JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Bill Brown on May 10, 2021, 11:18:11 PM
-
The Secret Service and the FBI reconstructed Oswald's steps (with the help of Cecil McWatters and William Whaley) in an attempt the determine the absolute earliest that Oswald could have reached the rooming house.
Based on McWatters' statement of where it was that Oswald boarded the bus (we know Oswald boarded that bus because he had McWatters' specific bus transfer and McWatters said he issued that transfer to only one woman and only one man), Oswald walked about seven blocks east (into the downtown area) after he left the Depository within three minutes of the shooting.
"So I gave her a transfer and opened the door and she was going out the gentleman I had picked up about two blocks (back) asked for a transfer and got off at the same place in the middle of the block where the lady did. It was the intersection near Lamar Street, it was near Poydras and Lamar Street." -- Cecil McWatters
They concluded, based on what McWatters told them (along with the Secret Service agents and FBI agents walking the route in an average time of six and a half minutes), that Oswald boarded the bus around 12:40 near the intersection of Field St. and Elm St. and then, after being on the bus for no more than four minutes, Oswald got off the bus near Lamar St. and Elm St. (asking for the transfer as he got off the bus).
So now we have Oswald leaving the bus around 12:44.
Oswald then walked three to four short blocks to the Greyhound station where he boarded Whaley's cab. This has Oswald entering the cab around 12:48.
They then, with Whaley, reconstructed the cab ride from the Greyhound to the intersection of Beckley and Neely (Oswald got out of the cab on Beckley just north of the intersection with Neely). They concluded (using a stopwatch) that the cab ride took five minutes and thirty seconds.
So now we have Oswald exiting Whaley's cab on Beckley at 12:53-12:54.
Still using the stopwatch, they concluded that it was a five minute and forty-five second walk from the point Oswald exited the cab back to the rooming house.
I think Oswald got to the rooming house between 12:58 and 1:00 and was back in his room just long enough to grab a jacket before hurrying out the door, zipping up the jacket as he went out the door.
(https://i.imgur.com/TAxZS8N.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/em8ql06.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/7paEZKC.jpg)
-
12:58 for arriving back at the rooming house is entirely possible. This would make it easier for Oswald to get to 10th and Patton in time for the Tippit shooting. It may even, at a stretch, enable Oswald to go the long way around and reach the Tippit shooting sight from the east side of 10th street rather than the west as the WC went by.
-
12:58 for arriving back at the rooming house is entirely possible. This would make it easier for Oswald to get to 10th and Patton in time for the Tippit shooting. It may even, at a stretch, enable Oswald to go the long way around and reach the Tippit shooting sight from the east side of 10th street rather than the west as the WC went by.
Except Earlene Roberts said he arrived just afer 1 PM
At 5.03 minutes in this timeline special Roberts tells us Oswald entered the rooming house after 1 PM
-
The Secret Service and the FBI reconstructed Oswald's steps (with the help of Cecil McWatters and William Whaley) in an attempt the determine the absolute earliest that Oswald could have reached the rooming house.
Based on McWatters' statement of where it was that Oswald boarded the bus (we know Oswald boarded that bus because he had McWatters' specific bus transfer and McWatters said he issued that transfer to only one woman and only one man), Oswald walked about seven blocks east (into the downtown area) after he left the Depository within three minutes of the shooting.
"So I gave her a transfer and opened the door and she was going out the gentleman I had picked up about two blocks (back) asked for a transfer and got off at the same place in the middle of the block where the lady did. It was the intersection near Lamar Street, it was near Poydras and Lamar Street." -- Cecil McWatters
They concluded, based on what McWatters told them (along with the Secret Service agents and FBI agents walking the route in an average time of six and a half minutes), that Oswald boarded the bus around 12:40 near the intersection of Field St. and Elm St. and then, after being on the bus for no more than four minutes, Oswald got off the bus near Lamar St. and Elm St. (asking for the transfer as he got off the bus).
So now we have Oswald leaving the bus around 12:44.
Oswald then walked three to four short blocks to the Greyhound station where he boarded Whaley's cab. This has Oswald entering the cab around 12:48.
They then, with Whaley, reconstructed the cab ride from the Greyhound to the intersection of Beckley and Neely (Oswald got out of the cab on Beckley just north of the intersection with Neely). They concluded (using a stopwatch) that the cab ride took five minutes and thirty seconds.
So now we have Oswald exiting Whaley's cab on Beckley at 12:53-12:54.
Still using the stopwatch, they concluded that it was a five minute and forty-five second walk from the point Oswald exited the cab back to the rooming house.
I think Oswald got to the rooming house between 12:58 and 1:00 and was back in his room just long enough to grab a jacket before hurrying out the door, zipping up the jacket as he went out the door.
(https://i.imgur.com/TAxZS8N.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/em8ql06.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/7paEZKC.jpg)
Bill: Do you know where Oswald's "usual" bus stop was located when he left work or arrived by bus each morning? I read (I believe in Bugliosi) that it was on Houston Street just around the corner from the TSBD?
Also: Were there any bus stops between the route he took from the TSBD to the bus he boarded? In other words, couldn't he have walked several blocks to a bus stop and simply waited for one? No need to keep walking and then pound on the door to get onto one.
-
12:58 for arriving back at the rooming house is entirely possible. This would make it easier for Oswald to get to 10th and Patton in time for the Tippit shooting. It may even, at a stretch, enable Oswald to go the long way around and reach the Tippit shooting sight from the east side of 10th street rather than the west as the WC went by.
Absolutely.
-
Absolutely.
It's always handy when you have a unreliable witness to manipulate time estimates to fit your narrative, isn't it?
-
Except Earlene Roberts said he arrived just afer 1 PM
At 5.03 minutes in this timeline special Roberts tells us Oswald entered the rooming house after 1 PM
"I had the television on listening to...trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he came in, it must have been after 1 o'clock because..." - Earlene Roberts
JohnM
-
Based on McWatters' statement of where it was that Oswald boarded the bus (we know Oswald boarded that bus because he had McWatters' specific bus transfer and McWatters said he issued that transfer to only one woman and only one man), Oswald walked about seven blocks east (into the downtown area) after he left the Depository within three minutes of the shooting.
"So I gave her a transfer and opened the door and she was going out the gentleman I had picked up about two blocks (back) asked for a transfer and got off at the same place in the middle of the block where the lady did. It was the intersection near Lamar Street, it was near Poydras and Lamar Street." -- Cecil McWatters
(https://i.imgur.com/TAxZS8N.jpg)
Before a CT claims the Bus Transfer was pristine, it wasn't, it's been obviously folded and creased.
(https://i.postimg.cc/FK05Mc30/back-of-osw-ald-bus-transfer.jpg)
Mr. BALL - Did your punch mark have a distinctive mark?
Mr. McWATTERS - It had a distinctive mark and it is registered, in other words, all the drivers, every driver has a different punch mark.
Mr. BALL - What makes it different?
Mr. McWATTERS - Well, it is, it would be, the symbol of it or angle, in other words, every one; it is different, in other words.
Mr. BALL - You have a punch there?
Mr. McWATTERS - Yes, sir; I have the punch right here.
Mr. BALL - Is that the punch that you used?
Mr. McWATTERS - That is the punch I used.
Mr. BALL - Will you punch a piece of paper and show us?
Mr. McWATTERS - In other words, that is the type of punch that this one makes right here, in other words.
Mr. BALL - That is a different type of punch than any other driver has?
Mr. McWATTERS - Any driver, in other words.
Mr. BALL - On any bus in Dallas?
Mr. McWATTERS - In other words, the superintendent has a list, in other words, it would be just like this and every man has a punch and he has his name, and everything. In other words, if anyone calls in about a transfer or anything, I mean brings one in he can look right down the list by the punch mark and tell whose punch it is, and who it is registered to.
Mr. BALL - Now, the sample of your punch there has been on a piece of paper and we would like to have it marked as 372 at this time.
(The paper referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 372 and received in evidence.)
(https://i.postimg.cc/BvDVV0H6/CE372.jpg)
JohnM
-
"I had the television on listening to...trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he came in, it must have been after 1 o'clock because..." - Earlene Roberts
JohnM
So you agree? Great stuff....
You either agree with Roberts or you call her unreliable again. Which is it going to be?
-
So you agree? Great stuff....
You either agree with Roberts or you call her unreliable again. Which is it going to be?
Huh? Roberts says "it must have been....because", she guessed then qualified her guess, those late nights in Spain with your beach view and Learjet lifestyle sure has made you sloppy.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/74/19/43/741943626378724bb6c2eabf90b35045.jpg)
JohnM
-
Huh? Roberts says "it must have been....because", she guessed then qualified her guess, those late nights in Spain with your beach view and Learjet lifestyle sure has made you sloppy.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/74/19/43/741943626378724bb6c2eabf90b35045.jpg)
JohnM
Ok, so you call her unreliable. Got it!
And btw, I don't have a beach view here, just look at my avatar. Not sure where you got that from....
Nor do I have a Learjet lifestyle. Don't even know what that means. My company has a jet on lease, yes, but to call it a lifestyle is a bit silly... Btw we used it when we flew down under... you know, where we were supposed to meet but you never showed up.
-
Ok, so you call her unreliable. Got it!
And btw, I don't have a beach view here, just look at my avatar. Not sure where you got that from....
Nor do I have a Learjet lifestyle. Don't even know what that means. My company has a jet on lease, yes, but to call it a lifestyle is a bit silly... Btw we used it when we flew down under... you know, where we were supposed to meet but you never showed up.
(https://slidetodoc.com/presentation_image/0ca7b90b664119fe2694107df99d75c9/image-20.jpg)
JohnM
-
Thank you for playing, Johnny
Better luck next time
-
Bill: Do you know where Oswald's "usual" bus stop was located when he left work or arrived by bus each morning? I read (I believe in Bugliosi) that it was on Houston Street just around the corner from the TSBD?
Also: Were there any bus stops between the route he took from the TSBD to the bus he boarded? In other words, couldn't he have walked several blocks to a bus stop and simply waited for one? No need to keep walking and then pound on the door to get onto one.
Steve, there was a bus stop at Houston and Elm on the northeast corner of that intersection. To the best of my recollection, the busses that stopped at that corner (heading west on Elm through town towards Dealey Plaza) would continue straight onto Elm and go underneath the triple underpass.
However, the route that the bus that McWatters was driving that day (the bus boarded by Oswald after the assassination) had a stop at Elm and Record (one small block east of the other busses that stopped at Elm and Houston that I described above). Instead of continuing straight on Elm and going underneath the triple underpass like the busses I describe above, the busses that stopped at Elm and Record would then continue west on Elm for a block and turn left onto Houston and take the Houston Street viaduct over to Oak Cliff.
Some of the busses, after crossing the viaduct into Oak Cliff, would then head south on Marsalis and other busses would stay on Zang (immediately after crossing the viaduct) to Beckley.
Long story short; after work, Oswald could leave the Depository building, walk one full block east on Elm to the intersection of Elm and Record. At that bus stop (Elm and Record) Oswald would wait for the Beckley line (as opposed to the Marsalis line) to take him to the rooming house.
I hope this helps.
-
Steve, there was a bus stop at Houston and Elm on the northeast corner of that intersection. To the best of my recollection, the busses that stopped at that corner (heading west on Elm through town towards Dealey Plaza) would continue straight onto Elm and go underneath the triple underpass.
However, the route that the bus that McWatters was driving that day (the bus boarded by Oswald after the assassination) had a stop at Elm and Record (one small block east of the other busses that stopped at Elm and Houston that I described above). Instead of continuing straight on Elm and going underneath the triple underpass like the busses I describe above, the busses that stopped at Elm and Record would then continue west on Elm for a block and turn left onto Houston and take the Houston Street viaduct over to Oak Cliff.
Some of the busses, after crossing the viaduct into Oak Cliff, would then head south on Marsalis and other busses would stay on Zang (immediately after crossing the viaduct) to Beckley.
Long story short; after work, Oswald could leave the Depository building, walk one full block east on Elm to the intersection of Elm and Record. At that bus stop (Elm and Record) Oswald would wait for the Beckley line (as opposed to the Marsalis line) to take him to the rooming house.
I hope this helps.
Helps alot. So every morning Oswald would go to the bus stop outside his rooming house and take the reverse of this line. This bus would take Oswald north on Houston heading for the TSBD. It would then turn right onto Elm. Did the bus then drop him off at the bus stop on the northeast corner of Elm and Houston? Or perhaps most likely the bus continued on for one block to Elm and Record and left Oswald off. Oswald would then have to cross the street to the north sidewalk and then walk one block west to get to the TSBD and begin his work for the day.
Any idea which corner of the Elm and Record intersection that bus stop was that would allow Oswald to get to his rooming house? Obviously it was on the north side of the intersection but was it on the east or west side? I guess all such bus stops would be on the east side? It would seem kind of dangerous to stop a bus on the west side of an intersection - that would block other traffics view.
-
Steve, there was a bus stop at Houston and Elm on the northeast corner of that intersection. To the best of my recollection, the busses that stopped at that corner (heading west on Elm through town towards Dealey Plaza) would continue straight onto Elm and go underneath the triple underpass.
However, the route that the bus that McWatters was driving that day (the bus boarded by Oswald after the assassination) had a stop at Elm and Record (one small block east of the other busses that stopped at Elm and Houston that I described above). Instead of continuing straight on Elm and going underneath the triple underpass like the busses I describe above, the busses that stopped at Elm and Record would then continue west on Elm for a block and turn left onto Houston and take the Houston Street viaduct over to Oak Cliff.
Some of the busses, after crossing the viaduct into Oak Cliff, would then head south on Marsalis and other busses would stay on Zang (immediately after crossing the viaduct) to Beckley.
Long story short; after work, Oswald could leave the Depository building, walk one full block east on Elm to the intersection of Elm and Record. At that bus stop (Elm and Record) Oswald would wait for the Beckley line (as opposed to the Marsalis line) to take him to the rooming house.
I hope this helps.
Bill: Great, it certainly does help.
I'm starting to have some suspicious thoughts/ideas about Oswald's post assassination behavior <g>. But I'm a lone nut WC trash person so I can't help it. It's my nature.
-
Can you name a single person giving testimony to support any of these theories?
I don't see it as a theory. I'm simply going by the bus route of the Beckley line and the position of the bus stops. If Oswald was to get the Beckley line to and from work each evening from his rooming house, then it would seem Oswald would have to travel the way Bill laid out in his post and to which i expanded upon.
-
The stopwatch photo in Bills post reads 8 min 30 sec :)
-
At risk of harming my CT Personal bias, I’ve realized that it’s possible for Oswald to have arrived at 10th and Patton st as early as 1:06 pm
This timeline requires discarding Mrs Reid’s 2min post shots encounter with Oswald in the 2nd floor office and discounting McWatters bus ride as some OTHER man whom McWatters mistakenly thought might have been Oswald.
The transfer ticket may be rejected on grounds it was pristine , and had no fingerprints of Oswald or McWatters on it . It is suspect as planted evidence.
This leaves Pierce Allman reporter encounter with Oswald in the front lobby entrance of TSBD approx 2:15 sec post shots as plausible and allows Oswald to exit front entrance of TSBD by 2:30 sec before DPD officer Barnett arrived to lock the front door about 3 min post shots ( by Barnett’s estimate)
Note: Allman was able to enter TSBD before the front door was locked by Barnett, hence the 2:15 sec estimate allows a brief encounter with Oswald and Oswald still having time to exit front door preceding Barnett’s arrival at 3 min post shots.
Therefore the adjusted scenario has Oswald plausibly being seen by BW Frazier at Elm/Houston st intersection at 2:45 sec and then Frazier able to return into TSBD just before the 3min post shot mark of Officer Barnett locking the entrance door.
The WC theory has Oswald in anxious desire to return to his boarding room ASAP. Therefore it is not implausible that perhaps Oswald chose the fastest possible way, which is go directly to find a taxi.
The alternative is some vehicle driven by unknown person, Such as the rambler station wagon DC man driver story ( Roger Craig etc. sighting) . This must be discarded if William Walley’s ID of Oswald is valid.
What is left is for Oswald to have walked directly from.Elm/Houston st intersection to William Walleys taxi, Oswald arriving there approx by 12:39-12:40pm
This is consistent with Walleys Taxi manifest having recorded the pickup in the 12:30 to 12:45 section.
It’s entirely plausible that William Walley was able to drive his taxi a bit faster than his WC time trial and arrive 5 blocks from Oswalds boarding house in 7:30 sec. (The reasoning here is that during the WC time trial, Walley would be following the speed limit , as opposed while on his own, unscrutinized, probably driving a bit faster ) :)
Thus, at approx 12:47:30 , Oswald departs Walleys taxi.
If Oswald the began a double time jog to his boarding room, 5 blocks away, he would arrive at the front door approx 12:50 pm.
Exiting at 12:55pm, Oswald then was able to have plausibly walked at fast pace the0.9 mile to 10th and Patton in 11 minutes, arriving there at 1:06 pm
-
(https://web.archive.org/web/20190725121142im_/https://nebula.wsimg.com/cf74ef484ade1018da0a49d76c67491c?AccessKeyId=9CD8649F35FCA7653E81&disposition=0&alloworigin=1)
-
So you agree? Great stuff....
You either agree with Roberts or you call her unreliable again. Which is it going to be?
"Actually, I consider Roberts to be one of the most unreliable witnesses in this case." - Martin Weidmann
Oh, the hypocrisy.
Truly unbelievable.
Roberts guess at the time means nothing:
"...it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say..."
What does this even mean?
It must have been after 1 PM because it was after JFK was shot?
What does that mean?
She is clearly guessing and finishes off by saying "what time I wouldn't want to say"
Only the truly Tinfoil can take this seriously.
-
"Actually, I consider Roberts to be one of the most unreliable witnesses in this case." - Martin Weidmann
Oh, the hypocrisy.
Truly unbelievable.
Roberts guess at the time means nothing:
"...it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say..."
What does this even mean?
It must have been after 1 PM because it was after JFK was shot?
What does that mean?
She is clearly guessing and finishes off by saying "what time I wouldn't want to say"
Only the truly Tinfoil can take this seriously.
Why have you jumped thread with this BS?
Btw just to demonstrate your utter dishonesty by selective quoting, let me first post the actual exchange between John Mytton and myself that you delibately misrepresented by leaving out what John had said.
"I had the television on listening to...trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he came in, it must have been after 1 o'clock because..." - Earlene Roberts
JohnM
So you agree? Great stuff....
You either agree with Roberts or you call her unreliable again. Which is it going to be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The obvious reason for leaving out what John had said is of course that he agreed that Roberts said that Oswald must have come in after 1 PM, which is exactly what you don't want to hear. So, you desperately tried to make it look as if I disagreed with John, when in fact I didn't. Why so much dishonesty?
The last time I heard from you about this topic was when you were preparing to run away from answering the simple question at the end of this post;
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=post;msg=112169;topic=697.2510
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As predicted, a complete farce.
More than once I stressed that I was presenting an "interpretation" of various pieces of evidence which is necessarily a series of assumptions to integrate Roberts' statements with the video and you've jumped on that like it's some big discovery.
Well done. Great work.
Just confronting you with the obvious truth. Sorry you don't like it.
But here's what I'd like to highlight just to show the pointlessness of attempting to deal with the Tinfoil mentality:
"So, that's the first assumption. The only problem is that Roberts said in the video I posted that her friend called her and told her Kennedy had been killed. That had not been broadcast yet."
In her WC testimony Roberts states that:
"Well, it was after President Kennedy had been shot and I had a friend that said, "Roberts, President Kennedy has been shot," and I said, "Oh, no." She said, "Turn on your television," and I said "What are you trying to do, pull my leg?" And she said, "Well, go turn it on."
She emphasises it was after JFK was shot, which fits perfectly with her interview in which she says she was watching "As The World Turns" and the a bulletin came on. This bulletin referred to JFK being shot.
She does not emphazise anything. She just said it. And you jump on that as if it means something. And no, it doesn't fit with her watching "As the world turns" because that means the television was already on, so why did she say she turned it on after the phone call from her friend. Just how dishonest can you get?
But in a short video posted of Roberts she uses the word "killed" instead of "shot" which you jump on to try and win a point.
The problem is that the announcement of JFK's death isn't until 1:38 PM.
So you are now implying that Oswald didn't enter the rooming house until after 1:38 PM which destroys your own theory!!
No, I am not implying anything of the kind. That's just your strawman. Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1 PM. You don't know where Roberts' friend got the information from. Unlike you, I just try to follow the evidence and am not trying to create an alternate reality.
You have absolutely no qualms about destroying your own theory just to make a silly point so you can feel you're winning the argument.
Is there nothing you won't do to try and win a point?
The only one who has a "theory" is you. And you seem to be willing to throw out all logic and honesty to "win a point". Somehow, as Roberts was watching "As the world turns" the television went wild and she had to get it fixed. Yeah right, and you want to be taken seriously? You're making up stuff the witness never said and you keep on doing it. It's dishonest and pathetic.
Just like you simply ignored completely the presence of CE 163 at the TSBD and what Bledsoe said about the hole in a shirt sleeve as well as dismissed what Reid and Roberts said (about Oswald not wearing a jacket) to create your fictional jacket story, you now again simply ignore the basic, yet crucial, fact that Roberts said she turned on the television and she was trying to get a better picture when Oswald came in. You don't have to turn on the television if you are already watching it!
What am I saying...you're more than prepared to falsify eye-witness testimony so why wouldn't you do this.
Truly unbelievable.
You're not worth discussing anything with.
More ad hominem BS.... Coming from the guy who basically ignores the available testimony to make up his own little story to fit his own little theory. Kinda sad really, but I guess it must be frustrating if you can't make others believe the fairytales you dream up.
And just for the record - I've not said anything about Oswald coming in at 12:49 PM. That's just a little strawman you've put up to knock down to give yourself the illusion you're still in the game. ::)
What game would that be?
You still haven't answered the basic question;
Roberts said, in her interview as well as in her testimony, that it must have been after one o'clock that Oswald came in. Now, why in the world would you make up your own alternate reality based on several assumptions instead of simply accepting what she testified?
And that tells me all I need to know about your agenda.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want to try and provide a credible answer in this thread? Go ahead....
And while you're at it, perhaps you can explain this little conundrum as well;
You claimed that Roberts was watching "As the world turns" when the first special bulletin about Kennedy being shot came on and you clearly implied that this was about the time that Oswald walked into the room. You've since tried to walk it back some what by claiming that when "As the world turns" was on the television somehow started to play up and Roberts was trying to fix that when Oswald came in, but the biggest problem with that is that you made it up.
Your "theory" of Oswald arriving at the rooming house prior to 1 PM, of course, completely ignores the time Oswald needed to get from the TSBD to the rooming house, but it also ignores the basic fact that Roberts said, in one of the videos as well as in her testimony that a friend called her by phone (to tell her about the shooting) and that she then turned on the television and was trying to get a better picture when Oswald walked in.
So, here is the conundrum (again); how in the world can Roberts turn the television on, if she had been watching "As the world turns", which - just in case you don't understand this - means that the television was already on.
Now, am I going to get a credible answer to either question or is it going to be another ad hom "tinfoil" attack to cover up the fact that you don't have any answers?
-
Why have you jumped thread with this BS?
Btw just to demonstrate your utter dishonesty by selective quoting, let me first post the actual exchange between John Mytton and myself that you delibately misrepresented by leaving out what John had said.
So you agree? Great stuff....
You either agree with Roberts or you call her unreliable again. Which is it going to be?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The obvious reason for leaving out what John had said is of course that he agreed that Roberts said that Oswald must have come in after 1 PM, which is exactly what you don't want to hear. So, you desperately tried to make it look as if I disagreed with John, when in fact I didn't. Why so much dishonesty?
The last time I heard from you about this topic was when you were preparing to run away from answering the simple question at the end of this post;
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=post;msg=112169;topic=697.2510
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just confronting you with the obvious truth. Sorry you don't like it.
She does not emphazise anything. She just said it. And you jump on that as if it means something. And no, it doesn't fit with her watching "As the world turns" because that means the television was already on, so why did she say she turned it on after the phone call from her friend. Just how dishonest can you get?
No, I am not implying anything of the kind. That's just your strawman. Kennedy was pronounced dead at 1 PM. You don't know where Roberts' friend got the information from. Unlike you, I just try to follow the evidence and am not trying to create an alternate reality.
The only one who has a "theory" is you. And you seem to be willing to throw out all logic and honesty to "win a point". Somehow, as Roberts was watching "As the world turns" the television went wild and she had to get it fixed. Yeah right, and you want to be taken seriously? You're making up stuff the witness never said and you keep on doing it. It's dishonest and pathetic.
Just like you simply ignored completely the presence of CE 163 at the TSBD and what Bledsoe said about the hole in a shirt sleeve as well as dismissed what Reid and Roberts said (about Oswald not wearing a jacket) to create your fictional jacket story, you now again simply ignore the basic, yet crucial, fact that Roberts said she turned on the television and she was trying to get a better picture when Oswald came in. You don't have to turn on the television if you are already watching it!
More ad hominem BS.... Coming from the guy who basically ignores the available testimony to make up his own little story to fit his own little theory. Kinda sad really, but I guess it must be frustrating if you can't make others believe the fairytales you dream up.
What game would that be?
You still haven't answered the basic question;
Roberts said, in her interview as well as in her testimony, that it must have been after one o'clock that Oswald came in. Now, why in the world would you make up your own alternate reality based on several assumptions instead of simply accepting what she testified?
And that tells me all I need to know about your agenda.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want to try and provide a credible answer in this thread? Go ahead....
And while you're at it, perhaps you can explain this little conundrum as well;
You claimed that Roberts was watching "As the world turns" when the first special bulletin about Kennedy being shot came on and you clearly implied that this was about the time that Oswald walked into the room. You've since tried to walk it back some what by claiming that when "As the world turns" was on the television somehow started to play up and Roberts was trying to fix that when Oswald came in, but the biggest problem with that is that you made it up.
Your "theory" of Oswald arriving at the rooming house prior to 1 PM, of course, completely ignores the time Oswald needed to get from the TSBD to the rooming house, but it also ignores the basic fact that Roberts said, in one of the videos as well as in her testimony that a friend called her by phone (to tell her about the shooting) and that she then turned on the television and was trying to get a better picture when Oswald walked in.
So, here is the conundrum (again); how in the world can Roberts turn the television on, if she had been watching "As the world turns", which - just in case you don't understand this - means that the television was already on.
Now, am I going to get a credible answer to either question or is it going to be another ad hom "tinfoil" attack to cover up the fact that you don't have any answers?
"The obvious reason for leaving out what John had said is of course that he agreed that Roberts said that Oswald must have come in after 1 PM, which is exactly what you don't want to hear. So, you desperately tried to make it look as if I disagreed with John, when in fact I didn't. Why so much dishonesty?"
You have completely lost your grip on reality.
John was pointing out, as I did, that Roberts was guessing.
He wasn't agreeing with you at all. He was pointing out the unreliability of her testimony on this point.
Get a grip man.
"Roberts said, in her interview as well as in her testimony, that it must have been after one o'clock that Oswald came in. Now, why in the world would you make up your own alternate reality based on several assumptions instead of simply accepting what she testified?"
How many times do I have to answer the same question?
Roberts was guessing the time!!
She wasn't lying or being sneaky. She was guessing.
Why can't you get your head round that?
When she says "it must have been", this indicates she's guessing.
This is confirmed by her reasoning - because it was after JFK was shot.
Why should it be after 1 PM just because it was after JFK was shot?
What is so difficult to understand about that?
"So, here is the conundrum (again); how in the world can Roberts turn the television on, if she had been watching "As the world turns", which - just in case you don't understand this - means that the television was already on."
I've already answered this as well.
Roberts friend (who you think was getting the inside scoop from Parkland :D) called her up to switch on the TV.
Roberts switched on the TV.
And "As The World Turns" was on.
Why can't you understand this simple scenario.
-
"The obvious reason for leaving out what John had said is of course that he agreed that Roberts said that Oswald must have come in after 1 PM, which is exactly what you don't want to hear. So, you desperately tried to make it look as if I disagreed with John, when in fact I didn't. Why so much dishonesty?"
You have completely lost your grip on reality.
John was pointing out, as I did, that Roberts was guessing.
He wasn't agreeing with you at all. He was pointing out the unreliability of her testimony on this point.
Get a grip man.
Hilarious. It's amazing just how much desperation you LNs put into trying to destroy a witness who you subsequently want to rely on for the jacket issue.
"Roberts said, in her interview as well as in her testimony, that it must have been after one o'clock that Oswald came in. Now, why in the world would you make up your own alternate reality based on several assumptions instead of simply accepting what she testified?"
How many times do I have to answer the same question?
Roberts was guessing the time!!
She wasn't lying or being sneaky. She was guessing.
Why can't you get your head round that?
When she says "it must have been", this indicates she's guessing.
This is confirmed by her reasoning - because it was after JFK was shot.
Why should it be after 1 PM just because it was after JFK was shot?
What is so difficult to understand about that?
The one who is guessing is you. Her choice of words is just convenient for you. If she was really guessing she would most likely have said something like "it probably was after 1 PM". Her use of "it must have been" is clear affirmation of her belief that it was indeed after 1 PM.
The only reason why you don't want to accept the "after 1 PM" comment is because that just about destroys any possibility for Oswald to have enough time to get to 10th/Patton to kill Tippit, even if he ran. That's the extent of your desperation.
"So, here is the conundrum (again); how in the world can Roberts turn the television on, if she had been watching "As the world turns", which - just in case you don't understand this - means that the television was already on."
I've already answered this as well.
Roberts friend (who you think was getting the inside scoop from Parkland :D) called her up to switch on the TV.
Roberts switched on the TV.
And "As The World Turns" was on.
Why can't you understand this simple scenario.
No, you haven't answered it at all. You have first tried to spin it in such a way that Roberts switched on the TV (presumably after her friend called) and saw the first special bulletin at 12:40.
In the clip below (that you posted) at 4:37, Roberts begins to explain things from the moment she turned on the TV (presumably after her friend called)
She describes that a program called "As The World Turns" was on when suddenly a bulletin cut in about the assassination.
The bulletin Roberts is describing was at 12:40 PM.
She describes how she was then trying to find out more news about the assassination when Oswald came in.
Which was of course absolute BS simply because if Roberts saw the first bulletin, where did the friend get the information about the shooting from?
Ever since then you have been trying to spin this thing in every imaginary way you can to somehow get to a coherent narrative and you have failed every time.
I am beginning to wonder just how old you are, but back in the early sixties a television set needed to warm up (for lack of a better term) before providing a stable picture. Once the set was heated up you had no such problems. You assumption (because that's what it is) is that Oswald came in when Roberts was "trying to find out more news" presumably by changing channels, but that was not what she said in her testimony and/or video interviews. In fact you just made it up.
What Roberts really said was that she turned on the television (after her friend's call) and that she had the sound and was trying to get a better picture when Oswald came in. Her turning on the television and trying to get a better picture describes exactly how, in those early days, televisions worked.
You really need to find another hobby, because you are not very good at this stuff....
-
Hilarious. It's amazing just how much desperation you LNs put into trying to destroy a witness who you subsequently want to rely on for the jacket issue.
"Actually, I consider Roberts to be one of the most unreliable witnesses in this case."
Your words, not mine.
And you didn't even realise John was disagreeing with you ::)
The one who is guessing is you. Her choice of words is just convenient for you. If she was really guessing she would most likely have said something like "it probably was after 1 PM". Her use of "it must have been" is clear affirmation of her belief that it was indeed after 1 PM.
The only reason why you don't want to accept the "after 1 PM" comment is because that just about destroys any possibility for Oswald to have enough time to get to 10th/Patton to kill Tippit, even if he ran. That's the extent of your desperation.
Note how you'll tackle my first point about her saying "it must have been" but forget to tackle the qualification of her guess - "because it was after President Kennedy had been shot"
It doesn't make sense, does it?
Why should it be after 1PM just because it is after JFK was shot?
She didn't say it was after 1 PM because she looked at a clock or because the 1 PM news was on.
She is clearly guessing at the time.
But that doesn't suit your doomed theory.
No, you haven't answered it at all. You have first tried to spin it in such a way that Roberts switched on the TV (presumably after her friend called) and saw the first special bulletin at 12:40.
Which was of course absolute BS simply because if Roberts saw the first bulletin, where did the friend get the information about the shooting from?
Ever since then you have been trying to spin this thing in every imaginary way you can to somehow get to a coherent narrative and you have failed every time.
I am beginning to wonder just how old you are, but back in the early sixties a television set needed to warm up (for lack of a better term) before providing a stable picture. Once the set was heated up you had no such problems. You assumption (because that's what it is) is that Oswald came in when Roberts was "trying to find out more news" presumably by changing channels, but that was not what she said in her testimony and/or video interviews. In fact you just made it up.
How devious you are.
Using a very early post to try and win your point and ignoring the following post after I had found the actual channel, uncut, that Roberts states she was watching that day.
Where I discovered there were three bulletins.
This is from Reply #2506
My first port of call was David Von Pein's website, an invaluable research tool. Without genuine researchers such as David, Robin Unger and Pat Speer a novice such as myself wouldn't have a clue what to do. It's all been done for me.
From there I found a video of the CBS channel showing it's contents uncut from just after the time of the assassination. This is the channel Roberts was watching according to her interview. It starts with As The World Turns, a popular soap opera. A quick Google search of the show threw up this image:
(https://i.postimg.cc/g29nVTSv/Screenshot-190.png) (https://postimages.org/)
These are the two actors in the opening sequence of the video confirming it is As The World Turns.
I found a timestamp at 58:50 in the video where Walter states that JFK died at 1:00 PM "some thirty eight minutes ago".
Therefore 58:50 on the video = 1:38 PM in "real time" [RT] (obviously this is not to the second, just an approximation. But a close one)
The following analysis of the first part of the video is based on this approximate timestamp.
0:00 [ 12:39.10 RT ] -- "As The World Turns" is on
1:50 [ 12:41 RT ] -- The first bulletin flashes on (this is the one shown in the Roberts interview)
2:50 [ 12:42 RT ] -- First bulletin ends, followed by various ads
4:57 [ 12:44.07 RT ] -- Second Bulletin flashes on
7:08 [ 12:46.18 RT ] -- Second Bulletin finishes and "As The World Turns" resumes
8:50 [ 12:48 RT ] -- "As The World Turns" goes into an ad break
9:34 [ 12:48.44 RT ] -- Third bulletin begins. This runs continuously until the 1:00 PM news comes on with Walter Cronkite
My best interpretation of Roberts testimony and the interview she gave is that her friend sees either the first or second Bulletin and rings Roberts to tell her the news.
Roberts switches on the TV and "As The World Turns" is on which goes into an ad break shortly after which the third and final bulletin comes on. This is the bulletin Roberts reports seeing. This bulletin begins around 12:49 PM. For whatever reason her TV starts playing up and she has to try to fix it. She can hear the report but the picture isn't any good. It is around this time Oswald comes in.
Remember - this is my best, most honest interpretation. It's not the only interpretation and it doesn't account for every statement Roberts made in her various testimonies and interviews, but it accounts for a lot of them.
Obviously the timings are not perfect to the second but they are probably within a minute.
You seem to think Roberts' friend was getting the scoop about JFK's death straight from Parkland.
I think her friend saw the first or, possibly, second bulletin,
Phoned Roberts and told her about the news,
Roberts switched on the TV,
"As The World Turns" was on after which the third bulletin came on and it was this one Roberts saw.
A far more likely possibility than Roberts' friend with the hotline to Parkland.
What Roberts really said was that she turned on the television (after her friend's call) and that she had the sound and was trying to get a better picture when Oswald came in. Her turning on the television and trying to get a better picture describes exactly how, in those early days, televisions worked.
This is what Roberts really said:
ROBERTS - I was watching "As The World Turns", it comes on from twelve thirty 'til one, And it'd been on a few minutes and they says a...a "Special Bulletin".
Well I was listening, I had the television on listening, trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he [Oswald] came in. It must have been after one o'clock because... he come in and...(unintelligible)... I was trying to clear it up and he come in, he wasn't running he was just in a fast walk.
INTERVIEWER - Now when he came in that day, you were trying to fix the television set, did you say anything to him about the President being shot or not?
ROBERTS - No sir, I just said "Oh you sure are in a hurry"
She was watching as "As The World Turns", there was a bulletin, then she was trying to clear the picture up and Oswald came in.
Her words.
Not mine.
You really need to find another hobby, because you are not very good at this stuff....
I've burned you so many times on this I might have to start calling you "Crispy".
-
"Actually, I consider Roberts to be one of the most unreliable witnesses in this case."
Your words, not mine.
And you didn't even realise John was disagreeing with you ::)
Note how you'll tackle my first point about her saying "it must have been" but forget to tackle the qualification of her guess - "because it was after President Kennedy had been shot"
It doesn't make sense, does it?
Why should it be after 1PM just because it is after JFK was shot?
She didn't say it was after 1 PM because she looked at a clock or because the 1 PM news was on.
She is clearly guessing at the time.
But that doesn't suit your doomed theory.
How devious you are.
Using a very early post to try and win your point and ignoring the following post after I had found the actual channel, uncut, that Roberts states she was watching that day.
Where I discovered there were three bulletins.
This is from Reply #2506
You seem to think Roberts' friend was getting the scoop about JFK's death straight from Parkland.
I think her friend saw the first or, possibly, second bulletin,
Phoned Roberts and told her about the news,
Roberts switched on the TV,
"As The World Turns" was on after which the third bulletin came on and it was this one Roberts saw.
A far more likely possibility than Roberts' friend with the hotline to Parkland.
This is what Roberts really said:
ROBERTS - I was watching "As The World Turns", it comes on from twelve thirty 'til one, And it'd been on a few minutes and they says a...a "Special Bulletin".
Well I was listening, I had the television on listening, trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he [Oswald] came in. It must have been after one o'clock because... he come in and...(unintelligible)... I was trying to clear it up and he come in, he wasn't running he was just in a fast walk.
INTERVIEWER - Now when he came in that day, you were trying to fix the television set, did you say anything to him about the President being shot or not?
ROBERTS - No sir, I just said "Oh you sure are in a hurry"
She was watching as "As The World Turns", there was a bulletin, then she was trying to clear the picture up and Oswald came in.
Her words.
Not mine.
I've burned you so many times on this I might have to start calling you "Crispy".
"Actually, I consider Roberts to be one of the most unreliable witnesses in this case."
Your words, not mine.
Indeed, and I stand by them. But even an unreliable witness can say something that's true.
Note how you'll tackle my first point about her saying "it must have been" but forget to tackle the qualification of her guess - "because it was after President Kennedy had been shot"
It doesn't make sense, does it?
Of course it makes sense. Kennedy was shot at 12:30, so it was obviously after Kennedy was shot that her friend called her.
How devious you are.
Using a very early post to try and win your point and ignoring the following post after I had found the actual channel, uncut, that Roberts states she was watching that day.
Where I discovered there were three bulletins.
So what, your first post shows beyond a doubt that you have been adapting your fairytale story whenever you found out something new. So, what you wrote in your first post was wrong.... why would any of the subsequent posts be correct? Tomorrow you might find out something new (to you) again and change your story again. It's pathetic.
This is from Reply #2506
You seem to think Roberts' friend was getting the scoop about JFK's death straight from Parkland.
I think her friend saw the first or, possibly, second bulletin,
Phoned Roberts and told her about the news,
Roberts switched on the TV,
"As The World Turns" was on after which the third bulletin came on and it was this one Roberts saw.
A far more likely possibility than Roberts' friend with the hotline to Parkland.
So, now she saw the third bulletin and not the first one... Yeah right! And btw, all this BS of Roberts' friend having a hotline to Parkland is all BS you made up as well. It just shows how low you will go to desperately score a point.
ROBERTS - I was watching "As The World Turns", it comes on from twelve thirty 'til one, And it'd been on a few minutes and they says a...a "Special Bulletin".
Well I was listening, I had the television on listening, trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he [Oswald] came in. It must have been after one o'clock because... he come in and...(unintelligible)... I was trying to clear it up and he come in, he wasn't running he was just in a fast walk.
Yes, that's what she said in the video and it doesn't compute with her seeing the third bulletin, after her friend called, because she clearly says that "As the world turns" had been on a few minutes when the special bulletin came on. This would imply that she actually saw the first bulletin. And of course there is no mention of her friend's phonecall.
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, it was after President Kennedy had been shot and I had a friend that said, "Roberts, President Kennedy has been shot," and I said, "Oh, no." She said, "Turn on your television," and I said "What are you trying to do, pull my leg?" And she said, "Well, go turn it on." I went and turned it on and I was trying to clear it up---I could hear them talking but I couldn't get the picture and he come in and I just looked up and I said, "Oh, you are in a hurry." He never said a thing, not nothing. He went on to his room and stayed about 3 or 4 minutes.
She was watching as "As The World Turns", there was a bulletin, then she was trying to clear the picture up and Oswald came in.
Her words.
Not mine.
No. Not her words. They are yours. You made it up.
She said she turned on the television and was trying to clear the picture up when Oswald came in.
She did not say that she was trying to clear up the picture after having watched a bulletin, as you seem to be claiming.
I've burned you so many times on this I might have to start calling you "Crispy".
All you have show is utter dishonesty, flip flopping on the issue whenever the need arises, making stuff up and blatantly misrepresenting what Roberts actually said.
But, by all means, keep the ad homs coming. They only expose the weakness of your arguments.
-
Indeed, and I stand by them. But even an unreliable witness can say something that's true.
Note how you'll tackle my first point about her saying "it must have been" but forget to tackle the qualification of her guess - "because it was after President Kennedy had been shot"
It doesn't make sense, does it?
[Why should it be after 1PM just because it is after JFK was shot?
She didn't say it was after 1 PM because she looked at a clock or because the 1 PM news was on.
She is clearly guessing at the time.
But that doesn't suit your doomed theory.]
Of course it makes sense. Kennedy was shot at 12:30, so it was obviously after Kennedy was shot that here friend called her.
:D
Don't you ever listen to yourself?
Don't you have any idea how crazy you sound?
This is the logic of your argument -
You think it makes sense that when Roberts says it was after 1PM because it was after JFK was shot. And the reason you think it makes sense is because JFK was shot at 12:30 PM!!
It could have been 12:55 PM or 12:58 PM or any time after JFK was shot.
12:55 PM is after JFK was shot.
Here's what you don't understand - just because it was after JFK was shot, doesn't mean it was after 1PM!!
You must surely understand this most simple point.
You must surely agree that when Roberts says it was after JFK was shot, this doen't "prove" it was after 1 PM.
Even you must see this.
Or is it the case that no matter what evidence or argument is presented to you, you are not going to change your mind.
The true hallmark of the Tinfoil mentality
How devious you are.
Using a very early post to try and win your point and ignoring the following post after I had found the actual channel, uncut, that Roberts states she was watching that day.
Where I discovered there were three bulletins.
So what, your first post shows beyond a doubt that you have been adapting your fairytale story whenever you found out something new. So, what you wrote in your first post was wrong.... why would any of the subsequent posts be correct? Tomorrow you might find out something new (to you) again and change your story again. It's pathetic.
"Tomorrow you might find out something new...and change your story again."
That you honestly believe this is a criticism or a weakness says it all.
This says it all about your inflexible Tinfoil mentality.
As far as your concerned, it doesn't matter if you find out something new because you won't be changing your mind.
That is weakness!!
That is a profound weakness of mind.
But you don't see that, do you?
Now that is truly pathetic.
This is from Reply #2506
You seem to think Roberts' friend was getting the scoop about JFK's death straight from Parkland.
I think her friend saw the first or, possibly, second bulletin,
Phoned Roberts and told her about the news,
Roberts switched on the TV,
"As The World Turns" was on after which the third bulletin came on and it was this one Roberts saw.
A far more likely possibility than Roberts' friend with the hotline to Parkland.
So, now she saw the third bulletin and not the first one... Yeah right! And btw, all this BS of Roberts' friend having a hotline to Parkland is all BS you made up as well. It just shows how low you will go to desperately score a point.
"Yeah right!"
What a brilliant counter-argument ::)
How insightful.
And the stuff about the Parkland hotline can be found a few pages back where you destroyed your own theory trying to win a point then tried to dig yourself out of one of the many holes you've dug for yourself.
In fact, you've dug so many holes I might have to start calling you The Mole.
ROBERTS - I was watching "As The World Turns", it comes on from twelve thirty 'til one, And it'd been on a few minutes and they says a...a "Special Bulletin".
Well I was listening, I had the television on listening, trying to find out what happened to President Kennedy when he [Oswald] came in. It must have been after one o'clock because... he come in and...(unintelligible)... I was trying to clear it up and he come in, he wasn't running he was just in a fast walk.
Yes, that's what she said in the video and it doesn't compute with her seeing the third bulletin, after her friend called, because she clearly says that "As the world turns" had been on a few minutes when the special bulletin came on. This would imply that she actually saw the first bulletin. And of course there is no mention of her friend's phonecall.
No it doesn't brain boy.
Go back and read the analysis again - before the third bulletin "As The World Turns" is playing.
In fact, why don't you actually watch the video before commenting.
You might learn something new (Oh yeah...I forgot...you're not interested in learning anything new)
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, it was after President Kennedy had been shot and I had a friend that said, "Roberts, President Kennedy has been shot," and I said, "Oh, no." She said, "Turn on your television," and I said "What are you trying to do, pull my leg?" And she said, "Well, go turn it on." I went and turned it on and I was trying to clear it up---I could hear them talking but I couldn't get the picture and he come in and I just looked up and I said, "Oh, you are in a hurry." He never said a thing, not nothing. He went on to his room and stayed about 3 or 4 minutes.
She was watching as "As The World Turns", there was a bulletin, then she was trying to clear the picture up and Oswald came in.
Her words.
Not mine.
No. Not her words. They are yours. You made it up.
She said she turned on the television and was trying to clear the picture up when Oswald came in.
She did not say that she was trying to clear up the picture after having watched a bulletin, as you seem to be claiming.
"No. Not her words. They are yours. You made it up"
They literally are her words.
They are literally what she, herself, says in the interview.
I wrote a transcript of the relevant part of the interview.
You can go back and watch the interview yourself.
These are her words.
The only reason you think I've made it up is because you've not actually read my post properly.
An error you've made time and time again.
I get the impression you are a very old man.
I've burned you so many times on this I might have to start calling you "Crispy".
All you have show is utter dishonesty, flip flopping on the issue whenever the need arises, making stuff up and blatantly misrepresenting what Roberts actually said.
But, by all means, keep the ad homs coming. They only expose the weakness of your arguments.
"...by all means, keep the ad homs coming..."
Will do Crispy Mole Brain Boy
-
:D
Don't you ever listen to yourself?
Don't you have any idea how crazy you sound?
This is the logic of your argument -
You think it makes sense that when Roberts says it was after 1PM because it was after JFK was shot. And the reason you think it makes sense is because JFK was shot at 12:30 PM!!
It could have been 12:55 PM or 12:58 PM or any time after JFK was shot.
12:55 PM is after JFK was shot.
Here's what you don't understand - just because it was after JFK was shot, doesn't mean it was after 1PM!!
You must surely understand this most simple point.
You must surely agree that when Roberts says it was after JFK was shot, this doen't "prove" it was after 1 PM.
Even you must see this.
Or is it the case that no matter what evidence or argument is presented to you, you are not going to change your mind.
The true hallmark of the Tinfoil mentality
Here's what you don't understand - just because it was after JFK was shot, doesn't mean it was after 1PM!!
Nobody said that
You must surely agree that when Roberts says it was after JFK was shot, this doen't "prove" it was after 1 PM.
Nobody said that either. These are just silly strawman arguments.
You are, rather pathetically, trying to make an issue out of something that isn't one. It's not the first time you've done that, and it probably won't be the last.
Roberts was using the words "it was after Kennedy was shot" because the events we are discussing took place after Kennedy was shot. Most people don't select their words carefully, just in case some fool might want to read something into them some half a decade + later!
"Tomorrow you might find out something new...and change your story again."
That you honestly believe this is a criticism or a weakness says it all.
This says it all about your inflexible Tinfoil mentality.
As far as your concerned, it doesn't matter if you find out something new because you won't be changing your mind.
That is weakness!!
That is a profound weakness of mind.
But you don't see that, do you?
Now that is truly pathetic.
Who says it was a criticism or a weakness? It merely exposed you as a person who first makes his mind up about something and then starts to look for evidence that might support that decision. It's not about changing your or my mind either. It's about you desperately trying to find an argument that will stick. It's utter dishonesty.
"Yeah right!"
What a brilliant counter-argument ::)
How insightful.
And the stuff about the Parkland hotline can be found a few pages back where you destroyed your own theory trying to win a point then tried to dig yourself out of one of the many holes you've dug for yourself.
In fact, you've dug so many holes I might have to start calling you The Mole.
Keep the ad homs coming. It exposes your frustration and lack of coherent counter arguments. I did not destroy my own theory. You, rather stupidly, tried to claim I had done that and you used this Parkland hotline crap. I couldn't be bothered to reply to it back then, because I could not imagine that you were taking such a pathetic argument, that you made up, seriously, but it seems I was wrong and you are actually taking it seriously. How sad.....
No it doesn't brain boy.
Go back and read the analysis again - before the third bulletin "As The World Turns" is playing.
In fact, why don't you actually watch the video before commenting.
You might learn something new (Oh yeah...I forgot...you're not interested in learning anything new)
Oh boy.... you really are in desperate need of some help. First of all, stop being such a smug. You're not nearly as clever as you think you are. Secondly, let's see if you can wrap your head around this;
We are basically dealing with two videos in which Roberts says something different.
In the first video she says she was watching "as the world turns" when a bulletin came on about Kennedy being shot. There is no mention of her friend calling her by phone or her switching on the television. That's the video you want to rely on.
In another video, that you want to ignore, which is also posted in the Cop Killer thread, Roberts says that a friend called her and said that Kennedy was killed and that she should turn on the television, which is what she did. She already had the sound but not a stable picture and was trying to fix it when Oswald came in.
Clearly both these statements can't be true. So, in order to find out what actually happened you need to look at what Roberts said under oath in her testimony;
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, it was after President Kennedy had been shot and I had a friend that said, "Roberts, President Kennedy has been shot," and I said, "Oh, no." She said, "Turn on your television," and I said "What are you trying to do, pull my leg?" And she said, "Well, go turn it on." I went and turned it on and I was trying to clear it up---I could hear them talking but I couldn't get the picture and he come in and I just looked up and I said, "Oh, you are in a hurry." He never said a thing, not nothing. He went on to his room and stayed about 3 or 4 minutes.
So, unless Roberts lied under oath, she was not watching "as the world turns" and she did not know Kennedy had been shot until her friend called her and she switched the television on. When she did, "as the world turns" was probably still on and was shortly after that followed by a news bulletin. This is how the discrepancy between the two statements most likely happened. Or is that over your head? In the video you want to rely on, she simply did not mention how it came to be that she switched the television on "after Kennedy was shot" or perhaps it was simply edited out.
I find it completely amazing that you are so desperately clinging to some words spontaneously spoken in a brief conversation and try to pretend that they are 100% accurate and complete, as if normal persons are always 100% accurate and complete in everything they say.
There are two more comments to make. Your entire theory that Roberts watched either the first, the second or the third special bulletin is nothing more than that; an extremely bad theory. There is no evidence for it whatsoever. You are just making it up and are completely ignoring the possibility that Roberts got the phone call from her friend and turned on the television just as "as the world turned" came to an end and was followed by the news at 1PM. This scenario fits your theory just as well! Ever thought of that, genius?
And secondly, in her testimony Roberts placed the time that Oswald came in at "around 1 o'clock"
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me what time it was approximately that Oswald came in?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Now, it must have been around 1 o'clock, or maybe a little after, because it was after President Kennedy had been shot-what time I wouldn't want to say because
and in the video you want to rely on she said "it must have been after 1 o'clock".
The expression "it must have been" is not an estimate, it's an affirmative statement!
Nowhere does she say he came in earlier than 1 o'clock! Try dealing with facts for once rather than your imaginations.
"No. Not her words. They are yours. You made it up"
They literally are her words.
They are literally what she, herself, says in the interview.
I wrote a transcript of the relevant part of the interview.
You can go back and watch the interview yourself.
These are her words.
The only reason you think I've made it up is because you've not actually read my post properly.
An error you've made time and time again.
I get the impression you are a very old man.
Stop being so dishonest. She never made the connection between watching "as the world turned" and trying to clean up the picture. You are the one who is falsely conflating the two comments into one in order to somehow score a point. It's really pathetic.
"...by all means, keep the ad homs coming..."
Will do Crispy Mole Brain Boy
Thank you for showing just how little of an adult you truly are.
-
Makes sense. As for "after 1 o'clock"...
affirmative statements can be wrong. As she does not (or it was edited out) elaborate further it's impossible to verify if she was correct or not. It is what it is....
Why O'meara keeps As I was walking a' alane, I heard twa corbies makin' a mane. The tane untae the tither did say, Whaur sail we gang and dine the day, O. Whaur sail we gang and dine the day? It's in ahint yon auld fail dyke I wot there lies a new slain knight; And naebody kens that he lies there But his hawk and his hound, and his lady fair, O. But his hawk and his hound, and his lady fair. His hound is to the hunting gane His hawk to fetch the wild-fowl hame, His lady ta'en anither mate, So we may mak' our dinner swate, O. So we may mak' our dinner swate. Ye'll sit on his white hause-bane, And I'll pike oot his bonny blue e'en Wi' ae lock o' his gowden hair We'll theek oor nest when it grows bare, O. We'll theek oor nest when it grows bare. There's mony a ane for him maks mane But nane sail ken whaur he is gane O'er his white banes when they are bare The wind sail blaw for evermair, O. The wind sail blaw for evermair.'ing over this is a mystery to me. I would be MUCH more concerned with the statement she made on December 5, 1963, to the secret service (7H439):
That was quick -- LOL
Thanks for emphasising Roberts' trouble with timekeeping Thumb1:
-
Notice Dan says nothing about the secret service being there in half an hour
-
Notice Dan says nothing about the secret service being there in half an hour
He is very selective about what he wants to talk about or consider and what he prefers to ignore or misunderstand.
-
Notice Dan says nothing about the secret service being there in half an hour
What am I supposed to say Ray?
Apart from the Secret Service never went to Roberts' home on the day of the assassination.
Do you know what you're talking about Ray?
-
He is very selective about what he wants to talk about or consider and what he prefers to ignore or misunderstand.
Why talk about or consider something that didn't happen?
-
Why talk about or consider something that didn't happen?
But you do that all the time :D
Oswald never left the TSBD wearing a jacket, yet you considered it
You claimed that Roberts' television suddenly started playing up while she was watching "as the world turns", but there is not a shred of evidence that it actually happened.
You falsely claimed that I had somehow destroyed my own theory, when in fact it never happened and the whole thing was a pathetic strawman you made up
Your theory that Oswald arrived at the rooming house prior to 1 PM does not compute with Robert's testimony that "it must have been after 1 PM" when he came in, yet - without a shred of credible evidence and a whole lot of bogus speculation - you nevertheless considered it.
-
What trouble was that?
Erm...that Potts, Senkel and Cunningham didn't go round to Beckley until after Oswald had been asked his address.
That trouble
-
You are, rather pathetically, trying to make an issue out of something that isn't one.
This is another Oswald shot the cop re-visited. Every 4 months it seems... and as usual it goes pretty much like this---------
(https://media.tenor.com/images/0f9c7116d6bf310998409305572849aa/tenor.gif)
He will never catch it and it will never end.
-
And you didn't even realise John was disagreeing with you ::)
Of course Robert's was guessing, the only people required to have an accurate time piece were the officials at the time, and from the Dallas Police through to the Ambulance and even Scoggins' dispatcher, all their times corroborate each other, whereas virtually every civilian Tippit time witness prefaces their time estimate with either "about" or "approximately".
JohnM
-
Of course Robert's was guessing, the only people required to have an accurate time piece were the officials at the time,
Please cite this "requirement".
and from the Dallas Police through to the Ambulance and even Scoggins' dispatcher, all their times corroborate each other,
Well, let's see, we have hearsay about a stamped time clock slip from an article published almost a year later, double hearsay in testimony from Scoggins taken about 4 months later about what his supervisor supposedly heard from his dispatcher, and some time checks on edited dictabelts that the supervisor of the dispatchers categorically stated were not accurate. That's some "corroboration". :D
-
Please cite this "requirement".
Well, let's see, we have hearsay about a stamped time clock slip from an article published almost a year later, double hearsay in testimony from Scoggins taken about 4 months later about what his supervisor supposedly heard from his dispatcher, and some time checks on edited dictabelts that the supervisor of the dispatchers categorically stated were not accurate. That's some "corroboration". :D
The fact that the three times from these three essential services are independently corroborated, speaks for itself.
And as for the voice/sound activated dictabelt, we have regular time checks from dispatch which was synchronised at 12:30 and therefore we know the chronological order of events and in the case of Tippit's murder we can pinpoint the time as being after the 1:16 time call and before the 1:18 time call.
(https://i.postimg.cc/nrq7WYgX/12-30-dispatch.jpg)
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/99/cd/07/99cd07ea1e2d16093a6fa9052ec6580b.jpg)
A time call at 1:16 and nothing yet has been broadcast regarding Tippit.
(https://i.postimg.cc/j5dFtCtq/1-16-1-18.jpg)
Somewhere between 1:16 and 1:18 someone comes over the air and says a Policeman has been shot, so as Bowles says the time of a broadcast without a time check can only be calculated by the before and after time checks but in the case of Tippit's murder the times of between 1:16 and 1:18 is a very specific window and puts the total kibosh on any conspiracy fantasy.
(https://i.postimg.cc/fL2gLZRc/1-16-1-18-dispatch-b.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QhmkCs1/1-19-dispatch-b.jpg)
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/BigHeavenlyChanticleer-size_restricted.gif)
JohnM
-
The fact that the three times from these three essential services are independently corroborated, speaks for itself.
And as for the voice/sound activated dictabelt, we have regular time checks from dispatch which was synchronised at 12:30 and therefore we know the chronological order of events and in the case of Tippit's murder we can pinpoint the time as being after the 1:16 time call and before the 1:18 time call.
A time call at 1:16 and nothing yet has been broadcast regarding Tippit.
Somewhere between 1:16 and 1:18 someone comes over the air and says a Policeman has been shot, so as Bowles says the time of a broadcast without a time check can only be calculated by the before and after time checks but in the case of Tippit's murder the times of between 1:16 and 1:18 is a very specific window and puts the total kibosh on any conspiracy fantasy.
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/BigHeavenlyChanticleer-size_restricted.gif)
JohnM
This was one of the funniest episodes of Looney Tunes yet. Thanks for the laugh Thumb1:
A time call at 1:16 and nothing yet has been broadcast regarding Tippit.
Really?
So, when DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) wrote in their supplementary offense report that at approximently 1:10 they heard on the radio that a police officer was involved in a shooting at East Tenth Street, they just made that up?
-
Of course Robert's was guessing, the only people required to have an accurate time piece were the officials at the time, and from the Dallas Police through to the Ambulance and even Scoggins' dispatcher, all their times corroborate each other, whereas virtually every civilian Tippit time witness prefaces their time estimate with either "about" or "approximately".
JohnM
and even Scoggins' dispatcher, all their times corroborate each other, whereas virtually every civilian Tippit time witness prefaces their time estimate with either "about" or "approximately".
Well, let's have a closer look at what Scoggins testified;
Mr. SCOGGINS. The policeman. I was excited when I heard them shots, and I started to get out-- since we went back over there the other day and reenacted that scene, I must have seen him fall as I was getting out of my cab, because I got out of the cab, and in the process of getting out of the cab I seen this guy coming around, so I got out of sight. I started to cross the street, but I seen I didn't have enough time to cross the street before he got down there, so I got back behind the cab, and as he cut across that yard I heard him running into some bushes, and I looked up and seen him going south on Patton and then when I jumped back in my cab I called my dispatcher.
Now let's compare this with the known facts. Benavides said that he stayed in his truck until Tippit's killer had disappeared on Patton street. In one of the videos posted by Bill Brown somebody walked the distance from the location of Tippit's car to the corner of 10th and Patton and timed it as around 30 seconds. But let's be generous and make it double that, so 1 minute.
We know from the witnesses that Tippit's killer cut across the front lawn of the Davis sisters and jumped over a hedge to get to Patton. Scoggins saw him do that and saw him run down Patton. He then jumped back in his taxi and called his dispatcher.
So, if the dispatcher was right and 1:23 was the correct time for that call it would mean that Tippit was shot roughly one minute prior to that at 1:22, which of course is total BS because even the WC had (incorrectly) Tippit being declared DOA at around 1:22.
So much for Scoggin's dispatcher.
-
The fact that the three times from these three essential services are independently corroborated, speaks for itself.
"Independently corroborated". LOL.
And as for the voice/sound activated dictabelt, we have regular time checks from dispatch which was synchronised at 12:30
"Synchronized" how exactly? I guess you don't know that channel 1 and channel 2 had different dispatchers using different clocks.
-
So, when DPD officers Poe and Jez (squad car 105) wrote in their supplementary offense report that at approximently 1:10 they heard on the radio that a police officer was involved in a shooting at East Tenth Street, they just made that up?
I guess they weren't one of "Mytton's" self-proclaimed "essential services".