JFK Assassination Forum

General Discussion & Debate => General Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Dan O'meara on September 21, 2022, 04:44:07 PM

Title: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 21, 2022, 04:44:07 PM
On the day of the assassination, after breaking for lunch around 11:50am, Bonnie Ray Williams made his way back to the 6th floor to watch the motorcade. He'd collected his lunch from the Domino Room, which consisted of a chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and a bag of Fritos in a small, paper lunch bag, and he'd bought a bottle of Dr. Pepper from a first floor dispenser.
According to his WC testimony, BRW had his lunch while sat on a small trolley, a couple of aisles away from the Sniper's Nest, approximately 30ft from the window from which the assassin fired:
I ate my lunch--I am not sure about this, but the third or the fourth set of windows...
...I remember sitting on this two-wheeler. By that time, I was through, and I got up and I just left then.


The remains of his lunch - the bag [containing chicken left-overs and a piece of Fritos] and the empty soda bottle - were photographed by the DPD Crime Lab as part of their investigation of the crime scene. BRW is shown the photo, CE484, and asked if it was the place he was sitting when he had his lunch to which he replies:

Yes, sir; that is the exact place I was sitting.

(https://i.postimg.cc/hGpFNgKF/CE484.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Bonnie Ray is then given a diagram of the 6th floor [CE483] and asked to mark on it where he had his lunch. He draws a rough rectangle to indicate the general area, around the third and fourth windows.
I have added a Green X to indicate the more specific area the "two wheeler" trolley was located, the one he sat on while having his lunch. I have also added a Red X to indicate the location of the Sniper's Perch, the boxes used to rest the rifle on during the shooting. Why I have done this will become clear shortly, for now it is enough to notice that the distance between the two X's is approximately 25ft.

(https://i.postimg.cc/T3X1RsPP/CE483X.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/RNX4dXKr)

So far so good - Bonnie Ray has testified he was sat on a two wheeler trolley in front of the third set of windows from the east while he was having his lunch and the DPD crime lab photographed his lunch remains in that exact area. Bonnie Ray confirmed that these photos were of the exact location he was sat while he was having his lunch.
So what's the problem? Why should there be any issue over such an innocuous detail?

The problems start with the first officer to discover the location from which the assassin took his shots. In his report, from the day after the assassination, Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney writes:

I then went on back to the 6th floor and went direct to the far corner and then discovered a cubby hole which had been constructed out of cartons which protected it from sight and found where someone had been in an area of perhaps 2 feet surrounded by cardboard cartons of books. Inside this cubby hole affair was three more boxes so arranged as to provide what appeared to be a rest for a rifle. On one of these cartons was a half-eaten piece of chicken. The minute that I saw the expended shells on the floor, I hung my head out of the half opened window and signaled to Sheriff Bill Decker and Captain Will Fritz who were outside the building and advised them to send up the Crime Lab Officers at once that I had located the area from which the shots had been fired. At this time, Officers Webster, Victory, and McCurley came over to this spot and we guarded this spot until Crime Lab Officers got upstairs within a matter of a few minutes. We then turned this area over to Captain Fritz and his officers for processing

There are a number of points to be made about this section of the report:
1) Mooney describes a "cubby hole" "constructed out of cartons". The point of this specific construction was to protect this position from sight. This construction of cardboard cartons created an "area of perhaps 2 feet".
2) On one the cartons that formed the construction of this cubby hole "was a half-eaten piece of chicken".
3) On the floor of the cubby hole were "expended shells".
4) Whilst in the cubby hole Mooney signals for the Crime Lab
5) Other officers come to his location and they "guarded this spot until Crime Lab Officers".

Mooney is describing a specific structure, constructed out of cartons full of books, and on top of one these cartons was a half-eaten piece of chicken. In his WC testimony Mooney gives more detail about the moment he discovered the "cubby hole" [Sniper's Nest]:

"I went straight across to the southeast corner of the building, and I saw all these high boxes. Of course they were stacked all the way around over there. And I squeezed between two. And the minute I squeezed between these two stacks of boxes, I had to turn myself sideways to get in there that is when I saw the expended shells and the boxes that were stacked up looked to be a rest for the weapon. And, also, there was a slight crease in the top box. Whether the recoil made the crease or it was placed there before the shots were fired, I don't know. But, anyway, there was a very slight crease in the box, where the rifle could have lain--at the same angle that the shots were fired from."

The high boxes he squeezed through are the boxes that form the Sniper's Nest. It is notable he has to squeeze his way into it. Once inside he sees the expended shells and the boxes used as " a rest for the weapon" [Sniper's Perch].
The next part of his testimony is spent describing what he saw and did while he was in the SN. At one point Ball asks him - "Now, was there anything you saw over in the corner?", to which Mooney replies:

Mr. Mooney: No, sir; I didn't see anything over in the corner. I did see this one partially eaten piece of fried chicken laying over to the right. It looked like he was facing--
Mr. Ball: Tell us where you found it?
Mr. Mooney: It would be laying over on the top of these other boxes.


Ball cuts him off at this point - "We will get to that in a moment." The testimony moves on to the empty shells that were in the SN, Mooney's revelation that he watched Fritz pick up the shells and his confusion over the crime lab pictures of the shells and how they seemed to be in a different position than he remembered. It then moves on to the Sniper's Perch, the three boxes stacked up that appeared to be used as a rifle rest with the top box having a crease on the top of it.
Eventually, Ball asks about the lunch remains:

Mr. Mooney: If I recall correctly, the chicken bone could have been laying on this box or it might have been laying on this box right here.
Mr. Ball: Make a couple of marks there to indicate where possibly the chicken bone was lying.
Mr. Mooney: Yes, sir.
Mr. Ball: Make two "X's". You think there was a chicken bone on the top of either one of those two?
Mr. Mooney: There was one of them partially eaten. And there was a little small paper poke.
Mr. Ball: By poke, you mean a paper sack?
Mr. Mooney: Right.
Mr. Ball: Where was that?
Mr. Mooney: Saw the chicken bone was laying here. The poke was laying about a foot away from it.
Mr. Ball: On the same carton?
Mr. Mooney: Yes, sir. In close relation to each other. But as to what was in the sack--it was kind of together, and I didn't open it. I didn't put my hands on it to open it. I only saw one piece of chicken.


During this phase of his testimony Mooney is describing the things he saw when he was in the SN and, once again he notes the partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the boxes used to construct the 'walls' of the SN. He also notes a small, paper lunch sack on the same box. He then gives a very precise idea of how far away from the Sniper's Perch these lunch remains were:

Senator Cooper: How far was the chicken, the piece of chicken you saw, and the paper bag from the boxes near the window, and particularly the box that had the crease in it?
Mr. Mooney: I would say they might have been 5 feet or something like that. He wouldn't have had to leave the location. He could just maybe take one step and lay it over there, if he was the one that put it there.
Senator Cooper: You mean if someone had been standing near the box with the crease in it?
Mr. Mooney: Yes, sir.


Mooney could hardly be any more specific - the lunch remains were about 5ft from the box with the crease on top of it.
He is describing the lunch remains on top of the boxes forming the SN and that it would have taken a single step to place them there from the Sniper's Perch.
There was only one lunch sack recovered from the 6th floor by the Crime Lab and there was no pieces of chicken, other than those already in the lunch sack. Det. Robert Studebaker is specifically asked about this point during his WC testimony:

Mr. BALL. That's the sack, is that right?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And it shows - it has some chicken bones in it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Any chicken bones in any other place?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. None outside the sack?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; they were all inside the sack, wrapped up and put right back In. It had a little piece of Fritos in the sack, too.


How can this be?
How can the first officer on the scene describe a half-eaten piece of chicken and a lunch sack on one of the boxes that formed the small "cubby hole", yet by the time the Crime Lab takes their photos of the scene the only lunch sack on the 6th floor is stuffed down the side of a two-wheeler truck about 25ft away?
Where has the half-eaten piece of chicken gone?

The answer is simple - at some point, before the Crime Lab take their pictures, the half-eaten piece of chicken has been placed in the lunch sack which has then been moved 25ft away and stuffed down the side of the two wheeler truck.
What other credible explanation could there be?
However, this would mean Bonnie Ray lied about having his lunch on the two wheeler truck. Why would he do such a thing?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 21, 2022, 05:06:07 PM
On the day of the assassination, after breaking for lunch around 11:50am, Bonnie Ray Williams made his way back to the 6th floor to watch the motorcade. He'd collected his lunch from the Domino Room, which consisted of a chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and a bag of Fritos in a small, paper lunch bag, and he'd bought a bottle of Dr. Pepper from a first floor dispenser.
According to his WC testimony, BRW had his lunch while sat on a small trolley, a couple of aisles away from the Sniper's Nest, approximately 30ft from the window from which the assassin fired:
I ate my lunch--I am not sure about this, but the third or the fourth set of windows...
...I remember sitting on this two-wheeler. By that time, I was through, and I got up and I just left then.


The remains of his lunch - the bag [containing chicken left-overs and a piece of Fritos] and the empty soda bottle - were photographed by the DPD Crime Lab as part of their investigation of the crime scene. BRW is shown the photo, CE484, and asked if it was the place he was sitting when he had his lunch to which he replies:

Yes, sir; that is the exact place I was sitting.

(https://i.postimg.cc/hGpFNgKF/CE484.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Bonnie Ray is then given a diagram of the 6th floor [CE483] and asked to mark on it where he had his lunch. He draws a rough rectangle to indicate the general area, around the third and fourth windows.
I have added a Green X to indicate the more specific area the "two wheeler" trolley was located, the one he sat on while having his lunch. I have also added a Red X to indicate the location of the Sniper's Perch, the boxes used to rest the rifle on during the shooting. Why I have done this will become clear shortly, for now it is enough to notice that the distance between the two X's is approximately 25ft.

(https://i.postimg.cc/T3X1RsPP/CE483X.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/RNX4dXKr)

So far so good - Bonnie Ray has testified he was sat on a two wheeler trolley in front of the third set of windows from the east while he was having his lunch and the DPD crime lab photographed his lunch remains in that exact area. Bonnie Ray confirmed that these photos were of the exact location he was sat while he was having his lunch.
So what's the problem? Why should there be any issue over such an innocuous detail?

The problems start with the first officer to discover the location from which the assassin took his shots. In his report, from the day after the assassination, Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney writes:

I then went on back to the 6th floor and went direct to the far corner and then discovered a cubby hole which had been constructed out of cartons which protected it from sight and found where someone had been in an area of perhaps 2 feet surrounded by cardboard cartons of books. Inside this cubby hole affair was three more boxes so arranged as to provide what appeared to be a rest for a rifle. On one of these cartons was a half-eaten piece of chicken. The minute that I saw the expended shells on the floor, I hung my head out of the half opened window and signaled to Sheriff Bill Decker and Captain Will Fritz who were outside the building and advised them to send up the Crime Lab Officers at once that I had located the area from which the shots had been fired. At this time, Officers Webster, Victory, and McCurley came over to this spot and we guarded this spot until Crime Lab Officers got upstairs within a matter of a few minutes. We then turned this area over to Captain Fritz and his officers for processing

There are a number of points to be made about this section of the report:
1) Mooney describes a "cubby hole" "constructed out of cartons". The point of this specific construction was to protect this position from sight. This construction of cardboard cartons created an "area of perhaps 2 feet".
2) On one the cartons that formed the construction of this cubby hole "was a half-eaten piece of chicken".
3) On the floor of the cubby hole were "expended shells".
4) Whilst in the cubby hole Mooney signals for the Crime Lab
5) Other officers come to his location and they "guarded this spot until Crime Lab Officers".

Mooney is describing a specific structure, constructed out of cartons full of books, and on top of one these cartons was a half-eaten piece of chicken. In his WC testimony Mooney gives more detail about the moment he discovered the "cubby hole" [Sniper's Nest]:

"I went straight across to the southeast corner of the building, and I saw all these high boxes. Of course they were stacked all the way around over there. And I squeezed between two. And the minute I squeezed between these two stacks of boxes, I had to turn myself sideways to get in there that is when I saw the expended shells and the boxes that were stacked up looked to be a rest for the weapon. And, also, there was a slight crease in the top box. Whether the recoil made the crease or it was placed there before the shots were fired, I don't know. But, anyway, there was a very slight crease in the box, where the rifle could have lain--at the same angle that the shots were fired from."

The high boxes he squeezed through are the boxes that form the Sniper's Nest. It is notable he has to squeeze his way into it. Once inside he sees the expended shells and the boxes used as " a rest for the weapon" [Sniper's Perch].
The next part of his testimony is spent describing what he saw and did while he was in the SN. At one point Ball asks him - "Now, was there anything you saw over in the corner?", to which Mooney replies:

Mr. Mooney: No, sir; I didn't see anything over in the corner. I did see this one partially eaten piece of fried chicken laying over to the right. It looked like he was facing--
Mr. Ball: Tell us where you found it?
Mr. Mooney: It would be laying over on the top of these other boxes.


Ball cuts him off at this point - "We will get to that in a moment." The testimony moves on to the empty shells that were in the SN, Mooney's revelation that he watched Fritz pick up the shells and his confusion over the crime lab pictures of the shells and how they seemed to be in a different position than he remembered. It then moves on to the Sniper's Perch, the three boxes stacked up that appeared to be used as a rifle rest with the top box having a crease on the top of it.
Eventually, Ball asks about the lunch remains:

Mr. Mooney: If I recall correctly, the chicken bone could have been laying on this box or it might have been laying on this box right here.
Mr. Ball: Make a couple of marks there to indicate where possibly the chicken bone was lying.
Mr. Mooney: Yes, sir.
Mr. Ball: Make two "X's". You think there was a chicken bone on the top of either one of those two?
Mr. Mooney: There was one of them partially eaten. And there was a little small paper poke.
Mr. Ball: By poke, you mean a paper sack?
Mr. Mooney: Right.
Mr. Ball: Where was that?
Mr. Mooney: Saw the chicken bone was laying here. The poke was laying about a foot away from it.
Mr. Ball: On the same carton?
Mr. Mooney: Yes, sir. In close relation to each other. But as to what was in the sack--it was kind of together, and I didn't open it. I didn't put my hands on it to open it. I only saw one piece of chicken.


During this phase of his testimony Mooney is describing the things he saw when he was in the SN and, once again he notes the partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the boxes used to construct the 'walls' of the SN. He also notes a small, paper lunch sack on the same box. He then gives a very precise idea of how far away from the Sniper's Perch these lunch remains were:

Senator Cooper: How far was the chicken, the piece of chicken you saw, and the paper bag from the boxes near the window, and particularly the box that had the crease in it?
Mr. Mooney: I would say they might have been 5 feet or something like that. He wouldn't have had to leave the location. He could just maybe take one step and lay it over there, if he was the one that put it there.
Senator Cooper: You mean if someone had been standing near the box with the crease in it?
Mr. Mooney: Yes, sir.


Mooney could hardly be any more specific - the lunch remains were about 5ft from the box with the crease on top of it.
He is describing the lunch remains on top of the boxes forming the SN and that it would have taken a single step to place them there from the Sniper's Perch.
There was only one lunch sack recovered from the 6th floor by the Crime Lab and there was no pieces of chicken, other than those already in the lunch sack. Det. Robert Studebaker is specifically asked about this point during his WC testimony:

Mr. BALL. That's the sack, is that right?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And it shows - it has some chicken bones in it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Any chicken bones in any other place?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. None outside the sack?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; they were all inside the sack, wrapped up and put right back In. It had a little piece of Fritos in the sack, too.


How can this be?
How can the first officer on the scene describe a half-eaten piece of chicken and a lunch sack on one of the boxes that formed the small "cubby hole", yet by the time the Crime Lab takes their photos of the scene the only lunch sack on the 6th floor is stuffed down the side of a two-wheeler truck about 25ft away?
Where has the half-eaten piece of chicken gone?

The answer is simple - at some point, before the Crime Lab take their pictures, the half-eaten piece of chicken has been placed in the lunch sack which has then been moved 25ft away and stuffed down the side of the two wheeler truck.
What other credible explanation could there be?
However, this would mean Bonnie Ray lied about having his lunch on the two wheeler truck. Why would he do such a thing?

 Bonnie Ray lied about having his lunch on the two wheeler truck. Why would he do such a thing?

Because he was a scared black kid who had witnessed the murder of Lee Oswald..... He knew that Lee hadn't been on the sixth floor and therefore was not an assassin.   But he was frightened and smart enough to say what he was told to say.

Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 22, 2022, 12:00:28 AM
It would be one thing if Mooney were the only officer to have noticed the lunch remains on the boxes that formed the SN, but he wasn't.
This is from the WC testimony of Jerry Hill. At this phase of his testimony he is describing what happened when he reached the 6th floor:

We hadn't been there but a minute until someone yelled, "Here it is," or words to that effect.
I moved over and found they had found an area where the boxes had been stacked in sort of a triangle shape with three sides over near the window.
Two small boxes with Roller books on the side of the carton were stacked near the east side of the window.


Hill clarifies that he is talking about the south-east corner of the floor. He then goes into more detail about the boxes "stacked in sort of a triangle shape":

There was the boxes. The boxes were stacked in sort of a three-sided shield.
That would have concealed from general view, unless somebody specifically walked up and looked over them, anyone who was in a sitting or crouched position between them and the window. In front of this window and to the left or east corner of the window, there were two boxes, cardboard boxes that had the words "Roller books," on them.
On top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment. there was a chicken leg bone and a paper sack which appeared to have been about the size normally used for a lunch sack.


Hill is clearly describing Mooney's "cubby hole". A shield constructed of boxes designed to conceal the sniper's position from general view. On top of one of the stacks of boxes used to construct the SN, Hill describes a piece of chicken and a lunch sack - exactly as Mooney described.
The following two officers describe seeing a piece of chicken on a box in the south-east corner of the 6th floor, where Mooney was situated when he called out:

Deputy Sheriff A D McCurley

"We were searching the 6th floor when Deputy Sheriff Mooney...hollered that he had found the place where the assassin had fired from. I went over and saw three expended shells laying by the window that faced onto Elm Street, along with a half-eaten piece of chicken that was laying on a cardboard carton. It appeared as if the assassin had piled up a bunch of boxes to hid him from anyone who happened to come up on that floor..."

Deputy Sheriff Harry Weatherford

"I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "Here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw three expended rifle shells, a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barricade..."


There is little doubt that the lunch remains left by Bonnie Ray Williams were discovered on top of a stack of boxes that formed part of the SN and not about 25ft away, in a lunch bag on the floor, where they were photographed by Studebaker.
All the officers quoted above arrived on the scene before the Crime Lab. When Studebaker arrived to take the photos I imagine he had no idea the lunch remains had been moved to the area he photographed them - stuffed down the side of the two wheeler trolley, 25ft away from the SN.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 22, 2022, 01:40:42 PM
So what is being suggested?  I'm not exactly sure why all this matters.  We know with absolute certainty that at 12:30 someone (i.e. Oswald) was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window.  So someone was there at 12:30 whether BRW saw or heard anything while having his lunch.  It seems extremely unlikely that BRW would have seen or heard anything suspicious and never mentioned it to anyone.  And would go to the window directly below if he had reason to believe something was up on the 6th floor.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2022, 02:03:59 PM
So what is being suggested?  I'm not exactly sure why all this matters.  We know with absolute certainty that at 12:30 someone (i.e. Oswald) was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window.  So someone was there at 12:30 whether BRW saw or heard anything while having his lunch.  It seems extremely unlikely that BRW would have seen or heard anything suspicious and never mentioned it to anyone.  And would go to the window directly below if he had reason to believe something was up on the 6th floor.


 We know with absolute certainty that at 12:30 someone was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window.

Who is "we".....  you and your cat ?....  And since you know we "absolute certainty"  please present  a photo as "absolute verification".   
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 22, 2022, 04:03:40 PM

 We know with absolute certainty that at 12:30 someone was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window.

Who is "we".....  you and your cat ?....  And since you know we "absolute certainty"  please present  a photo as "absolute verification".

Several witnesses described seeing the rifle pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination.  That is the reason that there are photos of the window taken moments later by Robert Jackson.  Are you suggesting all these folks were mistaken and they just decided to take a photo of the window for no apparent reason?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2022, 04:09:19 PM
Several witnesses described seeing the rifle pointing out the window at the moment of the assassination.  That is the reason that there are photos of the window taken moments later by Robert Jackson.  Are you suggesting all these folks were mistaken and they just decided to take a photo of the window for no apparent reason?

I simply asked you to PROVE that there was a rifle pointing out of the window AT THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING....

Solid irrefutable prove  ..... Not statements from spectators....
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 22, 2022, 04:29:36 PM
I simply asked you to PROVE that there was a rifle pointing out of the window AT THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING....

Solid irrefutable prove  ..... Not statements from spectators....

This is comedy gold.  I got to ask this one.  Wait for it.  What would constitute "solid irrefutable prove" if you don't accept the statements from multiple witnesses who were present or physical evidence left by Oswald (e.g. his rifle)?  Several witnesses confirmed that a rifle was pointed out the 6th floor window at the moment the shots were fired.  The folks under that window on the 5th floor confirmed that the shots came from just about their heads.  They actually heard the rifle being used.  Robert Jackson took a photo of the window moments after the assassination because he saw the rifle.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2022, 04:49:29 PM
This is comedy gold.  I got to ask this one.  Wait for it.  What would constitute "solid irrefutable prove" if you don't accept the statements from multiple witnesses who were present or physical evidence left by Oswald (e.g. his rifle)?  Several witnesses confirmed that a rifle was pointed out the 6th floor window at the moment the shots were fired.  The folks under that window on the 5th floor confirmed that the shots came from just about their heads.  They actually heard the rifle being used.  Robert Jackson took a photo of the window moments after the assassination because he saw the rifle.

I said the above is all BS.... I asked you to post a photo that shows a rifle sticking out of the window. 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 22, 2022, 05:22:05 PM
So what is being suggested?  I'm not exactly sure why all this matters.

You're not sure why it matters that Bonnie Ray Williams had his lunch sitting in the Sniper's Nest while a man with a rifle was stood at the other end of the 6th floor? You're not sure why that matters?

Quote
We know with absolute certainty that at 12:30 someone (i.e. Oswald) was pointing a rifle out the 6th floor window.  So someone was there at 12:30 whether BRW saw or heard anything while having his lunch.

We know it wasn't Oswald as four eye-witness reported that the assassin was wearing clothes Oswald wasn't wearing that day and didn't own.
We know it wasn't Oswald as he never had the distinctive bald spot Amos Euins was adamant about.
Not to mention the report of Oswald's observation of Norman and Jarman as they made their way to the west elevator after entering the rear door of the TSBD building.
But someone was definitely pointing a rifle out of the SN window and they fired the rifle from the Sniper's Nest, vacated by BRW minutes before.

Quote
It seems extremely unlikely that BRW would have seen or heard anything suspicious and never mentioned it to anyone.  And would go to the window directly below if he had reason to believe something was up on the 6th floor.

Does it seem likely that a young black man, in Dallas [the City of Hate], in the '60's, would lie to the police when questioned about the assassination of the President? Because that's exactly what he did.
And when he did admit to being on the 6th floor he continually lied about how long he was up there.
And he was still lying during his WC testimony when he said he had his lunch in the place the Crime Lab photographed his lunch remains. We know this because his lunch remains were found on top of the SN.
Williams consistently makes every effort to distance himself from the SN.
If he saw anyone on the 6th floor before coming down to the 5th floor to join Norman and Jarman, it wasn't Oswald, it was someone still very much alive at the time of his WC testimony. Otherwise there would be no need to continue lying.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 22, 2022, 06:10:07 PM
You're not sure why it matters that Bonnie Ray Williams had his lunch sitting in the Sniper's Nest while a man with a rifle was stood at the other end of the 6th floor? You're not sure why that matters?

We know it wasn't Oswald as four eye-witness reported that the assassin was wearing clothes Oswald wasn't wearing that day and didn't own.
We know it wasn't Oswald as he never had the distinctive bald spot Amos Euins was adamant about.
Not to mention the report of Oswald's observation of Norman and Jarman as they made their way to the west elevator after entering the rear door of the TSBD building.
But someone was definitely pointing a rifle out of the SN window and they fired the rifle from the Sniper's Nest, vacated by BRW minutes before.

Does it seem likely that a young black man, in Dallas [the City of Hate], in the '60's, would lie to the police when questioned about the assassination of the President? Because that's exactly what he did.
And when he did admit to being on the 6th floor he continually lied about how long he was up there.
And he was still lying during his WC testimony when he said he had his lunch in the place the Crime Lab photographed his lunch remains. We know this because his lunch remains were found on top of the SN.
Williams consistently makes every effort to distance himself from the SN.
If he saw anyone on the 6th floor before coming down to the 5th floor to join Norman and Jarman, it wasn't Oswald, it was someone still very much alive at the time of his WC testimony. Otherwise there would be no need to continue lying.

If he saw anyone on the 6th floor before coming down to the 5th floor to join Norman and Jarman, it wasn't Oswald

Yes, That's true.... But I believe that BRW did see someone on the sixth floor and that someone was a figure of authority  ( a man dressed in khaki clothes like a deputy sheriff ) who reminded him that the employees had been informed that the sixth floor was closed during lunch period and threatened to get him fired if he didn't leave immediately.....and forget that he had seen anybody on the sixth floor.

That would fit with the sighting of the man with the rifle by Rowland....And also Howard Brennan   
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 23, 2022, 12:29:18 AM
Some facts worth injecting into this discussion:

1. Mr. Bonnie Ray Williams does not match the description of the 'elderly Negro' seen by Mr. Arnold Rowland at the SN window

2. Mr. Tom Alyea said that the lunch sack was found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth floor

3. There is no compelling evidence tying the chicken lunch remains (or the Dr. Pepper bottle) to Mr. Williams

4. There is no compelling evidence that the chicken lunch remains (or the Dr. Pepper) were even consumed on 11/22

5. Mr. Rowland recalled that, at or about the time he noticed the 'elderly Negro' in the SN window and the man with the weapon at the sixth-floor southwest window, he noticed either two or three people in the pair of windows directly below the SN window: either two-black-people-and-one-white-man, or just two black people. Messrs. Norman & Jarman were still down on the street ca. 12:15, so Mr. Rowland's recollection puts two black people other than them (and possibly a white man too) on the fifth floor some 15 minutes prior to the assassination
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QQKkkp4/Bronson-fifth-floor.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 23, 2022, 12:33:39 AM
But I believe that BRW did see someone on the sixth floor and that someone was a figure of authority  ( a man dressed in khaki clothes like a deputy sheriff ) who reminded him that the employees had been informed that the sixth floor was closed during lunch period and threatened to get him fired if he didn't leave immediately.....and forget that he had seen anybody on the sixth floor.

Yep, something like this. No way would it have been left to blind chance that the sixth floor would be clear of employees at the time of the motorcade

Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 23, 2022, 08:03:26 AM
Robert Jackson took a photo of the window moments after the assassination because he saw the rifle.

Speaking of comedy gold…

Let’s see this Bob Jackson photo. Do you ever get tired of embarrassing yourself?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 23, 2022, 11:18:01 AM
Some facts worth injecting into this discussion:

1. Mr. Bonnie Ray Williams does not match the description of the 'elderly Negro' seen by Mr. Arnold Rowland at the SN window

2. Mr. Tom Alyea said that the lunch sack was found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth floor

3. There is no compelling evidence tying the chicken lunch remains (or the Dr. Pepper bottle) to Mr. Williams

4. There is no compelling evidence that the chicken lunch remains (or the Dr. Pepper) were even consumed on 11/22

5. Mr. Rowland recalled that, at or about the time he noticed the 'elderly Negro' in the SN window and the man with the weapon at the sixth-floor southwest window, he noticed either two or three people in the pair of windows directly below the SN window: either two-black-people-and-one-white-man, or just two black people. Messrs. Norman & Jarman were still down on the street ca. 12:15, so Mr. Rowland's recollection puts two black people other than them (and possibly a white man too) on the fifth floor some 15 minutes prior to the assassination
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QQKkkp4/Bronson-fifth-floor.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:

Rowland testifies that at around 12:15pm he sees a white male holding a rifle at the far west side of the 6th floor and a black male at the far east side of the same floor. He is specific both men are on the same floor, he circles the SN windows and marks it with an "A" and even goes so far as to describe the "configuration" of the SN windows [each set of windows consists of a pair of windows and each floor has seven sets/pairs of windows]. He describes the west window as being closed and the east window as being partially opened. No other set of windows had this configuration at the time of the assassination other than the SN windows.
So there can be little doubt the black male Rowland is describing is at the SN windows.
At this same time we know Bonnie Ray Williams is having his lunch on the 6th floor. He testifies he has his lunch by the third set of windows from the east side, but, as we have seen, there is copious amounts of evidence [from at least seven of the first officers on the scene] his lunch remains were initially found on top of the stacks of boxes that formed the SN.
So we have this situation - the lunch remains of Bonnie Ray are found by the SN window [these are the only lunch remains found on the 6th floor - to suggest otherwise displays a profound ignorance of the case], Bonnie Ray is having his lunch on the 6th floor around 12:15pm and Arnold Rowland sees the man with the rifle and the man at the SN window around this time.
There are two main scenarios possible:
There is a man with a rifle by the east window, BRW is having his lunch by the third set of windows and there is an unknown black male by the SN window at the same time.
OR
There is a man with a rifle by the east window and it is BRW sat by the SN window.
The fact that BRW's lunch remains are initially discovered by the SN window suggest the latter scenario.

But there is a problem with Rowland's description of the black male at the SN window.
Rowland has the impression the man is quite elderly, certainly more elderly than Bonnie Ray. But this should hardly dissuade us from the facts established by the testimonial and physical presented above.
What factors might have led Rowland to believe the man in the SN window appeared older?
The first is that Rowland wasn't really paying close attention to the man in the SN window, he was more interested in trying to find the man with the rifle to show his wife:

Mr. Specter: Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. Rowland: It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.


The second factor is related to Rowland's distance from the TSBD and how this may have affected his judgement of the man's age. Rowland makes this comment when trying to estmate the age of the man with the rifle:

Mr. Specter: Were you able to form any opinion as to the age of that man?
Mr. Rowland: This is again just my estimation. He was--I think I remember telling my wife that he appeared in his early thirties. This could be obscured because of the distance, I mean.


There is also the appearance of BRW that may have led to the over-estimation of his age.

(https://i.postimg.cc/D0N30rkT/bonnieraywilliams.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Bonnie Ray has a very high forehead and a slightly receding hairline. He has very short, black hair which would've disappeared in front of a black background and when viewed from a position below he would have appeared balding. I believe this greatly contributed to Rowland's over-estimation of his age. The notion of someone balding is naturally associated with an older person. In the pic below it is easy to see how Rowland would have mistaken BRW for a balding, older man:

(https://i.postimg.cc/0QY23HwB/Screenshot-267.png) (https://postimages.org/)

There is one last factor that may have influenced Rowland's opinion of the age of the man in the SN window. Rowland makes the following comment about the man:

Mr. Specter: Can you give us a more definite description as to complexion?
Mr. Rowland: Very dark or fairly dark, not real dark compared to some Negroes, but fairly dark. Seemed like his face was either--I can't recall detail but it was either very wrinkled or marked in some way.


What is this feature of the man's face that Rowland is trying to remember?
I believe Rowland is referring to the fact BRW has a mustache. Although not unheard of for a young man to have a mustache, I imagine it would be another contributing factor to Rowland's over-estimation of BRW's age.
Rowland wasn't really paying attention to the man in the SN window, who was quite a distance away.
BRW has features that would certainly make him appear older from a distance, particularly to someone just getting a quick impression of him.
In no way should Rowland's explicable over-estimation of BRW's age detract from the evidence we have that BRW was having his lunch on the 6th floor at that time and that his lunch remains were initially discovered by the SN window.

LATER EDIT: It must also be noted that Rowland described features that accurately describe BRW.
Rowland describes the man as being very slender and that he was lighter skinned that other black men, two features clearly true of BRW.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 23, 2022, 01:44:12 PM
I said the above is all BS.... I asked you to post a photo that shows a rifle sticking out of the window.

LOL.  So you require a time machine.  There is no photo of John Wilkes Booth point the gun at Lincoln.  I guess he is innocent along with every criminal who has commited a crime without being photographed in the act.  You should be embarrassed to post this nonsense.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 23, 2022, 01:54:16 PM
You're not sure why it matters that Bonnie Ray Williams had his lunch sitting in the Sniper's Nest while a man with a rifle was stood at the other end of the 6th floor? You're not sure why that matters?

We know it wasn't Oswald as four eye-witness reported that the assassin was wearing clothes Oswald wasn't wearing that day and didn't own.
We know it wasn't Oswald as he never had the distinctive bald spot Amos Euins was adamant about.
Not to mention the report of Oswald's observation of Norman and Jarman as they made their way to the west elevator after entering the rear door of the TSBD building.
But someone was definitely pointing a rifle out of the SN window and they fired the rifle from the Sniper's Nest, vacated by BRW minutes before.

Does it seem likely that a young black man, in Dallas [the City of Hate], in the '60's, would lie to the police when questioned about the assassination of the President? Because that's exactly what he did.
And when he did admit to being on the 6th floor he continually lied about how long he was up there.
And he was still lying during his WC testimony when he said he had his lunch in the place the Crime Lab photographed his lunch remains. We know this because his lunch remains were found on top of the SN.
Williams consistently makes every effort to distance himself from the SN.
If he saw anyone on the 6th floor before coming down to the 5th floor to join Norman and Jarman, it wasn't Oswald, it was someone still very much alive at the time of his WC testimony. Otherwise there would be no need to continue lying.

You think BRW ate his lunch in the SN?  BRW himself confirmed this was not the case.  Why would he climb through the boxes to eat his lunch in that confined space when there was ample space elsewhere?  You are simply taking imprecise and subjective witness descriptions of a floor cluttered with boxes and grafting onto them your desired narrative.  And you really think your fantasy assassin/conspirators would allow BRW to leave the floor after seeing them just before the assassination?  Possibly raising the alarm or later implicating them.  And BRW goes down to the window directly below where all this is going on and doesn't say a word to his pals about what has just happened.  Then the fantasy conspirators trust him to remain forever silent.  That is tin foil hat territory.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 23, 2022, 01:58:43 PM
LOL.  So you require a time machine.  There is no photo of John Wilkes Booth point the gun at Lincoln.  I guess he is innocent along with every criminal who has commited a crime without being photographed in the act.  You should be embarrassed to post this nonsense.

So you require a time machine.

No, Walt simply asked you to produce a photo to support your pathetic claim and once again you have failed.
The one who should be embarrassed is the one who is making claims that he can not back up with evidence .... and that would be you!
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 23, 2022, 02:22:32 PM
So you require a time machine.

No, Walt simply asked you to produce a photo to support your pathetic claim and once again you have failed.
The one who should be embarrassed is the one who is making claims that he can not back up with evidence .... and that would be you!

No, he didn't.  As usual, you don't understand.  Walt suggests that a photo of the event is the only way to prove that a rifle was pointed out the window.  Can you understand the difference?  He rejected the testimony of multiple witnesses who saw the rifle and the discovery of the rifle itself with fired bullet casings by that window.  Do you have a photo of John Wilkes Booth pointing a gun at Lincoln?  Does the lack of such a photo raise doubt as to his guilt and negate the other evidence that links him to the crime?  Does there have to be a film or photo of a criminal committing the act to prove it?  Even you can't be that idiotic. 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 23, 2022, 02:25:05 PM
Some facts worth injecting into this discussion:

1. Mr. Bonnie Ray Williams does not match the description of the 'elderly Negro' seen by Mr. Arnold Rowland at the SN window

2. Mr. Tom Alyea said that the lunch sack was found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth floor

3. There is no compelling evidence tying the chicken lunch remains (or the Dr. Pepper bottle) to Mr. Williams

4. There is no compelling evidence that the chicken lunch remains (or the Dr. Pepper) were even consumed on 11/22

5. Mr. Rowland recalled that, at or about the time he noticed the 'elderly Negro' in the SN window and the man with the weapon at the sixth-floor southwest window, he noticed either two or three people in the pair of windows directly below the SN window: either two-black-people-and-one-white-man, or just two black people. Messrs. Norman & Jarman were still down on the street ca. 12:15, so Mr. Rowland's recollection puts two black people other than them (and possibly a white man too) on the fifth floor some 15 minutes prior to the assassination
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QQKkkp4/Bronson-fifth-floor.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

 Thumb1:

2. Mr. Tom Alyea said that the lunch sack was found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth floor

This doesn't make sense.... 

A)   The search was concentrated on the 6th floor so why was Alyea on the 5th floor ?  He was with the searchteam looking for news to report....  And why in the world would the searchers carry chicken bones from the 5th to the 6th?   The vast majority of those who noticed the chicken bones, noticed them because those bones were in the place where the shells were found and thus it appeared  as though the assassin had callously  sat there eating chicken, while awaiting the parade.   As a matter f fact the reporters made a big deal out of the assassin calmly sitting there eating while waiting to murder the President.  And Curry told reporters how officer Baker had encountered Leeeee Harrrrrrrvey OSSSSSSwald ( HISSSS ) calmly drinking a coke just minutes after he had murdered the President.   It was all BS but it got peoples attention, and started the hate Oswald movement that has never abated.... 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 23, 2022, 02:25:32 PM
LATER EDIT: It must also be noted that Rowland described features that accurately describe BRW.

So.........

A man is recalled as wearing an open-necked white or off-white tshirt, and you say 'This on its own rules out Oswald'.

A man is recalled as wearing a very bright plaid shirt, and you say 'Yep, it's definitely this guy':

(https://i.postimg.cc/VL4X2nKd/Williams-shirt.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

As for your other arguments, Mr. O'Meara, no disrespect but they are just a medley of 'I choose to focus only on those of various BRW's statements that I like' and Organ-like 'No matter what the witness got wrong----all that SUN! all that DISTANCE!!----he still saw the guy I want him to have seen'.

And you have ignored Mr. Rowland's recollection of two black people in the fifth-floor pair of windows directly underneath the SN at or around the same time.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 23, 2022, 02:54:49 PM
No, he didn't.  As usual, you don't understand.  Walt suggests that a photo of the event is the only way to prove that a rifle was pointed out the window.  Can you understand the difference?

You foolishly claimed that we know this with “absolute certainty”. Can you understand the difference?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 23, 2022, 02:58:53 PM
And still no answer or even hypothesis as to why anyone would move any boxes.  The conspirators were apparently like the Three Stooges.  Moe stuck a "pipe-like" object out the window, Curly yelled "bang", and then Larry moved some boxes around before making their escape (but not down the stairs since Martin suggests that was impossible).  Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.  It's all coming together for the contrarians.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 23, 2022, 03:18:24 PM
Brennan saw the shooter in the 6th floor window.  BRW and the others on the 5th floor heard the shots just about their heads.  Multiple witness describe seeing the rifle pointing out that window at the moment shots were fired.  Fired rifle bullet casings were found by that window and a rifle was found nearby.  But we need a "photograph" to prove this!

Mr. JACKSON - Right here approximately. And as we heard the first shot, I believe it was Tom Dillard from the Dallas News who made some remark as to that sounding like a firecracker, and it could have been somebody else who said that. But someone else did speak up and make that comment and before he actually the sentence we heard the other two shots. Then we realized or we thought it was gunfire, and then we could not at that point see the President's car. We were still moving slowly, and after the third shot the second two shots seemed much closer together than the first shot, than they were to the first shot. Then after the last shot, I guess all of us were just looking all around and I just looked straight up ahead of me which would have been looking at the School Book Depository and I noticed two Negro men in a window straining to see directly above them, and my eyes followed right on up to the window above them and I saw the rifle, or what looked like a rifle approximately half of weapon,


Mr. Couch.
Jackson, who was, as I recall, on my right, yelled something like, "Look up in the window! There's the rifle!"
And I remember glancing up to a window on the far right, which at the time impressed me as the sixth or seventh floor, and seeing about a foot of a rifle being---the barrel brought into the window. I saw no one in that window---just a quick l-second glance at the barrel.


Mr. Crawford: 

As the report from the third shot sounded, I looked
up. I had previously looked around to see if there was somebody shooting fire
crackers to see if I could see a puff of smoke, and after I decided it wasn’t a
backfire from an automobile and as the third report was sounded, I looked up
and from the far east corner of the sixth floor I saw a movement in the only
window that was open on that floor. It was an indistinct movement. It was
just barely a glimpse.

Mr. BALL. Which window?
Mr. CRAWFORD. That n-ould be the far east window---
Mr. BALL. On the---
Mr. CRAWFORD. On the sixth floor of the Tesas School Book Deositorv. I
turned to Miss Mitchell and made the statement that if those were shots they
came from that window
. That was based mainly on the fact of the quick movement observed in the window right at the conclusion of the report.

Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 23, 2022, 04:05:09 PM
No, he didn't.  As usual, you don't understand.  Walt suggests that a photo of the event is the only way to prove that a rifle was pointed out the window.  Can you understand the difference?  He rejected the testimony of multiple witnesses who saw the rifle and the discovery of the rifle itself with fired bullet casings by that window.  Do you have a photo of John Wilkes Booth pointing a gun at Lincoln?  Does the lack of such a photo raise doubt as to his guilt and negate the other evidence that links him to the crime?  Does there have to be a film or photo of a criminal committing the act to prove it?  Even you can't be that idiotic. 

Walt suggests that a photo of the event is the only way to prove that a rifle was pointed out the window.

Walt responded to your comment;

Robert Jackson took a photo of the window moments after the assassination because he saw the rifle.

and asked you to produce that photo

I said the above is all BS.... I asked you to post a photo that shows a rifle sticking out of the window.

What part of "I asked you to post a photo" don't you understand?

Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 23, 2022, 04:32:03 PM
Perhaps “Richard” should ask himself why he expects anything that happens to have some “conspiratorial” explanation invented to explain it or else it didn’t happen.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 23, 2022, 07:14:42 PM
Rowland testifies that at around 12:15pm he sees a white male holding a rifle at the far west side of the 6th floor and a black male at the far east side of the same floor. He is specific both men are on the same floor, he circles the SN windows and marks it with an "A" and even goes so far as to describe the "configuration" of the SN windows [each set of windows consists of a pair of windows and each floor has seven sets/pairs of windows]. He describes the west window as being closed and the east window as being partially opened. No other set of windows had this configuration at the time of the assassination other than the SN windows.
So there can be little doubt the black male Rowland is describing is at the SN windows.
At this same time we know Bonnie Ray Williams is having his lunch on the 6th floor. He testifies he has his lunch by the third set of windows from the east side, but, as we have seen, there is copious amounts of evidence [from at least seven of the first officers on the scene] his lunch remains were initially found on top of the stacks of boxes that formed the SN.
So we have this situation - the lunch remains of Bonnie Ray are found by the SN window [these are the only lunch remains found on the 6th floor - to suggest otherwise displays a profound ignorance of the case], Bonnie Ray is having his lunch on the 6th floor around 12:15pm and Arnold Rowland sees the man with the rifle and the man at the SN window around this time.
There are two main scenarios possible:
There is a man with a rifle by the east window, BRW is having his lunch by the third set of windows and there is an unknown black male by the SN window at the same time.
OR
There is a man with a rifle by the east window and it is BRW sat by the SN window.
The fact that BRW's lunch remains are initially discovered by the SN window suggest the latter scenario.

But there is a problem with Rowland's description of the black male at the SN window.
Rowland has the impression the man is quite elderly, certainly more elderly than Bonnie Ray. But this should hardly dissuade us from the facts established by the testimonial and physical presented above.
What factors might have led Rowland to believe the man in the SN window appeared older?
The first is that Rowland wasn't really paying close attention to the man in the SN window, he was more interested in trying to find the man with the rifle to show his wife:

Mr. Specter: Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. Rowland: It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.


The second factor is related to Rowland's distance from the TSBD and how this may have affected his judgement of the man's age. Rowland makes this comment when trying to estmate the age of the man with the rifle:

Mr. Specter: Were you able to form any opinion as to the age of that man?
Mr. Rowland: This is again just my estimation. He was--I think I remember telling my wife that he appeared in his early thirties. This could be obscured because of the distance, I mean.


There is also the appearance of BRW that may have led to the over-estimation of his age.

(https://i.postimg.cc/D0N30rkT/bonnieraywilliams.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

Bonnie Ray has a very high forehead and a slightly receding hairline. He has very short, black hair which would've disappeared in front of a black background and when viewed from a position below he would have appeared balding. I believe this greatly contributed to Rowland's over-estimation of his age. The notion of someone balding is naturally associated with an older person. In the pic below it is easy to see how Rowland would have mistaken BRW for a balding, older man:

(https://i.postimg.cc/0QY23HwB/Screenshot-267.png) (https://postimages.org/)

There is one last factor that may have influenced Rowland's opinion of the age of the man in the SN window. Rowland makes the following comment about the man:

Mr. Specter: Can you give us a more definite description as to complexion?
Mr. Rowland: Very dark or fairly dark, not real dark compared to some Negroes, but fairly dark. Seemed like his face was either--I can't recall detail but it was either very wrinkled or marked in some way.


What is this feature of the man's face that Rowland is trying to remember?
I believe Rowland is referring to the fact BRW has a mustache. Although not unheard of for a young man to have a mustache, I imagine it would be another contributing factor to Rowland's over-estimation of BRW's age.
Rowland wasn't really paying attention to the man in the SN window, who was quite a distance away.
BRW has features that would certainly make him appear older from a distance, particularly to someone just getting a quick impression of him.
In no way should Rowland's explicable over-estimation of BRW's age detract from the evidence we have that BRW was having his lunch on the 6th floor at that time and that his lunch remains were initially discovered by the SN window.

LATER EDIT: It must also be noted that Rowland described features that accurately describe BRW.
Rowland describes the man as being very slender and that he was lighter skinned that other black men, two features clearly true of BRW.

(https://i.postimg.cc/0QY23HwB/Screenshot-267.png) (https://postimages.org/)


Notice the horizontal shadow being cast by the bottom sash of the window above BRW's head...... There is a narrow strip of the window that is not in shadow.......Compare this strip in the Dillard  and Powell photos.....  In which photo was the sun higher in the sky?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 24, 2022, 02:24:49 PM
Walt suggests that a photo of the event is the only way to prove that a rifle was pointed out the window.

Walt responded to your comment;

and asked you to produce that photo

What part of "I asked you to post a photo" don't you understand?

What point are you trying to make?  That a photograph is necessary to prove that there was a shooter in the window?  That is absurd.   We all know that there are no photos of the rifle pointing out the window.  To ask for such a photo knowing it does not exist while ignoring the actual evidence of a shooter is absurd.   Walt suggested that was the ONLY way to prove this happened while rejecting multiple witnesses who placed a shooter in the window and the evidence such as fired bullet casings found by that window.   It is laughable to suggest that they only way to prove that there was a shooter in that window is to have a photograph of the event.  That is the old time machine claim.  Most criminals are not photographed in the act.  They are nevertheless convicted on the evidence.  Multiple witnesses (as I cited) saw the shooter or rifle in the window at the moment of the assassination.  Jackson saw the rifle and took a picture of the window because he had seen the rifle from that window.  There is zero doubt of the presence of someone in that window at the moment of the assassination.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 24, 2022, 02:34:41 PM
What point are you trying to make?  That a photograph is necessary to prove that there was a shooter in the window?  That is absurd.   We all know that there are no photos of the rifle pointing out the window.  To ask for such a photo knowing it does not exist while ignoring the actual evidence of a shooter is absurd.   Walt suggested that was the ONLY way to prove this happened while rejecting multiple witnesses who placed a shooter in the window and the evidence such as fired bullet casings found by that window.   It is laughable to suggest that they only way to prove that there was a shooter in that window is to have a photograph of the event.  That is the old time machine claim.  Most criminals are not photographed in the act.  They are nevertheless convicted on the evidence.  Multiple witnesses (as I cited) saw the shooter or rifle in the window at the moment of the assassination.  Jackson saw the rifle and took a picture of the window because he had seen the rifle from that window.  There is zero doubt of the presence of someone in that window at the moment of the assassination.

Psssst...Mr" Smith".... Even the The Dallas Chief of police , no less, told you that they ( The investigators) had never been able to place Lee Oswald behind that window with the rifle in his hands.....

Do you understand that?...Mr "Smith"
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 24, 2022, 10:59:25 PM
Psssst...Mr" Smith".... Even the The Dallas Chief of police , no less, told you that they ( The investigators) had never been able to place Lee Oswald behind that window with the rifle in his hands.....

The actual quote is:

"No one has ever been able to put him in the Texas School Book Depository with a rifle in his hand."

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 24, 2022, 11:39:23 PM
The actual quote is:

"No one has ever been able to put him in the Texas School Book Depository with a rifle in his hand."

 Thumb1:

Thanks Alan....  I know that Curry basically said that they couldn't PROVE that Lee Oswald was an assassin.

And of course that would mean that Lee probably would have never been convicted in a fair trial....
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 25, 2022, 05:42:57 AM
Jackson saw the rifle and took a picture of the window because he had seen the rifle from that window. 

Still waiting for “Richard” to produce this elusive Jackson photo, because this would be news to Jackson as well.

And “Richard” wonders why nobody takes him seriously…

Quote
There is zero doubt of the presence of someone in that window at the moment of the assassination.

There is nothing about anything that has “zero doubt” — even if there was a photo of it.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on September 25, 2022, 01:56:14 PM
LOL.  Classic contrarian logic.  Jackson directed Dillard to the window from which he saw the rifle and Dillard took the photo.  Jackson saw the rifle and directed Dillard to the window to take the photograph.  Got it.  But contrarians are obsessed on whether it was technically Jackson's photo.  HA HA HA.  The point being that Jackson saw the rifle as corroborated by the photo.  Why else would Jackson direct attention to that particular window in the moments after the assassination?  Unreal how the contrarians deflect from the obvious point to minutia.  Now where is the long-awaited explanation for why anyone would move the boxes in the moments after the assassination while law enforcement was closing in on the building?  Waiting, waiting. 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2022, 05:12:19 PM
LOL.  Classic contrarian logic.  Jackson directed Dillard to the window from which he saw the rifle and Dillard took the photo.  Jackson saw the rifle and directed Dillard to the window to take the photograph.  Got it.  But contrarians are obsessed on whether it was technically Jackson's photo.  HA HA HA.  The point being that Jackson saw the rifle as corroborated by the photo.  Why else would Jackson direct attention to that particular window in the moments after the assassination?  Unreal how the contrarians deflect from the obvious point to minutia.  Now where is the long-awaited explanation for why anyone would move the boxes in the moments after the assassination while law enforcement was closing in on the building?  Waiting, waiting.

 Now where is the long-awaited explanation for why anyone would move the boxes in the moments after the assassination while law enforcement was closing in on the building?  Waiting, waiting.

You'll have to wait forever.....  because you're not smart enough to OPEN your eyes and SEE.....   The window sill box was moved between the Powell and Dillard photos..... But you've got the chronology backwards....  Powell too his photo BEFORE Tom Dillard took his photo...

Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Martin Weidmann on September 25, 2022, 05:20:20 PM
LOL.  Classic contrarian logic.  Jackson directed Dillard to the window from which he saw the rifle and Dillard took the photo.  Jackson saw the rifle and directed Dillard to the window to take the photograph.  Got it.  But contrarians are obsessed on whether it was technically Jackson's photo.  HA HA HA.  The point being that Jackson saw the rifle as corroborated by the photo.  Why else would Jackson direct attention to that particular window in the moments after the assassination?  Unreal how the contrarians deflect from the obvious point to minutia.  Now where is the long-awaited explanation for why anyone would move the boxes in the moments after the assassination while law enforcement was closing in on the building?  Waiting, waiting.

Jackson directed Dillard to the window from which he saw the rifle and Dillard took the photo.

So this claim;


Robert Jackson took a photo of the window moments after the assassination because he saw the rifle.


was an outright lie, pure and simple.... Got it!

The point being that Jackson saw the rifle as corroborated by the photo.

No. There is no corroboration at all. Dillard took a photo which does not show a rifle sticking out of the window.
Also, there is no confirmation that Dillard took the photo at Jackson's direction. You are making stuff up again.

Unreal how the contrarians deflect from the obvious point to minutia.

When dealing with a proven habitual liar who doesn't give a damn about actual facts and evidence, like you, details and truth matter.

Your "obvious point" is more often than not just an assumption.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 25, 2022, 08:05:11 PM
Dilliard:

"Bob Jackson said, "There's a rifle barrel up there." I said, "Where?" I had my camera ready. He said, "It's in that open window."

Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 25, 2022, 10:12:55 PM
LOL.  Classic contrarian logic.  Jackson directed Dillard to the window from which he saw the rifle and Dillard took the photo.  Jackson saw the rifle and directed Dillard to the window to take the photograph.  Got it.  But contrarians are obsessed on whether it was technically Jackson's photo. 

“Technically”? You claimed (twice) that Jackson saw a rifle and took a photo of the building. Now that your ignorance is on full display once again, you make this lame attempt to cover your tracks? You should be embarrassed.  “Minutia”, LOL.

Quote
The point being that Jackson saw the rifle as corroborated by the photo. 

The Dillard photo doesn’t show any rifle. It doesn’t “corroborate” squat.

Quote
Now where is the long-awaited explanation for why anyone would move the boxes in the moments after the assassination while law enforcement was closing in on the building?  Waiting, waiting.

Comedy gold that “Richard” actually thinks that in order for something to have occurred, there needs to be an “explanation” invented for it. And at the same time he has no explanation for how Oswald could have gotten from the sixth floor to the second floor in 75 seconds without being seen or heard by any of the 12 people along the way.

So let’s use “Richard” “logic” and say that the “explanation” for the boxes being moved is that it happened.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 25, 2022, 11:23:43 PM
“Technically”? You claimed (twice) that Jackson saw a rifle and took a photo of the building. Now that your ignorance is on full display once again, you make this lame attempt to cover your tracks? You should be embarrassed.  “Minutia”, LOL.

The Dillard photo doesn’t show any rifle. It doesn’t “corroborate” squat.

Comedy gold that “Richard” actually thinks that in order for something to have occurred, there needs to be an “explanation” invented for it. And at the same time he has no explanation for how Oswald could have gotten from the sixth floor to the second floor in 75 seconds without being seen or heard by any of the 12 people along the way.

So let’s use “Richard” “logic” and say that the “explanation” for the boxes being moved is that it happened.

The Dillard photo doesn’t show any rifle. It doesn’t “corroborate” squat.

I disagree....I believe that the Dillard photo corroborates the fact that there was no sniper firing from the sixth floor....There most certainly isn't any gunman visible in any window..... and if a gunman had fired from the sixth floor window he would be visible in the photo.... 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 26, 2022, 04:50:41 AM
Yeah Walt, but you are the only one who believes that the Dillard photo was taken during the shooting.

Regardless, “Richard’s” claim that the Dillard photo somehow corroborates Jackson seeing a rifle is ridiculous, even by “Richard” standards.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2022, 02:53:38 PM
Yeah Walt, but you are the only one who believes that the Dillard photo was taken during the shooting.

Regardless, “Richard’s” claim that the Dillard photo somehow corroborates Jackson seeing a rifle is ridiculous, even by “Richard” standards.

the Dillard photo somehow corroborates Jackson seeing a rifle is ridiculous,

There certainly isn't any rifle visible in the Dillard photo.....But I believe there would be  IF IF the shots were fired from there....

You may recall that Brennan said that AFTER he heard the first shot he looked up he saw a rifle ( "I could see all of the barrel of the gun" )

If Brennan saw the barrel of a rifle several seconds after the FIRST shot then that rifle barrel should be in the Dillard Photo also.....

WHY  isn't it there?......   Because.... Brennan did in fact see a rifle Barrel, BUT IT WAS NOT IN THE  "SNIPER"S NEST"WINDOW .....  Even his description of the man STANDING and bracing the rifle against the side of the window while aiming the rifle DOES NOT FIT   the "Sniper's Nest......  Brennan saw the man in about the same place that Arnold Rowland saw the man with the rifle....

Bottom line..... There were no shots fired from that "Sniper's Nest " window....
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 26, 2022, 07:47:14 PM
Yeah Walt, but you are the only one who believes that the Dillard photo was taken during the shooting.

Regardless, “Richard’s” claim that the Dillard photo somehow corroborates Jackson seeing a rifle is ridiculous, even by “Richard” standards.

Look at the sun table that Mr Hackerott posted ..... It shows that the sun moved from east to west 6  degrees between 12:20 and 12:40

The shadow being cast on the face of the TSBD between the 5th and 6th  floor windows  verifies that table ...

The powell and Dillard photos were NOT taken with mere seconds between them...
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 27, 2022, 04:01:08 PM
So.........

A man is recalled as wearing an open-necked white or off-white tshirt, and you say 'This on its own rules out Oswald'.

A man is recalled as wearing a very bright plaid shirt, and you say 'Yep, it's definitely this guy':

(https://i.postimg.cc/VL4X2nKd/Williams-shirt.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

As for your other arguments, Mr. O'Meara, no disrespect but they are just a medley of 'I choose to focus only on those of various BRW's statements that I like' and Organ-like 'No matter what the witness got wrong----all that SUN! all that DISTANCE!!----he still saw the guy I want him to have seen'.

And you have ignored Mr. Rowland's recollection of two black people in the fifth-floor pair of windows directly underneath the SN at or around the same time.

Hi Alan, I'm glad you agree with the arguments I laid out in that rather lengthy post regarding Rowland's over-estimation of BRW's age.
I'm well aware you are trying to peddle your "Multi-racial Assassination Death Squad" [MADS] theory but we'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue.
You must reject a copious amount of physical and testimonial evidence in order to pursue your MADS theory, which you seem to have accepted without a shred of evidence supporting it.
Why have you done that?

Anyhoo, back to Rowland's testimony. My last post was quite a long one so I didn't feel I had the time and space to deal with all the issues you raise.
Just to recap - after initially lying to the DPD regarding his movements leading up to the assassination, Bonnie Ray is called in by the FBI the day after the assassination, to check his story. Far from having his lunch on the first floor with Norman and Jarman and going up to the 5th floor with them [as he told the DPD on the day of the assassination], Bonnie Ray admits he went up to the 6th floor alone to have his lunch. But he still lies by saying he was only up there for around 3 minutes.
This young black man has lied to the DPD and then lied to the FBI!
He firstly lied about being on the 6th floor at all, he then lied about how long he was up there. Why is he trying to distance himself from the 6th floor?
His WC testimony reveals that in subsequent interviews Bonnie Ray continued to lie about how long he was up there but a pattern emerges - the more he is questioned, the longer he has been up there - 0, 3, 5, 10, 12 and 15 minutes, until finally he blurts out 20 minutes. But even this isn't quite accurate. We know from the testimonies of Harold Norman and Junior Jarman that BRW didn't join them on the floor until 12:25pm at the earliest, meaning he was up on the 6th floor for around 25 minutes.
Ten minutes before this, Rowland observes the man with the rifle on the 6th floor. He has already seen the man at the SN window (and there is no doubt he is specifically referring to the SN window), and continues to see him as he searches for the man with the rifle to show his wife. A few minutes before the motorcade arrives the man at the SN window disappears, reflecting the movements of BRW from the 6th floor to the 5th, to join Norman and Jarman.
Bonnie Ray continues to lie in his WC testimony about where he had his lunch - the Keystone DPD have pictures of the only lunch sack found on the 6th floor and a bottle of Dr. Pepper close by. In the lunch sack are chicken remains and a piece of Fritos - the lunch BRW said he had. The bottle is dusted for prints but the prints aren't Oswald's, so it is dismissed as a piece of evidence. In his WC testimony Day explains:

Mr. Mccloy: On the crime scene, that is, on the sixth floor, did you notice any chicken bones or chicken remnants of a chicken sandwich or lunch or the whereabouts, if you did see them?
Mr. Day: Yes, sir; there was a sack of some chicken bones and a bottle brought into the identification bureau. I think I still have that sack and
bottle down there. The chicken bones, I finally threw them away that laid around there.
In my talking to the men who were working on that floor, November 25, they stated, one of them stated, he had eaten lunch over there.


Day states that lunch remains belonged to one of the men who had worked on the 6th floor - Bonnie Ray.
However, at least seven officers place the lunch remains by the SN window - two officers specifically state that the lunch remains were found on top of one of the stacks that formed the SN. Others state that they saw a half-eaten piece of chicken and a lunch sack on top of some boxes but by the time the DPD take their photos, the chicken has found it's way into the lunch sack and the lunch sack is no longer on top of any boxes, it's on the floor stuffed down the side of the trolley.

So, at around 12:15pm, when it has been firmly established that Bonnie Ray is having his lunch on the 6th floor, Rowland sees a slender, black male at the SN window, the same window by which Bonnie Ray's lunch remains were found. Rowland also notes that just a few minutes before the motorcade arrives in Dealey Plaza, the man in the SN window disappears, perfectly reflecting BRW's movements from the 5th floor to the 6th.
I am not willing to ignore all this evidence. The man in the SN window can only be Bonnie Ray Williams waiting for the motorcade to arrive. He lies about ever being on the 6th floor, he lies about how long he was up there and he lies about where he ate his lunch. Bonnie Ray is doing everything in his power to distance himself from the SN window, the same window Rowland saw a black man at the same time BRW was having his lunch.
As I've explained in my last post there are a number of factors that led to Rowland over-estimating BRW's age. Which leaves us with his observation of Bonnie Ray's very brightly coloured, red and green shirt.
This is the single, tiny detail you are pinning all your hopes on. The pile of evidence pointing towards the man in the SN window has been ignored. All you have is this detail.
It could easily be brushed off by pointing out that Rowland made it perfectly clear he wasn't paying much attention to what this man looked like. He is asked to remember an astonishing amount of things and he got this one small detail wrong.
But Rowland makes the point that the colour was "really bright" and that's why he remembered it. Leaving aside the strange notion of a would-be assassin wearing such a conspicuous garment, there is something suggestive about this "really bright" colour. BRW was wearing a green shirt that day, so where would this really bright red colour be coming from. I believe it was Colin Crow who suggested a perfectly reasonable explanation:

BRW's lunch consisted of a chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and a bag of Fritos. As he waited for the motorcade to arrive Bonnie Ray sat at the SN window munching on his Fritos, while holding the bag up in front of him (I'm sure we've all done something similar at the movies, munching away on a snack while holding the bag up in front of us). In the 1960's, this is what a bag of Fritos looked like:

(https://i.postimg.cc/QMKpd1q7/Fritos.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

This is where the bright red colour was coming from. BRW was eating from a large bag of Fritos held up in front of him. Rowland mistook the colour as being part of his shirt but did remember the colour as being "really bright".

And you have ignored Mr. Rowland's recollection of two black people in the fifth-floor pair of windows directly underneath the SN at or around the same time.

Your desperation is beginning to show.
Rowland never makes such a recollection and you know it.
Grasping onto tiny details and twisting testimonial evidence to suit your purposes are signs of desperation you should recognise from your "PM=Oswald" days.
I suspect your time would be better spent considering the very large amount of evidence that supports the scenario outlined above.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 27, 2022, 04:56:54 PM
Hi Alan, I'm glad you agree with the arguments I laid out in that rather lengthy post regarding Rowland's over-estimation of BRW's age.
I'm well aware you are trying to peddle your "Multi-racial Assassination Death Squad" [MADS] theory but we'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue.
You must reject a copious amount of physical and testimonial evidence in order to pursue your MADS theory, which you seem to have accepted without a shred of evidence supporting it.
Why have you done that?

Anyhoo, back to Rowland's testimony. My last post was quite a long one so I didn't feel I had the time and space to deal with all the issues you raise.
Just to recap - after initially lying to the DPD regarding his movements leading up to the assassination, Bonnie Ray is called in by the FBI the day after the assassination, to check his story. Far from having his lunch on the first floor with Norman and Jarman and going up to the 5th floor with them [as he told the DPD on the day of the assassination], Bonnie Ray admits he went up to the 6th floor alone to have his lunch. But he still lies by saying he was only up there for around 3 minutes.
This young black man has lied to the DPD and then lied to the FBI!
He firstly lied about being on the 6th floor at all, he then lied about how long he was up there. Why is he trying to distance himself from the 6th floor?
His WC testimony reveals that in subsequent interviews Bonnie Ray continued to lie about how long he was up there but a pattern emerges - the more he is questioned, the longer he has been up there - 0, 3, 5, 10, 12 and 15 minutes, until finally he blurts out 20 minutes. But even this isn't quite accurate. We know from the testimonies of Harold Norman and Junior Jarman that BRW didn't join them on the floor until 12:25pm at the earliest, meaning he was up on the 6th floor for around 25 minutes.
Ten minutes before this, Rowland observes the man with the rifle on the 6th floor. He has already seen the man at the SN window (and there is no doubt he is specifically referring to the SN window), and continues to see him as he searches for the man with the rifle to show his wife. A few minutes before the motorcade arrives the man at the SN window disappears, reflecting the movements of BRW from the 6th floor to the 5th, to join Norman and Jarman.
Bonnie Ray continues to lie in his WC testimony about where he had his lunch - the Keystone DPD have pictures of the only lunch sack found on the 6th floor and a bottle of Dr. Pepper close by. In the lunch sack are chicken remains and a piece of Fritos - the lunch BRW said he had. The bottle is dusted for prints but the prints aren't Oswald's, so it is dismissed as a piece of evidence. In his WC testimony Day explains:

Mr. Mccloy: On the crime scene, that is, on the sixth floor, did you notice any chicken bones or chicken remnants of a chicken sandwich or lunch or the whereabouts, if you did see them?
Mr. Day: Yes, sir; there was a sack of some chicken bones and a bottle brought into the identification bureau. I think I still have that sack and
bottle down there. The chicken bones, I finally threw them away that laid around there.
In my talking to the men who were working on that floor, November 25, they stated, one of them stated, he had eaten lunch over there.


Day states that lunch remains belonged to one of the men who had worked on the 6th floor - Bonnie Ray.
However, at least seven officers place the lunch remains by the SN window - two officers specifically state that the lunch remains were found on top of one of the stacks that formed the SN. Others state that they saw a half-eaten piece of chicken and a lunch sack on top of some boxes but by the time the DPD take their photos, the chicken has found it's way into the lunch sack and the lunch sack is no longer on top of any boxes, it's on the floor stuffed down the side of the trolley.

So, at around 12:15pm, when it has been firmly established that Bonnie Ray is having his lunch on the 6th floor, Rowland sees a slender, black male at the SN window, the same window by which Bonnie Ray's lunch remains were found. Rowland also notes that just a few minutes before the motorcade arrives in Dealey Plaza, the man in the SN window disappears, perfectly reflecting BRW's movements from the 5th floor to the 6th.
I am not willing to ignore all this evidence. The man in the SN window can only be Bonnie Ray Williams waiting for the motorcade to arrive. He lies about ever being on the 6th floor, he lies about how long he was up there and he lies about where he ate his lunch. Bonnie Ray is doing everything in his power to distance himself from the SN window, the same window Rowland saw a black man at the same time BRW was having his lunch.
As I've explained in my last post there are a number of factors that led to Rowland over-estimating BRW's age. Which leaves us with his observation of Bonnie Ray's very brightly coloured, red and green shirt.
This is the single, tiny detail you are pinning all your hopes on. The pile of evidence pointing towards the man in the SN window has been ignored. All you have is this detail.
It could easily be brushed off by pointing out that Rowland made it perfectly clear he wasn't paying much attention to what this man looked like. He is asked to remember an astonishing amount of things and he got this one small detail wrong.
But Rowland makes the point that the colour was "really bright" and that's why he remembered it. Leaving aside the strange notion of a would-be assassin wearing such a conspicuous garment, there is something suggestive about this "really bright" colour. BRW was wearing a green shirt that day, so where would this really bright red colour be coming from. I believe it was Colin Crow who suggested a perfectly reasonable explanation:

BRW's lunch consisted of a chicken-on-the-bone sandwich and a bag of Fritos. As he waited for the motorcade to arrive Bonnie Ray sat at the SN window munching on his Fritos, while holding the bag up in front of him (I'm sure we've all done something similar at the movies, munching away on a snack while holding the bag up in front of us). In the 1960's, this is what a bag of Fritos looked like:

(https://i.postimg.cc/QMKpd1q7/Fritos.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

This is where the bright red colour was coming from. BRW was eating from a large bag of Fritos held up in front of him. Rowland mistook the colour as being part of his shirt but did remember the colour as being "really bright".

And you have ignored Mr. Rowland's recollection of two black people in the fifth-floor pair of windows directly underneath the SN at or around the same time.

Your desperation is beginning to show.
Rowland never makes such a recollection and you know it.
Grasping onto tiny details and twisting testimonial evidence to suit your purposes are signs of desperation you should recognise from your "PM=Oswald" days.
I suspect your time would be better spent considering the very large amount of evidence that supports the scenario outlined above.

Rowland observes the man with the rifle on the 6th floor. He has already seen the man at the SN window (and there is no doubt he is specifically referring to the SN window), and continues to see him as he searches for the man with the rifle to show his wife.


You're right....Rowland did see a man with a rifle on the sixth floor..... And I've long believed that James Powell snapped a photo of that man sticking the rifle out of the SE corner window.    LOOK at the Powell photo....  If Dillard hadn't screwed up the plot by taking a photo of he TSBD during the shooting , the conspirators would have presented Powell's photo of the rifle sticking out of the window as proof that Lee Harvey Oswald had been firing that rifle and killed president Kennedy.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 27, 2022, 06:36:50 PM
Rowland observes the man with the rifle on the 6th floor. He has already seen the man at the SN window (and there is no doubt he is specifically referring to the SN window), and continues to see him as he searches for the man with the rifle to show his wife.


You're right....Rowland did see a man with a rifle on the sixth floor..... And I've long believed that James Powell snapped a photo of that man sticking the rifle out of the SE corner window.    LOOK at the Powell photo....  If Dillard hadn't screwed up the plot by taking a photo of he TSBD during the shooting , the conspirators would have presented Powell's photo of the rifle sticking out of the window as proof that Lee Harvey Oswald had been firing that rifle and killed president Kennedy.

Can you keep this to the "Are these two photos legit" thread please.
This is a different topic.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 28, 2022, 02:01:40 AM
Hi Alan, [snippety-snip.......]

Jeez, Mr O'Meara, talk about weak sauce..........................

1. Your cherry-picking assumption that the timeframe Mr Williams testified to before the WC is, out of all the timeframes he gave, the true one is just that----------a cherry-picking assumption

2. Your rather desperate attempt to explain away the plaid shirt recalled by Mr Rowland as a bag of chips (!) is just that----------rather desperate

3. Your comically unconvincing attempt to turn Mr Williams into an 'elderly Negro' is just that--------comically unconvincing

4. Your sorry lack of understanding as to what Mr Rowland testified about window 'B' is just that---------sorry

5. Your strange zeal in opposing the very idea that the two men seen on the sixth floor by Mr Rowland might not have been employees is just that--------strange

But hey, if you want to keep believing that Mr Rowland was a moron, and that Mr Williams blithely ate corn chips at the SN window while an armed fellow-employee blithely made himself visible at the far side of the floor, knock yourself out!

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 28, 2022, 09:37:27 AM
Jeez, Mr O'Meara, talk about weak sauce..........................

1. Your cherry-picking assumption that the timeframe Mr Williams testified to before the WC is, out of all the timeframes he gave, the true one is just that----------a cherry-picking assumption

2. Your rather desperate attempt to explain away the plaid shirt recalled by Mr Rowland as a bag of chips (!) is just that----------rather desperate

3. Your comically unconvincing attempt to turn Mr Williams into an 'elderly Negro' is just that--------comically unconvincing

4. Your sorry lack of understanding as to what Mr Rowland testified about window 'B' is just that---------sorry

5. Your strange zeal in opposing the very idea that the two men seen on the sixth floor by Mr Rowland might not have been employees is just that--------strange

But hey, if you want to keep believing that Mr Rowland was a moron, and that Mr Williams blithely ate corn chips at the SN window while an armed fellow-employee blithely made himself visible at the far side of the floor, knock yourself out!

 Thumb1:

This is a bit of a nothing post, Alan.
As you put it, "weak sauce" indeed.

1. Your cherry-picking assumption that the timeframe Mr Williams testified to before the WC is, out of all the timeframes he gave, the true one is just that----------a cherry-picking assumption

If you were a bit more familiar with the evidence you would know that this isn't cherry-picking at all.
BRW's movements are confirmed by the testimonies of Harold Norman and Junior Jarman. They put themselves on the 5th floor no earlier than 12:25pm. They both testify that BRW joins them when they are on the 5th floor. BRW testifies that he leaves the 6th floor and joins Norman and Jarman on the 6th floor. The timeline is corroborated by multiple testimonies.
Whatis strange about all this is, as I've pointed out, BRW lies about not being on the 6th floor, then lies about how long he was up there, constantly changing the amount of time he was on the 6th floor. But we don't have to "cherry-pick" which timeline BRW is providing as the timeline is dictated by Norman and Jarman. In fact, BRW never actually gives the correct amount of time he is up there so your whole criticism is utterly meaningless.
It should also be noted that Rowland's observation that the man in the SN window disappears a few minutes before the motorcade arrives in Dealey Plaza, perfectly matches the movements of BRW - leaving the 6th floor to go down to the 5thfloor minutes before the motorcade arrives.

2. Your rather desperate attempt to explain away the plaid shirt recalled by Mr Rowland as a bag of chips (!) is just that----------rather desperate

From BRW's WC testimony:

Mr. Ball: Did you have anything else in your lunch besides chicken?
Mr. Williams: I had a bag of Fritos, I believe it was.


From the WC testimony of Robert Studebaker, discussing the lunch remains found on the 6th floor:

Mr. Ball: Any chicken bones in any other place?
Mr. Studebaker: No.
Mr. Ball: None outside the sack?
Mr. Studebaker: No; they were all inside the sack, wrapped up and put right back in. It had a little piece of Fritos in the sack, too.

So BRW testifies that part ofhis lunch was a bag of Fritos.
Studebaker testifies that a piece of Fritos is found in the lunch sack.
BRW ate a bag of Fritos as he waited for the motorcade to arrive.
The bag of Fritos is bright red in colour.
Rowland descibes the colour of BRW's shirt as being "really bright".
BRW is at the SN window eating his Fritos from a bright red bag held up in front of him, and Rowland mistakes this colour for part of his shirt. Perfectly plausible - we know BRW ate a bag of Fritos, we know the bag was bright red, we know Rowland describes the colour as being really bright, we know it's not uncommon to hold a bag of snacks in front of you while eating them.
We also know why you can't accept such a rational explanation. And that's fair enough.

3. Your comically unconvincing attempt to turn Mr Williams into an 'elderly Negro' is just that--------comically unconvincing

I've dealt with this issue in depth previously. You haven't argued against a single point I've made. You just come up with silly comments that have no substance. I refer any reader interested to Reply#14.

4. Your sorry lack of understanding as to what Mr Rowland testified about window 'B' is just that---------sorry

You are being very disingenuous here Alan.
You know you misrepresented Rowland's testimony in a truly desperate attempt to score a little point.
But it's back-fired and I would advise you to drop it before your dodgy tactics are exposed.

5. Your strange zeal in opposing the very idea that the two men seen on the sixth floor by Mr Rowland might not have been employees is just that--------strange

 :D
I think you'll find it's not that strange to imagine TSBD employees in the TSBD building.
What is strange is to imagine a Multi-racial Assassination Death Squad roaming round the TSBD. Particularly when this isn't supported by a scrap of evidence.

Good luck with that Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 29, 2022, 01:31:59 AM
This is a bit of a nothing post, Alan. [Snippety-snip!..........]

~Grin~

If Mr. Rowland had seen an 'elderly white man' with practically no hair wearing a green shirt at the SN window at 12:15, the Warren Gullibles would be using your embarrassingly strained logic to argue that this 'can only have been Oswald'. They'd be posting a grainy black-and-white photo of Mr Oswald like you've done with Mr. Williams, and talking up the amazing effects of sunlight and distance on normal human perception. And pointing up the amazing coincidence between the man's race and Mr Oswald's. They'd be saying the apple he was eating must have caused Mr Rowland to think the man's shirt was green. They would, in short, be throwing pure bunkum at the problem posed by Mr. Rowland's recollection, just as you're doing now, all in an effort to make Mr. Rowland out to be a moron. And you'd be the first to laugh at their hapless efforts.

Some other points:

1.  Yes, it is established that Messrs. Jarman & Norman did not go up to five until ~5 minutes before the motorcade's arrival
2. No, it is not established that Mr. Williams joined them shortly after they got there----Mr. Williams may have already been on the fifth floor (which would explain why they didn't go up to six in the first place------they saw him up on five from down on the street and decided to join him there)
3. Mr. Tom Alyea was adamant that the lunch remains were found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth. So it's perfectly possible that Mr. Williams started eating over at the third window on six but was told to leave the floor way earlier than he later testified; and that he brought his lunch down to five with him and left the remnants there after the shooting
4. Your lack of understanding as to what Mr Rowland testified about what he saw in window 'B' remains sorry
5. Your position is amusingly incoherent: A) we cannot contemplate a multi-racial assassination team; B) BRW blithely munched corn chips while an armed white man was blithely making himself visible over on the west side. Let me guess: Mr Jack Dougherty was the white man, and he told Mr Williams he was up there to do some recreational pigeon shooting before the motorcade. Anything but (gasp! horror! pass the smelling salts!) an outside team, right?

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 29, 2022, 12:29:43 PM
~Grin~

If Mr. Rowland had seen an 'elderly white man' with practically no hair wearing a green shirt at the SN window at 12:15, the Warren Gullibles would be using your embarrassingly strained logic to argue that this 'can only have been Oswald'. They'd be posting a grainy black-and-white photo of Mr Oswald like you've done with Mr. Williams, and talking up the amazing effects of sunlight and distance on normal human perception. And pointing up the amazing coincidence between the man's race and Mr Oswald's. They'd be saying the apple he was eating must have caused Mr Rowland to think the man's shirt was green. They would, in short, be throwing pure bunkum at the problem posed by Mr. Rowland's recollection, just as you're doing now, all in an effort to make Mr. Rowland out to be a moron. And you'd be the first to laugh at their hapless efforts.

Yet another nothing post.
This fantastical rant shows the [lack of] strength of your arguments over this issue.
You have literally nothing to support your position and can only produce nonsense like this.

Quote
Some other points:

 :D :D
I like your use of the word "other", as if you'd already made a point

Quote
1.  Yes, it is established that Messrs. Jarman & Norman did not go up to five until ~5 minutes before the motorcade's arrival
2. No, it is not established that Mr. Williams joined them shortly after they got there----Mr. Williams may have already been on the fifth floor (which would explain why they didn't go up to six in the first place------they saw him up on five from down on the street and decided to join him there)
3. Mr. Tom Alyea was adamant that the lunch remains were found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth. So it's perfectly possible that Mr. Williams started eating over at the third window on six but was told to leave the floor way earlier than he later testified; and that he brought his lunch down to five with him and left the remnants there after the shooting
4. Your lack of understanding as to what Mr Rowland testified about what he saw in window 'B' remains sorry
5. Your position is amusingly incoherent: A) we cannot contemplate a multi-racial assassination team; B) BRW blithely munched corn chips while an armed white man was blithely making himself visible over on the west side. Let me guess: Mr Jack Dougherty was the white man, and he told Mr Williams he was up there to do some recreational pigeon shooting before the motorcade. Anything but (gasp! horror! pass the smelling salts!) an outside team, right?

 Thumb1:

No, it is not established that Mr. Williams joined them shortly after they got there----Mr. Williams may have already been on the fifth floor

From the WC testimony of Junior Jarman:

Mr. Ball: Was there any reason why you should go to the fifth floor any more than the fourth or the sixth?
Mr. Jarman: No.

....
Mr. Ball: When you got there was there anybody on the fifth floor?
Mr. Jarman: No, sir.

...
Mr. Ball: Did somebody join you then?
Mr. Jarman: Yes, sir; a few minutes later.
Mr. Ball: Who joined you?
Mr. Jarman: Bonnie Ray Williams.


Familiarise yourself with the evidence. This is really basic stuff. Your desperation to promote your MADS theory is causing you to make fundamental errors.

Mr. Tom Alyea was adamant that the lunch remains were found on the fifth floor and brought up to the sixth. So it's perfectly possible that Mr. Williams started eating over at the third window on six but was told to leave the floor way earlier than he later testified; and that he brought his lunch down to five with him and left the remnants there after the shooting

Cite please.

If this was indeed the case, and if you think this somehow nullifies the witness testimony of the first officers on the scene (before Alyea got there), then you need to question how you approach the evidence (talk about cherry-picking!).
Two of the first officers specifically place the lunch remains on top of one of the stacks that form the Sniper's Nest. Five other others place them in the southeast corner, by the SN window.
And there is also this from Tom Alyea:

At the time it was suspected that the assassin had stayed quite a time there. There was a stack with a stack of chicken bones on it. There was a Dr. Pepper bottle which they dusted for fingerprints. The fingerprints were not Oswald's. You know how he piled the boxes up?
[email to Dale Myers - https://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html]

4. Your lack of understanding as to what Mr Rowland testified about what he saw in window 'B' remains sorry

I genuinely can't believe you're sticking by your twisted version of Rowland's testimony.
You should be ashamed:

Mr. Specter: At or about that time did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Mr. Rowland: No; no one else on that floor.


Rowland does not state that he saw the black men in the window below the SN window "at or about that time".
He clearly answers a question regarding who else was on the 6th floor.
That you've tried to turn this into Rowland observing the men on the 5th floor about 12:15pm is a sorry tactic reserved for the truly desperate. This alone should be setting off alarm bells regarding how you approach this case.

Alan, you have nothing to offer other than nonsensical rants and completely unsupported conjecture. Plus a willingness to fake testimonial evidence.
If you have zero substance, why do you bother posting?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 29, 2022, 07:23:03 PM
Yet another [snippety-snip!]

Gosh, you really are lost, Mr. O'Meara..................

1. The fact that Messrs. Jarman & Norman testified to X before the WC does not prove X, especially when their various statements are so all over the place. So quoting from Mr. Jarman's testimony no more proves his veracity than quoting from Mr Shelley's or Mr Lovelady's proves theirs. This is elementary stuff  ::)

2. http://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html, Tom Alyea, "Facts and Photos", from Connie Kritzberg's Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window, pp. 39-46:

Police officers who claim they were on the 6th floor when the assassin's window was found have reported that they saw chicken bones at or near the site. One officer reported that he saw chicken bones on the floor near the location. Another said he saw chicken bones on the barricade boxes, while another reported that he saw chicken bones on the box which was laying across the window sill. Some of these officers have given testimony as to the location of the shell casings. Their testimony differs and none of it is true. I have no idea why they are clinging to these statements. They must have a reason. Perhaps it is because they put it in a report and they must stick to it.

One officer stated that he found the assassin's location at the 6th floor window. He went on to say that as he and his fellow officers were leaving the building, he passed Captain Fritz coming in. He said he stopped briefly to tell Captain Fritz that he had found the assassin's lair at the 6th floor window. This seems highly unlikely because Captain Fritz joined us on the 5th floor and aided in the search. The chances are great that this, or these officers heard the report, that stemmed from WFAA-TV's incorrect announcement that the chicken bones were found on the 6th floor. This officer or officers perhaps used this information to formulate their presence at the scene. There were no chicken bones found on the 6th floor. We covered every inch of it and I filmed everything that could possibly be suspected as evidence. There definitely were no chicken bones were no chicken bones on or near the barricade or boxes at the window. I shot close-up shots of the entire area
.

3. Continue the exchange from Mr Rowland's testimony:

Mr. SPECTER - You testified before that there were other windows where you had seen people hanging out, is that correct?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you tell us and indicate on the picture, Exhibit 356, to the best of your ability to recollect just which those windows were?
Mr. ROWLAND - There was either two or three people in this window.
Mr. SPECTER - Mark that with a "B" if you would, please.


Take a look at the Exhibit in question and get back to us with you, ahem, thoughts!

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 29, 2022, 10:22:32 PM
Gosh, you really are lost, Mr. O'Meara..................

1. The fact that Messrs. Jarman & Norman testified to X before the WC does not prove X, especially when their various statements are so all over the place. So quoting from Mr. Jarman's testimony no more proves his veracity than quoting from Mr Shelley's or Mr Lovelady's proves theirs. This is elementary stuff  ::)

I provide evidence that Bonnie Ray was not on the 5th floor when Norman and Jarman arrive and that he came down a few minutes later, but it's not good enough for you.
I have to assume you have better evidence that BRW was already on the 5th floor when they got there.
WHAT IS THIS EVIDENCE?

Quote
2. http://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html, Tom Alyea, "Facts and Photos", from Connie Kritzberg's Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window, pp. 39-46:

Police officers who claim they were on the 6th floor when the assassin's window was found have reported that they saw chicken bones at or near the site. One officer reported that he saw chicken bones on the floor near the location. Another said he saw chicken bones on the barricade boxes, while another reported that he saw chicken bones on the box which was laying across the window sill. Some of these officers have given testimony as to the location of the shell casings. Their testimony differs and none of it is true. I have no idea why they are clinging to these statements. They must have a reason. Perhaps it is because they put it in a report and they must stick to it.

One officer stated that he found the assassin's location at the 6th floor window. He went on to say that as he and his fellow officers were leaving the building, he passed Captain Fritz coming in. He said he stopped briefly to tell Captain Fritz that he had found the assassin's lair at the 6th floor window. This seems highly unlikely because Captain Fritz joined us on the 5th floor and aided in the search. The chances are great that this, or these officers heard the report, that stemmed from WFAA-TV's incorrect announcement that the chicken bones were found on the 6th floor. This officer or officers perhaps used this information to formulate their presence at the scene. There were no chicken bones found on the 6th floor. We covered every inch of it and I filmed everything that could possibly be suspected as evidence. There definitely were no chicken bones were no chicken bones on or near the barricade or boxes at the window. I shot close-up shots of the entire area
.

Yeah, if you hadn't noticed Alan, I quoted from the same site. Alyea appears to have had a change of heart.
But it doesn't matter.
HOW DOES ALYEA'S COMMENT NEGATE THE TESTIMONY OF THE SEVEN OFFICERS WHO DID SEE THE LUNCH REMAINS ON THE 6TH FLOOR?
[...and remember, these officers saw the remains before Alyea started filming on the 6th floor]
Quote
3. Continue the exchange from Mr Rowland's testimony:

Mr. SPECTER - You testified before that there were other windows where you had seen people hanging out, is that correct?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you tell us and indicate on the picture, Exhibit 356, to the best of your ability to recollect just which those windows were?
Mr. ROWLAND - There was either two or three people in this window.
Mr. SPECTER - Mark that with a "B" if you would, please.


Take a look at the Exhibit in question and get back to us with you, ahem, thoughts!

 Thumb1:

I took at look at the Exhibit and couldn't help but notice that, ahem, there is no mention of the time Rowland says he saw the men at the 5th floor window! So your desperate little point has no substance.
Did you not notice that Alan  ::)
Did you really think you were going to get away with your little deception?
 Walk:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Walt Cakebread on September 29, 2022, 11:00:54 PM
I provide evidence that Bonnie Ray was not on the 5th floor when Norman and Jarman arrive and that he came down a few minutes later, but it's not good enough for you.
I have to assume you have better evidence that BRW was already on the 5th floor when they got there.
WHAT IS THIS EVIDENCE?

Yeah, if you hadn't noticed Alan, I quoted from the same site. Alyea appears to have had a change of heart.
But it doesn't matter.
HOW DOES ALYEA'S COMMENT NEGATE THE TESTIMONY OF THE SEVEN OFFICERS WHO DID SEE THE LUNCH REMAINS ON THE 6TH FLOOR?
[...and remember, these officers saw the remains before Alyea started filming on the 6th floor]
I took at look at the Exhibit and couldn't help but notice that, ahem, there is no mention of the time Rowland says he saw the men at the 5th floor window! So your desperate little point has no substance.
Did you not notice that Alan  ::)
Did you really think you were going to get away with your little deception?
 Walk:

Dan, I'm really perplexed by the Powell / Dillard photos..... BRW appears in both of the photos in almost identical poses...I don't see haw that's possible when all three of the three stooges said they jumped up immediately after the first shot and ran to the west end of the sixth floor to see what was happening in the railroad yard.     HOW could BRW appear in that window if they had jumped up and ran to the west side of the sixth floor?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 29, 2022, 11:06:45 PM
Dan, I'm really perplexed by the Powell / Dillard photos..... BRW appears in both of the photos in almost identical poses...I don't see haw that's possible when all three of the three stooges said they jumped up immediately after the first shot and ran to the west end of the sixth floor to see what was happening in the railroad yard.     HOW could BRW appear in that window if they had jumped up and ran to the west side of the sixth floor?

Once again Walt, this is for the other thread. It's not relevant to this one.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 30, 2022, 01:37:48 AM
I provide [snippety-snip!]

~Yawn~

1. Giving us some WC testimony from a witness who couldn't get his story straight is not providing us with 'evidence'. It's just giving us some WC testimony from a witness who couldn't get his story straight

2. Mr Alyea played along with the lie in Dec 1963 but later decided to tell the true story--------which he did quite emphatically. The DPD men, true to form, just kept up the lie

3. 
Mr. SPECTER - Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. ROWLAND - It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.
Mr. SPECTER - At or about that time did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; no one else on that floor.
Mr. SPECTER - You testified before that there were other windows where you had seen people hanging out, is that correct?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you tell us and indicate on the picture, Exhibit 356, to the best of your ability to recollect just which those windows were?
Mr. ROWLAND - There was either two or three people in this window.
Mr. SPECTER - Mark that with a "B" if you would, please.

-------------->But nice try, Mr O'Meara!  Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Dan O'meara on September 30, 2022, 09:01:37 AM
~Yawn~

1. Giving us some WC testimony from a witness who couldn't get his story straight is not providing us with 'evidence'. It's just giving us some WC testimony from a witness who couldn't get his story straight

2. Mr Alyea played along with the lie in Dec 1963 but later decided to tell the true story--------which he did quite emphatically. The DPD men, true to form, just kept up the lie

Yeah, great stuff Alan.
So, Jarman's lying, Mooney's lying, Hill's lying, Haygood's lying, Brewer's lying, Weatherford's lying, McCurley's lying, Craig's lying and Alyea was lying but changed his mind.
Typical of a lot of your research.
Do you remember how many people you claimed were lying when you thought Oswald was PM.
Oh yeah, if you knew anything about the case you'd know that these weren't all "DPD men".

I've provided a wealth of evidence supporting my position, you were asked to provided one scrap of evidence supporting yours. True to form, you fail to do even that.

Quote
3. 
Mr. SPECTER - Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. ROWLAND - It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.
Mr. SPECTER - At or about that time did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; no one else on that floor.
Mr. SPECTER - You testified before that there were other windows where you had seen people hanging out, is that correct?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you tell us and indicate on the picture, Exhibit 356, to the best of your ability to recollect just which those windows were?
Mr. ROWLAND - There was either two or three people in this window.
Mr. SPECTER - Mark that with a "B" if you would, please.

-------------->But nice try, Mr O'Meara!  Thumb1:

Another English lesson, Alan?
Really?

The key phrase is "at or about that time" - a reference to 12:15pm. mentioned earlier in Rowland's testimony.
This phrase is part of a question - did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Specter is asking a specific question - did you see anyone else [other than the man with the rifle and the man at the SN window], at any window on the 6th floor?
Rowland gives a very specific answer - no, I did not see anyone else on the 6th floor.
So, at or about 12:15pm, Rowland did not see anyone else on the 6th floor other than those two men.

The questioning then moves on. Rowland is reminded that he's already testified about people on the 5th floor and is asked to elaborate on that,
which he does.
This is a completely separate question from the one about the 6th floor. Rowland is not asked "who did you see on the 5th floor at or about 12:15pm?"
You have taken this phrase from one question and decided to stick in another question to suit your purposes.
That's how desperate you are to make it appear like you have any kind of point.
I thought you were being deceitful but I now think it's just a lack of language skills.

All you can do is say everyone is lying who doesn't support your MADS theory.
You twist the meaning of testimonial evidence to suit your ends and never provided a scrap of evidence to support your fantasy - isn't this ringing a bell?
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on September 30, 2022, 07:15:00 PM
Yeah, [snippety-snip!]

~Yawn Encore~

1. The chicken bones were made a big deal of by DPD in the initial phase, then they stopped wanting to talk about them. Mr. Alyea blows the whistle on what happened: they were found on five and brought up to six. Unlike everyone you cite, he has zero reason to want to lie about this

2.
Mr. SPECTER - Will you describe with as much particularity as you can what that man looked like?
Mr. ROWLAND - It seemed to me an elderly Negro, that is about all. I didn't pay very much attention to him.
Mr. SPECTER - At or about that time did you observe anyone else hanging out any window or observe any one through any window on the same floor where you have drawn the two circles on Exhibit 356?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; no one else on that floor.
Mr. SPECTER - You testified before that there were other windows where you had seen people hanging out, is that correct?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you tell us and indicate on the picture, Exhibit 356, to the best of your ability to recollect just which those windows were?
Mr. ROWLAND - There was either two or three people in this window.
Mr. SPECTER - Mark that with a "B" if you would, please.


Mr. Specter uses past perfect ("had seen") because he is referring back to this portion of Mr. Rowland's testimony:

Representative FORD - And the man you saw hanging out from the window was at what corner?
Mr. ROWLAND - The east, southeast corner.
Representative FORD - Southeast corner. On the same floor?
Mr. ROWLAND - On the same floor.
Representative FORD - When did you notice him?
Mr. ROWLAND - This was before I noticed the other man with the rifle.
Representative FORD - I see. This was before you saw the man in the window with the rifle?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes. My wife and I were both looking and making remarks that the people were hanging out the windows I think the majority of them were colored people, some of them were hanging out the windows to their waist, such as this. We made several remarks to this fact, and then she started watching the colored boy, and I continued to look, and then I saw the man with the rifle.


Mr. Rowland noticed two black people, and possibly a white man with them, at window "B" BEFORE he noticed the man with the rifle  Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on October 01, 2022, 12:31:52 AM
Now! From Mr. Williams' WC Testimony:

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, I thought I heard somebody walking, the windows moving or something. I said maybe someone is down there, I said to myself. And I just went on down.
Mr. BALL. Did you find anybody there?
Mr. WILLIAMS. As I remember, when I was walking up, I think Harold Norman and James Jarman as I remember, they was down facing the Elm Street on the fifth floor, as I remember.


All those 'as I remembers'! All that hedging! The poor fellow's lying, not because he's a bad man but because he has to lie.

He started eating lunch on six but was told by someone to leave the floor. He brought his lunch down to five, where he went to the easternmost pair of windows on the south-facing side. At least one co-worker (Mr. Piper?--who was black and who was asked with peculiar forcefulness in his WC testimony if he went higher than four that day) joined him there or was already there. (Mr. Rowland noticed their presence in the window.) And then he was on his own again until Messrs Norman & Jarman spotted him up there from down in the street. They decided to go up just before the motorcade's arrival and join him on five.

After the shooting, Mr Williams was horribly shook up, because he knew now that the man/men on six were NOT there to protect Mr. Kennedy but to kill him. At first, he and Messrs Jarman & Norman tried to pretend the three of them had watched the motorcade from down in the street. But they finally had to admit to having been on the fifth floor. Mr Williams persuaded Messrs Jarman & Norman to cover for him, i.e. NOT to tell of what he had told them-----------that someone claiming authority had told him to leave the sixth floor not long after noon. Instead they were to say HE joined THEM on five, and not the other way around. They loyally played ball, but kept going off script--------which is what tends to happen when a lie is created.

Mr Truly told the WC in so many words that Mr Williams was a very dangerous witness:

Mr. McCLOY. From what you know of these young men who testified before you today, are they trustworthy?
Mr. TRULY. Yes, sir; I think they are. They are good men. They have been with me, most of them, for some time. I have no reason to doubt their word. I do know that they have been rather, as the expression goes, shook up about this thing, especially this tall one, Bonnie Williams. He is pretty superstitious, I would say. For 2 or 3 weeks the work was not normal, or a month. The boys did not put out their normal amount of work. Their hearts were not in it. But after that, they have picked up very well. They are doing their work well.
Mr. BELIN. If we can go off the record for just a moment.
(Discussion off the record.)
The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record.

Mr. TRULY. I thank you very much.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, sir. You have helped us a good deal. We will recess at this time until 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.


Mr Williams was entirely innocent of any knowing involvement in the assassination. He did NOT hang out at the SN window while an armed white man stood in open view on the west side of the floor. But he DID encounter this man-----and/or a confederate------on the sixth floor at some point before 12:15

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on October 02, 2022, 01:59:39 PM
Mr. Ball. Did you at any time go above the fourth floor on that date?
Mr. Piper. No, sir.
Mr. Ball. Did you at any time go that day up above the fourth floor?
Mr. Piper. No--no, sir.
Mr. Ball. You never did---either before or after the shots?
Mr. Piper. No, sir.


(https://i.postimg.cc/XNDzFn8R/Eddie-Piper-full.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/4nVPRkjP)
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on October 02, 2022, 02:09:11 PM
MR. ROWLAND: [...] not real dark compared to some Negroes, but fairly dark.

Cf?--------------------------:

'Right-wing radical and Kennedy denouncer Thomas Vallee had arranged to be off work for JFK's visit; Vallee, an expert marksman, was arrested with an M1 rifle, a handgun and 3,000 rounds of ammo. But then there was the phone call to federal agents from a motel manager concerning what she'd seen in a room rented by two Cuban nationals.

"Had seen lying on the bed several automatic rifles with telescopic sights, with an outline of the route that President Kennedy was supposed to take in Chicago that would bring him past that building," said former Secret Service agent Abraham Bolden."'

https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3902495&page=1
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on October 02, 2022, 03:31:54 PM
Now! From Mr. Williams' WC Testimony:

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, I thought I heard somebody walking, the windows moving or something. I said maybe someone is down there, I said to myself. And I just went on down.
Mr. BALL. Did you find anybody there?
Mr. WILLIAMS. As I remember, when I was walking up, I think Harold Norman and James Jarman as I remember, they was down facing the Elm Street on the fifth floor, as I remember.


All those 'as I remembers'! All that hedging! The poor fellow's lying, not because he's a bad man but because he has to lie.

He started eating lunch on six but was told by someone to leave the floor. He brought his lunch down to five, where he went to the easternmost pair of windows on the south-facing side. At least one co-worker (Mr. Piper?--who was black and who was asked with peculiar forcefulness in his WC testimony if he went higher than four that day) joined him there or was already there. (Mr. Rowland noticed their presence in the window.) And then he was on his own again until Messrs Norman & Jarman spotted him up there from down in the street. They decided to go up just before the motorcade's arrival and join him on five.

After the shooting, Mr Williams was horribly shook up, because he knew now that the man/men on six were NOT there to protect Mr. Kennedy but to kill him. At first, he and Messrs Jarman & Norman tried to pretend the three of them had watched the motorcade from down in the street. But they finally had to admit to having been on the fifth floor. Mr Williams persuaded Messrs Jarman & Norman to cover for him, i.e. NOT to tell of what he had told them-----------that someone claiming authority had told him to leave the sixth floor not long after noon. Instead they were to say HE joined THEM on five, and not the other way around. They loyally played ball, but kept going off script--------which is what tends to happen when a lie is created.

Mr Truly told the WC in so many words that Mr Williams was a very dangerous witness:

Mr. McCLOY. From what you know of these young men who testified before you today, are they trustworthy?
Mr. TRULY. Yes, sir; I think they are. They are good men. They have been with me, most of them, for some time. I have no reason to doubt their word. I do know that they have been rather, as the expression goes, shook up about this thing, especially this tall one, Bonnie Williams. He is pretty superstitious, I would say. For 2 or 3 weeks the work was not normal, or a month. The boys did not put out their normal amount of work. Their hearts were not in it. But after that, they have picked up very well. They are doing their work well.
Mr. BELIN. If we can go off the record for just a moment.
(Discussion off the record.)
The CHAIRMAN. Back on the record.

Mr. TRULY. I thank you very much.
The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, sir. You have helped us a good deal. We will recess at this time until 9 o'clock tomorrow morning.


Mr Williams was entirely innocent of any knowing involvement in the assassination. He did NOT hang out at the SN window while an armed white man stood in open view on the west side of the floor. But he DID encounter this man-----and/or a confederate------on the sixth floor at some point before 12:15

 Thumb1:

So you think your conspirators allowed BRW to see them in the moments just before the assassination and they allowed him to not only leave the floor but trusted him not to raise the alarm and otherwise remain silent for his entire life!  HA HA HA.  So trusting those conspirators.  But this fairy fable doesn't just end there, you also think they allowed their "patsy" Oswald to be elsewhere in the building where he might have an alibi for the moment of the assassination.  Unreal.  You can't possibly believe this nonsense. 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on October 02, 2022, 07:13:13 PM
So you think your conspirators allowed BRW to see them in the moments just before the assassination and they allowed him to not only leave the floor but trusted him not to raise the alarm and otherwise remain silent for his entire life!

Why would he raise the alarm if they showed him credentials and said they were here to protect Mr. Kennedy? Have you never been to an event where people presenting themselves as security refused you access to an area? If you have, how many times did you 'raise the alarm'?

As for the risk of Mr Williams' talking about them afterwards------what risk? They'd be long gone by that time

Quote
you also think they allowed their "patsy" Oswald to be elsewhere in the building where he might have an alibi for the moment of the assassination.

No, Mr Strawman, because Mr. Oswald was not their patsy in the sense in which you mean here: he was not being set up as the sixth-floor gunman

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on October 02, 2022, 09:00:16 PM
Why would he raise the alarm if they showed him credentials and said they were here to protect Mr. Kennedy? Have you never been to an event where people presenting themselves as security refused you access to an area? If you have, how many times did you 'raise the alarm'?

As for the risk of Mr Williams' talking about them afterwards------what risk? They'd be long gone by that time

No, Mr Strawman, because Mr. Oswald was not their patsy in the sense in which you mean here: he was not being set up as the sixth-floor gunman

 Thumb1:

LOL.  This gets better and better.  Like a best seller.  So BRW is on the 6th floor and he is told to beat it by someone "showing him credentials."  A few minutes later BRW hears the shots being fired from right above his head from the same location where these individuals were and he lies and remains silent about this for the rest of his life.  The conspirators trust that he will do so even though that they have no reason for him to behave in this manner.  Wow.  And Oswald was not being set up as the gunman?  I don't even know what that could mean since all the evidence left behind can be linked only to him.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on October 03, 2022, 12:24:46 AM
LOL.  This gets better and better.  Like a best seller.  So BRW is on the 6th floor and he is told to beat it by someone "showing him credentials."  A few minutes later BRW hears the shots being fired from right above his head from the same location where these individuals were and he lies and remains silent about this for the rest of his life.  The conspirators trust that he will do so even though that they have no reason for him to behave in this manner.  Wow.

~Grin~

MR ALAN FORD: The conspirators wouldn't have cared if he spoke about it afterwards.
MR RICHARD SMITH: So you're saying the conspirators would have cared if he spoke about it afterwards, yet they blah blah blah...........

Quote
And Oswald was not being set up as the gunman?  I don't even know what that could mean since all the evidence left behind can be linked only to him.

It would mean that at most he was being set up as having supplied the rifle

 Thumb1:
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Richard Smith on October 03, 2022, 01:40:05 PM
~Grin~

MR ALAN FORD: The conspirators wouldn't have cared if he spoke about it afterwards.
MR RICHARD SMITH: So you're saying the conspirators would have cared if he spoke about it afterwards, yet they blah blah blah...........

It would mean that at most he was being set up as having supplied the rifle

 Thumb1:

Your conspirators would need a time machine to convert this mumbo jumbo into a plan.  There was evidence left at the crime scene that linked Oswald to the crime.  This evidence derived from many different sources and dated back months in some cases.  It came from a variety of different sources.  Most of it was discovered within a few hours of the crime.  It would have taken months or years to create all that evidence.  But your fantasy conspirators don't care if their cover is blown by BRW?  Wow.  And, of course, there is nothing in your fantasy that precludes Oswald himself from telling BRW to beat it from the 6th floor. 
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: John Iacoletti on October 03, 2022, 06:45:43 PM
There was evidence left at the crime scene that linked Oswald to the crime.  This evidence derived from many different sources and dated back months in some cases.  It came from a variety of different sources.

The usual load of “Richard” BS.
Title: Re: The Remains of Bonnie Ray
Post by: Alan Ford on October 03, 2022, 10:01:25 PM
And, of course, there is nothing in your fantasy that precludes Oswald himself from telling BRW to beat it from the 6th floor.

Riiiiiiiight, because
a) Mr Oswald would have had authority to order Mr Williams to leave the floor  Thumb1:
b) his telling Mr Williams to leave the floor would have given Mr Williams no grounds at all to raise the alarm  Thumb1: Thumb1:
c) Mr Oswald would have had no fear that Mr Williams would be able to identify Mr Oswald afterwards as the man who kicked him off the floor.  Thumb1: Thumb1: Thumb1:
d) after the Sunday Mr Williams would have been terrified of Mr Oswald's ghost coming after him for telling what happened  Thumb1: Thumb1: Thumb1: Thumb1:

What a genius you are, Mr Smith!   :D