts was mistaken as she wasn't paying attention and two people have already testified that Oswald was wearing a jacket before he reached his rooming house.
Why can we assume that Roberts was mistaken (because she wasn't paying attention) about what Oswald was wearing when he came in and why can't we assume that Roberts was mistaken (for the same reason) about Oswald leaving wearing a jacket? You are applying a double standard, why?
We can assume Oswald was wearing a jacket when he entered the rooming house because Whaley confirms he was wearing a jacket when he got in the taxi. There is no reason to assume Oswald didn't take his jacket from the TSBD when he left. There is no reason to assume he got rid of it between the taxi and his room. We must assume he entered the house wearing a jacket which Roberts mistook for some kind of shirt.
The reason we can have more confidence in Roberts' observation that he left the house wearing a jacket is that she specifically recalls Oswald trying to zip it up:
Mr. BALL. It was a zippered jacket, was it?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; it was a zipper jacket. How come me to remember it, he was zipping it up as he went out the door.
Mr. BALL. He was zipping it up as he went out the door?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
We can even assume why he was trying to zip it up before he left the house - because he had a gun tucked in his trouser belt.
Oswald wore his light grey jacket to Irving on the 21st.
He wore the same jacket to work on the 22nd.
He left work wearing the same jacket.
He got back to his room wearing the same jacket.
He left his room wearing the same jacket.
Nice bit of speculation for which there is no evidence. But it does suggest that you have understood that the discrepancy between Roberts' and Frazier's testimony about the grey jacket is an evidentiary problem which requires some sort of explanation on how the grey jacket got from Irving (where it was on Thursday evening) to the rooming house on Friday 1:00 PM.
It is speculation based on eye-witness testimony.
McWatters
Whaley
Roberts
Do you have a better fit for the eye-witness testimony.
Remember, there is no reason to assume Oswald left the TSBD without his jacket.
And remember, you are wrong about Oswald wearing the blue/grey jacket to work that morning.
Oswald entered the rooming house wearing his light grey jacket and left wearing the same jacket. He was not wearing it in the Texas Theater
Assumes facts not in evidence.
It isn't a fact he wasn't wearing the jacket in the Texas Theater??
Really??
Whatever the case, I'd be interested to know why you assume Oswald left the TSBD without his jacket.
