JFK Assassination Forum

General Discussion & Debate => General 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......