(https://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/c3019d596f.gif)
The butt of the handle is oval.
This is a good copy of CE 133A..... Dose the handle of the revolver on Lee's hip look like the handle of a police style Smith & Wesson.... or does it look like a western style revolver.
(https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/691a336/2147483647/strip/true/crop/868x1080+0+0/resize/772x960!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.newatlas.com%2Farchive%2Flee-harvy-oswald-backyard-photo-posture-authentic-2.jpg)
The backyard photos have finally been accepted as genuine?
Picture an alleged fleeing suspect running up the street with a 4 inch pistol tucked in his crotch, side or backside. A bit long for a front pocket.
The presumed assailant ...wearing street fitting trousers [not Speedos] would have a pickle of a time keeping that much steel weighed down with cartridges--- from either sliding down his pants leg or flopping out onto the pavement.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/.38_Caliber_Revolver_Belonging_to_Lee_Harvey_Oswald_Allegedly_Used_to_Shoot_Dallas_Policeman_J._D._Tippit_-_NARA_-_305138_%28page_2%29.gif/480px-.38_Caliber_Revolver_Belonging_to_Lee_Harvey_Oswald_Allegedly_Used_to_Shoot_Dallas_Policeman_J._D._Tippit_-_NARA_-_305138_%28page_2%29.gif) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Oswald's revolver |
If a 4" barrel is a impediment, then a snub-nose barrel would have helped to conceal the revolver.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Oswald's revolver
I'll ask again....Does the handle of the revolver on Lee's hip in the photo ( CE 133A ) look like A WESTERN style "six shooter"?
If you're arguing that, maybe you need to provide something more than this:
(https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/691a336/2147483647/strip/true/crop/868x1080+0+0/resize/772x960!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.newatlas.com%2Farchive%2Flee-harvy-oswald-backyard-photo-posture-authentic-2.jpg)
Smith, Wesson... and Lee
Why don't you try to add something useful to the conversation?
Why don't you try to add something useful to the conversation?
OK so we have a snub nose .38? ---------Rarely worn in a hip holster are they not? Usually concealed under a jacket [a la Ruby] or on the belt in the back.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51rtexihcgL._AC_SX425_.jpg)
The Backyard pictures look like a 4" holster? I'm not sure.
OK so we have a snub nose .38? ---------Rarely worn in a hip holster are they not? Usually concealed under a jacket [a la Ruby] or on the belt in the back.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51rtexihcgL._AC_SX425_.jpg)
The Backyard pictures look like a 4" holster? I'm not sure.
Chapman?
:D :D :D :D :D
Movie clip Chapman doesn’t even know how Hidell’s name was spelled.
What does the holster that was found in the room on North Beckley look like?Looks like a 4" holster.....(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/samsebeskazal/21464625/878637/878637_original.jpg)
Looks like a 4" holster.....(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/samsebeskazal/21464625/878637/878637_original.jpg)
Why show a picture above of a 4 inch barrel if the pistol in question was a 2 inch snub nose?
| (http://www.whokilledjfk.net/images/XVI-514.jpg) | (https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/1/1e/Photo_naraevid_CE143-1.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) CE 143 |
(https://images2.imgbox.com/01/17/nIZlGifJ_o.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Holster would fit Oswald's revolver | (https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51rtexihcgL._AC_SX425_.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif) Best a kook could manage |
Oswald's was originally a 5" (which was modified to a 2").So they say. Where was any ammo kept? Where was any gun cleaning stuff?
If you look at the bullets in the gun belt, you can see that the shells are covered by the holder in exactly the same position as the red box above.https://www.giljesus.com/proof-the-dallas-police-falsified-evidence-against-oswald.html
The corrosion reveals that the shells were in either a bullet slide ( above, top right ) or a gun belt ( above, bottom right ) for a long period of time.
In fact, no evidence exists that Oswald either owned a bullet slide or a gun belt and neither was ever found by authorities among Oswald's possessions.
Looks like a 4" holster....
(https://i.vgy.me/x34Cpg.jpg)
Not really, but arguable. Above is a holster that fits a 4" barrel S&W Victory .38. In the evidence photo, compare the width of the sun glasses to the length of the holster at the area that covers the barrel. Keep in mind the holster has a significant height (above the floor tiles) and only measure the outside surface of the holster. The dimensions of that part of the Beckley holster and the sunglasses width are relatively close. My glasses measure a little over 5" in width. Therefore the Beckley holster should measure about the same. The best I can tell the holster (replica of one that was made for the 4" S&W Victory revolver measures a little over 6.5" at the part that covers the barrel.
Smith & Wesson Victory Specs
Caliber: .38 Special
Barrel: 4 inches
OA Length: 8.98 inches
Weight: 34 ounces (empty)
Grips: Walnut
Sights: Front blade, notch rear
Action: DA/SA
Finish: Parkerized
Capacity: 6
Why show a picture above of a 4 inch barrel if the pistol in question was a 2 inch snub nose?
The question by Walt was regarding the appearance of the handle. I was showing the difference in the handles of the Victory model versus the police model from the available photos in a book. Barrel lengths of the Victory models made for the British were 4", 5", and 6". Oswald's was originally a 5" (which was modified to a 2").
The question by Walt was regarding the appearance of the handle. I was showing the difference in the handles of the Victory model versus the police model
Yes that's right, and thank you for posting the photos.... Notice that the SW has a "hump" at the rear of the hammer.... This "hump was designed to keep the revolver from rotating backward in the shooters hand ( ie; give the shooter a good grip on the gun) The revolver on Lee's hip in CE 133A does not seem to have that "hump"
Jerry posted a picture of a western style "six shooter"..... Notice the six shooter does not have the "hump" like a S&W..
(https://nebula.wsimg.com/7c993860583583af9520295592caa7ed?AccessKeyId=9CD8649F35FCA7653E81&disposition=0&alloworigin=1)
https://www.giljesus.com/proof-the-dallas-police-falsified-evidence-against-oswald.html
Walt, in the photo below, is the yellow arrow pointing to the "hump" you keep harping about?
(https://i.vgy.me/Bo4pyO.jpg)
If your answer is yes, then my interpretation of the hump on the pistol in CE 133A is shown in the cropped portion of it (below):
(https://i.vgy.me/nCmuMR.jpg)
Thank you.... For offering your opinion. I'm not sure that I agree...let's see if others will look at the revolver and offer their opinion.
Thank you.... For offering your opinion. I'm not sure that I agree...let's see if others will look at the revolver and offer their opinion.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Best a kook could manage
If the police confiscated holster is in the archives...then someone should have been able to observe and photograph it up close after all these years.
They see conspiracy everywhere.OK don't blow out an artery there. Just make sure you look under the bed tonight ;)
Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever see him make up a bag or sack or anything like that, to hold a rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
(The article referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 142, for identification.)
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 143 is a pistol.
Mrs. OSWALD. Lee Oswald's.
Mr. RANKIN. You recognize that as a pistol of your husband?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Exhibit 143.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(The article referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 143, and received in evidence.)
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 144 is a leather pistol holster.
Mrs. OSWALD. That is a holster for Lee's pistol.
Mr. RANKIN. Is Exhibit 144 the same holster that is in those pictures that you took?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And the pistol is the same pistol as in those pictures?
Mrs. OSWALD. As much as I can tell.
Mr. RANKIN. At least they appear to be, as far as you can tell?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And the rifle is the same, or appears to be, is it not?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(The article referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 144, and received in evidence.)
OK don't blow out an artery there. Just make sure you look under the bed tonight ;)
I found it...but your picture is better.
So...Supposedly, Oswald used that [really, really, really worn] holster that one time for these BY pictures and then hung on to it as a kind of keepsake?
Or perhaps he took this pistol and a bus out of town and played Mr Quick Draw Ozzie out in the country with it?
Of course, this blueish ribbon panel didn't ever have to answer these questions.
Unfortunately...there was no "Blue Ribbon" cross-examination available.
The wear on the holster indicates to me that Oswald was willing to buy worn but usable gun-related items, probably from local gun shops or surplus stores. Might have bought loose revolver bullets with worn-off wash from a cardboard barrel with a label "Slight marks, reduced price." The Backyard Photos shows a rope sling on the rifle; that's a sign of cheapness. The rifle was found with a sling cleverly improvised from a shoulder-harness strap for a USAF holster, possibly from a surplus store. Maybe the USAF holster and sling was originally meant for the S&W.
They weren't charged with answering absurd dead-end questions asked only to sow innuendo. If they had, critics would have attacked them for speculating. The Commission wasn't a playground for kooks and loons; that would be today's US Senate.
Mr. FREEMAN. Now, Mrs. Oswald, I'm going to hide CE 144 from you. Would you cover your eyes, please? Thank you. Now, can you describe any distinguishing marks on the holster?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, I don't recall. I saw it a few times and from a distance.
Mr. FREEMAN. So you can't positively identify the holster?
Mrs. OSWALD. Well, it was found in his room ...
Mr. FREEMAN. (interrupting) ... Now, Mrs. Oswald, can you explain why the picture of the holster in the exhibit is so fuzzy and faint?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
Mr. FREEMAN. Was it done to reflect your memory of the holster's appearance?(https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/d/da/Photo_sp1_wc_fullcommission.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Blue Ribbon Commission - 56 Years On and Findings Still Valid
The Backyard Photos shows a rope sling on the rifle;
(https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/691a336/2147483647/strip/true/crop/868x1080+0+0/resize/772x960!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.newatlas.com%2Farchive%2Flee-harvy-oswald-backyard-photo-posture-authentic-2.jpg)
Really??? Do you really believe that there is a "rope sling" ON THE RIFLE, Mr O???
Please enlighten me.....Where was that "rope sling" attached? What was it's purpose ??
The wear on the holster indicates to me that Oswald was willing to buy worn but usable gun-related items, probably from local gun shops or surplus stores. Might have bought loose revolver bullets with worn-off wash from a cardboard barrel with a label "Slight marks, reduced price." The Backyard Photos shows a rope sling on the rifle;There was no rope. And we have more probables...might haves...and could bes. No matter how unlikely it may seem--Oswald did it...that homicidal creep :(
They weren't charged with answering absurd dead-end questions asked only to sow innuendo. If they had, critics would have attacked them for speculating. The Commission wasn't a playground for kooks and loons; that would be today's US Senate.So, the BRWC wasn't out to save some political asses?... Truth was their only client....my rear end.
(https://sites.google.com/site/shotonelmclassicsiteview/backyard/ce133c-crop-1200x800.jpg)
Jerry, Why are you so damned dishonest.....I know...you switched the photo to the fake 133C ( the one that Lee told Fritz was a fake) because you can't possibly show the "rope sling" attached TO THE RIFLE in the authentic photo CE 133A ( the one photo that Marina took) Why do you lie like this Jerry?
Here's the photo ( CE 133A) that was being referenced ..... Now then Mr O, Please point out the points on the rifle where that "sling" is attached.
(https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/691a336/2147483647/strip/true/crop/868x1080+0+0/resize/772x960!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.newatlas.com%2Farchive%2Flee-harvy-oswald-backyard-photo-posture-authentic-2.jpg)
| (https://i2.wp.com/www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/20131118135547_3737-1024x576.jpg) | (https://sites.google.com/site/shotonelmclassicsiteview/backyard/ce133c-crop-1200x800.jpg) | (https://i.imgur.com/KioGzCL.jpg) |
The side of the rifle with attachments points is not visible in CE 133A. Attachment points are largely-visible and the full length of the sling are visible in CE 133B & C.
(https://i2.wp.com/www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/20131118135547_3737-1024x576.jpg) (https://sites.google.com/site/shotonelmclassicsiteview/backyard/ce133c-crop-1200x800.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/KioGzCL.jpg)
The sling hangs free in B and C but in A, the sling is held to the rifle by the left hand and I would say portions are held up between the body and rifle. The sling being partially hidden in 133A would seem to be accidental and random, not staged.(https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/d/da/Photo_sp1_wc_fullcommission.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Blue Ribbon Commission - 56 Years On and Findings Still Valid
Why do you lie....When your lies are so easily exposed. The photo (CE 133A ) clearly shows the front sling swivel and there is NO SLING passing through the sling loop.
Anybody with an ounce of commonsense can see that "sling" in CE 133A looks like the handle of a woman's purse. Clearly some "artist" ( Lee Oswald ?) has altered the photo by adding the handle. He also doctored the photo by retouching the rifle in the photo.
(https://assets.newatlas.com/dims4/default/691a336/2147483647/strip/true/crop/868x1080+0+0/resize/772x960!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.newatlas.com%2Farchive%2Flee-harvy-oswald-backyard-photo-posture-authentic-2.jpg)
Mr O.... I think I need to thank you ... Any open minded intelligent person can see that there is differences between the original BY photo ( CE 133A) and the other two photos....Marina originally testified that she took only ONE photo of Lee in their backyard ...
Then the liars of LBJ's Special cover up committee tricked by showing her a fake photo CE 133B. In her fear of being called uncooperative she said that perhaps she had also taken CE 133B ...by snapping the camera shutter twice....
Which is an utterly ridiculous because she would have created a double exposure if she had snapped the shutter twice. But the liars of the WC accepted that ridiculous explanation without batting an eye....
So what you've done, Mr O is provide evidence that there is only ONE authentic Back Yard photo.... That photo is...CE 133A.
"At the time that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken
two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were
two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses."
There were three poses. If she could put out of her mind the taking of two pictures, why not three?
Of course if someone is faking other photos and for no apparent reason, wouldn't they stop at one fake? More fakes increase the risk of detention (meaning professional, not armchair).
Referring to an exhibit showing 133-A and 133-B,
Mr. RANKIN. You took both of those pictures, did you, in Exhibit 133?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Marina did not know how to create a double exposure. She also never said she pressed the shutter button twice during one of the exposures.
Marina said Lee would set up the camera for her between exposures, including advancing the film for her.
133-A differs from B and C because it's the only one of the three where Oswald is in the fixed focal plane of the camera. He's further back (thereby defined with less resolution as well as less focus) in B and C.(https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/d/da/Photo_sp1_wc_fullcommission.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Blue Ribbon Commission - 56 Years On and Findings Still Valid
Will CTer brainiacs ever see the (sun)light?
Brennan certainly perceived light-coloured clothing all right.... one way or the other.
(https://i.postimg.cc/4NwFgB8J/Oswald-in-strong-sunlight.png)
Daniel Webber as Oswald in Steven King's 11.22.63
"Sunlight made dark clothing look khaki".
Another one for the "lame LN excuses" list.
"Sunlight made dark clothing look khaki".
The LNer's have hundreds of ridiculous ideas which they use to avoid facing facts. And this one is one of the utterly absurd excuses .....Lee Oswald's clothing couldn't possibly have been seen as "light colored khaki"..... as Howard Brennan and others described the clothing of the man behind the sixth floor window.
This from the same guy who believes the red circles on the TSBD were a signal to LBJ. Despite newspaper accounts from decades earlier explaining their actual purpose. But here we learn that it is absurd to contend that lighting can affect the appearance of someone's clothing. Comedy gold.He also stated that JFK was given a Stetson at the breakfast in Fort Worth the morning of the assassination so that the snipers could more easily target him in Dallas.
This from the same guy who believes the red circles on the TSBD were a signal to LBJ. Despite newspaper accounts from decades earlier explaining their actual purpose. But here we learn that it is absurd to contend that lighting can affect the appearance of someone's clothing. Comedy gold.
Yes, Mr "Smith", It's a laugh riot..... The lengths you LNer clowns will go to to avoid facing facts. Only a lunatic would present the idea that a brick colored shirt could be mistaken for a yellow colored shirt.....and also offer the absurd idea that DARK GREY trousers could appear to be WHITE because the sun was shining..... :D ROTFLMAO!
"Sunlight made dark clothing look khaki".
Another one for the "lame LN excuses" list.
So, is the dress white and gold or blue and black?
"Sunlight made dark clothing look khaki".
Another one for the "lame LN excuses" list.
It's blue and black.
https://twitter.com/romanoriginals/status/571224722438004736 (https://twitter.com/romanoriginals/status/571224722438004736)
But what does that have to do with sunlight?
So, is the dress white and gold or blue and black?What do these dresses have to do with whether or not the pistol in question is a Smith&Wesson?
Mitch Todd: So, is the dress white and gold or blue and black?Not much. It's a response to the brown vs khaki shirt sidechain. You're just now catching up to the fact that the topic veered off onto the rumble strip?
What do these dresses have to do with whether or not the pistol in question is a Smith&Wesson?
Not much. It's a response to the brown vs khaki shirt sidechain. You're just now catching up to the fact that the topic veered off onto the rumble strip?
Should be self-evident. Differences in lighting and background can affect the apparent color of an object. Not exactly a new idea.
No doubt. But this isn’t a washed-out photo of a dress. The claim seems to be that sunlight makes a dark-brown shirt and even darker pants looks like a khaki shirt and even lighter pants. Never mind the fact that a shooter taking aim for the head shot would not be in the sunlight...
Brennan clearly said in his affidavit " He had on light colored clothing but definitely not a suit". ( in other words, Brennan said that the shirt and trousers were similar in color, but they were not a suit)
>>> Somebody claimed the little pipsqueak wore a suit? String the bastard up!
During his testimony before LBJ's Select Blue Ribbon Cover up Committee, Brennan described the man's clothing as "khaki", and the trousers were a shade LIGHTER than than the dingy white colored shirt.
>>> Brennan hemmed & hawed about the khaki colour.
Lee Oswald was wearing a reddish brown ( brick color) shirt and DARK grey trousers ..... Neither the shirt or the trousers could be seen as "Dingy white" and Lee's dark grey trousers most certainly would not have appeared as a "shade lighter" than his shirt ...... Even if the observer was color blind.....
>>> In his WC testimony Brennan said the shirt he saw was maybe a shade lighter than the one he was shown (CE 159)... not that the trousers were a shade lighter.
High noon had sunlight streaming in that window and catching the little prick in bits & pieces, suggesting lighter clothes (not colours)... whether you lot like that observable, repeatable science or not.
----------------------------------
Khaki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaki#Tones_of_khaki
Khaki (UK: /ˈkɑːki/, Canada and US: /ˈkæki/) is a color, a light shade of brown with a yellowish tinge. Khaki is an equal mix of sage and buff so it is considered a quinary color.[1]
He also stated that JFK was given a Stetson at the breakfast in Fort Worth the morning of the assassination so that the snipers could more easily target him in Dallas.
I think most people recognize falsehoods from, well, let's say "unstable" people. But I do worry that someone may come here and believe some of these falsehoods. But that's the price for free speech; truth will defeat false ideas but it takes time and the lies can cause damage.
This from the same guy who believes the red circles on the TSBD were a signal to LBJ. Despite newspaper accounts from decades earlier explaining their actual purpose. But here we learn that it is absurd to contend that lighting can affect the appearance of someone's clothing. Comedy gold.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember the specific color of any shirt that the man with the rifle was wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. No, other than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Could you see the man's trousers at all?
Do you remember any color?
Mr. BRENNAN. I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I called their attention to at the lineup.
Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by that?
Mr. BRENNAN. That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the window.
Mr. BELIN. You mean with reference to the trousers or the shirt?
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, not particularly either. In other words, he just didn't have the same clothes on.
Tell us what clothes Oswald had on in the show up. And was the show up held in the SE corner on a sunny day at 12:30 with Brennan viewing from the same position he had on the actual day of the assassination?
You schooled these brainiacs about something they don't have a clue about. When that happens, they whine about staying strictly on topic.Oupurz.
It doesn't help when Fox News falls for spoofs from sites like the Onion; to wit the fake 75,000 word rambling email 'from Obama' a few years back.You need to cut back on the booze.
Watch me drop in another one, and the ensuing scramble from the crème de la crème of the local tin foil hat crowd take it ever-so-seriously. You know, the type who thrive on the chain mails from the right-wing lunatic fringe blogosphere.
Oupurz.You need to cut back on the booze.
Yet another nothing-burger from the far shores of the lunatic fringe
Mr. BRENNAN. Well, as I previously have said, I had saw the man in the window and I had saw him on television. He looked much younger on television than he did from my picture of him in the window--not much younger, but a few years younger--say 5 years younger.
Nice to see you finally showing some introspection.
No doubt. But this isn’t a washed-out photo of a dress. The claim seems to be that sunlight makes a dark-brown shirt and even darker pants looks like a khaki shirt and even lighter pants. Never mind the fact that a shooter taking aim for the head shot would not be in the sunlight...
About twenty years ago, I was standing in line at a C-store when someone in the near gas lane drove off without paying. The cashier called the cops, who showed up before I could pay and leave, so I and a few other customers got to describe the car that just sped off. I thought it was a light metallic blue Maxima (of the "4 door sports car" early '90s generation). Someone thought it was a BMW. Someone else thought an Accord.While I thought it was blue, a couple of the other witnesses said it was silver. Someone said it was white. Someone thought it was gold. And the car couldn't have been more than 25 feet away.
But what does that have to do with sunlight?
Nice work "Iacoletti", Oswald's shirt when in direct sunlight appears much lighter.
(https://i.postimg.cc/D0kKJkCN/lb-maccammon.jpg)
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8f/f4/65/8ff465ec870cebb3ebefc0bf20034186.jpg)
JohnM
Nice work "Iacoletti", Oswald's shirt when in direct sunlight appears much lighter.
Iacoletti is my real name, “Mytton”.
Still looks darker than khaki. If that’s even the same shirt he was wearing at work.
Iacoletti is my real name, “Mytton”.
Still looks darker than khaki.
Sure it is "Iacoletti" How can you prove that "Iacoletti" just made the above post?
Not according to Brennan.
If you remember the original dress photo imbroglio, there was only one photo of the dress. Some people looked at it and saw a white dress with gold accents, others saw a blue dress with black accents. At the time, there was a lot of discussion about the underlying phenomena, the upshot being that different people experience colors in slightly different ways. Sometimes, probably usually, it's not significant. Other times it is.
About twenty years ago, I was standing in line at a C-store when someone in the near gas lane drove off without paying. The cashier called the cops, who showed up before I could pay and leave, so I and a few other customers got to describe the car that just sped off. I thought it was a light metallic blue Maxima (of the "4 door sports car" early '90s generation). Someone thought it was a BMW. Someone else thought an Accord.While I thought it was blue, a couple of the other witnesses said it was silver. Someone said it was white. Someone thought it was gold. And the car couldn't have been more than 25 feet away.
Describe the person who drove off
(https://images2.imgbox.com/c0/e2/y2QgmMWZ_o.jpg)
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODAY/USATODAY/2013/02/17/jfk-exhibit-16_9.jpg)
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODAY/USATODAY/2013/02/17/jfk-exhibit-16_9.jpg)
Would you describe this shirt as "DINGY WHITE"? Brennan said the man's shirt was "dingy white, and his trousers were a shade lighter than the shirt.
.(https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/samsebeskazal/21464625/878637/878637_original.jpg)
Clearly Lee had TWO shirts that were similar...., He was wearing one of them at the time this photo was taken.....
LHO was in his dingy white t-shirt during the assassination. Look closely at photos of him in it when he was in custody at DPD after his outer shirt had been taken from him. It is worn out and dingy white. The sun was shining in through the windows of the TSBD at that point in time (assassination). This would have most likely made him warm enough to want to remove the darker shirt for comfort. At the rooming house, after the assassination, LHO put on the jacket to try to conceal his revolver. Tippit might have noticed a bulge (due to the revolver) and got out of his car to investigate. After the Tippit shooting, LHO discarded his jacket in an effort to change his appearance. And his shirt tail was then pulled out to try to conceal his revolver.
LHO was in his dingy white t-shirt during the assassination. ....
"He had on light colored clothing but definitely not a suit"... Line 17 of Brennan's affidavit.
Really Charlie??.... Do you really believe that Brennan would have specified that the man's clothing "was not a suit" if he was wearing a T shirt?
Absolutely positive...
Absolutely positive...
Seems Brennan dismissed the idea that it wasn't a suit right away so as to make it clear that it wasn't an SS or FBI agent; a part of security that, as far as he knew, might have been assigned to buildings in the area.
As well, one would think that removing the shirt would give the shooter a little more freedom to maneuver during the shooting sequence.
Re the dingy Tshirt, he may have looked... comfortable.
(Like the guy in the 'date' ad haha)
Sure it is "Iacoletti" How can you prove that "Iacoletti" just made the above post?
Not according to Brennan.
JohnM
Not everyone is too cowardly to post under his real name.
Nice circular argument, “Mytton”.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/c0/e2/y2QgmMWZ_o.jpg)
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODAY/USATODAY/2013/02/17/jfk-exhibit-16_9.jpg)
Yes, but do you think any of these differences were due to the lighting conditions?
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODAY/USATODAY/2013/02/17/jfk-exhibit-16_9.jpg)
Would you describe this shirt as "DINGY WHITE"? Brennan said the man's shirt was "dingy white,
and his trousers were a shade lighter than the shirt.
Clearly Lee had TWO shirts that were similar...., He was wearing one of them at the time this photo was taken.....
I realize now the shirt in the photograph is a shirt shown under artificial light. Sunlight is more powerful.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/64/07/viath93F_o.jpg)
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce150.jpg)
Wasn't Brennan comparing the trousers to the darkness of the shirt as shown him in CE 150?
Mr. BELIN. I am handing you what the court reporter has marked as Commission Exhibit 150.
Does this look like it might or might not be the shirt, or can you make at this time any positive identification of any kind?
Mr. BRENNAN. I would have expected it to be a little lighter--a shade or so lighter.
Mr. BELIN. Than Exhibit 150?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is the best of my recollection.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Could you see the man's trousers at all?
Do you remember any color?
Mr. BRENNAN. I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of the shirt or a little lighter.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/23/79/tHi8sxeF_o.jpg)
The other shirt he supposedly wore seems to be light under artificial light.
Worn out t-shirts ARE very comfortable. And the dinginess was probably a result of years of use without using bleach when he washed it.Marina washed his shirts when they were together. That is how she knew what all he wore.
Worn out t-shirts ARE very comfortable. And the dinginess was probably a result of years of use without using bleach when he washed it.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/c0/e2/y2QgmMWZ_o.jpg)
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODAY/USATODAY/2013/02/17/jfk-exhibit-16_9.jpg)
"THE VIEWPOINT OF BRENNAN"
He must have had binoculars
or was Brennan floating at a height equal to the traffic light?
I realize now the shirt in the photograph is a shirt shown under artificial light. Sunlight is more powerful.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/64/07/viath93F_o.jpg)
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce150.jpg)
Wasn't Brennan comparing the trousers to the darkness of the shirt as shown him in CE 150?
Mr. BELIN. I am handing you what the court reporter has marked as Commission Exhibit 150.
Does this look like it might or might not be the shirt, or can you make at this time any positive identification of any kind?
Mr. BRENNAN. I would have expected it to be a little lighter--a shade or so lighter.
Mr. BELIN. Than Exhibit 150?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is the best of my recollection.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Could you see the man's trousers at all?
Do you remember any color?
Mr. BRENNAN. I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of the shirt or a little lighter.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/23/79/tHi8sxeF_o.jpg)
The other shirt he supposedly wore seems to be light under artificial light.
Why are you misquoting me? This is not the Trump thread.Please don't distract by changing the subject, but thank you for showing how you manipulate things.
Didn't think it would need to be mentioned, but it's a zoomed-in view fixed to the line-of-sight from where Brennan sat. It also represents in a general way his concentration on the subject.
That would make Brennan 1/4 closer to the window than where he actually was.
Thank you Mr O..... for posting the photo of the shirt that Lee was wearing at the TSBD that morning.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/23/79/tHi8sxeF_o.jpg)
This is the shirt that Lee took off at 1:00 pm and left in the drawer of his dresser. And it is the shirt with the BUTTON DOWN COLLAR that Detective pots found in the dresser drawer ( see Potts exhibit)
Please don't distract by changing the subject, but thank you for showing how you manipulate things.
I know it is zoomed in and that is the problem. Are you trying to say Brennan had an eye like Steve Austin?
Misquoting? Now you are making up nonsense. Who are you trying to fool?
(https://images2.imgbox.com/23/79/tHi8sxeF_o.jpg)
This shirt tells us many things ..... A) It tells us that William Whaley did NOT have Lee Oswald as his passenger....Because this shirt is totally different than the shirt that Whaley's passenger was wearing. Recall that Whaley said that the shirt his passenger was wearing had silver stripes running through the fabric...
B) It may expose Mrs Bledsoe as a liar.... Because Mrs Bledsoe said that the shirt she saw Lee Oswald wearing had a kole in the elbow....This shirt does not apper to have a hole in the elbow. C ) In addition to the BUTTON DOWN COLLAR this shirt has only one breast pocket.
| (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg) | (https://i.postimg.cc/t4bR680F/oswald-shirt-hole1.jpg) |
A review will show I addressed all your petty whinny complains.
Researchers don't utilize zooms of the Zapruder film when discussing what witnesses saw?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Wikipedia-spotlight.jpg/300px-Wikipedia-spotlight.jpg)
And people with normal vision do focus on a central area of interest when necessary. If visual concentration was solely defined by field of vision, people would read books by holding them a few inches from their eyes.
I said the graphic was "From Viewpoint of Brennan". You wrote: "THE VIEWPOINT OF BRENNAN".
Do you want to understand things about the assassination, or just endlessly nitpick about advances from people like Farid and the Haags?
Whaley said: " he had on a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it". So not "silver" literally.
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/media/USATODAY/USATODAY/2013/02/17/xxx-oswald-kennedy-newseu-4.jpg)
The arrest shirt was mercerized, which causes fabric to have a shiny look. The shirt has what appears to be light yellow vertical stripes on it. Overall, the shirt in this picture has an orange-brown color.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3f/30/14/3f301498b50fd75fd86e64c9edee2e5e.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/t4bR680F/oswald-shirt-hole1.jpg)
The arrest shirt appears to exhibit a hole in the right elbow.
The shirt with the button down collar is the shirt that Lee would have been wearing IF IF he had been William Whaley's passenger.....There isn't a hint of a silver thread running through the fabric....
And ,,, no "silver thread" in this one either.
So who was Whaley’s actual passenger? Faded blue khaki uniform? Work jacket that almost matched the pants? Two jackets?
And ,,, no "silver thread" in this one either.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/23/79/tHi8sxeF_o.jpg)
(https://images2.imgbox.com/23/79/tHi8sxeF_o.jpg)
no "silver thread" in this one either.
That's correct.... And this IS the shirt that Lee would have been wearing at the time that Whaley transported the young man who was wearing a BLUE worThe Lithping Larry Grayson "Oooh Shut That Door" doppleganger's type uniform jacket. Whaley said that his passenger was wearing a shirt with silver threads running through the fabric... As you can see there is no "silver threads" running through this shirt. And it definitely IS the shirt that Lee took off and left in the drawer of his dresser at the rooming house.
I don't expect witnesses to record minute details as if they were digital cameras, though a "a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it" seems appropriate as a rough recall of the lighter stripes on the mercerized shirt and its overall color. Did Whaley identify Oswald as the man in his cab?
I don't expect witnesses to record minute details as if they were digital cameras, though a "a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it" seems appropriate as a rough recall of the lighter stripes on the mercerized shirt and its overall color. Did Whaley identify Oswald as the man in his cab?
Mr. BALL. Did you notice how he was dressed?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir. I didn't pay much attention to it right then.
But it all came back when I really found out who I had. He was dressed
in just ordinary work clothes. It wasn't khaki pants but they were
khaki material, blue faded blue color, like a blue uniform made in
khaki. Then he had on a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on
it and he had on some kind of jacket. I didn't notice very close but I
think it was a work jacket that almost matched the pants.
If you're going to give Whaley and Brennan full-credit on minor details, how about giving them credit on their identification of Oswald as the man they saw?
I don't expect witnesses to record minute details as if they were digital cameras, though a "a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it" seems appropriate as a rough recall of the lighter stripes on the mercerized shirt and its overall color. Did Whaley identify Oswald as the man in his cab?
though a "a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it" seems appropriate as a rough recall of the lighter stripes on the mercerized shirt and its overall color.
This is an example of trying to make the evidence fit the desired suspect rather than the suspect fitting the evidence.
Sure. Brown shirts with a single silver stripe were the fashion rage back then.
Any way you slice it....The plaid shirt that has been presented as the shirt that Lee was wearing at the TSBD that morning does NOT have a SILVER stripe in it.
I believe I know what Whaley was trying to say when he described the man's shirt.... Because I owned a similar shirt .... The shirt had silver threads ( similar to Christmas tree tinsel ) running through the fabric.
But .... The whole argument is irrelevant because the plaid shirt ( CE 150) is NOT the shirt that Lee was wearing at the TSBD that morning. It is the shirt he was wearing at the Texas Theater and the shirt that the FBI claimed the tuft of fibers that were found on the butt of the rifle came from. But the shirt that Lee was wearing at the TSBD is CE 151, the reddish brown shirt with the BUTTON DOWN COLLAR....and it sure as hell does NOT have any silver stripes on it.
Yes, I think he's referring to more than one stripe. But that go against this earlier claim: "Whaley didn't say anything about Multiple STRIPES"?
You sure have a unique take on terms like "khaki" and "plaid". You would have been quite an asset for Neiman-Marcus or Jennifer Juniors.