Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[Martin Weidmann]

Let's call it a 5 minute discrepancy.
It is still quite a substantial difference.

Bowles is describing things that "could" happen or "might" happen and not what "did" happen.
The evidence I have provided in my previous post demonstrates the 12:30pm timestamp on channel 2 was correct as it is corroborated by other "external" sources. It may not have been accurate to the second but it was to the minute.
As such, the idea that the dispatchers clock might have been out as much as two minutes at 12:30pm can be dispensed with.
This is not to say the discrepancy couldn't have crept in after 12:30pm but it is important to get some kind of corroboration for this.

I have also presented the evidence of Brewer appearing in the Allen pic riding the wrong way up Elm St at 12:39pm (according to the Hertz clock). In the DP tape transcript Brewer is dealing with a witness near the triple underpass between 12:37pm and 12:40pm [timestamps on channel 2]. After agreeing to leave the witness there he drives the wrong way up Elm St where he is photographed at 12:39pm. It can be said with some confidence that this evidence precludes a five minute gap at this period.


Obviously I'm aware of this evidence but am trying to approach the problem from a different angle - how the events in and around Dealey Plaza relate to Bowley's call on the police radio, in terms of timing.
It is notable that the radio traffic on channel 1 is very intense for the period in question (far more so than channel 2) and, considering Bowles' insights, it seems likely some kind of discrepancy to crept in.
But 5 minutes?

It is notable that the radio traffic on channel 1 is very intense for the period in question (far more so than channel 2) and, considering Bowles' insights, it seems likely some kind of discrepancy to crept in.
But 5 minutes?

Fair enough, but how much time do you think the discrepancy could be?

[Dan O'meara]

It is notable that the radio traffic on channel 1 is very intense for the period in question (far more so than channel 2) and, considering Bowles' insights, it seems likely some kind of discrepancy to crept in.
But 5 minutes?

Fair enough, but how much time do you think the discrepancy could be?

At the moment I can't find anything that might support a discrepancy of more than 3 minutes at the very most.

[Vincent Baxter]

Out of my quite substantial post you pick one line:

"And who's to say the Hertz clock represents "real" time."

To which your response is - "Exactly"

And in one line you've pretty much summed up Iacoletti
Takes one line from a lengthy post, takes it completely out of context and then argues against a point that you weren't even making in the first place  .

[Martin Weidmann]

And in one line you've pretty much summed up Iacoletti
Takes one line from a lengthy post, takes it completely out of context and then argues against a point that you weren't even making in the first place  .

Mytton didn't have time? 

[Vincent Baxter]

Mytton didn't have time? 

Have time for what? Well done on attempting a joke that didn't actually make sense.

Have you calmed down from your explosive rant and excessive 'throwing your toys out of the pram' moment with regards to the $25,000 challenge that got our previous thread disabled yet, Weidmann?
Still haven't received a PM with the contact info for yours (and Otto's) solicitors yet. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Have time for what? Well done on attempting a joke that didn't actually make sense.

Have you calmed down from your explosive rant and excessive 'throwing your toys out of the pram' moment with regards to the $25,000 challenge that got our previous thread disabled yet, Weidmann?
Still haven't received a PM with the contact info for yours (and Otto's) solicitors yet. 

Have time for what? Well done on attempting a joke that didn't actually make sense.

But you still got it, anyway... I wonder why

[John Iacoletti]

To suggest I'm not providing evidence is ridiculous and misrepresentative.
Juries use common sense all the time to determine which "narrative" is the most realistic/probable.

Perhaps they do, but that doesn’t make it evidence.

The "Prosecution Narrative" in the case of JFK's assassination is well known, it is the narrative espoused by all LNers. To counter it, there must be a "Defense Narrative" that has emerged from the same evidence available to the Prosecution.

This is why it’s important to distinguish actual evidence from assumptions made about the evidence. The WC narrative is not conclusively supported by the totality of the evidence.

This is the reason why all the pseudo-defense attorneys who inhabit this forum are irrelevant and always will be - they never provide a "Defense Narrative".

No, that doesn’t absolve the people who make up a narrative from demonstrating that it’s actually true. The burden of proof always lies on the person making the positive claim. The only thing that’s required to reject a claim is to show that it has not met that burden. For example it was not rational to accept as true the claim that the moon is made of cheese prior to humans visiting it. There wasn’t any conclusive evidence to support that — it was just a narrative made up by somebody who considered it “common sense”. Sure, it’s better to keep investigating and come up with a correct answer, but it’s not a requirement for rejection. The point in showing that the proffered evidence is either not evidence at all (ring in a cup), questionable/tainted (lineups), or not pointing to a specific person (shells by the window) is to show why the burden of proof has not been met.

We are left with determining which narrative is most realistic, most probable, and "common sense" is key to making this determination.

Right. And the best answer that fits all the known evidence is “undetermined”. I know that doesn’t satisfy people who would rather have an answer, even if they have to make one up, but it is what it is.

The McIntire pic below, taken from the Unger gallery, shows the Hertz clock reading 12:30pm.

Agreed.

So whatever I present is never going to be an "Absolute Truth" as this is impossible to do.

Also agreed. Which is why the legal standard is beyond a reasonable doubt, not just “story makes sense to me”.

The screenshot below shows the moment in the DP tape transcripts that the assassination occurs:

Also agreed.

Dave Powers "was Special Assistant and assistant Appointments Secretary" to JFK.
My common sense is telling me that the assistant Appointments Secretary to the most powerful man on the planet is someone very concerned with timekeeping.

That’s not the same kind of assumption as the previous two. In fact it has no evidentiary basis at all. And even if it happens to be correct, that doesn’t mean his watch was precise or that he remembered it properly. A photo carries much more weight.

As was his custom, he kept a close eye on his watch regarding the timekeeping of JFK's appointments.

You have given no basis for declaring this as his custom.

Greer witnesses Kellerman look at his watch and then hears him say "12:30". My common sense is telling me that Kellerman's watch was reading 12:30pm which is why he said "12:30". This happened when they were in underpass, seconds after the assassination.

The problem with this is that it’s hearsay. Greer didn’t see what Kellerman’s watch said. There’s a reason that hearsay testimony is generally not permitted in a trial.

Four pieces of evidence all pointing to 12:30pm as the time of the assassination.

But the only one you have physical evidence for is the Hertz clock. And there’s no compelling reason to believe it must be more accurate than any other timepiece.

Can it realistically be the case that within 40 minutes later a six minute discrepancy emerges between the two "times".

Absolutely. Because Curry’s 12:30 announcement was on channel 2 and all the Tippit related timechecks were on channel 1. Different dispatcher, different clock. And besides that, the time of the Tippit shooting is not captured on the police recordings at all — only the aftermath.

[John Iacoletti]

I have also presented the evidence of Brewer appearing in the Allen pic riding the wrong way up Elm St at 12:39pm (according to the Hertz clock).

How did you determine that this is Brewer?