JFK Assassination Forum

JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Walt Cakebread on July 31, 2022, 05:19:20 PM

Title: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on July 31, 2022, 05:19:20 PM
From page 22 of Hosty's  Assignment: Oswald.

Captain Fritz:  You were working in the book depository today. Is that right?

Lee Oswald:....Yes...

Captain Fritz;  Were you there when the president's motorcade went by?

Lee Oswald:.... Yes...

Captain Fritz:...Where were you when the president went by the book depository?

Lee Oswald:... I was eating my lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom.   

From Cap't Fritz's notes ( which he swore he never took) ....

The following is not verbatim.....

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men. 

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.




Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on July 31, 2022, 06:36:59 PM
From page 22 of Hosty's  Assignment: Oswald.

Captain Fritz:  You were working in the book depository today. Is that right?

Lee Oswald:....Yes...

Captain Fritz;  Were you there when the president's motorcade went by?

Lee Oswald:.... Yes...

Captain Fritz:...Where were you when the president went by the book depository?

Lee Oswald:... I was eating my lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom.   

From Cap't Fritz's notes ( which he swore he never took) ....

The following is not verbatim.....

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men. 

Yeah, that's the two Oswald could together on the sidewalk from the SN window. He knew they must have went into the building together because he heard them arrive together on the floor and corner below the SN.

Quote
The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.

12:27? They heard "Main" on the police radio five minutes earlier.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on July 31, 2022, 08:04:56 PM
Yeah, that's the two Oswald could together on the sidewalk from the SN window. He knew they must have went into the building together because he heard them arrive together on the floor and corner below the SN.

12:27? They heard "Main" on the police radio five minutes earlier.

Yeah, that's the two Oswald could together on the sidewalk from the SN window.

Try selling another fairytale. There is no way anybody walking on the sidewalk either on Elm or Houston could be seen from the SN window. And please spare us your selfserving bogus gif because it's BS also

He knew they must have went into the building together because he heard them arrive together on the floor and corner below the SN.

More desperation on display. You can't prove Oswald was even on the 6th floor, nor do you have any idea what, if anything, could be heard about what was happening on the floor below.


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on July 31, 2022, 08:42:33 PM
There’s no reference on police radio to the motorcade being on “Main” until 12:28 dispatcher 1 time.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on July 31, 2022, 08:45:40 PM
Yeah, that's the two Oswald could together on the sidewalk from the SN window.

Try selling another fairytale. There is no way anybody walking on the sidewalk either on Elm or Houston could be seen from the SN window. And please spare us yourself selfserving bogus gif because it's BS also

(https://images2.imgbox.com/c5/df/wA72bOw7_o.jpg)

Quote
He knew they must have went into the building together because he heard them arrive together on the floor and corner below the SN.

More desperation on display. You can't prove Oswald was even on the 6th floor, nor do you have any idea what, if anything, could be heard about what was happening on the floor below.

Oswald's prints on the cartons and boxes, coworkers who saw him on the sixth floor, Harold Brennan, the Carcano rifle he ordered that had his prints on it. Not everything has your Hollywood-movie-film or time-travel for proof (and even then). As for hearing, one of the men at the fifth floor windows said they could hear shells dropping above and the bolt being recycled.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on July 31, 2022, 09:12:17 PM
(https://images2.imgbox.com/c5/df/wA72bOw7_o.jpg)

Oswald's prints on the cartons and boxes, coworkers who saw him on the sixth floor, Harold Brennan, the Carcano rifle he ordered that had his prints on it. Not everything has your Hollywood-movie-film or time-travel for proof (and even then). As for hearing, one of the men at the fifth floor windows said they could hear shells dropping above and the bolt being recycled.

What part of "And please spare us your selfserving bogus gif because it's BS also" did you not understand?

Your pathetic gif has Oswald hanging out of the window in a way that never happened and it shows Jarman and Norman at a location they never were. That's why it's bogus. For anybody not sticking his head out the window, the entire sidewalk next to the building is not visible.

Oswald's prints on the cartons and boxes,

Wow... he worked there and his job had him opening and moving boxes

coworkers who saw him on the sixth floor,

Not after 12:00. Bonnie Ray Williams was on the 6th floor until approx 12:20 and he saw nobody

Harold Brennan

Is an utter joke

the Carcano rifle he ordered that had his prints on it.

Wrong again. The FBI checked for prints within 24 hours of the shooting and found no prints. And the evidence that he ordered "the Carcano rifle" is questionable at best and relies entirely on the opinion of an FBI expert about the handwriting on the order form

Not everything has your Hollywood-movie-film or time-travel for proof (and even then).

And hardly any real life crime has as little physical and conclusive evidence as this one

As for hearing, one of the men at the fifth floor windows said they could hear shells dropping above and the bolt being recycled.

Which proves exactly nothing about what anybody in the S/N could have heard about what was going on on the floor below.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on July 31, 2022, 09:15:23 PM
From page 22 of Hosty's  Assignment: Oswald.

Captain Fritz:  You were working in the book depository today. Is that right?

Lee Oswald:....Yes...

Captain Fritz;  Were you there when the president's motorcade went by?

Lee Oswald:.... Yes...

Captain Fritz:...Where were you when the president went by the book depository?

Lee Oswald:... I was eating my lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom.   

And, as we have known since 2019, Mr Hosty is lying in his book about what Mr Oswald actually said.

We have it in Mr Hosty's own handwriting:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Mr Oswald did not claim to have been eating his lunch in the domino room at the time of the P. Parade. He did, however, claim to have been doing so when he saw Messrs Jarman & Norman passing through shortly before the P. Parade.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on July 31, 2022, 10:48:55 PM
And, as we have known since 2019, Mr Hosty is lying in his book about what Mr Oswald actually said.

We have it in Mr Hosty's own handwriting:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Mr Oswald did not claim to have been eating his lunch in the domino room at the time of the P. Parade. He did, however, claim to have been doing so when he saw Messrs Jarman & Norman passing through shortly before the P. Parade.

Mr Oswald did not claim to have been eating his lunch in the domino room at the time of the P. Parade.

Lee Oswald most certainly DID tell Captain Fritz that he was eating his lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom (Domino Room)  at the time of the P. parade.    That is what Fritz jotted down in his scribbled notes which he wrote while interrogating Lee.  ( He lied and said he never took any notes during the interrogation. )
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on July 31, 2022, 11:39:23 PM
From page 22 of Hosty's  Assignment: Oswald.

Captain Fritz:  You were working in the book depository today. Is that right?

Lee Oswald:....Yes...

Captain Fritz;  Were you there when the president's motorcade went by?

Lee Oswald:.... Yes...

Captain Fritz:...Where were you when the president went by the book depository?

Lee Oswald:... I was eating my lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom.   

From Cap't Fritz's notes ( which he swore he never took) ....

The following is not verbatim.....

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men. 

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.

Is there a full moon or something?  How do you get a "rock solid alibi" by putting yourself in the location from which the crime was committed (i.e. TSBD)?  And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.  They get an alibi when some neutral witness can put the suspect at a different location at the time the crime was committed.  Oswald claiming to see someone in the lunchroom who didn't see him doesn't do that.  Obviously, Oswald knows his coworkers, who they hung out with, and what they look like from weeks of working in the building.  It wouldn't take Nostradamus to come up with that tale.  He has no alibi. 

No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on July 31, 2022, 11:46:09 PM
And, as we have known since 2019, Mr Hosty is lying in his book about what Mr Oswald actually said.

We have it in Mr Hosty's own handwriting:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Mr Oswald did not claim to have been eating his lunch in the domino room at the time of the P. Parade. He did, however, claim to have been doing so when he saw Messrs Jarman & Norman passing through shortly before the P. Parade.

Where does Oswald obtain his lunch that day?  He tells Frazier, in direct response to his question, that he didn't bring his lunch that morning.  There is no place in the TSBD to buy a lunch.  Oswald makes no mention of leaving the building to buy his lunch.  No one sees him do so.  And with the motorcade due in the area, he would have to do so in the midst of crowd (including his coworkers) and police outside. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on July 31, 2022, 11:51:25 PM
Where does Oswald obtain his lunch that day?  He tells Frazier, in direct response to his question, that he didn't bring his lunch that morning.  There is no place in the TSBD to buy a lunch.  Oswald makes no mention of leaving the building to buy his lunch.  No one sees him do so.  And with the motorcade due in the area, he would have to do so in the midst of crowd (including his coworkers) and police outside.


Being the frugal type that he is, he decided to wait and bum something from the DPD...    ;)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 12:06:34 AM

Being the frugal type that he is, he decided to wait and bum something from the DPD...    ;)

Yes, or maybe he lifted a piece of BRW's chicken.  It was fowl play.  A contrarian here once suggested that perhaps Oswald didn't sneak into the Texas Theatre without buying a ticket because no one could rule out that he bought a ticket in advance!  As though they had Fandango in 1963 and Oswald could somehow know in advance that he would be knocking off early for the movie that day after the president was assassinated from his building.  Nothing ever has to make sense.  The sole objective is to cast doubt on Oswald's guilt by any means.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 12:38:09 AM
Mr Oswald did not claim to have been eating his lunch in the domino room at the time of the P. Parade.

Lee Oswald most certainly DID tell Captain Fritz that he was eating his lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom (Domino Room)  at the time of the P. parade.    That is what Fritz jotted down in his scribbled notes which he wrote while interrogating Lee.

You have notes in Captain Fritz's handwriting that say this? Amazing! Do show us!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 12:41:41 AM
Where does Oswald obtain his lunch that day?  He tells Frazier, in direct response to his question, that he didn't bring his lunch that morning.  There is no place in the TSBD to buy a lunch.  Oswald makes no mention of leaving the building to buy his lunch.  No one sees him do so.  And with the motorcade due in the area, he would have to do so in the midst of crowd (including his coworkers) and police outside.

Mr Oswald brought an apple and cheese sandwich to work with him. And, several minutes before the P. Parade, he purchased a Coca-Cola from the machine to have with his lunch.

Maybe he told Mr Frazier he didn't bring his lunch with him because he didn't want to spend his lunch break eating with him. Or maybe Mr Frazier misremembered exactly what he said. Who knows? But by all means, do enjoy tucking into this delicious nothing burger you've cooked up!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 01, 2022, 12:49:58 AM
Is there a full moon or something?  How do you get a "rock solid alibi" by putting yourself in the location from which the crime was committed (i.e. TSBD)?  And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.  They get an alibi when some neutral witness can put the suspect at a different location at the time the crime was committed.  Oswald claiming to see someone in the lunchroom who didn't see him doesn't do that.  Obviously, Oswald knows his coworkers, who they hung out with, and what they look like from weeks of working in the building.  It wouldn't take Nostradamus to come up with that tale.  He has no alibi. 

No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime.

a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.

Oh, Really ?......  Let's pretend that you are a suspect in a murder case.    But You know that you weren't anywhere near the murder site at the time it happened.  Let's say the time was 10:30 pm Saturday night....  And you had said that you had seen a police car stopped with the red lights flashing and the cop was  testing the driver for drunk driving.  The cop never saw you but you had witnessed the arrest of the driver.   

Of course what you witnessed would have been a matter of police record....and the only way you could have described the event was because you had seen it.....  Would you think that you had a rock solid alibi?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 01, 2022, 01:17:09 AM
Is there a full moon or something?  How do you get a "rock solid alibi" by putting yourself in the location from which the crime was committed (i.e. TSBD)?  And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.  They get an alibi when some neutral witness can put the suspect at a different location at the time the crime was committed.  Oswald claiming to see someone in the lunchroom who didn't see him doesn't do that.  Obviously, Oswald knows his coworkers, who they hung out with, and what they look like from weeks of working in the building.  It wouldn't take Nostradamus to come up with that tale.  He has no alibi. 

No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime.

And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.

There are many ways an alibi can be established. If, as Walt says, he sees two particular individuals at a specific location and time and it turns out they were indeed there at that time that clearly confirms that Oswald must have been near the location at that time in order to see them.

They get an alibi when some neutral witness can put the suspect at a different location at the time the crime was committed.

That's another way to get an alibi but most certainly not the only one

Oswald claiming to see someone in the lunchroom who didn't see him doesn't do that.

Claiming to see someone might not do it, but seeing two particular individuals at a specific location and time does.

Obviously, Oswald knows his coworkers, who they hung out with, and what they look like from weeks of working in the building.  It wouldn't take Nostradamus to come up with that tale. 

Utter stupidity. It doesn't matter if Oswald knew his co-workers and who they hung out with. This was a singular event and Oswald could not have known these two particular individuals were at that location at that particular time unless he was there to see them.

No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime.

There you go again with another classic meaningless strawman.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 01:20:37 AM
a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.

Oh, Really ?......  Let's pretend that you are a suspect in a murder case.    But You know that you weren't anywhere near the murder site at the time it happened.  Let's say the time was 10:30 pm Saturday night....  And you had said that you had seen a police car stopped with the red lights flashing and the cop was  testing the driver for drunk driving.  The cop never saw you but you had witnessed the arrest of the driver.   

Of course what you witnessed would have been a matter of police record....and the only way you could have described the event was because you had seen it.....  Would you think that you had a rock solid alibi?

Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade. He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

He had no idea that he was in the frame for pulling any trigger in Dealey Plaza. Such an idea would have been too absurd for words. He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

It therefore follows as a distinct possiblity that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi (which he didn't even think he needed) but as potentially helpful information: I saw those two guys come in shortly before the motorcade. Maybe you need to talk to them, not me.

This would be similar to his mention of having seen a/the rifle being handled by Mr Truly on the first floor a couple of days ago. Again the implication is: Maybe you need to talk to him, not me.

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 01, 2022, 01:33:13 AM
Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade. He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

He had no idea that he was in the frame for pulling any trigger in Dealey Plaza. Such an idea would have been too absurd for words. He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

It therefore follows as a distinct possiblity that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi (which he didn't even think he needed) but as potentially helpful information: I saw those two guys come in shortly before the motorcade. Maybe you need to talk to them, not me.

This would be similar to his mention of having seen a/the rifle being handled by Mr Truly on the first floor a couple of days ago. Again the implication is: Maybe you need to talk to him, not me.

 Thumb1:

He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

Not according to FBI agent James Hosty.   Hosty said that Fritz asked Lee Oswald point blank.   "Lee, Did you shoot the president?"   Lee responded with an emphatic "NO".... 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 01:41:49 AM
He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

Not according to FBI agent James Hosty.   Hosty said that Fritz asked Lee Oswald point blank.   "Lee, Did you shoot the president?"   Lee responded with an emphatic "NO"....

-----"Did you shoot the President?"
-----"No, I have not been charged with that. The first thing I heard about that was when the newspaper reporters in the hall axed me that question."

In the first interrogation, Captain Fritz asked Mr Oswald to account for his movements earlier that day. Mr Oswald did that, and the question of his having actually pulled a trigger in Dealey Plaza was not seriously raised thereafter.

However, Captain Fritz was thereby hoodwinking Mr Oswald into thinking he had been ruled out as the Depository gunman. Thus Mr Oswald felt no need to explain his rock-solid front-entrance alibi to the press.

And his bombshell claim to have gone outside to watch the P. Parade was buried.

You're free to keep on partying like it's 2018 by ignoring the game-changing information contained in Agent Hosty's handwritten draft interrogation report, but in doing so you will be condemning your analysis to irrelevance.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 01, 2022, 02:20:18 AM
Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade. He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

He had no idea that he was in the frame for pulling any trigger in Dealey Plaza. Such an idea would have been too absurd for words. He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

It therefore follows as a distinct possiblity that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi (which he didn't even think he needed) but as potentially helpful information: I saw those two guys come in shortly before the motorcade. Maybe you need to talk to them, not me.

This would be similar to his mention of having seen a/the rifle being handled by Mr Truly on the first floor a couple of days ago. Again the implication is: Maybe you need to talk to him, not me.

 Thumb1:

He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

If he had been there, don't you think other employees would have told the police that they had seen him 
there?

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Mr Ford....You're reading something into Hosty's notes that simply isn't specific...
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 02:27:23 AM
He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

If he had been there, don't you think other employees would have told the police that they had seen him 
there?

I have no doubt that (at a minimum) Messrs Shelley, Lovelady & Frazier did. Read the weasel wording of Messrs Shelley & Lovelady's same-day affidavits on this!  Thumb1:

Quote
(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Mr Ford....You're reading something into Hosty's notes that simply isn't specific...

Right-------------it doesn't specify as to which P. Parade Mr Oswald was actually talking about. Could have been any one of the many that passed the Depository on a daily basis

 ::)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Dan O'meara on August 01, 2022, 11:43:20 AM
Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade. He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

He had no idea that he was in the frame for pulling any trigger in Dealey Plaza. Such an idea would have been too absurd for words. He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

It therefore follows as a distinct possiblity that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi (which he didn't even think he needed) but as potentially helpful information: I saw those two guys come in shortly before the motorcade. Maybe you need to talk to them, not me.

This would be similar to his mention of having seen a/the rifle being handled by Mr Truly on the first floor a couple of days ago. Again the implication is: Maybe you need to talk to him, not me.

 Thumb1:

Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade.

How many times? ::)

Hosty's sacred note says: "Then went outside to watch P. Parade."
The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE
The reason it doesn't say that he saw the parade is because he didn't see it. How can we know that?
When specifically asked the question - did you see the parade - by Inspector Kelley, Oswald answers that no, he did not see the parade.
He did not see the parade.
In the corridors of the DPD, when asked his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, Oswald states he was in the building at that time (please don't start with the "on the steps is still in the building" routine, it really looks bad).
Oswald went outside to watch the parade but missed the moment the president passed because he was in the TSBD building having his lunch in the Domino Room. That's where he was when Norman and Jarman entered the through the north/rear door.

He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

Oswald was not stood on the steps of the TSBD building at the time of the assassination. We have already seen that he stated this to the press. If he was (which he wasn't) there are about a dozen co-workers who were stood behind him (in the lobby), on the steps with him, and who would have passed by him on the steps as they returned to the building. When specifically asked if they had seen Oswald each one said they had not. And it's not a case of silencing these witnesses. As the events of the day unfolded each person who'd seen Oswald on TV would've told family, friends and neighbours, who'd have told more family, friends and relatives. It was such a massive event this sort of news would've spread like wildfire as it's all anyone was talking about.
"They" would never have been able to cover this up.
But they didn't have to cover it up.
Because it didn't happen.

It therefore follows as a distinct possibility that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi


Oswald on the steps would never have seen Norman and Jarman entering the rear of the TSBD. He would've had no idea they did this. It is further evidence Oswald was not on the steps. As if any were needed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 01, 2022, 01:56:10 PM
Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade.

How many times? ::)

Hosty's sacred note says: "Then went outside to watch P. Parade."
The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE
The reason it doesn't say that he saw the parade is because he didn't see it. How can we know that?
When specifically asked the question - did you see the parade - by Inspector Kelley, Oswald answers that no, he did not see the parade.
He did not see the parade.
In the corridors of the DPD, when asked his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, Oswald states he was in the building at that time (please don't start with the "on the steps is still in the building" routine, it really looks bad).
Oswald went outside to watch the parade but missed the moment the president passed because he was in the TSBD building having his lunch in the Domino Room. That's where he was when Norman and Jarman entered the through the north/rear door.

He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

Oswald was not stood on the steps of the TSBD building at the time of the assassination. We have already seen that he stated this to the press. If he was (which he wasn't) there are about a dozen co-workers would were stood behind him (in the lobby), on the steps with him, and who would have passed by him on the steps as they returned to the building. When specifically asked if they had seen Oswald each one said they had not. And it's not a case of silencing these witnesses. As the events of the day unfolded each person who'd seen Oswald on TV would've told family, friends and neighbours, who'd have told more family, friends and relatives. It was such a massive event this sort of news would've spread like wildfire as it's all anyone was talking about.
"They" would never have been able to cover this up.
But they didn't have to cover it up.
Because it didn't happen.

It therefore follows as a distinct possibility that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi


Oswald on the steps would never have seen Norman and Jarman entering the rear of the TSBD. He would've had no idea they did this. It is further evidence Oswald was not on the steps. As if any were needed.

Mr O'meara is enlightening you Mr Ford.... Please accept what he's written and abandon your idea that Lee was outside watching the P . parade ...
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 03:18:53 PM
Mr Oswald brought an apple and cheese sandwich to work with him. And, several minutes before the P. Parade, he purchased a Coca-Cola from the machine to have with his lunch.

Maybe he told Mr Frazier he didn't bring his lunch with him because he didn't want to spend his lunch break eating with him. Or maybe Mr Frazier misremembered exactly what he said. Who knows? But by all means, do enjoy tucking into this delicious nothing burger you've cooked up!  Thumb1:

Wrong, unless you think Oswald lied to Frazier about not having a lunch that morning AND carried his sandwich in a bag over two feet long.  LOL.  You think Oswald did this to avoid having lunch with Frazier?  What bad luck for Old Lee.  Not to mention being a completely baseless and bizarre claim.


Mr. BALL. Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked
like a lunch package that morning?

Mr. FRAZIER. You know like I told you earlier, I say, he didn’t take his
lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was
his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day.


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 03:21:10 PM
[
No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime.

There you go again with another classic meaningless strawman.

It's a strawman to suggest that if Oswald had enough interest in JFK to check out "Profiles in Courage" from the library and read it, that he would have had enough interest to step out of his workplace for a moment to watch him drive by as President of the United States?  Wow.   Once a contrarian, always a contrarian.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 03:28:46 PM
And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.

There are many ways an alibi can be established. If, as Walt says, he sees two particular individuals at a specific location and time and it turns out they were indeed there at that time that clearly confirms that Oswald must have been near the location at that time in order to see them.



This is so absurd it requires specific comment.  Here's a simple example.  If I know that Martin and Otto have lunch together on most days at McDonald's and I claim that I saw them there that would not give me an alibi.  It is simply a regular occurrence that anyone could observe.  Just because it might turn out to be true doesn't mean that I was there.  Oswald had worked in the TSBD for weeks.  He would have noticed who had lunch with who and where.  That does not take Nostradamus.  You should be ashamed to peddle such absurd contrarian nonsense.  No one saw Oswald having lunch.  He has no alibi.   He didn't even bring a lunch according to what he told Frazier.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 04:21:37 PM
Wrong, unless you think Oswald lied to Frazier about not having a lunch that morning AND carried his sandwich in a bag over two feet long.  LOL.  You think Oswald did this to avoid having lunch with Frazier?  What bad luck for Old Lee.  Not to mention being a completely baseless and bizarre claim.

If Captain Fritz had felt there were serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier, he could have ordered that the suspect's stomach be pumped. Obviously, Captain Fritz felt there were no serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier.

 Thumb1:

Quote
Mr. BALL. Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked
like a lunch package that morning?

Mr. FRAZIER. You know like I told you earlier, I say, he didn’t take his
lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was
his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day.

You raise an interesting question, Mr Smith: why are you and your fellow Warren Gullibles still at an embarrassing loss to explain the dates on this document?

(https://i.postimg.cc/V6Hg3KLS/Curtain-Rods-Texas-History-guide.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/zbKThSh5)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 04:22:49 PM
It's a strawman to suggest that if Oswald had enough interest in JFK to check out "Profiles in Courage" from the library and read it, that he would have had enough interest to step out of his workplace for a moment to watch him drive by as President of the United States?

But that's exactly what Mr Oswald did do-------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 04:41:27 PM
If Captain Fritz had felt there were serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier, he could have ordered that the suspect's stomach be pumped. Obviously, Captain Fritz felt there were no serious grounds to doubt Mr Oswald's claim to have eaten lunch some three hours earlier.

 

There were no grounds to believe Oswald had any lunch.  No one other than himself ever claimed it was so.  And the DPD had a mountain of evidence to connect him to the crime.  Again, though, you think Oswald lied to Frazier about his lunch and brought a sandwich in a bag over two feet long?  Like Fred Flinstone's lunch box?  That's really the story you are going with?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 04:43:28 PM
Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade.

How many times? ::)

Hosty's sacred note says: "Then went outside to watch P. Parade."
The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE

'The most obvious interpretation' lol

Quote
The reason it doesn't say that he saw the parade is because he didn't see it. How can we know that?
When specifically asked the question - did you see the parade - by Inspector Kelley, Oswald answers that no, he did not see the parade.
He did not see the parade.

No one else remembered Mr Oswald making such a statement. Indeed, Agent Bookhout follows Insp. Kelley in giving us Mr Oswald's answer to the two other questions Insp. Kelley put to Mr Oswald in that interrogation, but his report says NOT A WORD about a third question, still less Mr Oswald's answer to it. He knew better than to put any such statement in Mr Oswald's mouth.

As for what led Insp. Kelley to write what he wrote, it's either explained as
a) fabrication on Insp. Kelley's part to incriminate Mr Oswald
b) he asked Mr Oswald 'Did you see Pres. Kennedy get shot?' and Mr Oswald responded 'No I didn't' (as the limousine was out of sight)

How do you account for the fact that not a single officially published interrogation report tells us where exactly Mr Oswald said he was at the time of the shooting? I mean, it's the single most important thing Mr Oswald would have said across all his interrogations. Yet not a peep from anyone about it. They just don't go there.

The explanation for this bizarre omission came in 2019, when Agent Hosty's draft interrogation report for the first interrogation came to light:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

The fact that you don't like what it says is neither here nor there

Quote
In the corridors of the DPD, when asked his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, Oswald states he was in the building at that time (please don't start with the "on the steps is still in the building" routine, it really looks bad).

Again, 'I, Dan O'Meara, don't like this explanation' is not a substantial rebuttal

Quote
Oswald went outside to watch the parade but missed the moment the president passed because he was in the TSBD building having his lunch in the Domino Room. That's where he was when Norman and Jarman entered the through the north/rear door.

He saw Messrs Norman & Jarman before he went outside to watch the P. Parade

Quote
He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.

Oswald was not stood on the steps of the TSBD building at the time of the assassination. We have already seen that he stated this to the press. If he was (which he wasn't) there are about a dozen co-workers would were stood behind him (in the lobby), on the steps with him, and who would have passed by him on the steps as they returned to the building. When specifically asked if they had seen Oswald each one said they had not. And it's not a case of silencing these witnesses. As the events of the day unfolded each person who'd seen Oswald on TV would've told family, friends and neighbours, who'd have told more family, friends and relatives. It was such a massive event this sort of news would've spread like wildfire as it's all anyone was talking about.
"They" would never have been able to cover this up.
But they didn't have to cover it up.
Because it didn't happen.

A rather odd argument to be coming from someone who believes, as you do, that numerous employees of the Depository lied about things that went down that day. Now you're suddenly telling us that Messrs Lovelady and Shelley were the soul of honesty? Really, Mr O'Meara?

Besides, if Mr Oswald nipped outside at the last minute to watch the P. Parade, he (being a nobody at that time) was in all likelihood noticed by few of the others on those steps.

And the ridiculous magic shadow down Mr Lovelady, which neither I nor you nor anyone else can explain as a natural shadow, strongly suggests that he was noticed by the 'investigating' authorities who first checked out the Wiegman film:

(https://i.postimg.cc/25gCpBmk/Prayer-Man-in-Wiegman-(References & links to websites which contain pornographic images and/or abusive content directed at members of this Forum is strictly prohibited )-Scan-Nov-2015-75.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Quote
It therefore follows as a distinct possibility that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi[/b][/i]

Oswald on the steps would never have seen Norman and Jarman entering the rear of the TSBD. He would've had no idea they did this. It is further evidence Oswald was not on the steps. As if any were needed.

He saw Messrs Norman & Jarman before he went outside to watch the P. Parade

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 04:44:27 PM
But that's exactly what Mr Oswald did do-------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade  Thumb1:

Honestly, that is tin foil hat stuff.  It ranks with Walt's red rings.  There are no witnesses, films or photos that place Oswald outside.  And you think the conspirators would exercise no control over their "patsy" who they were framing for the crime?  They just let him stand on the street in the presence of his co-workers, law enforcement. and random witnesses.  Hoping they can get all these folks to lie after the fact?  That was their plan?  Unreal.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 04:44:38 PM
There were no grounds to believe Oswald had any lunch.  No one other than himself ever claimed it was so.  And the DPD had a mountain of evidence to connect him to the crime.  Again, though, you think Oswald lied to Frazier about his lunch and brought a sandwich in a bag over two feet long?  Like Fred Flinstone's lunch box?  That's really the story you are going with?

Let me know when you have an actual argument, Mr Smith!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 04:47:25 PM
Honestly, that is tin foil hat stuff.  It ranks with Walt's red rings.  There are no witnesses, films or photos that place Oswald outside.  And you think the conspirators would exercise no control over their "patsy" who they were framing for the crime?

They weren't framing him as the man who pulled a trigger from the sixth floor

Quote
They just let him stand on the street in the presence of his co-workers, law enforcement. and random witnesses.

Yep

Quote
Hoping they can get all these folks to lie after the fact?  That was their plan?

Nope

Quote
Unreal.

Yep, just like all of your strawman arguments, Mr Smith.

If you really are confident there's nothing to see in that doorway, then you will have no hesitation in explaining the shadow down Mr Lovelady here:

(https://i.postimg.cc/25gCpBmk/Prayer-Man-in-Wiegman-(References & links to websites which contain pornographic images and/or abusive content directed at members of this Forum is strictly prohibited )-Scan-Nov-2015-75.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 01, 2022, 05:08:35 PM
Honestly, that is tin foil hat stuff.  It ranks with Walt's red rings.  There are no witnesses, films or photos that place Oswald outside.  And you think the conspirators would exercise no control over their "patsy" who they were framing for the crime?  They just let him stand on the street in the presence of his co-workers, law enforcement. and random witnesses.  Hoping they can get all these folks to lie after the fact?  That was their plan?  Unreal.

There are no witnesses, films or photos that place Oswald outside.

Since when is absence of evidence evidence of absence?

And you think the conspirators would exercise no control over their "patsy" who they were framing for the crime?  They just let him stand on the street in the presence of his co-workers, law enforcement. and random witnesses.  Hoping they can get all these folks to lie after the fact?  That was their plan?  Unreal.

And again another meaningless strawman. Witnesses do not need to lie when they are ignored, just like Dorothy Garner. And they can always be discredited when they do speak, like Carolyn Arnold.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 01, 2022, 05:19:53 PM
There are no witnesses, films or photos that place Oswald outside.

Since when is absence of evidence evidence of absence?



There is not an "absence of evidence."  There is an absence of Oswald.  LOL.  There are plenty of films and photos of Dealey Plaza during the motorcade.  They show the folks who WERE there.  Oswald is in none of them.  He was not the invisible man.  If he had stepped outside the TSBD to watch the motorcade, he would have showed up in one of those films or photos.  He did not.  He is "absent" because he was not there.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 01, 2022, 06:07:03 PM
There is not an "absence of evidence."  There is an absence of Oswald.  LOL.  There are plenty of films and photos of Dealey Plaza during the motorcade.  They show the folks who WERE there.  Oswald is in none of them.  He was not the invisible man.  If he had stepped outside the TSBD to watch the motorcade, he would have showed up in one of those films or photos.  He did not.  He is "absent" because he was not there.

There is not an "absence of evidence."  There is an absence of Oswald.

Are you really this dumb, or just pretending to be?

There are plenty of films and photos of Dealey Plaza during the motorcade.  They show the folks who WERE there.

So, everybody who was at Dealey Plaza at that time can be seen on film or photo? Is that what you are rather stupidly trying to say? Really? How in the world would you even know this?

Oswald is in none of them. 

You've seen all of the films and photos, have you? And even if he is not in any of them, that still doesn't mean he wasn't there.

If he had stepped outside the TSBD to watch the motorcade, he would have showed up in one of those films or photos.

You can't be this dumb, can you?


But to apply your special kind of logic; there is no film or photo showing Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30, so that means he wasn't there, right?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 01, 2022, 07:18:25 PM
coworkers who saw him on the sixth floor,

Not after 12:00.

Or even before 12:00.  The elevator race guys said "5th or 6th".  Givens didn't come up with his "going back for cigarettes" story until April, 1964.  After Revill told Gemberling that he believed that Givens would change his story for money.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 01, 2022, 09:14:59 PM
No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.

No reasonable person can call this evidence of murder.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 01, 2022, 09:16:36 PM
Oswald makes no mention of leaving the building to buy his lunch.  No one sees him do so.

 :D

Nobody saw him shoot Kennedy either.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 01, 2022, 09:18:20 PM
Yes, or maybe he lifted a piece of BRW's chicken.  It was fowl play.  A contrarian here once suggested that perhaps Oswald didn't sneak into the Texas Theatre without buying a ticket because no one could rule out that he bought a ticket in advance!  As though they had Fandango in 1963 and Oswald could somehow know in advance that he would be knocking off early for the movie that day after the president was assassinated from his building.  Nothing ever has to make sense.  The sole objective is to cast doubt on Oswald's guilt by any means.

Despite your lame attempt at ridicule, Julia Postal told both Brewer and the FBI that she wasn't sure if he bought a ticket or not.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 01, 2022, 10:52:32 PM
There is not an "absence of evidence."  There is an absence of Oswald.  LOL.  There are plenty of films and photos of Dealey Plaza during the motorcade.  They show the folks who WERE there.  Oswald is in none of them.  He was not the invisible man.  If he had stepped outside the TSBD to watch the motorcade,

Ah, I see what you did there, Mr Smith. Mr Oswald didn't "step outside the TSBD", he went out the front door of the building without leaving the premises---------i.e. front steps.

Next you'll be telling us, as you and your Warren Gullible pals always do, that Mr Oswald told a pressman he was "inside the building at the time"  :D

Quote
he would have showed up in one of those films or photos.  He did not.  He is "absent" because he was not there.

OK, show us Mr Roy Edward Lewis outside @ assassination-time. If you can't, I will conclude that you believe Mr Lewis was not there.

And show us Mr Bill Shelley. If you can't, I will conclude that you believe Mr Shelley was not there.

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Dan O'meara on August 01, 2022, 11:15:47 PM
'The most obvious interpretation' lol

I wrote the following interpretation of Hosty's note regarding Oswald's movements in the TSBD:

The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade."

If you disagree with this interpretation let's hear yours.

When I wrote - "IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE" - that is not an interpretation, it's a fact.

Quote
No one else remembered Mr Oswald making such a statement. Indeed, Agent Bookhout follows Insp. Kelley in giving us Mr Oswald's answer to the two other questions Insp. Kelley put to Mr Oswald in that interrogation, but his report says NOT A WORD about a third question, still less Mr Oswald's answer to it. He knew better than to put any such statement in Mr Oswald's mouth.

As for what led Insp. Kelley to write what he wrote, it's either explained as
a) fabrication on Insp. Kelley's part to incriminate Mr Oswald
b) he asked Mr Oswald 'Did you see Pres. Kennedy get shot?' and Mr Oswald responded 'No I didn't' (as the limousine was out of sight)

Kelley reports that Oswald said he did not see the parade - that's a fact. You can make up whatever you want to try to make it go away.

Quote
Again, 'I, Dan O'Meara, don't like this explanation' is not a substantial rebuttal

When it comes to your "standing on the front steps is the same as being in the building" shtick it's a question of "I, Alan Ford, have lost the plot."

Oswald is reported as saying he went outside to watch the parade but didn't see it. The explanation is that Oswald publicly states he was in the building at the time of the shooting. Your painful mental contortions to try to make this otherwise are of no use.

Quote
He saw Messrs Norman & Jarman before he went outside to watch the P. Parade
Agreed.

Quote
A rather odd argument to be coming from someone who believes, as you do, that numerous employees of the Depository lied about things that went down that day. Now you're suddenly telling us that Messrs Lovelady and Shelley were the soul of honesty? Really, Mr O'Meara?

Besides, if Mr Oswald nipped outside at the last minute to watch the P. Parade, he (being a nobody at that time) was in all likelihood noticed by few of the others on those steps.

Trying to use the unreliability of Lovelady and Shelley to discredit everyone else reveals your desperation. As does your insistence he wasn't noticed by the people he supposedly passed to get out of the front door, not to mention those employees who knew him by sight returning up the TSBD building steps.
For a nobody he seemed to make a very strong (and negative) impression on many of his fellow employees. Not one employee reports seeing Oswald on the steps. Not a single one.

Quote
And the ridiculous magic shadow down Mr Lovelady, which neither I nor you nor anyone else can explain as a natural shadow, strongly suggests that he was noticed by the 'investigating' authorities who first checked out the Wiegman film:
Only in your imagination.


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 01, 2022, 11:20:59 PM
There is not an "absence of evidence."  There is an absence of Oswald.  LOL.  There are plenty of films and photos of Dealey Plaza during the motorcade.  They show the folks who WERE there.  Oswald is in none of them.  He was not the invisible man.  If he had stepped outside the TSBD to watch the motorcade, he would have showed up in one of those films or photos.  He did not.  He is "absent" because he was not there.

What kind of ridiculous argument is that?  There are no films and photos showing Pauline Sanders during the motorcade either.  Does that demonstrate that she wasn't there?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Rick Plant on August 02, 2022, 12:07:41 AM
Lee Oswald most certainly DID tell Captain Fritz that he was eating his lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom (Domino Room)  at the time of the P. parade. That is what Fritz jotted down in his scribbled notes which he wrote while interrogating Lee.  ( He lied and said he never took any notes during the interrogation. )

Where are Fritz's notes dated from Oswald's interrogation?   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 12:22:15 AM
I wrote the following interpretation of Hosty's note regarding Oswald's movements in the TSBD:

The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade."

If you disagree with this interpretation let's hear yours.

When I wrote - "IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE" - that is not an interpretation, it's a fact.

Agent Hosty is recording the suspect's key claims: his whereabouts at & around the time of the shooting. The absence of any further clarifying note------along the lines of "Then went outside to watch P. Parade, but heard three loud bangs just before doing so" or "Then went outside to watch P. Parade but it had already passed"-------renders your interpretation quite bizarre.

No less bizarre is your belief that Mr Oswald claimed he had a gun stuck in his gut by a cop and was told by a female employee the Pres. had just been shot, and then went downstairs to finish his lunch, before going outside in the belief that what he would be seeing there was... a P. Parade!  :D

Quote
Kelley reports that Oswald said he did not see the parade - that's a fact. You can make up whatever you want to try to make it go away.

When it comes to your "standing on the front steps is the same as being in the building" shtick it's a question of "I, Alan Ford, have lost the plot."

Oswald is reported as saying he went outside to watch the parade but didn't see it. The explanation is that Oswald publicly states he was in the building at the time of the shooting.

The recessed front entrance steps are in the building. Only when you step out on to the sidewalk can you be said to have left the building

Quote
Your painful mental contortions to try to make this otherwise are of no use.
Agreed.

Trying to use the unreliability of Lovelady and Shelley to discredit everyone else reveals your desperation.


Not if I believe that Messrs Lovelady & Shelley noticed Mr Oswald there. After all, we are agreed that they were egregious liars. So it's wildly inconsistent for you to now cite them as reliable witnesses

Quote
As does your insistence he wasn't noticed by the people he supposedly passed to get out of the front door,

Tell us who he would have had to pass to get out of the front door? And then tell us which way everyone on those steps was looking as the motorcade turned onto Dealey Plaza  Thumb1:

Quote
not to mention those employees who knew him by sight returning up the TSBD building steps.
For a nobody he seemed to make a very strong (and negative) impression on many of his fellow employees. Not one employee reports seeing Oswald on the steps. Not a single one.

Not one employee reports seeing Mr Roy Edward Lewis on the steps. Not a single one. So what?

Gee, if I didn't know better, I'd say that, what with the President's passing by and the pandemonium after the loud bangs, most folks were not that interested in doing a mental inventory of fellow employees present on the steps.

--

You evidently still cannot explain why there is a naturalistically impossible shadow down Mr Lovelady in the Wiegman film. And yet you carry on insisting that there's nothing to see in the entranceway. Pure reality-denial!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 12:22:57 AM
Where are Fritz's notes dated from Oswald's interrogation?

They exist only in Mr Cakebread's imagination
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Dan O'meara on August 02, 2022, 12:33:47 AM
These are Fritz's handwritten notes. The top page has "morning 23rd" written at the top.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29103#relPageId=3

Second page has:

Claims 2nd floor Coke
when off came in
to 1st fl had lunch
out with Bill Shelley in front


Compare with Hosty's notes:

He went to 2nd
floor to get Coca Cola to eat with
lunch and returned to 1st floor to
eat lunch. Then went outside to watch
P. Parade


Pretty much the same story:
Oswald is up on the 2nd floor getting a Coke
Goes down to the first floor
Finishes lunch
Heads outside

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 12:38:11 AM
These are Fritz's handwritten notes. The top page has "morning 23rd" written at the top.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29103#relPageId=3

Second page has:

Claims 2nd floor Coke
when off came in
to 1st fl had lunch
out with Bill Shelley in front


Compare with Hosty's notes:

He went to 2nd
floor to get Coca Cola to eat with
lunch and returned to 1st floor to
eat lunch. Then went outside to watch
P. Parade


Pretty much the same story:
Oswald is up on the 2nd floor getting a Coke
Goes down to the first floor
Finishes lunch
Heads outside

"Pretty much the same", lol
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Dan O'meara on August 02, 2022, 01:16:34 AM
Agent Hosty is recording the suspect's key claims: his whereabouts at & around the time of the shooting. The absence of any further clarifying note------along the lines of "Then went outside to watch P. Parade, but heard three loud bangs just before doing so" or "Then went outside to watch P. Parade but it had already passed"-------renders your interpretation quite bizarre.

Hosty wrote:

He went to 2nd
floor to get Coca Cola to eat with
lunch and returned to 1st floor to
eat lunch. Then went outside to watch
P. Parade


My interpretation of this is:

"The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade."

Please explain what is bizarre about this interpretation and provide your own "sensible" interpretation.

When I wrote - "IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE" - that is not part of an interpretation, it's a fact. This is confirmed by Kelley reporting that Oswald said he did not see the parade.

Quote
No less bizarre is your belief that Mr Oswald claimed he had a gun stuck in his gut by a cop and was told by a female employee the Pres. had just been shot, and then went downstairs to finish his lunch, before going outside in the belief that what he would be seeing there was... a P. Parade!  :D

Unlike you, I don't believe Oswald is some kind of falsely accused, innocent bystander.
He is deeply involved in the events of that day and his reported comments/behaviour should be seen in that light.

Quote
The recessed front entrance steps are in the building. Only when you step out on to the sidewalk can you be said to have left the building

I can't believe you've actually gone there.  Thumb1:

Quote
Not if I believe that Messrs Lovelady & Shelley noticed Mr Oswald there. After all, we are agreed that they were egregious liars. So it's wildly inconsistent for you to now cite them as reliable witnesses

Nowhere have I cited them as reliable witnesses.

Quote
Tell us who he would have had to pass to get out of the front door? And then tell us which way everyone on those steps was looking as the motorcade turned onto Dealey Plaza  Thumb1:

Lewis, Frazier, Shelley and Molina.
Saunders and  Stanton were also on the top landing.

Everyone would most likely have been watching the motorcade as it passed by. Nowhere have I suggested otherwise.

Quote
Not one employee reports seeing Mr Roy Edward Lewis on the steps. Not a single one. So what?

Now you're being silly.
How many employees were asked if they saw Lewis around the time of the assassination?  [None]
How many employees were asked if they saw Oswald around the time of the assassination?  [All of them]
What a stupid point to make.

Quote
You evidently still cannot explain why there is a naturalistically impossible shadow down Mr Lovelady in the Wiegman film. And yet you carry on insisting that there's nothing to see in the entranceway. Pure reality-denial!

Neither can you.  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 01:16:40 AM
Ah, I see what you did there, Mr Smith. Mr Oswald didn't "step outside the TSBD", he went out the front door of the building without leaving the premises---------i.e. front steps.

Next you'll be telling us, as you and your Warren Gullible pals always do, that Mr Oswald told a pressman he was "inside the building at the time"  :D

OK, show us Mr Roy Edward Lewis outside @ assassination-time. If you can't, I will conclude that you believe Mr Lewis was not there.

And show us Mr Bill Shelley. If you can't, I will conclude that you believe Mr Shelley was not there.

 Thumb1:

You are claiming Oswald was on the front steps of the TSBD even though the films and photos of the event don't show him there at the relevant time?  And many of his co-workers - like Frazier - were there but didn't see him.  It's laughable.  No one saw Oswald outside the building or in the lunchroom at the time of the assassination. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 02, 2022, 01:31:16 AM
You are claiming Oswald was on the front steps of the TSBD even though the films and photos of the event don't show him there at the relevant time?  And many of his co-workers - like Frazier - were there but didn't see him.  It's laughable.  No one saw Oswald outside the building or in the lunchroom at the time of the assassination.

What's your point? Nobody saw Oswald on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination. So he wasn't there, right?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:01:42 AM
Hosty wrote:

He went to 2nd
floor to get Coca Cola to eat with
lunch and returned to 1st floor to
eat lunch. Then went outside to watch
P. Parade


My interpretation of this is:

"The most obvious interpretation of this being [IMO] that after Oswald had been up to the second floor for a Coke, he went down to the first floor, finished his lunch then went outside to watch the parade."

Please explain what is bizarre about this interpretation and provide your own "sensible" interpretation.

What's bizarre is your translation of "Then went outside to watch P. Parade" into "Then went outside with the intention of watching the P. Parade but ended up not succeeding in doing so for reasons I won't bother mentioning here in this interrogation report"

Quote
When I wrote - "IT DOES NOT SAY THAT HE SAW THE PARADE" - that is not part of an interpretation, it's a fact. This is confirmed by Kelley reporting that Oswald said he did not see the parade.

It is, indeed, a fact that Insp. Kelley reports that Mr Oswald said this; that does not, however, of itself make it an established fact that Mr Oswald actually said it. Anymore than it is an established fact that Mr Oswald claimed to have eaten lunch WITH Messrs Jarman & Norman in the domino room. We must treat incriminating hearsay from the 'investigators' very carefully indeed.

You still haven't explained BTW why not ONE of those present at interrogations is willing to state for the official record where exactly Mr Oswald claimed to have been at the time of the assassination. Any thoughts? You think they didn't regard this question as bearing any great relevance to the case? Hm?

Quote
Unlike you, I don't believe Oswald is some kind of falsely accused, innocent bystander.
He is deeply involved in the events of that day and his reported comments/behaviour should be seen in that light.

I can't believe you've actually gone there.  Thumb1:

Nowhere have I cited them as reliable witnesses.

So you accept that Messrs Lovelady and Shelley may be lying when they say they didn't see Mr Oswald out front? Yes?

Quote
Lewis, Frazier, Shelley and Molina.
Saunders and  Stanton were also on the top landing.

The top landing was not one foot deep, for heaven's sake! And the front door opened inwards as well as outwards
(https://i.postimg.cc/br4FRXMS/Rather-Steps.gif) (https://postimages.org/)

If Mr Oswald left it until the last minute to go out through the front door, then he could easily have slipped out unnoticed by those already there. Everyone's attention was fixated on the approaching motorcade.

And in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, there was shock & confusion. How many people noticed a police officer wearing a white helmet dashing up the front steps and running inside the front door? How many people noticed Mr Truly doing the same? We literally only have Ms Sanders reportedly saying she saw the former; and only Mr Molina saying he saw the latter. (Unless you want to redeploy your new star witnesses Messrs Shelley & Lovelady to top up that glorious tally?)

Are you seriously claiming to know to a moral certainty that any of the individuals you name above (other than Mr Frazier, whom I have no doubt saw Mr Oswald out there) was standing right back against the glass door as the motorcade was turning onto Houston? That Mr Oswald would have had to push his way past them? Or are you just making details up?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:04:11 AM
You are claiming Oswald was on the front steps of the TSBD even though the films and photos of the event don't show him there at the relevant time?

You are claiming Oswald was in the SN window even though the films and photos of the event don't show him there at the relevant time?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 02, 2022, 06:09:09 AM
Quote
He saw Messrs Norman & Jarman before he went outside to watch the P. Parade
Any link to James Jarmon's testimony? Nothing here anymore----
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/jarman.htm
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Rick Plant on August 02, 2022, 11:06:08 AM
Of course, Mr Oswald had already given his alibi------------he went outside to watch the P. Parade.[/b] He assumed that other employees would vouch for his presence there.[/b]

He had no idea that he was in the frame for pulling any trigger in Dealey Plaza. Such an idea would have been too absurd for words. He was given to understand only that he was being accused of killing Officer Tippit and (at most) having some involvement in the events in Dealey Plaza.

It therefore follows as a distinct possiblity that his mention of Messrs Jarman & Norman was not meant as an alibi (which he didn't even think he needed) but as potentially helpful information: I saw those two guys come in shortly before the motorcade. Maybe you need to talk to them, not me.

This would be similar to his mention of having seen a/the rifle being handled by Mr Truly on the first floor a couple of days ago. Again the implication is: Maybe you need to talk to him, not me.

 Thumb1:

If you were an employee outside watching the parade, you would be focusing on watching the parade and not turning around to see who was behind you. Any employee could have been outside watching the parade and not have been seen for that exact reason. Plus with all the confusion and hysteria people weren't looking for specific employees to give an alibi to.       
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 01:10:05 PM
What's your point? Nobody saw Oswald on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination. So he wasn't there, right?

LOL.  Stick to being a contrarian.  Alan claims Oswald was standing on the front steps of the TSBD.  There are photos and films that show Oswald wasn't there.  His coworkers like Frazier were there.  None of them claimed to see Oswald there.  Can you understand the difference between that situation and the 6th floor?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 01:20:18 PM
If you were an employee outside watching the parade, you would be focusing on watching the parade and not turning around to see who was behind you. Any employee could have been outside watching the parade and not have been seen for that exact reason. Plus with all the confusion and hysteria people weren't looking for specific employees to give an alibi to.       

Many of these people had been standing together well before the motorcade arrived.  They wouldn't have jumped out the door at the last instant since no one knew exactly when the motorcade would pass.   There was no "confusion and hysteria" going on while they were waiting.  They would have had nothing else to do but notice the folks standing around them.  Many of them were TSBD coworkers who would have known each other and socialized.  None of them claimed to see Oswald outside the building although they remembered many others.  Frazier was standing on the front steps and noted the folks who were standing around him.  Oswald wasn't there.  If there was any doubt, there are films and photos of the people standing on the front steps.  Oswald is not in them.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 02, 2022, 01:24:55 PM
LOL.  Stick to being a contrarian.  Alan claims Oswald was standing on the front steps of the TSBD.  There are photos and films that show Oswald wasn't there.  His coworkers like Frazier were there.  None of them claimed to see Oswald there.  Can you understand the difference between that situation and the 6th floor?

No. You claim that Oswald was on the 6th floor, don't you? So, there is no difference.

There are photos and films that show Oswald wasn't there.

Utter stupidity on full display! Photos and films can only show that somebody was there. They can not show that somebody wasn't there.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 02, 2022, 01:29:24 PM
Many of these people had been standing together well before the motorcade arrived.  They wouldn't have jumped out the door at the last instant since no one knew exactly when the motorcade would pass.   There was no "confusion and hysteria" going on while they were waiting.  They would have had nothing else to do but notice the folks standing around them.  Many of them were TSBD coworkers who would have known each other and socialized.  None of them claimed to see Oswald outside the building although they remembered many others.  Frazier was standing on the front steps and noted the folks who were standing around him.  Oswald wasn't there.  If there was any doubt, there are films and photos of the people standing on the front steps.  Oswald is not in them.

Many of these people had been standing together well before the motorcade arrived.  They wouldn't have jumped out the door at the last instant since no one knew exactly when the motorcade would pass. 

Another meaningless strawman

Oswald wasn't there.  If there was any doubt, there are films and photos of the people standing on the front steps.  Oswald is not in them.

There is at least one person in them that, so far, hasn't been positively identified. How can you rule out with 100% certainty that person isn't Oswald? The honest answer would be that you can't rule that out 100%. So, now let's hear your answer....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 01:30:45 PM
No. You claim that Oswald was on the 6th floor, don't you? So, there is no difference.

There are photos and films that show Oswald wasn't there.

Utter stupidity on full display! Photos and films can only show that somebody was there. They can not show that somebody wasn't there.

HA HA HA.  This one is priceless.  A photo or film cannot show somebody wasn't there?   Classic contrarian logic.  So the claim is that Oswald was standing on the front steps of the TSBD at the moment of the assassination giving him an alibi.  There are photos and films of the people standing there at the relevant moment.  Oswald isn't there.  That leaves us with two possible conclusions.  First, that Oswald has powers of invisibility or second, he wasn't there.   And there is no difference between this situation and the 6th floor?  Do you have photos and films of the 6th floor at the moment of the assassination that show Oswald wasn't there?  And there were coworkers on that floor at the moment the shots were fired who didn't see him?  Wow.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 01:36:48 PM
Many of these people had been standing together well before the motorcade arrived.  They wouldn't have jumped out the door at the last instant since no one knew exactly when the motorcade would pass. 

Another meaningless strawman

Oswald wasn't there.  If there was any doubt, there are films and photos of the people standing on the front steps.  Oswald is not in them.

There is at least one person in them that, so far, hasn't been positively identified. How can you rule out with 100% certainty that person isn't Oswald? The honest answer would be that you can't rule that out 100%. So, now let's hear your answer....

Frazier is standing right there.  He is the guy who knew Oswald better than anyone else in the building.  He drove him to work that very morning.  Others there also knew Oswald.  None of them ever claimed Oswald had been standing there.  Frazier has scientific powers of observation in your estimation when it comes to the length of Oswald's bag that morning, But suddenly he doesn't observe Oswald standing right next to him on the steps.  A critical piece of evidence since Oswald would be accused of assassinating the President at that moment.  Unreal.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 02, 2022, 02:30:41 PM
It is entirely plausible  that Oswajd could have been eating his lunch in the Domino room and saw Norman&Jarman approx 12:24-25 entering rear loading dock door AND ALSO that  Oswald left he Domino room and took his coke in hand to the front lobby approx 12:25-26 where Carolyn Arnold caught  a glimpse of him thru  the window.

Carolyn Arnold could have seen Oswajd TWICE!
Once at 12:15 in the 2nd floor lunchroom because Oswald had gone up at that point to get his coke. Then the 2nd sighting was at 12:25-26 when Carolyn was outside standing on the sidewalk and looked back to the TSBD entrance momentarily. (Note: she was fairly certain that it was NOT Lovelady she saw because of the “thru the glass “ description, thus not Lovelady because he was OUTSIDE on the west side of the steps near the west wall .


Then Oswald went out the front door and being the slender 135 lb man was able to easily go behind several persons on the entrance landing including Buell W. frazier, to the PM location in the west corner at approx 12:28-29.

There , Oswald was captured in Weigman film raising a bottle (white label?) on it to his mouth and down back to waste level again.

What about the lunch question? Where did Oswald get his lunch?

possible options:

1. Oswald brought the lunch in a smaller bag Inside the the longer 22-27” bag that Frazier saw.

2. Oswald already  had some lunch left in the 2nd floor lunchroom refrigerator from the day before.

3. Oswald may have gone out of the TSBD after speaking to Eddie Piper at 12:00 , thus Oswald was unseen by anyone from 12:01 until 12:14 when Oswald returns and went up to 2nd floor lunchroom to buy a coke.
 When Carolyn entered the lunchroom, 12:15 , Oswald decided he best get back to the Domino room since the 2nd floor lunchroom was generally reserved  for the office workers only ( per Lovelady WC testimony ).

An objective analysis of the many actions and movements required of Oswald to make the WC theory work actually demonstrate the theory is severely flawed and approaching a level of improbability that makes it Implausible.

Examples:

1. If Oswald was in the Domino room observing Norman/Jarman passing by at 12:25 then Oswald could not have been the one placing a box on the 6th floor SN window since that box had to been placed just before Bronson film begins at 12:25, showing box is in the window

2. If Oswald was seen at 12:15 by Carolyn Arnold in the 2nd floor lunchroom, then Oswald was not the man seen by Arnold Rowland at 12:15 at the SW window holding a rifle in hand

3. If Oswald was seen  approx. 12:25 by Carolyn Arnold in the Front entrance Lobby ground floor of TSBD , then Oswald was not in proximity of the 6th floor in time to place the window ledge box before Bonnie Ray Williams left the 6th floor.

4. If Bonnie Ray Williams  did not leave from the 6th floor until 12:24 , thus only joining Norman and Jarman AFTER  they. reach the 5th floor south facing windows approx 12:26 then Oswald could not have placed a box on the 6th floor window ledge earlier that 12:25.

4. Given that it would have taken Bob Jackson a few seconds to locate and spot a rifle sticking out the SE 6th floor window after the last shot, a few more seconds to exclaim “there’s a rifle in that window” , a few seconds more for  Malcom Couch (in the same car w/Jackson) to respond , and finally, about 3 more seconds for both men to observe the rifle “slowly withdrawn” ….

Therefore: It is already approx.  10 secs post shots BEFORE the SE gunman even gets up out of his cramped position and had to squeeze out of a more enclosed wall that existed before some boxes were removed later by the Fritz SN rearrangement crew. ( 4 secs more)

Thus the time is approx 14 sec post shots before an Oswald (presumed to be gunman) could even start his trek across 180 ft of 6th floor to get to the staircase.

It would take 27 secs more at 8ft per second double time running to get to the boxes were the rifle was presumed to be hidden. ( +2 sec to accelerate and +2 sec to decelerate added to 180ft/8ft sec point to point instantaneous 23sec calculation.

Question: How probable that a person could wipe off all prints from the rifle while in the process of running with it at 8ft/sec having to navigate past columns and taking a turn past rows of boxes?  In the 27 sec time?

Even if it can demonstrated by experiment that it  is possible, the time of Oswald arriving at the boxes near staircase is  approx 50 secs post shots. This is even before getting the rifle hidden in between the boxes. That would take at least 5 more secs even if the rifle could have just been “dropped”, because of the  sling with 2”wide pad has to go in first, and then a box pushed over top of the gap afterwards.

There is still about another 10 ft to travel from
Boxes  to the actual staircase so the total time elapsed before Oswald could have started down the 6th floor staircase is approx 55 sec post shots.

The fastest probable rate of descent per floor using the L-shaped 18 step staircase and across 20 ft arc distance of landing =10 secs/floor

This therefore makes it virtually impossible for Oswald ,  if starting at 50-55 sec post shots from top of the 6th floor staircase,  to have descended  4 floors to the 2nd floor landing before 80 secs post shots which is the approx time Truly and Baker would have arrived per the WC time trial)

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:23:45 PM
If you were an employee outside watching the parade, you would be focusing on watching the parade and not turning around to see who was behind you. Any employee could have been outside watching the parade and not have been seen for that exact reason. Plus with all the confusion and hysteria people weren't looking for specific employees to give an alibi to.       

Exactly, Mr Plant-----well said, sir!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:32:12 PM
Many of these people had been standing together well before the motorcade arrived.  They wouldn't have jumped out the door at the last instant since no one knew exactly when the motorcade would pass.

Well, that's exactly what Mr Roy Edward Lewis says he did.

Quote
There was no "confusion and hysteria" going on while they were waiting.  They would have had nothing else to do but notice the folks standing around them.  Many of them were TSBD coworkers who would have known each other and socialized.  None of them claimed to see Oswald outside the building although they remembered many others.  Frazier was standing on the front steps and noted the folks who were standing around him.  Oswald wasn't there.

Mr Oswald, not wanting to go out front until the last moment, because he wasn't into small talk with coworkers, mooched around inside the first floor, keeping an eye on what was happening outside by looking through the glass front door. Then, when he saw (and heard) that the motorcade was arriving, he slipped outside.

Your argument, in short, is irrelevant to such a scenario.

Quote
If there was any doubt, there are films and photos of the people standing on the front steps.  Oswald is not in them.

Nor is Mr Roy Lewis. Nor is Ms Pauline Sanders. So what?

And you still can't explain the impossible shadow down Mr Lovelady in Wiegman. If Mr Oswald did go out front and was caught on film, then the addition of that ridiculous shadow makes perfect sense.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:36:06 PM
HA HA HA.  This one is priceless.  A photo or film cannot show somebody wasn't there?   Classic contrarian logic.  So the claim is that Oswald was standing on the front steps of the TSBD at the moment of the assassination giving him an alibi.  There are photos and films of the people standing there at the relevant moment.  Oswald isn't there.  That leaves us with two possible conclusions.  First, that Oswald has powers of invisibility or second, he wasn't there.

Third, that your heroes in the 'investigation' have powers of making him invisible by doctoring the visual record

(https://i.postimg.cc/25gCpBmk/Prayer-Man-in-Wiegman-(References & links to websites which contain pornographic images and/or abusive content directed at members of this Forum is strictly prohibited )-Scan-Nov-2015-75.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dw0V88Cv/Cronkite-Altgens-LHO-arm-coke-gif.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:37:59 PM
Frazier is standing right there.  He is the guy who knew Oswald better than anyone else in the building.  He drove him to work that very morning.  Others there also knew Oswald.  None of them ever claimed Oswald had been standing there.  Frazier has scientific powers of observation in your estimation when it comes to the length of Oswald's bag that morning, But suddenly he doesn't observe Oswald standing right next to him on the steps.  A critical piece of evidence since Oswald would be accused of assassinating the President at that moment.  Unreal.

"I can't say for sure that I saw Lee Harvey Oswald"

--Mr Roy Edward Lewis (JFK conference Dallas, 2016) when asked whom he saw out on those steps at the time of the assassination.

(https://i.imgur.com/MFtXBl1.jpg)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:45:43 PM
Then Oswald went out the front door and being the slender 135 lb man was able to easily go behind several persons on the entrance landing

Yes---people on the landing (other than the tall Mr Frazier) stepped forward for a better view of the motorcade as it turned onto Houston

Quote
including Buell W. frazier,

Again, I think Mr Frazier's height enabled him to be the one person who stayed right back by the glass. I have no doubt he noticed Mr Oswald

Quote
to the PM location in the west corner at approx 12:28-29.

Maybe to the PM location, maybe around that time.

But also: Maybe to another location v. close by, and maybe even a little later.

I think Mr Oswald may, at least by the time of the actual shooting, be HERE:

(https://i.postimg.cc/sXTLHVqD/Wiegman-Weisberg-Archive2-arnold.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dw0V88Cv/Cronkite-Altgens-LHO-arm-coke-gif.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 03:48:47 PM
Third, that your heroes in the 'investigation' have powers of making him invisible by doctoring the visual record

(https://i.postimg.cc/25gCpBmk/Prayer-Man-in-Wiegman-(References & links to websites which contain pornographic images and/or abusive content directed at members of this Forum is strictly prohibited )-Scan-Nov-2015-75.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dw0V88Cv/Cronkite-Altgens-LHO-arm-coke-gif.gif) (https://postimages.org/)

So all the photos and films were doctored AFTER the fact to remove Oswald?  They somehow knew who the random people in Dealey Plaza were and tracked them down to alter their films before they could be made available to the press.  And all the witnesses were coerced to avoid giving him an alibi?  That was the plan.  You can't believe that tin foil hat nonsense.  Honestly, find a mental health professional and explain this theory to them.  Get back to us with their opinion. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 02, 2022, 03:57:35 PM
So all the photos and films were doctored AFTER the fact to remove Oswald?

Nope, but nice strawman!

Quote
They somehow knew who the random people in Dealey Plaza were and tracked them down to alter their films before they could be made available to the press.

Nope, but nice strawman!

Bottom line: you & your fellow Warren Gullibles still can't explain the magic shadow down Mr Lovelady in the Wiegman film.

I look forward to your next question: 'So they made a hologram of Billy Lovelady and implanted a microchip in Wiegman's brain and [etc. etc.]?'

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 02, 2022, 04:03:35 PM
Nope, but nice strawman!

Nope, but nice strawman!

Bottom line: you & your fellow Warren Gullibles still can't explain the magic shadow down Mr Lovelady in the Wiegman film.

I look forward to your next question: 'So they made a hologram of Billy Lovelady and implanted a microchip in Wiegman's brain and [etc. etc.]?'

 Thumb1:

So when you said the following, you were not claiming that the fantasy conspirators doctored the photos? 

"Third, that your heroes in the 'investigation' have powers of making him invisible by doctoring the visual record."
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 02, 2022, 05:04:36 PM
Itis questionable if at the time the  Weigman and Darnell films were 1st examined if PM was as visible as he is now.

Could it be that PM was pretty much in total darkness when the original films were seen? Was the negative film frames still as dark?

Because as I understand it, it wasn’t until around 2011?  That somebody ( maybe it was Groden?) who discovered PM after a process of lighting up the negative frames?

If this the case, the the conspirators didn’t see any PM figure that in any way could possibly resemble Oswald . Thus the reason why ther was no added darkening to obscure PMs white object.

Therefore, the reason for the blackened part of Lovelady in Weigman film was possibly because his right arm had to be obscured since his right sleeve was  not rolled up. This was an attempt to hide an anomaly in the 1st version of the Altgens 6 photo , the Cronkite version, which shows what appears to be a forearm raised with some horizontal element ( bottle) and the shirt sleeve rolled up.

After realizing however, that the forearm in the 1sr version Altgens did not belong to the black man in front of Lovelady, the Altgens photo seems to have been altered to “erase” this arm, (and bottle) by adding texture pattern of Loveladys shirt to create the illusion .Loveladys right arm is there.

Only problem is the end of Loveladys right shirt sleeve looks Ike it extends in FRONT of part of the black man’s face. This is obviously Impossible.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 02, 2022, 06:51:29 PM
Frazier is standing right there.  He is the guy who knew Oswald better than anyone else in the building.  He drove him to work that very morning.  Others there also knew Oswald.  None of them ever claimed Oswald had been standing there.  Frazier has scientific powers of observation in your estimation when it comes to the length of Oswald's bag that morning, But suddenly he doesn't observe Oswald standing right next to him on the steps.  A critical piece of evidence since Oswald would be accused of assassinating the President at that moment.  Unreal.

You mean the same Frazier who was arrested later that day for possible complicity and who Fritz demanded he'd sign a pre-written confession, despite the fact that he was standing on the steps and appears in films and photos?

Until this day nobody has ever positively identified the person they now call PM. He was clearly there, so why did nobody confirm who it was? Could it be they were all focused on other things and simply didn't observe him? Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 02, 2022, 07:29:28 PM
You mean the same Frazier who was arrested later that day for possible complicity and who Fritz demanded he'd sign a pre-written confession, despite the fact that he was standing on the steps and appears in films and photos?

Until this day nobody has ever positively identified the person they now call PM. He was clearly there, so why did nobody confirm who it was? Could it be they were all focused on other things and simply didn't observe him? Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.

Could it be they were all focused on other things and simply didn't observe him? Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.
_Correct.
  AKA 'inattentional blindness'
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 02, 2022, 08:11:11 PM
Any link to James Jarmon's testimony? Nothing here anymore----
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/jarman.htm

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0103b.htm (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0103b.htm)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 02:03:25 AM
So when you said the following, you were not claiming that the fantasy conspirators doctored the photos? 

"Third, that your heroes in the 'investigation' have powers of making him invisible by doctoring the visual record."

~Yawn~

You translated this into "So all the photos and films were doctored AFTER the fact to remove Oswald?"

If you were intellectually secure in your Warren Gullible beliefs, Mr Smith, you wouldn't feel the need to resort again and again and again to this kind of strawman nonsense.

So! If you wish to get away with dismissing the notion that the Wiegman film was doctored to add a fake shadow down Mr Lovelady's side, then you'll need to do a lot better than 'I can't explain the shadow, but I know it's definitely not an issue'.

Explain the shadow, or man up and take the L  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 02:09:15 AM
Itis questionable if at the time the  Weigman and Darnell films were 1st examined if PM was as visible as he is now.

Could it be that PM was pretty much in total darkness when the original films were seen? Was the negative film frames still as dark?

Because as I understand it, it wasn’t until around 2011?  That somebody ( maybe it was Groden?) who discovered PM after a process of lighting up the negative frames?

If this the case, the the conspirators didn’t see any PM figure that in any way could possibly resemble Oswald . Thus the reason why ther was no added darkening to obscure PMs white object.

Therefore, the reason for the blackened part of Lovelady in Weigman film was possibly because his right arm had to be obscured since his right sleeve was  not rolled up. This was an attempt to hide an anomaly in the 1st version of the Altgens 6 photo , the Cronkite version, which shows what appears to be a forearm raised with some horizontal element ( bottle) and the shirt sleeve rolled up.

After realizing however, that the forearm in the 1sr version Altgens did not belong to the black man in front of Lovelady, the Altgens photo seems to have been altered to “erase” this arm, (and bottle) by adding texture pattern of Loveladys shirt to create the illusion .Loveladys right arm is there.

Only problem is the end of Loveladys right shirt sleeve looks Ike it extends in FRONT of part of the black man’s face. This is obviously Impossible.

Yes, it may be that PM=LHO, and the shadow was added to hide the fact that Mr Lovelady's sleeves were down.

The question however is: how realistic is it that Mr Oswald went from here in Altgens--------

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dw0V88Cv/Cronkite-Altgens-LHO-arm-coke-gif.gif) (https://postimages.org/)

---------up to the Prayer Man spot in Wiegman?

We are talking a difference here of only a very few seconds.....

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 02:19:46 AM
You mean the same Frazier who was arrested later that day for possible complicity and who Fritz demanded he'd sign a pre-written confession, despite the fact that he was standing on the steps and appears in films and photos?

Until this day nobody has ever positively identified the person they now call PM. He was clearly there, so why did nobody confirm who it was? Could it be they were all focused on other things and simply didn't observe him? Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.

Exactly, Mr Weidmann!  Thumb1:

I believe that Mr Oswald went through a similar experience in interrogation as Mr Frazier: he was told 'We know you weren't the shooter, because we know you were on the steps. But...'

Mr Frazier was threatened with a charge of conspiracy in the assassination. Mr Oswald thought that's what he was being accused of. He had no idea they were seriously trying to make a triggerman charge stick.

If Mr Frazier, "out in the hall" at DPD HQ, had been asked by a press reporter, "Did you shoot the President?", he would have taken this to mean, "Were you part of the plot?" And he would have said, 'No', and made no effort to proclaim his front-steps alibi. Either that, or he would have thought the idea of his actually having personally fired the shots as too ridiculous to dignify with a detailed response. Again, he would have felt zero need to proclaim his front-steps alibi.

Same goes for Mr Oswald. He was kept in the dark, precisely so that he WOULDN'T try to vindicate himself in front of the press by stating his location at the time of the shooting. He did not know this was even an issue------------or at issue.

Captain Fritz played him, but good.

And this is why the coming to light in 2019 of the Agent Hosty draft interrogation report was and is of such explosive significance. It allowed us to hear, for the very first time, what Mr Oswald WOULD have screamed to the press had he known what he was really being accused of:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

This case has, since 2019, come down to a fight between two rival claims as to Mr Oswald's whereabouts:
a) Front steps (Mr Oswald)
b) Sixth-floor window (WC)

Whether or not Mr Oswald is indeed Prayer Man, claim a) is, in a stunning reversal of fortune, winning
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 03, 2022, 11:59:15 AM
Yes, it may be that PM=LHO, and the shadow was added to hide the fact that Mr Lovelady's sleeves were down.

The question however is: how realistic is it that Mr Oswald went from here in Altgens--------

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dw0V88Cv/Cronkite-Altgens-LHO-arm-coke-gif.gif) (https://postimages.org/)

---------up to the Prayer Man spot in Wiegman?

We are talking a difference here of only a very few seconds.....

 Thumb1:


How realistic is it that he went from the top of the steps to the second floor lunchroom before Truly and Baker got there, and no one saw him?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 03, 2022, 01:35:33 PM
~Yawn~

You translated this into "So all the photos and films were doctored AFTER the fact to remove Oswald?"

If you were intellectually secure in your Warren Gullible beliefs, Mr Smith, you wouldn't feel the need to resort again and again and again to this kind of strawman nonsense.

So! If you wish to get away with dismissing the notion that the Wiegman film was doctored to add a fake shadow down Mr Lovelady's side, then you'll need to do a lot better than 'I can't explain the shadow, but I know it's definitely not an issue'.

Explain the shadow, or man up and take the L  Thumb1:

How would your fantasy conspirators even know who took pictures and films that needed to be doctored?  Imagine the plan.  Months or even years are devoted to framing LHO for the assassination.  At the moment of the assassination, however, he is left free to roam about in the presence of his coworkers and even perhaps be caught on film.  So the conspirators have to leap into action right afterward to obtain all the films and cameras in Dealey Plaza before any photos can be published.  They also have to coerce any random witness who may have seen Oswald and could give him an alibi for the assassination of the president.  It is complete insanity.  All of this could be avoided simply by keeping Oswald out of sight.  There is no basis for this theory in fact or narrative consistency.  It is an outlier even by JFK conspiracy standards.  The stuff of Bigfoot and UFOs.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 04:56:18 PM
How would your fantasy conspirators even know who took pictures and films that needed to be doctored?

Another Smith Strawman........ The conspirators behind the assassination were not trying to frame Mr Oswald as gunman. The 'investigating' authorities were, after the event.

Quote
Imagine the plan.  Months or even years are devoted to framing LHO for the assassination.

~Yawn~

See above.

Your position is: 'I cannot explain the shadow down Lovelady in Wiegman but I know the image hasn't been doctored because I know the shadow down Lovelady must have an explanation that doesn't involve the doctoring of the image so I'm going to keep deflecting from the issue of the shadow down Lovelady in Wiegman that I can't explain'

 ::)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 04:57:18 PM

How realistic is it that he went from the top of the steps to the second floor lunchroom before Truly and Baker got there, and no one saw him?

He went up to the second-floor lunchroom to buy a coke BEFORE the P. Parade
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 03, 2022, 05:00:47 PM
He went up to the second-floor lunchroom to buy a coke BEFORE the P. Parade

He was stopped by Baker and Truly in the second floor lunchroom immediately after the motorcade passed by the TSBD.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 03, 2022, 05:02:28 PM
Could it be they were all focused on other things and simply didn't observe him? Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.
_Correct.
  AKA 'inattentional blindness'

Inattentional 'blindness' might have been a factor if indeed Oswald was outside (but not noticed) as some here are arguing
The same kind of argument may be applied re inattentional deafness and the stairs

In any case:

(https://i.postimg.cc/7LjN6SzF/OSWALD-QUIET-STAIRS.png)
billchapman

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 03, 2022, 05:03:46 PM
He was stopped by Baker and Truly in the second floor lunchroom immediately after the motorcade passed by the TSBD.

So what? What does that tell you about when he got to the lunchroom?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 05:05:18 PM
He was stopped by Baker and Truly in the second floor lunchroom immediately after the motorcade passed by the TSBD.

Not according to Officer Baker's same-day affidavit. But by all means continue in your happily subcritical Warren Gullibility, Mr Collins!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 03, 2022, 05:06:36 PM
Inattentional 'blindness' might have been a factor if indeed Oswald was outside (but not noticed) as some here are arguing
The same kind of argument may be applied re inattentional deafness and the stairs

In any case:

(https://i.postimg.cc/7LjN6SzF/OSWALD-QUIET-STAIRS.png)
billchapman

Except that it was impossible to be quiet on those old wooden stairs. Dorothy Garner told Barry Ernest that she knew the girls had gone down (before she saw Truly and the police man come up) because she heard them on the stairs. There is no way that anybody could have run down those stairs without making a noise.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 03, 2022, 05:26:53 PM
Not according to Officer Baker's same-day affidavit. But by all means continue in your happily subcritical Warren Gullibility, Mr Collins!  Thumb1:

Roy Truly’s same-day affidavit includes the correct floor and room. He was with Baker and knew the building well. But by all means, continue in your nutty fantasy Mr. Ford.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 03, 2022, 05:44:21 PM
Except that it was impossible to be quiet on those old wooden stairs. Dorothy Garner told Barry Ernest that she knew the girls had gone down (before she saw Truly and the police man come up) because she heard them on the stairs. There is no way that anybody could have run down those stairs without making a noise.

The noise can be minimized by someone light on his feet (including his 131lbs) and in good shape
The girls had no reason to worry about being heard.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 03, 2022, 06:27:08 PM
The noise can be minimized by someone light on his feet (including his 131lbs) and in good shape
The girls had no reason to worry about being heard.
One of the order fillers/workers Roy Lewis said this in "No More Silence."

"Sometimes if you were on one of the floors by yourself somebody would sneak up and you'd never know they were there.....They could walk down the stairway and a lot of times they'd be on you before you'd know it..."

What's the evidence that the steps made loud noises or were loud when you went up and down? I can understand multiple people making noise but Lewis's account says one person could go down quietly. And that's in a quiet time or atmosphere; there was lots of noise outside during the aftermath of the shooting.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 03, 2022, 06:29:55 PM
The noise can be minimized by someone light on his feet (including his 131lbs) and in good shape
The girls had no reason to worry about being heard.

The noise can be minimized by someone light on his feet

LOL  You never ran down those stairs.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 03, 2022, 06:47:43 PM
Inattentional 'blindness' might have been a factor if indeed Oswald was outside (but not noticed) as some here are arguing
The same kind of argument may be applied re inattentional deafness and the stairs

In any case:

(https://i.postimg.cc/7LjN6SzF/OSWALD-QUIET-STAIRS.png)
billchapman



The same kind of argument may be applied re inattentional deafness and the stairs

Yes, just because no one remembered hearing him, doesn’t mean he wasn’t there.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 03, 2022, 06:55:34 PM
One of the order fillers/workers Roy Lewis said this in "No More Silence."

"Sometimes if you were on one of the floors by yourself somebody would sneak up and you'd never know they were there.....They could walk down the stairway and a lot of times they'd be on you before you'd know it..."

What's the evidence that the steps made loud noises or were loud when you went up and down? I can understand multiple people making noise but Lewis's account says one person could go down quietly. And that's in a quiet time or atmosphere; there was lots of noise outside during the aftermath of the shooting.

"Sometimes if you were on one of the floors by yourself somebody would sneak up and you'd never know they were there.....They could walk down the stairway and a lot of times they'd be on you before you'd know it..."

That says very little. The TSBD is a big building and if you were on a floor by yourself but some distance away from the stairs in the back you probably wouldn't hear anybody coming up.

but Lewis's account says one person could go down quietly.

No it doesn't. That's just merely your incorrect conclusion

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 03, 2022, 07:01:47 PM


The same kind of argument may be applied re inattentional deafness and the stairs

Yes, just because no one remembered hearing him, doesn’t mean he wasn’t there.

Too bad Dorothy Garner and some other women on the 4th floor did not see him passing by.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 03, 2022, 08:29:45 PM
Too bad Dorothy Garner and some other women on the 4th floor did not see him passing by.

The "absence of evidence is not evidence" some contrarian philosopher once said.  We know someone was on the 6th floor.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window.  We know that person got off that floor without being noticed.  Therefore we know it was entirely possible for Oswald to have done so. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 03, 2022, 08:46:02 PM
Months or even years are devoted to framing LHO for the assassination.

Strawman "Smith" strikes again.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 03, 2022, 08:50:22 PM
The "absence of evidence is not evidence" some contrarian philosopher once said.  We know someone was on the 6th floor.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window.  We know that person got off that floor without being noticed.  Therefore we know it was entirely possible for Oswald to have done so.

Not necessarily within 75-90 seconds of the shots though.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 09:07:07 PM
Roy Truly’s same-day affidavit includes the correct floor and room. He was with Baker and knew the building well. But by all means, continue in your nutty fantasy Mr. Ford.

Mr Truly's same-day affidavit? Wow------show us!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 03, 2022, 09:10:26 PM
The "absence of evidence is not evidence" some contrarian philosopher once said.
Being a contrarian can be a good thing... https://www.psychotactics.com/contrarian-mindset/
Quote
We know someone was on the 6th floor.
Agree.
Quote
Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window.
So it is written.
 
Quote
We know that *person got off that floor without being noticed.
Or *persons.
Quote
Therefore we know it was entirely possible for Oswald to have done so.
Were it he.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 09:13:34 PM
The "absence of evidence is not evidence" some contrarian philosopher once said.  We know someone was on the 6th floor.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window.  We know that person got off that floor without being noticed.

On the contrary, Mr Smith--------------he was noticed, by Officer Baker, who caught him "walking away from the stairway" a number of floors up the building

(https://i.postimg.cc/Y9WNFdcx/Marrion-Baker-Affidavit-description.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

And, a little after this, he was noticed running out of the building

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

This latter sighting was the true source of the suspect description that went out

Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 03, 2022, 09:15:37 PM
Mr Truly's same-day affidavit? Wow------show us!  Thumb1:
I would like to see that too [didn't know one existed]
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 09:17:37 PM
I would like to see that too [didn't know one existed]

We anxiously await evidence of Mr Collins' amazing discovery!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 03, 2022, 09:22:42 PM
Mr Truly's same-day affidavit? Wow------show us!  Thumb1:


 https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338979/ (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338979/)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 09:27:37 PM

 https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338979/ (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338979/)

 :D

Read the second sentence on p.1, Mr Collins!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 03, 2022, 10:04:41 PM
For some reason...I can't get that page site to load :(
But I found page one where is the other?--
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340660/m1/1/med_res/)
Is that a Truly signature or a stamp? I guess it doesn't matter much. It just all looks 'contrived'.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 03, 2022, 10:32:04 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/MgbqzSR/texashistory-unt.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Zf3yQXh)

Did Roy take his stamp with him to the county office?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 03, 2022, 10:51:55 PM
:D

Read the second sentence on p.1, Mr Collins!


This is what I noticed:


Dallas (Tex.). Police Department. [Affidavit In Any Fact by Roy S. Truly #1], text, November 22, 1963; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338979/m1/1/: accessed August 3, 2022), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.



It is below the affidavit on page one, just scroll down a bit. It’s apparently in error based on what you pointed out. I must have skimmed over and missed the word yesterday. My mistake.

However, the point is that Baker wasn’t familiar with the building and apparently guessed wrong regarding which floor they encountered LHO on. Truly correctly stated which floor and room the next day. Regardless of which one you choose, my original question hasn’t been answered. How realistic is it for him to get from the top of the stairs of the entrance to where Baker and Truly encountered him without being seen?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 03, 2022, 10:57:22 PM

The "absence of evidence is not evidence" some contrarian philosopher once said.  We know someone was on the 6th floor.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window.  We know that person got off that floor without being noticed.  Therefore we know it was entirely possible for Oswald to have done so.


It's without question true that the absense of evidence isn't evidence of absense, but the fact that something is theoretically possible doesn't automatically mean that it is practically possible also. Nobody has ever seen a pig fly, but that doesn't mean that they can fly!

The problem for the theory is that Oswald had to be in the 2nd floor lunchroom some 75 seconds after the last shot and the only way to get there would be the stairs. The same stairs where Dorothy Garner stood in close proximity of.

Any other shooter could have just mingled with the crowd and simply walked out later.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 11:21:19 PM

This is what I noticed:


Dallas (Tex.). Police Department. [Affidavit In Any Fact by Roy S. Truly #1], text, November 22, 1963; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338979/m1/1/: accessed August 3, 2022), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.



It is below the affidavit on page one, just scroll down a bit. It’s apparently in error based on what you pointed out. I must have skimmed over and missed the word yesterday. My mistake.

No problem, Mr Collins!  Thumb1:

Now----------------there are two FBI documents (in the production of both of which FBI agent Agent Pinkston is involved) dated 11/22/63 in which Mr Truly is indeed reported as describing a lunchroom incident. And then we have an official interrogation report (by FBI agent Bookhout) that has Mr Oswald confirming such an incident. But we now know (since 2019) that Mr Oswald actually said he visited the lunchroom for a coke BEFORE the P. Parade, which he afterwards went out to see.

Well! You will claim that Mr Oswald is lying. OK. But then you have to explain why two different interrogation reports have Mr Oswald telling two VERY different stories about the second-floor lunchroom in the same interrogation session. Who's doing the lying here?

If the lunchroom incident happened as Mr Truly and (later) Officer Baker claim, why does a false 'confirmation' of it need to put in Mr Oswald's mouth? Because it's a fiction, designed to deprive him of his front steps alibi. And the interrogation report that says NOTHING about his claim to have gone outside to watch the P. Parade just so happens to be the one that has him 'confirm' a lunchroom encounter. Go figure!

And! The interrogation report that DOES have Mr Oswald claim a PRE-Parade visit to the lunchroom but NO cop encounter there, as well as the going outside to watch P. Parade is--------buried. Go figure!

Quote
However, the point is that Baker wasn’t familiar with the building and apparently guessed wrong regarding which floor they encountered LHO on.

A very naive attempt to harmonize two very different accounts (11/22/63 affidavit + official lunchroom story).

And the man Officer Baker describes in his affidavit was caught "walking away from the stairway".

And Mr Oswald was brought into the Homicide Office while Officer Baker was giving his affidavit-------yet the affidavit makes no connection between the suspect Officer Baker now sees in front of him and the man he caught several floors up walking away from the stairway.

Go figure!

Quote
Truly correctly stated which floor and room

Well of course he did------------he knew the location of the lunchroom. Doesn't mean he was telling the truth about an encounter happening there!

Quote
the next day. Regardless of which one you choose, my original question hasn’t been answered. How realistic is it for him to get from the top of the stairs of the entrance to where Baker and Truly encountered him without being seen?

It's v. improbable but not physically impossible. And that's precisely why the lunchroom was chosen (probably by Agent Pinkston) as the location of the fictitious encounter. Mr Oswald was very quickly known to have been out front during the assassination, and there was every possibility that positive proof of this would emerge over the coming days. So they had to choose a location which he could physically have reached in time for an encounter v. shortly after the assassination---------a location that he could conceivably have made his way to from the front steps via the second-floor corridor or office area while Mr Truly & Officer Baker were making theirs via the first-floor shipping room. Otherwise the 'investigating' authorities are caught in a blatant lie.

Mr Oswald did visit the lunchroom, but it was several minutes before the assassination. There was no post-assassination lunchroom encounter.

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 11:35:26 PM
For some reason...I can't get that page site to load :(
But I found page one where is the other?--
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340660/m1/1/med_res/)
Is that a Truly signature or a stamp? I guess it doesn't matter much. It just all looks 'contrived'.

It's legit. Mr Truly was brought on board the concocted lunchroom story several hours after the assassination-------------after DPD had been telling the world he'd been stopped by an officer at the front door.

All the evidence suggests that Officer Baker was MUCH slower to come on board the lunchroom fiction train
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 03, 2022, 11:42:36 PM
It's without question true that the absense of evidence isn't evidence of absense, but the fact that something is theoretically possible doesn't automatically mean that it is practically possible also. Nobody has ever seen a pig fly, but that doesn't mean that they can fly!

The problem for the theory is that Oswald had to be in the 2nd floor lunchroom some 75 seconds after the last shot and the only way to get there would be the stairs. The same stairs where Dorothy Garner stood in close proximity of.

Any other shooter could have just mingled with the crowd and simply walked out later.

Once again-------------

The descending shooter was seen, by Officer Baker, who caught him "walking away from the stairway" a number of floors up the building

(https://i.postimg.cc/Y9WNFdcx/Marrion-Baker-Affidavit-description.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

And, a little after this, he was seen running from the building

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

The uncanny match between the two descriptions is no fluke.

The true source of the suspect description that went out was not Mr Howard Brennan but another construction worker, the man who saw the man running from the building.

Cf. Mr Amos Euins' testimony:

Mr. SPECTER. Do you know who that man was who said somebody ran out the back?
Mr. EUINS. No, sir. He was a construction man working back there.
Mr. SPECTER. Were you there when the man talked about somebody running out the back?
Mr. EUINS. Yes, sir. He said the man had--he said he had kind of bald spot on his head. And he said the man come back there.


 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 03, 2022, 11:57:09 PM
Baker's hand written statement months later just before the Report was issued also looks contrived---

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/c649blf3s1cnge3/CE%203076.jpg?dl=0)

Alternate floor  and drinking a coke obscured.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 04, 2022, 12:03:39 AM
The testimony from a variety of sources all corroborate the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter, as they say in the classics "All roads lead to Rome".
And as for Baker being confused about the floor he was on is perfectly understandable because he first walks up steps to get into the Depository and then enters a closed stairwell which has a set of stairs leading to a platform and then he leaves the platform and walks up another set of stairs to the next floor.
In other words Baker was just a dumbass cop and couldn't count floor entries. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 12:27:25 AM
No problem, Mr Collins!  Thumb1:

Now----------------there are two FBI documents (in the production of both of which FBI agent Agent Pinkston is involved) dated 11/22/63 in which Mr Truly is indeed reported as describing a lunchroom incident. And then we have an official interrogation report (by FBI agent Bookhout) that has Mr Oswald confirming such an incident. But we now know (since 2019) that Mr Oswald actually said he visited the lunchroom for a coke BEFORE the P. Parade, which he afterwards went out to see.

Well! You will claim that Mr Oswald is lying. OK. But then you have to explain why two different interrogation reports have Mr Oswald telling two VERY different stories about the second-floor lunchroom in the same interrogation session. Who's doing the lying here?

If the lunchroom incident happened as Mr Truly and (later) Officer Baker claim, why does a false 'confirmation' of it need to put in Mr Oswald's mouth? Because it's a fiction, designed to deprive him of his front steps alibi. And the interrogation report that says NOTHING about his claim to have gone outside to watch the P. Parade just so happens to be the one that has him 'confirm' a lunchroom encounter. Go figure!

And! The interrogation report that DOES have Mr Oswald claim a PRE-Parade visit to the lunchroom but NO cop encounter there, as well as the going outside to watch P. Parade is--------buried. Go figure!

A very naive attempt to harmonize two very different accounts (11/22/63 affidavit + official lunchroom story).

And the man Officer Baker describes in his affidavit was caught "walking away from the stairway".

And Mr Oswald was brought into the Homicide Office while Officer Baker was giving his affidavit-------yet the affidavit makes no connection between the suspect Officer Baker now sees in front of him and the man he caught several floors up walking away from the stairway.

Go figure!

Well of course he did------------he knew the location of the lunchroom. Doesn't mean he was telling the truth about an encounter happening there!

It's v. improbable but not physically impossible. And that's precisely why the lunchroom was chosen (probably by Agent Pinkston) as the location of the fictitious encounter. Mr Oswald was very quickly known to have been out front during the assassination, and there was every possibility that positive proof of this would emerge over the coming days. So they had to choose a location which he could physically have reached in time for an encounter v. shortly after the assassination---------a location that he could conceivably have made his way to from the front steps via the second-floor corridor or office area while Mr Truly & Officer Baker were making theirs via the first-floor shipping room. Otherwise the 'investigating' authorities are caught in a blatant lie.

Mr Oswald did visit the lunchroom, but it was several minutes before the assassination. There was no post-assassination lunchroom encounter.

 Thumb1:



There was no post-assassination lunchroom encounter.



So, it appears that you believe that they just made up the story about the lunchroom encounter. Is that right? If so, what do you think LHO did immediately after the assassination? Where do you think he went?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:10:23 AM


There was no post-assassination lunchroom encounter.



So, it appears that you believe that they just made up the story about the lunchroom encounter. Is that right?

Yes. There was an encounter with a different man by the rear stairway on a higher floor

Quote
If so, what do you think LHO did immediately after the assassination? Where do you think he went?

I don't know for sure, Mr Collins. But I believe strongly he was out on the front steps when the assassination occurred
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:13:23 AM
In other words Baker was just a dumbass cop and couldn't count floor entries.

A second-floor lunchroom encounter with Mr Oswald was invented, in part, to cover (up) a real encounter with a man (not Mr Oswald) whom Officer Baker caught walking away from the stairway on a higher floor.

That same man was seen running from the back of the building shortly afterwards
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 02:01:40 AM
Yes. There was an encounter with a different man by the rear stairway on a higher floor

I don't know for sure, Mr Collins. But I believe strongly he was out on the front steps when the assassination occurred


A different man than LHO who was supposedly carrying a rifle? And Truly identified him as an employee? So, Baker just let him go? That’s very difficult to swallow. It appears to me that you are extremely desperate to hang onto your belief.

By the way, how do you explain the sighting of LHO by Mrs. Reid?

She testified that she saw LHO walk in through the back door of her office. This door was only approximately 10’ from the door to the second floor lunchroom. And she saw him enter through that door only seconds after the reported encounter that both Truly and Baker testified about.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 02:12:08 AM

A different man than LHO who was supposedly carrying a rifle?

If he heard the two men coming up the stairs, he will have quickly divested himself of the rifle

Quote
And Truly identified him as an employee?

Yes, NB!

Quote
So, Baker just let him go? That’s very difficult to swallow.

Why? If he's lost the rifle, then it's not at all difficult to swallow. And it's what Officer Baker describes in his affidvait

Quote
It appears to me that you are extremely desperate to hang onto your belief.

By the way, how do you explain the sighting of LHO by Mrs. Reid?

She testified that she saw LHO walk in through the back door of her office. This door was only approximately 10’ from the door to the second floor lunchroom. And she saw him enter through that door only seconds after the reported encounter that both Truly and Baker testified about.

Yes, the perfect story to back up the man she immediately answers to. Unfortunately, Ms Geneva Hine puts a dampener on the whole farce

Consider this, Mr Collins:

The three Depository people who talked about seeing Mr Oswald in the Depository after the shooting----------Mr Truly, Ms Reid & Mr Campbell----------just so happen to have been standing together watching the P. Parade just before this.

Out of all the Depository people it might have been, it's the members of this trio. What are the odds, hm?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 04, 2022, 03:10:15 AM
A second-floor lunchroom encounter with Mr Oswald was invented, in part, to cover (up) a real encounter with a man (not Mr Oswald) whom Officer Baker caught walking away from the stairway on a higher floor...That same man was seen running from the back of the building shortly afterwards.

 Oswald--- reported mentioning in the interrogator's notes that he had a coke...Baker wrote that Oswald had a coke [then was apparently compelled to scratch this out] No one else mentions coke anywhere else.
Jarman testified that he went outside with his buds to watch the parade and then some 5 minutes before the parade came by...they decide to go back upstairs...walked all the way to the back of the building took the elevator up to the 5th floor and opened the SE windows and watched it from there [boy that was cutting it close :-\]
In Truly's typed affidavit...he coincidentally mentions the "elevator stuck on the 5th floor".
In testimony---
Quote
Mr. BELIN. When you got to the fifth floor, as I understand it, the west elevator was not there, but when you started up from the first floor, you thought it was on the fifth floor.
Mr. TRULY. No. When I came down from the second floor---from the seventh floor with the officer, I thought I saw Jack Dougherty on the fifth floor, which he would have had plenty of time to move the elevator down and up and get some stock and come back.
Mr. BELIN. But when you got to the fifth floor that west elevator was not there?
Mr. TRULY. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Was it on any floor below the fifth floor?
Mr. TRULY. I didn't look.
Mr. BELIN. As you were climbing up the floors, you did not see it?
Mr. TRULY. No, sir.
 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 04, 2022, 03:17:40 AM
A different man than LHO who was supposedly carrying a rifle? And Truly identified him as an employee? So, Baker just let him go? That’s very difficult to swallow. It appears to me that you are extremely desperate to hang onto your belief.
There was a report that a guy wearing a brown suit coat/slacks was seen coming out the rear of the TSBD carrying a rifle and kept walking north. You must have seen this posted before now.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 12:52:57 PM
If he heard the two men coming up the stairs, he will have quickly divested himself of the rifle

Yes, NB!

Why? If he's lost the rifle, then it's not at all difficult to swallow. And it's what Officer Baker describes in his affidvait

Yes, the perfect story to back up the man she immediately answers to. Unfortunately, Ms Geneva Hine puts a dampener on the whole farce

Consider this, Mr Collins:

The three Depository people who talked about seeing Mr Oswald in the Depository after the shooting----------Mr Truly, Ms Reid & Mr Campbell----------just so happen to have been standing together watching the P. Parade just before this.

Out of all the Depository people it might have been, it's the members of this trio. What are the odds, hm?


Please explain how it is that you believe Geneva Hine “puts a dampener” on this.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:12:13 PM
There was a report that a guy wearing a brown suit coat/slacks was seen coming out the rear of the TSBD carrying a rifle and kept walking north. You must have seen this posted before now.


I do have a vague memory of someone claiming to have seen something like that from up high in a building at quite a distance. But don’t remember any details. I also seem to remember a report by an employee who worked at the other TSBD warehouse who walked south on Houston Street towards Elm Street. This person (if I remember correctly) said that no one came out of the back door and walking north. Sorry, but I don’t have the names or other specifics handy. But since this is your pet theory, I imagine that you have seen this discussed before now.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:13:50 PM

Please explain how it is that you believe Geneva Hine “puts a dampener” on this.

Read her testimony, Mr Collins!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:16:23 PM
Read her testimony, Mr Collins!  Thumb1:

I have Mr. Ford. I actually started a thread a while back about Geneva Hine. Perhaps you need to do a little reading…
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:16:59 PM

I do have a vague memory of someone claiming to have seen something like that from up high in a building at quite a distance. But don’t remember any details. I also seem to remember a report by an employee who worked at the other TSBD warehouse who walked south on Houston Street towards Elm Street. This person (if I remember correctly) said that no one came out of the back door and walking north. Sorry, but I don’t have the names or other specifics handy. But since this is your pet theory, I imagine that you have seen this discussed before now.

And I have a vague memory of posting this on this thread in the last 24 hours. Guess you missed it:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

So much for a man seen running from the building being a 'pet theory'!

How do you explain away the conspiracy-proving information in the above document, Mr Collins?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:17:48 PM
I have Mr. Ford. I actually started a thread a while back about Geneva Hine. Perhaps you need to do a little reading…

Give us the bullet points!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:19:53 PM
Ruth Dean: (page 71 of “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed)


I was standing there with Madie Reese and Billy Lovelady and several other employees. I remember Billy being there because we were joking before the motorcade arrived. Lee Harvey Oswald was not there on the steps, as some people have claimed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:21:03 PM
Give us the bullet points!  Thumb1:

Answer the question. You made the claim.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:29:51 PM
And I have a vague memory of posting this on this thread in the last 24 hours. Guess you missed it:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

So much for a man seen running from the building being a 'pet theory'!

How do you explain away the conspiracy-proving information in the above document, Mr Collins?

 Thumb1:

It reminds me of the experiment that elementary shcool teachers like to demonstrate. They tell a story to one student, then the story is passed around the room from one student to another, and by the time it gets to the last student it has changed quite a bit.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:43:16 PM
Ruth Dean: (page 71 of “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed)


I was standing there with Madie Reese and Billy Lovelady and several other employees. I remember Billy being there because we were joking before the motorcade arrived. Lee Harvey Oswald was not there on the steps, as some people have claimed.

She didn't see Mr Oswald out on the steps as everyone was awaiting the arrival of the motorcade. Your point?

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:47:54 PM
Answer the question. You made the claim.

~Grin~

Seeing as you started a thread on Ms Hine, you obviously saw her as a problem to be neutralized. So you don't need me to walk you through the issue.

But what the heck, I'll play..............

Ms Hine was frantic to find out what had happened. Ms Reid came in. And yet Ms Hine has no memory of finding out about the shooting from Ms Reid.

Did Ms Reid hide under a desk just before Ms Hine re-entered the office area?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:50:03 PM
It reminds me of the experiment that elementary shcool teachers like to demonstrate. They tell a story to one student, then the story is passed around the room from one student to another, and by the time it gets to the last student it has changed quite a bit.

Ah, so your way of coping with the disastrous information contained in this document is to compare the trained law enforcement officers named therein to elementary school students. Got it!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:50:20 PM
She didn't see Mr Oswald out on the steps as everyone was awaiting the arrival of the motorcade. Your point?


She knew him by sight and states that he wasn’t there….
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:52:08 PM
Ah, so your way of coping with the disastrous information contained in this document is to compare the trained law enforcement officers named therein to elementary school students. Got it!  Thumb1:


Not at all. The lesson applies to people of all ages and all walks of life.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:52:43 PM

She knew him by sight and states that he wasn’t there….

And I'm not claiming he was there before the motorcade. He slipped out at the last minute.

Any more strawmen, Mr Collins?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 01:55:44 PM

Not at all. The lesson applies to people of all ages and all walks of life.

So a suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.

 :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 01:59:51 PM
So a suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.

 :D


Where do you come up with this nonsense? I said nothing that even remotely resembles that. Are you going to answer the question about how you believe that Geneva Hine put a dampener on Reid’s account? Or do we just end this conversation on this note?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 02:14:35 PM

Where do you come up with this nonsense? I said nothing that even remotely resembles that. Are you going to answer the question about how you believe that Geneva Hine put a dampener on Reid’s account? Or do we just end this conversation on this note?

Just a minute, Mr Collins. Your attempt to explain away the conspiracy-proving information in the document I posted amounted to: it was just a case of Chinese whispers.

The reason this idea won't wash----------beyond its obvious silliness-----------is that the document makes clear that this ONE conversation (between Insp. Sawyer and the witness) had the following immediate result: "this description was broadcast to all Dallas squad cars".

So I can only restate the logic that you are relying on:

A suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.

And I am happy to follow this up by noting what will already be obvious to everyone reading: your conclusion is no more than a hilariously desperate Warren Gullible cope, of the sort we have learned to recognize so well in these here parts.

**

However! If it would make you feel better, I would be happy to drop one of the hallucinations. This would leave us with the following:

EITHER
A suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just had hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.
OR
A suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just seen hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.

Which of the two options do you feel more comfortable aligning yourself with?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 02:53:32 PM
Just a minute, Mr Collins. Your attempt to explain away the conspiracy-proving information in the document I posted amounted to: it was just a case of Chinese whispers.

The reason this idea won't wash----------beyond its obvious silliness-----------is that the document makes clear that this ONE conversation (between Insp. Sawyer and the witness) had the following immediate result: "this description was broadcast to all Dallas squad cars".

So I can only restate the logic that you are relying on:

A suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.

And I am happy to follow this up by noting what will already be obvious to everyone reading: your conclusion is no more than a hilariously desperate Warren Gullible cope, of the sort we have learned to recognize so well in these here parts.

**

However! If it would make you feel better, I would be happy to drop one of the hallucinations. This would leave us with the following:

EITHER
A suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just had hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.
OR
A suspect description was put out over police radio by a trained law enforcement officer on the strength of his having just hallucinated a conversation with a man who had just seen hallucinated a man with a rifle running from the building.

Which of the two options do you feel more comfortable aligning yourself with?

 Thumb1:


You jump to the most ridiculous conclusions. What appears to have eluded you (even though I gave an elementary school analogy) is that this is sixth-hand information by the time Gordon Shanklin gets it. Seventh-hand information by the time it gets to J. Edgar Hoover. Hence the comparison to the elementary school lesson. You do not include the date and time of the memo. You do not include any information at all that would tend to corroborate what the sixth-hand account says. As far as I know, none of the seven individuals involved in transmitting this account ever confirmed it. And best of all it was supposedly started by an “unidentified individual”. You claim that this is “conspiracy-proving”. It isn’t, its just another bit of early-on misinformation that ended up on a memo to JEH.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 03:04:39 PM
~Grin~

Seeing as you started a thread on Ms Hine, you obviously saw her as a problem to be neutralized. So you don't need me to walk you through the issue.

But what the heck, I'll play..............

Ms Hine was frantic to find out what had happened. Ms Reid came in. And yet Ms Hine has no memory of finding out about the shooting from Ms Reid.

Did Ms Reid hide under a desk just before Ms Hine re-entered the office area?


Sorry, I must have missed this post until now. That’s it?   ???

You obviously haven’t read the thread that I started a while back regarding Geneva Hine. It was started for a completely different reason. You can read it if you are interested.

So, specifically how do you think that this idea you have regarding Geneva Hine’s account put a damper on Mrs. Reid’s account? What are you trying to say? 

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 04, 2022, 03:27:19 PM
It's without question true that the absense of evidence isn't evidence of absense, but the fact that something is theoretically possible doesn't automatically mean that it is practically possible also. Nobody has ever seen a pig fly, but that doesn't mean that they can fly!

The problem for the theory is that Oswald had to be in the 2nd floor lunchroom some 75 seconds after the last shot and the only way to get there would be the stairs. The same stairs where Dorothy Garner stood in close proximity of.

Any other shooter could have just mingled with the crowd and simply walked out later.

What "crowd" was there between the 6th floor and exit that your "other" shooter could have mingled with to escape the building?  Unreal.  Oswald was LESS likely to be noticed than a stranger since he worked in the building and had a legitimate reason to be there.  The simple point here is that we know with absolute certainty that someone on the 6th floor could get off that floor without anyone noticing them because that is what actually happened.  Whether that was Oswald or someone else.  Witnesses placed a shooter on the 6th floor.  That person got off the floor without being seen by anyone.  So all the CTer pedantic mumbo jumbo about Oswald not being able to get down the stairs without being seen is not relevant.  It happened - whether you want to believe it was Oswald or someone else who escaped that floor.  Therefore we know it was not only possible but actually occurred since the shooter got off that floor without being seen.  You are implying that the fantasy conspirator shooter could do something that Oswald for some inexplicable reason could not.  That is absurd.  Nothing precludes Oswald from being the shooter and getting to the lunchroom unnoticed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 04:23:26 PM
What "crowd" was there between the 6th floor and exit that your "other" shooter could have mingled with to escape the building?  Unreal.  Oswald was LESS likely to be noticed than a stranger since he worked in the building and had a legitimate reason to be there.  The simple point here is that we know with absolute certainty that someone on the 6th floor could get off that floor without anyone noticing them because that is what actually happened.  Whether that was Oswald or someone else.  Witnesses placed a shooter on the 6th floor.  That person got off the floor without being seen by anyone.  So all the CTer pedantic mumbo jumbo about Oswald not being able to get down the stairs without being seen is not relevant.  It happened - whether you want to believe it was Oswald or someone else who escaped that floor.  Therefore we know it was not only possible but actually occurred since the shooter got off that floor without being seen.  You are implying that the fantasy conspirator shooter could do something that Oswald for some inexplicable reason could not.  That is absurd.  Nothing precludes Oswald from being the shooter and getting to the lunchroom unnoticed.

What "crowd" was there between the 6th floor and exit that your "other" shooter could have mingled with to escape the building?

Who said anything about "between the 6th floor and exit"?

The simple point here is that we know with absolute certainty that someone on the 6th floor could get off that floor without anyone noticing them because that is what actually happened.  Whether that was Oswald or someone else.

Yes, there's no need to repeat yourself

So all the CTer pedantic mumbo jumbo about Oswald not being able to get down the stairs without being seen is not relevant.

Of course it's relevant. If there was no window of opportunity for Oswald to get down the stairs and arrive at the 2nd floor lunchroom within 75 seconds of the last shot, then you've got nothing.

Adams and Styles left their window at the 4th floor directly after the last shot. To get to the stairs in the back, they only had to cross the 4th floor diagonally where as the shooter on the 6th floor had to run from back to front and then right to left. In other words, there is no way that he could have reached the stairs faster that Adams and Styles. Even more so, as Brennan said that the shooter did not leave the window straight away. Once the girls went down the stairs, Dorothy Garner heard them on the stairs, which places here in close proximity of those stairs. She saw nobody come down from the higher floors but she did observe Truly and a police man come up. By then the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter between Baker and Oswald had already happened.

There is no window of opportunity for Oswald to get down those stairs in that timeframe, which is exactly why the WC tried to discredit Adams and disregarded Garner. You may call it "Pedantic mumbo jumbo" but als long as you can't show there was actually a window of opportunity for Oswald, it's you who is blowing hot air.

You are implying that the fantasy conspirator shooter could do something that Oswald for some inexplicable reason could not.  That is absurd.  Nothing precludes Oswald from being the shooter and getting to the lunchroom unnoticed.

Except for the one thing you conveniently forget; Oswald is the only one who needed to do that within 75 seconds after the last shot. Any other shooter could have done it later. So, yes there is something the precludes Oswald from being the shooter and getting to the lunchroom unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 04, 2022, 04:41:48 PM
What "crowd" was there between the 6th floor and exit that your "other" shooter could have mingled with to escape the building?

Who said anything about "between the 6th floor and exit"?

The simple point here is that we know with absolute certainty that someone on the 6th floor could get off that floor without anyone noticing them because that is what actually happened.  Whether that was Oswald or someone else.

Yes, there's no need to repeat yourself

So all the CTer pedantic mumbo jumbo about Oswald not being able to get down the stairs without being seen is not relevant.

Of course it's relevant. If there was no window of opportunity for Oswald to get down the stairs and arrive at the 2nd floor lunchroom within 75 seconds of the last shot, then you've got nothing.

Adams and Styles left their window at the 4th floor directly after the last shot. To get to the stairs in the back, they only had to cross the 4th floor diagonally where as the shooter on the 6th floor had to run from back to front and then right to left. In other words, there is no way that he could have reached the stairs faster that Adams and Styles. Even more so, as Brennan said that the shooter did not leave the window straight away. Once the girls went down the stairs, Dorothy Garner heard them on the stairs, which places here in close proximity of those stairs. She saw nobody come down from the higher floors but she did observe Truly and a police man come up. By then the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter between Baker and Oswald had already happened.

There is no window of opportunity for Oswald to get down those stairs in that timeframe, which is exactly why the WC tried to discredit Adams and disregarded Garner. You may call it "Pedantic mumbo jumbo" but als long as you can't show there was actually a window of opportunity for Oswald, it's you who is blowing hot air.

You are implying that the fantasy conspirator shooter could do something that Oswald for some inexplicable reason could not.  That is absurd.  Nothing precludes Oswald from being the shooter and getting to the lunchroom unnoticed.

Except for the one thing you conveniently forget; Oswald is the only one who needed to do that within 75 seconds after the last shot. Any other shooter could have done it later. So, yes there is something the precludes Oswald from being the shooter and getting to the lunchroom unnoticed within 75 seconds after the last shot

75 seconds - lol.  As though the timing of these events can be known with scientific precision. Ridiculous.  And there is still nothing to have precluded Oswald from reaching the lunchroom in that timeframe.  Your fantasy shooter presumably has to get out of the entire building - not just down to the 2nd floor in the same timeframe.  But there is not a scintilla of evidence that shows anyone did so.  A stranger beating it down the stranger was much more likely to be remembered than an employee like Oswald who had a legitimate reason to be in the building.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 04, 2022, 04:56:19 PM
75 seconds - lol.  As though the timing of these events can be known with scientific precision. Ridiculous.  And there is still nothing to have precluded Oswald from reaching the lunchroom in that timeframe.  Your fantasy shooter presumably has to get out of the entire building - not just down to the 2nd floor in the same timeframe.

Why does it have to be the same timeframe?

Quote
But there is not a scintilla of evidence that shows anyone did so.

There’s not a scintilla of evidence that Oswald did so either.

Quote
A stranger beating it down the stranger was much more likely to be remembered than an employee like Oswald who had a legitimate reason to be in the building.

Why would it have to be a stranger?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 05:27:11 PM
This reasoning was used for why someone might not have been noticed on the front entrance steps:

Quote
Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.

Yet, it is apparently being ignored when it comes to the northwest inside stairs.

There was no one “monitoring the stairs”. There wasn’t a security checkpoint with retina scanning (like they use these days at U.S. customs for people entering the country). LHO was sneaky. He was reportedly sneaking out of his aunt’s house while everyone was asleep when he wasn’t much older than a toddler. If you think LHO couldn’t have gotten down those stairs in that timeframe without being detected, you are just kidding yourself.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 06:43:56 PM
75 seconds - lol.  As though the timing of these events can be known with scientific precision. Ridiculous.  And there is still nothing to have precluded Oswald from reaching the lunchroom in that timeframe.  Your fantasy shooter presumably has to get out of the entire building - not just down to the 2nd floor in the same timeframe.  But there is not a scintilla of evidence that shows anyone did so.  A stranger beating it down the stranger was much more likely to be remembered than an employee like Oswald who had a legitimate reason to be in the building.

75 seconds - lol.  As though the timing of these events can be known with scientific precision.

Scientific precision. No. It could of course be a few seconds more or less. But the 2nd lunchroom meeting took place when Truly and Baker got there and that wasn't much later than 75 seconds after the last shot.

And there is still nothing to have precluded Oswald from reaching the lunchroom in that timeframe.

There's only nothing as long as you keep ignoring the obvious truth. But then, that's par for course with you, isn't it?

Your fantasy shooter presumably has to get out of the entire building - not just down to the 2nd floor in the same timeframe. 

What makes you say something this stupid?

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 06:49:45 PM
This reasoning was used for why someone might not have been noticed on the front entrance steps:

Yet, it is apparently being ignored when it comes to the northwest inside stairs.

There was no one “monitoring the stairs”. There wasn’t a security checkpoint with retina scanning (like they use these days at U.S. customs for people entering the country). LHO was sneaky. He was reportedly sneaking out of his aunt’s house while everyone was asleep when he wasn’t much older than a toddler. If you think LHO couldn’t have gotten down those stairs in that timeframe without being detected, you are just kidding yourself.

If you think LHO couldn’t have gotten down those stairs in that timeframe without being detected, you are just kidding yourself.

So, why don't you tell us how exactly he could have done that?

How did he manage to cover a distance nearly double in lenght as the distance Adams and Styles had to cover and go down two flights of stairs and still be there before Adams and Styles got to the stairs on the 4th floor?

Or, alternatively, how did he manage to get by Dorothy Garner, who was near enough to the stairs to hear the girls go down and who saw nobody else except Truly and Baker coming up?

Shall I prepare for a long wait?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 06:55:23 PM
If you think LHO couldn’t have gotten down those stairs in that timeframe without being detected, you are just kidding yourself.

So, why don't you tell us how exactly he could have done that?

How did he manage to cover a distance nearly double in lenght as the distance Adams and Styles had to cover and go down two flights of stairs and still be there before Adams and Styles got to the stairs on the 4th floor?

Or, alternatively, how did he manage to get by Dorothy Garner, who was near enough to the stairs to hear the girls go down and who saw nobody else except Truly and Baker coming up?

Shall I prepare for a long wait?


You’ve already said it yourself. And I pointed out that the same reasoning applies to these stairs.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 07:01:20 PM

You’ve already said it yourself. And I pointed out that the same reasoning applies to these stairs.

Oh no, it doesn't work that way. There is a lot of difference between somebody in a crowd, with a lot going on, not seeing a particular individual and one person like Garner who was standing near the stairway of an empty warehouse floor with nothing else going on somehow missing somebody coming down noisy stairs and passing directly by her.

The one living in a fantasy world is you. If this is all you've got, then you've got nothing!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 07:04:02 PM

You jump to the most ridiculous conclusions. What appears to have eluded you (even though I gave an elementary school analogy) is that this is sixth-hand information by the time Gordon Shanklin gets it. Seventh-hand information by the time it gets to J. Edgar Hoover. Hence the comparison to the elementary school lesson. You do not include the date and time of the memo. You do not include any information at all that would tend to corroborate what the sixth-hand account says. As far as I know, none of the seven individuals involved in transmitting this account ever confirmed it. And best of all it was supposedly started by an “unidentified individual”. You claim that this is “conspiracy-proving”. It isn’t, its just another bit of early-on misinformation that ended up on a memo to JEH.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 1
WITNESS TO SAWYER: I saw a man running from the building shortly after the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 30, slender build, 5'10", 165 pounds, carrying what looked to be a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 2
SAWYER TO HENSLEE: The witness says he saw a man running from the building shortly after the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 30, slender build, 5'10", 165 pounds, carrying what looked to be a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 3
SAWYER TO BATCHELOR: The witness said he saw a man running from the building shortly after the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 30, slender build, 5'10", 165 pounds, carrying what looked to be a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 4
BATCHELOR TO DRAIN: The witness said he saw a man running from the window shortly after the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 30, stocky build, 5'11", 150 pounds, carrying what looked to be a Mauser.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 5
DRAIN TO MALLEY: The witness said he saw a man standing at the window during the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 25, stocky build, 5'11", 150 pounds, carrying what looked to be a Mauser.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 6
MALLEY TO SHANKLIN: The witness said he saw a man standing at the window during the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 25, stocky build, 5'11", 150 pounds, carrying what looked to be a Carcano.

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHISPER 7
SHANKLIN TO HOOVER: The witness said he saw a man running from the building shortly after the shooting. He was a white male, approximately 30, slender build, 5'10", 165 pounds, carrying what looked to be a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle.

--
Something like this, Mr Collins?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 07:04:41 PM

Sorry, I must have missed this post until now. That’s it?   ???

You obviously haven’t read the thread that I started a while back regarding Geneva Hine. It was started for a completely different reason. You can read it if you are interested.

So, specifically how do you think that this idea you have regarding Geneva Hine’s account put a damper on Mrs. Reid’s account? What are you trying to say?

Well? Which desk do you suspect Ms Reid hid under?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 07:07:26 PM
What "crowd" was there between the 6th floor and exit that your "other" shooter could have mingled with to escape the building?  Unreal.  Oswald was LESS likely to be noticed than a stranger since he worked in the building and had a legitimate reason to be there.  The simple point here is that we know with absolute certainty that someone on the 6th floor could get off that floor without anyone noticing them because that is what actually happened.

Except it's not:

(https://i.postimg.cc/Y9WNFdcx/Marrion-Baker-Affidavit-description.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 07:10:22 PM
This reasoning was used for why someone might not have been noticed on the front entrance steps:

Yet, it is apparently being ignored when it comes to the northwest inside stairs.

There was no one “monitoring the stairs”.

Ms Dorothy Garner could see them and noticed Mr Truly and Officer Baker come up them---------AFTER Ms Adams & Ms Styles went running down them. Oh dear!

Quote
There wasn’t a security checkpoint with retina scanning (like they use these days at U.S. customs for people entering the country). LHO was sneaky. He was reportedly sneaking out of his aunt’s house while everyone was asleep when he wasn’t much older than a toddler. If you think LHO couldn’t have gotten down those stairs in that timeframe without being detected, you are just kidding yourself.

Lol
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 04, 2022, 09:09:57 PM
Oh no, it doesn't work that way. There is a lot of difference between somebody in a crowd, with a lot going on, not seeing a particular individual and one person like Garner who was standing near the stairway of an empty warehouse floor with nothing else going on somehow missing somebody coming down noisy stairs and passing directly by her.

The one living in a fantasy world is you. If this is all you've got, then you've got nothing!


Not even one of the employees of the TSBD saw LHO around the time of the assassination. Many of them were at or near the area in question near the top of the steps of the entrance to the building at the time of the assassination. None of them saw LHO at that time, none of them.

You have one person within earshot of the the staircase who may or may not have been paying attention to the staircase the entire time in question.
 
So, how is it that you think only one person is less likely to miss noticing LHO at the northwest staircase, than all the people combined who were standing at the entrance of the building. Get real….
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 04, 2022, 10:15:34 PM
Ms Dorothy Garner could see them and noticed Mr Truly and Officer Baker come up them---------AFTER Ms Adams & Ms Styles went running down them. Oh dear!

Lol

Hearsay and without cross-examination.

    "Mr. Bellin was questioning Miss Adams about whether or not she
     saw anyone as she was running down the stairs. Miss Garner,
     Miss Adams' supervisor, stated this morning that after Miss Adams
     went downstairs she (Miss Garner) saw Mr. Truly and the policeman
     come up."

Also Garner doesn't say here she saw Adams & Styles go down. She could have heard Truly and Baker coming up, and mistakenly thought it was the two women on the stairs. Garner might have missed Adams and Styles going down altogether. Styles said it more like minutes, then seconds before they left the window and that they first went to and waited on the passenger elevator.

It's also possible that Garner saw the two girls enter the stairway and missed seeing Baker and Truly passing through the fourth floor a minute or so earlier.  Baker and Truly were back on the fourth, after having gone to the roof. Garner could have seen them then.

None of this was asked of Garner and we don't the context in which she was speaking. We do know what Baker and Truly did (and recreated it in time trials right at the Depository) and that Adams testified she saw Lovelady when she reached the first floor, which would be about 12:34.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 10:55:09 PM
Hearsay and without cross-examination.

    "Mr. Bellin was questioning Miss Adams about whether or not she
     saw anyone as she was running down the stairs. Miss Garner,
     Miss Adams' supervisor, stated this morning that after Miss Adams
     went downstairs she (Miss Garner) saw Mr. Truly and the policeman
     come up."

Also Garner doesn't say here she saw Adams & Styles go down. She could have heard Truly and Baker coming up, and mistakenly thought it was the two women on the stairs. Garner might have missed Adams and Styles going down altogether. Styles said it more like minutes, then seconds before they left the window and that they first went to and waited on the passenger elevator.

It's also possible that Garner saw the two girls enter the stairway and missed seeing Baker and Truly passing through the fourth floor a minute or so earlier.  Baker and Truly were back on the fourth, after having gone to the roof. Garner could have seen them then.

None of this was asked of Garner and we don't the context in which she was speaking. We do know what Baker and Truly did (and recreated it in time trials right at the Depository) and that Adams testified she saw Lovelady when she reached the first floor, which would be about 12:34.

Hearsay and without cross-examination.

This is, by far, the most hypocritical argument for any LN to make. The entire case against Oswald is based on hearsay and no cross-examination of witnesses, yet no LN has any kind of problem with that.

Also Garner doesn't say here she saw Adams & Styles go down. She could have heard Truly and Baker coming up, and mistakenly thought it was the two women on the stairs. Garner might have missed Adams and Styles going down altogether.

LOL... Barry Ernest interviewed Dorothy Garner for his book and she told him the girls left the window directly after the last shot. They ran to the back of the building and Garner followed them. Although she did not see them go down, she did hear them on the stairs.

Styles said it more like minutes, then seconds before they left the window and that they first went to and waited on the passenger elevator.

Styles gave several different versions over time, but when pressed she admitted she could be wrong and Adams may well be right. Also, facts don't lie and in this case Styles was photographed in front of the front entrance of the TSBD before it was locked down. She could not have been there if she and Adams did not leave the 4th floor directly after the shots. Besides, Garner saw Truly and a police man come up and that happened within less than a minute after the shots. So, where did the two girls go to if they didn't go down the stairs prior to Truly and Baker coming up?

None of this was asked of Garner and we don't the context in which she was speaking.

Actually, it was asked of her, by Barry Ernest

We do know what Baker and Truly did (and recreated it in time trials right at the Depository)

Yes, we do know what Baker and Truly did (because unlike Adams they were part of the time trails), which is how we know that the two men must have arrived at the 4th floor within a minute of the shots. And we know from Garner that the girls had already gone down by then.

and that Adams testified she saw Lovelady when she reached the first floor, which would be about 12:34.

According to Barry Ernest, Adams wasn't aware this was in her testimony and she denied saying it. Lovelady and Shelley both denied seeing Adams there (they were not even in the building at that time) and it's a physical impossibility for this to have happened given the fact that Styles was photographed at the front of the building a minute or two later. There is no way these women could have gone down the stairs, leave the building at the loading dock at the back, cross the railway yard and the length of the TSBD building in less than two minutes.

The alleged Lovelady sighting never took place. It was the WC's way of discrediting Adams who they needed to get out of the way to give Oswald a window of opportunity to go down the stairs. The whole thing is a bogus as can be and anybody with a functional brain will see it for what it is.

The bottom line is that you can not question what Dorothy Garner said simply because the WC's investigation was pathetic and they ignored her completely. If the WC had done a better job, than just place a phone call to Garner, we might have found out more of the truth about the stairs matter. But then, that's exactly what the WC wasn't interested in. Why else would they leave Adams out of the recreation?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 04, 2022, 11:00:19 PM
Hearsay and without cross-examination.

    "Mr. Bellin was questioning Miss Adams about whether or not she
     saw anyone as she was running down the stairs. Miss Garner,
     Miss Adams' supervisor, stated this morning that after Miss Adams
     went downstairs she (Miss Garner) saw Mr. Truly and the policeman
     come up."

Exactly-------------the WC were afraid to look any more closely into this bombshell information from Ms Garner.

Quote
Also Garner doesn't say here she saw Adams & Styles go down. She could have heard Truly and Baker coming up, and mistakenly thought it was the two women on the stairs.

Except she saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up. But nice try!  Thumb1:

Quote
Garner might have missed Adams and Styles going down altogether. Styles said it more like minutes, then seconds before they left the window and that they first went to and waited on the passenger elevator.

You are cherry-picking the bits you like from what Ms Styles has actually said in recent years

Quote
It's also possible that Garner saw the two girls enter the stairway and missed seeing Baker and Truly passing through the fourth floor a minute or so earlier.  Baker and Truly were back on the fourth, after having gone to the roof. Garner could have seen them then.

Nope---she saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up. But nice try!  Thumb1:

Quote
None of this was asked of Garner

Exactly!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 04, 2022, 11:18:19 PM
75 seconds - lol.  As though the timing of these events can be known with scientific precision.

Scientific precision. No. It could of course be a few seconds more or less. But the 2nd lunchroom meeting took place when Truly and Baker got there and that wasn't much later than 75 seconds after the last shot.

And there is still nothing to have precluded Oswald from reaching the lunchroom in that timeframe.

There's only nothing as long as you keep ignoring the obvious truth. But then, that's par for course with you, isn't it?

Your fantasy shooter presumably has to get out of the entire building - not just down to the 2nd floor in the same timeframe. 

What makes you say something this stupid?

How about this?  Explain to us how you think your fantasy shooter on the 6th floor got out of the building unnoticed and how long it took him instead of deflecting with insults.  It's unclear why you believe Oswald - who worked in the building - could not have done this but some stranger could.  Just making vague references to "75 seconds" and "crowds" don't do that.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 11:26:16 PM
How about this?  Explain to us how you think your fantasy shooter on the 6th floor got out of the building unnoticed and how long it took him instead of deflecting with insults.  It's unclear why you believe Oswald - who worked in the building - could not have done this but some stranger could.  Just making vague references to "75 seconds" and "crowds" don't do that.

Trying to explain anything to you has frequently proven to be a complete waste of time as you will either reject or ignore it anyway. So, why don't you try to figure it out by yourself.

But I will tell you this; unless you believe the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter didn't happen, Oswald must have been on the second floor within roughly 75 seconds after the last shot. He would not have had the luxury and ability of being able to hang around on the 6th floor and mingle with the many law enforcement officers that flooded the floor, pretending to be one of them and simply walking away. Oswald, or any other TSBD employee, on the 6th floor would have stood out in much the same way Oswald did to Baker on the 2nd floor.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 04, 2022, 11:32:28 PM
Trying to explain anything to you has frequently proven to be a complete waste of time as you will either reject or ignore it anyway. So, why don't you try to figure it out by yourself.

But I will tell you this; unless you believe the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter didn't happen, Oswald must have been on the second floor within roughly 75 seconds after the last shot. He would not have had the luxury and ability of being able to hang around on the 6th floor and mingle with the many law enforcement officers that flooded the floor, pretending to be one of them and simply walking away. Oswald, or any other TSBD employee, on the 6th floor would have stood out in much the same way Oswald did to Baker on the 2nd floor.

You want me to figure out your theory?  Wow.  You must have a lot of confidence in it if you won't even tell us what you are suggesting.  There is absolutely nothing that precludes Oswald from being the shooter and being in the lunchroom within the relevant timeframe to encounter Baker.  How long do you think it takes to walk down a few floors of stairs?  You are really suggesting that the assassin hung around on the 6th floor and waited for law enforcement to arrive to somehow blend in!  That is one of the most baseless and bizarre claims in history.  Not a single person ever claimed to have encountered this individual.  Honestly, I would be embarrassed to peddle this weak nonsense. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 04, 2022, 11:44:05 PM
Exactly-------------the WC were afraid to look any more closely into this bombshell information from Ms Garner.

Except she saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up. But nice try!  Thumb1:

You are cherry-picking the bits you like from what Ms Styles has actually said in recent years

Nope---she saw Mr Truly and the policeman come up. But nice try!  Thumb1:

Exactly!  Thumb1:

It's hearsay. Garner apparently overheard Belin taking about the two men "coming up" and could have innocently incorporated that into when she actually saw them, when they returned from the roof. For that matter, Shroud could have added that sweetener. Neither Garner nor Shroud might have known about the return of Baker and Truly to the fourth floor, which one or both could have assumed was the only time they were on the floor.

The Shrould Letter just isn't that definitive; it has no times or specific places or a witness who saw Garner. Rather than go with your imaginative take on pure hearsay, go with the witnesses who were sworn in and who participated in the time trials. Adams would have her broke her neck trying to duplicate her fanciful madcap dash in three-inch heels. She would have reached the parking before the policeman who turned her back.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 11:56:52 PM
You want me to figure out your theory?  Wow.  You must have a lot of confidence in it if you won't even tell us what you are suggesting.  There is absolutely nothing that precludes Oswald from being the shooter and being in the lunchroom within the relevant timeframe to encounter Baker.  How long do you think it takes to walk down a few floors of stairs?  You are really suggesting that the assassin hung around on the 6th floor and waited for law enforcement to arrive to somehow blend in!  That is one of the most baseless and bizarre claims in history.  Not a single person ever claimed to have encountered this individual.  Honestly, I would be embarrassed to peddle this weak nonsense.

There is absolutely nothing that precludes Oswald from being the shooter and being in the lunchroom within the relevant timeframe to encounter Baker.

This exactly what I was talking about. It has been explained to you over and over again and still you ignore the information and come up with the same bogus claim

How long do you think it takes to walk down a few floors of stairs?

You forgot the part where Oswald had to run in a straight line to the back of the building and then run the same distance from east to west to get to the stairs. Or are you under the impression that Oswald was standing next to the stairs entrance when the shots were fired?

You are really suggesting that the assassin hung around on the 6th floor and waited for law enforcement to arrive to somehow blend in!

I know by now that it's a difficult concept for you to grasp, but I am suggesting nothing. I'm merely considering possible options. Are you of the opinion that something like that could not have happened? Are you really so naive? Hiding in the open is very often the best option.

That is one of the most baseless and bizarre claims in history.  Not a single person ever claimed to have encountered this individual.

Here you go again.... Nobody claimed to have encountered Oswald on the 6th floor either. So what? The whole purpose of hiding in a crowd is not to get noticed.

Honestly, I would be embarrassed to peddle this weak nonsense.

As peddling weak nonsense goes, you should be embarrassed every day of the week, but being a Trump follower you probably won't as peddling nonsense is par for the course for that cult.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Rick Plant on August 05, 2022, 12:18:38 AM
You mean the same Frazier who was arrested later that day for possible complicity and who Fritz demanded he'd sign a pre-written confession, despite the fact that he was standing on the steps and appears in films and photos?

Until this day nobody has ever positively identified the person they now call PM. He was clearly there, so why did nobody confirm who it was? Could it be they were all focused on other things and simply didn't observe him? Many people simply do not notice things or people that are close to them and many also simply do not recollect information.

The employees were focused on watching the parade and had their backs at the Prayer Man. So, they clearly weren't paying attention to who was behind them on that day. Which is why the Prayer Man has never been identified. 

When people are out watching something they aren't looking around observing to see who is behind them.   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 12:23:10 AM
It's hearsay. Garner apparently overheard Belin taking about the two men "coming up" and could have innocently incorporated that into when she actually saw them, when they returned from the roof. For that matter, Shroud could have added that sweetener.

Lol

Quote
Neither Garner nor Shroud might have known about the return of Baker and Truly to the fourth floor, which one or both could have assumed was the only time they were on the floor.

The Shrould Letter just isn't that definitive; it has no times or specific places or a witness who saw Garner. Rather than go with your imaginative take on pure hearsay, go with the witnesses who were sworn in and who participated in the time trials. Adams would have her broke her neck trying to duplicate her fanciful madcap dash in three-inch heels. She would have reached the parking before the policeman who turned her back.

~Grin~

Translation: Thank God they never called Garner, otherwise I wouldn't be able to do this pseudo-logical-exploration thing I always do with uncongenial evidence
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 12:26:25 AM
How about this?  Explain to us how you think your fantasy shooter on the 6th floor got out of the building unnoticed

The shooter did not get out of the building unnoticed:

(https://i.postimg.cc/Y9WNFdcx/Marrion-Baker-Affidavit-description.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 05, 2022, 12:50:44 AM
Lol

~Grin~

Translation: Thank God they never called Garner, otherwise I wouldn't be able to do this pseudo-logical-exploration thing I always do with uncongenial evidence

That's it right there. Others who were sworn in, including Adams who signed her testimony transcript, recount the timeline determined by Belin.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 05, 2022, 12:52:56 AM
It's hearsay. Garner apparently overheard Belin taking about the two men "coming up" and could have innocently incorporated that into when she actually saw them, when they returned from the roof. For that matter, Shroud could have added that sweetener. Neither Garner nor Shroud might have known about the return of Baker and Truly to the fourth floor, which one or both could have assumed was the only time they were on the floor.

The Shrould Letter just isn't that definitive; it has no times or specific places or a witness who saw Garner. Rather than go with your imaginative take on pure hearsay, go with the witnesses who were sworn in and who participated in the time trials. Adams would have her broke her neck trying to duplicate her fanciful madcap dash in three-inch heels. She would have reached the parking before the policeman who turned her back.


Garner apparently overheard Belin taking about the two men "coming up" and could have innocently incorporated that into when she actually saw them, when they returned from the roof.

Nice theory, except for the fact that Garner never met Belin. Barry Ernest asked her and she said no.

Neither Garner nor Shroud might have known about the return of Baker and Truly to the fourth floor, which one or both could have assumed was the only time they were on the floor.

Stop talking out of the back of head! And who is Shroud?

The Shrould Letter

Huh?

The Stroud letter (you really need to pay more attention!) doesn't provide details simply because it was not it's purpose to do so. Martha Stroud simply informed Rankin about what Garner had said. It was up to Rankin to find out the details. He never did. Instead he just dumped the letter in Adams' file and ignored it.

go with the witnesses who were sworn in and who participated in the time trials

You mean the ones selected to tell the story the WC wanted to hear?

Adams would have her broke her neck trying to duplicate her fanciful madcap dash in three-inch heels.

Are you really this desperate? Hilarious....  :D

She would have reached the parking before the policeman who turned her back.

What is this word salad? How can a policeman turn her back if she got to the parking before he got there? You are not making sense.

The actual facts are that Adams and Styles left the building at the back, walked towards the railway yard, where a policeman told them to go back into the building. They continued walking towards Elm street, turned left and walked towards the front entrance of the TSBD, where Styles was photographed at a time she could only have been there if she and Adams left the 4th floor directly after the last shot.

But why am I telling you this. If you believe a policeman turned Adams and Styles back at a parking, you are clearly clueless about the actual evidence.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 05, 2022, 12:56:10 AM
That's it right there. Others who were sworn in, including Adams who signed her testimony transcript, recount the timeline determined by Belin.

Except for the fact that in their report the WC gave itself the right to edit testimony, Adams denied to Barry Ernest that she ever said anything about Lovelady and Shelley, both men denied seeing her, Belin was full of .... , and the version he came up is physically impossible and has already been debunked.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 05, 2022, 01:02:09 AM
The employees were focused on watching the parade and had their backs at the Prayer Man. So, they clearly weren't paying attention to who was behind them on that day. Which is why the Prayer Man has never been identified. 

When people are out watching something they aren't looking around observing to see who is behind them.

Or as Satchel Paige said: 'Never look back. Somethin' might be gainin'
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 01:31:53 AM
How about this?  Explain to us how you think your fantasy shooter on the 6th floor got out of the building unnoticed and how long it took him instead of deflecting with insults. 

Yet another case of “my unsubstantiated speculation automatically wins unless you come up with a different theory and substantiate it”.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 01:36:19 AM
It's hearsay. Garner apparently overheard Belin taking about the two men "coming up" and could have innocently incorporated that into when she actually saw them, when they returned from the roof.

“Could have”. LOL.

Quote
The Shrould Letter just isn't that definitive; it has no times or specific places or a witness who saw Garner.

Compare that to the Oswald story, which has ZERO to substantiate it.

Quote
Adams would have her broke her neck trying to duplicate her fanciful madcap dash in three-inch heels.

It’s a constant source of amazement how omniscient Nutters think they are.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 01:39:30 AM
That's it right there. Others who were sworn in, including Adams who signed her testimony transcript, recount the timeline determined by Belin.

 BS:

Adams didn’t “recount” Belin’s contrived timeline in her alleged testimony.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 02:03:57 AM
That's it right there. Others who were sworn in, including Adams who signed her testimony transcript, recount the timeline determined by Belin.

'The WC's decision not to seek clarification from Ms Styles or Ms Garner is justified by the fact that the WC, which had correctly determined the timeline, decided not to seek clarification from Ms Styles or Ms Garner'

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 05, 2022, 02:09:52 AM
The noise can be minimized by someone light on his feet

LOL  You never ran down those stairs.

What do anyone else's capabilities have do to with Oswald's
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 05, 2022, 02:25:45 AM
What do anyone else's capabilities have do to with Oswald's

What capabilities of Oswald are you talking about and how do you know he had those capabilities in the first place?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 05, 2022, 12:54:19 PM
Too bad Dorothy Garner and some other women on the 4th floor did not see him passing by.

Too bad nobody saw Oswald outside
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 01:11:17 PM
About 73 other people (besides LHO) worked in that building at that time. Not one of them said that they saw LHO at the time of the assassination. And, not one of them said that they were on the sixth floor at that time either. Is this just a coincidence or what?    ???
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 05, 2022, 01:16:51 PM
Not a valid %s URL
What capabilities of Oswald are you talking about and how do you know he had those capabilities in the first place?

His obvious physical fitness
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 01:19:56 PM
About 73 other people (besides LHO) worked in that building at that time. Not one of them said that they saw LHO at the time of the assassination. And, not one of them said that they were on the sixth floor at that time either. Is this just a coincidence or what?    ???

 ::)

Not one of them said they were in the domino room at that time either.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 01:47:38 PM
::)

Not one of them said they were in the domino room at that time either.


No one said that they saw someone who looked like LHO firing a rifle out of the window of the domino room either.   ::)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 05, 2022, 01:54:02 PM
::)

Not one of them said they were in the domino room at that time either.

Not one of them said they saw shooters in Dealey Plaza either
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 05, 2022, 02:59:29 PM
There is absolutely nothing that precludes Oswald from being the shooter and being in the lunchroom within the relevant timeframe to encounter Baker.

This exactly what I was talking about. It has been explained to you over and over again and still you ignore the information and come up with the same bogus claim

How long do you think it takes to walk down a few floors of stairs?

You forgot the part where Oswald had to run in a straight line to the back of the building and then run the same distance from east to west to get to the stairs. Or are you under the impression that Oswald was standing next to the stairs entrance when the shots were fired?

You are really suggesting that the assassin hung around on the 6th floor and waited for law enforcement to arrive to somehow blend in!

I know by now that it's a difficult concept for you to grasp, but I am suggesting nothing. I'm merely considering possible options. Are you of the opinion that something like that could not have happened? Are you really so naive? Hiding in the open is very often the best option.

That is one of the most baseless and bizarre claims in history.  Not a single person ever claimed to have encountered this individual.

Here you go again.... Nobody claimed to have encountered Oswald on the 6th floor either. So what? The whole purpose of hiding in a crowd is not to get noticed.

Honestly, I would be embarrassed to peddle this weak nonsense.

As peddling weak nonsense goes, you should be embarrassed every day of the week, but being a Trump follower you probably won't as peddling nonsense is par for the course for that cult.

The same tired contrarian nonsense.  Going round and round in circles of rambling commentary, deflection, and insults.  You have suggested that Oswald couldn't get from the 6th floor to the lunchroom unnoticed.  When it was pointed out to you that SOMEONE on the 6th floor did escape unnoticed, you became hysterical suggesting the following as a possible explanation for why this fantasy person could do something that you claim Oswald could not:

"[Oswald] would not have had the luxury and ability of being able to hang around on the 6th floor and mingle with the many law enforcement officers that flooded the floor, pretending to be one of them and simply walking away. Oswald, or any other TSBD employee, on the 6th floor would have stood out in much the same way Oswald did to Baker on the 2nd floor."

This is one of the most baseless and laughable claims in the history of this forum.  There is zero evidence that anyone was found hanging around on the 6th floor claiming to be a law enforcement officer.  Baker and Truly did not encounter any such person when they arrived on the floor.   Don't you think someone might mention that they encountered on the floor from which the shots were fired?  You also suggest a complete stranger would be less noticeable than Oswald who was an employee of the TSBD.  Unreal.  It's understandable why you are running away from your own theory, suggestion, or whatever you are calling this baseless nonsense.  You should apologize to intelligent people on this forum for wasting their time. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 03:33:44 PM
About 73 other people (besides LHO) worked in that building at that time. Not one of them said that they saw LHO at the time of the assassination. And, not one of them said that they were on the sixth floor at that time either. Is this just a coincidence or what?    ???

Amidst your usual nonsense, Mr Collins, you inadvertently stumble upon an extremely important point.

Mr Bonnie Ray Williams testified that several of the guys had agreed beforehand to watch the P. Parade from the sixth floor. And yet not a single one of them ended up watching the P. Parade from the sixth floor. Every other in-use floor in the building had employees at windows, yet not the sixth--which offered the best view of all. What an amazing stroke of luck for evil Mr Oswald!

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 05, 2022, 03:36:00 PM

Compare that to the Oswald story, which has ZERO to substantiate it. It’s a constant source of amazement how omniscient Nutters think they are.
Remember this one?----
Quote
If you're suggesting a conspiracy then prove it, otherwise we will just have to rely on the evidence.
JohnM----
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1266.msg30340.html#msg30340

More like... If you're suggesting a conspiracy then prove it, otherwise we will just have to rely on what we're told  :D

I have been trying to reconcile the location of the elevators up to and after the parade based on the description [which floor were they at] given by Roy Truly and the one given by James Jarman.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 05, 2022, 03:42:33 PM
Amidst your usual nonsense, Mr Collins, you inadvertently stumble upon an extremely important point.

Mr Bonnie Ray Williams testified that several of the guys had agreed beforehand to watch the P. Parade from the sixth floor. And yet not a single one of them ended up watching the P. Parade from the sixth floor. Every other in-use floor in the building had employees at windows, yet not the sixth--which offered the best view of all. What an amazing stroke of luck for evil Mr Oswald!

 Thumb1:

Again, why would this stroke of "luck" be limited to Oswald?  We know someone was on the 6th floor.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window at the moment of the assassination.  Whether that was Oswald or someone else, the "logic" of your post applies to whomever was there.  It isn't limited to Oswald.   It's amazing how Oswald is excluded from doing the very things they suggest could be done by others.   The fantasy conspirators apparently possessed some magical abilities that Oswald did not.  Although having no legitimate purpose for being in the TSBD (as Oswald did as an employee) they were able to enter the building unnoticed carrying a rifle, plant evidence on the 6th floor, and escape unnoticed.  All things we are told by CTers that Oswald couldn't have done.  It was apparently possible for others to do these things but not Oswald.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 03:49:45 PM
I have been trying to reconcile the location of the elevators up to and after the parade based on the description [which floor were they at] given by Roy Truly and the one given by James Jarman.

Potentially very N.B.!

(https://i.postimg.cc/4NHq8hDx/Bonnie-Ray-Williams-elevator.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 03:55:25 PM
Remember this one?----JohnM----
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1266.msg30340.html#msg30340

More like... If you're suggesting a conspiracy then prove it, otherwise we will just have to rely on what we're told  :D

I have been trying to reconcile the location of the elevators up to and after the parade based on the description [which floor were they at] given by Roy Truly and the one given by James Jarman.


Take a look at Jack Dougherty’s statement in CE-1381:


 https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf)
 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 05, 2022, 03:55:59 PM
  Martin Weidmann on August 04, 2022, 08:25:45 PM---
   
Quote
What capabilities of Oswald are you talking about and how do you know he had those capabilities in the first place?
His obvious physical fitness
He worked out?  :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 04:03:04 PM
Amidst your usual nonsense, Mr Collins, you inadvertently stumble upon an extremely important point.

Mr Bonnie Ray Williams testified that several of the guys had agreed beforehand to watch the P. Parade from the sixth floor. And yet not a single one of them ended up watching the P. Parade from the sixth floor. Every other in-use floor in the building had employees at windows, yet not the sixth--which offered the best view of all. What an amazing stroke of luck for evil Mr Oswald!

 Thumb1:


The guys had just finished working on the fifth floor a few days beforehand. It isn’t surprising that they would choose to go there. The photos that I remember seeing of the fifth floor (when they posed for their positions for the investigators) showed a much less cluttered area. Perhaps that is one reason that they chose it? Anyway, yes it was a stroke of good luck for LHO. Glad we agree on something….   ;)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 04:16:34 PM

The guys had just finished working on the fifth floor a few days beforehand. It isn’t surprising that they would choose to go there. The photos that I remember seeing of the fifth floor (when they posed for their positions for the investigators) showed a much less cluttered area. Perhaps that is one reason that they chose it?

Definitely the reason. Next to impossible to get at one of those south-facing windows on the sixth floor---------

(https://i.postimg.cc/VkXbYDC0/TSBD-sixth.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/Xr7vLKxn)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 05, 2022, 04:25:50 PM

Take a look at Jack Dougherty’s statement in CE-1381: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf)
Like where it says----
 
Quote
At the time President Kennedy was shot I was at a
point about 10 feet from the elevator on the fifth floor of
the Texas School Book Depository Building. I was alone at
this time.
What about those guys hanging out at the SE corner....no one saw each other? It seems like there was some mystery fog everywhere at this time. Also...were there not 2 elevators...where was the other one?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 04:27:03 PM
Again, why would this stroke of "luck" be limited to Oswald?

You do well to put the word "luck" in scare quotes, Mr Smith!  Thumb1:

If the absence of any employees on the sixth floor benefited a Lone Nut gunman, then he got incredibly lucky (no scare quotes needed).
But if the assassination was a planned conspiracy, then the idea this "luck" (scare quotes needed) would have been left to chance is absurd.

Furthermore!

A Lone Nut employee-gunman would have been suicidally stupid to choose the sixth floor, for he would have known the high likelihood that he wouldn't have the floor to himself. He would have chosen the rarely-visited seventh floor:

(https://i.postimg.cc/nr6g1HTz/Seventh-floor-tsbd.png) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 04:29:55 PM
Like where it says----
  What about those guys hanging out at the SE corner....no one saw each other? It seems like there was some mystery fog everywhere at this time. Also...were there not 2 elevators...where was the other one?

I wouldn't waste my time, Mr Freeman. When Mr Dougherty says something that doesn't jibe well with the official story, the Warren Gullibles dismiss him as a confused m0ron. When an elevator needs moving, they give you a link to his unimpeachable testimony.

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 04:38:07 PM
No one said that they saw someone who looked like LHO firing a rifle out of the window of the domino room either.   ::)

Or out of the sixth floor window either. At least not until Howard Brennan’s “change of heart” many days later.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 04:39:52 PM
Not one of them said they saw shooters in Dealey Plaza either

Sounds like most of us agree that it doesn’t mean a damn thing that nobody reported seeing somebody somewhere.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 04:46:45 PM
The same tired contrarian nonsense.  Going round and round in circles of rambling commentary, deflection, and insults.

That’s an accurate description of “Richard Smith”.

Quote
There is zero evidence that anyone was found hanging around on the 6th floor claiming to be a law enforcement officer.

There is ZERO evidence that Oswald came bounding down the stairs within the first 75 seconds, but that doesn’t stop you from not only claiming it’s possible, but that it actually happened.

Quote

You also suggest a complete stranger would be less noticeable than Oswald who was an employee of the TSBD.

When did Martin say anything about a “complete stranger”, Strawman “Smith”?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 05, 2022, 04:57:35 PM
Again, why would this stroke of "luck" be limited to Oswald?  We know someone was on the 6th floor.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the window at the moment of the assassination.  Whether that was Oswald or someone else, the "logic" of your post applies to whomever was there. 

Oswald is the only one who is required to have done it on the back stairs within 75 seconds, when Adams and Styles were on the staircase and in view and earshot of Garner, Dougherty, and the three amigos.

That’s the difference that you keep ignoring. What the hell is wrong with you?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 05:01:58 PM
Like where it says----
  What about those guys hanging out at the SE corner....no one saw each other? It seems like there was some mystery fog everywhere at this time. Also...were there not 2 elevators...where was the other one?

I tried to help you. You are welcome.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 05:09:26 PM
The prestigious corner office was quite cluttered. Unless, of course one had bad intent and wanted to be hidden from any potential others on the floor...

(https://i.vgy.me/1iguQ4.gif)


The workers who selected the fifth floor also apparently liked the southeast corner office. But they knew the one on the floor above was cluttered...
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 05, 2022, 05:13:50 PM
Oswald is the only one who is required to have done it on the back stairs within 75 seconds, when Adams and Styles were on the staircase and in view and earshot of Garner, Dougherty, and the three amigos.

That’s the difference that you keep ignoring. What the hell is wrong with you?

You're adding so much on to the Stroud Letter, Garner can now see Adams and Styles on the staircase and can only hear them going down the stairs rather than Baker and Truly coming up.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 05:46:27 PM
Or out of the sixth floor window either. At least not until Howard Brennan’s “change of heart” many days later.

That’s not true. Brennan gave a reasonably close description at the scene. And singled out LHO at the lineup later that evening as looking like the gunman. (And that’s what I said that you disagreed with.)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 05, 2022, 06:13:23 PM
The same tired contrarian nonsense.  Going round and round in circles of rambling commentary, deflection, and insults.  You have suggested that Oswald couldn't get from the 6th floor to the lunchroom unnoticed.  When it was pointed out to you that SOMEONE on the 6th floor did escape unnoticed, you became hysterical suggesting the following as a possible explanation for why this fantasy person could do something that you claim Oswald could not:

"[Oswald] would not have had the luxury and ability of being able to hang around on the 6th floor and mingle with the many law enforcement officers that flooded the floor, pretending to be one of them and simply walking away. Oswald, or any other TSBD employee, on the 6th floor would have stood out in much the same way Oswald did to Baker on the 2nd floor."

This is one of the most baseless and laughable claims in the history of this forum.  There is zero evidence that anyone was found hanging around on the 6th floor claiming to be a law enforcement officer.  Baker and Truly did not encounter any such person when they arrived on the floor.   Don't you think someone might mention that they encountered on the floor from which the shots were fired?  You also suggest a complete stranger would be less noticeable than Oswald who was an employee of the TSBD.  Unreal.  It's understandable why you are running away from your own theory, suggestion, or whatever you are calling this baseless nonsense.  You should apologize to intelligent people on this forum for wasting their time.

There is zero evidence that anyone was found hanging around on the 6th floor claiming to be a law enforcement officer.

Of course not, fool. That would be the point of hiding in the open. There were so many difference law enforcement agents on that floor that anybody who looked similar to them would not be noticed. Do you, rather stupidly, think that those officers were going round asking eachother's credentials?

Besides, there's also zero evidence that Oswald ran down the stairs after the last shot.

Baker and Truly did not encounter any such person when they arrived on the floor.   Don't you think someone might mention that they encountered on the floor from which the shots were fired?

What in the world are you rambling on about? You seem to be losing it completely! Do you think Baker and Truly searched every floor completely? If not, how would they possibly see somebody hiding behind some boxes at another part of the building? Geeez... does everything need to be explained to you?

You also suggest a complete stranger would be less noticeable than Oswald who was an employee of the TSBD.  Unreal.

Try to understand this; after the shooting it didn't take long for the 6th floor to be flooded with all sorts of officers from different agencies, who were all "complete strangers" there!

You should apologize to intelligent people on this forum for wasting their time.

Which only means that I should never have to apologize to you.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 05, 2022, 06:17:48 PM
That’s not true. Brennan gave a reasonably close description at the scene. And singled out LHO at the lineup later that evening as looking like the gunman. (And that’s what I said that you disagreed with.)
You'll notice that the behavior of Brennan - e.g., not immediately identifying the shooter as Oswald - is evidence that calls into question his credibility but the behavior of Oswald that calls into question his credibility or innocence is always dismissed. Always meaning: always.

So the rule in "Oswald defender land" is that the behavior of those implicating Oswald can be used against them but the behavior of Oswald implicating himself cannot be used against him. Because the latter behavior is suddenly not evidence. It's evidence when it helps him but not evidence when it hurts him.

The efforts by the Oswald defenders to clear him, the double standards, the intellectual inconsistency, the shamelessness is sometimes remarkable.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 05, 2022, 06:18:12 PM
You're adding so much on to the Stroud Letter, Garner can now see Adams and Styles on the staircase and can only hear them going down the stairs rather than Baker and Truly coming up.

Could it be you have not read what Dorothy Garner told Barry Ernest?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 05, 2022, 06:19:30 PM
You'll notice that the behavior of Brennan - e.g., not immediately identifying the shooter as Oswald - is evidence that calls into question his credibility but the behavior of Oswald that calls into question his credibility or innocence is always dismissed. Always meaning: always.

So the rule in "Oswald defender land" is that the behavior of those implicating Oswald can be used against them but the behavior of Oswald implicating himself cannot be used against him. Because the latter behavior is suddenly not evidence. It's evidence when it helps him but not evidence when it hurts him.

The efforts by the Oswald defenders to clear him, the double standards, the intellectual inconsistency, the shamelessness is sometimes remarkable.

Ah stop whining, cry baby
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 05, 2022, 06:36:45 PM
You'll notice that the behavior of Brennan - e.g., not immediately identifying the shooter as Oswald - is evidence that calls into question his credibility but the behavior of Oswald that calls into question his credibility or innocence is always dismissed. Always meaning: always.

So the rule in "Oswald defender land" is that the behavior of those implicating Oswald can be used against them but the behavior of Oswald implicating himself cannot be used against him. Because the latter behavior is suddenly not evidence. It's evidence when it helps him but not evidence when it hurts him.

The efforts by the Oswald defenders to clear him, the double standards, the intellectual inconsistency, the shamelessness is sometimes remarkable.


 Thumb1:


I was watching a documentary about WWII recently. And they showed a statement from General Douglas MacArthur about FDR which went something like:

“He never tells the truth when a lie will suffice.”

Of course, that’s just political jockeying nonsense between the General and FDR.

But, I couldn’t help but think how well that actually applies to LHO. It’s a pity that the naysayers don’t seem to realize that.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 10:33:02 PM
The prestigious corner office was quite cluttered. Unless, of course one had bad intent and wanted to be hidden from any potential others on the floor...

(https://i.vgy.me/1iguQ4.gif)


The workers who selected the fifth floor also apparently liked the southeast corner office. But they knew the one on the floor above was cluttered...

--"Hey, let's not go up to 6 after all. Let's go to 5"
--"Why?"
--"There's some boxes at one of the seven windows on 6."
--"Ugh, you're right. I couldn't concentrate on the parade knowing there's a bunch of boxes at another window. Actually I'd prefer 5 also on account of I'm scared of heights"
--"Thank you for saying that. Me too. And I really miss 5, we had so many good times laying the floor there. 6 is yucky."
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 10:35:11 PM

 Thumb1:


I was watching a documentary about WWII recently. And they showed a statement from General Douglas MacArthur about FDR which went something like:

“He never tells the truth when a lie will suffice.”

Of course, that’s just political jockeying nonsense between the General and FDR.

But, I couldn’t help but think how well that actually applies to LHO. It’s a pity that the naysayers don’t seem to realize that.

Here are just some of the fine, honest and totally uncorrupt people Mr Oswald was up against

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 10:37:25 PM
So the rule in "Oswald defender land" is that the behavior of those implicating Oswald can be used against them

But no witness implicates Mr Oswald as the sixth-floor shooter. Not a one!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 05, 2022, 10:54:19 PM
That’s not true. Brennan gave a reasonably close description at the scene.

What description did Mr Brennan give at the scene, Mr Collins?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 05, 2022, 11:46:40 PM
Here are just some of the fine, honest and totally uncorrupt people Mr Oswald was up against

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Quote
'Not a racist'
But some of those who knew Wade say the truth is more complicated than Watkins' summation. "My father was not a racist. He didn't have a racist bone in his body," said Kim Wade, a lawyer in his own right. "He was very competitive."
There are some things I would say about Henry Wade..competitive ...isn't one of them. I would say a soul of granite is more like it.
Henry Wade gave lectures to his assistants ---Avoid picking black jurists... avoid picking women jurists... but especially avoid picking black women jurists. No ...he wasn't a racist ::) 

(https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-1240w,f_auto,q_auto:best/ap/7d506d2d-c0d5-4a89-8b09-1ca7fdece7c2.jpg)
                                             Nice tie :)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 06, 2022, 12:25:54 AM
That’s not true. Brennan gave a reasonably close description at the scene. And singled out LHO at the lineup later that evening as looking like the gunman. (And that’s what I said that you disagreed with.)

“Reasonably close”? It was the wrong height, wrong weight, wrong age, and wrong clothing to be Oswald. He also had no reasonable way to estimate those things for a person “taking aim” for the last shot, who would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 06, 2022, 12:43:08 AM
You'll notice that the behavior of Brennan - e.g., not immediately identifying the shooter as Oswald - is evidence that calls into question his credibility but the behavior of Oswald that calls into question his credibility or innocence is always dismissed. Always meaning: always.

Question his credibility all you like — just don’t pretend that’s evidence of murder.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 01:42:15 AM
“Reasonably close”? It was the wrong height, wrong weight, wrong age, and wrong clothing to be Oswald. He also had no reasonable way to estimate those things for a person “taking aim” for the last shot, who would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.

It was reasonably close given the circumstances. And he saw him while waiting for the motorcade to arrive from the waist up.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 01:44:46 AM
What description did Mr Brennan give at the scene, Mr Collins?

The one that Sawyer broadcast over the DPD radio about 12:44.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 06, 2022, 01:59:31 AM
The one that Sawyer broadcast over the DPD radio about 12:44.

Really? The one where Insp. Sawyer says the witness cannot give a clothing description? The one that leads Insp. Sawyer to mention there is uncertainty as to whether the suspect under description was "there in the first place"? That one?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 02:12:51 AM
Really? The one where Insp. Sawyer says the witness cannot give a clothing description? The one that leads Insp. Sawyer to mention there is uncertainty as to whether the suspect under description was "in the building in the first place"? That one?

No, the uncertainty part was concerning Charles Givens. They put out a description of Givens because they were trying to locate him.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 06, 2022, 02:21:12 AM
No, the uncertainty part was concerning Charles Givens. They put out a description of Givens because they were trying to locate him.

The witness couldn't give a clothing description for Mr Givens?

And what makes you say Insp. Sawyer's "unknown if he was there in the first place" remark relates to Mr Givens?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 02:37:46 AM
The witness couldn't give a clothing description for Mr Givens?

And what makes you say Insp. Sawyer's "unknown if he was there in the first place" remark relates to Mr Givens?

I was mistaken about Givens. That was later.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 06, 2022, 02:43:39 AM
I was mistaken about Givens. That was later.

Thank you, Mr Collins-----it was indeed later, a lot later.

So! Are you saying that Mr Howard Brennan's on-the-scene description of the man he saw firing from the sixth-floor window is the description in relation to which Insp. Sawyer says the witness cannot remember enough to give a clothing description? And that it is "unknown if he was in the building in the first place"?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 03:08:02 AM
Thank you, Mr Collins-----it was indeed later, a lot later.

So! Are you saying that Mr Howard Brennan's on-the-scene description of the man he saw firing from the sixth-floor window is the descrption in relation to which Insp. Sawyer says the witness cannot remember enough to give a clothing description? And that it is "unknown if he was in the building in the first place"?

 Thumb1:

This was during the first 15 to 20 minutes after the shots. They were still trying to figure out what happened.

“From this building it is unknown if he is still there or not. Unknown if
he was there in the first place.”
Mr. BELIN. Then it reads back here, “All the information we have received, indicates it did come from the fifth or fourth of that building.”
That is the central headquarters back to you, is that it?
Mr. SAWYER. That’s right.


Why are you asking about this?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 06, 2022, 03:13:38 AM
This was during the first 15 to 20 minutes after the shots. They were still trying to figure out what happened.

“From this building it is unknown if he is still there or not. Unknown if
he was there in the first place.”
Mr. BELIN. Then it reads back here, “All the information we have received, indicates it did come from the fifth or fourth of that building.”
That is the central headquarters back to you, is that it?
Mr. SAWYER. That’s right.


Why are you asking about this?

Ah ok, I think I get it now, Mr Collins.

So:

Insp. Sawyer hears from Mr Brennan about a man firing from an upper window of the Depository. Mr Brennan gives him a description of the shooter, including a clothing description (light-colored), which we know Mr Brennan was able to give. And then Insp. Sawyer gives that description (but without any reference to clothing) over the police radio, before proceeding to
a) say that the witness cannot remember anything as to clothing;
b) express uncertainty as to whether the man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository was even in the Depository in the first place.

Is that about the size of it?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 03:27:09 AM
Ah ok, I think I get it now, Mr Collins.

So:

Insp. Sawyer hears from Mr Brennan about a man firing from an upper window of the Depository. Mr Brennan gives him a description of the shooter, including a clothing description (light-colored), which we know Mr Brennan was able to give. And then Insp. Sawyer gives that description (but without any reference to clothing) over the police radio, before proceeding to
a) say that the witness cannot remember anything as to clothing;
b) express uncertainty as to whether the man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository was even in the Depository in the first place.

Is that about the size of it?

Holding for Hux?   ::)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 06, 2022, 03:43:47 AM
Holding for Huck?   ::)

So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan. In fact, you are quite at a loss.

That's okay, Mr Collins. We're understanding people. And we take heart from the fact that you have been disabused of the dreadful misapprehension you have been laboring under that these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio related to Mr Charles Givens. This means that you can now decontaminate your brain of the WC propaganda you were fed about this issue and actually approach it for the very first time with some logical thinking.

If you go bravely forth into this exciting new world of evidence-based research, you have every hope of coming to the realization that your claim that the witness behind the suspect description was Mr Brennan is perfectly absurd. This will be a painful realization for you, but it promises to be a crucial first step out of the judgment-addling fog of Warren Gullibility into which you so sadly wandered a long time ago. No pain, no gain, right?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 11:47:34 AM
So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan. In fact, you are quite at a loss.

That's okay, Mr Collins. We're understanding people. And we take heart from the fact that you have been disabused of the dreadful misapprehension you have been laboring under that these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio related to Mr Charles Givens. This means that you can now decontaminate your brain of the WC propaganda you were fed about this issue and actually approach it for the very first time with some logical thinking.

If you go bravely forth into this exciting new world of evidence-based research, you have every hope of coming to the realization that your claim that the witness behind the suspect description was Mr Brennan is perfectly absurd. This will be a painful realization for you, but it promises to be a crucial first step out of the judgment-addling fog of Warren Gullibility into which you so sadly wandered a long time ago. No pain, no gain, right?

 Thumb1:


So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan.


Let me get this straight.

You are trying to ask me to provide evidence that Brennan was the person who gave the description to Sawyer? If so, I must have missed the question.

And your argument is that it was someone else other than Brennan?

And your evidence is that Sawyer said: “From this building it is unknown if he is still there or not. Unknown if
he was there in the first place.“?    ???

Do I have this straight?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 06, 2022, 12:53:33 PM

So: it is clear that you cannot think of a way to reconcile these things Insp. Sawyer said over the radio with your claim that the witness giving the suspect description he put out was Mr Brennan.


Let me get this straight.

You are trying to ask me to provide evidence that Brennan was the person who gave the description to Sawyer? If so, I must have missed the question.

And your argument is that it was someone else other than Brennan?

And your evidence is that Sawyer said: “From this building it is unknown if he is still there or not. Unknown if
he was there in the first place.“?    ???

Do I have this straight?

~Grin~

You had it straight several posts back, Mr Collins. What you clearly don't have is the ability to offer a coherent response.

Do let us know when you can logically connect what Insp. Sawyer says over the police radio with your claim that the suspect description he has put out was given to him by Mr Brennan-------------a witness who saw a man, whose clothing he noticed, firing from an upper window of the building

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 01:04:13 PM
~Grin~

You had it straight several posts back, Mr Collins. What you clearly don't have is the ability to offer a coherent response.

Do let us know when you can logically connect what Insp. Sawyer says over the police radio with your claim that the suspect description he has put out was given to him by Mr Brennan-------------a witness who saw a man, whose clothing he noticed, firing from an upper window of the building

 Thumb1:


Read the testimonies of Eugene Barnett and Forrest Sorrels.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 06, 2022, 01:51:59 PM
“Reasonably close”? It was the wrong height, wrong weight, wrong age, and wrong clothing to be Oswald. He also had no reasonable way to estimate those things for a person “taking aim” for the last shot, who would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.

Wrong height
_Getting anal about an inch of two, I see

would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.
_IOW, took a knee..

BTW, Brennan saw him from the belt up
Thick neck adds to determination of weight
Bulky open shirt adds to appearance of body size
Harsh light & shadows, smirk, squint, nerves, worry (no tea for two) add age

TAEers don't realize that harsh direct sunshine lightens clothing

(https://i.postimg.cc/Nf83DM2h/68-OSWALD-ALL-LIT-UP-OMEN.png)
billchapman

--------
BONUS
--------
Too bad Oswald got reasonably close to Tippit
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 06, 2022, 02:28:05 PM
Wrong height
_Getting anal about an inch of two, I see

would necessarily be crouched down behind boxes.
_IOW, took a knee..

BTW, Brennan saw him from the belt up
Thick neck adds to determination of weight
Bulky open shirt adds to appearance of body size
Harsh light & shadows, smirk, squint, nerves, worry (no tea for two) add age

TAEers don't realize that harsh direct sunshine lightens clothing

(https://i.postimg.cc/Nf83DM2h/68-OSWALD-ALL-LIT-UP-OMEN.png)
billchapman

--------
BONUS
--------
Too bad Oswald got reasonably close to Tippit

And so we get from a completely incorrect description to a "correct" one in four easy steps.....

It's called making up your own "reality"
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 06, 2022, 07:03:03 PM
It was reasonably close given the circumstances. And he saw him while waiting for the motorcade to arrive from the waist up.

Except it was the guy with the rifle “taking aim” that Brennan claimed to see “from the belt up”. And how did he know that the guy crouched down with a rifle was the same person he saw earlier with no rifle?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 07:49:07 PM
Except it was the guy with the rifle “taking aim” that Brennan claimed to see “from the belt up”. And how did he know that the guy crouched down with a rifle was the same person he saw earlier with no rifle?


I would assume that he still had the same face on. Also, he said he saw him draw the rifle back to his side while looking towards the limo. Then move away from the window.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 06, 2022, 08:52:26 PM

I would assume that he still had the same face on. Also, he said he saw him draw the rifle back to his side while looking towards the limo. Then move away from the window.

Don't foget there were four of him. In a gang.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 09:02:06 PM
Don't foget there were four of him. In a gang.

Did you include Lee Harold Oswald? (The one that Ruby shot.)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 06, 2022, 09:37:20 PM
Did you include Lee Harold Oswald? (The one that Ruby shot.)

(https://i.postimg.cc/R0HMhS70/3-OZZIE.png)
billchapman

Gang of 4

Lee Harvey Oswald (aka A.Hidell, O.H. Lee & Dirty Harvey)
A. Hidell (aka Lee Harvey Oswald)
O.H. Lee (aka Lee Harvey Oswald)
Dirty Harvey (aka Lee Harvey Oswald)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 06, 2022, 09:48:07 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/R0HMhS70/3-OZZIE.png)
billchapman

Gang of 4

Lee Harvey Oswald (aka A.Hidell, O.H. Lee & Dirty Harvey)
A. Hidell (aka Lee Harvey Oswald)
O.H. Lee (aka Lee Harvey Oswald)
Dirty Harvey (aka Lee Harvey Oswald)


I’m talking about Lee Harold Oswald. The reporter said that name (Lee Harold Oswald) a lot of times on national television. So it just has to be true.   ;)

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 07, 2022, 05:34:42 AM

Read the testimonies of Eugene Barnett and Forrest Sorrels.

~Grin~

I'm afraid there is nothing in either to suggest that Mr Brennan couldn't remember any clothing, nor that what he said left room for uncertainty as to whether the man he saw firing from an upper window of the Depository had been in the Depository in the first place.

What else you got, Mr Collins?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 07, 2022, 11:55:19 AM
~Grin~

I'm afraid there is nothing in either to suggest that Mr Brennan couldn't remember any clothing, nor that what he said left room for uncertainty as to whether the man he saw firing from an upper window of the Depository had been in the Depository in the first place.

What else you got, Mr Collins?

 Thumb1:


Sorry, I have no idea what it is that you are trying to argue about. Maybe you need to state specifically what it is that you are suggesting happened. And specifically what it is that you consider evidence for your claim.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 07, 2022, 02:22:45 PM
Have you ever sat in Howard Brennan’s spot and tried to distinguish facial features of people at the windows?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 07, 2022, 02:24:28 PM

Sorry, I have no idea what it is that you are trying to argue about. Maybe you need to state specifically what it is that you are suggesting happened. And specifically what it is that you consider evidence for your claim.

What happened to the Barnett or Sorrels testimony's accounting for the anomaly between what Mr Brennan saw and remembered and what Insp. Sawyer said on the police radio? Like I thought, you had nothing.

Your belief, Mr Collins, that Mr Brennan is the source of the suspect description that was put out by Insp. Sawyer commits you to an absurd scenario. Of course, you know this----------it's why you keep parrying and deflecting from the problem.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Warren Gullible Productions Proudly Present A Snippet of Collins Fantasy Dialogue...............

SAWYER: Do you remember anything about what the man was wearing?
BRENNAN: No, sir.
SAWYER: So you're absolutely sure you saw him fire from the building?
BRENNAN: Well, I definitely saw him fire from that window, but I couldn't be sure he was actually in the building at the time.
SAWYER: OK, thank you for this information. I'll put out your description on the radio right away.


 :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 07, 2022, 03:27:39 PM

I’m talking about Lee Harold Oswald. The reporter said that name (Lee Harold Oswald) a lot of times on national television. So it just has to be true.   ;)

I had the impression that you weren't aware of my 'Gang of 4'

I've addressed 'Dirty Harold' 'what-ifs' before
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 07, 2022, 03:41:18 PM
Have you ever sat in Howard Brennan’s spot and tried to distinguish facial features of people at the windows?

No fair: You can't see the right colours from there

Euins position would be better
You can see bald spots from there
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 07, 2022, 04:05:36 PM
Have you ever sat in Howard Brennan’s spot and tried to distinguish facial features of people at the windows?


Only in my 3-D model.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 07, 2022, 04:20:56 PM
What happened to the Barnett or Sorrels testimony's accounting for the anomaly between what Mr Brennan saw and remembered and what Insp. Sawyer said on the police radio? Like I thought, you had nothing.

Your belief, Mr Collins, that Mr Brennan is the source of the suspect description that was put out by Insp. Sawyer commits you to an absurd scenario. Of course, you know this----------it's why you keep parrying and deflecting from the problem.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Warren Gullible Productions Proudly Present A Snippet of Collins Fantasy Dialogue...............

SAWYER: Do you remember anything about what the man was wearing?
BRENNAN: No, sir.
SAWYER: So you're absolutely sure you saw him fire from the building?
BRENNAN: Well, I definitely saw him fire from that window, but I couldn't be sure he was actually in the building at the time.
SAWYER: OK, thank you for this information. I'll put out your description on the radio right away.


 :D


What makes you believe that Brennan (or whoever you might think it was) had anything to do with Sawyer’s statements about not knowing if the suspect is still in the building, etc.?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 07, 2022, 06:49:55 PM
Here is the pertinent transcript from the DPD radio recordings:





Note: there is nothing there regarding a witness that "couldn't remember" clothing. So I really don't know what they were looking at during Sawyer's testimony. (Anyone who might know please feel free to share it here.)

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 08, 2022, 03:25:58 AM
Here is the pertinent transcript from the DPD radio recordings:



  • Dispatcher   Yes, 12:44 p.m.
  • 9 ( Sawyer)   The type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester.
  • Dispatcher   9, it was a rifle?
  • 9   A rifle, yes.
  • Dispatcher   9, any clothing description?
  • 9   About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds.
  • Dispatcher   Attention all squads, the suspect in the shooting at Elm and Houston is supposed to be an unknown white male, approximately 30, 165 pounds, slender build, armed with what is thought to be a 30-30 rifle, - repeat, unknown white male, approximately 30, 165 pounds, slender build. No further description at this time or information, 12:45 p.m.
  • 15 (Captain C.E. Talbert)  Could 9 determine whether man was supposed to have been still in the building or was he supposed to have left?
  • Dispatcher   I didn't know for sure and the witnesses didn't have the description, but we have got that building surrounded by now and we should know something before long.
  • 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer)   On this building, it's unknown whether he is still in the building or not known if he was there in the first place.
  • 531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building.


Note: there is nothing there regarding a witness that "couldn't remember" clothing. So I really don't know what they were looking at during Sawyer's testimony. (Anyone who might know please feel free to share it here.)

"Pertinent transcript" indeed!  :D

Mr. BELIN. What did you say then?
Mr. SAWYER. "The wanted person in this is a slender white male about 30, 5 feet 10, 165, carrying what looks to be a 30-30 or some type of Winchester."
Mr. BELIN. Then the statement is made from the home office, "It was a rifle?"
Mr. SAWYER. I answered, "Yes, a rifle."
Mr. BELIN. Then the reply to you, "Any clothing description?"
Mr. SAWYER. "Current witness can't remember that."


Ergo, Mr Brennan--------who did give a clothing description--------cannot be the source of the suspect description Insp. Sawyer has just given out.

Thankfully, there is no mystery as to what the true source of the suspect description saw:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 08, 2022, 11:50:58 AM
"Pertinent transcript" indeed!  :D

Mr. BELIN. What did you say then?
Mr. SAWYER. "The wanted person in this is a slender white male about 30, 5 feet 10, 165, carrying what looks to be a 30-30 or some type of Winchester."
Mr. BELIN. Then the statement is made from the home office, "It was a rifle?"
Mr. SAWYER. I answered, "Yes, a rifle."
Mr. BELIN. Then the reply to you, "Any clothing description?"
Mr. SAWYER. "Current witness can't remember that."


Ergo, Mr Brennan--------who did give a clothing description--------cannot be the source of the suspect description Insp. Sawyer has just given out.

Thankfully, there is no mystery as to what the true source of the suspect description saw:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:


Transcript of the DPD radio (try reading it, why don't you?). If you do, you will find that Sawyer never said "current witness cannot remember that." You will also find that the statement regarding whether or not he was still in the building had nothing at all to do with Brennan's description. It was an answer to a question from Captain Talbert. Here's a link to the transcript:

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/dpdtapes/ (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/dpdtapes/)

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 08, 2022, 02:57:24 PM
What’s weird is that in the dpdtapes transcript nobody tells the dispatcher over the radio that it was a white male, so where did he get that info for the “attention all squads” broadcast of the description?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 08, 2022, 02:57:36 PM

Transcript of the DPD radio (try reading it, why don't you?).

But, my dear Mr Collins, Insp. Sawyer is reading a transcript of the DPD radio for Mr Belin. Or do you think that, as he is giving his testimony, he has a witness standing beside him and, after that witness' whispering in his ears, informs Mr Belin: "Current witness can't remember that"? (Perhaps you do... nothing would surprise me at this stage.)

And-------to return to your "pertinent transcript"-------if you think that "About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds" is Insp. Sawyer's actual response to the Dispatcher's question, "any clothing description?", then we'll just have to add that to the already impressive tally of absurd things you believe!

Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 08, 2022, 03:00:53 PM
What’s weird is that nobody tells the dispatcher over the radio that it was a white male, so where did he get that info for the “attention all squads” broadcast of the description?

Good question, Mr Iacoletti! One cannot help wondering whether Insp. Sawyer's actual communication of the suspect description contained other information that meant his broadcast needed pruning from the audio record............

 Thumb1:

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 08, 2022, 03:33:32 PM
But, my dear Mr Collins, Insp. Sawyer is reading a transcript of the DPD radio for Mr Belin. Or do you think that, as he is giving his testimony, he has a witness standing beside him and, after that witness' whispering in his ears, informs Mr Belin: "Current witness can't remember that"? (Perhaps you do... nothing would surprise me at this stage.)

And-------to return to your "pertinent transcript"-------if you think that "About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds" is Insp. Sawyer's actual response to the Dispatcher's question, "any clothing description?", then we'll just have to add that to the already impressive tally of absurd things you believe!

Thumb1:


The DPD radio transcript used for Sawyer’s testimony appears to me be incorrect. The actual recordings are the physical evidence that shows what was said (and what wasn’t said).
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 08, 2022, 04:39:58 PM

The DPD radio transcript used for Sawyer’s testimony appears to me be incorrect.

Of course it does, Mr Collins. Anything that threatens your favorite bedtime story appears to you to be incorrect

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 09, 2022, 12:10:56 AM
What’s weird is that in the dpdtapes transcript nobody tells the dispatcher over the radio that it was a white male, so where did he get that info for the “attention all squads” broadcast of the description?


This article is mostly about the channel-1 recording, which is Sawyer exhibit B. But it clearly states that Henslee prepared transcripts of both channels. A look at Sawyer exhibit A shows that it is a transcript of channel 2. Here’s a snip from the article:


Quote
DPD Sergeant Gerald Dalton Henslee prepared an edited transcript of the channel 1 and 2 transmissions in the first few days of December 1963, and his testimony before the Warren Commission on April 8, 1964 clearly states that the transcripts were made directly from the original recordings – “They were prepared from the tapes on the channel 1. We have a tape on channel 1, and we have a record on channel 2. Two separate tape records, but they are prepared from those records and tapes.” Endnote The record shows that Henslee’s channel 1 transcript was given to Police Chief Jesse Curry on December 5, 1963. Curry gave the transcript to Secret Service Inspector Thomas Kelley, who forwarded it to his superior under date of December 6. The transcript was later entered into the records of the Warren Commission as Sawyer Exhibit B on April 8, 1964 at the time of Henslee’s testimony.

 https://www.jfk-assassination.net/scally.htm (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/scally.htm)




Sawyer Exhibit A page 392:

 https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0208b.htm (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0208b.htm)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 09, 2022, 11:01:39 AM

Sawyer Exhibit A page 392:

 https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0208b.htm (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0208b.htm)

(https://i.postimg.cc/wjT290H8/No-clothing-description.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 09, 2022, 11:03:54 AM

This article is mostly about the channel-1 recording, which is Sawyer exhibit B. But it clearly states that Henslee prepared transcripts of both channels. A look at Sawyer exhibit A shows that it is a transcript of channel 2. Here’s a snip from the article:

 https://www.jfk-assassination.net/scally.htm (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/scally.htm)


"DPD Sergeant Gerald Dalton Henslee prepared an edited transcript of the channel 1 and 2 transmissions in the first few days of December 1963................"
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 09, 2022, 11:08:54 AM
Compare!

EXHIBIT A
15 (Captain C.E. Talbert)  Could 9 determine whether man was supposed to have been still in the building or was he supposed to have left?
Dispatcher   I didn't know for sure and the witnesses didn't have the description, but we have got that building surrounded by now and we should know something before long.
9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer)   On this building, it's unknown whether he is still in the building or not known if he was there in the first place.
531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building.


EXHIBIT B
(https://i.postimg.cc/W14S6Xdp/Sawyer-Talbert-in-the-first-place.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 09, 2022, 07:31:09 PM
excerpt from Commission Exhibit 705 (pages 75-76): (note: there is no response concerning current witness can't remember that, nor is there anything about a white male)



Unknown:   The type of weapon locked like a 30-30 rifle or some type
of Winchester .
Disp:   9 ; it was a rifle?
9:   A rifle, yes .
Disp:    9, any clothing description?
9:    Abut 30, 5 1 101", 165 lbs .
Disp:    Attention all squads, the suspect in the shooting at
Elm and Houston is supposed to be an unknown white
male, approximately 30, 165 lbs ., slender build, armed
with what is thought to be a 30-30 rifle . - repeat,
unknown white male, approximately 30, 165 lbs ., slender
build . No further description at this time or information, 12:45 p .m.
15:  Could 9 determine whether man was supposed to have been
still in the building or was he supposed to have left?
Disp:   I didn't know for sure and the witnesses didn't have
the description, but we have got that building secured
by now and we should know something before long .
9:   On this building, its unknown Whether he is still in
the building or not or known if he was there in the first
place .
531:   Well, all the information we have received, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor
of that building.




It is difficult to decide which of the three transcripts included in the Warren Commission Documents to believe. But I think that the Sawyer Exhibits A and B are probably the most accurate. I base that opinion on Henslee reportedly being the radio dispatcher manning channel 2 at that time, and reportedly creating the Sawyer exhibit A&B transcripts from the original recordings. I think Henslee (as someone who regularly dispatched on this radio system) would be more likely to be able to understand the lingo and recognize voices and words and identify the people making the calls than someone who was less familiar with all those items.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 09, 2022, 08:44:57 PM
excerpt from Commission Exhibit 705 (pages 75-76): (note: there is no response concerning current witness can't remember that, nor is there anything about a white male)



Unknown:   The type of weapon locked like a 30-30 rifle or some type
of Winchester .
Disp:   9 ; it was a rifle?
9:   A rifle, yes .
Disp:    9, any clothing description?
9:    Abut 30, 5 1 101", 165 lbs .
Disp:    Attention all squads, the suspect in the shooting at
Elm and Houston is supposed to be an unknown white
male, approximately 30, 165 lbs ., slender build, armed
with what is thought to be a 30-30 rifle . - repeat,
unknown white male, approximately 30, 165 lbs ., slender
build . No further description at this time or information, 12:45 p .m.
15:  Could 9 determine whether man was supposed to have been
still in the building or was he supposed to have left?
Disp:   I didn't know for sure and the witnesses didn't have
the description, but we have got that building secured
by now and we should know something before long .
9:   On this building, its unknown Whether he is still in
the building or not or known if he was there in the first
place .
531:   Well, all the information we have received, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor
of that building.

It is difficult to decide which of the three transcripts included in the Warren Commission Documents to believe. But I think that the Sawyer Exhibits A and B are probably the most accurate. I base that opinion on Henslee reportedly being the radio dispatcher manning channel 2 at that time, and reportedly creating the Sawyer exhibit A&B transcripts from the original recordings. I think Henslee (as someone who regularly dispatched on this radio system) would be more likely to be able to understand the lingo and recognize voices and words and identify the people making the calls than someone who was less familiar with all those items.

Disp:    9, any clothing description?
9:    About 30, 5'10", 165 lbs .


 :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 09, 2022, 09:23:35 PM
Disp:    9, any clothing description?
9:    About 30, 5'10", 165 lbs .


 :D

Lee Oswald ....Just had 24th birthday... He was 5"9" .... Weighed 131 pounds..... 

Who ever the witnesses described, it was NOT  Lee Oswald.

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 09, 2022, 09:44:41 PM
Disp:    9, any clothing description?
9:    About 30, 5'10", 165 lbs .


 :D

I've said many times that the 6.5mm Carcano, a bolt action military style rifle was hidden beneath the pallet in the NW corner of the sixth floor BEFORE the shooting....

A witness (Howard Brennan ?)  said that the rifle he saw in the hands of the man who as older than Lee Oswald and dressed in Khaki colored clothing was holding a  ..... 30-30 Winchester.

Unknown:   The type of weapon locked like a 30-30 rifle or some type
of Winchester .
Disp:   9 ; it was a rifle?
9:   A rifle, yes .
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 09, 2022, 10:52:22 PM
I've said many times that the 6.5mm Carcano, a bolt action military style rifle was hidden beneath the pallet in the NW corner of the sixth floor BEFORE the shooting....

A witness (Howard Brennan ?)  said that the rifle he saw in the hands of the man who as older than Lee Oswald and dressed in Khaki colored clothing was holding a  ..... 30-30 Winchester.

Unknown:   The type of weapon locked like a 30-30 rifle or some type
of Winchester .
Disp:   9 ; it was a rifle?
9:   A rifle, yes .

The witness (NOT Mr Brennan, who was a witness but not the one whose description made Insp. Sawyer put out the broadcast) said he saw a man "carrying what looks to be a 30-30 or some type of Winchester". The witness had seen this man running from the building carrying such a rifle.

Hence Insp. Sawyer does NOT say the suspect "may be carrying the rifle he fired with - a 30-30 or some type of Winchester". He knows the shooter was seen fleeing with his weapon.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 09, 2022, 10:58:07 PM
Lee Oswald ....Just had 24th birthday... He was 5"9" .... Weighed 131 pounds..... 

Who ever the witnesses described, it was NOT  Lee Oswald.

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.


The autopsy report shows an estimated weight of 150-lbs. And Dr. Rose had an up close and thorough examination of the body. Using your “logic”, it must not have been LHO….   ::)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 09, 2022, 11:03:07 PM
The witness (NOT Mr Brennan, who was a witness but not the one whose description made Insp. Sawyer put out the broadcast) said he saw a man "carrying what looks to be a 30-30 or some type of Winchester". The witness had seen this man running from the building carrying such a rifle.

Hence Insp. Sawyer does NOT say the suspect "may be carrying the rifle he fired with - a 30-30 or some type of Winchester". He knows the shooter was seen fleeing with his weapon.



If a witness told Sawyer that he had seen a man running away from the building with a rifle, why would Sawyer then state that it was unknown if he was still in the building and not known if he was there in the first place?    ???
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 09, 2022, 11:52:14 PM
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/oswald-131.jpg)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 12:01:21 AM
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/oswald-131.jpg)


First sentence: “estimated weight 150-pounds”.  This would be somewhat comparable to Brennan’s estimate, but from a much closer distance and no clothes to influence the guess.


 https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337932/m1/1/ (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337932/m1/1/)


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 10, 2022, 12:26:23 AM
That doesn’t change the fact that Oswald was 131 pounds.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 12:35:20 AM
That doesn’t change the fact that Oswald was 131 pounds.

You apparently missed my point regarding Walt’s “logic”. He seems to think that if a witness didn’t guess the correct weight, then it couldn’t have been LHO. I wasn’t trying to say LHO actually weighed 150 pounds. Just that the estimated weight is 150 pounds. Get it?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 10, 2022, 12:55:10 AM
I get what you’re saying but an estimate of a corpse doesn’t really equate to an estimate of a living person (bloating, rigor mortis, etc).
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 01:02:37 AM
I get what you’re saying but an estimate of a corpse doesn’t really equate to an estimate of a living person (bloating, rigor mortis, etc).

There wasn’t enough time between his death and the autopsy for any of that stuff. He wasn’t even cold yet.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 10, 2022, 01:11:38 AM


If a witness told Sawyer that he had seen a man running away from the building with a rifle, why would Sawyer then state that it was unknown if he was still in the building and not known if he was there in the first place?    ???

Because Insp. Sawyer understands that it is possible the man, if an employee in the building, tossed the rifle and returned to the building to blend in; but that it is also possible he didn't fire from that building at all. He is cautioning against drawing conclusions.

Hence the response to Insp. Sawyer's broadcast: "531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

i.e. everything points to the fact that this did come from the building, so we can be confident the man you describe was in that building in the first place (i.e. at the time of the shooting)

Sgt. Henslee would not need to be pointing this out to Insp. Sawyer if the latter had gotten his description from Mr Brennan.

Again, this isn't speculation. Law enforcement knew all about it:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 01:41:28 AM
Because Insp. Sawyer understands that it is possible the man, if an employee in the building, tossed the rifle and returned to the building to blend in; but that it is also possible he didn't fire from that building at all. He is cautioning against drawing conclusions.

Hence the response to Insp. Sawyer's broadcast: "531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

i.e. everything points to the fact that this did come from the building, so we can be confident the man you describe was in that building in the first place (i.e. at the time of the shooting)

Sgt. Henslee would not need to be pointing this out to Insp. Sawyer if the latter had gotten his description from Mr Brennan.

Again, this isn't speculation. Law enforcement knew all about it:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:

So, do you really believe that Sawyer would let an alleged suspect, that an alleged unknown witness described as leaving the building with a rifle, just get away by not at least informing his department what this unknown witness said?   ???    ::) 


And do you really believe that Sawyer would just let an eyewitness (that said he saw a man with a rifle leaving the building) just disappear without at least getting his name and contact information?   ???    ::)


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 10, 2022, 01:47:26 AM
That doesn’t change the fact that Oswald was 131 pounds.

Mr Collins must have missed the word "ESTIMATED" ......because on the dearg certificate the weight is listed as 131 pounds.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 01:59:57 AM
Mr Collins must have missed the word "ESTIMATED" ......because on the dearg certificate the weight is listed as 131 pounds.


I intentionally chose the estimated weight because Brennan’s description was an estimate. See my explanation to Iacoletti:


 
You apparently missed my point regarding Walt’s “logic”. He seems to think that if a witness didn’t guess the correct weight, then it couldn’t have been LHO. I wasn’t trying to say LHO actually weighed 150 pounds. Just that the estimated weight is 150 pounds. Get it?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 10, 2022, 03:26:01 AM
There wasn’t enough time between his death and the autopsy for any of that stuff. He wasn’t even cold yet.

> He was born cold
> Did he have rigor mortis or was that a banana in his pocket
> I wonder if his smirk got all bloated up

I heard that he suddenly sat up in the ambulance and said 'does anybody smell toast?*
Then looked around, realized that he wasn't in a kitchen and said 'Uh, oh..'

*I here we smell toast when close to kicking the bucket
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 10, 2022, 05:21:51 AM
I here hear we smell toast when close to kicking the bucket.
There I fixed it (https://ruadventures.com/forum/Smileys/animated/tiphat.gif)
Cause where you could be going afterwards may be mighty toasty?
 
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/9-15-2015/o-nmdM.gif)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 10, 2022, 03:15:10 PM
So, do you really believe that Sawyer would let an alleged suspect, that an alleged unknown witness described as leaving the building with a rifle, just get away by not at least informing his department what this unknown witness said?

Letting him get away? What are you talking about, Mr Collins?

"Attention all squads. Attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting, Elm and Houston, is reported to be an unknown white male, approximately 30, slender build, height, 5 feet 10 inches, weight, 165 pounds, reported to be armed with what is thought to be a .30 caliber rifle, no further description or information at this time"

This is a description of an armed suspect at large whom all squads are to be on the lookout for. (And no particular mention here of the building as the locus of the search-------the man seen running from the building might be anywhere at this time.)

Quote
And do you really believe that Sawyer would just let an eyewitness (that said he saw a man with a rifle leaving the building) just disappear without at least getting his name and contact information?

Do you really believe Insp. Sawyer would just invent such an eyewitness and confidentially tell fellow law enforcement about it?

And do you really believe that such an eyewitness, if their contact information were on file, would be seen as a witness friendly to the official 'investigation' and hence one whose testimony was to be proactively chased up on and brought to everyone's attention?

Though maybe it did cross their minds to make Mr Oswald the man seen running from the building. He tossed the rifle, then returned inside, etc. But then what to do about the Carcano..............?  :-[
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 05:14:08 PM
Letting him get away? What are you talking about, Mr Collins?

"Attention all squads. Attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting, Elm and Houston, is reported to be an unknown white male, approximately 30, slender build, height, 5 feet 10 inches, weight, 165 pounds, reported to be armed with what is thought to be a .30 caliber rifle, no further description or information at this time"

This is a description of an armed suspect at large whom all squads are to be on the lookout for. (And no particular mention here of the building as the locus of the search-------the man seen running from the building might be anywhere at this time.)

Do you really believe Insp. Sawyer would just invent such an eyewitness and confidentially tell fellow law enforcement about it?

And do you really believe that such an eyewitness, if their contact information were on file, would be seen as a witness friendly to the official 'investigation' and hence one whose testimony was to be proactively chased up on and brought to everyone's attention?

Though maybe it did cross their minds to make Mr Oswald the man seen running from the building. He tossed the rifle, then returned inside, etc. But then what to do about the Carcano..............?  :-[



Letting him get away? What are you talking about, Mr Collins?

"Attention all squads. Attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting, Elm and Houston, is reported to be an unknown white male, approximately 30, slender build, height, 5 feet 10 inches, weight, 165 pounds, reported to be armed with what is thought to be a .30 caliber rifle, no further description or information at this time"

This is a description of an armed suspect at large whom all squads are to be on the lookout for. (And no particular mention here of the building as the locus of the search-------the man seen running from the building might be anywhere at this time.)



What this is not is a description of a man with a rifle seen leaving the building. Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave that very important aspect out? Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer would not (in response to the dispatcher’s statement) explain that a witness reported seeing your mystery man with a rifle leaving the building? Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer would allow the main focus of the search be inside the TSBD if your mystery man with a rifle had been reported to him as leaving the building? If you are going to try to sell your theory to others, it might be helpful if you began it with “Once upon a time.” And ended it with “And they lived happily ever after.”



Do you really believe Insp. Sawyer would just invent such an eyewitness and confidentially tell fellow law enforcement about it?


No, I don’t believe that Sawyer told that to anyone at all. The cropped image of a memo that you keep displaying is nothing more than some sixth hand bad information that was incorrect due to having gone through several people who weren’t even at the scene. I have explained this to you before, but you insist on believing your nutty theory.



And do you really believe that such an eyewitness, if their contact information were on file, would be seen as a witness friendly to the official 'investigation' and hence one whose testimony was to be proactively chased up on and brought to everyone's attention?


Though maybe it did cross their minds to make Mr Oswald the man seen running from the building. He tossed the rifle, then returned inside, etc. But then what to do about the Carcano..............?  :-[




I don’t believe that there was such an eyewitness, all of this theory is just a figment of your imagination.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 10, 2022, 06:46:10 PM

What this is not is a description of a man with a rifle seen leaving the building.

Is it a description of a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository?

Quote
Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave that very important aspect out?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave the all-important fact out that the suspect was seen firing from the window?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably forget Mr Brennan's very important clothing description?

Quote
Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer would not (in response to the dispatcher’s statement) explain that a witness reported seeing your mystery man with a rifle leaving the building? Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer would allow the main focus of the search be inside the TSBD if your mystery man with a rifle had been reported to him as leaving the building?

Again, you're rather confused, Mr Collins.

The Dispatcher has to explain to Insp. Sawyer that there is little or no doubt that the shots were indeed fired from an upper window of the building:

"531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

Why do you think that might be? Hm? And why do you think Insp. Sawyer doesn't reply, "I know that, my witness saw him do it"?

Quote
Do you really believe Insp. Sawyer would just invent such an eyewitness and confidentially tell fellow law enforcement about it?

No, I don’t believe that Sawyer told that to anyone at all. The cropped image of a memo that you keep displaying is nothing more than some sixth hand bad information that was incorrect due to having gone through several people who weren’t even at the scene. I have explained this to you before, but you insist on believing your nutty theory.

The only thing nutty here, Mr Collins, is your wild theory that a group of law enforcement officials would have the discursive control of a bunch of elementary school kids and allow a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository morph into a man seen running from the building carrying a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle. Amazing how the description-of-suspect details remain identical with the radio broadcast details, yet a radically different description of the context of the sighting manages to creep in. I guess you believe these guys had the cognitive sophistication of law enforcement officials for part of the sentence, but then went all elementary school for the rest.

Your reaction to this official document-----------

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

-----------is no different to the Warren Gullible reaction to the Stroud letter: you hate what it says, and so issue an irrational and rather desperate declaration that it's not really saying anything valid.

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 10, 2022, 08:24:04 PM
Is it a description of a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave the all-important fact out that the suspect was seen firing from the window?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably forget Mr Brennan's very important clothing description?

Again, you're rather confused, Mr Collins.

The Dispatcher has to explain to Insp. Sawyer that there is little or no doubt that the shots were indeed fired from an upper window of the building:

"531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

Why do you think that might be? Hm? And why do you think Insp. Sawyer doesn't reply, "I know that, my witness saw him do it"?

The only thing nutty here, Mr Collins, is your wild theory that a group of law enforcement officials would have the discursive control of a bunch of elementary school kids and allow a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository morph into a man seen running from the building carrying a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle. Amazing how the description-of-suspect details remain identical with the radio broadcast details, yet a radically different description of the context of the sighting manages to creep in. I guess you believe these guys had the cognitive sophistication of law enforcement officials for part of the sentence, but then went all elementary school for the rest.

Your reaction to this official document-----------

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZWWqNx7/Sawyer-description-source.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

-----------is no different to the Warren Gullible reaction to the Stroud letter: you hate what it says, and so issue an irrational and rather desperate declaration that it's not really saying anything valid.

 Thumb1:



Is it a description of a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave the all-important fact out that the suspect was seen firing from the window?


These four broadcasts occurred just prior to the one we are discussing:

Officer 142 - I just talked to a guy up here wno was standing close
to it and the best he could tell it came from the
Texas School Book Dapository Building here with that
Hertz Renting sign on top .

Officer 260 - I have a witness that says that it came from the 5th
floor of the Texas Bock Depository Store .

Officer 22 - Get some men up here to cover this school depository
building . It's believed the shot came from, as you
see it on Elm Street, looking toward the building,
it would be upper right hand corner, second window
from the end .

Officer 137 - We have a man here who says he seen him pull the
weap,;^ back through the window from Southeast corner
of that depcsitnry bud,'ding .


Therefore, the general location of the source of the shots had already been reported. Why do you appear to think the location needed to be repeated again? Sawyer was reporting a description of the suspect.


Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably forget Mr Brennan's very important clothing description?

I don't think that. I believe that Brennan, in all the excitement and at the moment he was first asked, couldn't remember it (but after a short while and a little thought he did remember it by the time Forrest Sorrels escorted him to the Sheriff's Office). If you consider that Sawyer might have said "currently, witness can't remember..." instead of "current witness can't remember..." it makes better sense to me. The last syllable of "currently might have easily been lost when trying to interpret the recording.



Again, you're rather confused, Mr Collins.

The Dispatcher has to explain to Insp. Sawyer that there is little or no doubt that the shots were indeed fired from an upper window of the building:

"531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

Why do you think that might be? Hm? And why do you think Insp. Sawyer doesn't reply, "I know that, my witness saw him do it"?


Sawyer was trying to be the initial command center at this very early point in time. He was hearing a lot of different accounts. Many people (including many officers) initially thought the shots came from other places than the TSBD (the bushes, the picket fence, the triple overpass, etc). Those accounts, being listened to by Sawyer just prior to that point in time, would plenty of reasons for Sawyer to have some initial doubts that Brennan's account was accurate. Just because Sawyer doesn't broadcast Brennan's name, address, and social security number, doesn't mean that it wasn't Brennan's description.



The only thing nutty here, Mr Collins, is your wild theory that a group of law enforcement officials would have the discursive control of a bunch of elementary school kids and allow a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository morph into a man seen running from the building carrying a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle. Amazing how the description-of-suspect details remain identical with the radio broadcast details, yet a radically different description of the context of the sighting manages to creep in. I guess you believe these guys had the cognitive sophistication of law enforcement officials for part of the sentence, but then went all elementary school for the rest.


I don't have any idea where Batchelor got his information (the memo doesn't say, so it could have been passed through several others before Batchelor got it) but then the message is passed to Vincent Drain, then it was passed to James Malley, then it was passed on to Gordon Shanklin. It appears that all of these transmissions must have been verbal until Shanklin prepares his memo. It doesn't matter whether they were school children or professional law enforcement officers, when a message is verbally passed through that many people, the chances of it being anywhere near correct at the end of the line are slim and none. Getting part of it right and being wrong on other parts would be expected. The only thing that surprises me is that apparently Shanklin put it in writing without verifying it was accurate. But when one considers that Shanklin allegedly ordered the destruction of the LHO note, it shows that he tended to react rather badly under pressure. Many people do just that.  No one to my knowledge has confirmed or corroborated the mystery suspect that you so desperately want to believe in, no one. All you have is a memo that seems to include some details that are not accurate. And by the way, I don't believe that I have ever said anything at all about the Stroud letter.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Dan O'meara on August 11, 2022, 02:02:31 AM
Letting him get away? What are you talking about, Mr Collins?

"Attention all squads. Attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting, Elm and Houston, is reported to be an unknown white male, approximately 30, slender build, height, 5 feet 10 inches, weight, 165 pounds, reported to be armed with what is thought to be a .30 caliber rifle, no further description or information at this time"

This is a description of an armed suspect at large whom all squads are to be on the lookout for. (And no particular mention here of the building as the locus of the search-------the man seen running from the building might be anywhere at this time.)

Do you really believe Insp. Sawyer would just invent such an eyewitness and confidentially tell fellow law enforcement about it?

And do you really believe that such an eyewitness, if their contact information were on file, would be seen as a witness friendly to the official 'investigation' and hence one whose testimony was to be proactively chased up on and brought to everyone's attention?

Though maybe it did cross their minds to make Mr Oswald the man seen running from the building. He tossed the rifle, then returned inside, etc. But then what to do about the Carcano..............?  :-[


 >:(
There is also this from Amos Euins' WC testimony:

Mr. Euins: No, sir. He was kind of an old policeman. I ran down and got him. And he ran up here.
Mr. Specter: You mean--
Mr. Euins: The Book Depository Building.
Then he called some more cars. They got all the way around the building. And then after that, well, he seen another man. Another man told him he seen a man run out the back.
Mr. Specter: Do you know who that man was who said somebody ran out the back?
Mr. Euins: No, sir. He was a construction man working back there.

Hmmmm...
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 11, 2022, 12:49:27 PM


Is it a description of a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave the all-important fact out that the suspect was seen firing from the window?


These four broadcasts occurred just prior to the one we are discussing:

Officer 142 - I just talked to a guy up here wno was standing close
to it and the best he could tell it came from the
Texas School Book Dapository Building here with that
Hertz Renting sign on top .

Officer 260 - I have a witness that says that it came from the 5th
floor of the Texas Bock Depository Store .

Officer 22 - Get some men up here to cover this school depository
building . It's believed the shot came from, as you
see it on Elm Street, looking toward the building,
it would be upper right hand corner, second window
from the end .

Officer 137 - We have a man here who says he seen him pull the
weap,;^ back through the window from Southeast corner
of that depcsitnry bud,'ding .


Therefore, the general location of the source of the shots had already been reported. Why do you appear to think the location needed to be repeated again? Sawyer was reporting a description of the suspect.

Inspector Sawyer, notably, does not put out any broadcast on that. Yet he has supposedly just spoken with a witness who could speak very specifically to that.

Inpsector Sawyer will have obviously connected the man seen running from the building with a rifle to the man other witnesses had seen at the window. However, such a connection will have been provisional in his seasoned veteran's mind: hence his pointed statement of uncertainty as to whether the man seen running from the building had been in that building in the first place. And hence the Dispatcher's pointed words in response to him: "Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

Quote
Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably forget Mr Brennan's very important clothing description?

I don't think that. I believe that Brennan, in all the excitement and at the moment he was first asked, couldn't remember it (but after a short while and a little thought he did remember it by the time Forrest Sorrels escorted him to the Sheriff's Office). If you consider that Sawyer might have said "currently, witness can't remember..." instead of "current witness can't remember..." it makes better sense to me. The last syllable of "currently might have easily been lost when trying to interpret the recording.

~Grin~

Keep reaching, Mr Collins!

Quote
Again, you're rather confused, Mr Collins.

The Dispatcher has to explain to Insp. Sawyer that there is little or no doubt that the shots were indeed fired from an upper window of the building:

"531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

Why do you think that might be? Hm? And why do you think Insp. Sawyer doesn't reply, "I know that, my witness saw him do it"?


Sawyer was trying to be the initial command center at this very early point in time. He was hearing a lot of different accounts. Many people (including many officers) initially thought the shots came from other places than the TSBD (the bushes, the picket fence, the triple overpass, etc). Those accounts, being listened to by Sawyer just prior to that point in time, would plenty of reasons for Sawyer to have some initial doubts that Brennan's account was accurate.

You're right in one respect: Insp. Sawyer has heard different (and probably conflicting) reports. But he knows for sure that a man was seen running from the building with a rifle in his hand, and that the witness can give a good description. While the obvious conclusion is that this man was the man others report as having seen firing from an upper window of the building, this is far from the only possible conclusion. The man might have been handed the weapon by the real shooter, who might still be in the building. He might have had the weapon dropped down to him from a high window. The man might have fired from west of the Depository and run behind it for cover, before running on further. He might have been but one of several shooters.

All Insp. Sawyer knows for sure is that a man seen running with a rifle in his hand shortly after the shooting is most definitely a suspect and is at large------------and so he puts out the description. That description comes from a witness who has no clothing description, and thinks the rifle was a "30.30 or some type of Winchester rifle"------------i.e. a witness other than Mr Brennan

Quote
The only thing nutty here, Mr Collins, is your wild theory that a group of law enforcement officials would have the discursive control of a bunch of elementary school kids and allow a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository morph into a man seen running from the building carrying a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle. Amazing how the description-of-suspect details remain identical with the radio broadcast details, yet a radically different description of the context of the sighting manages to creep in. I guess you believe these guys had the cognitive sophistication of law enforcement officials for part of the sentence, but then went all elementary school for the rest.


I don't have any idea where Batchelor got his information

Don't be silly! He spoke with Insp. Sawyer. If his source had been someone other than Insp. Sawyer, dontcha think he would have checked with Insp. Sawyer before passing on such bombshell information to Special Agent Drain? Being some ways past elementary school level of training and all?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 11, 2022, 12:51:36 PM

 >:(
There is also this from Amos Euins' WC testimony:

Mr. Euins: No, sir. He was kind of an old policeman. I ran down and got him. And he ran up here.
Mr. Specter: You mean--
Mr. Euins: The Book Depository Building.
Then he called some more cars. They got all the way around the building. And then after that, well, he seen another man. Another man told him he seen a man run out the back.
Mr. Specter: Do you know who that man was who said somebody ran out the back?
Mr. Euins: No, sir. He was a construction man working back there.

Hmmmm...

Hmmmm indeed, Mr O'Meara. I guess this nukes Mr Collins' claim that "No one to my knowledge has confirmed or corroborated the mystery suspect that you so desperately want to believe in, no one."

We await Mr Collins' 'explanation': Euins wasn't too long out of elementary school......................  :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 11, 2022, 05:28:06 PM


Is it a description of a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository?

Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably leave the all-important fact out that the suspect was seen firing from the window?


These four broadcasts occurred just prior to the one we are discussing:

Officer 142 - I just talked to a guy up here wno was standing close
to it and the best he could tell it came from the
Texas School Book Dapository Building here with that
Hertz Renting sign on top .

Officer 260 - I have a witness that says that it came from the 5th
floor of the Texas Bock Depository Store .

Officer 22 - Get some men up here to cover this school depository
building . It's believed the shot came from, as you
see it on Elm Street, looking toward the building,
it would be upper right hand corner, second window
from the end .

Officer 137 - We have a man here who says he seen him pull the
weap,;^ back through the window from Southeast corner
of that depcsitnry bud,'ding .


Therefore, the general location of the source of the shots had already been reported. Why do you appear to think the location needed to be repeated again? Sawyer was reporting a description of the suspect.


Why do you appear to think that Inspector Sawyer, a seasoned veteran police officer, would inexplicably forget Mr Brennan's very important clothing description?

I don't think that. I believe that Brennan, in all the excitement and at the moment he was first asked, couldn't remember it (but after a short while and a little thought he did remember it by the time Forrest Sorrels escorted him to the Sheriff's Office). If you consider that Sawyer might have said "currently, witness can't remember..." instead of "current witness can't remember..." it makes better sense to me. The last syllable of "currently might have easily been lost when trying to interpret the recording.



Again, you're rather confused, Mr Collins.

The Dispatcher has to explain to Insp. Sawyer that there is little or no doubt that the shots were indeed fired from an upper window of the building:

"531 (Sergeant G.D. Henslee)   Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

Why do you think that might be? Hm? And why do you think Insp. Sawyer doesn't reply, "I know that, my witness saw him do it"?


Sawyer was trying to be the initial command center at this very early point in time. He was hearing a lot of different accounts. Many people (including many officers) initially thought the shots came from other places than the TSBD (the bushes, the picket fence, the triple overpass, etc). Those accounts, being listened to by Sawyer just prior to that point in time, would plenty of reasons for Sawyer to have some initial doubts that Brennan's account was accurate. Just because Sawyer doesn't broadcast Brennan's name, address, and social security number, doesn't mean that it wasn't Brennan's description.



The only thing nutty here, Mr Collins, is your wild theory that a group of law enforcement officials would have the discursive control of a bunch of elementary school kids and allow a man seen firing from an upper window of the Depository morph into a man seen running from the building carrying a 30:30 or some type of Winchester rifle. Amazing how the description-of-suspect details remain identical with the radio broadcast details, yet a radically different description of the context of the sighting manages to creep in. I guess you believe these guys had the cognitive sophistication of law enforcement officials for part of the sentence, but then went all elementary school for the rest.


I don't have any idea where Batchelor got his information (the memo doesn't say, so it could have been passed through several others before Batchelor got it) but then the message is passed to Vincent Drain, then it was passed to James Malley, then it was passed on to Gordon Shanklin. It appears that all of these transmissions must have been verbal until Shanklin prepares his memo. It doesn't matter whether they were school children or professional law enforcement officers, when a message is verbally passed through that many people, the chances of it being anywhere near correct at the end of the line are slim and none. Getting part of it right and being wrong on other parts would be expected. The only thing that surprises me is that apparently Shanklin put it in writing without verifying it was accurate. But when one considers that Shanklin allegedly ordered the destruction of the LHO note, it shows that he tended to react rather badly under pressure. Many people do just that.  No one to my knowledge has confirmed or corroborated the mystery suspect that you so desperately want to believe in, no one. All you have is a memo that seems to include some details that are not accurate. And by the way, I don't believe that I have ever said anything at all about the Stroud letter.

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 11, 2022, 06:12:46 PM
Inspector Sawyer, notably, does not put out any broadcast on that. Yet he has supposedly just spoken with a witness who could speak very specifically to that.

Inpsector Sawyer will have obviously connected the man seen running from the building with a rifle to the man other witnesses had seen at the window. However, such a connection will have been provisional in his seasoned veteran's mind: hence his pointed statement of uncertainty as to whether the man seen running from the building had been in that building in the first place. And hence the Dispatcher's pointed words in response to him: "Well, all the information we have receive, 9, indicates that it did come from about the 5th or 4th floor of that building."

~Grin~

Keep reaching, Mr Collins!

You're right in one respect: Insp. Sawyer has heard different (and probably conflicting) reports. But he knows for sure that a man was seen running from the building with a rifle in his hand, and that the witness can give a good description. While the obvious conclusion is that this man was the man others report as having seen firing from an upper window of the building, this is far from the only possible conclusion. The man might have been handed the weapon by the real shooter, who might still be in the building. He might have had the weapon dropped down to him from a high window. The man might have fired from west of the Depository and run behind it for cover, before running on further. He might have been but one of several shooters.

All Insp. Sawyer knows for sure is that a man seen running with a rifle in his hand shortly after the shooting is most definitely a suspect and is at large------------and so he puts out the description. That description comes from a witness who has no clothing description, and thinks the rifle was a "30.30 or some type of Winchester rifle"------------i.e. a witness other than Mr Brennan

Don't be silly! He spoke with Insp. Sawyer. If his source had been someone other than Insp. Sawyer, dontcha think he would have checked with Insp. Sawyer before passing on such bombshell information to Special Agent Drain? Being some ways past elementary school level of training and all?


Sawyer makes all of this very clear in his testimony. I have bolded the parts that spell out that apparently it was Brennan who gave Sawyer the description that Sawyer broadcast about 12:44. So your silly theory that it was some mystery witness who supposedly saw a man with a rifle going out the back of the building who gave Sawyer that description has been shown to be completely false.




Quote
Mr. BELIN. All right, now, sir; you did broadcast that description out of this
man?
Mr. SAWYER. Yes, that’s correct.
Mr. BELIN. That shows on the radio log. Where did you get that description
from?

Mr. SAWYER. We are talking now about the colored man?
Mr. BELIN. No, I am talking about the one that is on Sawyer’s Deposition
Exhibit A. that shows you at 12 :43.

Mr. SAWYER. That description came to me mainly from one witness who
claimed to have seen the rifle barrel in the fifth or sixth floor of the building,
and claimed to have been able to see the man up there.

Mr. BELIIP. Do you know this person’s name?
Mr. SAWYER. I do not.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know anything about him, what he was wearing?
Mr. SAWYER. Except that he was-I don’t remember what he was wearing.
I remember that he was a white man and that he wasn’t young and he wasn’t
old. He was there. That is the only two things that I can remember about
him.
Mr. BELIN. What age would you categorize as young?
322
Mr. SAWYER. Around 35 would be my best recollection of it, but it could be a
few years either way.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember if he was tall or short, or can’t YOU remember
anything about him?
Mr. SAWYER. I can’t remember that much about him. I was real hazy about
that.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember where he said he was standing when he saw
the person with the rifle?
Mr. SAWYER. I didn’t go into detail with him except that from the best of
my recollection, he was standing where he could have seen him. But there
were too many people coming up with questions to go into detail. I got the
description and sent him on over to the Sheriff’s Office.

Mr. BELIN. Inspector, do you remember anything else about this person who
you say gave you the primary description?
Mr. SAWYER. No, I do not, except that I did send him with an escort to the
Sheriff’s Office to give fuller or more complete detail.

.
.
.
Mr. BELIN. What about this person, who I will call the primary description
witness, did he say what side of the building it was on?
Mr. SAWYER. He went and pointed out the window which I now note to be
the sixth floor, but when I talked to him, I thought it was the fifth floor.
Mr. BELIN. The fifth floor?
Mr. SAWYER. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. What side of the building?
Mr. SAWYER. On the south side of the building, and the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Did you talk to any witness, or did any witness talk to you who
claimed to see any rifle or portion of a rifle at any place other than a window
of Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. SAWYER. No, did any

Mr. BELIN. Did any officer give you any information about talking to anyone
who saw a rifle or a portion of a rifle at any place other than a window in the
Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. SAWYER. No, not to my knowledge.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 11, 2022, 08:28:33 PM

Sawyer makes all of this very clear in his testimony. I have bolded the parts that spell out that apparently it was Brennan who gave Sawyer the description that Sawyer broadcast about 12:44. So your silly theory that it was some mystery witness who supposedly saw a man with a rifle going out the back of the building who gave Sawyer that description has been shown to be completely false.




Quote
Mr. BELIN. All right, now, sir; you did broadcast that description out of this
man?
Mr. SAWYER. Yes, that’s correct.
Mr. BELIN. That shows on the radio log. Where did you get that description
from?

Mr. SAWYER. We are talking now about the colored man?
Mr. BELIN. No, I am talking about the one that is on Sawyer’s Deposition
Exhibit A. that shows you at 12 :43.

Mr. SAWYER. That description came to me mainly from one witness who
claimed to have seen the rifle barrel in the fifth or sixth floor of the building,
and claimed to have been able to see the man up there.

Mr. BELIIP. Do you know this person’s name?
Mr. SAWYER. I do not.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know anything about him, what he was wearing?
Mr. SAWYER. Except that he was-I don’t remember what he was wearing.
I remember that he was a white man and that he wasn’t young and he wasn’t
old. He was there. That is the only two things that I can remember about
him.
Mr. BELIN. What age would you categorize as young?
322
Mr. SAWYER. Around 35 would be my best recollection of it, but it could be a
few years either way.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember if he was tall or short, or can’t YOU remember
anything about him?
Mr. SAWYER. I can’t remember that much about him. I was real hazy about
that.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember where he said he was standing when he saw
the person with the rifle?
Mr. SAWYER. I didn’t go into detail with him except that from the best of
my recollection, he was standing where he could have seen him. But there
were too many people coming up with questions to go into detail. I got the
description and sent him on over to the Sheriff’s Office.

Mr. BELIN. Inspector, do you remember anything else about this person who
you say gave you the primary description?
Mr. SAWYER. No, I do not, except that I did send him with an escort to the
Sheriff’s Office to give fuller or more complete detail.

.
.
.
Mr. BELIN. What about this person, who I will call the primary description
witness, did he say what side of the building it was on?
Mr. SAWYER. He went and pointed out the window which I now note to be
the sixth floor, but when I talked to him, I thought it was the fifth floor.
Mr. BELIN. The fifth floor?
Mr. SAWYER. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. What side of the building?
Mr. SAWYER. On the south side of the building, and the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Did you talk to any witness, or did any witness talk to you who
claimed to see any rifle or portion of a rifle at any place other than a window
of Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. SAWYER. No, did any

Mr. BELIN. Did any officer give you any information about talking to anyone
who saw a rifle or a portion of a rifle at any place other than a window in the
Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. SAWYER. No, not to my knowledge.


What does this discussion have to do with Lee Oswald's statement to Captain Fritz?  Lee told Fritz that he was in the 1st floor lunchroom when JFK passed by the TSBD..... And while he was in that lunchroom he saw Jarman and Norman walk by the lunchroom.  The time they walked by was 12:27..... 

Spectators on the streets in front of the TSBD saw a man who was wearing khaki colored clothing and holding a rifle, standing behind a 6th floor window at the time that Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 11, 2022, 08:35:08 PM

Sawyer makes all of this very clear in his testimony.

The gullibility of these Warren Gullibles never ceases to amaze and entertain!  :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 11, 2022, 08:45:38 PM
(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.

As I'm sure you know, Mr Cakebread, the Warren Gullibles have tried to push back on this with the following argument:

Mr Oswald, from the 6th floor, noticed Messrs Jarman & Norman down on the street walk down towards the rear of the building. A little later, he heard their voices a floor below. Later, in custody, he exploited his inference that they had come in by the back door.

The problem with this is a guilty Mr Oswald cannot have known for certain that the domino room did not contain several people at this time. So describing such is a big risk. Yet he confidently describes a domino room he had to himself. V. telling-------------and that the 'investigating' authorities understood this is proved by the fact that they inflated his actual claim (saw Junior & short guy walking through) into 'ate lunch with Junior & Shorty'.

If I were a Warren Gullible I would supplement my Jarman/Norman theory by postulating a live video feed of the domino room that evil Mr Oswald had

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 11, 2022, 09:51:18 PM
As I'm sure you know, Mr Cakebread, the Warren Gullibles have tried to push back on this with the following argument:

Mr Oswald, from the 6th floor, noticed Messrs Jarman & Norman down on the street walk down towards the rear of the building. A little later, he heard their voices a floor below. Later, in custody, he exploited his inference that they had come in by the back door.

The problem with this is a guilty Mr Oswald cannot have known for certain that the domino room did not contain several people at this time. So describing such is a big risk. Yet he confidently describes a domino room he had to himself. V. telling-------------and that the 'investigating' authorities understood this is proved by the fact that they inflated his actual claim (saw Junior & short guy walking through) into 'ate lunch with Junior & Shorty'.

If I were a Warren Gullible I would supplement my Jarman/Norman theory by postulating a live video feed of the domino room that evil Mr Oswald had

 Thumb1:

Mr Ford.... You're presenting waaaaaaay too much commonsense ..... Anybody with an IQ greater than a turnip would know that the idea that Lee ( or anybody but a person with a neck like a giraffe ) couldn't stick his head out of a sixth floor window and see Jarman and Norman standing in front of the TSBD.   And then devine that they were contemplating  going to the 5th floor to watch the parade.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 14, 2022, 07:09:33 PM
(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.

Jarman's WC Testimony

Mr. BALL - Where did you stand?
Mr. JARMAN - I was standing over to the right in front of the building going toward the west.
Mr. BALL - Were you on the sidewalk or curb?
Mr. JARMAN - On the sidewalk.
Mr. BALL - The sidewalk in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - How long did you stand there?
Mr. JARMAN - Well, until about 12:20, between 12:20 and 12:25.
Mr. BALL - Who do you remember was standing near you that worked with you in the Book Depository?
Mr. JARMAN - Harold Norman and Charles Givens and Daniel Arce.
Mr. BALL - What about Mr. Truly?
Mr. JARMAN - He wasn't standing close to me.
Mr. BALL - Did you see him?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Who was he with?
Mr. JARMAN. He was with the Vice President of the company.
Mr. BALL - What is his name?
Mr. JARMAN - O. V. Campbell.
Mr. BALL - Where were they standing?
Mr. JARMAN - They were standing at the corner of the building in front of the mail boxes.


 Jarman met up with Norman on the way outside. They were with Givens and Arce and standing west of the steps on the sidewalk.  He noticed Truly and Campbell east of the steps. When asked about Lovelady, he remembered him (they) came out later. Was he referring to Shelley as well?

Representative FORD - You testified earlier that you were standing on the steps or in front of the School Depository Building prior to the President's motorcade coming by the building.
Mr. JARMAN - No, sir. I was standing on the sidewalk.
Representative FORD - But in front of the building?
Mr. JARMAN - In front of the building.
Representative FORD - Then you said you went around the building.
Mr. JARMAN - Yes.
Representative FORD - What route did you take? Did you go down Elm or did you go down Houston?
Mr. JARMAN - I went to the corner of the building facing Elm, and turned going north on Houston.
Representative FORD - Can you turn around and--here is the main entrance on Elm Street. And you were standing out on the sidewalk more or less where?
Mr. JARMAN - Right here.
Representative FORD - In which direction did you go then?
Mr. JARMAN - This way.
Representative FORD - You went by the front to the corner of Houston and Elm, and then down Houston towards the loading dock?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Representative FORD - And where did you get on the elevator?
Mr. JARMAN - We walked around to the back entrance and went through this door here, and this elevator here was up on six, I believe. And we walked around the elevator and took the west elevator up.
Representative FORD - How could you tell this elevator was at six?
Mr. JARMAN - Because after we got around to the other side we looked up.
Representative FORD - You could see it was on six?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes.
Representative FORD - This was about what time?
Mr. JARMAN - That was about 12:25 or 12:28.
Representative FORD - You got off the fifth floor?
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Representative FORD - As you rode the elevator, you noticed the other one was on the sixth floor?
Mr. JARMAN - Right, sir.


He estimates the time was 12.25-12.28 when they arrived at the 5th floor windows, just minutes before the shots.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 14, 2022, 10:27:22 PM

He estimates the time was 12.25-12.28 when they arrived at the 5th floor windows, just minutes before the shots.
Here's what I don't get..
JFK was scheduled to speak at the Dallas Trade Mart at 12:30 PM.
An announcement came there that the motorcade was running behind the timetable---
Quote
The entire faculty of the center and their wives were invited to the luncheon in a huge building downtown. There were hundreds of tables, and President Kennedy was supposed to address that huge audience of notables from Dallas at 12:30. People were there at 12 o’clock; then it became 12:30. Somebody came to the podium and said that people should start eating, that there would be a delay in Kennedy’s appearance.
https://magazine.utdallas.edu/the-jfk-connection/

Why would those guys take a chance of missing the parade [as scheduled] by abandoning their spot and walking all the way around to the rear of the building and then taking some pokey elevator to the upper floors?
Also...how would a snipers' nest shooter [who had no such information about the delay] know when to occupy their position?
The newspapers having also published the agenda...the motorcade should then have been through Dealey Plaza at perhaps between 11:50-12:10ish---allowing 5-10 minutes to arrive at the Trade Mart parking lot and JFK to have time to arrive at the podium.
Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 14, 2022, 10:41:37 PM
Here's what I don't get..
JFK was scheduled to speak at the Dallas Trade Mart at 12:30 PM.
An announcement came there that the motorcade was running behind the timetable---https://magazine.utdallas.edu/the-jfk-connection/

Why would those guys take a chance of missing the parade [as scheduled] by abandoning their spot and walking all the way around to the rear of the building and then taking some pokey elevator to the upper floors?
Also...how would a snipers' nest shooter [who had no such information about the delay] know when to occupy their position?
The newspapers having also published the agenda...the motorcade should then have been through Dealey Plaza at perhaps between 11:50-12:10ish---allowing 5-10 minutes to arrive at the Trade Mart parking lot and JFK to have time to arrive at the podium.
Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade.

a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade.

Yes, You're right ....  And the DPD had the radio communication....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 15, 2022, 04:19:48 PM
Here's what I don't get..
JFK was scheduled to speak at the Dallas Trade Mart at 12:30 PM.
An announcement came there that the motorcade was running behind the timetable---https://magazine.utdallas.edu/the-jfk-connection/

Why would those guys take a chance of missing the parade [as scheduled] by abandoning their spot and walking all the way around to the rear of the building and then taking some pokey elevator to the upper floors?
Also...how would a snipers' nest shooter [who had no such information about the delay] know when to occupy their position?
The newspapers having also published the agenda...the motorcade should then have been through Dealey Plaza at perhaps between 11:50-12:10ish---allowing 5-10 minutes to arrive at the Trade Mart parking lot and JFK to have time to arrive at the podium.
Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade.

The progress of the motorcade was being reported in real time over the broadcast and police radios.  I recall some witness in Dealey Plaza noting that they could hear the location of the motorcade being reported via the motorcycle police radios.  In addition, there was a lot of noise as the motorcade approached.  The sound of the crowd and caravan of motorcycles etc.  These events almost always run behind schedule.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 16, 2022, 02:28:16 AM
The progress of the motorcade was being reported in real time over the broadcast and police radios.
Prove it. Yes ...for once in your life cite proof of what you claim. I will provide the sources---


Give us the time stamps there. I only hear music and commercials until the shooting is reported.


Same there just usual police racket until all hell breaks loose.

Otherwise stop making stuff up...it's embarrassing.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 16, 2022, 02:44:03 PM
Prove it. Yes ...for once in your life cite proof of what you claim. I will provide the sources---


Give us the time stamps there. I only hear music and commercials until the shooting is reported.


Same there just usual police racket until all hell breaks loose.

Otherwise stop making stuff up...it's embarrassing.

Mr. SPECTER - When, after you first observed him did you have a conversation about him with your wife?
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us, and the radio was on it giving the details of the motorcade, where it was positioned, and right after the time I noticed him and when my wife was pointing this other thing to me, I don't remember what that was, the dispatcher came on and gave the position of the motorcade as being on Cedar Springs. This would be in the area of Turtle Creek, down in that area.
I can't remember the street's name but I know where it is at. And this was the position of the motorcade and it was about 15 or 16 after 12.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 16, 2022, 03:29:58 PM
Mr. SPECTER - When, after you first observed him did you have a conversation about him with your wife?
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us, and the radio was on it giving the details of the motorcade, where it was positioned, and right after the time I noticed him and when my wife was pointing this other thing to me, I don't remember what that was, the dispatcher came on and gave the position of the motorcade as being on Cedar Springs. This would be in the area of Turtle Creek, down in that area.
I can't remember the street's name but I know where it is at. And this was the position of the motorcade and it was about 15 or 16 after 12.


So, this communication must be on the DPD radio recordings. Where is it?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 16, 2022, 03:46:00 PM
So, this communication must be on the DPD radio recordings. Where is it?

No idea not having searched them for this information.  Have you?  Jerry made the baseless claim that no one could possibly have known that the motorcade was running behind schedule.  Of course, most such events do run a few minutes late.  I simply cited the fact that a witness in Dealey Plaza (one often cited by CTers) also indicated that the progress of the motorcade could be heard over the police radios.  Jerry was apparently unaware of this fact since he went into hysterics suggesting that I had made this up.  I then provided the specific witness statement that I had made reference (and which Jerry apparently was unaware of). 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 16, 2022, 05:13:16 PM
“Richard” must have forgotten that he also claimed the motorcade progress was being announced over broadcast radio.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 16, 2022, 05:54:01 PM
We are playing whack a mole again.   The original claim was that it was not possible to know the location/timing of the motorcade as it made its way to Dealey Plaza.  Then it was deemed a lie to suggest that there was reporting of the progress of the motorcade (as you might expect so that those responsible for security had a head's up as it approached their location). The witness testimony indicates that the motorcade was being reported over the police radio and reports of its progress could be heard in Dealey Plaza as it approached.  And, of course, the motorcade was the top news story that day in Dallas and was widely covered on broadcast TV and radio.  In addition, the crowd and motorcade noise were audible as the motorcade progressed through the city.  You could hear it approaching.   There was nothing impossible about anticipating the arrival of the motorcade in Dealey Plaza or knowing that it would be a few minutes behind schedule (as most such events are).  And even if this baseless claim had any validity (i.e. there would be no way for Oswald to know the exact time the motorcade would pass the building) that does nothing to preclude him from still being the assassin.  Instead down the rabbit hole we go.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 16, 2022, 06:16:49 PM
Once again, “Richard” gets caught out in a lie and then whines about it instead of being honest.

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/50390f82525f5158db33acb14cb03b36/tenor.gif)
The progress of the motorcade was being reported in real time over the broadcast and police radios.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 16, 2022, 07:14:23 PM
Jerry made the baseless claim that no one could possibly have known that the motorcade was running behind schedule.  Of course, most such events do run a few minutes late. 
  BS: False and untrue followed by incorrect and distorted.
Martin Weidmann provided that specific witness statement and Mr Smith wants to take credit for his move.
Here is what I actually stated based on logic---

Also...how would a snipers' nest shooter [who had no such information about the delay] know when to occupy their position?
The newspapers having also published the agenda...the motorcade should then have been through Dealey Plaza at perhaps between 11:50-12:10ish---allowing 5-10 minutes to arrive at the Trade Mart parking lot and JFK to have time to arrive at the podium.
Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 16, 2022, 07:48:37 PM
No idea not having searched them for this information.  Have you?  Jerry made the baseless claim that no one could possibly have known that the motorcade was running behind schedule.  Of course, most such events do run a few minutes late.  I simply cited the fact that a witness in Dealey Plaza (one often cited by CTers) also indicated that the progress of the motorcade could be heard over the police radios.  Jerry was apparently unaware of this fact since he went into hysterics suggesting that I had made this up.  I then provided the specific witness statement that I had made reference (and which Jerry apparently was unaware of).

No idea not having searched them for this information.  Have you?

Says the lazy contrarian. No I haven't searched for it because Jerry asked the information from you. It seems however that as per usual you don't (can't or want to) back up your claims with actual evidence.

I then provided the specific witness statement

Yes, you did but without providing the proof that what the witness said was actually true. How very gullible of you!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 16, 2022, 07:50:31 PM
We are playing whack a mole again.   The original claim was that it was not possible to know the location/timing of the motorcade as it made its way to Dealey Plaza.  Then it was deemed a lie to suggest that there was reporting of the progress of the motorcade (as you might expect so that those responsible for security had a head's up as it approached their location). The witness testimony indicates that the motorcade was being reported over the police radio and reports of its progress could be heard in Dealey Plaza as it approached.  And, of course, the motorcade was the top news story that day in Dallas and was widely covered on broadcast TV and radio.  In addition, the crowd and motorcade noise were audible as the motorcade progressed through the city.  You could hear it approaching.   There was nothing impossible about anticipating the arrival of the motorcade in Dealey Plaza or knowing that it would be a few minutes behind schedule (as most such events are).  And even if this baseless claim had any validity (i.e. there would be no way for Oswald to know the exact time the motorcade would pass the building) that does nothing to preclude him from still being the assassin.  Instead down the rabbit hole we go.


And, of course, the motorcade was the top news story that day in Dallas and was widely covered on broadcast TV and radio.

Sure, it was.... there just wasn't any live minute by minute coverage.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 16, 2022, 07:53:49 PM
  BS: False and untrue followed by incorrect and distorted.
Martin Weidmann provided that specific witness statement and Mr Smith wants to take credit for his move.
Here is what I actually stated based on logic---

LOL.  You falsely and baselessly claimed:  "Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade."  When I noted that a witness in Dealey Plaza indicated that he could hear the progress of the motorcade repeated over the police radios, you went into hysterics claiming that was a lie and asking me to prove it.  I then posted the witness testimony that makes that claim.  I'm not even sure what you are babbling about here.  You have noted nothing to call into question that the police were not accurately reporting the progress of the motorcade.  And, of course, you ignore that events such as these are often running behind schedule.  It wouldn't take Nostradamus to figure that out.  And even if Oswald had no clue where the motorcade was, he had eyes and ears.  The motorcade wouldn't roar past Dealey Plaza before he aware of its approach.  This is a ridiculous trip down the rabbit hole.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 16, 2022, 08:00:15 PM

And, of course, the motorcade was the top news story that day in Dallas and was widely covered on broadcast TV and radio.

Sure, it was.... there just wasn't any live minute by minute coverage.

More rabbit hole nonsense.  Why would it have to be minute to minute?  The arrival and motorcade departure time from Love Field was covered.  Most of the delay occurred with JFK pausing to shake hands with the crowd.  That would have been known via local broadcasts.  The route and approximate timeframe were published.  The police radios in DP were announcing the progress of the motorcade.  It would be expected to be a few minutes later than anticipated.  Oswald had eyes and ears.  Another witness indicated that he could hear the progress of the motorcade through Dallas.  You could hear the roar of the crowd and noise as the motorcade approached.  And EVEN if Oswald had no idea when the motorcade would be there, nothing about that precludes him from being the assassin.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 16, 2022, 09:02:14 PM
More rabbit hole nonsense.  Why would it have to be minute to minute?  The arrival and motorcade departure time from Love Field was covered.  Most of the delay occurred with JFK pausing to shake hands with the crowd.  That would have been known via local broadcasts.  The route and approximate timeframe were published.  The police radios in DP were announcing the progress of the motorcade.  It would be expected to be a few minutes later than anticipated.  Oswald had eyes and ears.  Another witness indicated that he could hear the progress of the motorcade through Dallas.  You could hear the roar of the crowd and noise as the motorcade approached.  And EVEN if Oswald had no idea when the motorcade would be there, nothing about that precludes him from being the assassin.
The ramblings of a certified manic neurotic ::)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 16, 2022, 09:27:31 PM
More rabbit hole nonsense.  Why would it have to be minute to minute?  The arrival and motorcade departure time from Love Field was covered.  Most of the delay occurred with JFK pausing to shake hands with the crowd.  That would have been known via local broadcasts.  The route and approximate timeframe were published.  The police radios in DP were announcing the progress of the motorcade.  It would be expected to be a few minutes later than anticipated.  Oswald had eyes and ears.  Another witness indicated that he could hear the progress of the motorcade through Dallas.  You could hear the roar of the crowd and noise as the motorcade approached.  And EVEN if Oswald had no idea when the motorcade would be there, nothing about that precludes him from being the assassin.

More rabbit hole nonsense.  Why would it have to be minute to minute?

Have it your way; there was absolutely no live coverage on radio or television of the motorcade. None.

Most of the delay occurred with JFK pausing to shake hands with the crowd.  That would have been known via local broadcasts.

Except for the fact there were no such live broadcasts.

The police radios in DP were announcing the progress of the motorcade.  It would be expected to be a few minutes later than anticipated.  Oswald had eyes and ears.

Yes he did and he must have had super powers as well, if he could hear a radio broadcast on a police motorbike passing by for 6 floors up at the TSBD. 

And EVEN if Oswald had no idea when the motorcade would be there, nothing about that precludes him from being the assassin.

It also doesn't place him on the 6th floor.... Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
The motorcade was due to arrive at the Trade Mart at 12:30 and was delayed by some 15 minutes. Yet, somehow, Oswald, who could not know of the delay, manages to get to the 6th floor, without being seen, some 10 minutes after the motorcade had been scheduled to pass by and still gets there on time to actually see it pass by. Boy, he really did have super powers, didn't he?   :D

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 17, 2022, 12:28:58 AM
Mr. Belin.
Now, Mrs. Reid, you left lunch about what time?
Mrs. Reid.
Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 17, 2022, 12:52:07 AM
Mr. Belin.
Now, Mrs. Reid, you left lunch about what time?
Mrs. Reid.
Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.

Her husband worked in the nearby records building and very well might have been listening to the DPD radio channel two broadcasts.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 17, 2022, 12:58:59 AM
Her husband worked in the nearby records building and very well might have been listening to the DPD radio channel two broadcasts.

Well, that must be it, because there were no radio stations broadcasting live to provide details of the motorcade.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 17, 2022, 01:02:35 AM
Well, that must be it, because there were no radio stations broadcasting live to provide details of the motorcade.

Mr Sam Pate for KBOX?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Alan Ford on August 17, 2022, 01:08:47 AM
Hmmmm indeed, Mr O'Meara. I guess this nukes Mr Collins' claim that "No one to my knowledge has confirmed or corroborated the mystery suspect that you so desperately want to believe in, no one."

We await Mr Collins' 'explanation': Euins wasn't too long out of elementary school......................  :D

Mr Sam Pate, 1970 interview:

(https://i.postimg.cc/cJnwK5Q0/Sam-Pate-man-running.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 17, 2022, 01:24:49 AM
More rabbit hole nonsense.  Why would it have to be minute to minute?

Have it your way; there was absolutely no live coverage on radio or television of the motorcade. None.

Most of the delay occurred with JFK pausing to shake hands with the crowd.  That would have been known via local broadcasts.

Except for the fact there were no such live broadcasts.

The police radios in DP were announcing the progress of the motorcade.  It would be expected to be a few minutes later than anticipated.  Oswald had eyes and ears.

Yes he did and he must have had super powers as well, if he could hear a radio broadcast on a police motorbike passing by for 6 floors up at the TSBD. 

And EVEN if Oswald had no idea when the motorcade would be there, nothing about that precludes him from being the assassin.

It also doesn't place him on the 6th floor.... Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
The motorcade was due to arrive at the Trade Mart at 12:30 and was delayed by some 15 minutes. Yet, somehow, Oswald, who could not know of the delay, manages to get to the 6th floor, without being seen, some 10 minutes after the motorcade had been scheduled to pass by and still gets there on time to actually see it pass by. Boy, he really did have super powers, didn't he?   :D

Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
_ Williams: The books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing-as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/pdf/WH3_Williams.pdf

IIRC, BR also mentioned other times that he might have headed down to the 5th, like 12:10, 12:15
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 17, 2022, 01:42:02 AM
Her husband worked in the nearby records building and very well might have been listening to the DPD radio channel two broadcasts.
Let's pull even more possibilities out of thin air....why not?

For those interested, here is a link to the DPD transcripts-----
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0208b.htm
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 17, 2022, 08:48:40 AM
Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
_ Williams: The books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing-as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/pdf/WH3_Williams.pdf

IIRC, BR also mentioned other times that he might have headed down to the 5th, like 12:10, 12:15

Nice try, but no cigar

First of all, make up your mind. On the one hand you have Jarman claiming he heard the bold action and the shells dropping on the floor, while he was one floor below yet on the other hand you seem to rule out (or ignore, rather) that Bonnie Ray Williams wouldn't have heard anybody moving around on the wooden floor.

Secondly, Bonnie Ray Williams went down to the fifth floor and when he got there Jarman and Norman were already there. They did not get there until about 5 minutes prior to the shooting.

Try sticking to the script, will ya?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 17, 2022, 10:08:16 AM
Nice try, but no cigar

First of all, make up your mind. On the one hand you have Jarman claiming he heard the bold action and the shells dropping on the floor, while he was one floor below yet on the other hand you seem to rule out (or ignore, rather) that Bonnie Ray Williams wouldn't have heard anybody moving around on the wooden floor.

Secondly, Bonnie Ray Williams went down to the fifth floor and when he got there Jarman and Norman were already there. They did not get there until about 5 minutes prior to the shooting.

Try sticking to the script, will ya?

First of all, make up your mind. On the one hand you have Jarman claiming he heard the bold action and the shells dropping on the floor, while he was one floor below yet on the other hand you seem to rule out (or ignore, rather) that Bonnie Ray Williams wouldn't have heard anybody moving around on the wooden floor.
_My post did not address anything about Jarman.

TO WIT:

=================================

Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
_ Williams: The books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing-as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/pdf/WH3_Williams.pdf

IIRC, BR also mentioned other times that he might have headed down to the 5th, like 12:10, 12:15

==================================
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 17, 2022, 10:42:43 AM
Let's pull even more possibilities out of thin air....why not?

For those interested, here is a link to the DPD transcripts-----
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0208b.htm


The reason I suggest that possibility is that I believe the Sheriff’s Department had facilities in that building. And the probability that there was a police-band radio turned on in that building, and that it was monitoring DPD channel 2 (for the parade progress), that her husband could have been listening to, seems very high to me. So, I don’t think “thin air” is a fair description. But you are welcome to have a differing opinion, you usually do. And, I don’t need to look at transcripts. Channel 2 includes many reports regarding the current progress of the motorcade.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 17, 2022, 11:35:57 AM
First of all, make up your mind. On the one hand you have Jarman claiming he heard the bold action and the shells dropping on the floor, while he was one floor below yet on the other hand you seem to rule out (or ignore, rather) that Bonnie Ray Williams wouldn't have heard anybody moving around on the wooden floor.
_My post did not address anything about Jarman.

TO WIT:

=================================

Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
_ Williams: The books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing-as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/pdf/WH3_Williams.pdf

IIRC, BR also mentioned other times that he might have headed down to the 5th, like 12:10, 12:15

==================================

I'm sorry but not surprised that you failed to understand the logic of my reply.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 17, 2022, 01:12:17 PM
  And, I don’t need to look at transcripts. Channel 2 includes many reports regarding the current progress of the motorcade.

For those interested, here is a link to the DPD transcripts-----
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0208b.htm
There may be readers here that aren't as omniscient as you.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 17, 2022, 01:14:19 PM
Mr. Belin.
Now, Mrs. Reid, you left lunch about what time?
Mrs. Reid.
Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.

Excellent.  So there is witness evidence that the police radios in Dealey Plaza were reporting the motorcade progress (as any reasonable person would expect), the broadcast radios were reporting, the route and approximate timeline was published in the paper, and there was TV coverage of the beginning of the motorcade at Love Field (where the delay began).  As a result, it would not have taken a top secret team to know that the motorcade was running a few minutes behind schedule.  Something that occurs in almost any such event.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 17, 2022, 02:04:25 PM
I'm sorry but not surprised that you failed to understand the logic of my reply.

Feel free to park your ego at the door
Now show where I spoke about Jarman at all

======================================================================
First of all, make up your mind. On the one hand you have Jarman claiming he heard the bold action and the shells dropping on the floor, while he was one floor below yet on the other hand you seem to rule out (or ignore, rather) that Bonnie Ray Williams wouldn't have heard anybody moving around on the wooden floor.
=======================================================================

Show us where I ever said anything about Jarman re bolt action + shells dropping
That was Harold Norman, dog.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 17, 2022, 02:08:30 PM
IIRC, BR also mentioned other times that he might have headed down to the 5th, like 12:10, 12:15

What part of "when he got there Jarman and Norman were already there" did you not understand?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 17, 2022, 02:11:25 PM
Excellent.  So there is witness evidence that the police radios in Dealey Plaza were reporting the motorcade progress (as any reasonable person would expect), the broadcast radios were reporting, the route and approximate timeline was published in the paper, and there was TV coverage of the beginning of the motorcade at Love Field (where the delay began).  As a result, it would not have taken a top secret team to know that the motorcade was running a few minutes behind schedule.  Something that occurs in almost any such event.

Is this ramble supposed to somehow prove that Lee Oswald would have been aware of any of this?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 17, 2022, 06:04:47 PM
 
Is this ramble supposed to somehow prove that Lee Oswald would have been aware of any of this?
He could hear the police scanner from the lunchroom?
 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 17, 2022, 07:28:01 PM
He could hear the police scanner from the lunchroom?

Of course.... the guy had super powers. Didn't you know that?   :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 17, 2022, 08:56:37 PM
He could hear the police scanner from the lunchroom?

Are we moving on from your previous false claim that there was no real time broadcast of the motorcade progress to something new?  This statement also contains a false premise since Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.  He could certainly hear the police broadcasts over a motorcycle radio through an open window in the building.  He was not the top floor of a skyscraper but the 6th floor of a building that was in close proximity to the motorcycle radio heard by Rowland.  Did he?  No idea but it wasn't necessary since his every movement is not known.  We know only that he was in the 6th floor window at 12:30 since that is when he pulled the trigger of his rifle at that moment.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 17, 2022, 09:20:12 PM
Are we moving on from your previous false claim that there was no real time broadcast of the motorcade progress to something new?  This statement also contains a false premise since Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.  He could certainly hear the police broadcasts over a motorcycle radio through an open window in the building.  He was not the top floor of a skyscraper but the 6th floor of a building that was in close proximity to the motorcycle radio heard by Rowland.  Did he?  No idea but it wasn't necessary since his every movement is not known.  We know only that he was in the 6th floor window at 12:30 since that is when he pulled the trigger of his rifle at that moment.

This statement also contains a false premise since Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.

Really? And you know this how? Even more importantly, can you prove where he was?

He could certainly hear the police broadcasts over a motorcycle radio through an open window in the building. 

"An" open window? What window would that be?

And what kind of amazing super power is this? He can hear police broadcasts from a motorcycle radio as the bike passes by? Wow!

He was not the top floor of a skyscraper but the 6th floor of a building that was in close proximity to the motorcycle radio heard by Rowland.

Too bad you just can't prove that!

No idea but it wasn't necessary since his every movement is not known.

His every movement isn't known, but you know nevertheless that he wasn't in the Domino room but on the 6th floor instead. You got super powers also?  :D

We know only that he was in the 6th floor window at 12:30 since that is when he pulled the trigger of his rifle at that moment.

No. We don't know that and you can't prove it. Jesse Curry stated:

"No one has ever been able to put him (Oswald) in the Texas School Book Depository with a rifle in his hand."

Yet, here we have Richard Smith who knows better..... Hilarious!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 17, 2022, 09:33:42 PM
This statement also contains a false premise since Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.

Really? And you know this how? Even more importantly, can you prove where he was?

He could certainly hear the police broadcasts over a motorcycle radio through an open window in the building. 

"An" open window? What window would that be?

And what kind of amazing super power is this? He can hear police broadcasts from a motorcycle radio as the bike passes by? Wow!

He was not the top floor of a skyscraper but the 6th floor of a building that was in close proximity to the motorcycle radio heard by Rowland.

Too bad you just can't prove that!

No idea but it wasn't necessary since his every movement is not known.

His every movement isn't known, but you know nevertheless that he wasn't in the Domino room but on the 6th floor instead. You got super powers also?  :D

We know only that he was in the 6th floor window at 12:30 since that is when he pulled the trigger of his rifle at that moment.

No. We don't know that and you can't prove it. Jesse Curry stated:

"No one has ever been able to put him (Oswald) in the Texas School Book Depository with a rifle in his hand."

Yet, here we have Richard Smith who knows better..... Hilarious!

Huh?  I'm not sure what you are babbling about here.  Rowland indicated that he heard the motorcycle radio report around 12:15.   It was not a police bike driving through Dealey Plaza but one parked there.   What open window?  HA HA HA.  Take a guess.

Again:
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us, and the radio was on it giving the details of the motorcade, where it was positioned, and right after the time I noticed him and when my wife was pointing this other thing to me, I don't remember what that was, the dispatcher came on and gave the position of the motorcade as being on Cedar Springs. This would be in the area of Turtle Creek, down in that area.
I can't remember the street's name but I know where it is at. And this was the position of the motorcade and it was about 15 or 16 after 12.



Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 17, 2022, 09:53:21 PM
Huh?  I'm not sure what you are babbling about here.  Rowland indicated that he heard the motorcycle radio report around 12:15.   It was not a police bike driving through Dealey Plaza but one parked there.   What open window?  HA HA HA.  Take a guess.

Again:
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us, and the radio was on it giving the details of the motorcade, where it was positioned, and right after the time I noticed him and when my wife was pointing this other thing to me, I don't remember what that was, the dispatcher came on and gave the position of the motorcade as being on Cedar Springs. This would be in the area of Turtle Creek, down in that area.
I can't remember the street's name but I know where it is at. And this was the position of the motorcade and it was about 15 or 16 after 12.

Huh?  I'm not sure what you are babbling about here.

No surprise there, as you are clueless more often than not.

Rowland indicated that he heard the motorcycle radio report around 12:15.   It was not a police bike driving through Dealey Plaza but one parked there.

Wow, this gets better and better. Rowland testified he was on Elm and Main, which is some distance away from the TSBD. So, even if there was a police bike parked there, there is no possibility whatsoever that anybody inside the TSBD could have heard any message coming over the police radio. You've just shot down your entire argument as well as demonstrated beyond doubt that you can not prove a damned thing you claim. But then, hey, that's nothing new......
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 18, 2022, 12:01:04 AM
Are we moving on from your previous false claim that there was no real time broadcast of the motorcade progress to something new?  This statement also contains a false premise since Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.  He could certainly hear the police broadcasts over a motorcycle radio through an open window in the building.  He was not the top floor of a skyscraper but the 6th floor of a building that was in close proximity to the motorcycle radio heard by Rowland.  Did he?  No idea but it wasn't necessary since his every movement is not known.  We know only that he was in the 6th floor window at 12:30 since that is when he pulled the trigger of his rifle at that moment.

 Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.

Then please explain how he knew that Jarman and Norman walked past that lunchroom at 12:27.   And if you still can't believe the facts, then  please provide a plausible explanation how Lee could have known that there was nobody in that lunchroom who could have refuted his statement of "I was in the first floor lunchroom when the president past by the TSBD." 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 18, 2022, 12:12:30 AM
What part of "when he got there Jarman and Norman were already there" did you not understand?

What part of my focus on BRW and his reasons for not being not able to see the SE section do you not get?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 12:22:57 AM
What part of my focus on BRW and his reasons for not being not able to see the SE section do you not get?

What makes you think we don't understand that pathetic "focus on BRW"?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 18, 2022, 12:37:12 AM
What makes you think we don't understand that pathetic "focus on BRW"?

What I also focused on was your statement that BRW saw nothing
He also couldn't see the SE corner... Why didn't you include that?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 18, 2022, 12:46:41 AM
Huh?  I'm not sure what you are babbling about here.  Rowland indicated that he heard the motorcycle radio report around 12:15.   It was not a police bike driving through Dealey Plaza but one parked there.   What open window?  HA HA HA.  Take a guess.

Again:
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us, and the radio was on it giving the details of the motorcade, where it was positioned, and right after the time I noticed him and when my wife was pointing this other thing to me, I don't remember what that was, the dispatcher came on and gave the position of the motorcade as being on Cedar Springs. This would be in the area of Turtle Creek, down in that area.
I can't remember the street's name but I know where it is at. And this was the position of the motorcade and it was about 15 or 16 after 12.

What open window?  HA HA HA.  Take a guess.

I'd guess that you're referring to the window at the SE corner of the sixth floor where Bonnie Ray Williams was eating his lunch at about 15 or 16 minutes after 12:00 O'clock.  Are you suggesting that Lee Oswald and BRW were dining together at 12:15? 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 01:54:13 AM
What I also focused on was your statement that BRW saw nothing
He also couldn't see the SE corner... Why didn't you include that?

Because it doesn't matter that he doesn't see anything, when you ignore what he would/could have heard.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 18, 2022, 11:10:15 AM
Because it doesn't matter that he doesn't see anything, when you ignore what he would/could have heard.

Why are you dragging in that 'could/would' aspect when, again, I'm only addressing the fact that BRW testified that he could not see anything in the SE area because of the stacks of boxes. You only claimed that he didn't see anything, without including the reasons why.

To me, that looks like an attempt to mislead.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 12:37:31 PM
Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.

Then please explain how he knew that Jarman and Norman walked past that lunchroom at 12:27.   And if you still can't believe the facts, then  please provide a plausible explanation how Lee could have known that there was nobody in that lunchroom who could have refuted his statement of "I was in the first floor lunchroom when the president past by the TSBD."

We have beat that one to death.  Oswald had worked in the building for weeks.  He had observed the typical patterns of his coworkers.  For example, who had lunch where and with whom. It wouldn't take Nostradamus to figure this out.  And, of course, a suspect does not obtain an alibi by claiming to see others.  He obtains an alibi when others can confirm his presence.   None did.
Lastly, I thought CTers questioned the accuracy of Oswald's statements while in custody?  Does that only apply when he said something incriminatory?  That's a rhetorical question since I know the answer.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 01:19:40 PM
Huh?  I'm not sure what you are babbling about here.

No surprise there, as you are clueless more often than not.

Rowland indicated that he heard the motorcycle radio report around 12:15.   It was not a police bike driving through Dealey Plaza but one parked there.

Wow, this gets better and better. Rowland testified he was on Elm and Main, which is some distance away from the TSBD. So, even if there was a police bike parked there, there is no possibility whatsoever that anybody inside the TSBD could have heard any message coming over the police radio. You've just shot down your entire argument as well as demonstrated beyond doubt that you can not prove a damned thing you claim. But then, hey, that's nothing new......

Wrong.  Elm and Main are parallel streets.  Rowland's testimony is confusing, but he was standing on Houston.  Obviously in plain sight and close proximity to the TSBD since he references the clock and seeing a person with a gun in the building.  About 150 feet away.  He also says that the police motorcycle that he makes reference was "not in front of us, just a little past us."   Meaning it was even closer to the TSBD.  No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade progress.  Only Oswald could know that.  He certainly could have, however.  He also had a good idea from the media reports of the timing of the motorcade.  He had eyes and ears to hear the approach of the motorcade.  Most such events run a few minutes late.  What has been demonstrated by the totality of the evidence is that your desperate attempt to exonerate Oswald was entirely false and based on a false premise (i.e. no real time information of the motorcade progress).  There was real time reporting of the motorcade progress.  Witnesses confirm that both police and radio broadcasts noted the progress (as anyone might expect given the circumstances). 


"The Rowlands stood at the west entrance of the Dallas County Records Building on Houston Street, about 150 feet from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository."
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 18, 2022, 01:54:48 PM
"The Rowlands stood at the west entrance of the Dallas County Records Building on Houston Street, about 150 feet from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository."

Arnold Rowland was about 280 feet away from the 6th-floor SW window (about 2/3 further away than Brennan was from the SE window). Guess which witness' testimony the critics parade as unimpeachable?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 01:58:37 PM
Arnold Rowland was about 280 feet away from the 6th-floor SW window (about 2/3 further away than Brennan was from the SE window). Guess which witness' testimony the critics parade as unimpeachable?

I'm still curious where "Elm and Main" are supposed to be.  Apparently far away.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 02:40:49 PM
Why are you dragging in that 'could/would' aspect when, again, I'm only addressing the fact that BRW testified that he could not see anything in the SE area because of the stacks of boxes. You only claimed that he didn't see anything, without including the reasons why.

To me, that looks like an attempt to mislead.

Oh, but it is an attempt to mislead on your part. By just saying that BRW said he could not see anything you are ignoring the fact that he most certainly would have heard anybody moving around on that old wooden floor.

You only claimed that he didn't see anything, without including the reasons why.

No I didn't. I said;


It also doesn't place him on the 6th floor.... Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 02:52:06 PM
We have beat that one to death.  Oswald had worked in the building for weeks.  He had observed the typical patterns of his coworkers.  For example, who had lunch where and with whom. It wouldn't take Nostradamus to figure this out.  And, of course, a suspect does not obtain an alibi by claiming to see others.  He obtains an alibi when others can confirm his presence.   None did.
Lastly, I thought CTers questioned the accuracy of Oswald's statements while in custody?  Does that only apply when he said something incriminatory?  That's a rhetorical question since I know the answer.

The king of BS strikes again!

Oswald had worked in the building for weeks.  He had observed the typical patterns of his coworkers.  For example, who had lunch where and with whom.

Even if true, it's utterly meaningless as Jarman and Norman going up to the 5th floor to watch the motorcade was never part of any "typical pattern"

And, of course, a suspect does not obtain an alibi by claiming to see others.  He obtains an alibi when others can confirm his presence.   None did.

An alibi can be obtained in many ways and does not require others to see the suspect. All that is needed is information of any kind that confirms the suspect was or must have been at a particular location at a particular time. Oswald seeing Jarman and Norman walk towards the elevators at a time when they in fact were walking there is sufficient confirmation of his presence at that location

Lastly, I thought CTers questioned the accuracy of Oswald's statements while in custody?

How can anybody question the accuracy of Oswald's statements when there is no verbatim record of what he actually said? Questioning the veracity of the reports is more likely.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 18, 2022, 03:01:44 PM
Oh, but it is an attempt to mislead on your part. By just saying that BRW said he could not see anything you are ignoring the fact that he most certainly would have heard anybody moving around on that old wooden floor.

You only claimed that he didn't see anything, without including the reasons why.

No I didn't. I said;


…you are ignoring the fact that he most certainly would have heard anybody moving around on that old wooden floor.


This wouldn’t even be relevant if LHO was already situated in the sniper’s nest before BRW came back to the sixth floor, and was keeping out of sight and making no noticeable noises.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 03:04:22 PM
Wrong.  Elm and Main are parallel streets.  Rowland's testimony is confusing, but he was standing on Houston.  Obviously in plain sight and close proximity to the TSBD since he references the clock and seeing a person with a gun in the building.  About 150 feet away.  He also says that the police motorcycle that he makes reference was "not in front of us, just a little past us."   Meaning it was even closer to the TSBD.  No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade progress.  Only Oswald could know that.  He certainly could have, however.  He also had a good idea from the media reports of the timing of the motorcade.  He had eyes and ears to hear the approach of the motorcade.  Most such events run a few minutes late.  What has been demonstrated by the totality of the evidence is that your desperate attempt to exonerate Oswald was entirely false and based on a false premise (i.e. no real time information of the motorcade progress).  There was real time reporting of the motorcade progress.  Witnesses confirm that both police and radio broadcasts noted the progress (as anyone might expect given the circumstances). 


"The Rowlands stood at the west entrance of the Dallas County Records Building on Houston Street, about 150 feet from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository."


Wrong.  Elm and Main are parallel streets.

Yes, I merely quoted Rowland from his testimony.

Rowland's testimony is confusing, but he was standing on Houston.

Yes, Houston is the street that connects Elm and Main.

About 150 feet away.  He also says that the police motorcycle that he makes reference was "not in front of us, just a little past us."   Meaning it was even closer to the TSBD.  No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade progress.

If nobody is saying that, what's the point of bringing it up in the first place?

Btw, to argue that somebody on the 6th floor of a building can hear broadcasts originating from a police motorbike parked some 150 feet away is just plain idiotic.

What has been demonstrated by the totality of the evidence is that your desperate attempt to exonerate Oswald was entirely false and based on a false premise (i.e. no real time information of the motorcade progress).

Don't you ever get tired of the crap you write here every day? Nothing of that kind has been demonstrated.

There was real time reporting of the motorcade progress.

Only on DPD radio

Witnesses confirm that both police and radio broadcasts noted the progress (as anyone might expect given the circumstances). 

Once again; there were no live radio broadcasts providing details of the progress of the motorcade. Stop making stuff up!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 03:09:53 PM

…you are ignoring the fact that he most certainly would have heard anybody moving around on that old wooden floor.


This wouldn’t even be relevant if LHO was already situated in the sniper’s nest before BRW came back to the sixth floor, and was keeping out of sight and making no noticeable noises.

"If" ?


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 03:14:59 PM
The king of BS strikes again!

Oswald had worked in the building for weeks.  He had observed the typical patterns of his coworkers.  For example, who had lunch where and with whom.

Even if true, it's utterly meaningless as Jarman and Norman going up to the 5th floor to watch the motorcade was never part of any "typical pattern"

And, of course, a suspect does not obtain an alibi by claiming to see others.  He obtains an alibi when others can confirm his presence.   None did.

More BS. An alibi can be obtained in many ways and does not require others to see the suspect. All that is needed is information of any kind that confirms the suspect was or must have been at a particular location at a particular time. Oswald seeing Jarman and Norman walk towards the elevators at a time when they did in fact were walking there is sufficient confirmation of his presence at that location

Lastly, I thought CTers questioned the accuracy of Oswald's statements while in custody?

How can anybody question the accuracy of Oswald's statements when there is no verbatim record of what he actually said? Questioning the veracity of the reports is more likely.

Let's say I know that two guys named Otto and Martin have lunch most days at the McDonald's on "Elm and Main."  I claim that I saw them there on a particular day.  And they entered through the front door.  It turns out they were actually there because this is what they do.  Do I have an alibi if no one sees me there or otherwise confirms my story and there is evidence that I was elsewhere?  Of course not.  Oswald made up a flimsy story.  CTers then grasp at details like he saw them "walking towards the elevators" as though that would take Nostradamus to predict.  LOL.  This is all the more humorous since you apparently accept on this basis that Oswald had an alibi.  Bringing you out of the CTer closet despite your protestations that you are not a CTer.  If you buy this flimsy story as an alibi for Oswald (as you suggest here), then you are a CTer by implication.  And if you doubt "what he actually said" then why are you relying on it to establish an alibi?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 18, 2022, 03:20:05 PM
"If" ?


Not in my mind. Just don’t want to argue about it.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 03:27:03 PM

Wrong.  Elm and Main are parallel streets.

Yes, I merely quoted Rowland from his testimony.

Rowland's testimony is confusing, but he was standing on Houston.

Yes, Houston is the street that connects Elm and Main.

About 150 feet away.  He also says that the police motorcycle that he makes reference was "not in front of us, just a little past us."   Meaning it was even closer to the TSBD.  No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade progress.

If nobody is saying that, what's the point of bringing it up in the first place?

Btw, to argue that somebody on the 6th floor of a building can hear broadcasts originating from a police motorbike parked some 150 feet away is just plain idiotic.

What has been demonstrated by the totality of the evidence is that your desperate attempt to exonerate Oswald was entirely false and based on a false premise (i.e. no real time information of the motorcade progress).

Don't you ever get tired of the crap you write here every day? Nothing of that kind has been demonstrated.

There was real time reporting of the motorcade progress.

Only on DPD radio

Witnesses confirm that both police and radio broadcasts noted the progress (as anyone might expect given the circumstances). 

Once again; there were no live radio broadcasts providing details of the progress of the motorcade. Stop making stuff up!

LOL.  You are running like Jessie Owens.  You cited Rowland's testimony and suggested he was too "far away" because he was on something called Elm and Main.  There is no such location.  This after suggesting that no one could hear the police radio of a motorcycle driving through DP.  Not apparently realizing it was parked there. You disputed that there was any real time reporting of the motorcade progress but now apparently accept that there was police radio broadcasts of the motorcade progress.  And split bizarre hairs between this and "reporting of the motorcade progress."  LOL.  All the more bizarre since Rowland indicates he could actually hear the police radio updates of the motorcade in Dealey Plaza.  Only a short distance from the TSBD and not "far away."  What evidence do you have that this could not be heard through an open window on the 6th floor of a nearby building?  Do you know the volume of the police radio broadcast.  It would seemingly be pretty high to hear over a motorcycle engine and crowd noise.  You have stated this as a fact.   Here is the witness testimony (once again) confirming that there were reports of the motorcade delay:

Mrs. Reid.
Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 03:39:12 PM
Let's say I know that two guys named Otto and Martin have lunch most days at the McDonald's on "Elm and Main."  I claim that I saw them there on a particular day.  And they entered through the front door.  It turns out they were actually there because this is what they do.  Do I have an alibi if no one sees me there or otherwise confirms my story and there is evidence that I was elsewhere?  Of course not.  Oswald made up a flimsy story.  CTers then grasp at details like he saw them "walking towards the elevators" as though that would take Nostradamus to predict.  LOL.  This is all the more humorous since you apparently accept on this basis that Oswald had an alibi.  Bringing you out of the CTer closet despite your protestations that you are not a CTer.  If you buy this flimsy story as an alibi for Oswald (as you suggest here), then you are a CTer by implication.  And if you doubt "what he actually said" then why are you relying on it to establish an alibi?

Again, Jarman and Norman did not have a routine of walking towards the elevators at around 12:25, which makes your entire McDonald's fairytale completely irrelevant.

Where you could just know that two people were having lunch at the same location and at the same time most days, there would be no way for you to know what those two people did elsewhere at any other time. The one making up a flimsy story is you. And just to put the record straight; Oswald seeing Norman and Jarman walking towards the elevators is confirmation of his presence on the first floor at that time. It is not an alibi for where he was when the shooting took place.

And if you doubt "what he actually said" then why are you relying on it to establish an alibi?

Very silly.... the reports tell different stories about what Oswald actually said. And who said I was trying to establish an alibi? Unlike you I just follow the factual information to where ever it leads me and in this case the most obvious conclusion is that Oswald must indeed have been at a location where he could observe Jarman and Norman walking towards the elevators. That puts him on the 1st floor a few minutes prior to the shooting.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 03:46:30 PM
LOL.  You are running like Jessie Owens.  You cited Rowland's testimony and suggested he was too "far away" because he was on something called Elm and Main.  There is no such location.  This after suggesting that no one could hear the police radio of a motorcycle driving through DP.  Not apparently realizing it was parked there. You disputed that there was any real time reporting of the motorcade progress but now apparently accept that there was police radio broadcasts of the motorcade progress.  And split bizarre hairs between this and "reporting of the motorcade progress."  LOL.  All the more bizarre since Rowland indicates he could actually hear the police radio updates of the motorcade in Dealey Plaza.  Only a short distance from the TSBD and not "far away."  What evidence do you have that this could not be heard through an open window on the 6th floor of a nearby building?  Do you know the volume of the police radio broadcast.  It would seemingly be pretty high to hear over a motorcycle engine and crowd noise.  You have stated this as a fact.   Here is the witness testimony (once again) confirming that there were reports of the motorcade delay:

Mrs. Reid.
Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.


and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.

Try to keep up. This has already been discussed. It could well be that they were listening to police radio. Nowhere does it say they were actually listening to a live radio broadcast.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 04:13:18 PM

and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.

Try to keep up. This has already been discussed. It could well be that they were listening to police radio. Nowhere does it say they were actually listening to a live radio broadcast.

LOL.  You have twisted this like a pretzel and moved the goal posts out of the stadium and down the street.  ""It could well be"!  You really believe someone was listening to a police radio in their office instead of a regular radio?  How were they doing that?  At least you are now acknowledging that there was a real time progress report being made of the motorcade.  Ironically, the very one that we know could be heard via the police radio in Dealey Plaza.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 04:26:41 PM
LOL.  You have twisted this like a pretzel and moved the goal posts out of the stadium and down the street.  ""It could well be"!  You really believe someone was listening to a police radio in their office instead of a regular radio?  How were they doing that?  At least you are now acknowledging that there was a real time progress report being made of the motorcade.  Ironically, the very one that we know could be heard via the police radio in Dealey Plaza.

You really believe someone was listening to a police radio in their office instead of a regular radio?  How were they doing that?

Just like they are still doing now. Listening to police radio is and always has been a hobby for many people. And when you know the President will be passing by the building where you work, why not simply take a scanner to work to keep track on the motorcade?

Ironically, the very one that we know could be heard via the police radio in Dealey Plaza.

A broadcast originating from a received on a parked motorbike some 150 feet away can not be heard inside the TSBD, no matter how often you repeat this BS


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 18, 2022, 04:35:51 PM
LOL.  You are running like Jessie Owens.  You cited Rowland's testimony and suggested he was too "far away" because he was on something called Elm and Main.  There is no such location.  This after suggesting that no one could hear the police radio of a motorcycle driving through DP.  Not apparently realizing it was parked there. You disputed that there was any real time reporting of the motorcade progress but now apparently accept that there was police radio broadcasts of the motorcade progress.  And split bizarre hairs between this and "reporting of the motorcade progress."  LOL.  All the more bizarre since Rowland indicates he could actually hear the police radio updates of the motorcade in Dealey Plaza.  Only a short distance from the TSBD and not "far away."  What evidence do you have that this could not be heard through an open window on the 6th floor of a nearby building?  Do you know the volume of the police radio broadcast.  It would seemingly be pretty high to hear over a motorcycle engine and crowd noise.  You have stated this as a fact.   Here is the witness testimony (once again) confirming that there were reports of the motorcade delay:

Mrs. Reid.
Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn't watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their office and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.

 You are running like Jessie Owens.

It's not Martin who is running , Mr "Smith" ....   And if you didn't have your head so deeply inserted, you "might" be able to see how stupid your attempts at refuting Martin are.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 04:40:26 PM
You really believe someone was listening to a police radio in their office instead of a regular radio?  How were they doing that?

Just like they are still doing now. Listening to police radio is and always has been a hobby for many people. And when you know the President will be passing by the building where you work, why not simply take a scanner to work to keep track on the motorcade?

Ironically, the very one that we know could be heard via the police radio in Dealey Plaza.

A broadcast originating from a received on a parked motorbike some 150 feet away can not be heard inside the TSBD, no matter how often you repeat this BS

Whew.  So your story now is that in 1963 someone had a police "scanner" in their office as a hobby to listen to the police broadcasts?  If you want to engage in this kind of fantasy, why not entertain the baseless possibility that Oswald had such a scanner?   And you don't believe a police motorcycle radio can be heard from 150 feet away even though Rowland indicated he could hear the broadcast down the street. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 04:44:07 PM
You are running like Jessie Owens.

It's not Martin who is running , Mr "Smith" ....   And if you didn't have your head so deeply inserted, you "might" be able to see how stupid your attempts at refuting Martin are.

It's not me refuting him.   It's the witnesses to the events.  This story keeps evolving and changing.  Now we are being told that when someone claims to have listened to the radio in their office, they actually meant that they had a police scanner in their work place to listen too as a hobby!  HA HA HA.  In 1963.  Not much getting done in that work place with the old police scanner squawking all day long. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 18, 2022, 05:48:54 PM
It's not me refuting him.   It's the witnesses to the events.  This story keeps evolving and changing.  Now we are being told that when someone claims to have listened to the radio in their office, they actually meant that they had a police scanner in their work place to listen too as a hobby!  HA HA HA.  In 1963.  Not much getting done in that work place with the old police scanner squawking all day long.

I believe that a woman's (Mrs Reid?) husband called her at about 12:25 and told her where the parade was at that time.  Didn't she testify to that point?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 06:10:01 PM
Whew.  So your story now is that in 1963 someone had a police "scanner" in their office as a hobby to listen to the police broadcasts?  If you want to engage in this kind of fantasy, why not entertain the baseless possibility that Oswald had such a scanner?   And you don't believe a police motorcycle radio can be heard from 150 feet away even though Rowland indicated he could hear the broadcast down the street.

So your story now is that in 1963 someone had a police "scanner" in their office as a hobby to listen to the police broadcasts?

Stop misrepresenting what I said.

And you don't believe a police motorcycle radio can be heard from 150 feet away even though Rowland indicated he could hear the broadcast down the street.

Rowland wasn't 150 feet away from the motorcycle and he most certainly wasn't on the 6th floor of a building with all, except one, windows closed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 06:13:50 PM
It's not me refuting him.   It's the witnesses to the events.  This story keeps evolving and changing.  Now we are being told that when someone claims to have listened to the radio in their office, they actually meant that they had a police scanner in their work place to listen too as a hobby!  HA HA HA.  In 1963.  Not much getting done in that work place with the old police scanner squawking all day long.

when someone claims to have listened to the radio in their office

Who claimed that?

they actually meant that they had a police scanner in their work place to listen too as a hobby!

Again, not what I said. When you have to keep misrepresenting what I said, you've already lost the argument.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 18, 2022, 11:09:34 PM
Are we moving on from your previous false claim that there was no real time broadcast of the motorcade progress to something new?

Nice deflection.  We were discussing your previous false claim that the progress of the motorcade was being reported in real time over the broadcast radio.

Quote
  This statement also contains a false premise since Oswald wasn't in the lunchroom.

LOL

Quote
We know only that he was in the 6th floor window at 12:30 since that is when he pulled the trigger of his rifle at that moment.

LOL.  "We" don't "know" anything of the kind.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 18, 2022, 11:14:24 PM
What part of my focus on BRW and his reasons for not being not able to see the SE section do you not get?

Why did Rowland see a black man in the SE window, then?  How did the remains of BRW's lunch end up on boxes behind the SE window?  He could certainly see the SE window from the SE window.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 18, 2022, 11:20:11 PM
No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade progress.  Only Oswald could know that.  He certainly could have, however.

"Could have".  LOL.

Quote
  He also had a good idea from the media reports of the timing of the motorcade.

Who was making these "media reports", and how exactly was Oswald hearing them?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 11:23:59 PM
So your story now is that in 1963 someone had a police "scanner" in their office as a hobby to listen to the police broadcasts?

Stop misrepresenting what I said.

And you don't believe a police motorcycle radio can be heard from 150 feet away even though Rowland indicated he could hear the broadcast down the street.

Rowland wasn't 150 feet away from the motorcycle and he most certainly wasn't on the 6th floor of a building with all, except one, windows closed.

You suggested that Rowland was on something called Elm and Main and "far away" from the TSBD.  LOL.  Now that you realize that was false you are still claiming a radio broadcast from a police motorcycle can't be heard in a wide open space even just 150 feet away?  Why do you keep repeating the same baseless claim that it was not possible to hear the police radio on the 6th floor with the window open?  Sound waves go up you know.  There is no scientific prohibition on someone sitting in a building with the window open from hearing the same noise that an individual on the street is hearing.  Good grief.  And your ever evolving story about the radio is exactly as I stated it.  You suggested that the radio referenced by Mrs. Reid in her husband's office was, for some inexplicable reason, a police radio to overhear the motorcade progress report!  HA HA HA.   How exactly did this office worker obtain this police radio or scanner or Magic 8 ball or whatever you are suggesting is being referenced by the term "radio,"  This is hilarious Bigfoot nonsense.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 18, 2022, 11:28:05 PM
Let's say I know that two guys named Otto and Martin have lunch most days at the McDonald's on "Elm and Main."  I claim that I saw them there on a particular day.  And they entered through the front door.  It turns out they were actually there because this is what they do.

How do you know who had lunch with whom on "most days"?  How do you know what Oswald knew about his coworkers' lunch habits?  Oh yeah, you made it up, because this is what you do.

Quote
If you buy this flimsy story as an alibi for Oswald (as you suggest here), then you are a CTer by implication.

Interesting.  How does this imply a conspiracy?  Or do you not know what "CT" stands for?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 18, 2022, 11:36:45 PM
LOL.  You have twisted this like a pretzel and moved the goal posts out of the stadium and down the street.  ""It could well be"!  You really believe someone was listening to a police radio in their office instead of a regular radio?

If you want to claim that some broadcast radio station was live broadcasting the motorcade progress, then produce that radio station.  "Mrs. Reid said that her husband said that they were listening to a radio" is hardly compelling.  And you said "witnesses".
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 18, 2022, 11:40:10 PM
Whew.  So your story now is that in 1963 someone had a police "scanner" in their office as a hobby to listen to the police broadcasts?  If you want to engage in this kind of fantasy, why not entertain the baseless possibility that Oswald had such a scanner?

Says the guy engaging in the baseless fantasy that the radio on a parked motorcycle halfway down Houston street can be heard inside the TSBD.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 18, 2022, 11:43:35 PM
I believe that a woman's (Mrs Reid?) husband called her at about 12:25 and told her where the parade was at that time.  Didn't she testify to that point?

Like most witnesses in this case, her estimate of exact time was not the height of clarity.  She indicates that she ate lunch "hurriedly" at 12 in the second floor lunchroom, stopped to call her husband where he informed her that the "radio" was reporting that the motorcade was delayed by ten minutes, and then went down and out of the building where she waited several minutes before the motorcade arrived.  She estimated that she left the lunchroom at 12:30 which can't be right for obvious reasons.

Mr. BELIN. Where were you on that day commencing with, say, around noon or so?
Mrs. REID. Well, at 12 I went to lunch, and I had my lunch rather hurriedly so that I might go downstairs and watch the parade.


Mr. BFLIN. Now, Mrs. Reid, you left lunch about what time?
Mrs. REID. Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn’t watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their offlce and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.
But I went down rather soon and stood on the steps.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 18, 2022, 11:54:48 PM
You suggested that Rowland was on something called Elm and Main and "far away" from the TSBD.  LOL.  Now that you realize that was false you are still claiming a radio broadcast from a police motorcycle can't be heard in a wide open space even just 150 feet away?  Why do you keep repeating the same baseless claim that it was not possible to hear the police radio on the 6th floor with the window open?  Sound waves go up you know.  There is no scientific prohibition on someone sitting in a building with the window open from hearing the same noise that an individual on the street is hearing.  Good grief.  And your ever evolving story about the radio is exactly as I stated it.  You suggested that the radio referenced by Mrs. Reid in her husband's office was, for some inexplicable reason, a police radio to overhear the motorcade progress report!  HA HA HA.   How exactly did this office worker obtain this police radio or scanner or Magic 8 ball or whatever you are suggesting is being referenced by the term "radio,"  How exactly did this office worker obtain this police radio or scanner Magic 8 ball or whatever you are suggesting is being referenced by the term "radio,"  This is hilarious Bigfoot nonsense.

You suggested that Rowland was on something called Elm and Main and "far away" from the TSBD.  LOL.  Now that you realize that was false

There was nothing false about it. It was what Rowland testified verbatim! He clearly wasn't aware of all the street names.

you are still claiming a radio broadcast from a police motorcycle can't be heard in a wide open space even just 150 feet away? 

Because it can't. Period. Prove me wrong or shut up!

Sound waves go up you know.

Hilarious.... they also drown in all the other street noise

There is no scientific prohibition on someone sitting in a building with the window open from hearing the same noise that an individual on the street is hearing.  Good grief.

So prove it..... go on then!

You suggested that the radio referenced by Mrs. Reid in her husband's office was, for some inexplicable reason, a police radio to overhear the motorcade progress report!  HA HA HA. 

Why do you insist in making a fool of yourself over and over again. Why is it impossible that somebody brought a police radio scanner to work to follow the progress of the motorcade?

How exactly did this office worker obtain this police radio or scanner

By buying one in one of the many shops that sell them. You clearly don't understand that just like train or plane spotters quite a few people have a police scanner to follow what is going on. There is nothing odd about it. 

This is hilarious Bigfoot nonsense.

Yes, that's a good way to describe your post.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 19, 2022, 03:37:06 AM
Whew.  So your story now is that in 1963 someone had a police "scanner" in their office as a hobby to listen to the police broadcasts?  If you want to engage in this kind of fantasy, why not entertain the baseless possibility that Oswald had such a scanner?   And you don't believe a police motorcycle radio can be heard from 150 feet away even though Rowland indicated he could hear the broadcast down the street.
Really? Just a reminder----
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us,..... 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 19, 2022, 02:25:50 PM
Really? Just a reminder----
Mr. ROWLAND - Right afterwards. There was--just before I observed him there was a police motorcycle parked just on the street, not in front of us, just a little past us,.....

That's right.  The police motorcycle was closer to the TSBD than Rowland.  Making it even more likely that its radio broadcast could be heard by Oswald.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 19, 2022, 02:40:10 PM
You suggested that Rowland was on something called Elm and Main and "far away" from the TSBD.  LOL.  Now that you realize that was false

There was nothing false about it. It was what Rowland testified verbatim! He clearly wasn't aware of all the street names.

you are still claiming a radio broadcast from a police motorcycle can't be heard in a wide open space even just 150 feet away? 

Because it can't. Period. Prove me wrong or shut up!

Sound waves go up you know.

Hilarious.... they also drown in all the other street noise

There is no scientific prohibition on someone sitting in a building with the window open from hearing the same noise that an individual on the street is hearing.  Good grief.

So prove it..... go on then!

You suggested that the radio referenced by Mrs. Reid in her husband's office was, for some inexplicable reason, a police radio to overhear the motorcade progress report!  HA HA HA. 

Why do you insist in making a fool of yourself over and over again. Why is it impossible that somebody brought a police radio scanner to work to follow the progress of the motorcade?

How exactly did this office worker obtain this police radio or scanner

By buying one in one of the many shops that sell them. You clearly don't understand that just like train or plane spotters quite a few people have a police scanner to follow what is going on. There is nothing odd about it. 

This is hilarious Bigfoot nonsense.

Yes, that's a good way to describe your post.

You cited Rowland's testimony that he was on Elm and Main to conclude that he was "far away" from the TSBD.  There is no such location.  Therefore, somehow concluding it was too far away from the TSBD to hear the police radio broadcast demonstrates a profound bias on your part.  Can you understand that?  You concluded that a nonexistent location was too "far away" to hear the radio.  LOL.  Then once you sorted out his actual location, you started making baseless claims like 150 feet is too far away to hear a radio broadcast in an open space.  A completely baseless claim.  Then you asked me to disprove your baseless claim.  Wow.  Then it got even better.  After claiming there was no radio broadcast of the motorcade progress, you concluded that when Mrs. Reid's husband informed her that he had been listening to the radio and was informed that the motorcade was running behind schedule, that his office "radio" was actually a police scanner!  HA HA HA.  This is 1963.  Do you believe he had access to a time machine and ordered it from Amazon?  Another completely baseless and ridiculous interpretation of a 1963 office radio. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 19, 2022, 04:00:13 PM
Put up or shut up, "Richard".  What Dallas radio station was live broadcasting the motorcade progress?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 19, 2022, 04:13:20 PM
Ouija board please tell us which station Mr. Reid was listening to on Nov. 22, 1963.  LOL.  The classic contrarian standard.  They make a claim (i.e. there was no radio broadcast reporting the progress of the motorcade).  The claim is directly refuted by the evidence (i.e. a witness confirms that her husband was listening to the "the radio" "as the parade progressed" and learned it was running late).  Instead of acknowledging the obvious implication, they move on to absurdities.  Tell us which station pr maybe his "radio" was a police scanner and on and on and on down the rabbit hole.  Another witness in Dealey Plaza tells us he overheard motorcade progress reports via the radio of a police motorcycle parked on the street near the TSBD.  The contrarians claim this broadcast could not be heard through an open window in the adjacent building for some inexplicable reason. 

Mr. BFLIN. Now, Mrs. Reid, you left lunch about what time?
Mrs. REID. Well, I left, I ate my lunch hurriedly, I wasn’t watching the time but I wanted to be sure of getting out on the streets in time for the parade before he got there, and I called my husband, who works at the records building, and they had a radio in their offlce and they were listening as the parade progressed and he told me they were running about 10 minutes late.  But I went down rather soon and stood on the steps.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 19, 2022, 04:21:54 PM
You cited Rowland's testimony that he was on Elm and Main to conclude that he was "far away" from the TSBD.  There is no such location.  Therefore, somehow concluding it was too far away from the TSBD to hear the police radio broadcast demonstrates a profound bias on your part.  Can you understand that?  You concluded that a nonexistent location was too "far away" to hear the radio.  LOL.  Then once you sorted out his actual location, you started making baseless claims like 150 feet is too far away to hear a radio broadcast in an open space.  A completely baseless claim.  Then you asked me to disprove your baseless claim.  Wow.  Then it got even better.  After claiming there was no radio broadcast of the motorcade progress, you concluded that when Mrs. Reid's husband informed her that he had been listening to the radio and was informed that the motorcade was running behind schedule, that his office "radio" was actually a police scanner!  HA HA HA.  This is 1963.  Do you believe he had access to a time machine and ordered it from Amazon?  Another completely baseless and ridiculous interpretation of a 1963 office radio.


You cited Rowland's testimony that he was on Elm and Main to conclude that he was "far away" from the TSBD.  There is no such location. 

Mr "Smith" your desperation obvious.  Whether Rowland knew the names of the streets or simply mis-spoke is irrelevant because he pointed out on a map the place where he and his wife were standing. And you're a utter fool if you actually believe that anybody in the TSBD could have heard the radio on the DPD motorcycle that was parked on Houston street, about half way between Elm and Main streets.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 19, 2022, 04:36:59 PM

You cited Rowland's testimony that he was on Elm and Main to conclude that he was "far away" from the TSBD.  There is no such location. 

Mr "Smith" your desperation obvious.  Whether Rowland knew the names of the streets or simply mis-spoke is irrelevant because he pointed out on a map the place where he and his wife were standing. And you're a utter fool if you actually believe that anybody in the TSBD could have heard the radio on the DPD motorcycle that was parked on Houston street, about half way between Elm and Main streets.
How about---The snipers yelled down at the cop and asked him to turn his radio up?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 19, 2022, 04:52:47 PM

You cited Rowland's testimony that he was on Elm and Main to conclude that he was "far away" from the TSBD.  There is no such location. 

Mr "Smith" your desperation obvious.  Whether Rowland knew the names of the streets or simply mis-spoke is irrelevant because he pointed out on a map the place where he and his wife were standing. And you're a utter fool if you actually believe that anybody in the TSBD could have heard the radio on the DPD motorcycle that was parked on Houston street, about half way between Elm and Main streets.

Yes, only about 150 feet from the TSBD.  Not far at all from where Old Ozzie was sitting behind his open window.  He could hear the noise from the street below him.  Did he hear the police progress reports?  No idea.  Only Oswald knows for sure.  No reason that he needed too, though, since he knew the approximate time and most such events do run behind schedule.  We have certainly come a long way from the original claim that only a top-secret team could know the motorcade progress since there was no live updates to debating how far away such a broadcast in Dealey Plaza could be heard and what radio station Mr. Reid was listening to get such an update.  And there was TV coverage of the motorcade beginning at Love Field where most of the delay occurred. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 19, 2022, 05:09:20 PM
Yes, only about 150 feet from the TSBD.  Not far at all from where Old Ozzie was sitting behind his open window.  He could hear the noise from the street below him.  Did he hear the police progress reports?  No idea.  Only Oswald knows for sure.  No reason that he needed too, though, since he knew the approximate time and most such events do run behind schedule.  We have certainly come a long way from the original claim that only a top-secret team could know the motorcade progress since there was no live updates to debating how far away such a broadcast in Dealey Plaza could be heard and what radio station Mr. Reid was listening to get such an update.  And there was TV coverage of the motorcade beginning at Love Field where most of the delay occurred.

This is turning into another Adams-on-the-stairs connivance. The critics contend Adams' laterday CT-spun account precludes Oswald using the stairs immediately after the shooting. Now Oswald needs a police radio or be near one to gauge whether the motorcade was still on.

But if Adams really went down the stairs as early as she claimed, it would only mean she was ahead of Oswald. Same with the radio straw man claim; Oswald in the SN wouldn't need it. He could see the streets still sealed off for the motorcade, policemen at the intersections and crowds waiting.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 19, 2022, 07:25:57 PM
Yes, only about 150 feet from the TSBD.  Not far at all from where Old Ozzie was sitting behind his open window.  He could hear the noise from the street below him.  Did he hear the police progress reports?  No idea.  Only Oswald knows for sure.  No reason that he needed too, though, since he knew the approximate time and most such events do run behind schedule.  We have certainly come a long way from the original claim that only a top-secret team could know the motorcade progress since there was no live updates to debating how far away such a broadcast in Dealey Plaza could be heard and what radio station Mr. Reid was listening to get such an update.  And there was TV coverage of the motorcade beginning at Love Field where most of the delay occurred.

So now you're proposing that Lee Oswald and Bonnie Ray Williams were together on the sixth floor at the time that Arnold Rowland noticed a man with a rifle behind a sixth floor window.....  Is that right Mr "Smith" ?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 19, 2022, 07:53:00 PM
This is turning into another Adams-on-the-stairs connivance. The critics contend Adams' laterday CT-spun account precludes Oswald using the stairs immediately after the shooting. Now Oswald needs a police radio or be near one to gauge whether the motorcade was still on.

But if Adams really went down the stairs as early as she claimed, it would only mean she was ahead of Oswald. Same with the radio straw man claim; Oswald in the SN wouldn't need it. He could see the streets still sealed off for the motorcade, policemen at the intersections and crowds waiting.

But if Adams really went down the stairs as early as she claimed, it would only mean she was ahead of Oswald.

For once you get something right. Well, kinda....If he was on the 6th floor, there is no way that Oswald - who would have needed to run roughly twice the distance Adams did, hide the rifle and go down two floors - could have beaten Adams and Styles to the stairs on the 4th floor. So, if he did come down the stairs, he would indeed have been behind the two women. But he wasn't as Dorothy Garner would have seen him! Rankin understood this, which is why Adams was not at the reconstruction and why the Stroud letter disappeared in Adams' file.

Same with the radio straw man claim; Oswald in the SN wouldn't need it. He could see the streets still sealed off for the motorcade, policemen at the intersections and crowds waiting.

The radio claim came from Richard Smith. It was his straw man! Just like his (and your) pathetic claim that Oswald, in the SN, could have seen Jarman and Norman walk around the building.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 19, 2022, 08:28:27 PM
But if Adams really went down the stairs as early as she claimed, it would only mean she was ahead of Oswald.

For once you get something right. Well, kinda....If he was on the 6th floor, there is no way that Oswald - who would have needed to run roughly twice the distance Adams did, hide the rifle and go down two floors - could have beaten Adams and Styles to the stairs on the 4th floor. So, if he did come down the stairs, he would indeed have been behind the two women. But he wasn't as Dorothy Garner would have seen him! Rankin understood this, which is why Adams was not at the reconstruction and why the Stroud letter disappeared in Adams' file.

The Shroud letter is hearsay with no specifics. Styles said it was more like minutes than seconds when they left the window and even then they first went to the passenger elevator.

Quote
Same with the radio straw man claim; Oswald in the SN wouldn't need it. He could see the streets still sealed off for the motorcade, policemen at the intersections and crowds waiting.

The radio claim came from Richard Smith. It was his straw man!

For Richard, it's only a possibly:

    "No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade
      progress.  Only Oswald could know that.  He certainly could have, however."

    "He could hear the noise from the street below him.  Did he hear the police progress
     reports?  No idea.  Only Oswald knows for sure.  No reason that he needed too, though,"

The straw-man goes back six days ado to Skeptic-Tank's "Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade." Just now, Richard wrote: "We have certainly come a long way from the original claim that only a top-secret team could know the motorcade progress"

Quote
Just like his (and your) pathetic claim that Oswald, in the SN, could have seen Jarman and Norman walk around the building.

Oswald from the SN window most certainly could have seen Norman and Jarman standing together on the sidewalk below. He then heard the two arrive below his window some minutes before the motorcade arrived. They were talking and throwing open windows. Unless Oswald had sight and hearing issues, I don't see any problem with that proposal.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 19, 2022, 09:22:06 PM
The Shroud letter is hearsay with no specifics. Styles said it was more like minutes than seconds when they left the window and even then they first went to the passenger elevator.

Wishful thinking from a desperate person who doesn't want to deal with the obvious truth.

The Stroud letter was an official cover letter from the office of a United States Attorney who confirms that "Miss Garner, Miss Adams' supervisor stated this morning....." That's not hearsay. It's a letter of one of the highest Federal law enforcement officers confirming to the General Counsel of the Warren Commission what a potential witness has said. It was not up the Barefoot Sanders or Martha Stroud to collect or provide more details. That would have been the responsibility of Rankin, who did in fact had somebody contact Garner briefly and then decided to bury the letter!

As for Styles, she said many different things. There is nothing consistent in anything she has said. In one interview she even acknowledged that she may have misremembered and that Vicky Adams was right all along. The bottom line is that her statements are unreliable and worthless. And of course, it's extremely telling that you, an LN, would prefer to go with whatever Styles said, not because it might be true but simply because it serves your purpose.

You may want to consider this; Styles was photographed in front of the main entrance of the TSBD at approx 12:36, just minutes before the building was locked down. It would have taken her and Adams less than a minute go down the stairs and leave the building at the loading dock in the back (which is why they did not run into Truly and Baker). It took them another two to three minutes to walk towards the railroad yard, pass the TSBD extension and walk down Elm street towards the main entrance. So, if you believe that Styles and Adams left the 4th floor later, this is the question you need to answer;

How did Styles get in front of a camera at the front of the building at roughly 12:36, having needed some 4 minutes to go down the stairs, leave the building and walk to the front, without running into Truly and Baker if they left any later than one minute after the shots?

Quote

For Richard, it's only a possibly:

    "No one is saying that Oswald definitively heard the police reports of the motorcade
      progress.  Only Oswald could know that.  He certainly could have, however."

    "He could hear the noise from the street below him.  Did he hear the police progress
     reports?  No idea.  Only Oswald knows for sure.  No reason that he needed too, though,"

The straw-man goes back six days ado to Skeptic-Tank's "Only a team with radio communication would be able to relay the actual accurate progress of the motorcade." Just now, Richard wrote: "We have certainly come a long way from the original claim that only a top-secret team could know the motorcade progress"


I see, so that's why Richard is so desperate to cling to the "he could hear the radio of a motorcycle parked some 150 feet away" crap. Right, got it. Oswald also simply could not have been there at all to hear anything on any radio.... if we are going to argue "could have" BS.

Quote
Oswald from the SN window most certainly could have seen Norman and Jarman standing together on the sidewalk below. He then heard the two arrive below his window some minutes before the motorcade arrived. They were talking and throwing open windows. Unless Oswald had sight and hearing issues, I don't see any problem with that proposal.

You are so ignorant and you have clearly never been inside the building. There is no way in hell even the smallest part of the sidewalk running next to the building can be seen from the 6th floor window, unless the person was hanging out of the window with his entire torso. In fact, a person standing behind the window of the 6th floor would not even see the largest part of the Elm street extension directly in front of the building. But don't take my word for it, just look at this video (at 1:30)


The problem with your "proposal" is that you are making up stuff. Who said Jarman and Norman were "talking and throwing open windows"? You seem to be living in some sort of alternate reality where you can make up your own set of "facts". Come to think of it, it's completely beyond me why you don't like Trump, when the man should clearly be your hero.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 19, 2022, 09:52:35 PM
Ouija board please tell us which station Mr. Reid was listening to on Nov. 22, 1963.  LOL.

You can't do it of course, because there is no radio station in Dallas that was live reporting the motorcade's progress.  Audio exists for all of the radio stations that had that capacity.  So, either Mrs. Reid is wrong or they weren't listening to commercial radio.  You can laugh all you like, but "Mrs. Reid said" is not reliable evidence for the claim that you made.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 19, 2022, 09:59:42 PM
But if Adams really went down the stairs as early as she claimed, it would only mean she was ahead of Oswald.

...or that Oswald never ran down those stairs.

Quote
Same with the radio straw man claim; Oswald in the SN wouldn't need it. He could see the streets still sealed off for the motorcade, policemen at the intersections and crowds waiting.

The point is that if Oswald was planning to shoot at the motorcade, he would have needed to be in position when the motorcade was scheduled to be there.  So where was he when Rowland saw the negro (BRW?) in the SE window, and when he saw a gunman in the SW window.  And why was Oswald on the first floor instead when Carolyn Arnold saw him?  Invisible pocket radio tuned to "Richard's" fantasy radio station?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 19, 2022, 10:14:54 PM
The Shroud letter is hearsay with no specifics. Styles said it was more like minutes than seconds when they left the window and even then they first went to the passenger elevator.

Says who?  Sean Murphy?  Talk about hearsay with no specifics...

Quote
Oswald from the SN window most certainly could have seen Norman and Jarman standing together on the sidewalk below.

Why is this "almost certain"?  Have you been in the TSBD and tried to look down at the sidewalk?  How do you even know exactly where they were standing?  The LN narrative is full of these speculative, could-have-been arguments.

Quote
He then heard the two arrive below his window some minutes before the motorcade arrived.

And that gave him the bright idea of using their names as people he saw from the lunch room?  That makes no sense whatsoever.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 19, 2022, 10:54:25 PM
If you're going to convince anyone that a sidewalk cannot be seen, you'll have to take a video of a guy actually attempting to peer over the edge. AND NO FAIR USING A GUY WITH VERTIGO HAHA 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 19, 2022, 11:35:49 PM
If you're going to convince anyone that a sidewalk cannot be seen, you'll have to take a video of a guy actually attempting to peer over the edge. AND NO FAIR USING A GUY WITH VERTIGO HAHA

Let's make a deal; you provide me with evidence that Oswald or anybody else stuck his head and torso out of the 6th floor window of the TSBD, just minutes before the motorcade arrived, and I will show you a video that even then that person  still couldn't have seen the sidewalk running directly next to the building.

So, let's have that evidence.....  Oh wait... I forgot for a moment who I am talking to.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 01:01:18 AM
Let's make a deal; you provide me with evidence that Oswald or anybody else stuck his head and torso out of the 6th floor window of the TSBD, just minutes before the motorcade arrived, and I will show you a video that even then that person  still couldn't have seen the sidewalk running directly next to the building.

So, let's have that evidence.....  Oh wait... I forgot for a moment who I am talking to.

The normal procedure is to run tests first to see if is doable in he first place, such as did the subject  use a hand-mirror to stick out the window at some point, for instance. After all, lots of ladies to powder their noses and misplace their hand mirrors.

I forgot for a moment who I am talking to
_YOU don't talk TO anybody. You talk AT them

stuck his head and torso out
_No torso required. Just head and neck.
  Torso needed later for when Oswald gets what he deserved.

Meantime

(https://i.postimg.cc/vZtxT8hX/SE-WINDOW-LEDGE.png)
The ledge barely clears the building. No peering-down issue there.

(https://i.postimg.cc/jjj2jHLd/KNEELER.png)
Nothing to stop a willing participant from snuggling up to the brickwork, taking a knee,
and flopping forward for an easy peer over the edge

So what's the problem?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 01:35:43 AM
The normal procedure is to run tests first to see if is doable in he first place, such as did the subject  use a hand-mirror to stick out the window at some point, for instance. After all, lots of ladies to powder their noses and misplace their hand mirrors.

I forgot for a moment who I am talking to
_YOU don't talk TO anybody. You talk AT them

stuck his head and torso out
_No torso required. Just head and neck.
  Torso needed later for when Oswald gets what he deserved.

Meantime

(https://i.postimg.cc/vZtxT8hX/SE-WINDOW-LEDGE.png)
The ledge barely clears the building. No peering-down issue there.

(https://i.postimg.cc/jjj2jHLd/KNEELER.png)
Nothing to stop a willing participant from snuggling up to the brickwork, taking a knee,
and flopping forward for an easy peer over the edge

So what's the problem?


The normal procedure is to run tests first to see if is doable in he first place, such as did the subject  use a hand-mirror to stick out the window at some point, for instance. After all, lots of ladies to powder their noses and misplace their hand mirrors.

Hilarious... so now, you've got Oswald using a hand-mirror to find out who was on the sidewalk, just minutes before the motorcade arrived? Get help, please....

stuck his head and torso out
_No torso required. Just head and neck.
  Torso needed later for when Oswald gets what he deserved.


Have it your way. Show me the evidence that Oswald or anybody else stuck his head and neck (you've clearly never been to the TSBD) out of the 6th floor window of the TSBD, just minutes before the motorcade arrived. Go on then....

Meantime

(https://i.postimg.cc/vZtxT8hX/SE-WINDOW-LEDGE.png)
The ledge barely clears the building. No peering-down issue there.

Comedy gold and utter stupidity combined. He shows a video which proves that from the 6th floor window you can only see the sidewalk at the other side of Elm street and not the one directly in front of the TSBD. Great stuff.....  Thumb1:

So what's the problem?

Other than that you are a complete idiot? Nothing much... you've proven my point. You can not show that anybody on the 6th floor could have seen a person standing on the sidewalk next to the building.

I forgot for a moment who I am talking to
_YOU don't talk TO anybody. You talk AT them

Nah, I will talk to anybody who is capable of having a normal reasoned conversation. I only talk at people who are beyond help.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 20, 2022, 04:32:06 AM
Since there was a CROWD of people below the SE window, why would Oswald just coincidentally have singled out and watched Norman and Jarman below moving around?

Why (and how?) would Oswald be watching persons directly below  the SE window when it seems to be that he kept himself hidden from view  12:25-12:29:30 given no evidence in the Bronson film (12:25) nor the Hughes film (12:29:30, (the JFK limo approaching the TSBD)of anyone visible in the SE window?

Wouldn’t Oswald be more focused on watching for when the motorcade lead car would be entering the Dealey plaza than watching anyone immediately below the SN window ( hence Oswald having to expose himself in the window to look down?)

Even if for some reason Oswald was able to see and took interest in watching 2 black guys below, is it certain he was able to see them
Go around the corner vs enter  TSBD from the front entrance?

If Oswald could possibly have seen Norman and Jarman go around the corner, how does he know they didn’t come back to the front and go into the TSBD via front entrance?

How probable to have heard the rear elevator coming up to the 5th floor if Oswald is in the 6th floor SN (barracked within a box wall no less) with all the outside ambient noise?

The only probable possibility it seems is that Oswald could have heard the voices of Jarman and Norman about 12;28 when they got to their respective 5th floor windows )

Seems a bit risky that Oswald would have ventured singling out 2 persons just upon hearing their voices when it’s doubtfully that he could know for certain if they ever passed by the Domino room at all.

In fact, Oswald offering the Domino room as the location he was at when he heard/saw ANYONE is taking a big risk that the Domino room was vacant of some other employee(s) whom would readily refute Oswald’s account.


For me this is a scenario of improbability which is compounded by the improbability of the “escape down the stairs”  past Mrs Garner unseen as well as the amount of time required just to get out the SN ( given the Bob Jackson /Malcolm Couch time of spotting the rifle and then seeing it slowly withdrawn, plus Tom Aleya’s description of the box wall barricade being totally enclosing the SN ( very narrow gao).

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 05:50:24 AM
Since there was a CROWD of people below the SE window, why would Oswald just coincidentally have singled out and watched Norman and Jarman below moving around?

Why (and how?) would Oswald be watching persons directly below  the SE window when it seems to be that he kept himself hidden from view  12:25-12:29:30 given no evidence in the Bronson film (12:25) nor the Hughes film (12:29:30, (the JFK limo approaching the TSBD)of anyone visible in the SE window?

Wouldn’t Oswald be more focused on watching for when the motorcade lead car would be entering the Dealey plaza than watching anyone immediately below the SN window ( hence Oswald having to expose himself in the window to look down?)

Even if for some reason Oswald was able to see and took interest in watching 2 black guys below, is it certain he was able to see them
Go around the corner vs enter  TSBD from the front entrance?

If Oswald could possibly have seen Norman and Jarman go around the corner, how does he know they didn’t come back to the front and go into the TSBD via front entrance?

How probable to have heard the rear elevator coming up to the 5th floor if Oswald is in the 6th floor SN (barracked within a box wall no less) with all the outside ambient noise?

The only probable possibility it seems is that Oswald could have heard the voices of Jarman and Norman about 12;28 when they got to their respective 5th floor windows )

Seems a bit risky that Oswald would have ventured singling out 2 persons just upon hearing their voices when it’s doubtfully that he could know for certain if they ever passed by the Domino room at all.

In fact, Oswald offering the Domino room as the location he was at when he heard/saw ANYONE is taking a big risk that the Domino room was vacant of some other employee(s) whom would readily refute Oswald’s account.


For me this is a scenario of improbability which is compounded by the improbability of the “escape down the stairs”  past Mrs Garner unseen as well as the amount of time required just to get out the SN ( given the Bob Jackson /Malcolm Couch time of spotting the rifle and then seeing it slowly withdrawn, plus Tom Aleya’s description of the box wall barricade being totally enclosing the SN ( very narrow gao).

Who said anything about Jarman, Arce and Norman being under the SN. Jarman said he ws standing just to the right of the doorway. The other two were standing by the mailboxes. The stairs in the doorway became too crowded so they walked around to the back and headed upstairs.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 06:52:07 AM

The normal procedure is to run tests first to see if is doable in he first place, such as did the subject  use a hand-mirror to stick out the window at some point, for instance. After all, lots of ladies to powder their noses and misplace their hand mirrors.

Hilarious... so now, you've got Oswald using a hand-mirror to find out who was on the sidewalk, just minutes before the motorcade arrived? Get help, please....

stuck his head and torso out
_No torso required. Just head and neck.
  Torso needed later for when Oswald gets what he deserved.


Have it your way. Show me the evidence that Oswald or anybody else stuck his head and neck (you've clearly never been to the TSBD) out of the 6th floor window of the TSBD, just minutes before the motorcade arrived. Go on then....

Meantime

(https://i.postimg.cc/vZtxT8hX/SE-WINDOW-LEDGE.png)
The ledge barely clears the building. No peering-down issue there.

Comedy gold and utter stupidity combined. He shows a video which proves that from the 6th floor window you can only see the sidewalk at the other side of Elm street and not the one directly in front of the TSBD. Great stuff.....  Thumb1:

So what's the problem?

Other than that you are a complete idiot? Nothing much... you've proven my point. You can not show that anybody on the 6th floor could have seen a person standing on the sidewalk next to the building.

I forgot for a moment who I am talking to
_YOU don't talk TO anybody. You talk AT them

Nah, I will talk to anybody who is capable of having a normal reasoned conversation. I only talk at people who are beyond help.

Other images from the same video show views that are taken too far away from the window to be able to lean the camera over the edge

As for the images I posted, they are samples (showing sizes, angles) I would post to a skilled photographer.
If I was there, I would whip out my iPhone, lean over the edge, and do it myself.

Thanks so much for your always-useful input.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 07:46:51 AM

The normal procedure is to run tests first to see if is doable in he first place, such as did the subject  use a hand-mirror to stick out the window at some point, for instance. After all, lots of ladies to powder their noses and misplace their hand mirrors.

Hilarious... so now, you've got Oswald using a hand-mirror to find out who was on the sidewalk, just minutes before the motorcade arrived? Get help, please....

stuck his head and torso out
_No torso required. Just head and neck.
  Torso needed later for when Oswald gets what he deserved.


Have it your way. Show me the evidence that Oswald or anybody else stuck his head and neck (you've clearly never been to the TSBD) out of the 6th floor window of the TSBD, just minutes before the motorcade arrived. Go on then....

Meantime

(https://i.postimg.cc/vZtxT8hX/SE-WINDOW-LEDGE.png)
The ledge barely clears the building. No peering-down issue there.

Comedy gold and utter stupidity combined. He shows a video which proves that from the 6th floor window you can only see the sidewalk at the other side of Elm street and not the one directly in front of the TSBD. Great stuff.....  Thumb1:

So what's the problem?

Other than that you are a complete idiot? Nothing much... you've proven my point. You can not show that anybody on the 6th floor could have seen a person standing on the sidewalk next to the building.

I forgot for a moment who I am talking to
_YOU don't talk TO anybody. You talk AT them

Nah, I will talk to anybody who is capable of having a normal reasoned conversation. I only talk at people who are beyond help.

Nah, I will talk to anybody who is capable of having a normal reasoned conversation
_Your idea of a reasoned conversation is to tell someone that BRW didn't see anyone on the 6th, and then ignore the part about the stacks of boxes.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 08:33:29 AM
Since there was a CROWD of people below the SE window, why would Oswald just coincidentally have singled out and watched Norman and Jarman below moving around?

Why (and how?) would Oswald be watching persons directly below  the SE window when it seems to be that he kept himself hidden from view  12:25-12:29:30 given no evidence in the Bronson film (12:25) nor the Hughes film (12:29:30, (the JFK limo approaching the TSBD)of anyone visible in the SE window?

Wouldn’t Oswald be more focused on watching for when the motorcade lead car would be entering the Dealey plaza than watching anyone immediately below the SN window ( hence Oswald having to expose himself in the window to look down?)

Even if for some reason Oswald was able to see and took interest in watching 2 black guys below, is it certain he was able to see them
Go around the corner vs enter  TSBD from the front entrance?

If Oswald could possibly have seen Norman and Jarman go around the corner, how does he know they didn’t come back to the front and go into the TSBD via front entrance?

How probable to have heard the rear elevator coming up to the 5th floor if Oswald is in the 6th floor SN (barracked within a box wall no less) with all the outside ambient noise?

The only probable possibility it seems is that Oswald could have heard the voices of Jarman and Norman about 12;28 when they got to their respective 5th floor windows )

Seems a bit risky that Oswald would have ventured singling out 2 persons just upon hearing their voices when it’s doubtfully that he could know for certain if they ever passed by the Domino room at all.

In fact, Oswald offering the Domino room as the location he was at when he heard/saw ANYONE is taking a big risk that the Domino room was vacant of some other employee(s) whom would readily refute Oswald’s account.


For me this is a scenario of improbability which is compounded by the improbability of the “escape down the stairs”  past Mrs Garner unseen as well as the amount of time required just to get out the SN ( given the Bob Jackson /Malcolm Couch time of spotting the rifle and then seeing it slowly withdrawn, plus Tom Aleya’s description of the box wall barricade being totally enclosing the SN ( very narrow gao).

Since there was a CROWD of people below the SE window, why would Oswald just coincidentally have singled out and watched Norman and Jarman below moving around?

That never happened. The LNs just desperately need some "explanation" for how Oswald could have known that Jarman and Norman were walking towards the elevators on the 1st floor only minutes before the shooting, and this is all they came up with.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 08:36:24 AM
Nah, I will talk to anybody who is capable of having a normal reasoned conversation
_Your idea of a reasoned conversation is to tell someone that BRW didn't see anyone on the 6th, and then ignore the part about the stacks of boxes.

No. I told you that BRW did not see or hear anybody. Your idea of a reasoned conversation is to ignore the "hear" part and just ramble on about boxes blocking the view.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 08:38:20 AM
Other images from the same video show views that are taken too far away from the window to be able to lean the camera over the edge

As for the images I posted, they are samples (showing sizes, angles) I would post to a skilled photographer.
If I was there, I would whip out my iPhone, lean over the edge, and do it myself.

Thanks so much for your always-useful input.

So, if Oswald didn't have a hand held mirror, he just could have used his iPhone? Is that what you are now saying?

Hilarious...
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on August 20, 2022, 12:29:13 PM
Rock Solid Alibi?   ???


Nope, just another one of his too numerous to count lies…



 https://www.jfk-assassination.net/leeslies.htm (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/leeslies.htm)


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 02:13:10 PM
So, if Oswald didn't have a hand held mirror, he just could have used his iPhone? Is that what you are now saying?

Hilarious...

 :D

I'm talking about doing tests present day, yo.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 02:42:27 PM
No. I told you that BRW did not see or hear anybody. Your idea of a reasoned conversation is to ignore the "hear" part and just ramble on about boxes blocking the view.

Besides, even if BRW was where he said he was, there was nothing blocking him from seeing Rowland's gunman in the SW window.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 02:45:53 PM
Nope, just another one of his too numerous to count lies…

"Lie" defined as contradicting something that WC-evangelists want to believe is true.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 03:24:02 PM
No. I told you that BRW did not see or hear anybody. Your idea of a reasoned conversation is to ignore the "hear" part and just ramble on about boxes blocking the view.

BRW was boxed in; you can't keep ignoring that
> IMO you are here to mislead people and nothing more
    All for a cold-blooded killer

I missed the 'hear' memo
> BRW was listening for his friends to appear
> Oswald was listening for party-poopers to appear

And so on and so forth

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 03:38:30 PM
Besides, even if BRW was where he said he was, there was nothing blocking him from seeing Rowland's gunman in the SW window.

Rowland said a lot of things
BRW gave a traffic-controller's list of departure times
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 20, 2022, 04:12:43 PM
Well according to the first page of Will Fritz WC testimony, Fritz claims Oswald said he “was eating lunch with “some of the employees” at the time of shooting.

So the initial scribbles Fritz made that  vaguely place Oswald in the 1st floor lunchroom (= the Domino room)  Fritz is apparently giving himself a lot of leeway to later edit the scenario to fit whatever timeline they construct for Oswald to place Oswald on the 6th floor at time of shooting.

This is why,imo that Fritz would have  bothered to write any scribbles at all about a “1st  floor lunchroom” and vaguely reference 2 negro employees , BECAUSE Fritz fully intended to negate  analibi for Oswald “seeing” the 2negroes returning  to  Oswald eating lunch” with them , which Fritz could then use to portray Oswald as having lied via Jarman and Norman denying they saw Oswald in the Domino room while eating their lunch.

Also this covers the possibility Norman or Jarman  Might verify having lunch with Oswald because that was would place Oswald in the Domino room only at the time between 12:00 and 12:15 thus NOT be an alibi.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 20, 2022, 04:24:24 PM
"Lie" defined as contradicting something that WC-evangelists want to believe is true.

A "Lie" is  defined as contradicting something that WC-evangelists want to believe is true.

Excellent, Mr Iacoletti.....  I would like to add an adjective... A lie is defined as contradicting something that the gutless WC-evangelists want to believe is true. 

The WC apologists simply lack the guts to accept facts that clearly refute their cherished beliefs....

As Clint Eastwood so succinctly  put it....."they can't handle the truth" ( I wish I knew how to copy and post that one line )
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 04:48:47 PM
Rowland said a lot of things

So did BRW.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 05:03:01 PM
A "Lie" is  defined as contradicting something that WC-evangelists want to believe is true.

Excellent, Mr Iacoletti.....  I would like to add an adjective... A lie is defined as contradicting something that the gutless WC-evangelists want to believe is true. 

The WC apologists simply lack the guts to accept facts that clearly refute their cherished beliefs....

The WC apologists simply lack the guts to accept facts that clearly refute their cherished beliefs
_ Oswald Arse Kissers are, well, Oswald Arse Kissers. And here we have one kissing the arse of another. YIKES!
   Oswald got what he deserved. Ya can't get water hot enough to wash the stench off that piece of road-kill.
   Booyah, bleach-boyz.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 20, 2022, 05:17:44 PM
The WC apologists simply lack the guts to accept facts that clearly refute their cherished beliefs
_ Oswald Arse Kissers are, well, Oswald Arse Kissers. And here we have one kissing the arse of another. YIKES!
   Oswald got what he deserved. Ya can't get water hot enough to wash the stench off that piece of road-kill.
   Booyah, bleach-boyz.

Captain Fritz:  You were working in the book depository today. Is that right?

Lee Oswald:....Yes...

Captain Fritz;  Were you there when the president's motorcade went by?

Lee Oswald:.... Yes...

Captain Fritz:...Where were you when the president went by the book depository?

Lee Oswald:... I was eating my lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom.   

From Cap't Fritz's notes ( which he swore he never took) ....

The following is not verbatim.....

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 05:19:47 PM
So did BRW.

Like lift-off times

Arnie provided geolocation choices re the window
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 05:35:29 PM
Can anybody make any sense out of the disjointed maniacal ramblings of Mr. Chapman?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 20, 2022, 05:59:17 PM
Can anybody make any sense out of the disjointed maniacal ramblings of Mr. Chapman?

Perhaps another mental hospital patient could understand Chappie.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 06:11:12 PM
Rock Solid Alibi?   ???


Nope, just another one of his too numerous to count lies…

 https://www.jfk-assassination.net/leeslies.htm (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/leeslies.htm)

Hilarious. To "prove" that Oswald was a liar you rely on a webpage that contains outright lies. How typical LN of you!
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 06:12:35 PM
Captain Fritz:  You were working in the book depository today. Is that right?

Lee Oswald:....Yes...

Captain Fritz;  Were you there when the president's motorcade went by?

Lee Oswald:.... Yes...

Captain Fritz:...Where were you when the president went by the book depository?

Lee Oswald:... I was eating my lunch in the 1st floor lunchroom.   

From Cap't Fritz's notes ( which he swore he never took) ....

The following is not verbatim.....

(Oswald ) Says...  Two fellow colored employees walked by the lunchroom while he was eating lunch. One called Junior and other man short stature .....Says he didn't know their names.  Check with Mr Truly to see if he knows the two men.

The two men were Junior Jarman and Harold Norman and they swore that they in fact did walk by the 1st floor lunchroom at about 12:27....

Lee's statement of seeing those two walk by the lunchroom is a rock solid alibi..... But Lee wasn't using it as an alibi when he replied to Fritz's question ..... He was simply stating what he saw while he was there in that lunchroom. He had no idea that Fritz would question Jarman and Norman, or if they would verify that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom.

Jarman, Arce and Norman were outside until 12:20-12:25
They left and, still outside, went around to the back and took an elevator upstairs

Are you suggesting that persons of interest (or even uninteresting persons) can be eyeballed from a speeding elevator (or even not-all-that-speedy an elevator)?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 06:23:17 PM
BRW was boxed in; you can't keep ignoring that
> IMO you are here to mislead people and nothing more
    All for a cold-blooded killer

What makes you think I am ignoring it? I've told you before, it's only half the story

Quote
I missed the 'hear' memo

Yeah, of course you did. It is a bit strange though, because you actually replied to it but of course ignored the "hear" part, as you have been doing all along.

Bonnie Ray Williams was up there until about 12:20 / 12:25 and he saw or heard nobody.
_ Williams: The books at the time were stacked so high. I could see only in the path that I was standing-as I remember, I could not possibly see anything to the east side of the building.

Is it on purpose that you keep missing the "hear" part or do you perhaps have a reading disorder?

Quote
> BRW was listening for his friends to appear

So, he was paying more than normal attention to any sounds he could hear on the 6th floor? Is that what you are saying?
No wonder you keep on ignoring the "hear" part
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 20, 2022, 06:25:40 PM
Jarman, Arce and Norman were outside until 12:20-12:25
They left and, still outside, went around to the back and took an elevator upstairs

Are you suggesting that persons of interest (or even uninteresting persons) can be eyeballed from a speeding elevator (or even not-all-that-speedy an elevator)?

Duh!....  You're half right ( that's par for a halfwit )

Arce was with Jarman and Norman when they went to the front of the building, but Arce left, and Jarman and Norman decided to go to the 5th floor to watch the approaching parade at about 12:25.  J &N walked past the windows of the 1st floor lunchroom and that's when Lee saw them....They weren't on the elevator when Lee saw them.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 20, 2022, 06:26:57 PM
The WC apologists simply lack the guts to accept facts that clearly refute their cherished beliefs
_ Oswald Arse Kissers are, well, Oswald Arse Kissers. And here we have one kissing the arse of another. YIKES!
   Oswald got what he deserved. Ya can't get water hot enough to wash the stench off that piece of road-kill.
   Booyah, bleach-boyz.


And this is coming from a guy who is complaining that others can not have a normal reasoned conversation with him.

Go figure.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 06:35:36 PM
Can anybody make any sense out of the disjointed maniacal ramblings of Mr. Chapman?

You're still not witty

'lift-off' times = BRW's guesses of what time he got up & departed to the 5th
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 20, 2022, 07:07:17 PM
This is turning into another Adams-on-the-stairs connivance. The critics contend Adams' laterday CT-spun account precludes Oswald using the stairs immediately after the shooting. Now Oswald needs a police radio or be near one to gauge whether the motorcade was still on.

But if Adams really went down the stairs as early as she claimed, it would only mean she was ahead of Oswald. Same with the radio straw man claim; Oswald in the SN wouldn't need it. He could see the streets still sealed off for the motorcade, policemen at the intersections and crowds waiting.

I agree completely.  Oswald did not need access to any real time reports of the motorcade's progress to assassinate JFK.  Just noting that such information was available to rebut the baseless claim that it was not possible to known it was running late.  Remarkably, we know that even in Dealey Plaza itself police motorcycle radios were apparently reporting the motorcade's progress and could be overheard by those in the vicinity.   The motorcade could also be heard as it made its way down Main via the crowd noise and engine noise from the motorcycles etc.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 07:08:56 PM
Can anybody make any sense out of the disjointed maniacal ramblings of Mr. Chapman?

You forgot 2 commas
Too eager to run-your-mouth I guess

Arnie provided geolocation choices re the window  =  Arnie provided choices re his shooter's distance from the window

--------
BONUS
--------
Cleaned up last line
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 20, 2022, 07:38:46 PM
You forgot 2 commas
Too eager to run-your-mouth I guess

Arnie provided geolocation choices re the window  =  Arnie provided choices re his shooter's distance from the window of approx 10-12 feet and approx 3-5 feet

Smooth move, Ex-lax.... But the debate is not about Arnold Rowland....  It's a rebuttal of the insane proposal that it's possible for a person on the 6th floor of the TSBD to hear  and understand a police radio message from a radio that was a half block away.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 07:59:15 PM
Jarman, Arce and Norman were outside until 12:20-12:25
They left and, still outside, went around to the back and took an elevator upstairs

Arce didn't go upstairs.  Are you determined to continually embarrass yourself?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 08:01:49 PM
You're still not witty

'lift-off' times = BRW's guesses of what time he got up & departed to the 5th

Who cares what BRW "guessed"?  He didn't leave until after Norman and Jarman got to the fifth floor.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 20, 2022, 08:10:58 PM
Who cares what BRW "guessed"?  He didn't leave until after Norman and Jarman got to the fifth floor.

He didn't leave until after Norman and Jarman got to the fifth floor.

Excellent point!.....  Junior Jarman testified that he and Norman arrived on the 5th floor at about 12:28. And BRW joined them there on the 5th floor so B R Williams was on the sixth floor until just a couple of minutes before the shooting broke out....   

This is simply another rebuttal of the official tale .......  It's highly unlikely that Lee Oswald could have been on the sixth floor at the time of the murder.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 08:11:13 PM
I agree completely.  Oswald did not need access to any real time reports of the motorcade's progress to assassinate JFK.  Just noting that such information was available to rebut the baseless claim that it was not possible to known it was running late.  Remarkably, we know that even in Dealey Plaza itself police motorcycle radios were apparently reporting the motorcade's progress and could be overheard by those in the vicinity.   The motorcade could also be heard as it made its way down Main via the crowd noise and engine noise from the motorcycles etc.

Nice back-pedal.  First it's "live reports were on broadcast radio", then it's "he could have heard the police radio halfway down Houston street", then it's "Mrs. Reid said that Mr. Reid said", then it's "he didn't need to hear any progress reports".  He could somehow hear the lack of "crowd noise and engine noise" from inside the second floor lunchroom where Carolyn Arnold saw him at 12:25 and knew that he didn't need to hurry back up to the sixth floor yet, so he waited a few more minutes for Bonnie Ray to leave (because he could also hear him 4 floors up) and then high-tailed it up there to get himself set up.

Entertaining as always.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 20, 2022, 08:13:39 PM
You forgot 2 commas

And your ramblings are still disjointed COMMA and maniacal.

But thanks for your useless contributions.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 08:42:26 PM
Arce didn't go upstairs.  Are you determined to continually embarrass yourself?

Are you determined to continually embarrass yourself, period?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 10:26:35 PM
Smooth move, Ex-lax.... But the debate is not about Arnold Rowland....  It's a rebuttal of the insane proposal that it's possible for a person on the 6th floor of the TSBD to hear  and understand a police radio message from a radio that was a half block away.

Not my claim or interest
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 10:40:22 PM
And your ramblings are still disjointed COMMA and maniacal.

But thanks for your useless contributions.

disjointed COMMA
_ Is there a translator in the house?

But thanks for your useless contributions.
_ By all means, sir
   And thanks so much for your always-useful input
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 20, 2022, 11:08:03 PM
Arce didn't go upstairs.  Are you determined to continually embarrass yourself?

So Arce was a major player in the assassination was he?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 20, 2022, 11:49:10 PM
So Arce was a major player in the assassination was he?
Quote
Mr. BALL. Where were you standing when you heard the shots?
Mr. ARCE. I was standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository. I was on that grassy area part in front.
Mr. BALL. You were not on the sidewalk?
Mr. ARCE. No, I was on the sidewalk, then I walked up to the grass to get a higher view. and still couldn't see.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear shots?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. How many?
Mr. ARCE. Three.
Mr. BALL. Where did you make out the direction of the sound?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah, I thought they came from the railroad tracks to the west of the Texas School Book Depository.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 21, 2022, 06:38:19 AM
  But the debate is not about Arnold Rowland....  It's a rebuttal of the insane proposal that it's possible for a person on the 6th floor of the TSBD to hear  and understand a police radio message from a radio that was a half block away.
The location of the Rowlands [it states] The limo beside them.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b1/42/fa/b142fa71370be839de78d3796bb546e5.jpg)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 21, 2022, 08:28:19 AM

And this is coming from a guy who is complaining that others can not have a normal reasoned conversation with him.

Go figure.

Point out where I complained that 'others cannot have a normal reasoned conversation' with me.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 21, 2022, 09:42:34 AM
Can anybody make any sense out of the disjointed maniacal ramblings of Mr. Chapman?

It's Oswald who was 'disjointed'
Hell, its the whole damn critic brigade that's disjointed
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 21, 2022, 01:18:31 PM
The location of the Rowlands [it states] The limo beside them.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b1/42/fa/b142fa71370be839de78d3796bb546e5.jpg)
 
A screenshot from that approx location---
 https://www.google.com/maps/@32.77908,-96.807901,3a,75y,347.49h,89.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv3J_Y4TCtP5m0I8760jMKw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 21, 2022, 01:23:30 PM
Point out where I complained that 'others cannot have a normal reasoned conversation' with me.

Why? So, you can have another abnormal unreasoned conversation about a subject that has nothing to do with this case?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 21, 2022, 03:09:28 PM
So Arce was a major player in the assassination was he?

You claimed Arce went upstairs with Norman and Jarman. You can’t hide your ineptitude with more disjointed, maniacal ramblings.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 21, 2022, 03:11:47 PM
Why? So, you can have another abnormal unreasoned conversation about a subject that has nothing to do with this case?

Bingo. Textbook troll.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 21, 2022, 04:03:08 PM
Smooth move, Ex-lax.... But the debate is not about Arnold Rowland....  It's a rebuttal of the insane proposal that it's possible for a person on the 6th floor of the TSBD to hear  and understand a police radio message from a radio that was a half block away.

How exactly is it insane?  The motorcycle wasn't even parked where Rowland was standing.  It wasn't the only police motorcycle there.  We know from Rowland's testimony that the radio could be heard by bystanders in the area.  Do you know how loud the radio broadcast was?  Presumably pretty high to be heard over a motorcycle engine.  Again, though, this whole issue is one of little relevance since Oswald required no real time progress report of the motorcade.  He knew the approximate time for media reports.  Most such events run behind schedule.  And the crowd and motorcade noise could be heard as the motorcade advanced.  Giving anyone in DP advanced notice of its approach. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 21, 2022, 04:20:30 PM
How exactly is it insane?  The motorcycle wasn't even parked where Rowland was standing.  It wasn't the only police motorcycle there.  We know from Rowland's testimony that the radio could be heard by bystanders in the area.  Do you know how loud the radio broadcast was?  Presumably pretty high to be heard over a motorcycle engine.  Again, though, this whole issue is one of little relevance since Oswald required no real time progress report of the motorcade.  He knew the approximate time for media reports.  Most such events run behind schedule.  And the crowd and motorcade noise could be heard as the motorcade advanced.  Giving anyone in DP advanced notice of its approach.

Amazing. If Richard's many crazy "explanations" are to believed, Oswald must have been some kind of super man, who managed to get to the 6th floor or hide there without Bonnie Ray Williams, or anybody else, seeing or hearing him. Who could hear a broadcast on a radio of a motorbike parked some 150 feet away, from the 6th floor of a building, who could see Jarman and Norman on a sidewalk right below his window without sticking his head out of the window and who managed to run down noisy stairs without anybody seeing or hearing him.

They should make a movie about a guy like that....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 21, 2022, 05:56:57 PM
Notice how “Richard” never addresses any objections, counterpoints, or corrections and instead just repeats the same talking points? He’s a one-way propaganda machine.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 21, 2022, 06:30:42 PM
Notice how “Richard” never addresses any objections, counterpoints, or corrections and instead just repeats the same talking points? He’s a one-way propaganda machine.

He’s a one-way propaganda machine.

Yes, I believe you've smacked the ten penny squarely.... Long ago I pegged our "Mr Smith" as agent who is paid to spread the official propaganda of LBJ's "special select Blue Ribbon Committee" and attempt to defuse the bombshells that threaten blow up that official LBJ approved pile of BS   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 21, 2022, 06:49:07 PM
I can’t imagine he is being paid. Somebody who was being paid would be a lot more competent.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 21, 2022, 06:55:45 PM
I can’t imagine he is being paid. Somebody who was being paid would be a lot more competent.

Competence is rapidly disappearing in all walks of life here in the U.S.......

Our Mr "Smith" does seem to have a supporter....   And Chappie is even less competent.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 21, 2022, 08:08:06 PM
Mr. BALL. Where did you make out the direction of the sound?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah, I thought they came from the railroad tracks to the west of the Texas School Book Depository.
No comment there from the Warren-ites?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 21, 2022, 09:35:12 PM
Amazing. If Richard's many crazy "explanations" are to believed, Oswald must have been some kind of super man, who managed to get to the 6th floor or hide there without Bonnie Ray Williams, or anybody else, seeing or hearing him. Who could hear a broadcast on a radio of a motorbike parked some 150 feet away, from the 6th floor of a building, who could see Jarman and Norman on a sidewalk right below his window without sticking his head out of the window and who managed to run down noisy stairs without anybody seeing or hearing him.

They should make a movie about a guy like that....

Why exactly would it take superman to sit quietly behind some boxes on the 6th floor?  And, again, for about the hundredth time, I'm not claiming that it was necessary for Oswald to have heard the police radio broadcast.  In fact, the opposite.  He was perfectly capable of assassinating JFK without any such update.  He knew the time and route of the motorcade.  Being a few minutes late was not a factor to him.  What I corrected was the false claim that there was no such progress updates.  We not only know that the police radio was providing such updates but that they could be heard in Dealey Plaza of all places.  In addition, another witness confirms that her husband was listening to the radio and learned the motorcade was running late.  And the beginning of the motorcade was covered on live TV including the delay in leaving Love Field.  Contrary to your false claim, there were a number of ways to know that the motorcade was running behind schedule.  Something that happens routinely in these types of events.  Whether Oswald learned from any of these sources or people who had access to them that the motorcade was running behind schedule is unknowable.  But they existed.  And he could have still committed the crime without any such information. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 21, 2022, 11:50:17 PM
Why? So, you can have another abnormal unreasoned conversation about a subject that has nothing to do with this case?

Catch me up with which subject you are talking about. Pretty sure I was reminding you to include the boxes.

Now this should help you remember some of what he had for lunch

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dwf762Dc/272-CHICKEN-DELIGHT.png)
billchapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 22, 2022, 12:17:26 AM
Catch me up with which subject you are talking about. Pretty sure I was reminding you to include the boxes.

Now this should help you remember some of what he had for lunch

(https://i.postimg.cc/Dwf762Dc/272-CHICKEN-DELIGHT.png)
billchapman

Pretty sure you mistakely thought you were reminding me to include the boxes.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 22, 2022, 12:24:32 AM
Bingo. Textbook troll.

Textbook oswald arse kisser

---------
UPDATE
---------
Texas textbook oswald arse kisser
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 22, 2022, 01:13:39 AM

And this is coming from a guy who is complaining that others can not have a normal reasoned conversation with him.

Go figure.

FFS. iF you want to figure out if BRW heard anything, read his testimony
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 22, 2022, 01:24:28 AM
FFS. iF you want to figure out if BRW heard anything, read his testimony

Already know. He didn't hear anything. That was the point.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 22, 2022, 01:46:40 AM
   Oswald.... He was perfectly capable of assassinating JFK...
How do you know this?
Quote
He knew the time and route of the motorcade.
How do you know that?
Quote
Mr. BALL - Where were you when you talked to him?
Mr. JARMAN - In between two rows of bins.
Mr. BALL - On what floor?
Mr. JARMAN - On the first floor.
Mr. BALL - And what was said by him and by you?
Mr. JARMAN - Well, he was standing up in the window and I went to the window also, and he asked me what were the people gathering around on the corner for, and I told him that the President was supposed to pass that morning, and he asked me did I know which way he was coming, and I told him, yes; he probably come down Main and turn on Houston and then back again on Elm. Then he said, "Oh, I see," and that was all.
So Oswald was just shining Jarman on?
 
Quote
Being a few minutes late was not a factor to him. 
Gaslighting Warren-ites feel at liberty to just make stuff up to justify their preconceived conclusion.
 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 22, 2022, 02:22:52 AM
Already know. He didn't hear anything. That was the point.

Talk to The Lunch

(https://i.postimg.cc/2jQ0yqh5/TALK-TO-THE-LUNCH.png)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 22, 2022, 04:11:39 AM
He knew the time and route of the motorcade.

How could you possibly know that? Oh yeah, it’s yet another thing you just made up.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 22, 2022, 04:13:37 AM
Now this should help you remember some of what he had for lunch

Please keep your “creativity” in its own thread, where it can be more easily ignored.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 22, 2022, 06:55:29 AM
Please keep your “creativity” in its own thread, where it can be more easily ignored.

'More easily ignored' hahahaha
Your longstanding obsession with me duly noted

Moth to the flame  ;)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 22, 2022, 09:25:01 AM
Pretty sure you mistakely thought you were reminding me to include the boxes.

Pretty sure you misled by omission
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 22, 2022, 11:56:32 AM
Pretty sure you misled by omission

Pretty sure a headless chicken makes more sense than you.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 22, 2022, 02:18:11 PM
He’s a one-way propaganda machine.

Yes, I believe you've smacked the ten penny squarely.... Long ago I pegged our "Mr Smith" as agent who is paid to spread the official propaganda of LBJ's "special select Blue Ribbon Committee" and attempt to defuse the bombshells that threaten blow up that official LBJ approved pile of BS

I'm an "agent who is paid to spread official propaganda" on behalf of the WC which hasn't existed in decades?  Wow.  That almost tops your claim that the red rings on the TSBD windows were some type of signal.  I hope you don't actually believe any of that nonsense as it would be indicative of a person who is several bricks short of a load.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 22, 2022, 02:25:44 PM
How do you know this?  How do you know that?So Oswald was just shining Jarman on?
 Gaslighting Warren-ites feel at liberty to just make stuff up to justify their preconceived conclusion.

You think there is some doubt that Oswald knew the time and route of the motorcade even though people were standing along the road in front of his own building and most coworkers had exited to watch the motorcade?  And it was widely publicized in the local press and TV for days leading up to the event.  Frazier indicated that the TSBD employees had been given permission to stand outside and watch the motorcade.  No talk among his fellow workers about the event?  You think Oswald was like Mr. Magoo from the cartoon and was the only person in Dallas unaware of the motorcade?  What do you think he believed had happened to all his coworkers?  Weak and desperate sauce.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 22, 2022, 03:06:34 PM
I'm an "agent who is paid to spread official propaganda" on behalf of the WC which hasn't existed in decades?  Wow.  That almost tops your claim that the red rings on the TSBD windows were some type of signal.  I hope you don't actually believe any of that nonsense as it would be indicative of a person who is several bricks short of a load.

The Lies that were dumped on us by LBJ's "Select Blue Ribbon Committee" Of Venerated honorable pillars of the community still live on, and those lies are supported and propagated by agents of the government.   How many pieces of silver have you garnered Mr "Smith"?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 22, 2022, 03:16:19 PM
The Lies that were dumped on us by LBJ's "Select Blue Ribbon Committee" Of Venerated honorable pillars of the community still live on, and those lies are supported and propagated by agents of the government.   How many pieces of silver have you garnered Mr "Smith"?

"Pieces of silver" like in "Treasure Island"?  How about this?  Find a mental health professional.  Tell them that you believe there are government agents on the JFK assassination forum being paid to cover up the truth about an event which occurred almost six decades ago.  Get back to us with their assessment.  That is not a good place.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 22, 2022, 04:22:57 PM
I'm an "agent who is paid to spread official propaganda" on behalf of the WC which hasn't existed in decades?  Wow.  That almost tops your claim that the red rings on the TSBD windows were some type of signal.  I hope you don't actually believe any of that nonsense as it would be indicative of a person who is several bricks short of a load.

How many bricks are in a load?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 22, 2022, 04:37:55 PM
How many bricks are in a load?

Only government agents know for sure. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 22, 2022, 04:57:26 PM
Only government agents know for sure.

Only government agents know for sure.

And YOU know that I'm short a few bricks..... Isn't tantamount to an admission?
Yer not the brightest penny in the pile .....are you Mr "Smith"
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 22, 2022, 05:21:42 PM
Only government agents know for sure.

And YOU know that I'm short a few bricks..... Isn't tantamount to an admission?
Yer not the brightest penny in the pile .....are you Mr "Smith"

Why don't Richard and you go together to a mental health professional and tell them you both believe everything on Fox News and the alt-right?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 22, 2022, 05:41:37 PM
Why don't Richard and you go together to a mental health professional and tell them you both believe everything on Fox News and the alt-right?

Don't watch Fox News or any other "News".     Any "news" based on politics is nothing but BS ..... Many years ago I came to realize that p-o-l-i-t-i-c-i-a-n is nothing but a different way to spell con man.   A wise man once said that he had more respect for an armed robber than a politician. 

In my life I've met lots of unscrupulous men ....  some will rob you with a gun, while other's use a fountain pen.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 22, 2022, 08:00:54 PM
You think there is some doubt that Oswald knew the time and route of the motorcade even though people were standing along the road in front of his own building and most coworkers had exited to watch the motorcade?  And it was widely publicized in the local press and TV for days leading up to the event.  Frazier indicated that the TSBD employees had been given permission to stand outside and watch the motorcade.  No talk among his fellow workers about the event?  You think Oswald was like Mr. Magoo from the cartoon and was the only person in Dallas unaware of the motorcade?  What do you think he believed had happened to all his coworkers?  Weak and desperate sauce.

You think there is some doubt that Oswald knew the time and route of the motorcade

Would this be the time the motorcade was supposed to pass by or the time it actually passed by?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 22, 2022, 08:25:31 PM
Don't watch Fox News or any other "News".     Any "news" based on politics is nothing but BS ..... Many years ago I came to realize that p-o-l-i-t-i-c-i-a-n is nothing but a different way to spell con man.   A wise man once said that he had more respect for an armed robber than a politician. 

In my life I've met lots of unscrupulous men ....  some will rob you with a gun, while other's use a fountain pen.


Can't be bothered with the mid-terms, uh? You need a year when Trump is running.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 22, 2022, 11:06:21 PM
You think there is some doubt that Oswald knew the time and route of the motorcade even though people were standing along the road in front of his own building and most coworkers had exited to watch the motorcade?  And it was widely publicized in the local press and TV for days leading up to the event.  Frazier indicated that the TSBD employees had been given permission to stand outside and watch the motorcade.  No talk among his fellow workers about the event?  You think Oswald was like Mr. Magoo from the cartoon and was the only person in Dallas unaware of the motorcade?  What do you think he believed had happened to all his coworkers?  Weak and desperate sauce.

This is “Richard’s” long-winded way of admitting that he just made it up. As usual.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 23, 2022, 02:21:25 AM
  A wise man once said that he had more respect for an armed robber than a politician.
Politicians are lawyers that couldn't make it as an attorney.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 23, 2022, 05:40:25 AM
The creed of the ideal public defender--- ~Better that 10 guilty go free than one innocent be convicted~
The creed of the politician ---  ~Better to let the poor schnook swing~ 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 23, 2022, 12:49:06 PM
Mr Ford.... You're presenting waaaaaaay too much commonsense ..... Anybody with an IQ greater than a turnip would know that the idea that Lee ( or anybody but a person with a neck like a giraffe ) couldn't stick his head out of a sixth floor window and see Jarman and Norman standing in front of the TSBD.   And then devine that they were contemplating  going to the 5th floor to watch the parade.

'anybody but a person with a neck like a giraffe'

(https://i.postimg.cc/xCwsKYgv/275-GIRAFFE-MAN.png)
billchapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 23, 2022, 01:54:02 PM
You think there is some doubt that Oswald knew the time and route of the motorcade

Would this be the time the motorcade was supposed to pass by or the time it actually passed by?

LOL.  How about answering the question?  It wasn't like the motorcade was hours late.  Most such events run slightly behind schedule.  The weak and pathetic argument that Oswald had to know in real time the EXACT minute the motorcade would move through DP to pull this off is laughable.  He knew the scheduled time.  The motorcade was a few minutes late.  Big deal.  And until someone explains his rifle and fired shell casings being found on the 6th floor in a way that exonerates him, nothing else matters.  That evidence links him to this crime beyond any doubt.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 02:22:16 PM
“His rifle and fired shell casings”. LOL.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 23, 2022, 02:33:24 PM
LOL.  How about answering the question?  It wasn't like the motorcade was hours late.  Most such events run slightly behind schedule.  The weak and pathetic argument that Oswald had to know in real time the EXACT minute the motorcade would move through DP to pull this off is laughable.  He knew the scheduled time.  The motorcade was a few minutes late.  Big deal.  And until someone explains his rifle and fired shell casings being found on the 6th floor in a way that exonerates him, nothing else matters.  That evidence links him to this crime beyond any doubt.

How about answering the question?

Why don't you do what you preach? And what question would that be? I didn't see any in your last rant.

It wasn't like the motorcade was hours late.

No, I wasn't hours. It was in fact some 15 minutes, which means that if Oswald was aware of the scheduled time, he would have had no reason to be up there before 12:10 and risk being seen, but he would have had to have been in place no later than 12:15, which is a problem as Bonnie Ray Williams was up there at that time eating his lunch. So, the question is; how did Oswald get into the sniper's nest between 12:10 and 12:15 without BRW seeing or hearing him and how could Carolyn Arnold see him on (iirc) the second floor either at 12:15 or 12:25?

And until someone explains his rifle and fired shell casings being found on the 6th floor in a way that exonerates him, nothing else matters. 

"His rifle"  lol

And what "fired shell casings" would that be? The ones Fritz picked up or the ones he threw down on the floor?

That evidence links him to this crime beyond any doubt.

Hardly conclusive. Even if it was his rifle, that still does not mean he shot it on 11/22 and those shells could have come from bullets that were fired at any time.

You are making two classic mistakes over and over again. (1) you are jumping to conclusions not supported by the evidence and (2) you lack completely the capacity to look at evidence objectively. Instead of making any conclusive points you just produce rant after rant without actually saying anything even remotely significant.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 23, 2022, 03:05:06 PM
[

Hardly conclusive. Even if it was his rifle, that still does not mean he shot it on 11/22 and those shells could have come from bullets that were fired at any time.

You are making two classic mistakes over and over again. (1) you are jumping to conclusions not supported by the evidence and (2) you lack completely the capacity to look at evidence objectively. Instead of making any conclusive points you just produce rant after rant without actually saying anything even remotely significant.

This is classic contrarian rabbit hole.  You engage in all manner baseless and unsupported speculation about Oswald's movements in the minutes leading up to the assassination, reject documented evidence of his ownership of the rifle, make idiotic claims like he must have had superpowers to hide behind some boxes, but then lecture others on jumping to conclusion!  HA HA HA.  Comedy gold considering the source.  Absent a time machine, there literally couldn't be ANY MORE evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle.  And we are supposed to believe that the presence of Oswald's rifle in the building, and on very floor from which witnesses saw a rifle at the moment of the assassination, with fired bullet casings from that rifle by that very window has some contrary explanation.  Oswald himself lies about ownership of this rifle.  He provides no explanation for its presence on the floor.  But we are supposed to ignore all this and entertain some wild, baseless speculation that some unspecified person obtained access to Oswald's rifle, carried it to his place of employment, assassinated JFK and left it there!  Unreal.  Talk about jumping to conclusions.  And Oswald helps to frame himself by fleeing the scene, getting his pistol, and killing and a police officer.  No normal person with a functioning brain can believe this fantasy scenario.  You can't possibly believe that unless you are delusional.  Rather, this seems like some type of game to play the contrarian and string out the discussion.  You know enough about the facts and circumstance to understand that Oswald was the assassin. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 23, 2022, 03:25:30 PM
LOL.  How about answering the question?  It wasn't like the motorcade was hours late.  Most such events run slightly behind schedule.  The weak and pathetic argument that Oswald had to know in real time the EXACT minute the motorcade would move through DP to pull this off is laughable.  He knew the scheduled time.  The motorcade was a few minutes late.  Big deal.  And until someone explains his rifle and fired shell casings being found on the 6th floor in a way that exonerates him, nothing else matters.  That evidence links him to this crime beyond any doubt.

The only thing that matters is that Oswald got what he deserved
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 23, 2022, 03:32:42 PM
This is classic contrarian rabbit hole.  You engage in all manner baseless and unsupported speculation about Oswald's movements in the minutes leading up to the assassination, reject documented evidence of his ownership of the rifle, make idiotic claims like he must have had superpowers to hide behind some boxes, but then lecture others on jumping to conclusion!  HA HA HA.  Comedy gold considering the source.  Absent a time machine, there literally couldn't be ANY MORE evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle.  And we are supposed to believe that the presence of Oswald's rifle in the building, and on very floor from which witnesses saw a rifle at the moment of the assassination, with fired bullet casings from that rifle by that very window has some contrary explanation.  Oswald himself lies about ownership of this rifle.  He provides no explanation for its presence on the floor.  But we are supposed to ignore all this and entertain some wild, baseless speculation that some unspecified person obtained access to Oswald's rifle, carried it to his place of employment, assassinated JFK and left it there!  Unreal.  Talk about jumping to conclusions.  And Oswald helps to frame himself by fleeing the scene, getting his pistol, and killing and a police officer.  No normal person with a functioning brain can believe this fantasy scenario.  You can't possibly believe that unless you are delusional.  Rather, this seems like some type of game to play the contrarian and string out the discussion.  You know enough about the facts and circumstance to understand that Oswald was the assassin.

You engage in all manner baseless and unsupported speculation about Oswald's movements in the minutes leading up to the assassination

Coming from you, this is hilarious. The one actually speculating is you. You claim he was on the 6th floor but haven't got a shred of evidence for that claim.

reject documented evidence of his ownership of the rifle

You don't know the difference between "reject" and "question"?

make idiotic claims like he must have had superpowers to hide behind some boxes,

Misrepresent much? I said that, according to your idiotic claims, for which you don't offer any evidence, you have to conclude that Oswald must have had super powers to get to the 6th floor, into the sniper's nest and then downstairs to the 2nd floor without anybody seeing or hearing him. Nothing you have said or are able to say contradicts that conclusion.

Absent a time machine, there literally couldn't be ANY MORE evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle.

That's your speculative opinion, for which you can not make a conclusive case.

But we are supposed to ignore all this and entertain some wild, baseless speculation that some unspecified person obtained access to Oswald's rifle, carried it to his place of employment, assassinated JFK and left it there!  Unreal.

And there's the strawman.... You always come up with one, when you lack anything conclusive to support your speculation.

Oswald himself lies about ownership of this rifle.

As you can not prove he owned a rifle, you also can not conclude that he lied. Wanna prove me wrong? Provide the evidence that Oswald owned the rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD.

And Oswald helps to frame himself by fleeing the scene, getting his pistol, and killing and a police officer.

Your assumptions are not evidence

No normal person with a functioning brain can believe this fantasy scenario.  You can't possibly believe that unless you are delusional.  Rather, this seems like some type of game to play the contrarian and string out the discussion.  You know enough about the facts and circumstance to understand that Oswald was the assassin.

And there is the usual whining again about anybody who doesn't agree with your narrowminded, shallow, opinions. One trick pony strikes again.

In the meantime, nowhere in this rant is a plausible explanation for how Oswald is supposed to have gotten into the sniper's nest around 12:15 without Bonnie Ray Williams seeing or hearing him and he he got down to the second floor without being seen or heard by anybody either. Why am I not surprised?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 23, 2022, 03:39:28 PM
Your (Richard) assumptions are not evidence

Show us where the Patton gang assumed anything
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 04:07:00 PM
Poor “Richard”. He thinks that regurgitating the same rant full of false and unsubstantiated claims constitutes evidence.

“evidence of Oswald's ownership of the rifle”. LOL.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 04:07:40 PM
The only thing that matters is that Oswald got what he deserved

Says the self-appointed prophet and decider.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 04:09:26 PM
Your (Richard) assumptions are not evidence

Show us where the Patton gang assumed anything

Show us what crime this “Patton gang” witnessed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 23, 2022, 05:06:32 PM
Show us what crime this “Patton gang” witnessed.

You seem to be the one doing the assuming. Where did I say that what they saw was a crime? What they saw was a man walking along Patton carrying a handgun. Why, he even slowed down to exchange pleasantries with one of the locals.

Nothin' wrong with that

No you might want focus on what Markham saw if you want to get to the fun part

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 23, 2022, 05:16:07 PM
You engage in all manner baseless and unsupported speculation about Oswald's movements in the minutes leading up to the assassination

Coming from you, this is hilarious. The one actually speculating is you. You claim he was on the 6th floor but haven't got a shred of evidence for that claim.



There is not a "shred" of evidence he was on the 6th floor?  LOL.  Round and round we go down the rabbit hole.  Let's see.  Just his rifle, fired bullet casings from that rifle, his prints on the SN boxes by that window. a long bag with his prints next to the 6th floor window from which the shots were fired.  Oswald apparently couldn't get to the SN and remain unseen and escape the floor without having "superpowers" while some other person could.  Laughable. Weak defense attorney nonsense to defend a guilty client.

Impasse -   a situation in which no progress is possible.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 23, 2022, 05:31:03 PM
There is not a "shred" of evidence he was on the 6th floor?  LOL.  Round and round we go down the rabbit hole.  Let's see.  Just his rifle, fired bullet casings from that rifle, his prints on the SN boxes by that window. a long bag with his prints next to the 6th floor window from which the shots were fired.  Oswald apparently couldn't get to the SN and remain unseen and escape the floor without having "superpowers" while some other person could.  Laughable. Weak defense attorney nonsense to defend a guilty client.

Impasse -   a situation in which no progress is possible.

IF the rifle was his....  How does that prove that Lee was there at 12:30 that day?

Fired bullet casings from the rifle....How do they prove that Lee was there at 12:30 that day ? Those spent shells could have been fired days or weeks before 11/22/63.  And who knows who fired them.???

His prints on boxes?....  REALLY Mr "Smith".  How utterly STUPID of you to try to use those prints as proof of anything other than proof that Lee Oswald worked at the TSBD and he handled boxes.

And a paper bag that has no chain of evidence .....  ROTFLMAO!   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 23, 2022, 06:22:42 PM
IF the rifle was his....  How does that prove that Lee was there at 12:30 that day?



If I ever commit a crime, please let Walt be on the jury!  A crime was committed on Nov. 22 at 12:30 with a rifle.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the 6th floor window of the TSBD at 12:30.  A rifle was found on that floor.  That rifle belonged to Oswald per the Klein's documentation confirming that a rifle with a specific serial number was sent to Oswald's PO Box.  Only Oswald's print were found on that rifle.  Oswald's prints also are found on the very boxes next to that window. Fired bullet casings from that rifle were found by the window from which the shots were fired.  Oswald flees the scene.   Denies owning any rifle.  Can't explain the presence of his rifle at the crime scene.  Murders a police officer less than an hour later.  Has no credible alibi for the moment of the assassination.  Conclusion guilty. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 23, 2022, 06:47:23 PM
Pretty sure a headless chicken makes more sense than you.

Pretty sure the talking chicken ain't headless
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 23, 2022, 06:49:04 PM
There is not a "shred" of evidence he was on the 6th floor?  LOL.  Round and round we go down the rabbit hole.  Let's see.  Just his rifle, fired bullet casings from that rifle, his prints on the SN boxes by that window. a long bag with his prints next to the 6th floor window from which the shots were fired.  Oswald apparently couldn't get to the SN and remain unseen and escape the floor without having "superpowers" while some other person could.  Laughable. Weak defense attorney nonsense to defend a guilty client.

Impasse -   a situation in which no progress is possible.

There is not a "shred" of evidence he was on the 6th floor?  LOL.

You can laugh all you want, but you are actually laughing at your own stupidity.

Let's see.  Just his rifle, fired bullet casings from that rifle, his prints on the SN boxes by that window. a long bag with his prints next to the 6th floor window from which the shots were fired.

Just his rifle,

Lol. Even if it was his rifle, how does that prove he was on the 6th floor at 12:30 on 11/22? Answer: it doesn't

fired bullet casings from that rifle

Lol. When were the bullets belonging to those casings fired? And how does that prove he was on the 6th floor at 12:30 on 11/22? Answer: it doesn't

his prints on the SN boxes by that window

Lol. He worked in the building and part of his job was to move boxes. And how does that prove he was on the 6th floor at 12:30 on 11/22? Answer: it doesn't

a long bag with his prints next to the 6th floor window from which the shots were fired.

What bag? The one that can not be seen in any in situ photographs?  And how does that prove he was on the 6th floor at 12:30 on 11/22? Answer: it doesn't

See the pattern?

Oswald apparently couldn't get to the SN and remain unseen and escape the floor without having "superpowers" while some other person could.

Only if you assume that shots were actually fired from the 6th floor window. We only have Brennan's word for that and he lied about just about everything from his location to the identification, on second thought, of Oswald. Not the most reliable witness.

All you really have is a theory based on all sorts of assumptions. The fact that those assumptions are highly questionable and are partly a physical impossibility, except of course in a fairytale, doesn't make any difference for you. It's one thing to believe that Oswald was the lone nut gun man but to do so without actual conclusive evidence is absolutely pathetic. As I said before, you haven't got a shred of evidence that Oswald was actually on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 on 11/22/63.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 23, 2022, 07:15:36 PM
Says the self-appointed prophet and decider.

No 'Prophet-eering' necessary when this image shows giraffe-necked persons
are not needed to peer 'overboard' so-to-speak.

(https://i.postimg.cc/xCwsKYgv/275-GIRAFFE-MAN.png)
billchapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 07:31:02 PM
You seem to be the one doing the assuming. Where did I say that what they saw was a crime? What they saw was a man walking along Patton carrying a handgun. Why, he even slowed down to exchange pleasantries with one of the locals.

So what’s your point?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 07:34:01 PM
If I ever commit a crime, please let Walt be on the jury!  A crime was committed on Nov. 22 at 12:30 with a rifle.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the 6th floor window of the TSBD at 12:30.  A rifle was found on that floor.  That rifle belonged to Oswald per the Klein's documentation confirming that a rifle with a specific serial number was sent to Oswald's PO Box.  Only Oswald's print were found on that rifle.  Oswald's prints also are found on the very boxes next to that window. Fired bullet casings from that rifle were found by the window from which the shots were fired.  Oswald flees the scene.   Denies owning any rifle.  Can't explain the presence of his rifle at the crime scene.  Murders a police officer less than an hour later.  Has no credible alibi for the moment of the assassination.  Conclusion guilty.

“Richard’s” fantasy jury would want him to actually substantiate his list of BS claims, at which point he would fall flat on his face.

LOL
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 23, 2022, 07:43:05 PM
No 'Prophet-eering' necessary when this image shows giraffe-necked persons
are not needed to peer 'overboard' so-to-speak.

And your evidence that this guy (whose name I bet you don’t even know) could see the sidewalk in front of the building from this position would be…?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

And your evidence that anybody stuck his head out a sixth floor window in such a fashion in the minutes leading up to the assassination would be…?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 23, 2022, 07:53:50 PM
If I ever commit a crime, please let Walt be on the jury!  A crime was committed on Nov. 22 at 12:30 with a rifle.  Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the 6th floor window of the TSBD at 12:30.  A rifle was found on that floor.  That rifle belonged to Oswald per the Klein's documentation confirming that a rifle with a specific serial number was sent to Oswald's PO Box.  Only Oswald's print were found on that rifle.  Oswald's prints also are found on the very boxes next to that window. Fired bullet casings from that rifle were found by the window from which the shots were fired.  Oswald flees the scene.   Denies owning any rifle.  Can't explain the presence of his rifle at the crime scene.  Murders a police officer less than an hour later.  Has no credible alibi for the moment of the assassination.  Conclusion guilty.

A crime was committed on Nov. 22 at 12:30 with a rifle. 

I'll agree that A crime was committed on Nov 22 at 12:30......   I'm fairly sure that there was more than one weapon and I don't believe those weapons were all rifles.......  And I would hasten to point out that Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom at 12:27 he couldn't have been firing a rifle out of a sixth floor window just a couple of minutes later.

 Witnesses saw a rifle pointed out the 6th floor window of the TSBD at 12:30.

If that's true ...then you should easily be able to list those witnesses.... Please verify your statement and prove that you're not a liar.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 23, 2022, 08:03:34 PM
No 'Prophet-eering' necessary when this image shows giraffe-necked persons
are not needed to peer 'overboard' so-to-speak.

(https://i.postimg.cc/xCwsKYgv/275-GIRAFFE-MAN.png)
billchapman

The window is not the window at the SE corner of the sixth floor....  That SE corner window was blocked by boxes of books....That's why Sergeant Hill is seen at a different window.....  The point remains....Only giraffe man could have stuck his head out of that SE corner window.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 12:58:09 AM
The window is not the window at the SE corner of the sixth floor....  That SE corner window was blocked by boxes of books....That's why Sergeant Hill is seen at a different window.....  The point remains....Only giraffe man could have stuck his head out of that SE corner window.

I know that's not the SE window

BUT you won't get any honest person saying the SE window was exactly blocked by boxes.
And didn't Euins say it looked like Oswald was trying to stick his head out the window at some point?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 01:09:24 AM
No, Euins didn’t say anything about Oswald.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 01:55:15 AM
No, Euins didn’t say anything about Oswald.

Yawn
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 02:58:38 AM
Yawn

Yes, it’s so boring when clowns speak with authority about stuff they know so little about.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 05:48:05 AM
Yes, it’s so boring when clowns speak with authority about stuff they know so little about.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 24, 2022, 10:49:30 AM

I see you're back at your normal level.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 24, 2022, 03:00:33 PM

Oswald apparently couldn't get to the SN and remain unseen and escape the floor without having "superpowers" while some other person could.

Only if you assume that shots were actually fired from the 6th floor window. We only have Brennan's word for that and he lied about just about everything from his location to the identification, on second thought, of Oswald. Not the most reliable witness.

All you really have is a theory based on all sorts of assumptions. The fact that those assumptions are highly questionable and are partly a physical impossibility, except of course in a fairytale, doesn't make any difference for you. It's one thing to believe that Oswald was the lone nut gun man but to do so without actual conclusive evidence is absolutely pathetic. As I said before, you haven't got a shred of evidence that Oswald was actually on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 on 11/22/63.

There are no questionable "assumptions" here.  Even if you repeat that contrarian nonsense a million times. Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor, fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the window, witnesses did see a rifle pointed from that window at the moment of the assassination (i.e. 12:30). Oswald was in the building at the moment the shots were fired and had no credible alibi,  Oswald's prints were found on the SN boxes (no other employee left their prints on those particular boxes), a long bag with Oswald's prints was found next to the SN, Oswald lied about his ownership of any rifle (as confirmed by his own wife, BY photos, and Klein's document), Oswald fled the scene within minutes, he obtained a gun, and murdered a police officer less than an hour.  Those are facts and evidence. 

There are only two choices here:  1) you accept the evidence in which case Oswald is stone cold guilty; or 2) you believe all this evidence derived from a variety of different sources including state and federal law enforcement agencies, third party businesses, and random citizens was fabricated to frame Oswald as part of a conspiracy.  What are assumptions and even baseless speculation is making bizarre claims like Oswald needed "superpowers" to sit behind some boxes and not be heard and get off the 6th floor unseen after the assassination.  Something that we know someone must have been able to do since we know someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at 12:30 per the witness confirmations.  For some reason, you constantly suggest Oswald couldn't do the same things that your fantasy conspirators could do. 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 24, 2022, 03:35:47 PM
There are no questionable "assumptions" here.  Even if you repeat that contrarian nonsense a million times. Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor, fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the window, witnesses did see a rifle pointed from that window at the moment of the assassination (i.e. 12:30). Oswald was in the building at the moment the shots were fired and had no credible alibi,  Oswald's prints were found on the SN boxes (no other employee left their prints on those particular boxes), a long bag with Oswald's prints was found next to the SN, Oswald lied about his ownership of any rifle (as confirmed by his own wife, BY photos, and Klein's document), Oswald fled the scene within minutes, he obtained a gun, and murdered a police officer less than an hour.  Those are facts and evidence. 

There are only two choices here:  1) you accept the evidence in which case Oswald is stone cold guilty; or 2) you believe all this evidence derived from a variety of different sources including state and federal law enforcement agencies, third party businesses, and random citizens was fabricated to frame Oswald as part of a conspiracy.  What are assumptions and even baseless speculation is making bizarre claims like Oswald needed "superpowers" to sit behind some boxes and not be heard and get off the 6th floor unseen after the assassination.  Something that we know someone must have been able to do since we know someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at 12:30 per the witness confirmations.  For some reason, you constantly suggest Oswald couldn't do the same things that your fantasy conspirators could do.

There are no questionable "assumptions" here.  Even if you repeat that contrarian nonsense a million times.

There are a multitude of questionable "assumptions" here.  Even if you repeat that "there aren't" nonsense a million times.


Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor

"Oswald's rifle" LOL


Those are facts and evidence. 

You clearly don't understand the difference between opinions, assumptions and actual facts.

There are only two choices here:

No. You want there to be only two choices to somehow make your strawman crap work. There are more choices whether you like it or not

What are assumptions and even baseless speculation is making bizarre claims like Oswald needed "superpowers" to sit behind some boxes and not be heard and get off the 6th floor unseen after the assassination.

And yet, you still haven't been able to explain how he managed to get into the sniper's nest without Bonnie Ray Williams saw or heard him, how he could run to the back of the building without the guys on the 5th floor hearing a single footstep and how he could pass by Adams, Styles (on the stairs) and Garner without anybody seeing or hearing him. Surely if what I say is "baseless speculation" you should be able to answer those questions..... So, why don't you?


Something that we know someone must have been able to do since we know someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at 12:30 per the witness confirmations.

What witness confirmations? And btw, witnesses are always 100% correct, right? But wait, that means that Rowland must also have been right when he said he saw a man with a rifle at a window at the other side of the building..... Go figure.

Something that we know someone must have been able to do

Somebody may well have been able to do something, but we are talking about Oswald and he has to be in the 2nd floor lunchroom some 75 seconds after the last shot. No other "somebody" had to meet that requirement.

For some reason, you constantly suggest Oswald couldn't do the same things that your fantasy conspirators could do.

The fact that you still don't understand what I am saying, tells me a lot about your limitations in processing basic information.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 03:38:59 PM
Even if “Richard” repeats his false and unsubstantiated nonsense a million times (and he has), that doesn’t constitute “facts and evidence”.

Even if shots were fired from the sixth floor, Oswald is the only one who is required by the circumstances to get down to the second floor unseen and unheard in 75 seconds. “Richard” constantly ignores this detail in his repetitive rants.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 03:46:34 PM
I see you're back at your normal level.

Yep. Regular again. Covid threw me off a bit, but you know me: I always land on top no matter how much crap is directed at me.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 04:13:07 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/TPWG3BrD/276-ON-THE-EDGE.png)
Bill Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 05:00:53 PM
And your evidence that this guy (whose name I bet you don’t even know) could see the sidewalk in front of the building from this position would be…?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

And your evidence that anybody stuck his head out a sixth floor window in such a fashion in the minutes leading up to the assassination would be…?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

Sgt Pepper, or whatever his name is, has his mug hanging out well past the edge of the building.
Is there some other factor that you 'thought' of that would prevent a downward gaze from reaching this magical sidewalk? 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 24, 2022, 05:28:05 PM
There are no questionable "assumptions" here.  Even if you repeat that contrarian nonsense a million times. Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor, fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the window, witnesses did see a rifle pointed from that window at the moment of the assassination (i.e. 12:30). Oswald was in the building at the moment the shots were fired and had no credible alibi,  Oswald's prints were found on the SN boxes (no other employee left their prints on those particular boxes), a long bag with Oswald's prints was found next to the SN, Oswald lied about his ownership of any rifle (as confirmed by his own wife, BY photos, and Klein's document), Oswald fled the scene within minutes, he obtained a gun, and murdered a police officer less than an hour.  Those are facts and evidence. 

There are only two choices here:  1) you accept the evidence in which case Oswald is stone cold guilty; or 2) you believe all this evidence derived from a variety of different sources including state and federal law enforcement agencies, third party businesses, and random citizens was fabricated to frame Oswald as part of a conspiracy.  What are assumptions and even baseless speculation is making bizarre claims like Oswald needed "superpowers" to sit behind some boxes and not be heard and get off the 6th floor unseen after the assassination.  Something that we know someone must have been able to do since we know someone was on the 6th floor pointing a rifle out the window at 12:30 per the witness confirmations.  For some reason, you constantly suggest Oswald couldn't do the same things that your fantasy conspirators could do.

Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor, fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the window, witnesses did see a rifle pointed from that window at the moment of the assassination (i.e. 12:30).

Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor,    Ok Granted.....  WHEN was it hidden beneath the pallet ??
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 05:29:44 PM
Yes, it’s so boring when clowns speak with authority about stuff they know so little about.

Only 3 things you need to know
about the nightmare on Elm

1) That Oswald got what he deserved
2) That IacLOLetti worships a cold-blooded killer
3) See above
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 24, 2022, 06:05:04 PM
Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor, fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the window, witnesses did see a rifle pointed from that window at the moment of the assassination (i.e. 12:30).

Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor,    Ok Granted.....  WHEN was it hidden beneath the pallet ??


When seems obvious.  As Oswald boogied for the stairs to get off the floor.  Oswald's rifle was on the floor from which a shooter assassinated JFK with a rifle at 12:30. Fired bullet casings from Oswald's rifle were found by the window from which witnesses confirm they saw a rifle at the moment of the assassination.  That rifle was found hidden on the 6th floor. Oswald fled the scene down the stairs near the location where the rifle was left.  We don't have to consult Sherlock Holmes here to connect the dots. 

As a bonus, I'll give you actual speculation and excite Martin to take us down the rabbit hole.  After Oswald learned of the motorcade route sometime that week, he scouted the TSBD for a location that afford the best combination of shooting location and seclusion to commit the act.  The 6th floor window was ideal due to the boxes surrounding that window, view down Elm, and it was out of sight of the elevator/stairs.  He might have had an alternative if it that turned out to not be feasible for some reason on the day of the assassination.  Maybe on the 7th floor.  Once he picks a shooting location, he decides on a good place to hide the rifle on that floor.  He creates or finds such a place on the 6th floor sometime that week.   When he brings his bag/rifle to work on 11.22 he heads directly to that location and stashes the rifle.  He can retrieve it on the floor from which he intends to commit the act.   He walks around with his clipboard on the 6th floor after noon giving him the appearance of having a job-related purpose for being there should he encounter anyone on the floor.  At some point after noon, likely before BRW arrives on the floor, he puts his clipboard down and retrieves the bag.  The location of the clipboard, therefore, provides some insight as to where he hid the rifle that morning.  He carries the bag to the SN, takes out the rifle, and does whatever assembly is required while he waits.  After the shooting, he stashes the rifle in the same place he hid it that morning.  Not taking him more than a few seconds.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 06:19:19 PM
Only 3 things you need to know
about the nightmare on Elm

1) That Oswald got what he deserved
2) That IacLOLetti worships a cold-blooded killer
3) See above

Clown boy thinks that making an accusation constitutes “knowledge”. That’s why nobody takes clown boy seriously.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 24, 2022, 06:20:16 PM
Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor, fired bullet casings from his rifle were found by the window, witnesses did see a rifle pointed from that window at the moment of the assassination (i.e. 12:30).

Oswald's rifle was found on the 6th floor,    Ok Granted.....  WHEN was it hidden beneath the pallet ??

"Hidden beneath the pallet"?  ::)

Never mind that Day and Studebaker said the rifle as found was as it appeared in Studebaker's high-red Crime Lab photos. That Studebaker himself was filmed taking the photos. That one of the first to spot the rifle agreed with Studebaker's in-situ photo. Nope, you have a cherrypick you can wordspin.

Over at the other Forum, there's a revealing post where JFK Assassination Loons have come out of the closet with their belief that the World Trade towers were brought down by controlled explosions.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 06:22:25 PM
As a bonus, I'll give you actual speculation

What do you mean “bonus”? The whole thing was speculation.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 24, 2022, 06:59:21 PM

When seems obvious.  As Oswald boogied for the stairs to get off the floor.  Oswald's rifle was on the floor from which a shooter assassinated JFK with a rifle at 12:30. Fired bullet casings from Oswald's rifle were found by the window from which witnesses confirm they saw a rifle at the moment of the assassination.  That rifle was found hidden on the 6th floor. Oswald fled the scene down the stairs near the location where the rifle was left.  We don't have to consult Sherlock Holmes here to connect the dots. 

As a bonus, I'll give you actual speculation and excite Martin to take us down the rabbit hole.  After Oswald learned of the motorcade route sometime that week, he scouted the TSBD for a location that afford the best combination of shooting location and seclusion to commit the act.  The 6th floor window was ideal due to the boxes surrounding that window, view down Elm, and it was out of sight of the elevator/stairs.  He might have had an alternative if it that turned out to not be feasible for some reason on the day of the assassination.  Maybe on the 7th floor.  Once he picks a shooting location, he decides on a good place to hide the rifle on that floor.  He creates or finds such a place on the 6th floor sometime that week.   When he brings his bag/rifle to work on 11.22 he heads directly to that location and stashes the rifle.  He can retrieve it on the floor from which he intends to commit the act.   He walks around with his clipboard on the 6th floor after noon giving him the appearance of having a job-related purpose for being there should he encounter anyone on the floor.  At some point after noon, likely before BRW arrives on the floor, he puts his clipboard down and retrieves the bag.  The location of the clipboard, therefore, provides some insight as to where he hid the rifle that morning.  He carries the bag to the SN, takes out the rifle, and does whatever assembly is required while he waits.  After the shooting, he stashes the rifle in the same place he hid it that morning.  Not taking him more than a few seconds.

Are your eyes brown Mr "Smith"?    I would guess that they are, because you're so full of s--t.

That rifle was found hidden on the 6th floor.

You are correct in stating that the rifle was hidden.....It was well hidden, and it was only after the police obtained powerful flashlights and moved some boxes that concealed it that it was found.    That rifle most certainly was NOT hastily jammed in between boxes of books with the entire rear half of the rifle exposed.   

The point is:.... If Lee had been the assassin who was encountered by Baker and Truly in the second floor lunchroom less than two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired, then he would not have had enough time to HIDE  the rifle as you've said.

But It is a FACT (verified by photos) of detective Day picking up the rifle FROM THE FLOOR , that the rifle was well hidden.   And since Lee would not have had enough time to hide the rifle AFTER the shots were fired.... IF he hid the rifle, then he would have to have hid it BEFORE the shots were fired.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 07:05:28 PM
So what’s your point?
 

You go first
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 24, 2022, 07:19:02 PM
"Hidden beneath the pallet"?  ::)

Never mind that Day and Studebaker said the rifle as found was as it appeared in Studebaker's high-red Crime Lab photos. That Studebaker himself was filmed taking the photos. That one of the first to spot the rifle agreed with Studebaker's in-situ photo. Nope, you have a cherrypick you can wordspin.

Over at the other Forum, there's a revealing post where JFK Assassination Loons have come out of the closet with their belief that the World Trade towers were brought down by controlled explosions.

"Hidden beneath the pallet"?

Yes that's what Seymour Weitzman said....  Weitzman said that he had his face down on the floor and he was shining his flashlight beneath the pallet when he spotted the rifle lying on the floor.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 24, 2022, 07:44:43 PM
Are your eyes brown Mr "Smith"?    I would guess that they are, because you're so full of s--t.

That rifle was found hidden on the 6th floor.

You are correct in stating that the rifle was hidden.....It was well hidden, and it was only after the police obtained powerful flashlights and moved some boxes that concealed it that it was found.    That rifle most certainly was NOT hastily jammed in between boxes of books with the entire rear half of the rifle exposed.   

The point is:.... If Lee had been the assassin who was encountered by Baker and Truly in the second floor lunchroom less than two minutes after the FIRST shot was fired, then he would not have had enough time to HIDE  the rifle as you've said.

But It is a FACT (verified by photos) of detective Day picking up the rifle FROM THE FLOOR , that the rifle was well hidden.   And since Lee would not have had enough time to hide the rifle AFTER the shots were fired.... IF he hid the rifle, then he would have to have hid it BEFORE the shots were fired.

Oswald had plenty of time to place the rifle where it was found and make his way to the lunchroom encounter.  But, as I tried to explain, whatever effort you think was necessary to construct this "hiding" place for the rifle could have been before the assassination to hide the bag/rifle there that morning.  All Oswald had to do afterward is return to that place put the rifle back into his hiding location.  An act that might take him 5 seconds.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 07:50:04 PM
You go first

There is no point — got it. You just invoke “Patton gang” as if it means something.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 24, 2022, 07:51:56 PM
Oswald had plenty of time to place the rifle where it was found and make his way to the lunchroom encounter.  But, as I tried to explain, whatever effort you think was necessary to construct this "hiding" place for the rifle could have been before the assassination to hide the bag/rifle there that morning.  All Oswald had to do afterward is return to that place put the rifle back into his hiding location.  An act that might take him 5 seconds.

Pssssst.... Mr "Smith" apparently you're ignorant of the fact that there was a new floor being installed on the sixth floor.....  If Lee had hid the rifle as you believe then he would have run the risk of the rifle being found by the men who were installing the new floor.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 07:52:26 PM
Oswald had plenty of time to place the rifle where it was found and make his way to the lunchroom encounter.  But, as I tried to explain, whatever effort you think was necessary to construct this "hiding" place for the rifle could have been before the assassination to hide the bag/rifle there that morning.  All Oswald had to do afterward is return to that place put the rifle back into his hiding location.  An act that might take him 5 seconds.

“Could have been”
“Might take him”

LOL
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 24, 2022, 07:55:31 PM
Pssssst.... Mr "Smith" apparently you're ignorant of the fact that there was a new floor being installed on the sixth floor.....  If Lee had hid the rifle as you believe then he would have run the risk of the rifle being found by the men who were installing the new floor.

LOL.  If anything, the clutter on the 6th floor would assist in hiding the bag.  No one would have found a rifle since it was hidden in a bag.  There was some risk inherent in assassinating the president.  For Oswald, that included bringing the rifle to the TSBD and hiding it somewhere that morning.  No matter where he stashed his bag/rifle there was some chance of discovery.  That risk would not be limited to the 6th floor as you stupidly suggest.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 08:02:07 PM
Like “Richard” has any evidence that any rifle was ever hidden in any bag.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 24, 2022, 08:19:25 PM
Like “Richard” has any evidence that any rifle was ever hidden in any bag.

If anything, the clutter on the 6th floor would assist in hiding the bag.  No one would have found a rifle since it was hidden in a bag.  There was some risk inherent in assassinating the president.  For Oswald, that included bringing the rifle to the TSBD and hiding it somewhere that morning.  No matter where he stashed his bag/rifle there was some chance of discovery.  That risk would not be limited to the 6th floor as you stupidly suggest.

Mr "Smith's" reply is simply another attempt to prop up the official LBJ approved story, and divert attention away from the fact that Lee Oswald said that he saw Jarman and Norman walk by as he was sitting in the Domino Room at 12:27.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 24, 2022, 08:28:21 PM
"Hidden beneath the pallet"?

Yes that's what Seymour Weitzman said....  Weitzman said that he had his face down on the floor and he was shining his flashlight beneath the pallet when he spotted the rifle lying on the floor.

Sure, Weitzman's going to plant his face on the oily dirty floor and shine his breadbox-size searchlight into the opening of a pallet.

The pallet openings run east/west, so here's the only openings available to Weitzman:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/03/7f/cR4zFLL3_o.jpg)

Weitzman can't possibly see to where the rifle is depicted in the Crime Lab photos.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

This photo shows the top of the cartons that were on Pallet "C" in the foreground (which photographer Studebaker was on) and the rifle in-situ to the north (top of the picture).

   "I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time
     he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun"

 Weitzman was in retail, so the term "on the floor" could mean the open area of a store.

    "Yes, sir; this is taken the opposite side the flat I was looking under."

    "Boone was looking the top side; I was looking under the flat. We
     were looking over everything. I was behind this section of books."

Notice Weitzman says "flat" and not "pallet". In others words, he was looking along the lower sides of the stacked cartons. Weitzman testified: "I said, 'There it is' and he [Boone] started hollering, 'We got it.' It was covered with boxes." That doesn't sound like a rifle hidden under the wooden boards of a pallet.

Look at the arrows in Weitzman Exhibits E and F:

(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0374b.jpg)

Mr. BALL - Would you mind making a mark there with a pen?
     That is on F. Draw on Exhibit F, draw an arrow. The arrow
     in ink on F shows the location?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Down on the floor.
Mr. BALL - Shows the location of the gun on the floor?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes.

Mr. BALL - Take E here and make a mark on E as to the
     location of the place where the gun was found.
Mr. WEITZMAN - Same area.
Mr. BALL - The same area and the arrow marks the place
     where the gun was found?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir.

The arrow points away from the pallets and Weitzman again says it was on the floor, not beneath a pallet.

What about Eugene Boone? He testified the rifle was "stuffed down between two rows of boxes with another box or so pulled over the top of it. And I hollered that the rifle was here." Shown one of the Studebaker in-situ photos, Boones testified:

Mr. BALL - This shows the rifle as you saw it, does it?
Mr. BOONE - That is right. Then you could kneel down over
    here and see that it had a scope, a telescopic sight on it,
    by looking down underneath the boxes.

Boone doesn't say the rifle was hidden in a pallet, visible through one of the end openings. Here's where Boone located the rifle and it is away from the pallets.

(https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce516.jpg)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 09:14:17 PM
There is no point — got it. You just invoke “Patton gang” as if it means something.

It might to the Gang of 4.
After all, they're ones who confessed:

An homage to Field of Dreams

(https://i.postimg.cc/N0yZGGBw/263-ITWAS-US-WE-DID-IT.png)
Bill Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 24, 2022, 09:27:36 PM
Thanks again for another useless display of “creativity”.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 24, 2022, 09:42:00 PM
Thanks again for another useless display of “creativity”.

Thanks so much for your always-useful input.
No, really.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 24, 2022, 10:56:31 PM
Sure, Weitzman's going to plant his face on the oily dirty floor and shine his breadbox-size searchlight into the opening of a pallet.

The pallet openings run east/west, so here's the only openings available to Weitzman:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/03/7f/cR4zFLL3_o.jpg)

Weitzman can't possibly see to where the rifle is depicted in the Crime Lab photos.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

This photo shows the top of the cartons that were on Pallet "C" in the foreground (which photographer Studebaker was on) and the rifle in-situ to the north (top of the picture).

   "I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time
     he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun"

 Weitzman was in retail, so the term "on the floor" could mean the open area of a store.

    "Yes, sir; this is taken the opposite side the flat I was looking under."

    "Boone was looking the top side; I was looking under the flat. We
     were looking over everything. I was behind this section of books."

Notice Weitzman says "flat" and not "pallet". In others words, he was looking along the lower sides of the stacked cartons. Weitzman testified: "I said, 'There it is' and he [Boone] started hollering, 'We got it.' It was covered with boxes." That doesn't sound like a rifle hidden under the wooden boards of a pallet.

Look at the arrows in Weitzman Exhibits E and F:

(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0374b.jpg)

Mr. BALL - Would you mind making a mark there with a pen?
     That is on F. Draw on Exhibit F, draw an arrow. The arrow
     in ink on F shows the location?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Down on the floor.
Mr. BALL - Shows the location of the gun on the floor?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes.

Mr. BALL - Take E here and make a mark on E as to the
     location of the place where the gun was found.
Mr. WEITZMAN - Same area.
Mr. BALL - The same area and the arrow marks the place
     where the gun was found?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir.

The arrow points away from the pallets and Weitzman again says it was on the floor, not beneath a pallet.

What about Eugene Boone? He testified the rifle was "stuffed down between two rows of boxes with another box or so pulled over the top of it. And I hollered that the rifle was here." Shown one of the Studebaker in-situ photos, Boones testified:

Mr. BALL - This shows the rifle as you saw it, does it?
Mr. BOONE - That is right. Then you could kneel down over
    here and see that it had a scope, a telescopic sight on it,
    by looking down underneath the boxes.

Boone doesn't say the rifle was hidden in a pallet, visible through one of the end openings. Here's where Boone located the rifle and it is away from the pallets.

(https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce516.jpg)

Notice Weitzman says "flat" and not "pallet". In others words, he was looking along the lower sides of the stacked cartons.

Is there a difference between a Pallet, and a flat?

Weitzman was in retail, so the term "on the floor" could mean the open area of a store.


C'mon....surely your not serious....

"Yes, sir; this is taken the opposite side the flat I was looking under."

    "Boone was looking the top side; I was looking under the flat.[/b]


Mr. BALL - Would you mind making a mark there with a pen?
     That is on F. Draw on Exhibit F, draw an arrow. The arrow
     in ink on F shows the location?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Down on the floor.
Mr. BALL - Shows the location of the gun on the floor?  "THE GUN ON THE FLOOR"
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes.


The official DPD in situ photo does NOT show the gun ON THE FLOOR.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 25, 2022, 12:43:38 AM
Notice Weitzman says "flat" and not "pallet". In others words, he was looking along the lower sides of the stacked cartons.

Is there a difference between a Pallet, and a flat?

The pallet is made of wood and is what the flat of goods sits on. ( Link (https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1055684405-1940s-flat-goods-lowered-ground-men-push) )

Quote
Weitzman was in retail, so the term "on the floor" could mean the open area of a store.


C'mon....surely your not serious....

     Weitzman  "I went on the road as district supervisor and manager for
 Holly's Dress Shops in New York, 115 Fifth Avenue, and I
 supervised 26 stores for them for approximately 15 years."
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
     Ball  "Then what did you do?"
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
     Weitzman  "I took over as general manager of the Lamont Corp. which
 is a discount operation and the headquarters, which was
 Galveston, Tex. We had stores in Dallas, Fort Worth, Loui-
 siana, Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz. At the end of 1960, I closed
 up all the stores, retired from the discount operation and went
 to work for Robie Love in Dallas County, precinct 1."

Quote

"Yes, sir; this is taken the opposite side the flat I was looking under."

    "Boone was looking the top side; I was looking under the flat.[/b]


Mr. BALL - Would you mind making a mark there with a pen?
     That is on F. Draw on Exhibit F, draw an arrow. The arrow
     in ink on F shows the location?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Down on the floor.
Mr. BALL - Shows the location of the gun on the floor?  "THE GUN ON THE FLOOR"
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes.


The official DPD in situ photo does NOT show the gun ON THE FLOOR.

Levitating, is it?

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

So everybody (including Weitzman) is wrong about finding the rifle as shown in the Dallas Crime Lab in-situ photos?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 25, 2022, 01:39:32 AM
The pallet is made of wood and is what the flat of goods sits on. ( Link (https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1055684405-1940s-flat-goods-lowered-ground-men-push) )

     Weitzman  "I went on the road as district supervisor and manager for
 Holly's Dress Shops in New York, 115 Fifth Avenue, and I
 supervised 26 stores for them for approximately 15 years."
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
     Ball  "Then what did you do?"
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
     Weitzman  "I took over as general manager of the Lamont Corp. which
 is a discount operation and the headquarters, which was
 Galveston, Tex. We had stores in Dallas, Fort Worth, Loui-
 siana, Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz. At the end of 1960, I closed
 up all the stores, retired from the discount operation and went
 to work for Robie Love in Dallas County, precinct 1."

Levitating, is it?

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

So everybody (including Weitzman) is wrong about finding the rifle as shown in the Dallas Crime Lab in-situ photos?

The pallet is made of wood and is what the flat of goods sits on. ( Link (https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1055684405-1940s-flat-goods-lowered-ground-men-push) )

How about a pallet of goods ..... How is that different than a flat of goods ?

Weitzman and Craig knew that the rifle was lying on the floor...Just as it is seen in the Tom Alyea film, and both men were harassed by their superiors and told to keep their mouths shut and stay in line ( the thin blue line)

Craig wouldn't close ranks.... and he was fired.   
   
So everybody (including Weitzman) is wrong about finding the rifle as shown in the Dallas Crime Lab in-situ photos?

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 25, 2022, 05:55:33 AM
Those photos indicate that it would be impossible for Weitzman to have seen the MC rifle from some position east of the 2rows of boxes even if his face was to the ground.

The only way Weitzman could have seen that MC rifle while looking “under a flat” is 2 possibilities:

1. Weitzman was looking  North THRU the open approx 4” space of a pallet from the south side of that pallet and saw a rifle IN that pallet space

.2. Weitzman was looking North THRU the pallet from the south side and he saw. the  WHOLE rifle between the north side of the pallet and south side wall of the stacked boxes

3. Weitzman was looking THRU the pallet and saw a  PORTION of the rifle thru a vertical gap between 2 adjacent bottom level boxes that formed  the south side wall , while Boone was looking on the north side of that wall and shining his light on it.

It’s not certain (imo) what the original configuration of the bottom level of boxes was  and if they were ALL end to end with no vertical gaps as it appears that SOME of them were in the photo or if the box that was removed had been snuggly fitting which would therefore rule OUT probability of a gap that Weitzman could have looked thru.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 25, 2022, 02:18:51 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/xTJgt0vq/277-INNOCENT-GIRAFFE.png)
Bill Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 25, 2022, 03:56:28 PM
Those photos indicate that it would be impossible for Weitzman to have seen the MC rifle from some position east of the 2rows of boxes even if his face was to the ground.

The only way Weitzman could have seen that MC rifle while looking “under a flat” is 2 possibilities:

1. Weitzman was looking  North THRU the open approx 4” space of a pallet from the south side of that pallet and saw a rifle IN that pallet space

.2. Weitzman was looking North THRU the pallet from the south side and he saw. the  WHOLE rifle between the north side of the pallet and south side wall of the stacked boxes

3. Weitzman was looking THRU the pallet and saw a  PORTION of the rifle thru a vertical gap between 2 adjacent bottom level boxes that formed  the south side wall , while Boone was looking on the north side of that wall and shining his light on it.

It’s not certain (imo) what the original configuration of the bottom level of boxes was  and if they were ALL end to end with no vertical gaps as it appears that SOME of them were in the photo or if the box that was removed had been snuggly fitting which would therefore rule OUT probability of a gap that Weitzman could have looked thru.


Zeon Mason wrote:
The only way Weitzman could have seen that MC rifle while looking “under a flat” is 2 possibilities:

Look at the "looking west" photo Zeon....

(https://images2.imgbox.com/03/7f/cR4zFLL3_o.jpg)


Zeon, The photo that Jerry has labeled "looking west" is the approximate view that Seymour Weitzman would have had.....He was down on the floor looking west beneath the pallet when he spotted the rifle LYING ON THE FLOOR.

IF the rifle had been stuck between the boxes as it is shown in the official DPD in situ photo, Weitzman could not have seen it.....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 25, 2022, 05:35:46 PM
Innocent-Giraffe Campaign brought to you courtesy
'Dead Oswald Walking Campaign'

(https://i.postimg.cc/Qx205zn2/278-BUDDA-BOOM.png)
Bill Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 25, 2022, 05:51:45 PM
The pallet is made of wood and is what the flat of goods sits on. ( Link (https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1055684405-1940s-flat-goods-lowered-ground-men-push) )

     Weitzman  "I went on the road as district supervisor and manager for
 Holly's Dress Shops in New York, 115 Fifth Avenue, and I
 supervised 26 stores for them for approximately 15 years."
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
     Ball  "Then what did you do?"
(http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1j4PIpNCtZbphz0kmWxmCckNi3vDlG5He)
     Weitzman  "I took over as general manager of the Lamont Corp. which
 is a discount operation and the headquarters, which was
 Galveston, Tex. We had stores in Dallas, Fort Worth, Loui-
 siana, Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz. At the end of 1960, I closed
 up all the stores, retired from the discount operation and went
 to work for Robie Love in Dallas County, precinct 1."

Levitating, is it?

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

So everybody (including Weitzman) is wrong about finding the rifle as shown in the Dallas Crime Lab in-situ photos?

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

Levitating, is it?

It's certainly NOT lying on the floor....   And it definitely was lying on the floor when detective Day reached out and grabbed the leather sling and picked it up.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 25, 2022, 06:00:54 PM
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

Levitating, is it?

It's certainly NOT lying on the floor....   And it definitely was lying on the floor when detective Day reached out and grabbed the lether sling and picked it up.

Or Day had gently slid away a box helping to keep the rifle upright while supporting the rifle to allow it to tilt onto the floor. When Day felt competent enough that the rifle could be safely lifted, he began his lift just as Alyea began his film sequence. The rifle in-situ photos are the still photos testified as true by Studebaker of the Dallas Crime Lab. Boone and Weitzman also agreed with the Studebaker photos.

Neither the Alyea film or the Crime Lab photos show the rifle hidden inside a pallet, or even leaning against a pallet.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 25, 2022, 06:38:07 PM
Or Day had gently slid away a box helping to keep the rifle upright while supporting the rifle to allow it to tilt onto the floor. When Day felt competent enough that the rifle could be safely lifted, he began his lift just as Alyea began his film sequence. The rifle in-situ photos are the still photos testified as true by Studebaker of the Dallas Crime Lab. Boone and Weitzman also agreed with the Studebaker photos.

Neither the Alyea film or the Crime Lab photos show the rifle hidden inside a pallet, or even leaning against a pallet.

Day had gently slid away a box helping to keep the rifle upright while supporting the rifle to allow it to tilt onto the floor. When Day felt competent enough that the rifle could be safely lifted, he began his lift just as Alyea began his film sequence. The rifle in-situ photos are the still photos testified as true by Studebaker of the Dallas Crime Lab. Boone and Weitzman also agreed with the Studebaker photos.

Yes of course.... Gravity was not working that day....   The scope made the rifle heavy on the left side, But the rifle couldn't topple to the left because of the stack of boxes so it toppled to the right.... :D

The rifle in-situ photos are the still photos testified as true by Studebaker of the Dallas Crime Lab. Boone and Weitzman also agreed with the Studebaker photos.

All members of the thin blue lie....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 25, 2022, 08:40:32 PM
Sure, Weitzman's going to plant his face on the oily dirty floor and shine his breadbox-size searchlight into the opening of a pallet.

The pallet openings run east/west, so here's the only openings available to Weitzman:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/03/7f/cR4zFLL3_o.jpg)

Weitzman can't possibly see to where the rifle is depicted in the Crime Lab photos.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

This photo shows the top of the cartons that were on Pallet "C" in the foreground (which photographer Studebaker was on) and the rifle in-situ to the north (top of the picture).

   "I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time
     he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun"

 Weitzman was in retail, so the term "on the floor" could mean the open area of a store.

    "Yes, sir; this is taken the opposite side the flat I was looking under."

    "Boone was looking the top side; I was looking under the flat. We
     were looking over everything. I was behind this section of books."

Notice Weitzman says "flat" and not "pallet". In others words, he was looking along the lower sides of the stacked cartons. Weitzman testified: "I said, 'There it is' and he [Boone] started hollering, 'We got it.' It was covered with boxes." That doesn't sound like a rifle hidden under the wooden boards of a pallet.

Look at the arrows in Weitzman Exhibits E and F:

(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0374b.jpg)

Mr. BALL - Would you mind making a mark there with a pen?
     That is on F. Draw on Exhibit F, draw an arrow. The arrow
     in ink on F shows the location?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Down on the floor.
Mr. BALL - Shows the location of the gun on the floor?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes.

Mr. BALL - Take E here and make a mark on E as to the
     location of the place where the gun was found.
Mr. WEITZMAN - Same area.
Mr. BALL - The same area and the arrow marks the place
     where the gun was found?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Yes, sir.

The arrow points away from the pallets and Weitzman again says it was on the floor, not beneath a pallet.

What about Eugene Boone? He testified the rifle was "stuffed down between two rows of boxes with another box or so pulled over the top of it. And I hollered that the rifle was here." Shown one of the Studebaker in-situ photos, Boones testified:

Mr. BALL - This shows the rifle as you saw it, does it?
Mr. BOONE - That is right. Then you could kneel down over
    here and see that it had a scope, a telescopic sight on it,
    by looking down underneath the boxes.

Boone doesn't say the rifle was hidden in a pallet, visible through one of the end openings. Here's where Boone located the rifle and it is away from the pallets.

(https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce516.jpg)


Weitzman exhibit E  provides a better perspective for verifying that Weitzman couldn't have seen the rifle as it is depicted in the official DPD in situ photo.

(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0374b.jpg)

In the official DPD photo the rifle is shown standing on it's magazine, and it is one row of boxes north of the pallet.  Those boxes are sitting on the floor and they would have blocked Weitzman's line of sight to the rifle if it had been sitting as depicted in the official DPD photo.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 25, 2022, 10:33:01 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/RVPtTNK5/279-KNEES-ALREADY.png)
Bil Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 26, 2022, 02:32:44 AM
So is it reasonably  to conclude that it was NOT probable that Weitzman could have seen even a portion of the rifle while looking under the flat (pallet)?

If so then Weitzman is exaggerating similar to Roger Craig or Weitzman saw the rifle originally in a different place than where Boone claims to have first seen it.

Seems to be a choice as to whom
Is the more credible witness, Weitzman or Boone?

Since Weitzman seems to have had some problem with depression later in his life, should this be considered as a sign he saw the rifle moved and remained silent about it? Or is it because he had exaggerated about actually seeing the rifle at the DAME time as Boone did?

This is just one example why  I’m still having trouble deciding what is true and what is not after 20 years of following the discussions about the JFK assassination.




Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 26, 2022, 02:58:49 AM
So is it reasonably  to conclude that it was NOT probable that Weitzman could have seen even a portion of the rifle while looking under the flat (pallet)?

If so then Weitzman is exaggerating similar to Roger Craig or Weitzman saw the rifle originally in a different place than where Boone claims to have first seen it.

Seems to be a choice as to whom
Is the more credible witness, Weitzman or Boone?

Since Weitzman seems to have had some problem with depression later in his life, should this be considered as a sign he saw the rifle moved and remained silent about it? Or is it because he had exaggerated about actually seeing the rifle at the DAME time as Boone did?

This is just one example why  I’m still having trouble deciding what is true and what is not after 20 years of following the discussions about the JFK assassination.

So is it reasonably  to conclude that it was NOT probable that Weitzman could have seen even a portion of the rifle while looking under the flat (pallet)?

No.....You are confused Zeon.     Weitzman DID see the rifle beneath the pallet.... BUT, if the rifle had been standing on it's magazine as it is depicted in the official DPD in situ photo then he could not have seen the rifle while he was down on the floor and shining his flashlight beneath the pallet.  He could not have seen the rifle as it is depicted in the DPD in situ photo because there was at least one box that was sitting in the floor and that box blocked his line of sight  to the place where the rifle is depicted in the official DPD photo.

I hope that explanation clears it up for you.....

Weitzman seems to have had some problem with depression later in his life, should this be considered as a sign he saw the rifle moved and remained silent about it?

Very probable, Zeon.... Weitzman knew that Lee Oswald had been murdered while in the custody of the DPD...And he knew that the DPD had altered evidence, and created false evidence to make Lee appear to be guilty. Weitzman knew that the DPD was corrupt and the WC had twisted his story ..... That had to weigh heavy on his mind as he tried to live a normal life.  Roger Craig also had mental problems for the same reasons.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 26, 2022, 03:13:06 AM
Walt, if you are correct, then Boone has to be considered as a suspect witness.

Is there verification of Boones 1:22 time stamp for the finding a rifle or is it entirely based on on Boone himself declaring  HIS watch read 1:22?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 26, 2022, 03:26:24 AM
Walt, if you are correct, then Boone has to be considered as a suspect witness.

Is there verification of Boones 1:22 time stamp for the finding a rifle or is it entirely based on on Boone himself declaring  HIS watch read 1:22?

Boone was another one of the low ranking law officers ( like Weitzman and Craig) who was cajoled and muscled into going along with the Dallas Law enforcement hierarchy.  Boone, Weitzman, and Craig were victims of the conspirators.... 

When your paycheck ( and possibly your life ) hangs in the balance you are not inclined to argue with those in authority.

As the old adage says...When they've got you by the gonads....your heart and mind will rapidly follow......

P.S...... Howard Brennan was another victim of the corrupt law enforcement officials.... Brennan entered the case as an innocent spectator who simply wanted to be a good citizen and help the police catch the guilty culprits....   Little did he know that he would have been far better off to simply walk away.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 26, 2022, 02:10:14 PM
Boone was another one of the low ranking law officers ( like Weitzman and Craig) who was cajoled and muscled into going along with the Dallas Law enforcement hierarchy.  Boone, Weitzman, and Craig were victims of the conspirators.... 

When your paycheck ( and possibly your life ) hangs in the balance you are not inclined to argue with those in authority.

As the old adage says...When they've got you by the gonads....your heart and mind will rapidly follow......

P.S...... Howard Brennan was another victim of the corrupt law enforcement officials.... Brennan entered the case as an innocent spectator who simply wanted to be a good citizen and help the police catch the guilty culprits....   Little did he know that he would have been far better off to simply walk away.

The plot grows bigger and bigger.  If this was a plot to frame Oswald, why hide the rifle at all?  Why not just drop it by the window in plain sight?  Why stage a fake discovery of the rifle hidden under some boxes etc?  Like the 'bus rider" to nowhere that seems completely pointless and even counterproductive as part of a conspiracy plan.  Presumably they want the rifle found and the sooner the better but they engage in this charade.  Amazing.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 26, 2022, 05:37:29 PM
The plot grows bigger and bigger.  If this was a plot to frame Oswald, why hide the rifle at all?  Why not just drop it by the window in plain sight?  Why stage a fake discovery of the rifle hidden under some boxes etc?  Like the 'bus rider" to nowhere that seems completely pointless and even counterproductive as part of a conspiracy plan.  Presumably they want the rifle found and the sooner the better but they engage in this charade.  Amazing.

It's very clear that this case is waaaaaaay beyond your limited ability to comprehend and understand.

There was two plays being played out....Lee was playing the role that he'd played at Walker's.   He was involved in making it appear that he had shot at JFK but missed and was fleeing to Cuba seeking asylum.

The rifle was hidden to allow him time to get out of the country.   He thought that the cops wouldn't get too excited about someone shooting at JFK ( He knew that JFK was not liked by many at the DPD) and probably wouldn't find the rifle for days.  THAT'S the reason the rifle was hidden....

Lee didn't know that he'd been double crossed and set up as the patsy by the killers.   There were no shots fired from the TSBD that day....  I know that you think the shells and the rifle constitute proof that Lee Oswald shot and killed JFK from that sixth floor window, but if you extract your head you'd realize that the spent shells and rifle were nothing but stage props.

P.S. If you could extract your head and see that Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom at 12:27 when Jarman and Norman walked by the room then MAYBE you'd start to see the light.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 27, 2022, 12:33:35 AM
It's very clear that this case is waaaaaaay beyond your limited ability to comprehend and understand.

There was two plays being played out....Lee was playing the role that he'd played at Walker's.   He was involved in making it appear that he had shot at JFK but missed and was fleeing to Cuba seeking asylum.

The rifle was hidden to allow him time to get out of the country.   He thought that the cops wouldn't get too excited about someone shooting at JFK ( He knew that JFK was not liked by many at the DPD) and probably wouldn't find the rifle for days.  THAT'S the reason the rifle was hidden....

Lee didn't know that he'd been double crossed and set up as the patsy by the killers.   There were no shots fired from the TSBD that day....  I know that you think the shells and the rifle constitute proof that Lee Oswald shot and killed JFK from that sixth floor window, but if you extract your head you'd realize that the spent shells and rifle were nothing but stage props.

P.S. If you could extract your head and see that Lee Oswald was in the 1st floor lunchroom at 12:27 when Jarman and Norman walked by the room then MAYBE you'd start to see the light.

HA HA HA.  An instant classic.  Where even to start?   Lee was playing the role of the assassin by hanging out in the lunchroom according to you?  Where he could easily have been seen instead of just staying on the 6th floor.  Wow.  And if someone was double crossing him to frame him for the crime and wanted him to get caught, then again, WHY HIDE THE RIFLE?  You have provided an explanation (albeit completely idiotic) as to why they would hide the rifle to buy him some time, but they actually want him to get caught in your double cross fantasy.   No shots fired?  What were they hearing on the 5th floor?  Why stage a shooting scene on the 6th floor but assassinate JFK from some other location with a different rifle necessitating access to the body and evidence? 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 27, 2022, 02:50:28 AM
HA HA HA.  An instant classic.  Where even to start?   Lee was playing the role of the assassin by hanging out in the lunchroom according to you?  Where he could easily have been seen instead of just staying on the 6th floor.  Wow.  And if someone was double crossing him to frame him for the crime and wanted him to get caught, then again, WHY HIDE THE RIFLE?  You have provided an explanation (albeit completely idiotic) as to why they would hide the rifle to buy him some time, but they actually want him to get caught in your double cross fantasy.   No shots fired?  What were they hearing on the 5th floor?  Why stage a shooting scene on the 6th floor but assassinate JFK from some other location with a different rifle necessitating access to the body and evidence?

As I told you...This case is waaaaaay beyond your abilities.....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on August 27, 2022, 03:30:13 AM
Well there WAS SOME rifle being stuck  out the 6th fioor SE corner window at the very least .

Because Bob Jackson and Malcolm Couch saw SOME rifle (or object resembling a rifle) stuck out the 6th floor SE window and observed it being “”slowly withdrawn”

And there is reason to believe that 3 shots were fired by that rifle per Harold Norman and Amos Euins WC testimony.

Therefore (imo ) the more objective conclusion is that although SOME rifle probably Was from the SE 6th story  corner window , it was NOT Likely to be the MC rifle that the Tom Aleya film recorded  being lifted by Lt. Day.

Reasons:

1. Harold Norman heard the 3 shots fired in approx 4 sec span per his own video recorded demonstration of the spacing.

2. A 2/3rd majority of ear witness heard the no.2 and no 3 shots too close together to have been plausibly fired by an MC rifle.

3. The absence of any statements made about gunpowder residue found in the barrel or the breech of the MC rifle.

4. No statements regarding gunpowder odor which should have been noticeable.

5. The misaligned scope due to the mount itself requiring shims under the mount = impossible for even a perfectly functional scope to have ever been zeroed using the elevation adjustment nibs.
 
6. The curiosity of the bolt handle being apparently up and the bolt not locked down.

7. Weitzman seeing a rifle while looking  eastward under a flat ie ( thru a pallet) which is not probable if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes. If Weitzman is credible , then the rifle must have been moved from its original “well hidden” location to the boxes where it was photographed
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on August 27, 2022, 02:20:46 PM
As I told you...This case is waaaaaay beyond your abilities.....

In which a child refuses to accept that there is no Santa Claus.   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 27, 2022, 03:57:05 PM
Well there WAS SOME rifle being stuck  out the 6th fioor SE corner window at the very least .

Because Bob Jackson and Malcolm Couch saw SOME rifle (or object resembling a rifle) stuck out the 6th floor SE window and observed it being “”slowly withdrawn”

And there is reason to believe that 3 shots were fired by that rifle per Harold Norman and Amos Euins WC testimony.

Therefore (imo ) the more objective conclusion is that although SOME rifle probably Was from the SE 6th story  corner window , it was NOT Likely to be the MC rifle that the Tom Aleya film recorded  being lifted by Lt. Day.

Reasons:

1. Harold Norman heard the 3 shots fired in approx 4 sec span per his own video recorded demonstration of the spacing.

2. A 2/3rd majority of ear witness heard the no.2 and no 3 shots too close together to have been plausibly fired by an MC rifle.

3. The absence of any statements made about gunpowder residue found in the barrel or the breech of the MC rifle.

4. No statements regarding gunpowder odor which should have been noticeable.

5. The misaligned scope due to the mount itself requiring shims under the mount = impossible for even a perfectly functional scope to have ever been zeroed using the elevation adjustment nibs.
 
6. The curiosity of the bolt handle being apparently up and the bolt not locked down.

7. Weitzman seeing a rifle while looking  eastward under a flat ie ( thru a pallet) which is not probable if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes. If Weitzman is credible , then the rifle must have been moved from its original “well hidden” location to the boxes where it was photographed

Wow!!.... You've really provided a plate full today Zeon .... But #7 is the one that has my attention.....

7. Weitzman seeing a rifle while looking  eastward under a flat ie ( thru a pallet) which is not probable if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes. If Weitzman is credible , then the rifle must have been moved from its original “well hidden” location to the boxes where it was photographed.

Weitzman seeing a rifle while looking  eastward WEST under a flat ie ( thru a pallet) which is not probable possible if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes

A)  Weitzman was looking toward the WEST.... (see Organ's post Weitzman "E"  looking west. )

(https://images2.imgbox.com/03/7f/cR4zFLL3_o.jpg)

 The camera angle is much steeper than Weitzman's face (which was on the floor) was when he looked beneath the pallet but Weitzman "E" provides a photo of the boxes and pallet where Weitzman saw the rifle LYING ON THE FLOOR.   

B)  which is not possible if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes

 The box that is sitting on the floor to the north( right hand side in the photo) of the pallet would have been in Weitzman's line of sight to a rifle that was jammed between boxes of books in the DPD photo ....  The official DPD in situ photo shows the carcano standing on it's magazine and sandwiched between cardboard boxes.   If the carcano had been there between the boxes  it would have been impossible for Weitzman to have seen it when he was down on the floor and shining his flashlight beneath the pallet.


Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 27, 2022, 04:26:17 PM
it would have been impossible for Weitzman to have seen it when he was down on the floor and shining his flashlight beneath the pallet.

This is not worthy of debate or serious consideration.

Weitzman looking (get this, with one of those large flashlights they were using) though the opening at the end of a pallet and seeing the Carcano jammed into the same opening that runs beneath the pallet? And same rifle was hidden to allow Oswald time to get out of the country?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 27, 2022, 04:58:35 PM
This is not worthy of debate or serious consideration.

Weitzman looking (get this, with one of those large flashlights they were using) though the opening at the end of a pallet and seeing the Carcano jammed into the same opening that runs beneath the pallet? And same rifle was hidden to allow Oswald time to get out of the country?

This is not worthy of debate or serious consideration.

Ok, Then move along.... But before you leave, I need to thank you for providing the photos....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 27, 2022, 08:41:45 PM
Well there WAS SOME rifle being stuck  out the 6th fioor SE corner window at the very least .

Because Bob Jackson and Malcolm Couch saw SOME rifle (or object resembling a rifle) stuck out the 6th floor SE window and observed it being “”slowly withdrawn”

And there is reason to believe that 3 shots were fired by that rifle per Harold Norman and Amos Euins WC testimony.

Therefore (imo ) the more objective conclusion is that although SOME rifle probably Was from the SE 6th story  corner window , it was NOT Likely to be the MC rifle that the Tom Aleya film recorded  being lifted by Lt. Day.

Reasons:

1. Harold Norman heard the 3 shots fired in approx 4 sec span per his own video recorded demonstration of the spacing.

2. A 2/3rd majority of ear witness heard the no.2 and no 3 shots too close together to have been plausibly fired by an MC rifle.

3. The absence of any statements made about gunpowder residue found in the barrel or the breech of the MC rifle.

4. No statements regarding gunpowder odor which should have been noticeable.

5. The misaligned scope due to the mount itself requiring shims under the mount = impossible for even a perfectly functional scope to have ever been zeroed using the elevation adjustment nibs.
 
6. The curiosity of the bolt handle being apparently up and the bolt not locked down.

7. Weitzman seeing a rifle while looking  eastward under a flat ie ( thru a pallet) which is not probable if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes. If Weitzman is credible , then the rifle must have been moved from its original “well hidden” location to the boxes where it was photographed

6. The curiosity of the bolt handle being apparently up and the bolt not locked down.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339279/m1/1/med_res/)

Where's the bolt handle?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 28, 2022, 01:01:43 AM
Well there WAS SOME rifle being stuck  out the 6th fioor SE corner window at the very least .

Because Bob Jackson and Malcolm Couch saw SOME rifle (or object resembling a rifle) stuck out the 6th floor SE window and observed it being “”slowly withdrawn”

And there is reason to believe that 3 shots were fired by that rifle per Harold Norman and Amos Euins WC testimony.

Therefore (imo ) the more objective conclusion is that although SOME rifle probably Was from the SE 6th story  corner window , it was NOT Likely to be the MC rifle that the Tom Aleya film recorded  being lifted by Lt. Day.

Reasons:

1. Harold Norman heard the 3 shots fired in approx 4 sec span per his own video recorded demonstration of the spacing.

2. A 2/3rd majority of ear witness heard the no.2 and no 3 shots too close together to have been plausibly fired by an MC rifle.

3. The absence of any statements made about gunpowder residue found in the barrel or the breech of the MC rifle.

4. No statements regarding gunpowder odor which should have been noticeable.

5. The misaligned scope due to the mount itself requiring shims under the mount = impossible for even a perfectly functional scope to have ever been zeroed using the elevation adjustment nibs.
 
6. The curiosity of the bolt handle being apparently up and the bolt not locked down.

7. Weitzman seeing a rifle while looking  eastward under a flat ie ( thru a pallet) which is not probable if the rifle were between the 2 rows  of boxes. If Weitzman is credible , then the rifle must have been moved from its original “well hidden” location to the boxes where it was photographed

If Weitzman is credible , then the rifle must have been moved from its original “well hidden” location to the boxes where it was photographed.

Weitzman is credible..... and yes the rifle was moved to the location where it was photographed by the DPD.

But I don't believe that happened before 11/26/63.   I believe the DPD needed the carcano back in Dallas so they could create some false photos and that's the reason it was returned to Dallas from the FBI lab in Washington DC.  In attempting to create a credible tale about how Lee Oswald shot JFK and then fled across the room and down the stairs they concluded that he wouldn't have had enough time to hide the rifle beneath the pallet of books as it was found where Seymour Weitzman saw it , so they recreated the in situ photo ( destroyed the original and created the one that is now the official DPD in situ photo.)   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 29, 2022, 05:06:05 PM
This is not worthy of debate or serious consideration.

Weitzman looking (get this, with one of those large flashlights they were using) though the opening at the end of a pallet and seeing the Carcano jammed into the same opening that runs beneath the pallet? And same rifle was hidden to allow Oswald time to get out of the country?

Weitzman looking though the opening at the end of a pallet and seeing the Carcano jammed into the same opening that runs beneath the pallet? And same rifle was hidden to allow Oswald time to get out of the country?



Weitzman looking toward the west,  though the opening at the end of a pallet and seeing the Carcano  lying on the floor beneath the pallet. The rifle was hidden to allow Oswald time to get out of the country.

The official in situ photo that was created by the DPD shows the carcano standing upright and sandwiched between boxes.   If the rifle had been in the location shown in the official DPD in situ photo, Weitzman could not have seen it when he had his face down on the floor and was looking beneath the pallet, because there were boxes sitting on the floor to the north of the pallet that blocked his line of sight to that location.





Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 29, 2022, 05:37:28 PM

Weitzman exhibit E  provides a better perspective for verifying that Weitzman couldn't have seen the rifle as it is depicted in the official DPD in situ photo.

(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0374b.jpg)

In the official DPD photo the rifle is shown standing on it's magazine, and it is one row of boxes north of the pallet.  Those boxes are sitting on the floor and they would have blocked Weitzman's line of sight to the rifle if it had been sitting as depicted in the official DPD photo.

Notice the boxes that are sitting on the floor to the east ( muzzle end) of the rifle .  Those boxes would have been between Seymour Weitzman  and the rifle if that rifle had been in the location shown in the official DPD in situ photo.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 01, 2022, 03:13:25 PM
Is there a full moon or something?  How do you get a "rock solid alibi" by putting yourself in the location from which the crime was committed (i.e. TSBD)?  And a suspect doesn't get an alibi from claiming to see others.  They get an alibi when some neutral witness can put the suspect at a different location at the time the crime was committed.  Oswald claiming to see someone in the lunchroom who didn't see him doesn't do that.  Obviously, Oswald knows his coworkers, who they hung out with, and what they look like from weeks of working in the building.  It wouldn't take Nostradamus to come up with that tale.  He has no alibi. 

No person can reasonably believe that LHO, a person with a well-documented history of interest in politics, who checked out and read JFK's book from the library, wouldn't so much as go outside to watch the motorcade go by his workplace if he was innocent.  If he was part of some conspiracy that involved framing him for the crime, the conspirators wouldn't risk allowing him to be in the lunchroom where he might be seen by someone at the time of the crime.

Apparently some folks believe that the word "alibi" means a contrive story in an attempt to prove that they were not the culprit in a crime.

alibi----a form of defense by which an accused person attempts to show that he was elsewhere when the crime was committed.

The "investigators" said that JFK had been shot from a sixth floor window of the TSBD at 12:30 

Lee Oswald said that he was in the 1st floor lunch room at the time that he saw Junior, and Shorty walk by that lunchroom at 12:27.  Therefore he couldn't have been on the sixth floor at 12:30.   

At the time Lee presented that alibi  in answering Captain Fritz question ..... There's no evidence that Lee even knew that the investigators were saying that the shots had been fired from the sixth floor.

 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on September 01, 2022, 03:21:57 PM
Apparently some folks believe that the word "alibi" means a contrive story in an attempt to prove that they were not the culprit in a crime.

alibi----a form of defense by which an accused person attempts to show that he was elsewhere when the crime was committed.

The "investigators" said that JFK had been shot from a sixth floor window of the TSBD at 12:30 

Lee Oswald said that he was in the 1st floor lunch room at the time that he saw Junior, and Shorty walk by that lunchroom at 12:27.  Therefore he couldn't have been on the sixth floor at 12:30.   

At the time Lee presented that alibi  in answering Captain Fritz question ..... There's no evidence that Lee even knew that the investigators were saying that the shots had been fired from the sixth floor.

 

Don't you think Oswald might know the time and place of the assassination if he was the assassin?  LOL.   Just making up a flimsy story that he was somewhere else is not an alibi.  No one saw him there.  There was no "corroboration" (a word CTers love).  Oswald has no alibi.  He has a baseless claim that can be judged against the evidence left on the 6th floor including his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, and his prints on the SN boxes.  His explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor?  None.  Instead he lies and denies owning any rifle. 

Conclusion:  GUILTY.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 01, 2022, 03:58:34 PM
Where specifically is it on the first floor that Eddie Piper said he went during the shots. He testified that he went to where they make coffee to see what time it was. Where exactly is this area located on the first floor?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 01, 2022, 04:50:36 PM
Don't you think Oswald might know the time and place of the assassination if he was the assassin?  LOL.   Just making up a flimsy story that he was somewhere else is not an alibi.  No one saw him there.  There was no "corroboration" (a word CTers love).  Oswald has no alibi.  He has a baseless claim that can be judged against the evidence left on the 6th floor including his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, and his prints on the SN boxes.  His explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor?  None.  Instead he lies and denies owning any rifle. 

Conclusion:  GUILTY.

Just making up a flimsy story that he was somewhere else is not an alibi.  No one saw him there.

A far better story would be that he was on the 6th floor where nobody saw him either, right?

His explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor?  None. Instead he lies and denies owning any rifle.   

You expect him to provide an explanation when he denies that he owns a rifle? Now that's funny   :D

Conclusion:   IDIOT
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 01, 2022, 10:32:05 PM
Where specifically is it on the first floor that Eddie Piper said he went during the shots. He testified that he went to where they make coffee to see what time it was. Where exactly is this area located on the first floor?


Okay, I found out where this area is located by reading the WC testimony of Troy Eugene West. It is about the middle of the west wall of the first floor. It is where the wrapping machine that West used to wrap the packages is located.

So, I have another question for anyone who subscribes to the idea that LHO was in the domino room when the shots were fired.

In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out. However, both Eddie Piper and Troy Eugene West were on the first floor, but neither one saw LHO do this trek across the first floor at that time. West was at his work station, and Piper was on his way toward West’s work station. Is there some legitimate reason why these two men wouldn’t have seen LHO walking across the first floor at this time? Just asking…
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 01, 2022, 10:45:19 PM
Don't you think Oswald might know the time and place of the assassination if he was the assassin?  LOL.   Just making up a flimsy story that he was somewhere else is not an alibi.  No one saw him there.  There was no "corroboration" (a word CTers love).  Oswald has no alibi.  He has a baseless claim that can be judged against the evidence left on the 6th floor including his rifle, fired bullet casings from his rifle, and his prints on the SN boxes.  His explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor?  None.  Instead he lies and denies owning any rifle. 

Conclusion:  GUILTY.

Don't you think Oswald might know the time and place of the assassination if he was the assassin?

But he wasn't the assassin.....When Fritz asked him where he was when the president passed by.  He said that he was in he 1st floor lunchroom when JFK passed by the TSBD.  And just a couple of minutes prior to JFK passing by he saw Junior Jarman and Harold Norman walk by the lunchroom as he sat there eating his lunch.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 01, 2022, 10:54:18 PM
CONCLUSION: SMIRKY
 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 01, 2022, 11:13:45 PM

Okay, I found out where this area is located by reading the WC testimony of Troy Eugene West. It is about the middle of the west wall of the first floor. It is where the wrapping machine that West used to wrap the packages is located.

So, I have another question for anyone who subscribes to the idea that LHO was in the domino room when the shots were fired.

In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out. However, both Eddie Piper and Troy Eugene West were on the first floor, but neither one saw LHO do this trek across the first floor at that time. West was at his work station, and Piper was on his way toward West’s work station. Is there some legitimate reason why these two men wouldn’t have seen LHO walking across the first floor at this time? Just asking…

Simply because neither Piper nor West recalled seeing Lee Oswald walk across the 1st floor from the Domino room to the stairs doesn't preclude the fact that Lee did walk from the Domino room to the stairs.... It's entirely possible that Lee could have walked across the room and the sounds of the gunshots distracted Piper and West and the  the routine event of a person walking across the room did not enter their memory banks.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 01, 2022, 11:24:15 PM
Simply because neither Piper nor West recalled seeing Lee Oswald walk across the 1st floor from the Domino room to the stairs doesn't preclude the fact that Lee did walk from the Domino room to the stairs.... It's entirely possible that Lee could have walked across the room and the sounds of the gunshots distracted Piper and West and the  the routine event of a person walking across the room did not enter their memory banks.

Yet Garner appears to immediately lost interest in the still-unfolding aftermath outside and was eye-locked on the backstairs. Piper and West, who didn't see as much of the assassination as Garner, aren't supposed to see towards the backstairs.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 01, 2022, 11:30:47 PM

Okay, I found out where this area is located by reading the WC testimony of Troy Eugene West. It is about the middle of the west wall of the first floor. It is where the wrapping machine that West used to wrap the packages is located.

So, I have another question for anyone who subscribes to the idea that LHO was in the domino room when the shots were fired.

In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out. However, both Eddie Piper and Troy Eugene West were on the first floor, but neither one saw LHO do this trek across the first floor at that time. West was at his work station, and Piper was on his way toward West’s work station. Is there some legitimate reason why these two men wouldn’t have seen LHO walking across the first floor at this time? Just asking…

Is there some legitimate reason why these two men wouldn’t have seen LHO walking across the first floor at this time?

The distance between the Domino room and the stairs isn't all that far and it would not have taken long to walk from one side to the other. Piper and West were some distance away and photographs of the first floor show wrapping tables and what else between them and the elevators. West said he saw nobody, which means he also did not see Adams and Styles and/or Lovelady and Shelley (if they entered when the WC claimed they did). Perhaps they simply were not paying attention to what was going on near the elevators.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 01, 2022, 11:35:09 PM
Yet Garner appears to immediately lost interest in the still-unfolding aftermath outside and was eye-locked on the backstairs. Piper and West, who didn't see as much of the assassination as Garner, aren't supposed to see towards the backstairs.

So you believe that Piper and West would have had to have remembered  seeing Lee Oswald walk across the back of the room?   Why could they not have forgot seeing him?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 12:05:15 AM
Yet Garner appears to immediately lost interest in the still-unfolding aftermath outside and was eye-locked on the backstairs. Piper and West, who didn't see as much of the assassination as Garner, aren't supposed to see towards the backstairs.

Yet Garner appears to immediately lost interest in the still-unfolding aftermath outside

Who said she lost interest? She, just like most people at the time, didn't know exactly what was going on. Garner followed Adams and Styles and stopped near the stairs. From there she had a perfect view across the railway yard. Her close proximity to the stairs made it impossible for anybody to cross the landing from one door to the next without making a sound on the wooden floor and thus draw attention to themselves.

West testified that he didn't have a clue there was something going on. He heard no shots and the first time he realized something had happened was when he saw Baker and Truly run to the elevators. Until that moment Piper and West had no reason to look towards the elevators.

Mr. WEST - Well, I had just, after I made coffee, I just had started to eat my lunch because I was a little hungry - I didn't anything that morning before I went to work - and I had started to eat my lunch.
But before I got through, well, all of this was, I mean, the police and things was coming in, and I was just spellbound. I just didn't know what was the matter. So I didn't get through eating. I had to eat about half my lunch, and that is all.
Mr. BELIN - Did you hear any shots fired?
Mr. WEST - I didn't hear a one. Didn't hear a one.

<>

Mr. BELIN - Who was the first person you saw on the first floor after you - while you were eating your lunch? Someone came in the building?
Mr. WEST - Yes; before I got through. The officers and things were coming in the front door.
Mr. BELIN - Who was the first person or persons that you saw coming through there while you were eating your lunch?
Mr. WEST - Well, that was the police.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 12:36:29 AM
Simply because neither Piper nor West recalled seeing Lee Oswald walk across the 1st floor from the Domino room to the stairs doesn't preclude the fact that Lee did walk from the Domino room to the stairs.... It's entirely possible that Lee could have walked across the room and the sounds of the gunshots distracted Piper and West and the  the routine event of a person walking across the room did not enter their memory banks.


West didn’t hear the gunshots, so your theory doesn’t apply to him.

What I am thinking is that the first floor is an open area for the most part. I don’t remember seeing any photos that show for sure that there is a clear view from West’s workstation area to the path that one would take from the domino room to the stairs. Unless there was some physical barrier to block that view, that I am not aware of, I think that they would have had a clear view. I don’t have a problem saying that there is a possibility that both of them might not have noticed. But if you believe that that is possible, then you really should admit that Dorothy Garner could have not noticed too. Also, BRW could have not noticed someone hidden and being as quiet as a mouse in the sniper’s nest…
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 01:06:32 AM

West didn’t hear the gunshots, so your theory doesn’t apply to him.

What I am thinking is that the first floor is an open area for the most part. I don’t remember seeing any photos that show for sure that there is a clear view from West’s workstation area to the path that one would take from the domino room to the stairs. Unless there was some physical barrier to block that view, that I am not aware of, I think that they would have had a clear view. I don’t have a problem saying that there is a possibility that both of them might not have noticed. But if you believe that that is possible, then you really should admit that Dorothy Garner could have not noticed too. Also, BRW could have not noticed someone hidden and being as quiet as a mouse in the sniper’s nest…

I don’t have a problem saying that there is a possibility that both of them might not have noticed. But if you believe that that is possible, then you really should admit that Dorothy Garner could have not noticed too.

Apples and oranges.

Garner was standing directly next to the stairs. West and Piper were some distance away and unaware something was going on until police started to come into the building.

It's utterly dishonest to compare the two situations as if they were equal. West and Piper also did not notice Jarman and Norman as well as Adams and Styles and we know for a fact all four were in fact in the same area where Oswald would have walked.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2022, 01:13:41 AM
I don’t have a problem saying that there is a possibility that both of them might not have noticed. But if you believe that that is possible, then you really should admit that Dorothy Garner could have not noticed too.

Apples and oranges.

Garner was standing directly next to the stairs. West and Piper were some distance away and unaware something was going on until police started to come into the building.

It's utterly dishonest to compare the two situations as if they were equal. West and Piper also did not notice Jarman and Norman as well as Adams and Styles and we know for a fact all four were in fact in the same area where Oswald would have walked.

Excellent rebuttal, Martin.  Thanks for saving me from having to respond....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 01:32:40 AM
Excellent rebuttal, Martin.  Thanks for saving me from having to respond....

Well, you still might, because Charles has said he won't be reading my posts anymore.

That will not stop me from posting and replying to his obvious attempt to take the sting out of Dorothy Garner not seeing Oswald.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2022, 01:35:44 AM
Well, you still might, because Charles has said he won't be reading my posts anymore.

That will not stop me from posting and replying to his obvious attempt to take the sting out of Dorothy Garner not seeing Oswald.

If Charlie persists .... I'll just copy your response and post it, because I can't improve on your rebuttal.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2022, 02:18:16 AM

Okay, I found out where this area is located by reading the WC testimony of Troy Eugene West. It is about the middle of the west wall of the first floor. It is where the wrapping machine that West used to wrap the packages is located.

So, I have another question for anyone who subscribes to the idea that LHO was in the domino room when the shots were fired.

In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out. However, both Eddie Piper and Troy Eugene West were on the first floor, but neither one saw LHO do this trek across the first floor at that time. West was at his work station, and Piper was on his way toward West’s work station. Is there some legitimate reason why these two men wouldn’t have seen LHO walking across the first floor at this time? Just asking…

In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out.

What do you mean by "In order for the timing to work out"?

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2022, 06:23:40 AM
One particular thought is not only what Ms Garner might have seen but also what she could have probably heard.
The trek from the domino room to the stairs would be about 80 feet. That should be easily done in 30 secs. No big feat for someone
who allegedly walked 6 [250 ft] blks in 5 minutes or less right?

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6y5P6JVmJgM/WRkmLxZAY_I/AAAAAAABLzc/a163MKUoVMcsDmaYajEGSdy3uI5w18Z3ACLcB/s1600/TSBD-Floor-Plan-First-Floor.png)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 09:42:16 AM
In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out.

What do you mean by "In order for the timing to work out"?

It is nonsense. Oswald could have gone up to the 2nd floor lunchroom shortly before the shots were fired. I suppose this is where the bottle of Coke comes in. IIRC, Baker initially said that Oswald had the bottle in his hand, which means he had already been in the lunchroom long enough to operate the vendingmachine before Baker encountered him.

But that doesn't sit well for the 6th floor scenario and it would reduce the available time for Oswald to get to the lunchroom even further. That's why Baker scratched out the mentioning of the Coke bottle in his second affidavit. Without the bottle, he could claim he saw Oswald walk away from the dividing door, which of course would suggest he had just arrived there.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 12:21:57 PM
In order to get to the second floor break room where Truly and Baker encountered him, LHO would have had to leave the domino room, and walk across the first floor to the stairs. This would have had to occur immediately after the shots were fired in order for the timing to work out.

What do you mean by "In order for the timing to work out"?


Baker and Truly were in the building and crossing the first floor towards the elevators/stairs within seconds of the shots. If LHO were actually in the domino room when the shots were fired then he would have had to leave the domino room immediately after the shots in order to be in the second floor lunchroom when Baker and Truly arrived on the second floor.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Richard Smith on September 02, 2022, 02:47:58 PM

Baker and Truly were in the building and crossing the first floor towards the elevators/stairs within seconds of the shots. If LHO were actually in the domino room when the shots were fired then he would have had to leave the domino room immediately after the shots in order to be in the second floor lunchroom when Baker and Truly arrived on the second floor.

Martin's endless contrarian game is to frame a discussion on reconstructing some unknowable event and interpreting any possible outcome in a way most favorable to Oswald.  For example, the movements of individuals in the building including Oswald down to a precise second.  No one, not even the actual participants, had that granular level of detail in their recollection of events.  This scenario, however, allows Martin to go on and on and on as though he has some point to make. 

The fact remains that the evidence places Oswald on the 6th floor at the moment of the assassination and then in the 2nd floor lunchroom when Baker arrives.  If Oswald was in both places, then it is implicit that we know he moved from point A to B without having to prove the unknowable second by second movements of everyone involved.  The best evidence that it could be done is that it was done.  Just because we can't know all the details doesn't mean we can't reach any conclusions.  All the pedantic, selective nitpicking of witness testimony to construct a narrative that he desires does not negate the evidence.  This is where he asks me to prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 as though that evidence is not widely known for nearly six decades.  He rejects it but is too cowardly to admit that he is a CTer who believes Oswald was framed.  Rather, like Inspector Clouseau, he suspects everyone and he suspects no one.  Round and round it goes.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 03:06:15 PM
Martin's endless contrarian game is to frame a discussion on reconstructing some unknowable event and interpreting any possible outcome in a way most favorable to Oswald.  For example, the movements of individuals in the building including Oswald down to a precise second.  No one, not even the actual participants, had that granular level of detail in their recollection of events.  This scenario, however, allows Martin to go on and on and on as though he has some point to make. 

The fact remains that the evidence places Oswald on the 6th floor at the moment of the assassination and then in the 2nd floor lunchroom when Baker arrives.  If Oswald was in both places, then it is implicit that we know he moved from point A to B without having to prove the unknowable second by second movements of everyone involved.  The best evidence that it could be done is that it was done.  Just because we can't know all the details doesn't mean we can't reach any conclusions.  All the pedantic, selective nitpicking of witness testimony to construct a narrative that he desires does not negate the evidence.  This is where he asks me to prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 as though that evidence is not widely known for nearly six decades.  He rejects it but is too cowardly to admit that he is a CTer who believes Oswald was framed.  Rather, like Inspector Clouseau, he suspects everyone and he suspects no one.  Round and round it goes.

There he is again; dismissing everything he doesn't like and pushing the same old lies, for which, of course, he has not a shred of evidence.
It seems that Richard now actually believes the clear and obvious lies he has been repeating time after time.


The fact remains that the evidence places Oswald on the 6th floor at the moment of the assassination and then in the 2nd floor lunchroom when Baker arrives.

There is no evidence that places Oswald on the 6th floor. Period! Your imagination is not evidence!

If Oswald was in both places, then it is implicit that we know he moved from point A to B without having to prove the unknowable second by second movements of everyone involved.The best evidence that it could be done is that it was done.

Hilarious, coming from the guy who can't prove that it actually was done and can't even explain how it could have been done. It's really pathetic.
If what's in your imagination is "the best evidence" than you've got nothing.

This is where he asks me to prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 as though that evidence is not widely known for nearly six decades.

If that evidence really exists (which it doesn't) and is widely known for 6 decades, it should be easy to produce, so why are you still failing to do so?

Wash, rinse and repeat.....

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 02, 2022, 03:21:58 PM
This is where he asks me to prove that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30 as though that evidence is not widely known for nearly six decades.

If that evidence really exists (which it doesn't) and is widely known for 6 decades, it should be easy to produce, so why are you still failing to do so?

Wash, rinse and repeat.....

By "evidence", Martin, Cakebread, etc. means events (but just those that implicate Oswald as lone-assassin) must have been captured on Hollywood-quality 35mm film with Dolby Sound. Or they would need to witness it personally through time-travel. Normal vetted longstanding traditional means of evaluating evidence is not good enough in this case. Oswald has gotten a nearly-60 year intense defense which has led nowhere; if anything, it has deservingly earned the CTs ridicule such that some now won't own the title.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 02, 2022, 04:08:21 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/W16NxnH6/290-FORKED.png)
Bill Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 04:29:27 PM
My point is that in order for this so called “rock solid alibi” to be feasible, LHO would have had to walk across the first floor in plain view of the two others who said that they were on the first floor at that point in time. Neither one of them saw him.

LHO had the ability to slither around undetected. He acquired this ability when he was very young while staying at his aunt’s house (because his mother didn’t have the time or inclination to take care of him). So your image is appropriate there Bill.    Thumb1:

The second part of my point is that that ability to slither would also be applicable to getting from the sixth floor to the second floor.

Personally, I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was. And I really couldn’t care less whether others choose differently. I made the point. You can decide for yourself what you want to believe.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 05:53:30 PM
By "evidence", Martin, Cakebread, etc. means events (but just those that implicate Oswald as lone-assassin) must have been captured on Hollywood-quality 35mm film with Dolby Sound. Or they would need to witness it personally through time-travel. Normal vetted longstanding traditional means of evaluating evidence is not good enough in this case. Oswald has gotten a nearly-60 year intense defense which has led nowhere; if anything, it has deservingly earned the CTs ridicule such that some now won't own the title.

By "evidence", Martin, Cakebread, etc. means events (but just those that implicate Oswald as lone-assassin) must have been captured on Hollywood-quality 35mm film with Dolby Sound.

No, that's just what some people complain about when they make a claim (like Oswald was on the 6th floor) without being able to present any evidence for it.

Normal vetted longstanding traditional means of evaluating evidence is not good enough in this case.

Why would that not be good enough? Just tell me what the evidence actually is, so that it can be evaluated. Go on then....

Oswald has gotten a nearly-60 year intense defense which has led nowhere; if anything, it has deservingly earned the CTs ridicule such that some now won't own the title.

Funny... Delusional, but funny nevertheless. Are you trying out for a job as stand up comedian, perhaps?

Why not stop whining about people who don't agree with you and start showing some conclusive evidence for once?

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 06:01:14 PM
My point is that in order for this so called “rock solid alibi” to be feasible, LHO would have had to walk across the first floor in plain view of the two others who said that they were on the first floor at that point in time. Neither one of them saw him.

LHO had the ability to slither around undetected. He acquired this ability when he was very young while staying at his aunt’s house (because his mother didn’t have the time or inclination to take care of him). So your image is appropriate there Bill.    Thumb1:

The second part of my point is that that ability to slither would also be applicable to getting from the sixth floor to the second floor.

Personally, I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was. And I really couldn’t care less whether others choose differently. I made the point. You can decide for yourself what you want to believe.

My point is that in order for this so called “rock solid alibi” to be feasible, LHO would have had to walk across the first floor in plain view of the two others who said that they were on the first floor at that point in time. Neither one of them saw him.

Disingenuous! First of all, there was no plain view. All anyone needs to do is look at the evidence photos of the 1st floor to know that. Secondly, Piper and West didn't see Norman and Jarman as well as Adams and Styles either and we know for a fact that all four were there, so the entire point you are trying to make is meaningless.

LHO had the ability to slither around undetected. He acquired this ability when he was very young while staying at his aunt’s house (because his mother didn’t have the time or inclination to take care of him). So your image is appropriate there Bill.    Thumb1:

The second part of my point is that that ability to slither would also be applicable to getting from the sixth floor to the second floor.


Utter speculation.

Personally, I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was. And I really couldn’t care less whether others choose differently. I made the point. You can decide for yourself what you want to believe.

Thank you. Very kind of you....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2022, 08:24:08 PM
My point is that in order for this so called “rock solid alibi” to be feasible, LHO would have had to walk across the first floor in plain view of the two others who said that they were on the first floor at that point in time. Neither one of them saw him.

LHO had the ability to slither around undetected. He acquired this ability when he was very young while staying at his aunt’s house (because his mother didn’t have the time or inclination to take care of him). So your image is appropriate there Bill.    Thumb1:

The second part of my point is that that ability to slither would also be applicable to getting from the sixth floor to the second floor.

Personally, I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was. And I really couldn’t care less whether others choose differently. I made the point. You can decide for yourself what you want to believe.

I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was.

Please post that "obvious lie",  and the evidence that supports the lie....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 02, 2022, 09:01:08 PM
Perhaps they simply were not paying attention to what was going on near the elevators.

I’ve always wondered if West was sleeping at his desk or something, because he didn’t see or hear or remember anything.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 02, 2022, 09:05:55 PM
Also, BRW could have not noticed someone hidden and being as quiet as a mouse in the sniper’s nest…

Not likely, since he was probably in the “sniper’s nest”. His lunch remains were originally seen there, and Rowland saw a black person in that window at about 12:15.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 09:11:32 PM
I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was.

Please post that "obvious lie",  and the evidence that supports the lie....


The obvious lie is that he reportedly said he was in the domino room at the time the President passed the TSBD.

You then asked for “evidence that supports the lie”.  Other that what LHO reportedly said, I don’t know of any evidence that supports his lie. Why don’t you provide some. You are the one who claims the lie is a rock solid alibi.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 02, 2022, 09:15:55 PM
I choose to not believe LHO’s obvious lie regarding where he was.

Please post that "obvious lie",  and the evidence that supports the lie....

It’s only an “obvious lie” because Charles already believes that Oswald shot Kennedy. It’s as circular an argument as “Richard’s” ridiculous “the best evidence that it could be done is that it was done”.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 09:29:08 PM
BRW said he ate his lunch in the third aisle. And that is where his lunch remains were found and photographed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 02, 2022, 09:47:26 PM

The obvious lie is that he reportedly said he was in the domino room at the time the President passed the TSBD.

You then asked for “evidence that supports the lie”.  Other that what LHO reportedly said, I don’t know of any evidence that supports his lie. Why don’t you provide some. You are the one who claims the lie is a rock solid alibi.

OMG!....How many times do you need to be told that Lee's claim that he was eating lunch ALONE in the Domino room when he saw "Junior" Jarman and Shorty Norman walk by.....  Jarman and Norman confirmed that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom while on their way to the fifth floor.   They said they left the front of the TSBD at 12:25 and arrived on the 5th floor at 12:28. Therfore they would have walked by the lunchroom at about 12:27.

There.... I've provided the evidence that Lee was in the lunchroom .... Now you need to provide the evidence that he was on the sixth floor at 12:30......   And saying that Lee was a liar is just your opinion...... So provide something that proves that he lied...   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2022, 10:06:10 PM
Quote
My point is that in order for this so called “rock solid alibi” to be feasible, LHO would have had to walk across the first floor in plain view of the two others who said that they were on the first floor at that point in time. Neither one of them saw him ------Charles Collins

... there was no plain view. All anyone needs to do is look at the evidence photos of the 1st floor to know that. 
The "plain view" comment is definitely a wiggle it in my way argument [just like the invisible train in the Patrolman White thread]
Of course cops never lie huh?
I would like to see a link to these evidence photographs that were taken on the first floor.

Another issue is a man seen at the 'sniper window' minutes after the shooting.
Report from Ms Lillian Mooneyham CE 2098----
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pdf/WH24_CE_2098.pdf
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 10:14:44 PM
OMG!....How many times do you need to be told that Lee's claim that he was eating lunch ALONE in the Domino room when he saw "Junior" Jarman and Shorty Norman walk by.....  Jarman and Norman confirmed that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom while on their way to the fifth floor.   They said they left the front of the TSBD at 12:25 and arrived on the 5th floor at 12:28. Therfore they would have walked by the lunchroom at about 12:27.

There.... I've provided the evidence that Lee was in the lunchroom .... Now you need to provide the evidence that he was on the sixth floor at 12:30......   And saying that Lee was a liar is just your opinion...... So provide something that proves that he lied...   


So,

1.) LHO said that he was in the domino room.

2.) LHO said that he saw some others walk in.

That’s it?   ???


I asked for evidence other than what LHO reportedly said. Apparently you have none?   ???
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 02, 2022, 10:18:48 PM

So,

1.) LHO said that he was in the domino room.

2.) LHO said that he saw some others walk in.

That’s it?   ???


I asked for evidence other than what LHO reportedly said. Apparently you have none?   ???

That’s it?

No.

3) The others (Jarman and Norman) confirmed they were actually there where Oswald saw them.

There's your "other than what LHO said" evidence.   Thumb1:

Btw it's a hell of a lot more evidence than you have for your claim that Oswald was on the 6th floor at 12:30.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 02, 2022, 10:45:24 PM
BRW said he ate his lunch in the third aisle. And that is where his lunch remains were found and photographed.

I know that’s what he said. But it doesn’t jibe with the other evidence.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 02, 2022, 11:23:01 PM
I know that’s what he said. But it doesn’t jibe with the other evidence.

Is this other evidence what you posted a few posts back in this thread?

Arnold Rowland only mentions seeing one white man on the sixth floor in his same day affidavit. Why would he omit seeing another person if he actually did?


And who said they saw the lunch remains in the sniper’s nest? Was any person who said that an actual experienced crime scene investigator investigating this scene (or just a motor jockey or traffic cop, etc.). There were photographs taken, and even a TV news camera on the sixth floor at that time. Yet there are no images of these supposed lunch remains in the sniper’s nest!   ???


Some “evidence” that you have there!     ::)

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 03, 2022, 12:34:00 AM
There are no photographs of the CE142 wrapper on the floor either, but that doesn’t seem to bother you…

It’s more evidence than you have for Oswald being at that window.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 03, 2022, 12:47:33 AM
There are no photographs of the CE142 wrapper on the floor either, but that doesn’t seem to bother you…

It’s more evidence than you have for Oswald being at that window.


LOL.   :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 03, 2022, 12:53:30 AM
I know that’s what he said. But it doesn’t jibe with the other evidence.

John , I don't give a damn what Bonnie Boy Williams said.   It doesn't alter the fact that Lee Oswald saw Jarman and Norman walk by the domino room at about 12:27....  Only a damned fool, and an idiot would believe that he could have been on the sixth floor firing that rusty old carcano out of the window at 12:30.   

BRW, Junior Jarman, and Harold Norman were three young Negroes who had been raised in the segregated south and they said whatever they thought would please the white cop with the badge.  They understood that they must cooperate with white authority or suffer the consequences.....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 03, 2022, 01:22:41 AM
John , I don't give a damn what Bonnie Boy Williams said.   It doesn't alter the fact that Lee Oswald saw Jarman and Norman walk by the domino room at about 12:27....  Only a damned fool, and an idiot would believe that he could have been on the sixth floor firing that rusty old carcano out of the window at 12:30.   

BRW, Junior Jarman, and Harold Norman were three young Negroes who had been raised in the segregated south and they said whatever they thought would please the white cop with the badge.  They understood that they must cooperate with white authority or suffer the consequences.....


Everyone was lying (except LHO).   ::)   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 03, 2022, 01:30:28 AM
And who said they saw the lunch remains in the sniper’s nest?

Mooney, McCurley, Faulkner, Craig, Hill, Brewer, Haywood, and Weatherford all said that they saw chicken bones and/or a lunch sack lying on top of boxes at the SE window, or next to the SE window.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 03, 2022, 01:39:18 AM
Mooney, McCurley, Faulkner, Craig, Hill, Brewer, Haywood, and Weatherford all said that they saw chicken bones and/or a lunch sack lying on top of boxes at the SE window, or next to the SE window.

Now you're going to have to present the sworn affidavits of all of those men or Charlie will call you a liar.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 03, 2022, 01:49:53 AM

Everyone was lying (except LHO).   ::)

Well, so you've finally seen the light.....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 03, 2022, 03:58:12 AM
Uh... bump-------------

... there was no plain view. All anyone needs to do is look at the evidence photos of the 1st floor to know that. 
The "plain view" comment is definitely a wiggle it in my way argument [just like the invisible train in the Patrolman White thread]
Of course cops never lie huh?
I would like to see a link to these evidence photographs that were taken on the first floor.

Another issue is a man seen at the 'sniper window' minutes after the shooting.
Report from Ms Lillian Mooneyham CE 2098----
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pdf/WH24_CE_2098.pdf
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 03, 2022, 02:17:12 PM
Mooney, McCurley, Faulkner, Craig, Hill, Brewer, Haywood, and Weatherford all said that they saw chicken bones and/or a lunch sack lying on top of boxes at the SE window, or next to the SE window.


I asked how many of them had actual crime scene investigation experience. Let’s start with your first one:

Mooney. He was in the writ and execution division of the Sheriff’s Dept. He shuffled legal paperwork for a living. No apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Craig. He testified that he ran away from home when he was 12 and had no subsequent schooling. He worked on some ranches, went into the army and worked in the motor pool, then was a dishwasher, a cook, a construction worker, and a packager, then went to work for the Sheriff’s Dept. in October of 1959. No apparent aptitude for, or experience in, crime scene investigation.

Haygood [not Haywood]. A motor jockey with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Faulkner. I only found a Sheriff’s report dated 11/22/63 with no mention of any lunch remains. So, I question why you included him in your list.

Hill. Assigned to checking the backgrounds of applicants for the DPD. No apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

McCurley. Deputy Sheriff with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Brewer. He was a motor jockey with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Weatherford. Deputy Sheriff with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.


None of these give any specific locations just general information. The only one who gave anything that could possibly be considered specific was Mooney. And Mooney qualified his information with qualifications which included “if I remember correctly”, and it could have been on this box or maybe on this other box. It is obvious to me that he really didn’t remember for sure where he saw it.

If you really believe that any of their testimony is evidence that they saw lunch remains at the southeast window or next to the southeast window, then apparently you have a completely different standard for what you consider to be evidence that you think tends to show a contrary scenario to the official one. Why he hell is that?   ???

Time and time again you claim that there is no evidence that tends to incriminate your idol. But when it comes to evidence that you think tends to exonotate your idol, the sketchiest testimony will do just fine.   ::)

None of the officers in your list were there to document the evidence. They were searching for the assassin and the weapon, etc. The actual crime scene investigators who were assigned to this scene provide the real answers. But, as usual, you will claim that there is no evidence (no matter how well it is documented) when it comes to incriminating evidence.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 03, 2022, 02:51:39 PM

I asked how many of them had actual crime scene investigation experience. Let’s start with your first one:

Mooney. He was in the writ and execution division of the Sheriff’s Dept. He shuffled legal paperwork for a living. No apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Craig. He testified that he ran away from home when he was 12 and had no subsequent schooling. He worked on some ranches, went into the army and worked in the motor pool, then was a dishwasher, a cook, a construction worker, and a packager, then went to work for the Sheriff’s Dept. in October of 1959. No apparent aptitude for, or experience in, crime scene investigation.

Haygood [not Haywood]. A motor jockey with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Faulkner. I only found a Sheriff’s report dated 11/22/63 with no mention of any lunch remains. So, I question why you included him in your list.

Hill. Assigned to checking the backgrounds of applicants for the DPD. No apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

McCurley. Deputy Sheriff with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Brewer. He was a motor jockey with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.

Weatherford. Deputy Sheriff with no apparent experience in crime scene investigation.


None of these give any specific locations just general information. The only one who gave anything that could possibly be considered specific was Mooney. And Mooney qualified his information with qualifications which included “if I remember correctly”, and it could have been on this box or maybe on this other box. It is obvious to me that he really didn’t remember for sure where he saw it.

If you really believe that any of their testimony is evidence that they saw lunch remains at the southeast window or next to the southeast window, then apparently you have a completely different standard for what you consider to be evidence that you think tends to show a contrary scenario to the official one. Why he hell is that?   ???

Time and time again you claim that there is no evidence that tends to incriminate your idol. But when it comes to evidence that you think tends to exonotate your idol, the sketchiest testimony will do just fine.   ::)

None of the officers in your list were there to document the evidence. They were searching for the assassin and the weapon, etc. The actual crime scene investigators who were assigned to this scene provide the real answers. But, as usual, you will claim that there is no evidence (no matter how well it is documented) when it comes to incriminating evidence.

I asked how many of them had actual crime scene investigation experience.

So, now you need "actual crime scene investigation experience" to notice where you saw lunch remains?

The desperation is hilarious!   :D

The actual crime scene investigators who were assigned to this scene provide the real answers.

Are those the guys who "forgot" to take an in situ photograph of a folded up paper bag, which they then unfolded potentially losing important trace evidence?

What kind of a Mickey Mouse case is this, where even the location of a lunchbag can't be conclusively resolved?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Rick Plant on September 03, 2022, 10:28:31 PM
Craig. He testified that he ran away from home when he was 12 and had no subsequent schooling. He worked on some ranches, went into the army and worked in the motor pool, then was a dishwasher, a cook, a construction worker, and a packager, then went to work for the Sheriff’s Dept. in October of 1959. No apparent aptitude for, or experience in, crime scene investigation.

So, are you trying to make the claim that a person who didn't have the greatest childhood is incapable of being trained to do a successful job later in life?   

The simple fact is nobody has experience in crime scene investigations until they gain that experience.

Are you saying that Craig was incapable of gaining that experience when he entered law enforcement?         
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 03, 2022, 11:51:36 PM
So, are you trying to make the claim that a person who didn't have the greatest childhood is incapable of being trained to do a successful job later in life?   

The simple fact is nobody has experience in crime scene investigations until they gain that experience.

Are you saying that Craig was incapable of gaining that experience when he entered law enforcement?         

Definition:

Aptitude: capability; ability; innate or acquired capacity for something; talent:


The context in which I used the word aptitude included his education and work experience. None of that (with the possible exception of his claim of passing a high school equivalency test) included anything that I consider a prerequisite to be able to comprehend the math and science involved in the crime scene investigation processes. I don’t know what his capacity for learning what was required to be able to do that work properly might have been. He might have been able to acquire enough knowledge. But I just don’t see any evidence that he had (at that point in time) an aptitude or ambition for that particular job.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 04, 2022, 01:06:05 AM
The context in which I used the word aptitude included his education and work experience. None of that (with the possible exception of his claim of passing a high school equivalency test) included anything that I consider a prerequisite to be able to comprehend the math and science involved in the crime scene investigation processes. I don’t know what his capacity for learning what was required to be able to do that work properly might have been. He might have been able to acquire enough knowledge. But I just don’t see any evidence that he had (at that point in time) an aptitude or ambition for that particular job.
Quote
He was named Man of the Year by the sheriff's office in 1960 for his work in aid in helping to capture an international jewel chief. He had a successful career in the DPD and was promoted four times.
https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKcraigR.htm
Craig was a county deputy sheriff..I don't know why it says "DPD".

Charles immediately responded to Mr Plant's statement but yet he, nor anyone else has responded to my post #584 which should establish [taken at face value] an alibi for LHO.
 
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 04, 2022, 07:42:35 AM
I asked how many of them had actual crime scene investigation experience.

I don’t see what difference it makes, given that the guys who allegedly *did* have crime scene experience completely screwed up the crime scenes and the evidence handling.

You can attempt to smear all of the officers who saw something you don’t like as an excuse to disregard what they said, but it doesn’t change what they saw. You don’t need any specialized knowledge to know what a chicken bone is.

Yes, Haygood. Autocorrect got me there.

Faulkner’s account of the chicken bones is in “No More Silence”.

Quote
Time and time again you claim that there is no evidence that tends to incriminate your idol.

There’s that “idol” crap again. And, no, I never claimed anything like this.

Quote
But when it comes to evidence that you think tends to exonotate your idol, the sketchiest testimony will do just fine.   ::)

Bull, because the lunch remains don’t tend to exonerate anybody. At best they illustrate that BRW was less than honest about where he was as what he saw (or could see).

Quote
None of the officers in your list were there to document the evidence. They were searching for the assassin and the weapon, etc. The actual crime scene investigators who were assigned to this scene provide the real answers.

“Real answers”. LOL.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 04, 2022, 12:55:44 PM
I don’t see what difference it makes, given that the guys who allegedly *did* have crime scene experience completely screwed up the crime scenes and the evidence handling.

You can attempt to smear all of the officers who saw something you don’t like as an excuse to disregard what they said, but it doesn’t change what they saw. You don’t need any specialized knowledge to know what a chicken bone is.

Yes, Haygood. Autocorrect got me there.

Faulkner’s account of the chicken bones is in “No More Silence”.

There’s that “idol” crap again. And, no, I never claimed anything like this.

Bull, because the lunch remains don’t tend to exonerate anybody. At best they illustrate that BRW was less than honest about where he was as what he saw (or could see).

“Real answers”. LOL.



I don’t see what difference it makes, given that the guys who allegedly *did* have crime scene experience completely screwed up the crime scenes and the evidence handling.


Well then, perhaps the next time you go to the doctor to get a diagnosis you should ask for some second opinions from the receptionists (be sure to request the ones with no medical experience). They could walk by the examination room and take a quick glance at you and give you their opinions. You’ll probably get the diagnosis of “He looks like he doesn’t feel good.” Then you can go home “just knowing” that the receptionists were right. And ignore the doctor’s diagnosis just because you somehow “know” that he completely screwed it up.



You can attempt to smear all of the officers who saw something you don’t like as an excuse to disregard what they said, but it doesn’t change what they saw. You don’t need any specialized knowledge to know what a chicken bone is.


No smear job was intended. None of the ones you have listed gave a specific location. It is you who is trying to interpret their descriptions to fit your nonsensical theory. You are being dishonest and trying to mislead the gullible.



Faulkner’s account of the chicken bones is in “No More Silence”.

Thank you. He doesn’t have any apparent crime scene investigation experience either. Neither does he give a specific location.


Bull, because the lunch remains don’t tend to exonerate anybody. At best they illustrate that BRW was less than honest about where he was as what he saw (or could see).

You were trying to use your idea of the location of the lunch remains to suggest that BRW was eating his lunch at the sniper’s nest. And therefore it was “unlikely” that he wouldn’t have seen LHO hiding there. However, your list is only of people who give no specific location of the chicken bone, etc.

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 04, 2022, 09:44:41 PM
(https://i.postimg.cc/2SwWgpkn/214-CARL-S-DAY.png)
Bill Chapman
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 05, 2022, 01:06:01 AM
Well then, perhaps the next time you go to the doctor to get a diagnosis you should ask for some second opinions from the receptionists (be sure to request the ones with no medical experience).

That’s a silly analogy, given that there’s no “diagnosis” involved here. The doctor, the nurse, the receptionist, and the building janitor would all be just as capable of seeing that a patient left her purse in the exam room.

Quote
And ignore the doctor’s diagnosis just because you somehow “know” that he completely screwed it up.

I don’t “somehow ‘know’” they screwed up the crime scenes and the evidence handling. They did screw them up. Crime scenes weren’t secured. Things were moved around or picked up before photos were taken. Prints weren’t photographed and covered. Probable cause wasn’t followed for searches and arrests. Chains of custody were not maintained. Evidence was not properly secured and stored. Lineups were egregiously unfair and biased. Relevant reports were either never written or written as an afterthought long after the events. Etc, etc, etc.

Quote
No smear job was intended. None of the ones you have listed gave a specific location.

That’s not correct. They all talked about the lunch bag and the chicken bones in the context of what they saw where the shells were found or on top of boxes by the SE window.

Quote
You were trying to use your idea of the location of the lunch remains to suggest that BRW was eating his lunch at the sniper’s nest. And therefore it was “unlikely” that he wouldn’t have seen LHO hiding there.

That’s true, but it still doesn’t exonerate anybody. There’s just no evidence whatsoever that LHO was “hiding there”.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 05, 2022, 02:12:51 PM
There's no evidence that somebody else shot Kennedy.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 05, 2022, 04:55:26 PM
That’s a silly analogy, given that there’s no “diagnosis” involved here. The doctor, the nurse, the receptionist, and the building janitor would all be just as capable of seeing that a patient left her purse in the exam room.

I don’t “somehow ‘know’” they screwed up the crime scenes and the evidence handling. They did screw them up. Crime scenes weren’t secured. Things were moved around or picked up before photos were taken. Prints weren’t photographed and covered. Probable cause wasn’t followed for searches and arrests. Chains of custody were not maintained. Evidence was not properly secured and stored. Lineups were egregiously unfair and biased. Relevant reports were either never written or written as an afterthought long after the events. Etc, etc, etc.

That’s not correct. They all talked about the lunch bag and the chicken bones in the context of what they saw where the shells were found or on top of boxes by the SE window.

That’s true, but it still doesn’t exonerate anybody. There’s just no evidence whatsoever that LHO was “hiding there”.


That’s a silly analogy, given that there’s no “diagnosis” involved here. The doctor, the nurse, the receptionist, and the building janitor would all be just as capable of seeing that a patient left her purse in the exam room.


The analogy is a perfectly fine one to demonstrate your ridiculous statement that:

Quote
I don’t see what difference it makes, given that the guys who allegedly *did* have crime scene experience completely screwed up the crime scenes and the evidence handling.

In other words, if it makes no difference to you, then apply that logic to yourself getting a diagnosis at your next trip to the doctor’s office. If you cannot see the difference it makes and choose to believe your interpretations of the general descriptions of the officers who were not there to document the location of the lunch remains over the photographs and descriptions of the trained crime scene investigators, then you should have no problem accepting the doctor’s receptionist’s “he looks like he doesn’t feel good” diagnosis.


That’s not correct. They all talked about the lunch bag and the chicken bones in the context of what they saw where the shells were found or on top of boxes by the SE window.

Again there were no specific location(s) given.



There’s just no evidence whatsoever that LHO was “hiding there”.


Mr. BELIN - Now what conversation did you and Ronald Fischer have about this man, if anything? Do you remember what he said?
Mr. EDWARDS - I made a statement to Ronny that I wondered who he was hiding from since he was up there crowded in among the boxes, in a joking manner.


Mr. FISCHER - The man held my attention for 10 or 15 seconds, because he appeared uncomfortable for one, and, secondly, he wasn't watching-uh---he didn't look like he was watching for the parade. He looked like he was looking down toward the Trinity River and the triple underpass down at the end-toward the end of Elm Street. And--uh--all the time I watched him, he never moved his head, he never-he never moved anything. Just was there transfixed.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 05, 2022, 10:30:29 PM
Right? And nice double standard. What crime scene training did Edwards and Fischer have?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Charles Collins on September 05, 2022, 10:47:39 PM
Right? And nice double standard. What crime scene training did Edwards and Fischer have?

WTF are you trying to say?    ???
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 05, 2022, 11:28:43 PM
WTF are you trying to say?    ???

This kind of BS and he gets upset when he doesn't get any respect..... Amazing   :D
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 06, 2022, 02:08:50 AM
This kind of BS and he gets upset when he doesn't get any respect..... Amazing   :D

Several months ago I debated Mr Collins about the feasibility of an adult man putting an identifiable palm print on a carcano barrel.   I presented dimensions that revealed that it would have been impossible for Lee Oswald to deposit an identifiable print on that 5/8 " diameter barrel....and any rational person would have acknowledged the utter impossibility ....but Mr Collins just kept arguing and presenting utter nonsense, and making a damned fool of himself.  I now have little respect for Mr Collins.....   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 06, 2022, 02:51:30 AM
Several months ago I debated Mr Collins about the feasibility of an adult man putting an identifiable palm print on a carcano barrel.   I presented dimensions that revealed that it would have been impossible for Lee Oswald to deposit an identifiable print on that 5/8 " diameter barrel....and any rational person would have acknowledged the utter impossibility ....but Mr Collins just kept arguing and presenting utter nonsense, and making a damned fool of himself.  I now have little respect for Mr Collins.....

If that's all you took away from the "debate", you weren't comprehending too well.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 06, 2022, 03:49:06 PM
If that's all you took away from the "debate", you weren't comprehending too well.

What factual information did Mr Collins present that I should have accepted?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 06, 2022, 05:10:43 PM
What factual information did Mr Collins present that I should have accepted?

For you "debate" is an euphemism for I won't change my mind one bit. Quite the opposite of "arguing and presenting utter nonsense," Charles tested fairly your hypothesis with experimentation.

Never mind Walt, we will just go with the measurement that you gave as at the bayonet lug: 16.68 mm, which is equal to 0.66". Using the formula for circumference of a circle, 2 pi R, we can calculate the circumference of the barrel at that point to be 2.07". Therefore 2" tape will not quite span the entire circumference of the barrel at that point. Jerry's diagrams are very useful for an experiment that I did to satisfy myself that the tape is about 2" wide and therefore the lines are about 5/16" apart. I printed the entire palm print on a piece of paper so that it closely matches the size of my actual palm. I have short fingers and LHO did not, but the size of the palm itself is what I used to compare my palm with my paper print of the palm print. The bottom row of Jerry's diagram contains two other partial prints. One is the area of the palm in which the lift from the rifle is found. I printed this on paper such that it's size matched the drawn square on the full palm print (which I had already printed scaled to my palm). This allowed me to test a scaled image of the print for fit. The creases matched well with the scaled LHO palm print, therefore it also is to the same scale as my palm. All of this gives me assurances that these images that I printed on paper are to a reasonably realistic full scale. This better image also shows the contours of the ridges (which are used for ID purposes) that form the palm print. Then I printed the other image in the bottom row of Jerry's diagram. This image shows the lift on the tape. I scaled it the same way that I did the partial palm print and compared the ridges on the lift to the ones on the palm print. They are to the same scale. Therefore, I am assured that the print I made of the image of the lift is to the proper scale. Measuring the width of the tape, it is very close to 2". Measuring the lift that is on that 2" tape I measure it taking up about 1-1/4" of the 2" width. And it measures about 2-1/4" going lengthwise on the tape. Jerry is probably correct about the rolling of the barrel in relation to the palm when gripping and/or releasing the grip. I believe that this would account for the print spanning more than half the circumference of the barrel.

Your hanging on to your beliefs in the face of ample evidence against them is typical of the nay sayers in general. As I said before, I don't expect you to change your tune. But I have proven to myself that the tape is ~2" and the teeth in the bayonet lug made the impressions (two lines) in the bottom of the barrel which showed up on the lift.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/61/48/QlQLZvO7_o.jpg)

(The fingers would not be pressed against the palm, as shown here, but rather wrapped around the barrel being gripped.)

Question: Do you believe it's possible to wrap your palm ( heel portion ) completely around a 5/8 " tube? My answer:

Not all at once. Just did an experiment. Grasped a 5/8" tube as if it were holding a heavy metal barrel. Then eased the grip by lifting the thumb and allowing the palm to relax. All of the fingers still held onto the tube but the tube had rolled on the palm. This added more palm imprinting than the initial grasping.

Although there are print impressions across 3/4 of the tape width (at 2", it would 1 1/2"), the actual print from the palm may only be a portion of that.

I think it was also established that the palm-print lift was done using 2"-wide tape and that, prior to making the lift, the bayonet lug was moved forward out of the way along the tapered end of the barrel.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 06, 2022, 05:47:20 PM
For you "debate" is an euphemism for I won't change my mind one bit. Quite the opposite of "arguing and presenting utter nonsense," Charles tested fairly your hypothesis with experimentation.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/61/48/QlQLZvO7_o.jpg)

(The fingers would not be pressed against the palm, as shown here, but rather wrapped around the barrel being gripped.)

Question: Do you believe it's possible to wrap your palm ( heel portion ) completely around a 5/8 " tube? My answer:

I think it was also established that the palm-print lift was done using 2"-wide tape and that, prior to making the lift, the bayonet lug was moved forward out of the way along the tapered end of the barrel.




For you "debate" is an euphemism for I won't change my mind one bit.

Your right ....When I have measuring devices that verify a dimension....   I'd be insane if I denied the caliper and accepted some other dimension.  So you're right, I won't change my mind....


the bayonet lug was moved forward out of the way along the tapered end of the barrel.


It's easy to make up stuff..... That Bayonet lug isn't "movable", without the tool for removing it.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 06, 2022, 06:28:12 PM
For you "debate" is an euphemism for I won't change my mind one bit. Quite the opposite of "arguing and presenting utter nonsense," Charles tested fairly your hypothesis with experimentation.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/61/48/QlQLZvO7_o.jpg)

(The fingers would not be pressed against the palm, as shown here, but rather wrapped around the barrel being gripped.)

Question: Do you believe it's possible to wrap your palm ( heel portion ) completely around a 5/8 " tube? My answer:

I think it was also established that the palm-print lift was done using 2"-wide tape and that, prior to making the lift, the bayonet lug was moved forward out of the way along the tapered end of the barrel.

Mr Collins said that the two parallel lines that are seen in the "palm print" photo are 5/16 inches apart.   

There are no such lines on the metal barrel of a carcano.   But if there were...... then they would be on opposite sides of the barrel.......   

   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 06, 2022, 06:32:58 PM



For you "debate" is an euphemism for I won't change my mind one bit.

Your right ....When I have measuring devices that verify a dimension....   I'd be insane if I denied the caliper and accepted some other dimension.  So you're right, I won't change my mind....


the bayonet lug was moved forward out of the way along the tapered end of the barrel.


It's easy to make up stuff..... That Bayonet lug isn't "movable", without the tool for removing it.


At 2:34 time, the bayonet lug is moved forward by tapping with the end of a screwdriver.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 06, 2022, 08:22:24 PM

At 2:34 time, the bayonet lug is moved forward by tapping with the end of a screwdriver.

Ok, my mistake.... I've never removed the bayonet lug and I was under the impression that it require a special tool.   

Now then.... how do you explain the two parallel lines that Charles said were 5/16 of an inch apart?   If they were 5/16 of an inch apart they would be on opposite sides of the barrel because the barrel is 11/16 of an inch in diameter at that point.   
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 07, 2022, 03:51:53 PM

At 2:34 time, the bayonet lug is moved forward by tapping with the end of a screwdriver.

I've been searching for your post in which you said that the two parallel lines were made by the bayonet lug.

I wanted to verify that that is what you wrote.... I can't find that post so perhaps you can explain it again....

What caused the two parallel lines that are clearly visible in the photo of the so called palm print?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 07, 2022, 04:40:18 PM
I've been searching for your post in which you said that the two parallel lines were made by the bayonet lug.

I wanted to verify that that is what you wrote.... I can't find that post so perhaps you can explain it again....

What caused the two parallel lines that are clearly visible in the photo of the so called palm print?

No prob', buddy.

    "It appears to me that the contact between the moveable bayonet lug and
     the underside of the barrel could create some rough spots on the underside
     of the barrel (which would be in the form of two parallel lines). When Day
     needed to apply the tape to the underside of the barrel, all he needed to do
     was slide the bayonet lug away from the print (towards the muzzle end of
     the barrel. The rough spots (in the form of two parallel lines) could retain
     some of the fingerprint powder. And those rough spots would show up on
     the lift as two parallel lines."

See post by Charles Collins here: https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.msg114974.html#msg114974 on Page 29 of the Topic: "Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?" Link (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.280.html).
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 07, 2022, 04:55:48 PM
No prob', buddy.

    "It appears to me that the contact between the moveable bayonet lug and
     the underside of the barrel could create some rough spots on the underside
     of the barrel (which would be in the form of two parallel lines). When Day
     needed to apply the tape to the underside of the barrel, all he needed to do
     was slide the bayonet lug away from the print (towards the muzzle end of
     the barrel. The rough spots (in the form of two parallel lines) could retain
     some of the fingerprint powder. And those rough spots would show up on
     the lift as two parallel lines."

See post by Charles Collins here: https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.msg114974.html#msg114974 on Page 29 of the Topic: "Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?" Link (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.280.html).

Thank you for providing the photos that lead you to believe the two parallel lines were made by the bayonet lug.

I'd suggest that you think about that idea....  Because is not plausible.   We need the palm print posted again so we can discuss the plausibility of your idea.

As I recall detective Day said that he saw some of the print on the metal barrel sticking out from beneath the wooden foregrip, so he decided to dismantle the rifle to expose the entire print.   

Do I have that right?

 Charles Collins posted this last year.....
I don't know why I missed this post by Charles Collins

I ran across this photo which shows more clearly that the two edges which contact the underside of the barrel are rough. It appears to me that there are teeth intentionally made into the edges. These teeth are slanted such that they would grip the underside of the barrel when the lug is pushed back towards the bolt, and would release very easily when it is pushed toward the muzzle end of the barrel. Also, take another look at the two lines on the lift done by Day. They look to me like impressions left on the underside of the barrel by similar teeth could have formed them. (Where's a forensic dentist when we need one?   ;))

(https://i.vgy.me/QGok9N.jpg)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 08, 2022, 12:25:00 AM
Thank you for providing the photos that lead you to believe the two parallel lines were made by the bayonet lug.

I'd suggest that you think about that idea....  Because is not plausible.   We need the palm print posted again so we can discuss the plausibility of your idea.

As I recall detective Day said that he saw some of the print on the metal barrel sticking out from beneath the wooden foregrip, so he decided to dismantle the rifle to expose the entire print.   

Do I have that right?

 Charles Collins posted this last year.....
I don't know why I missed this post by Charles Collins

I ran across this photo which shows more clearly that the two edges which contact the underside of the barrel are rough. It appears to me that there are teeth intentionally made into the edges. These teeth are slanted such that they would grip the underside of the barrel when the lug is pushed back towards the bolt, and would release very easily when it is pushed toward the muzzle end of the barrel. Also, take another look at the two lines on the lift done by Day. They look to me like impressions left on the underside of the barrel by similar teeth could have formed them. (Where's a forensic dentist when we need one?   ;))

(https://i.vgy.me/QGok9N.jpg)

(https://i.vgy.me/QGok9N.jpg)

This is NOT a baynet lug for a model 91/38 carcano ...... The 91/38 has two holes for the front barrel band and this lug has only one.   This lug is similar but it is not the correct bayonet lug.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 08, 2022, 02:42:31 AM
(https://i.vgy.me/QGok9N.jpg)

This is NOT a baynet lug for a model 91/38 carcano ...... The 91/38 has two holes for the from barrel band and this lug has only one.   This lug is similar but it is not the correct bayonet lug.

The bayonet lug had one bolt hole and the heavy metal barrel band had two.

(https://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/images/rifle.jpg)  (https://www.whokilledjfk.net/disassembling_the_mc_rifle_files/image059.jpg)

Just to show you I ain't pulling your leg, here's the Oswald rifle:

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/D18JTN/warren-commission-exhibit-gun-used-by-lee-harvey-oswald-to-assassinate-D18JTN.jpg)  (https://kubrick.htvapps.com/htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/ibmig/cms/image/wmur/23006390-23006390.jpg)

Finally, in the graphic below, the top inset shows how everything fitted together. Two bolts through the heavy metal barrel band and just one through the bayonet lug. It didn't need two bolts because the lug was additionally secured through friction to the barrel itself.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/be/88/DaeHb42r_o.jpg)

The folded bayonet.

(https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/productcart/pc/catalog/CarcanoM38FrontBandScrews(1).JPG)  (https://pre98.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/38c19.jpg)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 08, 2022, 03:09:27 AM
The bayonet lug had one bolt hole and the heavy metal barrel band had two.

(https://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/images/rifle.jpg)  (https://www.whokilledjfk.net/disassembling_the_mc_rifle_files/image059.jpg)

Just to show you I ain't pulling your leg, here's the Oswald rifle:

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/D18JTN/warren-commission-exhibit-gun-used-by-lee-harvey-oswald-to-assassinate-D18JTN.jpg)  (https://kubrick.htvapps.com/htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/ibmig/cms/image/wmur/23006390-23006390.jpg)

Finally, in the graphic below, the top inset shows how everything fitted together. Two bolts through the heavy metal barrel band and just one through the bayonet lug. It didn't need two bolts because the lug was additionally secured through friction to the barrel itself.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/be/88/DaeHb42r_o.jpg)

The folded bayonet.

(https://www.libertytreecollectors.com/productcart/pc/catalog/CarcanoM38FrontBandScrews(1).JPG)  (https://pre98.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/38c19.jpg)

Jerry the slotted part of the bayonet lug measures nearly  one inch  ( 60/64")

So you can use that as a scale and measure the length of the bayonet lug on CE 139  (C2766 ) and compare it to the photo that Charles posted ( the one hole lug)   Are they the same length ? 

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 08, 2022, 06:08:06 PM
Ok, my mistake.... I've never removed the bayonet lug and I was under the impression that it require a special tool. 
Nah...you should be able to do it by just using a dime  :-\
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 08, 2022, 06:12:58 PM
There's no evidence that somebody else shot Kennedy.
It's easier to sucker people than to convince them that they've been suckered(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/deadhorsebeat_2.gif)
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 08, 2022, 08:53:22 PM
Jerry the slotted part of the bayonet lug measures nearly  one inch  ( 60/64")

So you can use that as a scale and measure the length of the bayonet lug on CE 139  (C2766 ) and compare it to the photo that Charles posted ( the one hole lug)   Are they the same length ?

(https://images2.imgbox.com/e2/59/3hWUREDy_o.jpg)

Don't suppose you would put down some of the weird proportions in the lug photo to old-school perspective and wide lens distortion?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 08, 2022, 09:11:19 PM
(https://images2.imgbox.com/e2/59/3hWUREDy_o.jpg)

Don't suppose you would put down some of the weird proportions in the lug photo to old-school perspective and wide lens distortion?

I'm not sure what you're asking....but I'll accept that I was wrong in assuming that all model 91/38 carcanos had two holes in the bayonet lug for the screws to pass through.  My carcanos have two holes but apparently some have only one hole.  Possible the early version had just one hole and the engineers decided that two holes would be better because the two holes clamp the bayonet lug tighter to the stock.

Now then....   Do you believe that the two parallel lines in the so called  palm print photo are 5/16th  inches apart and they were caused by the bayonet ?

Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 09, 2022, 12:35:05 AM
I'm not sure what you're asking....but I'll accept that I was wrong in assuming that all model 91/38 carcanos had two holes in the bayonet lug for the screws to pass through.  My carcanos have two holes but apparently some have only one hole.  Possible the early version had just one hole and the engineers decided that two holes would be better because the two holes clamp the bayonet lug tighter to the stock.

I'm lost. Are you saying your bayonet lug looks like this:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/31/1b/Gi9MOSmL_o.jpg)

Sorry, but one has to guess at what you mean because you won't post any pictures.

Quote
Now then....   Do you believe that the two parallel lines in the so called  palm print photo are 5/16th  inches apart and they were caused by the bayonet ?

(https://images2.imgbox.com/52/12/JjzrSFa6_o.jpg)

If the lifting tape is 2" wide, the linear lines are 5/16" apart, the same width as the bayonet lug. (From this page (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.300.html)e )
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 09, 2022, 01:58:13 AM
I'm lost. Are you saying your bayonet lug looks like this:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/31/1b/Gi9MOSmL_o.jpg)

Sorry, but one has to guess at what you mean because you won't post any pictures.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/52/12/JjzrSFa6_o.jpg)

If the lifting tape is 2" wide, the linear lines are 5/16" apart, the same width as the bayonet lug. (From this page (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.300.html)e )

The diameter of the barrel at that point is.....    .652"   (21/32")  Pi X .652 =  2.04 "  So the circumference is 2".

So you're saying that Day used 2 inch wide tape and wrapped it completely around the barrel  even though the print covered only a fraction of  2 inches.     And then you place the tape that was on a cylindrical surface on a flat surface and think that you can present that BS as factual information.

Only a moron would believe that detective  Day wrapped the circumference of the barrel with 2" wide tape when the print was on about 1/2 inch of the surface.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 09, 2022, 02:06:01 AM
I'm lost. Are you saying your bayonet lug looks like this:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/31/1b/Gi9MOSmL_o.jpg)

Sorry, but one has to guess at what you mean because you won't post any pictures.

(https://images2.imgbox.com/52/12/JjzrSFa6_o.jpg)

If the lifting tape is 2" wide, the linear lines are 5/16" apart, the same width as the bayonet lug. (From this page (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3030.300.html)e )

I'm lost. Are you saying your bayonet lug looks like this:

(https://images2.imgbox.com/31/1b/Gi9MOSmL_o.jpg)

No, not exactly.... The holes are too far apart .... On my carcano they are 1 1/2 inches apart.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 14, 2022, 05:46:39 PM
And, as we have known since 2019, Mr Hosty is lying in his book about what Mr Oswald actually said.

We have it in Mr Hosty's own handwriting:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Mr Oswald did not claim to have been eating his lunch in the domino room at the time of the P. Parade. He did, however, claim to have been doing so when he saw Messrs Jarman & Norman passing through shortly before the P. Parade.

I've never given much thought to What Lee told Fritz regarding his movements after the encounter with Baker and Truly in the 2nd floor lunchroom....   But the official tale says that Lee walked through the office area with a Coca Cola in his hand after the encounter.

(https://i.postimg.cc/MppkKCWB/Hosty-parade-crop.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

In his reply to Fritz apparently Lee never specified the route that he took when he returned to the Domino Room to finish his lunch at about 12:33.  I now doubt that Lee walked through the office area after leaving the 2nd floor lunchroom.    If he had walked across the office area and used the front stairs to return to the Domino room he would have encountered many of the employees who were returning to the building after the shooting.  BUT NOBODY reported seeing Lee Oswald....  AND Lee certainly would have seen the mayhem on the street outside of the TSBD so he would have known that there was no P. Parade to watch.....


Thus, He probably returned to the Domino Room by way of the stairs in the NW corner of the building....
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on September 16, 2022, 05:43:40 AM
There is the possibility that Oswald could have been hiding at the NE corner of the 6th floor near an east facing window where  he theoretically had LOS to Norman and Jarman walking at ground level  along the Houston st.  side of TSBD. Oswald therefore upon hearing them on 5th floor below him after he placed  a box  on the SE window ledge at approx 12.24:45, knew Norman and Jarman had to have bypassed the Domino room to re-enter  TSBD.

Oswald might have been trying to look out this east facing window to see if the motorcade had yet entered Dealey plaza ,  while Oswald was waiting for BRW to leave the 6th floor.

Of course this is theoretically not probable if Oswald escaped  via staircases, because of Mrs Garner on the 4th floor.

However , an elevator escape is possible if  Oswald had an accomplice who could take Oswald via the East elevator from 6th floor to the 2nd floor landing by 50 sec post shots, thus bypassing Garner who had no LOS from her position by a west window near the staircase. The accomplice then returned the east elevator to the 5th floor by 70 secs post shots where it appeared stationary when Truly and Baker supposedly arrived at that time to the.rear elevator shaft. The West elevator was then taken down by either the accomplice or Jack Dougherty after Truly and Baker  began their ascent up the staircases.

However,  for the elevator escape scenario to be possible requires that BRW must leave the SE window by 12:23:30 which in turn requires Norman and Jarman to leave from the front side of TSBD EXACTLY at 1:22 so that they get to 5th floor windows  BEFORE BRW joined them.

If Walt’s timeline is the more accurate, then it’s several minutes PAST 1:22 (after the radio heard) that Norman and Jarman started their return , passing the Domino room at 12:25 and not until 12:27 approx getting to their 5th floor windows.

If Walt’s timeline ,  then not only is it impossible for Oswald to place the box on the window ledge by 12:25., it’s impossible  for ANY gunman to have done  so unless BRW was the one who placed the box, which makes no sense unless BRW is helping the shooter.

The only way imo to resolve this dilemma would be to refute the supposedly confirmed time stamp of the Bronson film starting at 12:25.
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2022, 10:35:47 PM
There is the possibility that Oswald could have been hiding at the NE corner of the 6th floor near an east facing window where  he theoretically had LOS to Norman and Jarman walking at ground level  along the Houston st.  side of TSBD. Oswald therefore upon hearing them on 5th floor below him after he placed  a box  on the SE window ledge at approx 12.24:45, knew Norman and Jarman had to have bypassed the Domino room to re-enter  TSBD.

Oswald might have been trying to look out this east facing window to see if the motorcade had yet entered Dealey plaza ,  while Oswald was waiting for BRW to leave the 6th floor.

Of course this is theoretically not probable if Oswald escaped  via staircases, because of Mrs Garner on the 4th floor.

However , an elevator escape is possible if  Oswald had an accomplice who could take Oswald via the East elevator from 6th floor to the 2nd floor landing by 50 sec post shots, thus bypassing Garner who had no LOS from her position by a west window near the staircase. The accomplice then returned the east elevator to the 5th floor by 70 secs post shots where it appeared stationary when Truly and Baker supposedly arrived at that time to the.rear elevator shaft. The West elevator was then taken down by either the accomplice or Jack Dougherty after Truly and Baker  began their ascent up the staircases.

However,  for the elevator escape scenario to be possible requires that BRW must leave the SE window by 12:23:30 which in turn requires Norman and Jarman to leave from the front side of TSBD EXACTLY at 1:22 so that they get to 5th floor windows  BEFORE BRW joined them.

If Walt’s timeline is the more accurate, then it’s several minutes PAST 1:22 (after the radio heard) that Norman and Jarman started their return , passing the Domino room at 12:25 and not until 12:27 approx getting to their 5th floor windows.

If Walt’s timeline ,  then not only is it impossible for Oswald to place the box on the window ledge by 12:25., it’s impossible  for ANY gunman to have done  so unless BRW was the one who placed the box, which makes no sense unless BRW is helping the shooter.

The only way imo to resolve this dilemma would be to refute the supposedly confirmed time stamp of the Bronson film starting at 12:25.

There is the possibility that Oswald could have been hiding at the NE corner of the 6th floor near an east facing window where  he theoretically had LOS to Norman and Jarman walking at ground level  along the Houston st.  side of TSBD.

Do you believe that Lee could have seen through the steel fire escape?
Title: Re: A Rock Solid Alibi.....
Post by: Zeon Mason on September 27, 2022, 06:38:10 PM
Walt. I’m just exhausting all the possibilities of the idea that Oswald looked out ANY window on the 6th floor and saw Jarman and Norman.

I ( and you 2  I think) have already refuted the suggestion by an LN that Oswald looked out the SE corner window and randomly just noticed Norman and Jarman below. It’s a very low probability because Oswald would theoretically have been hiding himself by sitting on that box so his torso is just left of the window (and the pipes)

The only other possibilitiie left was Oswajd at the NE corner of the 6th floor where.he would have had to be hiding waiting for Bonnie Ray Williams to leave the SE window. This about the only way probable that there’s enough time to placed a box on the ledge by 12:25 , just about 1 minute after BRW would have left the window.

In answers to your ? about the score escaoe, imo at the the NE corner window the fire escape is near the ground level so I think there is an LOS that is possible to some persons going around the NE corner of the T:SBD.

However, there are no photos of that NE side of the TSBD building (as far as I know)  that show any person at the NE window and No witness statement from any persons from Daltex building seeing anyone in the window either.

It’s of course a moot issue among us CTs as the timeline of 75-90 secs for Oswahd getting to the 2nd floor lunchroom just does not work because of the additional time required for Bob Jackson and Malcolm Couch having to spot the rifle, and then seeing the rifle slowly withdrawn form the window.

And unless there is some evidence found that proves Oswald wore a pair of gloves while firing the MC rifle then that limits the max probable floor crossing speed of Oswald to “double time”” (8ft/sec) to have any reasonable probability he could  have wiped wipe off all prints from the rifle while running with the rifle.